Blog

‘Genetic optimization’: Embryo ranking treats children as marketable goods, critics warn

An embryo screening service is drawing sharp criticism from scientists, ethicists and faith leaders who say the technology turns parents into shoppers and children into products.

Manhattan biotech startup Nucleus Genomics is marketing its Nucleus Embryo platform as a tool for genetic “optimization.” It allows couples undergoing in vitro fertilization to upload and rank DNA from up to 20 embryos based on potential intelligence, anxiety, addiction risk and more.

Embryos can come from whichever egg and sperm sources were used in that cycle.

For a minimum of $5,999, parents can receive “polygenic risk scores” estimating the likelihood that their future children will develop diseases such as Alzheimer’s or diabetes or possess traits such as high IQ, low BMI, anxiety resistance or a particular eye color.

“Every parent wants to give their children more than they had,” Nucleus Genomics posted on X alongside a promotional video showing a dashboard where users can sort embryos by projected traits.

To some critics, however, the premise behind the tool is less about love and more about control.

“For some parents, it looks for things like the potential for diabetes, the potential for deafness, conditions that are treatable or healable with today’s modern medicine,” Emma Waters, policy analyst for the Center for Technology and the Human Person at The Heritage Foundation, told The Washington Times.

“But in many other cases, the ones that are equally if not more disturbing, parents are actively using this technology to select children that are the smartest, have a certain personality, are the right sex or otherwise fit their model image of what a child should be — whether that’s blue eyes or blond hair or something else,” Ms. Waters said.

Keep reading

Congress moves to abolish sanctuary cities and states—it’s about time

The progressives have had their way for far too long when it comes to illegal immigration. Republicans have tolerated their insistence on harboring illegal aliens and criminals, and the time has finally arrived to stop this violation of the law and provide safety and security for our citizens. Both the Executive Branch and Congress are stepping up to honor the rule of law.

On January 22, several Republican Senators promoted a new bill on the issue:

Today, Senators Ted Budd (R-NC), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Katie Britt (R-AL), Roger Marshall (R-KS), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Tim Sheehy (R-MT), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), James Lankford (R-OK), and Mike Rounds (R-SD) introduced the Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act. 

The bill would allow the victims of murders, rapes, and other felonies committed by illegal aliens to sue sanctuary states or cities that failed to honor a detainer request. The legislation also bans certain federal grants to sanctuary jurisdictions. Senator Budd twice led this legislation in the U.S. House in 2019 and 2021.

Both senators Tillis and Budd made powerful statements in support of this bill. Here is Senator Tillis’s statement, in part:

‘I am committed to working with President Trump to end illegal immigration and fight sanctuary cities that prioritize reckless, lawless policies over public safety. It is clear that liberal politicians want to put political ideology ahead of the safety of their constituents. It is time for Congress to step in and hold sanctuary cities accountable.’

The House proposed a similar bill to stop these violations of federal law, initiated by Rep. Chris Langworthy:

Today, Congressman Nick Langworthy (NY-23) introduced the Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act of 2025 to block federal funding for sanctuary jurisdictions that prohibit or restrict local law enforcement from sharing immigration status information or cooperating with federal immigration enforcement efforts. Sanctuary cities are actively undermining federal immigration enforcement by refusing to cooperate with ICE detainer requests and releasing dangerous criminals back onto our streets. It’s time to hold them accountable. 

Additionally, this legislation clarifies legal authority for local and state law enforcement to honor federal immigration detainer requests by deeming officers who comply to be acting as federal agents. It protects law enforcement by shielding officers and jurisdictions from liability when they cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. The bill also encourages compliance with federal immigration law by targeting jurisdictions that defy lawful detainer requests and shield illegal immigrants from removal.

Cities and states are also willing to pay dearly for the cost of allowing illegal aliens in their locations. The cost of feeding and boarding them can be enormous; educating their children, many who don’t speak English, is significant. They are also putting ICE officers in danger by alerting protestors that the officers will be working in their areas. 

Keep reading

UK’s Net Zero agenda is right at the top of the tyranny scale

David Turver argues that the UK’s Net Zero agenda is a far-left, tyrannical project that attacks freedom and is comparable to fascist states.

“If we substitute ‘Net Zero’ for ‘the State’ in Mussolini’s famous quote, we get close to describing the totalitarian Net Zero agenda: ‘Everything within Net Zero, nothing outside Net Zero, nothing against Net Zero’,” he says.

He talks us through how he comes to the conclusion that those advocating for Net Zero dystopia are narcissistic, psychopathic Machiavellians.  “We have somehow allowed the very worst people to take charge of most of our lives,” Turver says.

Introduction

Some friends have asked me to write more articles on the political and sociological impact of Net Zero. In addition, another contact put forward the suggestion that Net Zero is an attack on freedom. That idea has been turning over in my mind and I have concluded he was right and, effectively, Net Zero is just a cloak for far-left tyranny.

The Political Compass

The Political Compass is a widely used tool to differentiate between different political ideas, philosophies and ideologies.

It is typically drawn with the x-axis representing left and right opinions along the economic dimension. The left represents a desire for the economy to be run by cooperative collective agency with substantial state intervention and the political right represents a desire for the economy to be left to the devices of competing individuals and organisations, otherwise known as free markets.

The y-axis represents the social dimension, with the top representing authoritarianism and the bottom representing libertarianism. For shorthand, we can shorten this to tyranny versus freedom.

Net Zero Is Far-Left Tyranny

We can characterise Net Zero along both axes of the political compass. Starting with energy policy, we can see that there are government-mandated subsidies for renewables which cost a fortune. Plus, intermittent renewables can bid low into the market and be dispatched onto the grid despite the full cost of renewables being much higher than the market clearing price. Then there are extra subsidies for the Capacity Market to provide backup to intermittent renewables. In addition, there are even more subsidies for industry to compensate them for the resulting high electricity prices. There are extra subsidies for biofuels, green gas, green hydrogen and carbon capture and storage. On top of that, Miliband’s plan for Clean Power by 2030 sounds like a Soviet-era five-year plan for tractor production.

The UK government and the Climate Change Committee are also intent on forcing landlords to install insulation measures, many of which have payback times measured in centuries. We also have subsidies for heat pumps and company EV drivers pay less tax than for petrol cars.

On the supply side, new drilling for both onshore and offshore oil and gas resources is effectively banned and the assets that remain are being taxed to oblivion with 78% marginal tax rates. Using gas to produce electricity attracts carbon taxes through the Emissions Trading Scheme, amounting to about 20% of wholesale prices.

All of this takes energy policy as far away from free markets as it is possible to imagine. Net Zero is a far-left project that would not have been out of place in the USSR.

Turning to the vertical axis, we can see that many of the proposed measures to achieve Net Zero can be described as tyrannical. First, the Climate Change Committee (“CCC”) is effectively beyond the control of Parliament and the people because, as former chair Lord Deben put it, Parliament has to seek the permission of the CCC to change the Carbon Budgets. To achieve the targets, the Government and their advisors want to interfere in our lives to an unprecedented extent. They are interfering in markets to mandate targets for heat pumps and EVs to change how we heat our homes and the type of car we drive. The Energy Act 2023 gives the authority for draconian powers to take control of EV chargers, batteries, home heating, washing machines, fridges and dishwashers. The Act even gives authority for powers of entry to check that our smart appliances are compliant. Now the Government is planning to force pension schemes to merge into mega-funds and force them to invest in clean energy projects.

The CCC has recommended that we cut our meat consumption by a third and cut the number of livestock by almost half. Of course, they also want us to eat “alternative proteins,” which is code for things like insects.

Some of the advisors to the Government are even more tyrannical. We have the Behavioural Insights Team (also known as the Nudge Unit) calling for the regulation of advertising and for TV drama and news to promote upbeat stories about Net Zero. They also want to influence the physical, social, economic and digital environment to alter what is offered to consumers and change perceptions of what is socially acceptable. They recommended that the Government intervene across vast swathes of the economy to align businesses, markets and institutions with Net Zero. These measures include a meat tax, making flights more expensive, defaulting us onto renewable energy tariffs and making heat pumps look cheaper than gas boilers.

The National Energy System Operator (“NESO”) is planning to halve per capita energy consumption. They also want to “optimise” demand by introducing penal charges at peak times through Time of Use Tariffs (“TOUTs”). In other words, consumers need to organise their lives around the grid rather than the grid being designed to meet the needs of its customers.

Keep reading

Ohio Republicans Introduce ‘Prenatal Equal Protection Act’ to Abolish Abortion in the State

Ohio State Representatives Levi Dean and Johnathan Newman have filed a bill to abolish abortion in the state by granting pre-born babies equal protection under the law.

The Ohio Prenatal Equal Protection Act, House Bill 370, points to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states “no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws’ to protect the life of preborn persons.”

“This bill recognizes that we are a country and state governed by laws, and that our laws must be constitutional,” Rep. Newman said in a press release. “Article I, Section 22 of Ohio’s Constitution, which was adopted by popular vote in 2023, has created an obvious conflict between the Ohio Constitution and U.S. Constitution.”

“We have a mandate from God to protect human life, which is of higher authority than any constitution,” Newman said. “Proverbs 24:11 commands us to ‘rescue those who are being carried off to death.’ Proverbs 17:15 says it is an ‘abomination’ to God for those who are guilty of doing harm to be called innocent.”

Keep reading

Report: Pentagon Agency Believes US Needs To Drop A Nuke To Destroy Iran’s Fordow Nuclear Plant

The Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has told US officials that in order to destroy Iran’s Fordow nuclear plant, which is buried deep underground, the US may need to drop a nuclear weapon, The Guardian has reported.

According to the report, Pentagon officials who received the briefing were told that dropping GBU-57s, conventional 30,000-pound bunker-busting bombs, would not penetrate deep enough underground and that it would only do enough damage to collapse tunnels and bury the facility under rubble.

The officials were told that in order to destroy Fordow completely, the US would likely need to first soften the ground with conventional bombs and then ultimately drop a tactical nuclear weapon from a B2 bomber.

The report said that President Trump is not considering using a nuclear weapon and that the option was not presented to him by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. According to a report from Axios, Trump is casting doubt on the idea that the GBU-57s could do enough damage to destroy the facility.

Israel wants the US to drop the bunker-busting bombs on Fordow since it lacks the capability, but so far, Trump has not given the order for US airstrikes on Iran. The president said on Thursday that he would decide within two weeks, although there are indications that attacks could begin this weekend.

Keep reading

Why Is Texas Supporting Psychedelics Research While Criminalizing Cannabis?

Texas just announced it will invest $50 million into studying ibogaine, a powerful psychedelic drug that remains illegal at the federal level. The goal? To develop it into a potential Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for conditions like opioid use disorder, PTSD and depression; especially among veterans.

On the surface, this might sound like a bold and progressive move. But here’s the irony: at the very same time, Texas continues to criminalize cannabis and might soon even outlaw hemp-derived THC products.

Let’s break this down. Cannabis, a plant with centuries of use, decades of medical data and broad public support remains illegal for adult use in Texas. Despite overwhelming national support for legalization—a staggering 88 percent of Americans now back medical or recreational cannabis use)—the state has chosen to double down on prohibition, with lawmakers sending Gov. Greg Abbott (R) a bill that would outlaw consumable hemp products with any traces of THC. He has until Sunday to decide whether to allow that ban to take effect.

Even worse, prohibition isn’t stopping anything. The black market is thriving in Texas. Cartels and illicit operators flood the state with unregulated, untested cannabis. No taxes are collected, no consumer protections exist and legal hemp retailers are now being threatened. It is a misguided public safety argument deluded by a lack of facts and science, political conservatism, contradictory business objectives and outdated stigmas.

Meanwhile, ibogaine, a hallucinogenic alkaloid that can induce intense psychedelic experiences, is now the subject of a $50 million state-funded research push. The same lawmakers who claim cannabis is too dangerous and not well studied are throwing their support behind a compound with far less research and much more uncertainty with the intent of studying it.

This isn’t a critique of psychedelic medicine. Ibogaine may very well hold incredible therapeutic value. But if Texas is willing to support cutting-edge, controversial treatments for serious mental health and addiction issues, why not start with widely available data and access to cannabis? Cannabis has already been shown to help with chronic pain, anxiety, sleep, seizures and opioid dependency.

Keep reading

Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Blasts EU’s Digital Services Act as Gateway to Censorship and Centralized Control

While European regulators polish their halos and crank out legislation faster than Brussels can subsidize cheese, Pavel Durov is out here playing the role of a digital heretic.

In a French interview, the Telegram founder is sounding alarms over what he sees as a not-so-slow crawl toward speech control disguised as safety. The latest darling of the bureaucratic elite? The Digital Services Act is a piece of legislation that reads like it was written by a committee of risk-averse interns with a fetish for vague language and zero accountability.

Durov isn’t whispering his concerns at think tank luncheons or lobbying dinners. He’s calling it what it is: an institutional greenlight for censorship. “Once you legitimize censorship, it’s difficult to go back,” he says, which probably makes him the least popular dinner guest in Brussels since anyone asked about eurozone debt.

What makes this more than another libertarian tech rant is that Durov isn’t hypothesizing. He’s living it. Right now, he’s effectively stuck in France, being slow-roasted by criminal accusations that, according to him, are so flimsy they wouldn’t hold up in a Bluesky comment section.

“Nothing has ever been proven that shows that I am, even for a second, guilty of anything,” he insists.

One story in particular peels back the clean, professional veneer of Europe’s “rules-based” order.

Durov describes a charming little tête-à-tête with the head of France’s foreign intelligence service, the DGSE.

Over croissants and state-sponsored pressure, he was asked to delete Telegram channels tied to Romanian political activists.

He refused. Not with a polite “I’ll look into it” or some carefully lawyered dodge, but with what may be the most defiant line uttered by a CEO since Steve Jobs told IBM to get lost: “I told them I prefer to die than betray my users.”

Nothing screams “democracy in action” quite like a spy agency demanding censorship in a private meeting. At least they skipped the pretense.

Beneath the PR gloss of the Digital Services Act lies the basic truth of modern governance: power is being centralized and speech, sanitized.

Keep reading

Waste Of The Day: $140 For Taxi Ride Across Parking Lot

Topline: Massachusetts’ Emergency Assistance Family Shelter Program recently funded what might just be history’s most expensive car trip: $140 for a taxi ride of 223 feet. For those quick with a calculator, that’s a rate of $3,314 per mile.

It’s just one example of taxpayer funds spent on “improper and unlawful emergency procurements” while the agency was using $325 million in state funds last year to help address the state’s migrant crisis, according to a recent report from the state auditor.

Key facts: The emergency housing program was originally created to carry out Massachusetts’ “right to shelter” law from 1983, which guarantees housing for families with children or pregnant mothers. 

The program has been overwhelmed with immigrant families in the last few years. There were 3,883 families in shelters in January 2023 but 7,463 families by December 2024. 

The influx forced the state to sign emergency, no-bid contracts with companies that were charging up to $31 per meal to feed migrants on the taxpayers’ dime. One company, Spinelli Ravioli, billed the state 9.6% more than their contract allowed for 493 food deliveries, according to the new audit.

Keep reading

Tulsi Gabbard sidelined in Trump administration discussions on Israel and Iran

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, an outspoken critic of past U.S. military interventions abroad, appears to have fallen out of favor with President Donald Trump as he weighs military action against Iran, according to multiple senior administration officials with knowledge of the matter.

Gabbard allies insist that, while there is some White House tension, some of the public blowback is overstated, and none interviewed by NBC News expect her to leave the administration as a result of the president’s Iran policy, even if that includes direct U.S. involvement.

Gabbard’s politically perilous position burst into the open this week when Trump brushed her back over her testimony to Congress in March. At that time, she said the U.S. intelligence community did not believe Iran was building a nuclear weapon — a comment at odds with Trump’s recent public statement about the threat posed by Iran’s potential nuclear program.

“I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one,” Trump told reporters Tuesday on Air Force One.

A person with knowledge of the matter said the U.S. intelligence community’s view has not changed since Gabbard’s testimony in March.

But the idea that a president would openly refute his director of national intelligence immediately spurred questions about whether she is now iced out of decision-making on the issue.

It also reflects a rift that is playing out publicly in Trump’s MAGA coalition, with some supporters advocating standing by Israel in whatever military action it takes against Iran and others saying intervention would go against the “America First” philosophy. Trump’s criticism of U.S. involvement in past conflicts — and his campaign promise to be a “peacemaker” in his second term — brought in unusual bedfellows, such as Gabbard, who had been a Democratic congresswoman.

Multiple senior administration officials said Gabbard has been sidelined in internal administration discussions about the conflict between Israel and Iran. Even two of her allies who spoke to NBC News acknowledged that her standing took a hit when she posted a video on June 10 after a trip to Hiroshima, Japan. The video, which featured the simulated destruction of American cities and Gabbard warning about the dangers of nuclear war, annoyed the White House team, the officials said.

Gabbard did not attend a meeting of top officials June 8 at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland, to discuss tensions between Israel and Iran, which raised fresh questions about her status in the administration. A White House official told NBC News that Gabbard was not present only because she had to take part in scheduled training as a member of the National Guard.

Gabbard’s past positions on Iran, coupled with her recent comments and Trump’s responses to them, have forced top administration officials into a difficult position. Gabbard has seemingly been at odds with the administration line, but not to the point where they feel the need to abandon her.

Keep reading

Bloomberg pours more cash into Cuomo super PAC, bringing his total contribution to $8.3M

Mike Bloomberg’s vast wealth is continuing to power Andrew Cuomo’s front-running mayoral bid.

The billionaire former mayor contributed $3.3 million to a super PAC supporting Cuomo’s attempted comeback in the nation’s largest city — a donation made public on Wednesday that comes just days after Bloomberg gave $5 million to the group.

With the latest gift, Bloomberg is now single-handedly responsible for one-third of the PAC’s total haul of $24 million since it launched in March, according to a POLITICO analysis. Other real estate and finance executives who make up New York’s monied elite, including billionaire Donald Trump supporter Bill Ackman, have poured cash into the group.

A spokesperson for the super PAC, which is called Fix the City, did not comment on Bloomberg’s latest contribution.

The money — and the flood of mailers and TV ads funded by it — indicate Cuomo supporters are nervous about the rise of his principal opponent, democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani. The state lawmaker has been running a strong second to the ex-governor in most polls; a Marist College survey on Wednesday found Cuomo would defeat Mamdani after seven rounds of ranked-choice voting, 55 percent to 45 percent. But early voting is high in some neighborhoods that would appear to benefit Mamdani, and temperatures are expected to hit 100 degrees next Tuesday, which could suppress turnout among older New Yorkers Cuomo is counting on.

Likely motivating Bloomberg, who had a rivalry with the former governor during their overlapping tenures, are Mamdani’s far-left politics and criticism of Israel. He wants to raise taxes on the rich to pay for services like free bus fare and as recently as this week, refused to criticize the phrase “globalize the Intifada,” calling it an expression of Palestinian rights.

The former mayor endorsed Cuomo last week, and called him the “one candidate whose management experience and government know-how stand above the others.” Cuomo is 67 and worked in and around government and politics his entire career; Mamdani is 33 and counters criticisms of his thin résumé with reminders of the scandals that drove Cuomo from office.

Keep reading