The Ruth Institute
News • Spirituality/Belief • Culture
Join us as we discuss how to protect your family from the ravages of the Sexual Revolution. We talk about finding ways to fight back and defend your homes, churches, communities, and even your nation. We bring together the scientific experts, the witnesses and survivors, and you!
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
😱 Studies prove ABC link they don’t want you to know

YouTube preemptively deleted this video because "YouTube does not allow content about abortion that contradicts expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO) and poses a serious risk of bodily harm or death."

Dr. Joel Brind explains how local health organizations in the United States came to have the consensus they have about abortion and breast cancer. He also explains how abortion increases the risk of bodily harm and death.

Dr. Joel Brind, Ph.D. has been a Professor of Biology and Endocrinology at Baruch College of the City University of New York for 34 years and a medical research biochemist since 1981. Long specializing in steroid biosynthesis and metabolism and endocrine-related cancers, his research has exposed the causal connection between abortion and breast cancer. Ostracized by his colleagues and persecuted by the National Cancer Institute, he persisted in telling the truth about the "ABC link." Along with Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, he co-founded the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. His research has also dealt with a connection between hormonal contraception and cancer. In recent years, Dr. Bring has specialized in amino acid metabolism, particularly in relation to glycine and one-carbon metabolism. In 2010 he founded Natural Food Science, LLC to make and market glycine supplement products.

Breast Cancer Prevention website:
https://www.bcpinstitute.org/

Dr. Brind’s dissenting opinion filed with the National Cancer Institute may be found on the Breast Cancer Prevention website.

Notes on the 2003 National Cancer Institute ABC link conference:
https://www.bcpinstitute.org/uploads/1/1/5/1/115111905/nci-minority-report-5_2003-brind__1_.pdf

Dr. Brind’s Minority Report to the NCI:
https://www.bcpinstitute.org/uploads/1/1/5/1/115111905/nci_minority_report-3_2003-brind.pdf

Dr. Brind’s 2018 research on Asian women:
https://www.bcpinstitute.org/uploads/1/1/5/1/115111905/brind_final_corrected_proof__021118.pdf

Significant studies on contraception:
Mortality among contraceptive pill users: cohort evidence from Royal College of General Practitioners’ Oral Contraception Study:
https://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c927

Cancer risk among users of oral contraceptives: cohort data from the Royal College of General Practitioner's oral contraception study:
https://www.bmj.com/content/335/7621/651

"Hush" documentary:
http://hushfilm.com/

Angela Lanfranchi slides explaining the ABC Link:
https://www.slideshare.net/tjfjustice/lan-franci

Dr. Brind’s glycine supplements:
http://sweetamine.com

00:49:11
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
How To Help The Gender Dysphoric | Atty. Mary Rice Hasson on The Dr J Show ep. 201

Atty. Mary Rice Hasson, is the Kate O’Beirne Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., where she co-founded and directs the Person and Identity Project, an initiative that equips parents and faith-based institutions to promote the truth about the human person and counter gender ideology. An attorney and policy expert, Mary has been a keynote speaker for the Holy See during the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, addressing education, women and work, caregiving, and gender ideology, and serves as a consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family, Life and Youth. She speaks frequently at national conferences, universities, and in dioceses across the country, and has testified before the U.S. Senate, state legislatures, and the Australian parliament on parents’ rights and transgender issues. The co-author of several books on education, Mary’s writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, National Review, First Things, the ...

01:14:36
Sexual Revolution from the Bishop’s Perspective | Bp. Peter Elliott on The Dr J Show ep.202

Bishop Peter John Elliott is a retired Australian bishop of the Catholic Church who served as an auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Melbourne from 2007 to 2018. He graduated from The University of Melbourne with a Master of Arts in history and then attained a Master of Arts in theology at the University of Oxford. Bishop Elliott is also an author, writing a number of published works that predominantly concern the celebration of Catholic liturgy. His latest book is entitled, The Sexual Revolution: History, Ideology, and Power. He was born and grew up in Melbourne, where his father served as an Anglican priest. In 2009, he was appointed the Delegate of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Australian Catholic Bishops’ Conference for the setting up of a Personal Ordinariate for Former Anglicans. In 2015, he was appointed Episcopal Vicar for Religious Education and continues his theological oversight of To Know, Worship and Love, the Archdiocesan Religious Education ...

00:54:08
How To Help The Gender Dysphoric | Atty. Mary Rice Hasson Preview

Atty. Mary Rice Hasson, is the Kate O’Beirne Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., where she co-founded and directs the Person and Identity Project, an initiative that equips parents and faith-based institutions to promote the truth about the human person and counter gender ideology.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter here:
https://ruthinstitute.org/newsletter/

00:01:33
How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 4 of 6)

Dr. Morse speaks at the Chapel of Hope in Hermosa Beach about how the Bible was right all along. This is part 3. This was recorded before the Ruth Institute was formed (pre-2008)

How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 4 of 6)
How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 3 of 6)

Dr. Morse speaks at the Chapel of Hope in Hermosa Beach about how the Bible was right all along. This is part 3. This was recorded before the Ruth Institute was formed (pre-2008)

How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 3 of 6)
How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 2 of 6)

Dr. Morse speaks at the Chapel of Hope in Hermosa Beach about how the Bible was right all along. This is part 2. This was recorded before the Ruth Institute was formed (pre-2008)

How Science Shows the Bible Was Right (Part 2 of 6)

I was helping set up the Scholastic Book Fair yesterday, and was appalled at what books were on the shelves. These books are targeted at elementary students. I immediately pulled them off the shelves!

One of the books, “Possess Me” Recommended age: 9-12
Description: "You've been warned -- if you summon a spirit, it may want to go back to being human... by living inside you."

Upon further investigation, I discovered just how evil Scholastic has become. Here is a quote from former Scholastic CEO Dick Robinson.

“We believe Scholastic can make the greatest impact by continuing to promote the work of LGBTQIA+ creators in our publishing, including the support and amplification of transgender and non-binary voices. This year, eight of the ten most challenged books on the American Library Association’s Most Challenged Books List were there because of LGBTQIA+ content, and we are proud that two of them were published by Scholastic: Raina Telgemeier’s Drama and Alex Gino’s George, the ...

Everyone's marriage can be happier still!

Check out all 101 Tips for a Happier Marriage here: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/101-tips-for-a-happier-marriage/

P.S. Pro-tip: Ask in the comments at check out to have yours autographed by Dr. Morse. Shhh! ;)

post photo preview
Know someone hoping to get married?

Your mom, for instance, has a vested interest in you making the right decision. She knows you well enough to see if the two of you are truly a good fit. Your friends, on the other hand, may be too afraid to tell you the harsh truth.

Find all 101 Tips for Marrying the Right Person here: https://ruthinstitute.org/product/101-tips-for-marrying-the-right-person/

post photo preview
post photo preview
Gov. Youngkin Stands Up For Parental Rights

“The Ruth Institute thanks Virginia’s Gov. Glenn Youngkin for righting a terrible injustice by pardoning a father whose only crime was standing up for his child,” said Ruth Institute President Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Scott Smith was convicted of disorderly conduct for protesting at an August 2021 Loudoun County school board meeting. He was outraged by his ninth-grade daughter’s sexual assault in a girl’s restroom by a boy wearing a skirt. The administration did its best to cover up the crime by not reporting the incident and transferring the perpetrator to another school.

When Smith objected too forcefully, he was arrested and later convicted of disorderly conduct.

“So instead of punishing a sex criminal, the school and the local prosecutor punished the victim’s father. Talk about a travesty of justice,” Morse said.

 

 

“The National School Boards Association tried to use this and similar incidents to have parents who object to public school indoctrination investigated as domestic terrorists. The Association sent a letter demanding the investigation to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who in turn referred the matter to the FBI and U.S. Attorneys,” Morse noted.

“The arrogance and criminal neglect of the Loudoun County School Board helped create the parents’ rights movement. It also resulted in Youngkin’s election in 2021, making him the first Republican governor of Virginia in over a decade.”

Youngkin ran against former Governor Terry McAuliffe, who wrote his political obituary in one debate when he declared: “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

Morse urged: “Parents must resist the efforts of the public education establishment to rob children of their innocence and make them fodder for the Sexual Revolution.”

For September, the Ruth Institute launched its Resist Pride Back to School Project to help parents protect children from LGBTQ indoctrination in schools, including the growing cult of transgenderism. Find helpful interviews with allied organizations on the Ruth Inst. YouTube channel, as well as more resources on the Ruth Inst. Facebook page.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Love and Economics - Excerpt
Chapter 11: The Costs of Love

The Suspicion Tax

In our society, we have a tendency to be suspicious of sacrifices, either the demand that one make sacrifices or the claim that someone else is actually making a sacrifice. We often look with suspicion upon the claim that someone actu- ally did something for someone else without a guarantee or even a reasonable expectation of something in return. We have great difficulty accepting an unrequited, unsolicited act of love from another person because we are afraid of being duped, of being used, of eventually being exploited. We want to know “What’s in it for you?” before we allow ourselves to be taken care of, before we accept love from another person. We are suspicious, too, about anyone who defends the proposition that making a sacrifice as an act of love is a desirable thing. We wonder:“What is this person’s agenda? How is my generosity going to be exploited?” We want a guarantee before we are willing to make a move.

I believe this suspicion arises because we have had too many experiences of having our trust and generosity abused. Too many politicians have asked us what we can do for our country only to exploit our patriotism for their own advan- tage. Too many clergymen have asked us to contribute to the church only to build their own mansions instead. Too many mothers have manipulated their children with guilt into doing things for their comfort rather than for the children’s lasting benefit. There is plenty of evidence for the cynical position that everyone is out for his own good despite his claims of and demands for sacrifice. In fact, we might be so bold as to say that the intuitive appeal of the economic analysis of self-interest derives largely from this experience. Adopting the cynical posture of homo economicus starts to seem sensible after enough experiences of betrayed gener- osity.

But there is a problem with acting entirely on the basis of these suspicions, however reasonable they might be. If these suspicions take over our minds and color our view of the human race, then there will be no room for love. We will not be in a position to accept an act of genuine generosity. This attitude increases the cost of accepting love. When the cost of something goes up, we usually expect that people will demand less of it.

An economist might reply that an increased price of something will usually call forth an additional supply. But we will not observe an increase in the supply of love when suspicious minds raise the cost of accepting love. Consider the likely response of the supplier, that is, the giver of love. The person performs a generous act or makes a profession of affection in perfectly good faith. Perhaps he neither explicitly nor implicitly demands reciprocity in kind. He is not try- ing to manipulate the other person into changing, even for the better. He just wants to do something nice for another person for no particular reason.

Now suppose this supplier of love receives the response, “You say you are doing something nice for me: what’s in it for you?” or “You say you love me: prove it.” This is not a response that is likely to call forth an additional supply. In fact, the person is most likely to give up or go away.

We hypothesized that the person did not expect anything particular in return. But he did need one kind of benefit for his efforts: he needed the experience of being visible to the other person. He surely wanted the other person to see him and his offers as they really were rather than as a cover for an agenda. But his attempt to perform a loving act failed because of the suspicion of its intended recipient. Suspicion can be viewed as a “tax” on love. Suspicion increases the costs of accepting love; that is, it increases the price paid by the receiver of love. But suspicion does not correspondingly increase the price received by the provider of love. Suspicion increases the cost of producing or giving love, so that less love is offered. A lower quantity offered, a lower quantity accepted, even when both parties could potentially have benefited: like all taxes, suspicion generates tremendous losses.

The problem flows both from people who are unreason- ably suspicious and from people who have, by their actions, given just reason for suspicion. But I believe there is another, more cerebral aspect to the problem. We live in a society that venerates science. One of the things science does best is to reject and verify hypotheses while adopting a relatively skeptical stance throughout the phases of experimentation and data gathering. The scientist can justify a noncommittal attitude. The scientist can reasonably demand proof.

But if a person carries these scientific attitudes into the realm of personal relationships, he can do great harm to himself and those around him. We cannot directly observe the interior of another person’s heart. If we remain skeptical until the proposition of love has been proven to us, we will necessarily remain skeptical forever. All the data will never be in. Even a person who loves us very much will certainly disappoint us or hurt us some of the time. The demand for proof where no proof is really possible destroys genuine love, for we more or less expect that eventually our hypothesis that no one really loves us will be verified. In effect, we place the entire human race on perpetual probation. Perhaps this begins to account for the indescribable loneliness that is so much a part of modern life.


So, we see how the supply side of this good called love bears some similarities to ordinary economic goods. Love is costly to give or produce or supply. Some of these costs are material costs that can be readily observed. Many of the other costs of giving love are purely interior, intellectual, or psychological. Because of all these costs of loving, the world is not necessarily filled with loving people,even though love is indeed a valuable good. It is reasonable to believe that the greater the perceived cost of love, the less of it will be given.

Our discussion of the suspicion tax suggests that there is something very counterintuitive about love once we begin to analyze it. Suspicious people resist being loved. The truth is that many people resist being loved, at least some of the time. Usually, economists think that when someone gives us a good thing, we accept it eagerly.

When people refuse a good, it is because it is, in some way, costly for them to accept it. We need to look at what we might somewhat irreverently call the demand for love. Our analysis of the costs of loving began by asking what we mean by “more love.” These same components of love will help us understand how it might be costly to be the recipi- ent of love.

The Costs of being Loved

An Increase in the Accuracy of Perception

An increase in the accuracy of another person’s percep- tion of us is not an unmixed blessing. Sometimes, we are delighted when another person sees us as we really are. We are enchanted when someone finally recognizes our good qualities or sees our skills and achievements. When seeing us accurately means seeing our good qualities more clearly, it is certainly easy for us to accept. It is not costly to receive love that is based on an accurate knowledge of the parts of us that make us proud.

But every person has bad points as well as good, faults as well as strengths. In any relationship of any duration and intensity, these less gratifying parts of ourselves eventually emerge. When the other person sees more of our faults more accurately, it is a different story.

Sometimes we have the experience that another person who knows us well can “see through us.” He can see us clearly in spite of our best efforts to conceal ourselves. Some- times this experience is deeply comforting. Other times the experience is profoundly unnerving, especially when we are embarrassed about the other person’s vision. We have the sense that there is no place to hide in the presence of such a person. We are having a kind of “moment of truth” that we were not prepared for.

How we react depends in part on our own courage. But it also depends on the reaction we expect from the other person. I argued earlier that a true “increase” in love needs to include an increase in all three of the components. The cost to us of accepting an increase in the accuracy of the other person’s vision depends on what we expect him to do with that information. If the person in his clear vision continues to stand beside us, in solidarity with us, we might be willing to reveal ourselves more fully and entrust ourselves to him more completely. If the person sees our faults, recognizes them as faults, and is willing to help us see our way through to positive change, we might be more willing to accept his perception of us.

By contrast, if the person’s increased accuracy of vision leads him to reject us, we would be hard-pressed to describe him as loving. At the same time, this reaction from him would make it more difficult for us to accept his vision of who we are. We will be more likely to argue the facts with him, claim that we do not in fact possess those particular faults, even if we do. If the person is not fully loving, we are more apt to find it costly to accept even the components of love that he can give.

If the person’s increased knowledge of us leads him to redefine what is good, we might actually be more willing to accept his vision. It would not, however, be as great a good for us. For instance, suppose a son tells his father that the fa- ther has a drinking problem. It would not be unusual for the father to resist hearing this information. He might be more willing to accept it if his son would modify his statement by saying that being an alcoholic is not so bad and by redefining the drinking issue for him,so that it does not appear in so bad a light. This statement might indeed make it less costly for the father to hear the truth about his acts, but only because his son has been less than truthful about their meaning. The son sees his father clearly but has not increased his father’s desire for positive change. Strictly speaking, a person telling us an unpleasant truth about ourselves is giving us a good. He may not necessarily be doing it as an act of love, but the truth is still a good to us. It is just that this particular good may be too costly for us to accept.

The example suggests that some attitudes significantly increase the costs of accepting an increase in the accuracy of a person’s vision of us. Every human person is imperfect, yet everyone wants to think well of himself. No one enjoys hav- ing attention called to his or her faults. There are a variety of strategies that people use to help manage the tension caused by the gap between our actual condition and the condition in which we would like to imagine ourselves.

One strategy is to redefine goodness so that it includes the imperfect act the person has already decided to perform. In our example, the son tried to redefine a drinking problem to be less of a problem. But this strategy is not based on reality. The father may still have car accidents or get liver disease no matter how his son helps him redefine the ques- tion of drinking.

Some people have an implicit philosophy that any negative information about themselves signifies that they are somehow defective. They seem to believe that the natural condition of the human person is to be without problems, without faults, without anxiety. Some interpret evidence of imperfection to mean that they are mentally ill or that they had a defec- tive upbringing. A few years ago, it was almost fashionable to claim to be “codependent” or that one’s “family of origin was dysfunctional.”

Others have a more spiritual approach. These people be- lieve that a person is either saved or not saved. They know perfectly well that everyone is imperfect. Yet being among the saved is supposed to regenerate the person, so that one is able to live a better life. Evidence of one’s own imperfection might mean that one is not among the saved. People with this view sometimes lose sleep wondering whether they are among the saved.

One problem with all of these approaches is that they make it more costly for us to hear the truth about our own imperfection. This type of personal philosophy raises the stakes, so to speak, in admitting to ourselves or to others that we are less than perfect. If a person points out to us one of our faults, we may have a hard time accepting this information, even if it is the truth (maybe especially, if it is the truth). It takes almost superhuman love and solidarity on the part of the other person, to remain in friendship while conveying this kind of unpleasant information.

There is an alternative attitude that lowers the cost to us of receiving negative information about ourselves. We can recognize imperfection as a natural part of the human condi- tion. When someone points out a fault, we can use it as an opportunity for growth, as it was perhaps intended to be. We can see this as evidence of our membership in the human race. This look at our own frailty can be an opportunity to really connect with the other frail human beings around us. This is very difficult and demonstrates clearly that accepting this component of love can be costly to us.

 

You can purchase your own copy of Love and Economics from the Ruth Institute store.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Married WIth Children Equals Happiness

A September 12 survey by the Institute for Family Studies shows that marriage is the biggest factor in people's reports of happiness.

Married parents report the highest levels of happiness, with 40% of married mothers and 35% of married fathers describing themselves as very happy. By comparison, only 17% of unmarried women and 12% of unmarried men with children say they are happy.

Ruth Institute President Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., said: “This does not surprise me. Pope St. John Paul II repeatedly taught that the human person is meant for love. In his first encyclical, Redemptor Hominis (The Redeemer of Man), he wrote: ‘Man cannot live without love.... his life is senseless if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter it and make it his own.’"

 

 

“We are happiest when we are loving and being loved,” Morse said. “Married women and men with children have the best chance of receiving stable, reliable love from their spouses. They also have the opportunity to give love to each other and to their children on a regular basis. No wonder married parents are the happiest demographic group!”

“The idea that independence and autonomy are the key to happiness was never more than an ideological fantasy. Advocates of big government promoted this out of self-interest. Employers loved the idea that having a job would make women happy. They could position themselves as the good progressives who just happened to benefit from a new pool of workers who were eager to prove themselves,” Morse said. 

“I personally never doubted that I wanted to be a mother. I can honestly say that the years I spent at home with children, adopted, birth, and foster, were the happiest years of my life.”

Dr. Morse has spoken around the world on marriage, family and human sexuality and authored six books on these topics. The Ruth Institute also has a Marriage Resource Center which explains the importance of marriage to both the individual and society.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals