Tag Archives: abortion

Alyssa Milano killed two of her children, so she’s a hero or something

I have great news for women who have had abortions: Forgiveness and healing is available if your repent and trust in the real Jesus.  But I will mock those who are proud of their child-killing.

I mentioned this in a Roundup but it was so ridiculous and fallacy-filled that it deserves a full post: Alyssa Milano opens up about having two abortions: ‘I knew I was not ready to be a parent’

Remember, we on the pro-science, pro-logic side always start with the irrefutable truth that a new human child is created at fertilization.  At least that’s what all those pesky mainstream embryology textbooks and the nice people at Dictionary.com say.

Actress and women’s rights activist Alyssa Milano opened up about having two abortions in 1993 because she was not “ready to be a parent” after becoming pregnant while taking birth control pills.

Alyssa killed two living children, so she was already a parent.  Whether she was “ready” or not is irrelevant.  If she didn’t feel equipped to parent them properly, then she could have given them up for adoption instead of killing them.  But that didn’t fit with her career goals.  The article doesn’t even hint that she considered adoption.

Milano spoke of her experience on the latest episode of her podcast entitled “Sorry Not Sorry” released Monday.

I’ve done prison ministry for 13 years and have met countless felons who are not sorry for their crimes.  But they are still guilty, just like she is guilty of killing her children. Her seared conscience is not evidence of her innocence — or, as she is trying to present it, her virtue of killing her children.

“I’m Alyssa Milano and I’ve had an abortion. I control my own body,” she said.

Only a Molech-worshiping Leftist can turn child-killing into a virtue.  Yeah, she controlled her body — and the bodies of her children — right into the trash.

“I still got pregnant,” she said. “It was devastating. I was raised Catholic and was suddenly put in conflict with my faith — a faith I was coming to realize empowered only men to make every single decision of what was allowed and what was not allowed,” Milano said.

Gee, what a strong and reasoned faith she had.  So it wasn’t that she had sex out of wedlock and logical consequences followed, it was that men are bad, her faith was false and she had to kill her children. [Yeah, her faith was false, but for 95 other reasons.]

The “Who’s the Boss” star said she wanted to focus on her budding film career.

Well in that case, of course she had to kill her children!

“I knew at that time I was not equipped to be a mother and so I chose to have an abortion. I chose,” Milano said, adding that she faced “crippling anxiety” during that time period. “It was my choice and it was absolutely the right choice for me. It was not an easy choice.”

Again, she was already a mother.  And yes, I can see how choosing to kill your children might make you anxious.  It was all about her, not her children.

“It was not something I wanted, but it was something that I needed, like most health care is.”

Now there is some extra-delusional rationalization.  As usual, Leftists put the wants of adults over the needs of children – including the need to live – but they frame their wants as needs.  No, Alyssa, you did not need to kill your children.

And abortion is the opposite of health care.  Health care is when humans don’t get crushed and dismembered.

After terminating her first pregnancy, Milano said on the podcast that she continued with her previous sexual relationship and use of birth control pills.

Slow learner.  But we should definitely do whatever she says anyway.

“A few months later, I found out I was pregnant again. I had done what I knew to do to prevent pregnancy and was still pregnant, so once again I made the right decision to end that pregnancy,” she said.

So instead of learning from her mistakes and telling people to only have sex in a one man / one woman marriage, she kills another child.  And of course it was the right decision, because she said it was.  She was having fun with the extramarital sex so killing her children was worth it.

Milano told her audience that she would not have her acting career or her activist platform had she not made the decision to get abortions.

Yep.  If she hadn’t killed her children she wouldn’t have time to tell other women how important it is to be able to kill their children.

“Fifteen years after that first love had fizzled, my life would be completely lacking all its great joys,” she said. “I would never had been free to be myself — and that’s what this fight is all about: freedom.”

More delusion.  Yeah, she’s some kind of super hero, fighting for freedom by slaughtering her own children.  But aren’t we all glad for her great joys?! Oddly, I’m not getting all choked up here.

She went on to say that she would not have been able to have her two “beautiful, perfect, loving, kind and inquisitive children” with husband David Bugliari.

Yeah, because she knew the two children she killed would have been ugly, imperfect, unkind and non inquisitive . . . or something.  They obviously deserved what they got.

What if this husband cheats on his child-killing wife and they get divorced? Does that mean these living children will be retroactive “mistakes?”

And I wonder how her living children really feel about this.  Of course they would publicly defend their mother, but deep down wouldn’t it bother them that she was a cold-blooded killer of their step-siblings?

Milano has spearheaded efforts to push back against strict abortion bans passed by several Republican-majority state legislatures in recent months, including a bill that banned abortions once a fetus has a detectable heartbeat in Georgia.

How noble!  Who cares if the children have beating hearts?  If mommy wants them dead then they need to be killed – and you all should have to pay for it!

Milano also called for a sex strike in response to the Republican Party’s “undeniable war on women.” 

I love how she got roasted for noting that not having out-of-wedlock sex would reduce abortions.  Hey, we agree!  I don’t think Alyssa is playing 4-D chess here.

And one day some of these old, lonely, childless women will realize that the real “war on women” was waged by the Left.  They’ll regret buying the lie that having sex with lots of men and killing their offspring was such a bright idea, especially when no one wanted to wife them up once they hit the “wall.”

“I refuse to let anyone else’s bullshit morality force me into a life of premarital celibacy. I refuse to live in the narrative that sexual pleasure is for men and that women exist to deliver that pleasure,” she said on her abortions on the podcast. “Nobody will say that he was at fault for enjoying sex with me, but you can be damned sure that the men enacting these laws think less of me for deriving the same pleasure from him.”

Her straw-man arguments to excuse her sluttiness are pathetic.  I know a “few” Republicans and can’t think of one that wants to deny sexual pleasure to women.  But even if that wasn’t a lie, it is a silly non sequitur to pretend that anti-abortion laws aren’t really about saving the lives of children.

In summary, this professional Leftist insists that killing two of her children was noble but Republicans are mean.  Duly noted.

Roundup

From the “we’re gonna need a lot of millstones to clean this place up” category: Tax-funded PBS perverts aggressively indoctrinate children – but remember, legalizing oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” won’t impact you! — Alabama Public Television refuses to air Arthur episode with gay wedding


Best of the Bee

‘Abortion Is Healthcare,’ Says Woman Who Apparently Thinks ‘Healthcare’ Means Tearing A Human Being Limb From Limb | The Babylon Bee

Caravan Of Unborn Babies Heads Toward Alabama To Apply For Asylum | The Babylon Bee


The Abortion Discourse in Social Media, Summed Up in One Conversation — The link is golden.  Partial list below.  Please read it all and share.  It really does sum up the abortion debate well.  All the pro-child-killing side has is one fallacious argument after another.

A summary of social media discourse over the last week, as it pertains to the abortion debate.

Me: “We need laws to protect the most innocent and vulnerable among us.”

Them: “You’re so fascist.”

Me: “I don’t think you know what that word means.”

Them: “Men shouldn’t tell women what to do.”

Me: “As a woman, should you tell men not to rape people?”

Them: “Yeah, but that involves hurting somebody else.”

Me: “So does abortion.”

Them: “No, a fetus isn’t a human being.”

Me: “Yeah, but…science and stuff.”

Them: “Don’t force your religion on me.”

Me: “Yeah, but…science and stuff. That’s literally, scientifically, and medically a living human being.”

Them: “But they’re not *really* a human being.”

Me: “Okay, Hitler.”

Them: “You just want to judge people.”

Me: “Is that wrong?”

Them: “Yes, it’s absolutely wrong to judge people.”

Me: “So am I wrong for that?”

. . .


Women Preaching — Excellent biblical analysis on why women shouldn’t be preachers.  This is needed more than ever as the Southern Baptist Convention and others bend to the culture.

The position which permits women preaching to mixed congregations cannot be supported from Scripture. Common descriptive biblical passages do not support the position. First Corinthians 14:34-35 [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] are the two prescriptive passages in the NT on the issue. Thus, they are the authority on the matter. Exegetically, both passages clearly forbid women from preaching and teaching to men in the local church. Therefore, NT churches must conduct themselves accordingly if they are going to be in obedience to Christ, the blessed Lord of the church.


For those who need a study to know that water is wet: Bombshell study explodes myth that same-sex parenting is no different


Coming soon to a country near you: Illegal Aliens Take Over Paris Airport

African illegal aliens calling themselves “black jackets” made a show of force at the main Paris airport yesterday afternoon, refusing to let passengers board their planes: “France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!” one person can be heard yelling into a loudspeaker.It follows that everyone on the planet also has a right to generous French welfare benefits.

 

Responding to the pro-abortion rape/incest argument

With several states doing the right thing and challenging Roe v Wade on its “personhood” distinction, it is a great time to be prepared to calmly and clearly refute pro-abortion sound bites.

Pro-abortion people exploit rape and incest victims to advance their child-killing cause, and they are joined by many pro-lifers who either haven’t thought the issue through carefully or are too scared to make the argument.  They try to paint you as evil for not wanting rape and incest victims to “solve” their problems by killing any children produced during the crimes, but it is false compassion and a red herring because they don’t just want to keep those abortions illegal.  They want all abortions to be legal, up to the child’s first breath.

Don’t shy away from that issue, just respond as follows.

I’m glad you brought up the topic of rape and incest. Those are terrible crimes that we should seek to prevent, and we should ensure that the victims aren’t further victimized and that there is justice for the rapists. If you propose the death penalty for the rapist I’d consider that, but why is it the first option for the innocent child? It is a scientific fact that the unborn are human beings from fertilization.

Abortionists such as Planned Parenthood help hide the crimes. They have been caught countless times hiding statutory rape, incest (which is another form of rape) and sex trafficking. If you really care about rape, then protest Planned Parenthood and how they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking.

Unless you can look at an ultrasound and tell if a child was the product of rape or incest, then you shouldn’t let them be killed.

Abortion doesn’t undo the trauma of rape, it compounds it. It is another way of a stronger person abusing a weaker person.

Rapes results in less than 1% of abortions. Those abortions are still wrong, but for the record, would you oppose outlawing all abortions, except those in the cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother? If not, then why not admit that you are really just pro-abortion and that you use the rape/incest card to advance your cause?  Stop exploiting rape victims to justify abortion.


Here’s a handy jpeg you can use on social media.

Alyssa Milano’s “sex strike”

It must be exhausting to be a God-mocking, Molech-worshiping Leftist.  You have to prop up all sorts of evil, inconsistent and anti-science ideas all day, every day.  Exhibit A: Alyssa Milano, who called for a “sex strike” by women because some states are saying you can’t kill children with beating hearts.

She was quickly and thoroughly roasted on social media for proving the point of every conservative ever, namely that abstinence works!  Mike Pence will be glad to know Alyssa has joined his side.  And I’m sure her children are comforted knowing that mommy fought aggressively for the right to have been able to kill them.

She also got in trouble with professional feminists who rightly noted that Milano was implying that sex was just a weapon used by women to manipulate men.  Apparently Milano doesn’t really enjoy sex, she just uses it to get what she wants and needs to be able to kill an unfortunate children created by her transaction.

Predictably, she trotted out the anti-science “reproductive rights” canard.  For the 397th time, abortion kills children who have already been reproduced.  Is that so hard to understand?  If they hadn’t been reproduced you wouldn’t have anything to murder!

And of course, she had to apologize to the inevitable “trans” (note: still not a real thing) people with some unintelligible complaints about cisgender or the like.

Never forget that the #1 issue in life for feminists is being able to kill their children up to their first breath and without anesthetic.  Oh, and even beyond that if the abortion fails to kill the child.  Because they insist that the Constitution doesn’t just give you a right to abortion but to a dead baby.

There is a reason they are indistinguishable from the “Christian” Left, whose god says it is OK to kill children to their first breath.  These are the real extremists, as most self-identified pro-choice people – and most Leftist countries – oppose late-term abortions.

Hopefully many women will heed her advice and stop having out-of-wedlock sex and realize how much better life is when doing things God’s way.  The Bible teaches the original “sex strike” — no sex until a one man / one woman marriage.  And the world would be a vastly better place if people heeded that.

Of course we should keep criticizing the work of Rachel Held Evans

The Bible didn’t shy away from criticizing Judas after he died, so why would we ignore Rachel Held Evans’ false teachings?  And given that her death will lead many to read her works, it is as important as ever to respond to her falsehoods.

The social media reactions by her fans were as sad as they were predictable.  If you dared question her salvation they immediately – and with complete tone-deafness to their hypocrisy – insisted that you weren’t a real Christian.  Meditate on that.

They used the most wicked and vitriolic language while insisting that they were the tolerant ones.  One lady graciously pointed out Evans’ theological flaws and was blasted by Evans’ kind, loving fans with the following: “wrong, gross, unkind, unloving, disgusting, opportunist, cruel, arrogant, horrid, disgraceful, insensitive, hypocrite, nasty, judgmental, condescending, Pharisee, poisonous, heathen, unsaved, good only for compost, evil, abomination, hellspawn (my personal favorite, lol), b**ch.”

Stay classy, “Christian” Leftists.

And when the unrepentant LGBTQX lobby views you as their favorite Christian and thanks you for bringing them back to “church” then you know you had bad theology.

I’ve written on Evans many times. She was similar to many others who left the church.  Their core trait was giving into peer pressure and acting like those around them.  When growing up in evangelical churches they played that part, but when they went to college they mimicked the worldviews of those around them.  Evans was just a bit more clever and milked the “ex-evangelical” bit for all it was worth.

Sure, I hope God reached her before she died, but I have the same sentiment for the ~150,000 people who die every day.  She made a living mocking the word of God and did so until the end, and her writings that survived her need to be refuted.  Here’s my catch-all.


fake3Faux evangelical Rachel Held Evans wrote A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband “Master” and in this case you can judge a book by its cover.  Evans sets out to mock the word of God that she claims to believe, and she succeeds before you even open the book. This is why the “Christian” Left loves her and why she gets so much Leftist media attention.

Exhibit A: The picture and subtitle of Evans on the roof relates to Proverbs 21:9 (and repeated in Proverbs 25:4) “It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife.”

You don’t need a PhD in theology to see how badly — and deliberately? — she misapplied the verse.

  1. It isn’t a literal command to anyone. It is a colorful illustration teaching the wisdom of not marrying someone who is quarrelsome. It isn’t immoral to marry such a person, but it also isn’t particularly wise.  It wouldn’t be pleasant to live on the corner of your roof (they had flat roofs), but it would be more unpleasant to have a quarrelsome wife.
  2. The biblical illustration doesn’t have the quarrelsome person on the roof, it has her suffering spouse there.
  3. It was not a punishment, it was a metaphorical escape.

Evans didn’t let those pesky and obvious details got in the way of mocking the word of God.  She accomplished exactly what she wanted to in this book.  Her message is basically this: “Hey people, I am totally a Christian, but let me show you how silly the Bible can be.  If you find something there you think you like then that’s great, but you shouldn’t take it seriously.”

So before you even open the book you can know that she is a false teacher and enemy of the real God (as are her editors and publishers who approved it).  The only way to miss it is to not read the verses (false teachers thrive on the biblical ignorance of their followers) or to share her view that the Bible is a foolish, man-made book.

But it gets worse as Evans continues to sit in judgment of the word of God.  Unlike Job (Job 1:20-22, Evans regularly charged God with wrong.  Referring to her parents, she said:

they seemed to know instinctively that rules that left people guilt-ridden, exhausted, and confused were not really from God.

Uh, sure.  Anything you don’t like or understand isn’t from God.  That’s Creating a God in Your Own Image 101.

Then there is this:

as a woman I have been nursing a secret grudge against the apostle Paul for about eight years.

Note how she tips her hand about her belief that the writings of Paul weren’t inspired by the Holy Spirit.  The Apostle Peter had her number 2,000 years ago:

2 Peter 3:15–16 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

And like all “Christian” Left feminists, she falsely targets Paul and she ignores that Jesus only selected men as apostles.  Does she think Jesus was a misogynist, or that even though He was the creator of the universe that He was afraid to upset the Pharisees’ sensibilities?

Worse yet, she accuses the authors of the Bible of being blasphemous liars, allegedly speaking for God in literally hundreds of passages when it was “really” what they wanted.  She quoted this with her approval:

God never told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites. The Israelites believed that God told them to kill the Canaanites.

So Evans also disagrees with Jesus, who affirmed the Old Testament down to its smallest details, and insists – without evidence — that massive sections of the Bible are lies.  Or could it be that Evans is believing what she wants God to be and that she is the liar?  I suppose she thinks that the command against making a God in your own image is just another one of those passages that the writers made up.  Anyone who has actually read the Old Testament would know that passage after passage refers to the Israelites taking over the Promised Land.  Evans insists that all of those are not only lies, but blasphemous lies.  What else would it be if you falsely blamed God for what would have been unjustified mass murder and land-stealing?

Evans told people that voting for Hillary Clinton is “pro-life.”  You have to be a true Molech-worshiping ghoul to hold that view.  Hillary is inseparable from Planned Parenthood and the rest of the pro-choice extremists — including the “Christian” Left – who not only insist on legal abortions up to to child’s first breath but want more abortions via taxpayer-funding.  Yet for Evans that was the only “Christian” option.  Indeed.

Evans posted countless pictures and gushing commentary over the #womensmarch #abortionmarch but was nearly silent for the #MarchforLife — and even then she only criticized it. “Christian” Leftists really tip their hands that way, claiming to be pro-life while being the true pro-abortion extremists. If they really believed what they said they’d be opening up pregnancy centers all over. Instead, they reflexively support anything Planned Parenthood does.

And you’d think that Mrs. “Oh noes, the patriarchy!!” would find some way to criticize Islam, which has treated women inhumanely for 1,500 years.  But she was silent.

While she was quick to play the fallacious race card against Christians, don’t miss where Racist Held Evans goes on a hypocritical rant lamenting how if Roe v Wade is overturned then less minority children will be killed.  She also accused pro-lifers of being racist and not knowing that we save mostly minority lives.  Who knew?  She deleted the Tweets when people outed her but I saved them as a public service.  It was epic.

I’ll buy a Christian book by someone whose primary self-descriptor is “doubt-filled” right after I buy one from a mathematician who doubts that 2+2=4.  Having some matters you haven’t completely studied is one thing. For example, I hadn’t delved deeply into continuation/cessation particulars until recently, so I didn’t blog about it. But if you are so doubt-filled that it defines your faith, maybe you should read instead of write.

Also note how she has no doubts about abortion being legal to the child’s first breath, that you can change your gender, that LGBTQX behaviors are not sins, that women should be pastors, etc.  Oddly enough, when her views line up with the world’s she has no doubts at all.

You can also know Evans is a false teacher by those she promotes and partners with.  She works directly with Nadia Bolz-Weber, who, among other things, says there is “no shame in ethically sourced porn,” that “the Bible’s not clear about [s%#^]!” and so much more  (Just as Evans claims that “It [the Bible] fails massively at getting to the point”). This isn’t some loose pairing, either.  They co-host a freak show called Why Christian each year and endorse each other’s work..

Also check out Jes Kast, whom Evans adores, and see if her theology is biblical, or Glennon Doyle Melton, the “super mom” who left her husband to be with a lesbian.

Evans is a typical Leftist hypocrite, believing ridiculous phonies like Kristine Blasey Ford (Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser) but dismissing credible stories of abuse by the wife of prominent “Christian” Left pastor Tony Jones – who just “happens” to help with her conferences. Go figure.

As bad as the self-avowed “Christian” Leftists are, at least they own their label (sans the scare quotes).  Evans masquerades as an Evangelical while holding “Christian” Leftist views, which makes her even worse than them.

She’s been really cranky since Trump won.  She completely ignores all the sex scandals and cover-ups from Leftist politicians, celebrities and journalists and completely fixates on Donald Trump.  She won’t admit it, but I think it is pretty obvious that she planned to have a role with Caesar – er, uh, Hillary — just like she did with Obama.  Trump has false teacher Paula White, Obama had – and Hillary probably would have had – Mrs. Evans.

And her latest book is just more blasphemy, where she titled it Inspired but obviously believes it isn’t.  Typical disingenuous behavior on her part.

Run, don’t walk, from faux evangelicals like Evans. In her own words and deeds she shows how much she loves the world and not Jesus.


Update: Truly sad that she died, especially having young kids.  But I have to be candid: When I read the comments of those who supported her and were affirmed by her, I am reminded at how wicked her “ministry” was. These were typical:

Be mad at God. Be mad at the Universe. Be mad. Be mad. Be mad.

4 hours ago   I had permission to explore LGBTQ+ affirming theology & eventually come out as bisexual. She was one of the first affirming Christians I encountered in my research, & her loud support is directly tied to who I am today.

37 minutes ago The door she opened for me by saying it’s okay to be angry at the church and it’s okay to leave, led to a thousand other open doors and new pathways that created who I am now: a queer Christian woman who no longer fears the white cisheteropatriarchy.

3 hours ago   I first started exploring Side A theology, which has led to me being in a wonderful, loving, gay relationship. I’m able to be myself and live my best life because of her opening my eyes.

4 hours ago  I’m an openly queer woman serving as an elder in my church . I never could have reconciled feminism and Christianity all those years ago without her.

If that’s what she encouraged people to do then it is a tragic legacy.

Someone wrote this in response to a blog post noting Evans’ bad theology:

Rude. Heartless. So inappropriate. Can you picture Christ responding like this – calling someone an apostate immediately after their untimely death? I don’t think so. I don’t know what god you guys are serving, but it doesn’t reflect the God that I know.

The commenter was tone-deaf to the fact that that’s exactly how Jesus will respond when someone dies — either with judgment or with “well done, good and faithful servant.” Someone rightly pointed out what Jesus said about untimely deaths:

Luke 13:1–5 There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

Not surprisingly, Evan’s fans reject what Jesus said.


Also see

Now That Rachel Held Evans Has Died,Should We Stop Calling Her A False Teacher? | The Outspoken TULIP

Remembering the Heretic, Rachel Held Evans – Reformation Charlotte

Rachel Held Evans and the Rightness of Post-Mortem Discernment

The shameless anti-science pro-abortion rhetoric of the Left

Sadly, this illogical nonsense actually resonates with the child-killing Democrats, including the Molech-worshiping “Christian” Leftists who support abortion to the child’s first breath.  It is all quite ridiculous, but go to the 6:00 mark for some scary comments.

These are painful decisions for these women

So?  I don’t care how painful it is for you to decide to murder your child or whether you consulted your doctor or religious advisor, it is still wrong, just as it would be if you killed her outside the womb.

With all of your distortions and horrible tales, I answered it numerous times.  When a woman gets pregnant it is not a human being inside of her.

Uh, that’s not what all those pesky embryology textbooks say, or even what common sense would dictate to even the dullest among us.  What else would two human beings produce, a puppy?  Of course it is a human being.

Even the chryon is fallacious, as it refers to “reproductive rights.”  But reproductive rights have nothing to do with abortion, because a new human being has already been created.  The question is whether you should be able to kill that human being.  Never let the pro-aborts get away with using that term.

As always, I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice.

Pro-abort Rachel Held Evans uses (false) exceptions to make bad rules

As the saying goes, exceptions make bad rules.  But in the case of pro-abort “Christian” Racist Held Evans, she uses a false exception to make a horribly bad rule.

She plays  on the sympathies of those with children diagnosed in utero with health issues.  In her world, it is much better to kill the child right away because she might have serious health issues when born.  That ignores that doctors and diagnoses are sometimes wrong (I’ve personally met several people who are glad they didn’t heed the advice to kill their children). It also ignores that God doesn’t permit mercy killings (then again, since when did pro-LGBTQX Mrs. Evans care what Jesus said?).

But as bad as that is, faux-lifer Evans isn’t using that argument to make the case to ban all abortions except those in her example  She uses it to justify all abortions at any time, and to have taxpayers pay for abortions for those who can’t afford to kill their children.  She piles evil upon evil.  When pro-aborts make deceptive claims like that, ask them exactly which abortions they want to make illegal.  Answer: None.

And to make it worse, she virtue signals in her pro-abort Tweet.  You see, she is more righteous and caring than you because she would consider killing her child while you wouldn’t.

Source: Pro-LGBT Activist Who Thinks She’s A Christian Defends Abortion – Reformation Charlotte:

In an ultimate display of selfishness, Held Evans, a professing Christian (of course she isn’t a real Christian, but she has many Christian followers), asserts that she isn’t sure what she would do if she were told by a doctor that her unborn child may have a birth defect affecting the “quality” of the child’s life.

The problem here isn’t that Held Evans is concerned with the quality of the child’s life. Held Evans is concerned about the quality of her own life. She — and other abortion supporters just like her — see children not as a gift from God made in the image of God, but as a burden. Further, a child that may need special care and extra attention would, in Held Evans’ eyes, decrease her own “quality of life.”This is the sickness of the pro-choice movement. You can’t call yourself a Christian while holding to anti-Christ beliefs. The gospel calls us to lay our own lives down, pick up our cross, and follow Jesus. Held Evans and the many pro-choice (or undecided) people out there have failed to see the goodness of God and the gift of salvation in Christ. They are, regardless of their claims, unregenerate and need the forgiveness of Jesus Christ found only through repentance and faith.

Toxic femininity celebrates killing children up to their 1st breath without anesthetic

Please use that response or something similar whenever any Leftists whine about “toxic masculinity” (which to them means any form of masculinity, because men = bad).

That goes double for anyone from the “Christian” Left.

This video is awesome.  Please share.  Hat tip: Dalrock  Bonus from Dalrock to work into conversations as appropriate: “He’s the kind of man who shaves with Gillette . . .” Ouch.

P.S. And yes, they are children.  At least that’s what the folks at dictionary.com say.

I saw the Gosnell movie. You should too.

I hadn’t been to a movie in at least a year.  I can’t even remember what the last one was. But I saw Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer tonight.  I hope you do as well.

You know how it ends, so I can’t spoil that. But these comments might tell you more than you want to know ahead of time, so you’ve been warned.

The acting and production values were good, and much better than expected. The guy who played Gosnell was amazing.

They obviously used some poetic license to move the plot along, but to their credit they didn’t appear to exaggerate any of the key facts.  The guy was so over-the-top it seemed like overkill just to describe it.

There were a couple unnecessary things that detracted in a minor way (I’m pretty sure that real coroners don’t hand scalpels to District Attorneys and let them cut up cadavers at all, let alone without gloves and masks).  But you get those in any movie.

While the trial and key players kept making the point that Gosnell was on trial for murder, not abortion, they did make a lot of good pro-life statements.  The “good” abortionist, there to make Gosnell look like a “bad” one,  described a 2nd term abortion in detail, including injecting a needle in the child’s heart to kill her, evacuating the “gray matter” (i.e., brains) to make her skull collapse, etc.  That’s more than most voters have probably ever heard.

Never forget that according to the Left — including the “Christian” Left — Gosnell’s only problem was killing the children a little too late.  They support unrestricted abortions to the child’s first breath and want more of them with taxpayer funding.  And despite their “safe, legal and rare” lies, the government really did prevent inspections from being done at Gosnell’s clinic.

Kudos to everyone involved with the production.  Hope you go see it!

Are you going to see the Gosnell movie? Please spread the word!

I’m so glad to see they made this.  The trailer looks great.  I haven’t been to a movie in over a year, but I may make an exception for this one.

Initially, the government deliberately ignored the greatest serial killer in American history.  Fortunately, someone finally took him on.  But unfortunately, the media did a choreographed embargo on the trial.  I remember searching MSNBC and the LA Times, among other Leftist sites, and getting zero hits for his name.  Zero.  That is active suppression.

When I would teach pro-life reasoning training to new Care Net Pregnancy Center volunteers I’d ask if they had heard of Kermit Gosnell.  Usually only about 25% had — and this was from a group of very committed pro-lifers!  The media was very effective at hiding it.

Not surprisingly, Facebook is choking ads for the film.  You can only imagine what other suppression Twitter and the rest of Big Tech are engaged in.

Make no mistake: Those Molech-worshiping ghouls love abortion.

Please share the word on this movie!  Even if it just gets people to search on the topic it will be worth it.

Are you ready to respond to pro-abortion arguments?

With the impending confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court Justice there is more talk than usual about abortion, and that will only increase from here.  Are you you ready to respond to people graciously when they make bad pro-abortion arguments?

The arguments are varied, but the most common ones are easy to refute.  For example, they love to play on people’s  emotions and pretend that we are hostile to rape victims if we don’t let them kill their children.  But just turn it around on them and ask, “So are you saying that you’d support making all abortions illegal except in the cases of rape?”  I guarantee you that the response will be “no.”  Then you simply say, “Then why are you exploiting rape victims to make your case for unrestricted abortions, and why do you support the Democrats’ policies of increasing abortions with taxpayer funding?”  it is just that easy.  Bonus points for reminding them how Planned Parenthood and other abortionists protect rapists and sex traffickers.

And when you get the inevitable “pro-lifers don’t care about children after they are born argument,” share these points.

This is a video where I teach about pro-life reasoning.  I used to give this content to Care Net Pregnancy Center volunteers.

Rachel Held Evans claims that the Bible “fails massively at getting to the point”

It would be true if she said that the Bible fails to get to her points – that is, her basic “Christian” Left views that God approves of LGBTQX perversions, abortion, coveting, egalitarianism, etc.  But the Bible doesn’t fail at all in what God wants to teach us.

The Domain for Truth has another review on her latest disingenuously titled book, “Inspired” — Analysis of Rachel Held Evan’s Book “Inspired” Part 6.  I admire SlimJim for reading it all so we don’t have to!  I’d read excerpts that Evans posted and analyzed them here.

The link notes how Evans, as usual, works overtime to undermine the authority of scripture.

It [the Bible] fails massively at getting to the point.

That is spoken like a non-Christian. Who could miss the point of the opening verse?  God created everything, so you better believe that you’ll be accountable to him — and the rest of this book tells you how to be reconciled to him.

The Bible teaches over 100 times that Jesus is the only way to salvation (it isn’t just John 14:6, though that would be enough). What could be more clear? But a spiritually blind wolf like Evans can’t see that — and obviously doesn’t believe it.

And she is wildly pro-LGBTQX perversions, even though the Bible couldn’t be more clear and consistent about God’s views on sex.  Consider the following truths and how Evans’ perversion-affirming god teaches the opposite:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referencing God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Even two out of three types of pro–gay theologians* concede those points, yet the “doubt-filled” Evans has zero doubts about affirming every sexual perversion in the LTBTQX spectrum.

She once again tips her hand that, despite her disingenuous book title, she absolutely does not think the Bible is the inspired word of God. She’s worse than a Bart Ehrman or a Richard Dawkins, as she says the same sorts of things about the Bible that they do.  But at least they are open about not being believers.

She also creates a straw-man argument where she pretends that we don’t think that different situations may require different actions.  Of course we know better.  An ectopic pregnancy may require an abortion to save the mother while the child will die either way. But wolves like Evans use that to dismiss truly universal truths that killing children for the other 99.9% of reasons is evil.

The Bible doesn’t fail at all.  It accomplishes just what God wants it to (Isaiah 55) and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3) — all things that Mrs. Evans and her followers desperately need!

As usual, run, don’t walk from wolves like Racist Held Evans.


*Pro-gay theology tends to fall into one of three categories. They are all wrong, but for varying reasons. Sometimes they overlap categories.

  1. The Bible is either not the Word of God, or most parts of it aren’t. This view claims that we can ignore the prohibitions against homosexual behavior because they were written by homophobic Jews.
  2. The Bible is the Word of God, but it doesn’t really say homosexual behavior is wrong. This view holds that people just aren’t reading the Bible properly, and that God’s Word is actually affirming of gay relationships.
  3. The Bible is the Word of God and does clearly and emphatically describe gay behavior as sinful. However, the Holy Spirit has given additional revelations such that this behavior is now acceptable. This view holds that God has changed his mind on this moral issue and not only is it now acceptable, but it is sinful if you don’t affirm this behavior and same-sex relationships.

Faux-lifers and loving your neighbor

One of the easiest ways to out faux-lifers (that is, pro-abortion people who pretend to be pro-life) is to keep them talking.  They often claim the name of Christ and that they love their neighbors.  They ever-so-briefly concede the humanity of the child and say how they would never have an abortion and wish they didn’t have to happen.

But they quickly forget about their neighbor in the womb and launch into tortured rationalizations about why they vote for politicians and support groups like Planned Parenthood that fight for unrestricted abortions to the child’s first breath.  They use every sound bite that the professional pro-aborts use.

So just ask them this: If you were in the womb, would you want someone to protect you from being crushed and dismembered?  And if you were going to be destroyed that way, would you at least want to be given anesthetic first?  After all, the faux-lifers fight to keep abortion legal to the child’s first breath and without anesthetic (they know that laws requiring anesthetics would remind people that the children do suffer when being killed, and they must prop up the lie that the children aren’t “really” living until their first breath).

The pro-aborts will squirm and go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to rationalize their inconsistency.  They’ll realize their reasoning is poor, so they’ll resort to attacking you instead. But just keep pointing back to their neighbor in the womb.  If they truly love their neighbors, how can they not try to protect their lives?

I also keep this jpg file handy to share with those who repeat the pro-abortion canard that pro-lifers don’t care about children after they are born.  I find that to be the #1 pro-abortion argument on the Internet.  It lets the pro-aborts pretend to kinda-sorta oppose abortion while attacking the character of pro-lifers.  There are nine things wrong with their sound bite.  Actually more, but the font was getting too small.  Feel free to use without attribution!

The “Christian” Left can’t make it past the first chapter of the New Testament without rejecting essential doctrines

I say that without exaggeration.  If you were reading a book that claimed to be the word of God and the explanation for this life and for eternity and for how to be on right terms with God, yet you completely rejected two of the religion’s foundational premises in the very first chapter, wouldn’t you just give it up and find another religion?  Not the “Christian” Left.  Consider these simple passages, clearly not written as illustrations but as specific truth claims (they immediately follow the genealogy of Jesus so it would be a non sequitur to shift genres).

Matthew 1 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. 20 But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

So we have two claims that the father is not human but that the conception was from the Holy Spirit.  The Left’s opposition to the virgin birth isn’t some side issue, because it goes to Jesus’ claims of deity that they typically deny.  Wolves like Mark Sandlin explicitly deny his divinity.

Then there is Jesus’ purpose for entering his creation.

21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:

23  “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,

and they shall call his name Immanuel”

(which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

So Jesus’ purpose was explicitly stated: To save his people from their sins.  Yes, He came for other reasons, but the opening of this Gospel focused on the main reason.  Also note the additional claim to the virgin birth.

Of course, the more you read the Bible, the worse it gets.  The “Christian” Left thinks they like the Sermon on the Mount, but they’d hate it if they understood it.  They only agree with a few parts of it because they get them wrong.

Run, don’t walk, from the “Christian” Left.  Their beliefs are indistinguishable from the world’s.