Tag Archives: Barack Obama

Pro-life

I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice

1 Comment

pro-choice-baby.jpgThe shirt says, “Now that I’m safe I’m pro-choice” ==>

One of my favorite techniques to use when debating pro-choicers is to highlight how pro-life views are in concert with science and how their views are not.  It is easy to demonstrate the scientific fact that life begins at conception.  They may try to argue that but will look pretty foolish when confronted with all the mainstream embryology textbooks that state otherwise (not to mention common sense as well as concessions of the point from so many people on their side).

Then they may shift to “personhood” arguments (i.e., “OK, the unborn are human beings, but they aren’t persons yet so abortion is morally neutral or even a moral good”).  Then you just point out that they are using philosophical arguments – and weak ones at that – and have ignored the clear facts of science.

You, on the other hand, are firmly on the side of science.  Note all the good things you’ve accomplished:

1. It bursts the myth that you’re anti-science.

2. It bursts the myth that you just are just pushing your religious beliefs on them.  You haven’t even mentioned Jesus (Though if they want to talk about him you’d be glad to).

3. It shows them how they have taken an anti-science position on this vitally important topic and have completely abandoned the “we only trust what science tells us” falsehood.

Remember that these are powerful arguments.  Don’t use them in a heavy handed way . . . unless you are dealing with a really irritating person on a blog.  Just kidding!  Probably!

Seriously, politely weave them into the conversation and see it if resonates with them.  Remember that members of the media are 90+% strongly pro-abortion so people have gotten away without being challenged on bad pro-abortion reasoning for a long, long time.  It may take them a little time to see the light and admit their errors.  At a minimum you’ve given them something to think about and disarmed them of some of their favorite bad arguments against you.

Just calmly tell them, “I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice.”

P.S. Yes, I’m aware that my critics will respond with comments like this one.

You’re “too pro science to be pro choice.” Well, sure. Science agrees with you on that topic. Funny how science goes out the window on others, though.

I reject the bad philosophy* that perverts one sub-branch of one of the dozens of branches of science.  That does not make me anti-science.  Neither does questioning the power-grabbing / subject-changing politics of “climate change.”**

As always, remember that forgiveness and healing are possible for those who have participated in the abortion process.

I’m also too pro-science to be pro-porn.

—–

*Atheist scientist Richard Lewontin’s quote is a classic example of Darwinist question-begging philosophy — that is, assuming what they claim to be proving:

Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

** Greenpeace founder on “global warming.”

Climate change has become a powerful political force for many reasons. First, it is universal; we are told everything on Earth is threatened. Second, it invokes the two most powerful human motivators: fear and guilt. We fear driving our car will kill our grandchildren, and we feel guilty for doing it.

Third, there is a powerful convergence of interests among key elites that support the climate “narrative.” Environmentalists spread fear and raise donations; politicians appear to be saving the Earth from doom; the media has a field day with sensation and conflict; science institutions raise billions in grants, create whole new departments, and stoke a feeding frenzy of scary scenarios; business wants to look green, and get huge public subsidies for projects that would otherwise be economic losers, such as wind farms and solar arrays. Fourth, the Left sees climate change as a perfect means to redistribute wealth from industrial countries to the developing world and the UN bureaucracy.

So we are told carbon dioxide is a “toxic” “pollutant” that must be curtailed, when in fact it is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, gas and the most important food for life on earth. Without carbon dioxide above 150 parts per million, all plants would die.

Christian worldview

Fathers matter

3 Comments

Despite what the LGBTQX lobby and media conglomerate will tell you, gender matters and fathers matter.  Via From Father Knows Best to Father Doesn’t Matter:

In America, roughly 39,000 suicides take place each year – 30,000 of which are committed by men. Ironically, most suicide literature will usually have a woman depicted on front with little attention paid to the mental health and wellness of men. This is because women overwhelmingly attempt suicide (a cry for help) while men overwhelmingly follow-through (an act of frustration and despair). Such feelings of despair and frustration are now being felt elsewhere in our society as well.

The number of American males valuing marriage is plummeting. . . . Socially, men are looked down upon more than at any other time in history. . . .

Verily, the greatest impact on men boycotting society has involved the future well-being of our nation’s children.

Pay close attention to these statistics.

It is well known that fatherless children are more likely to grow up impoverished and victims of neglect, abuse, and sexual molestation at significantly higher rates. However, the true impact of fatherless homes isn’t understood until the data is reviewed in greater detail.

The U.S. Department of Health notes that 63% of youth suicides come from fatherless homes – five times the normal average. The Center for Disease Control notes that 85% of all children who have mental or behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the normal average. The Journal of Family and Culture once noted an over 100% increase in juvenile self-identification as “homosexual” once a father leaves the home. Pediatrics journal noted in 2011 that homosexual teens are five times more likely to commit suicide than heterosexual teens. Fatherless teenage girls are 711% more likely to have children as a teen, 53% more likely to marry as a teen, and 92% more likely to get divorced. Over 50% of women in prison came from fatherless homes. Over two-thirds of teens in chemical dependence programs come from fatherless homes. And, according to the National Principals Association, some 71% of high school drop-outs come from fatherless homes.

As men become frustrated and full of despair, so does our society and the children of this nation. Despite a 93% chance of being killed on the streets, teens still decide it best to run away from home than to stay in their present living conditions – 90% of these teens are fatherless. The over 6% of the juvenile population is incarcerated each year – many tried as adults on felony and misdemeanor charges.

If this country is ever to change, our youth are ever to regain their hope, and the church is ever to grow, we must take a stance on the importance of men in society and their duty to society. Pastors and priests cannot, and should not, belittle man’s role in family and society anymore – even if done in jest. It cannot be suggested that man should take a passive role in society or in their families. Strong male role models should be used to help children more effectively cope and grow. And, most importantly, the church must start a public and male-centric dialogue on the problems facing men, fears of men, the needs of men in contemporary society, the importance of men in family and social structures, the Biblical role of men, and how America’s hatred of men is killing our youth and our nation’s future.

If the media/entertainment/political industries really want to reduce suicides, why not focus on fatherhood?  Why do more to damage children by mandating “same-sex marriage” recognition?

Politics

IRS leader visited Obama 157 times, but they never discussed targeting Conservatives? Sure.

1 Comment

Yeah, it is only 157 times more than the previous Commissioner visited with President Bush in his last 4 years.  And of course Obama learned about the targeting from the media.

Seriously, if you don’t see the problem then you are part of the problem.  Even if this was the only scandal in the Obama administration it would be worthy of impeachment.

But again, remember that the biggest issues we should emphasize here aren’t Obama’s incompetence, maliciousness, lying and law-breaking.  The issues to emphasize are the dangers of expecting government to solve all of our problems and trusting it to be better than the free market to choose winners and losers.  Point to the doctrine of original sin and how giving unchecked power to anyone is a bad idea.

Via Politics: Former IRS head visited Obama White House a staggering 157 times.

Even though we know at least two Senators pushed the IRS to target the left’s political enemies, and despite the fact that White House council knew about it weeks – maybe months – before it appeared in the papers, the official line is that Obama learned of the IRS scandal only when it appeared in the media.  He’s a busy guy and, since the agents involved were just “low-level rogues,” it was impossible for the President to hear about the targeted auditing of Tea Party groups.

It’s not like he’s being directly briefed by the head of the IRS on a regular basis.  He has no time for that.

Except, for some reason, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman was spending a staggering amount of time at the White House. According to a Daily Caller analysis of public records, he visited at least a whopping 157 times.

To put that in perspective, he enjoyed more White House visits that Secretaries of State Clinton and Kerry combined.  He was there three times as often as Kathleen Sebelius, the HHS secretary who’s been instrumental in the Obamacare fiasco.  Heck, it’s more than twice the number of appearances made by our resident gun-runner, Eric Holder.

 

Former IRS head visited Obama White House a staggering 157 times

Uncategorized

Pro-abortion false teachers & Planned Parenthood

I’ve yet to find a theologically Liberal false teacher who didn’t support the evils of Planned Parenthood.  The “social justice” crowd either ignores abortion (and thus implicitly supports it) or explicitly supports it by supporting Planned Parenthood, taxpayer-funded abortions and more.

The endless shamelessness of these baby-killers/statutory rape-hiders is evident in their new ads.

Planned Parenthood ad, baby

Uh, your baby will thank you for what — having her crushed and dismembered because you didn’t want her?!   It is right up there with the deadly cynicism of their “Care. No Matter what.” slogan.  Gee, that sounds like a bit more like a pro-life slogan, not a pro-abortion slogan.  I mean, if you really cared, wouldn’t you have the baby instead of killing her?

Christian worldview

Schadenfreude, sweet schadenfreude

5 Comments

Alternate title: Mugged by reality.

This has been the best week in politics in the last 5 years. I’m not glad that the Obama administration did all these illegal and unethical things. We knew they were doing them (for those who actually research these sort of things, he did them long before running for President). But now the few excesses that have gone public are so egregious that even Socialists like Stewart can’t deny them. If anyone thinks that the scandals are only limited to what we know about Benghazi, the IRS, AP, Fast and Furious, etc., then they are still part of the problem. (Oh, and the fact that they are still on the record for unrestricted, taxpayer-funded baby killing and their wildly anti-family and anti-Christian policies is no coincidence.) The administration is still trying out their Excuse of the Day (yesterday day was, “We’re not corrupt, just incompetent!”). I think they are corrupt and incompetent, but whichever lane they pick we have a solid argument against them.  Don’t give up.

But this isn’t just about Obama and his over-the-top corrupt administration, it is about big government. It is inherently inefficient and can’t be trusted, so you must limit it.  Don’t run against Obama, run against big government and Liberalism.  

P.S. How many of these scandals were President Bush’s fault?!

Uncategorized

The news media AND theologically Liberal “Christian” leaders are to blame for Obama

Everything written in Obama’s Travesty of Leadership: The News Media Shares Culpability applies to the false teachers* who helped Obama get elected twice.  They either knew or should have known what he was really like.  We Bible-believing conservatives knew!

Before he ran for President, Obama’s short careers as a lawyer and politician were studded with events that clearly indicated a weak character that would be dangerous in the presidency: representing Chicago slumlords and getting poor people—African-Americans, no less—thrown into the street in freezing weather, and winning elections via crony David Axelrod’s underhanded means. But the news media widely chose to not publicize those events: chose to instead glamorize Obama. He was from Harvard, brilliant, a gifted communicator, even our savior: hail Obama, minus the stiff-armed salute.

Some indications suggest, and were largely ignored by most major news media companies, that even in high school and undergraduate and graduate school, Obama showed a suspect character. By his own admission, he used drugs every day and skipped class in high school. His supporters, including those working for major news media companies, apparently thought this made him cool.

Since becoming president, Obama’s questionable character has shown itself repeatedly: his “green-energy” program, which looks like a means to repay rich, fat-cat campaign donors; his “fast-and-furious” gun scandal, which apparently entailed illegally selling US guns to Mexican drug dealers so they’d use the guns to kill people and create anti-gun fervor in the US; his continual, and very public, practice of encouraging supporters to aggressively attack those opposing him, so they’d do exactly what his supporters embedded within the IRS have done. Like a common bully, he publicly jeers at and insults his opposition, and his supporters love every word of it. They support him for who and what he is; because he divides rather than unites Americans; because he seeks to publicly humiliate half the US population; because he plays dirty; because he talks a smooth line of bologna.

Throughout all of this, most major news media companies have either remained silent or even defended Obama. Thus encouraged, he became bolder. His character, already weak, folded completely, and his arrogance, which has filtered throughout his administration, has run amok: widespread, unmonitored use of drones for killing . . . some people, we don’t know for sure whom; arming Mexican drug lords; domestic spying and harassment. You name it. He’s even grossly misrepresented his Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, named “Obamacare” erroneously because he neither conceived of nor wrote it. It doesn’t “provide healthcare for 30 millions Americans,” as he’s said. It provides health insurance, and the two are usually opposed to each other; health insurers work to minimize costs by minimizing and/or denying care. The federal government, already deeply into the healthcare business, is now in the health insurance business as well, and our beloved, trustworthy IRS is in charge.

* such as Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis and race-baiting Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie

Christian worldview

Increased unemployment, need for food stamps and other ills are design features of Obama’s policies, not bugs

1 Comment

If you don’t know what I mean by referring to Cloward & Piven and still support Obama, you are a big part of the problem. You really need to expand your media horizons and stop trusting the Liberal media.

If you know what I mean by referring to Cloward & Piven and still support Obama, you are a big part of the problem.

Via First-Hand Report on Obama’s Columbia Milieu:

The plan was revolting, but brilliant. Cloward & Piven taught that America could only be destroyed from within. Only by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements could capitalism and the America economy be destroyed. So the plan was to make a majority of Americans dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, unemployment, and entitlements of all kinds. Then, under the weight of the debt, the system would implode and the economy collapse, bankrupting business owners (i.e. conservative donors). Americans would be brought to their knees, begging for big government to save them. Voila — you’d have a new system — socialism!

This is not a conspiracy theory.  All the information is readily available in many sources, but the Liberal media refuses to report on it.  Obama and Hillary were both deeply influenced by these strategies.  It isn’t that they are surprised that their policies aren’t working, they know they won’t work.  At least they won’t work to solve the problems people care about, like unemployment.  They will work to destroy the country and pave the way for full-blown Socialism.

I would love to put polygraphs on the false teaching theological Liberals and see if they are ignorant of Cloward & Piven, which would be pretty bad, or if they know of the plan and approve of it, which would be even worse.  

Politics, Sexuality

Plan B pills available to 15 year old kids? This has enormous implications.

6 Comments

Once again, the illusion of consequence-free sex trumps parental rights, medical risks and more.

President Obama, Planned Parenthood and the rest of the radical Left are in favor of all children having unrestricted access to the “Plan B morning-after pill,” though for now the limit is 15 because one judge picked that age.  But what if another judge says it is 14, or 10?  Elections matter, and this is what you get when you stay at home or don’t understand the worldviews of those you are voting for.

Not only is this terribly dangerous for the children, but it aggressively usurps parental rights.  They are saying that as a parent you have no right to know if your kids are having sex or taking powerful drugs.  If it is legal for 15 yr. old children to buy them over the counter, why won’t adults buy be able to buy them and give them to kids in schools?

Like so many other birth control methods, this will give a false sense of security and increase pregnancies, abortions, diseases and emotional damage.

In nearly every other area of life and health 15 yr. olds are treated as not having the ability to make important decisions: Voting, alcohol, smoking, military service, whether to go to school, whether to take Advil at school without parental consent, drive, get tattoos, curfews and more. Yet the Left wants this powerful drug available to your daughters and sons and grandchildren.

I’m waiting for statutory rapists and pedophiles to use this and similar Leftist actions as a blanket defense. If 15 yr. old girls are mature enough to consent to sex with those 17 or younger and to purchase strong medicines by themselves, what is morally significant about their partners being 18 or over?  “But your honor, the State considers the 15 yr. old to be mature enough to consent to sex with a 17 yr. old and to buy these powerful drugs.  Why isn’t she mature enough to consent to sex with an 18 yr. old, or a 21 yr. old, or a 31 yr. old?”

And note that sales aren’t limited to girls.  Just think about all the guys who will buy these pills and use them as part of their seduction schemes. “Just take this pill tomorrow and there will be no consequences” — right?!

Worse yet, many of the extremists don’t want an age limit at all.  And in a sense they’ve already achieved their goal.  Since 15 yr. old children can’t drive they typically don’t have identification, so pharmacies will ultimately have to take their word for it.

Also see Thoughts on Plan-B – Sifting Reality and Hyper-sexualized, asexual America.

.

Politics, Sexuality

About that new hero . . .

32 Comments

While our culture not only accepts but applauds all sorts of deviant behavior, most people still frown on abandoning spouses or committing adultery. The exception is for gays who leave spouses and children to indulge their preferences, such as Episcopal “Bishop” Gene Robinson.  Their happiness at doing the opposite of what God commands trumps any lifetime commitments they made to their spouses, and of course the feelings and needs of their children are irrelevant.

Given that, why would anyone be surprised that most media accounts about one-point-per-game NBA player Jason Collins managed to “fake” it as a heterosexual for years and waste the youth of his former fiance’?  Via Jason Collins ‘outs’ himself, but fails to tell ex-fiancé he’s gay:

Eight years down the drain…

Basketball’s Jason Collins made headlines recently by telling the world he’s actually homosexual, but the one person he didn’t notify was his long-time ex, as reported by the New York Daily News on April 30, 2013.

The jilted Carolyn Moos claims that her former fiancé of eight years, Boston Celtics center Jason Collins, failed to notify her that he was homosexual, despite the fact that the two had been planning their nuptials for almost a decade.

Collins came out of the closet this past week-end, thusly being the only athlete in a major American sport who has publically identified himself as a homosexual.

Moos stated to the gossip network TMZ:

“It’s very emotional for me as a woman to have invested 8 years in my dream to have a husband, soul mate, and best friend in him.

This is all hard to understand.”

Benghazi? Let’s Talk About Collins Instead…

During today’s press conference, Barack Obama gushed on regarding his admiration for the Boston-based baller, saying he “couldn’t be prouder of him.”

Unlike the four Americans killed in the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Obama took time out of his busy schedule to place a telephone call Collins.

Even if he was “born that way” (another lie) then stringing his fiance’ on was reprehensible.

This guy waited to come out until it not only cost him nothing but will profit him greatly.  I’m not seeing the bravery that results in calls from the President, etc.

Oh, and Collins claims to be a Christian.  Meditate on that.  And the media ignores his “Christian” view that his behavior is acceptable yet blasts a man with the nerve to politely point out authentic biblical views.

Woe to those who call good evil and evil good.

Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. 

 

Politics, Pro-life

Words matter: The Democrats are pro-abortion, not pro-choice

5 Comments

I’ve mentioned this before and will probably only mention it six or seven more times, so please read carefully.  Do not let the pro-abortion people get away with using terms such as pro-choice or reproductive choice.  It is easy to show how false those are.  And don’t let them call you anti-abortion or anti-choice without taking the time to explain why they are correct on that claim.  You can take what they mean as a personal attack and use it to our advantage.

I used to try and be charitable and refer to pro-abortion people as pro-choice.  I preferred to get into the facts and logic and didn’t want to get people distracted by thinking we were just calling them names.  But with the latest platform of the Democratic party the most accurate term for them is pro-abortion.  

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

We should take the time to explain why pro-abortion is the correct term.  If you insist on taxpayer-funding of abortions, that is the opposite of choice.  Your are forcing pro-life people to pay for abortions.  And you are claiming that we don’t have enough abortions and that society will be better if we have more.  They don’t want them to be rare, they want more of them.  Those claims aren’t pro-choice, they are pro-abortion.

The majority of those who identify as “pro-choice” agree that abortion should be illegal after the first trimester, that women should have a 24 hour waiting period before having the abortion, that parental consent should be required for teens and that taxpayers shouldn’t have to fund abortions.  That makes Obama and anyone supporting the Democrat’s platform the extremists.

Consider how many people who identify as pro-choice agree with pro-life positions on specific topics, then consider how radical the Democrats’ platform is (unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortions at any time, including “partial-birth abortions”/infanticide).

Regarding “reproductive choice” or “reproductive health,” just point out the irrefutable scientific fact that a new human being is created at fertilization.  Therefore, abortions are designed to kill human beings who have already been reproduced.  Perverse organizations like the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice have self-refuting names.  It may seem subtle, but explaining how their pet terms are false undermines their credibility and helps point to the science and logic that are on our side.

These suggestions may seem unimportant, but they can make a big difference.  The Left uses terms to their advantage all the time, such as “marriage equality” and the pro-abortion phrases noted above.  Don’t let them get away with it.  By politely pointing out how pro-abortion their policies are and how “reproductive choice” is about birth control and not abortion we can plant seeds and persuade the middle ground about the truth.

Also, use verbal Judo and turn attack phrases such as “anti-choice” or “anti-abortion” back on them.  Just say, “Why yes, I am anti-abortion.  Abortions kill innocent but unwanted human beings without adequate justification, so I oppose them.  Thanks for noticing!  You should oppose them, too.”  I’m beginning to prefer the term anti-abortion over pro-life.  It is accurate and it spells out the word they hate to say: Abortion.

Regarding “anti-choice,” just ask them to complete the phrase and then agree with them: “You are using ‘choice’ in the sense of choosing to crush and dismember an innocent but unwanted human being without adequate justification, so I am against that choice.  You should be, too.  But I favor all sorts of other choices for women: Whom to marry, what career to choose, the freedom to speak out against “same-sex marriage,” whether to fund abortions of other people, whether to own a gun, what size soft-drink to consume, whether to home school, and more.  How do you feel about all of those choices?”