Via Researchers Confirm: Government Draws Workers of Lower Moral Caliber. Yet these are the people so many are content to have rule over them in an ever-expanding way. As the saying goes, do you really want the same people who run the DMV to be in charge of your health care?! I mean, other than being, on average, less competent and less ethical . . .
It takes a certain type of moral character to make a suitable government apparatchik. Recent research should make life easier for Big Government recruiters:
College students who cheated on a simple task were more likely to want government jobs, researchers from Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania found in a study of hundreds of students in Bangalore, India.
Their results, recently released as a working paper by the National Bureau of Economic Research, suggest that one of the contributing forces behind government corruption could be who gets into government work in the first place.
Honesty was tested by letting subjects roll dice and report the results; higher reported rolls resulted in higher payment. Aspiring bureauweenies unsurprisingly reported rolling lots of sixes.
“Overall, we find that dishonest individuals — as measured by the dice task — prefer to enter government service,” wrote Hanna and coauthor Shing-yi Wang, an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.
They added, “Importantly, we show that cheating on this task is also predictive of fraudulent behaviors by real government officials.”
Government workers who reported higher rolls were more likely to miss work. Government absenteeism is largely fraudulent.
This is a touching video of a couple who chose not to abort their child despite recommendations from “health care” providers.
There are a couple lessons from this that our morally schizophrenic and overly litigious society needs to learn.
1. Don’t kill human beings because they might have something wrong with them.
2. Don’t kill human beings even if they do have something wrong with them.
I’ve come across many people who were told by their doctors that they should abort, yet they have healthy kids today. Who knows how many have been killed who were perfectly healthy? And even if they weren’t healthy, they shouldn’t have been killed. We don’t do that to human beings outside the womb, so we shouldn’t do it inside the womb.
We didn’t bother with the amniocentesis with our daughters because there is no way we would have aborted and there was nothing that would have helped with our preparations for them if they had been diagnosed with Down Syndrome.
Planned Parenthood kills babies for a living, they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking, they encourage kids to have all sorts of out-of-wedlock sex and pretend that it can be done without risks, and so much more. Yet one of their representatives managed to shock people during a public hearing. Watch it yourself:
She and Planned Parenthood, like Barack Obama before her, are fighting the restrictions against withholding medical care and killing infants who survive abortions. She specifically says that the decision regarding what to do about the baby on the table is between the mother and the “healthcare provider.” (She initially said the family, then thought better of those implications and reverted to just the mother later in her testimony). And while this question may not have been asked, presumably she would insist that taxpayers fund the killing of the baby on the table.
Apparently the horrors of being a little too far away from a hospital were too much for Planned Parenthood to take, so speaking like Dr. Nick Riviera of The Simpsons, just to be on the safe side they need to be allowed to kill the baby.
Of course it is spectacularly evil to withhold care or directly kill a baby on a table. Just because the abortionist failed on the first try doesn’t mean he deserves a second shot. Anyone without a warped moral compass would agree. But who are the inconsistent ones? I submit that she is entirely consistent with the Democrats’ platform of abortions without restrictions, funded by taxpayers.
Remember, the successful abortion would have had the mother and child in the same room, with an irrelevant change in the distance between them. Everyone in the video seems to concede that. This Planned Parenthood representative would have been entirely consistent in saying the following (channeling Hillary Clinton):
With all due respect, the fact is we end up with a dead baby who wasn’t wanted by her mother. Was it because she was killed slightly inside the mother or slightly outside? What difference at this point does it make?
And she would be right. While killing the baby on the table seems worse, it is morally equal to the abortion. (Speaking of red equal signs . . .)
And if those babies can be killed, why not any baby delivered naturally?
Seriously. There are a lot of great money management ideas out there, but those two will make the most difference.
If you keep yourself fit — and I don’t mean tri-athlete fit, just moderate exercise/eat fairly well/don’t abuse alcohol and drugs type fit — you will save massive amounts of money on health care. If you haven’t already figured it out, Obamacare will be a disaster for this country, with higher costs and worse care. You can’t avoid some illnesses, but you’d be surprised how many things you can prevent. Just do some kind of exercise/activities you enjoy and eat decently (eat a little less, eat a little healthier).
And you won’t just save money, you’ll be loving your family. And you’ll feel better and work better. Who would want to unnecessarily burden their spouse and kids with their health problems?
And if you work on your marriage you’ll prevent a divorce, which would cost you dearly. I was teaching a Sunday School class on the Fireproof movie once and asked how many couple have so much extra money that they could afford a second household. No hands were raised.
And this isn’t just for young couples. I have seen far too many couples divorce who had been married 20+ years. If you get complacent things could unravel. Plan ahead for empty nests and ensure that you still have common interests. Ballroom dancing has been great for us, but it doesn’t matter if it is motor cycling, bowling, or whatever. Just do something together regularly that you both enjoy.
So spend some time on your marriage and save big. More importantly, that is the best thing you can do to show love to your spouse and your kids.
The title is what I should have announced to the crowd as I left the Department of Motor Vehicles when getting my licensed renewed (we have to do that in person every few years). As you might expect, the lines were very long (2+ hour wait for a very simple process) and there wasn’t enough parking or seats.
And keep in mind that while most businesses have to work hard to predict how many customers will come in on a given day, the DMV has it pretty easy. What could be more predictable than renewals? And these are the same government organizations that charge you extra to pay online, even though that saves time, money and fossil fuels for all involved.
So the question for anyone in favor of Obamacare is, “What makes you think that your healthcare service will improve?” There will be no incentives for them to perform any better. Who cares if you don’t like your service? Where else will you go? And it won’t just be your time, it will be your health. They’ll give you what they want to, when they want to, and any complaints you have will be far removed from anyone with the power to do anything about it.
And if you don’t know that Obamacare will necessarily lead to “death panels” and forced abortions (“either abort or pay for 100% of the costs yourselves, in cash”) then you don’t know how these people work.
Friendly tip for the guy wearing the “Drunk as sh!t” t-shirt: Maybe you should pick out something else when you are coming to get your license.
Shocking, I know. It turns out that organizations who kill innocent but unwanted human beings for a living and hide statutory rape don’t mind lying to protect their funding.
When faced with losing Federal funding, Planned Parenthood launched a full-scale, deceptive effort to mislead people into thinking that all sorts of important medical services would be lost if that happened. The deception was done in partnership with with the Obama administration and the mainstream media. The CEO of PP and various legislators and supporters claimed that Planned Parenthood did mammograms and that other vital services would be lost (apparently Walgreen’s is all out of condoms) if funding was cut. Those were lies.
Undercover phone calls released today show Planned Parenthood of Indiana clinic staffers at various locations admitting Medicaid patients have only to look around the corner to get healthcare.
Planned Parenthood and its supporters claim poor women in Indiana will lose access to vital healthcare services if they cannot go to Planned Parenthood.
But a new Live Action investigation shows the reality is quite the opposite….
. . .
In reality, according to PP’s own statistics, it sees only 1% of all Medicaid patients in the state. (PP states it sees 9,300 IN Medicaid patients, while IN has an enrollment of 1,022,700.)
Also see this Planned Parenthood overview for how, in addition to being the top destroyer of human life in the country, they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking (when not teaching your kids to ignore the perspectives on human sexuality that you and your religion hold).
Thursday, April 7, is World Health Day, hosted by the World Health Organization. The New Zealandnetwork of pro-life bloggers has decided to take this opportunity to create a “blogswarm” with the theme, “Abortion is not Health Care.“
Other than the abortions done to save the life of the mother (< 1%), abortion is the opposite of health care. Health care should improve the health of human beings. Abortion deliberately ends the life of a human being.
Did I really have to type that?
Taxpayer-funded abortions, a primary goal of nationalized health care, are the opposite of “pro-choice.” They force those who oppose abortions to participate in the process.
The solution to unsafe abortions isn’t to abort children “safely” but to stop killing children.
Chuck appears to be as ignorant of basic science as he is about Christianity and economics: He doesn’t realize that abortion occurs after two people have reproduced and made a new human being.
But why didn’t Chuck even mention Planned Parenthood’s serial hiding of statutory rape. Is it good for women if you hide statutory rape so you can make money off abortions? Chuck thinks it is a moral good to take 6 yr. old girls to gay pride parades. You’d think that at least his atheist wife (yeah, he’s not much of an evangelist, is he?) would have enough human decency to stop that. If his girls have 30 yr. old boyfriends when they are 13, will Chuck be glad PP is there to hide the crime of statutory rape and to kill his grandchild?
And why didn’t he mention how Planned Parenthood had been busted hiding traffickers of underage, illegal prostitution? How does he reconcile that with his faux concern for others?
I will say this for people like Chuck: They make it easy to spot fake Christians. Man, these guys aren’t even trying anymore!
Then there’s this big lie.
Planned Parenthood is proud of its vital role in providing young people with honest sexuality and relationship information in classrooms and online to help reduce our nation’s alarmingly high rates of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections.
Planned Parenthood helped cause the increase in STDs by giving false hope of the effectiveness of condoms and more.
Chuck also quotes the deceptively named Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (they appear to be equally ignorant about science):
As a coalition sustained by our faith and pursuit for social justice, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice asks: Where is the justice in destroying services that support responsible behaviors and healthy life styles? The answer is obvious: there is no justice and no compassion. These cuts must be stopped by the Senate because they are morally indefensible.
How can these moral freaks prattle on about justice, compassion and morality when their sole concern is to increase this? And if PP is such a swell organization, why don’t they contribute themselves instead of forcing other taxpayers to?
The health care bill was an un-Constitutional travesty brought about the multi-hundred million dollar bribes. It has and will reduce care and increase costs. Hundreds of exceptions have already been granted, presumably to the highest bidders.
But in addition to that, Chuck & Co. confuse correlation with causation. I just listed two bullets but the post has more. How deceptive or moronic due you have to be to conclude that 100% of the changes in the economy are due to a bill that hasn’t even been fully implemented?
The whole CNN piece was a glimpse into the mindset of those who don’t think carefully about matters of life and death, or even insurance, for that matter. Note how many times this worldview is in direct contradiction to reality.
Some segments and my thoughts . . .
Are they one of your success stories?” I asked, pointing behind Dr. H. to a large silver-framed photo of two fat-cheeked babies, identical twins. Dr. H. was my fertility doctor, and this was our first appointment.
“They’re my grandkids,” he explained, then laughed. “But everyone always says the same thing” — he held up his hands, like someone appealing to a higher power, and shook them dramatically — ” ‘We don’t want twins!’ ”
Hilarious, I thought. Dr. H.’s reaction suggested that anyone desperate enough to visit him would take a kid any way she could get one.
“But I really don’t want twins,” I said. “I already have a 3-year-old, and money is tight. One more is all we can handle.”
“Welllll,” Dr. H. replied, “given your age, we need to be aggressive. So I’d recommend going right to IVF. But if you want, we can transfer only one embryo.”
For that privilege, I had my insurer to thank, surprisingly enough: Since my policy covered three rounds of IVF, Dr. H. said, we could be conservative with the number of embryos we implanted each time.
For starters, why should insurance cover IVF at all? Think about it. I would gladly pay less for a plan that doesn’t cover wildly expensive and largely unsuccessful and unnecessary treatments. This is the costly fallacy of many health care discussions. Just because a procedure exists doesn’t mean you have a “right” to it and that others are obliged to provide it. If you can’t have kids and don’t want to adopt, then pay for IVF yourself. We had fertility issues before we were blessed with kids and we would not have used IVF.
“Great,” I replied, with a sigh of relief. “Then let’s get started.”
I left the consultation feeling excited and optimistic. Here was a science so precise that Dr. H. could choose among outcomes — you don’t want twins? Fine. I’ll just implant one embryo.
I was in control, finally. I’d spent months taking my temperature, monitoring my cervical mucus, and visiting an acupuncturist, wondering all the while if these efforts were any more effective than chanting a spell: Bibbity, bobbity, boo!
What if we did just one embryo?
One thing I’d somehow forgotten to ask Dr. H. about was my chance of becoming pregnant using a single embryo. According to research I’d done before seeing him, I knew that the live birth rate for in vitro fertilization for a 43-year-old like me was less than one in 20, and that was when the average number of embryos implanted was three. So going with only one had to worsen the already poor odds, didn’t it? But I kept silent.
Short version: She comes to realize that if she doesn’t implant multiple embryos that her odds of conceiving go down. No kidding.
And we seemed to have luck on our side: The crappy health plan supplied by my husband’s nonprofit employer paid for three IVF cycles. As I said to him after meeting with Dr. H., what did we have to lose?
Again, note how a system that provides three IVF cycles is “crappy.” I’d say providing more than zero is a waste.
. . . “You’re pregnant. In fact, your levels are quite high.” He paused. “And I’m afraid it might be twins.” He sounded apologetic; maybe he’d registered my objections after all.
I reminded him that when we did the insemination, he’d said that although I’d produced four follicles — as opposed to the one generated naturally — it was “highly unlikely” that more than one of the eggs would be fertilized.
“We won’t know anything for sure until we do a sonogram,” Dr. H. tried to reassure me. “And a third of the time, one of the twins vanishes anyway. So it’s too early to tell. But you’re pregnant — that’s the important thing…. Congratulations.” It came out sounding like an admonition.
Or perhaps he was opposed to abortion and trying to steer me away from the procedure known as “selective reduction,” in which one or more fetuses in a multiple pregnancy is terminated. I had no way of knowing.
I hope he was opposed to abortion.
It happened to be my husband’s and my anniversary. We’d been together long enough that we didn’t feel obliged to mark the occasion with flowers or candlelit dinners, but as he walked in the door that night, the timing suddenly seemed serendipitous. “Happy anniversary!” I said, pressing my lips to his. “I’m sorry I didn’t get you anything. Oh, there is this one little thing….” I stared coyly up into his face.
He lifted his eyebrows. “You’re pregnant?”
I nodded, but already my choice of words, “one little thing,” rang ominously in my ears. I trapped my bottom lip between my teeth. “Apparently my levels are high. He thinks it might be twins.”
My husband pulled back from me with the abruptness of someone who’s just learned he’s been betrayed. “Bettina, we can’t handle twins,” he said firmly.
“Well, we could if we had to. People have a toddler and twins all the time.”
“I told you when you started all this that I didn’t want twins.”
What about adoption instead of selective reduction (i.e., abortion)? This option was not even mentioned in the article. It reminds me of the deadly pride and selfishness of a boyfriend of a Care Net client I spoke to. He was pushing for abortion. When I raised the possibility of adoption, this “macho” guy got serious and said, “There’s no way I’m going to let someone else raise my kid.” Uh, yeah, but you’ll pay someone to kill her?
I nodded. He had said that. Unlike me, he’d been reluctant to have a second child. Our son was everything we could’ve wished for — funny, smart, a source of regular joy. As he got older, our lives got easier.
We took trips and found time for exercise and going to movies; we even had space in our two-bedroom apartment for guests. But at that moment, I didn’t want to hear any of that. I’d always wanted two children, and I countered with my best argument: Preserving our lifestyle seemed like a self-centered reason to deprive our son of a sibling.
Sadly and ironically, she will destroy one of his siblings to preserve their lifestyle.
Selective reduction had been my contingency plan, yet I’d never thought — or felt — through actually using it. I didn’t even know how the procedure was done. Now I was horrified at the idea of terminating one of the fetuses growing inside me by injecting potassium chloride into his or her heart.
Yes, that is horrifying.
With my son, I’d witnessed the step-by-step progress from blip to eight-pound, two-ounce boy, marveling at the increasingly recognizable sonogram images, poring over the weekly e-mail announcements from a pregnancy website: Your baby now has fingernails, your baby is now the size of a lemon, a banana, a melon. … And while I strongly believed in women’s right to have an abortion, the unlucky fetus destined for elimination wasn’t merely an abstract potential life, or an accident.
He or she was the product of my love for my husband, a life we’d made together on purpose. This fetus had an identity, not least as someone’s twin. “Selective reduction” was Orwellian; I knew I was ending what could be a life.
I also worried that the surviving child would be scarred by the loss. Perhaps the fetus would register the cessation of the heartbeat in the neighboring sac, the stilling of the fluttery movements.
Bizarre. She doesn’t even know which one to kill yet, and is worried about the survivor’s reaction. But if she isn’t a life yet, that makes no sense.
Could the proximity of decaying fetal tissue infuse my womb with the specter of death? If the chosen one ended up with mental illness or autism, would I always blame myself for having a reduction? All this may seem melodramatic, but I’ve heard about identical twins holding hands in utero; I’ve seen the secret language and private reality shared between even fraternal twins.
. . .
“But neither of us even likes our brothers and sisters that much,” my husband persisted. In fact, if it weren’t for the affection between our son and his cousins, he went on, we’d rarely see our siblings.
. . . .
During my weekly visits to Dr. H.’s office over the next month, I watched the two little sacs on the sonogram darken and grow, develop heartbeats and vaguely human outlines. “Can you turn the screen away, please?” I asked, tears pooling in the corners of my eyes. “I don’t want to get attached.”
. . .
My husband was convinced that twins would radically change our lives for the worse. We’d have to leave our beloved neighborhood for a place with cheaper rents and better public schools — there was no way we could afford private education for three kids.
Meditate on that, folks: They think it is better to kill one child than to have to send them all to public schools. The pro-teacher union / pro-abortion folks must be tied up in knots over that one!
We’d kiss goodbye any hope of career advancement, at least for the foreseeable future. To his list, I added the loss of my income, necessary to meet our expenses. I couldn’t see how I’d be able to resume working after the birth since we could never afford full-time help, and — no matter how well they napped — two infants wouldn’t leave much time for anything else.
Trot out the toddler time: Could they kill any child outside the womb for those reasons? Of course not. So the only question is, “What is the unborn?”
My husband told me he’d support whatever choice I made, but for him, there really was no choice. Our twins weren’t part of God’s plan, he reasoned (or rationalized?). They were the product of artificial insemination.
Yeah, they are all about following God’s plan here.
If we’d become pregnant with twins naturally, would we be making the same decision? I didn’t know. All I knew was that ultimately, I didn’t think we could have twins and remain an intact, happy-enough family.
Boo-hoo. Seriously. Has this lady ever stepped out of her Liberal enclaves to see the rest of the world? People endure far more than she could dream of, and many do it with much more joy.
After another stretch of silence, I asked, “Could you say a prayer when they’re doing it?”
He glanced at me, looking slightly surprised. “Sure. Of course.” Neither of us is very religious, but I wanted God to know that he or she, or whatever form God took, hadn’t been forgotten.
I hope they learn to think more carefully about God. It is their only chance at true joy and forgiveness. I doubt this marriage lasts very long after this.
Our doctor told us that she’d take into account any gender preference if the CVS determined that both babies were equally healthy. Now as she examined the ultrasound, she asked whether gender mattered to us. “Well, we have a boy at home, so I guess we’d prefer a girl,” I said, realizing with a start that since she gave us a choice, I must be carrying a boy and a girl, and I’d just chosen to terminate a boy.
One of the rare gender selection abortions that destroys a male. Usually this “pro woman” practice results in dead females.
What a sad story. I hope they find forgiveness and peace someday. And I hope this cautionary tale makes people think more carefully about IVF and reproductive issues in general. You do not want to put yourself in a position of having to make life and death choices like that. And if you do, choose life. Don’t buy into their bleak worldview.
You know those mandates that force insurance companies to cover children of adults until they are 26 years old? And the ones that forbid rejecting children who have pre-existing conditions? Yeah that costs insurance companies money. Can you believe that? Health care costs money! It costs more money to cover people for mandated coverages! Who could have foreseen that? Not Obama and his merry band of tenured Ivy League hermits, who have never held private sector jobs in their entire lives . . . Yeah, insurance companies don’t like being forced to add coverages, (= risk of having to pay claims), while keeping premiums the same.
Benny Hinn Denies Affair Despite Pics – I hope this ends his ministry and Paula White’s as well, but it probably won’t. What frauds. Hey, btw, he’s short a couple million dollars, so be sure to send some his way.
What kinds of experiences do women have after an abortion? – This is sad. Post abortion trauma is real, and Planned Parenthood and the rest of the pro-aborts won’t tell you about it. Apparently it is bad for their business to tell you about how their services will destroy your child and you. But there is help: Go find a Crisis Pregnancy Center like Care Net!
Destroying human beings because they are unwanted is by far the biggest social injustice in the country.
Also consider Jim’s concerns about racism in light of the 3-to-1 ratio of abortion in the black community relative to whites. That is the ultimate racism.
To make it worse, Wallis & Co. supported the health care bill when it had taxpayer-funded abortions and they didn’t support the Stupak Amendment. They were willing to risk the whole bill over the abortion coverage that would increase the ratio of black abortions.
Wallis is just like false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie, who is pro-legalized abortion and wants taxpayer-funded abortions. They both mention Matthew 25 as often as possible but miss the point on multiple levels. They mentions Jesus’ concern for the “least of these” but miss the obvious point that the unborn certainly fit that category as well as any other human beings.
The next closing ceremony for the Kairos Prison Ministry weekend at the Carol Vance prison in Sugarland, Texas is Sunday, October 10th from 4:30 pm – 7:30 pm. If you and/or your friends would like to attend, please let me know. It is a truly unique experience. If you want to know a little more about prison ministry it is a great way to learn.
Suppose any one of you had come from Heaven…Some would be curious to see what his bodily form would be like. They would expect to be dazzled by the radiance of his countenance.
However, we will let that pass. We want to see how he would live. Coming newly from Heaven, how would he act? Oh, sirs, if he came here to do the same as all men do on Earth, only after a heavenly sort, what a father he would be, what a husband, what a brother, what a friend! I would sit down and let him preach this morning, most assuredly; and when he had done preaching, I would go home with him, and have a chat.
I should be very careful to observe what he would do with his wealth. His first thought would be, if he had a shilling, to lay it out for God’s glory. “But,” says one, “I have necessities to buy with my shilling.” So be it, but when you go pray this: “Oh! Lord, help me to lay it out to your glory.” There should be as much piety in buying your necessaries as in going to a place of worship.
. . .
Now think, my brother, you will be in Heaven very soon. Since last year a great number have gone home: before next year many more will have ascended to glory. Sitting up in those celestial seats, how shall we wish that we had lived below?
It will not give any man in Heaven even a moment’s joy to think that he gratified himself while here. It will give him no reflections suitable to the place to remember how much he amassed, how much he left behind to be quarreled over after he was gone; he will say to himself, “I wish I had saved more of my capital by sending it on before me, for what I saved on Earth was lost, but what I spent for God was really laid up where thieves do not break through and steal.”
. . . why in the world would staff need counseling in the death of a born baby when they routinely abort babies into the 2nd trimester and not to worry, “can still help” mothers pregnant beyond 16 weeks with abortion referrals?
So had the mother of this dead born baby come to the Winston-Salem PP only one day prior for an abortion, the same staff would have helped her get one.
The “counseling was being made available” was a line of bull. I’m confident in actuality PP does not want employees to explore their feelings about dead babies.
If you join the Dropbox file sharing utility (it is free) we both get 250 MB extra (I think that means a total of 2.25 GB for you). It use this application a lot to share files between computers. It is also an instant online backup. Whatever files you save in your Dropbox folder are automatically saved to their server as well.
Filtered tap water makes up an increasing share of bottled water – rising from 32.7 percent in 2000 to 47.8 percent in 2009 – as the share of spring-sourced water declines…
"More and more bottled water is basically the same product that flows from consumer taps, subsidized by taxpayer dollars then poured into an environmentally destructive package and sold for thousands of times its actual value" — Wenonah Hauter
My $0.02 is that the best line about bottled water came when the craze began years ago: Evian is naive spelled backwards.
Obamacare worth 17.5K dead women a year? – Sounds like a death panel to me. If health care is truly a “human right,” then that means someone is obliged to provide it. So why isn’t the government forcing the culprit to provide it in this case?
Obama made a great show of having many homosexuals at his “Easter egg roll” rubbing Christians’ noses in what he called a "teachable moment" against "the forces of homophobia and hate."
Easter is Christianity’s major holy day. Why did he not mock and insult Muslims in the same way?
Why did Obama not shove a “teachable moment” into the faces of Muslims?
. . .
This is a deadly double standard by a man who refused to attend the National Day of Prayer breakfast, refused to attend the Boy Scouts of America (because of their policy of protecting boys from potential "gay" predators) and wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. He and his wife Michele attended Jeremiah Wright’s hate-filled "church" that promoted overt racism and black liberation theology for years. This is Obama’s sole connection with what the media think is legitimate Christianity.
Why is the media as silent about Obama’s purposeful neglect of the gay, lesbians and transgender community" when it comes to his Muslim holiday celebration as they are about that fact that the California city of Bell’s entire corruption scandal was 100% Democrat?
I’ve had Christians quote to me Planned Parenthood’s slogan, “Every child a wanted child”, saying it’s not right to bring children into the world who are not wanted. People can actually try to take the moral high ground as they advocate the killing of children.
I was in a debate with a Planned Parenthood person one time. I said, “Okay, your slogan is ‘Every child a wanted child.’ But how do you finish that statement?”
They said, “How do you mean finish that sentence?”
I said, “I believe every child a wanted child. So I say, let’s learn to want children more, and let’s get children in homes where people want them—like the millions of people who are lined up to adopt little children and can’t get them, because not enough are available, when in fact many of them are being killed. But how do you finish it? What you are saying is every child a wanted child, so let’s identify unwanted children and kill them before they are born.”
The nice little bumper sticker that says, “Every child a wanted child” really means, “Every unwanted child a deadchild.” Obviously that doesn’t look good on a bumper sticker, and nobody actually has a sticker that says that. But that is really what it means.
Hey, I agree with Harry Reid on something! Watch the video – it is less than a minute. I suppose he must be a racist bigot etc. etc. etc. – or whatever the open borders crowd calls anyone who disagrees with them these days. Has Reid recanted these awful views? If not, why aren’t they demanding that he do so now?