Tag Archives: Rape

Pro-life

Responding to the pro-abortion rape/incest argument

2 Comments

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.

Politics, Pro-life reasoning

Turning rocks into softballs

1 Comment

We often let our opponents silence us by bringing up tough questions.  We need to be wise and turn those around on them.  When they throw a verbal rock at you, turn it into a softball.  And then smash it.  It doesn’t require changing the subject, you just have to properly frame the issue.

A common example is the rape exception for abortions.  Leftists — and sadly, too many who claim to be pro-life — use this reflexively to shut us up and paint us as soft on rape.  As with nearly all pro-abortion arguments, they take the focus away from the unwanted human being who gets crushed and dismembered because she is unwanted.  Here’s a simple response to use when people try that:

I’m glad you brought up the topic of rape.  If you want to consider 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 like 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.  Abortion doesn’t undo the trauma of rape or incest, it compounds it.  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 card to advance your cause?  Let’s talk about the 99% of abortions that aren’t related to rape.

See how easy that was?  Feel free to copy and paste without attribution the next time this comes up on Facebook or elsewhere.  Offer your own versions in the comments section.

—

Here’s a more thorough response and how all politicians should be training to address that question: How pro-life apologetics–and a little common sense–could have swayed the elections.

A few gaffes – most notably by candidates Akin and Mourdock – cost the Republicans two Senate seats and possibly the White House.  But with just a little common sense and some simple pro-life arguments they could have easily turned this to our advantage.  Romney and others could have done the same thing whether the specific rape/abortion questions came up or not.

The errors resulted when the candidates tried to articulate theological concepts that can’t be distilled into sound bites and that are virtually certain to be misinterpreted by the media and voters.  If you are running for office you should be skilled at knowing what hot topic questions you’ll get and how to steer the answers to your advantage.

So when the topic of abortions in the case of rape and incest came up, they didn’t need to get theological.  They could have noted any or all of the following.  Consider how simple yet accurate these arguments are and how they would resonate with the average voter – even pro-choice voters, the majority of whom side with pro-lifers on topics like parental notification, late-term abortions and taxpayer funding of abortions.

  • Rape is an incredibly serious crime and I support punishing it to the full extent of the law.
  • Incest, in this case, isn’t about 30-something siblings who are attracted to each other, it is about innocent young girls being abused by relatives.  That means it is rape.  Here’s a perfect example.
  • Statutory rape is rape, and the most rampant kind in our society.  Planned Parenthood has been caught countless times on audio and video systematically hiding statutory rape.  If elected, I will not only fight to stop their Federal funding but I would work tirelessly to hold them accountable for their crimes of hiding these rapes. If a 28 yr. old guy is statutorily raping your 13 yr. old daughter or granddaughter then Planned Parenthood will be glad to destroy the evidence and hide the crime – funded by your tax dollars!  They have also been caught hiding sex traffickers, and the opposition to sex trafficking is one of the few issues where Democrats and Republicans have common ground.   Surely we can all agree that we don’t want our tax dollars to fund organizations that hide that crime!
  • If you want to entertain capital punishment for the rapist then we could debate that, but why would the innocent child have to suffer for the father’s crimes?  It is ascientific fact that the unborn are unique human beings from fertilization.  Go check out any embryology textbook.  Let’s put the focus on punishing the guilty rapists and those who hide their crimes.
  • If you want to understand the theology about God’s sovereignty I’d be glad to share it with you, but that is beyond the scope of this debate and would take some time to explain.  But you don’t have to be a theologian to know that rape is evil and hiding the crimes of rapists is evil.
  • Roe v Wade won’t be overturned and even if it was it wouldn’t make abortion illegal — it would just turn it over to the states.
  • Remember that the official platform of the Democrats is now pro-abortion, not pro-choice.  They want abortions without restriction — which would include partial-birth abortions (aka infanticide) — and they want pro-lifers to fund them with their taxes.  That means Democrats want more abortions, not less, and they want others to pay for them.  Obamacare is already forcing people to pay for some abortions, and it is deliberately violating religious freedoms and conscience clauses.

They could also respond by asking some of the questions the media never asks pro-abortion candidates:

1. You say you support a woman’s right to make her own reproductive choices in regards to abortion and contraception. Are there any restrictions you wouldapprove of?

2. In 2010, The Economist featured a cover storyon “the war on girls” and the growth of “gendercide” in the world – abortion based solely on the sex of the baby. Does this phenomenon pose a problem for you or do you believe in the absolute right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy because the unborn fetus is female?

3. In many states, a teenager can have an abortion without her parents’ consent or knowledge but cannot get an aspirin from the school nurse without parental authorization. Do you support any restrictions or parental notification regarding abortion access for minors?

4. If you do not believe that human life begins at conception, when do you believe it begins? At what stage of development should an unborn child have human rights?

5. Currently, when genetic testing reveals an unborn child has Down Syndrome, most women choose to abort. How do you answer the charge that this phenomenon resembles the “eugenics” movement a century ago – the slow, but deliberate “weeding out” of those our society would deem “unfit” to live?

6. Do you believe an employer should be forced to violate his or her religious conscience by providing access to abortifacient drugs and contraception to employees?

7. Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. has said that “abortion is the white supremacist’s best friend,” pointing to the fact that Black and Latinos represent 25% of our population but account for 59% of all abortions. How do you respond to the charge that the majority of abortion clinics are found in inner-city areas with large numbers of minorities?

8. You describe abortion as a “tragic choice.” If abortion is not morally objectionable, then why is it tragic? Does this mean there is something about abortion that is different than other standard surgical procedures?

9. Do you believe abortion should be legal once the unborn fetus is viable – able to survive outside the womb?

10. If a pregnant woman and her unborn child are murdered, do you believe the criminal should face two counts of murder and serve a harsher sentence?

How hard would that be?  Instead, Akin, Mourdock et al answered foolishly and cost us Senate seats and possibly the presidency, and they missed an easy opportunity to educate people on the most important moral issue of our time.

Please equip yourself with basic pro-life reasoning and be prepared to share it.

Roundup

Roundup

2 Comments

Happy Independence Day!

—

Anyone who thinks this will stop at mere gov’t recognition of “same-sex marriage” is naive or part of the problem. The next step will be to force military chaplains to officiate these unions or to quit. Obama & Co. win all around: Force people to violate their religious convictions, chase Bible-believers from the chaplaincy and make less believers want to enlist.

This article summed it up well — Religious freedom’s drip by drip death.The end point of liberalism is a coercive secular state in which the religious have no meaningful rights. American church leaders are kidding themselves if they think the gay-marriage juggernaut is going to stop at civil marriage. It won’t. It will quickly travel past court houses to churches, demanding that all religions bless gay marriages.Denmark casts a shadow of this future, where the gay-marriage juggernaut has smashed through church doors. Last year the country’s parliament passed a law requiring all Lutheran churches to conduct gay marriage ceremonies. “I think it’s very important to give all members of the church the possibility to get married,” said Manu Sareen, Denmark’s minister for gender equality. Reluctant bishops have to supply ministers to satisfy the right whether they like it or not.

—

CONFESSION FROM A FORMER HOMOSEXUAL –A former homosexual speaks out about homosexuality and the politics of dishonesty — Yes, they do recruit. Yes, they do lie. Not all of them, but the movement as a whole. If you love people you’ll want to protect them from this.

—

Canada repeals Section 13 law that criminalized politically incorrect speech — That’s good news for those who like free speech!

—

Book: Pope John Paul II self-flagellated to get closer to Jesus — another example of lousy theology. If you want to fast, donate money, etc. that is fine. But there is no call in the Bible to physically hurt yourself to get closer to Jesus. That’s just creepy.

Pope John Paul II used to beat himself with a belt and sleep on a bare floor to bring himself closer to Christ, a book published Wednesday says.

The late pope had a particular belt for self-flagellation and brought it with him to his summer residence, according to the book, “Why he is a Saint: The True story of John Paul II.”

“As some members of his own entourage were able to hear with their own ears, both in Poland and in the Vatican, Karol Wojtyla flagellated himself,” the book says, using the name the pope was given at birth.

“In the closet, among the cloaks, a particular pant-belt hung from a hook, which he utilized as a whip and one which he always had brought to Castel Gandolfo,” the book says.

—

Catholic Advocate Michael Voris Video on Vatican ‘Gay Lobby’ — Yes, lots of actively gay priests that infiltrated the Catholic hierarchy. And yes, most of the sexual abuse of young people was by homosexual priests. The media forgot to tell you that. To state the obvious, these priests are unfaithful to their religion. And so are the heterosexuals who knowingly let them stay in their positions. This is one good thing about the Interwebs: It helps uncover things that would be otherwise hidden.

—

Study explains why college women abandon courtship for hook-ups — tried to find one thing to quote but it is all good. Go read it.

—

The Face of Cowardice: Theresa May

Meet the hideous creature who banned Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer from England: British Home Secretary Theresa May, a disgrace to her office, to her nation and to every British citizen who ever lived. On June 25, this deplorable stain on the reputation of a once honorable people “personally directed that [Geller] should be excluded from the United Kingdom” because it is believed that Geller would “foment or justify terrorist violence . . . provoke others to terrorist acts . . . foster hatred,” etc. Robert Spencer writes of the ban:

We had planned to lay a wreath at a memorial to British soldier Lee Rigby, who was beheaded by Islamic jihadists on a Woolwich street on May 22. But it is not conducive to the public good in Britain to oppose jihad violence and Islamic supremacism.

British schoolgirls are being systematically gang-raped by Muslims andBritish soldiers are being hacked to death in the street by Muslims and yet this despicable gutless appeaser, Theresa May, thinks the way to solve the problem is to ban critics of Islam?

Neville Chamberlain was a heroic statesman by comparison.

—

EXPOSING THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN PLANNED PARENTHOOD, THE NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION AND MEN WHO SEXUALLY ABUSE UNDERAGE GIRLS — It is very well documented. Planned Parenthood aggressively and systematically hides crimes of rape, incest and sex trafficking — and all with your generous tax dollar. It is the real war on women.

Oh, and United Way plays their part: United Way in Wisconsin Refers Raped Teens to Planned Parenthood

—

America’s 50 worst charities rake in nearly $1 billion for corporate fundraisers — Please, everyone, use discernment when giving!

—

Police and social workers ignored sex-trafficking, rape and abuse by Muslims — It is staggering what they get away with. They’ve learned how effective terrorism is. This is from the UK but should be here soon.

—

Must-read: comprehensive survey of all the research on gay marriage — The surveys saying it is benign or helpful were poorly done.

—

Polygamists Celebrate Supreme Court’s Marriage Rulings — Of course they do. Like I’ve said all along, it wasn’t a slippery slope, it was a cliff. Once the government says that marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, it becomes whatever someone wants it to be.

“The nuclear family, with a dad and a mom and two or three kids, is not the majority anymore,” one polygamist cheers.

—

Roundup

Roundup

Leave a comment

Dem Pol Explains Why Women Should Not Be Allowed to Defend Themselves From Rapists – Now that’s a war on women.  If a Republican would have said those things he would have been appropriately skewered.  Yet this guy is getting a pass.  Do they think women are capable of defending themselves and making choices or not?

—

How China Plans to Wipe Out House Churches – persecution appears to be getting even worse there.

—

From the I am not making this up category: Massachusetts Education Policy Mandates Allowing Boys in Girls’ Restrooms.  Yep, this is what “same-sex marriage” and political correctness will get you.  You wish the quotes in the article were part of some overdone parody, but they are real.

The Massachusetts Commissioner of Education has released an outline of its new school policy regarding gender equality, mandating that boys be allowed to use girls restrooms and locker rooms — and vice versa — if they contend that they prefer to identify with the opposite gender.

The 11-page document, written by Mitchell Chester, is stated to be in response to a gender identity law that was passed last July in the state.

“This guidance is intended to help school and district administrators take steps to create a culture in which transgender and gender nonconforming students feel safe, supported, and fully included, and to meet each school’s obligation to provide equal educational opportunities for all students, in compliance with G.L. c. 76, §5 and the state regulations,” it states.

As part of the outline, entitled Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity, Chester explains that students need to be permitted to use whichever bathroom or locker room they wish. He states that as long as the child asserts that they would rather identify with the  opposite gender, they should have the access that they desire.

“The responsibility for determining a student’s gender identity rests with the student,” Chester states. “A school should accept a student’s assertion of his or her gender identity when there is … ‘evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person’s core identity.’”

Hat tip: The Bumbling Genius

—

Christian Arrested for Speaking Against Homosexuality – coming soon to a country near you.  What is even more ridiculous is that the debate hinges on whether he said something loudly or not, or in his sermon or not.  Sadly, that means they already lost the major battle.  It shouldn’t matter legally if he yelled it or not.  Speech is free or not.

 

A Christian man preaching in the street in Cumbria, England, was arrested by a homosexual police officer after he listed homosexuality among a number of sins referred to in the Bible. He was locked up for seven hours and charged with causing “harassment, alarm or distress,” according to The Examiner.

Dale McAlpine, 42, said he has been preaching in his hometown of Cumbria for years. On April 20, he was handing out leaflets when a woman engaged him in a private debate. During the conversation, McAlpine said he believed homosexuality went against the Word of God. After the conversation, a police support community officer, who identified himself as the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender liaison officer for Cumbria police, told McAlpine he could be arrested for using homophobic language.

After the conversation, McAlpine got on a stepladder and preached a 20-minute sermon, in which he says he did not mention homosexuality. However, after the sermon, a number of police gathered and arrested him for using abusive or insulting language, contrary to the Public Order Act, which was originally created to deal with soccer hooligans.

Officers claimed McAlpine was speaking in a voice loud enough to be overheard by others during his conversation with the woman. McAlpine said he used a quiet voice.

—

Teen lost parts of both legs after failed abortion: pursues wrestling dream anyway – great story!

—

Poll Worker Melowese Richardson Apparently Cast Six Votes for Obama

“Yes, I voted twice,” Richardson told WCPO-TV. “I, after registering thousands of people, certainly wanted my vote to count, so I voted. I voted at the polls.”

Authorities also are investigating if she voted in the names of four other people, too, for a total of six votes in the 2012 presidential election.

For every Obamunist who publicly admits to voter fraud, there are tens of thousands either not quite dumb enough or too busy watching the massive, extravagantly expensive televisions favored by welfare recipients.

As Obama voters were casting multiple ballots, Romney voters had theirs thrown out. In the opposite corner of the state, 21 Cleveland districts recorded not a single vote for Romney.

That’s how elections work in a country that has been “fundamentally transformed” into a second-rate banana republic. Happy now, libs?

—

How Do We Break the Cycle of Higher Tuition and More Debt? — Subsidies for college funding make it more expensive, not less.  Too many people drop out who should have never been there to begin with.  We’d be much better off without the “everyone should go to college” mantra.  There is nothing wrong – and many things right – about more focus on trade schools.

—

When “same-sex marriage” becomes the law

    • Religious liberty and freedom of conscience (i.e., the freedom to oppose homosexuality) will be repressed by the state in the name of “gay rights”; Illinois has already experienced this under our “Civil Unions” law [see the case of the Walders’ bed-and-breakfast in Paxton, IL].  Despite the current bill being amended to protect churches and religious institutions, business owners — even devout Christians — who cater to weddings (such as banquet hall owners and photographers) could be forced to use their facilities or expertise to celebrate homosexual “marriages”;
    • Liberal teachers, especially in public schools, will be emboldened to promote homosexual relationships to students in the classroom; homosexual teachers will be given a platform to discuss their “marriag
      es” and to model homosexuality as normal, natural and good to students. Parents will have a harder time stopping the promotion of homosexuality in schools;

    • Homosexual “sex ed” will gain ground in Illinois schools. Under the radical egalitarian idea that all relationships are morally “equal” and worthy of marriage, “safer gay sex” will be taught non-judgmentally alongside (normal) heterosexual sex. “Abstinence until marriage” (which regrettably is not the norm but only the ideal for most Illinois health classrooms) would apply to homosexual- and bisexual- as well as “straight” students — despite the reality that all homosexual sex is inherently immoral.  High-risk and unnatural practices like anal sex will be mainstreamed in our schools. (Could teaching the truth that sex between men is linked disproportionately to HIV and various sexually-transmitted diseases lead to charges of “anti-gay discrimination”?) And deviant lesbian sex will be taught for girls who in the future might “marry” a woman.
    • Businessmen will be forced to recognize and subsidize their employees’ immoral same-sex “marriages”; a form of this is already happening under Illinois’ “Civil Unions” law;
    • Society will be corrupted as unequal things are treated as equal; children will be further confused as the law (which is a teacher, as the saying goes) creates a Brave New Morality that officially “weds” sinful, unnatural and changeable behavior to the noble and life-sustaining institution of marriage;
    • Homosexual activists will be energized to use the homosexual “marriage” law to pressure citizens to approve of their lifestyle and step up their crusade to stigmatize, demonize and discredit pro-family Christians and moral opponents of homosexuality.  Groups like AFTAH that embrace wholesome, godly morality will be vilified as “hateful and bigoted.” And, as we have witnessed in Massachusetts, the push for ever more extreme “LGBT rights” would be propelled by enactment of “same-sex marriage” — including “transgender” activism in schools.
    • Legalized homosexual “marriage” will help “normalize” homosexual adoption, thus consigning greater numbers of innocent children to be raised in households that are motherless or fatherless by design.

—

The President of the United States, in some of his rare votes in the Illinois Senate, voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act three times. He knew what it was about, and he spoke out against it.  This is who was elected as our President. 

—

Newtown Shooter Picked School As It Was The “Easiest Target” – all the laws being proposed will take away guns from law-abiding citizens, leave them in the hands of criminals, and do nothing to prevent deaths like those in Newtown.

Bible, Christian worldview, Pro-life, Pro-life reasoning

Responding to religious pro-choice arguments

10 Comments

Pro-choice arguments by religious types, many of whom claim the name of Christ, are generally similar to those offered by pro-choicers.  Nearly all of them ignore the innocent but unwanted human being destroyed by abortion.  The difference with the religious types is that they insist that God is also pro-legalized, unrestricted abortion.

Here’s a prime example by a false teacher named Chuck Currie, who preaches at both UCC and UMC denominations: People Of Faith Must Defend Choice.

The title itself is a tipoff: As usual, pro-choicers can’t finish a sentence.  A choice to do what?  Where to go to college, whom to marry, what career to choose?  Of course not.  He means “People of faith must defend the choice to kill an innocent but unwanted human being.”  Sounds different, doesn’t it?

Todd Akin’s recent comments about rape were reprehensible

Hey, that’s what Mitt Romney and countless other Republican leaders said!  Welcome to the club.

– and so is the GOP platform, modeled after legislation put forth by Akin and Paul Ryan that would ban all abortions…even in the case of rape – but it is clear that Akin isn’t alone.

Just because Akin said one dumb thing doesn’t mean that we should stop trying to protect innocent but unwanted human beings from being destroyed.

Chuck goes on to insist that women can get pregnant from rape, which is what all of Akin’s critics concede.  The irony is that Chuck was acting as if his side had a monopoly on science, when they are the ones who ignore the scientific fact that a new human being is created at fertilization.

And Chuck seemed oddly hostile to the children of rapists and fights aggressively for the right to kill them.  I’d entertain the death penalty for the rapists, but I can’t see how that is just for their children.

Abortion is often used to hide the crimes of rape and incest. If they really care about rape, then they should protest Planned Parenthood and how they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking.

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ has long maintained that:

Whereas, women and men must make decisions about unplanned or unwanted pregnancies that involve their physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being; and …

Note how they ignore the well-being of the unborn human being.  Just because killing a human being appears to improve the well-being of another human being it still isn’t justified.

Whereas, abortion is a social justice issue, both for parents dealing with pregnancy and parenting under highly stressed circumstances, as well as for our society as a whole; …

That sentence is gibberish.  First, it doesn’t define “social justice.”  Did the government give unwanted artificial insemination to these women?  What injustice made people have sex?  Being relatively poor compared to those in your country (not to mention being simultaneously very wealthy compared to the rest of the planet) is not an excuse to kill unwanted human beings.

And what could more unjust than destroying an innocent human being merely because she is unwanted?

Does parenting under “highly stressed circumstances” justify killing children outside the womb?  Of course not. So why is it valid inside the womb?

Therefore, be it resolved, that the Sixteenth General Synod:

affirms the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular;

That is the biggest and most disingenuous lie of all.  Again, it is a scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from fertilization, so under no circumstances can they claim to “affirm the sacredness of all life” while justifying the destruction of over  3,000 lives in the U.S. each day.

Worse yet, these people advocate for taxpayer-funded abortions, which means they think that one of our problems is that there aren’t enough unwanted human beings destroyed each day.  And they claim Jesus is on their side!

encourages persons facing unplanned pregnancies to consider giving birth and parenting the child, or releasing the child for adoption, before abortion;

That is where they talk in circles.  They want to act as if abortion is sort of bad — not bad enough to be illegal, but bad enough to want to consider other options.  But if it doesn’t kill innocent human beings, why would they prefer other options?

upholds the right of men and women to have access to adequately funded family planning services,

Watch out for their deadly euphemisms like “family planning” services.  If you are pregnant, then that human being is part of your family.  Killing her doesn’t change that.

and to safe, legal abortions as one option among others; . . . People of faith must stand up and defend a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions.

Another deadly phrase: “health care decisions.”  That is right up there with “reproductive rights,” but remember that abortion kills a human being that has been reproduced.

 It shouldn’t be left up to Todd Akin, Paul Ryan or other politicans.

The lives of the unborn shouldn’t be left up to fake Christians like Chuck, President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

It is morbidly ironic that Chuck’s most frequently quoted verse is from Matthew 25: “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.”  Yet he opposes any restrictions to abortions and thinks we need more of them via taxpayer-funding.

Finally, consider how this is one of the rare topics where Liberals don’t play the race card (there is a recent notable exception that I’ll post about separately).  Why is that?  Perhaps because the abortion rate for blacks is three times that of whites, and for Hispanics it is two times that of whites.  And they know that taxpayer-funded abortions would increase those rates.  Actively supporting policies that kill minorities at such incredibly higher rates seems kinda . . . I don’t know . . . racist.

Jesus is the author of life (Acts 3:15).  False teachers like Chuck deny the divinity of Jesus (and therefore the Trinity), the exclusivity of Jesus (He is the only way to salvation and they teach the opposite), the authority and accuracy of scripture, and so much more.  Their position on abortion is just one more example of them being wolves in sheep’s clothing.

People of real faith should be anti-abortion.

Politics, Pro-life

Boomerang.

6 Comments

So the Democrats are going to run with the “Akin’s gaffe applies to all Republicans even though almost 100% have denounced it” theme at their convention and they are going to trot out Bill Clinton to speak there and in swing states?  Please feel free to remind people of the following:

  • A President who abused his power to have sex with an intern doesn’t make the best pro-women role model — especially when he was in the process of completely destroying her before he found out about the dress.
  • Just because he was President in the 90’s doesn’t mean he gets credit for everything good that happened then.  Remember that two of his better moves — welfare reform and NAFTA — were more Conservative than Liberal and that the Republican Congress stopped him from doing a lot damage with healthcare reform and more.  He should send New Gingrich a thank-you note every year.  Oh, and there was that little thing called the PC Revolution / Internet Bubble that did marvelous things for the economy in general and tax revenues in particular.  Clinton got the bubble and Bush got the damage when it burst.  But I don’t recall Bush blaming Clinton.
  • If Democrats really care about rape, then they should whale on people like Whoopi  Goldberg who said basically the same thing as Akin, and they should really pounce on people like accused rapist Bill Clinton.
  • Clinton was (is?) a serial adulterer.  Tell me again how that is pro-women?
  • Even Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill was on record saying that, “I don’t want my daughter near him.“
  • Democrats love abortion so much that they will ignore all the horrible things Clinton means for women as long as he lets them kill their unborn children.
  • If Obama is so pro-“equal pay,” why are women underpaid in his White House?
  • If the Democrats are so pro-women, why don’t they oppose gender-selection abortions, nearly all of which crush and dismember females for the sole reason that they are unwanted for being female?  It is the ultimate misogyny, fully supported by the Left.
  • Remind them of Al Franken’s jokes about raping reporter Leslie Stahl.
  • Remind them that unemployment has been worse for women and blacks under the Obama administration.
  • If they really care about rape, then ask them why they don’t protest Planned Parenthood for systematically hiding statutory rape and sex trafficking.  The audio and video evidence against them is overwhelming.  Start by asking them, “Are all rapes pretty much equally bad, as Akin’s critics have noted?  OK, so let’s talk about Planned Parenthood . . .”
  • Also, ask them how it qualifies as pro-women to cheer at the funding losses of the Komen Foundation just because they dared to cut a tiny fraction of Planned Parenthood’s funding.
  • Pretty much anything you can mention about Ted Kennedy should be effective as well.

Don’t let the Left get away with whitewashing Clinton and their anti-women policies.  Make their claims boomerang on them just like the silly dog issue (yeah, Romney had his on the roof of his car, but Obama ate a dog).  And then there’s the latest “Oh, the humanity” reaction that Romney made a birth certificate quip.  Somehow that is unacceptable, unlike accusing your opponent of being a cancer-causing felon and abandoning tradition to make waves during his convention.

The war on women – yet pandering to Islam.

Christian worldview

Watch how Akin’s comments are treated versus similar gaffes

41 Comments

Senate candidate Todd Akin said some garbled and erroneous things about rape and abortion and has since clarified them.  It appears that he was trying to distinguish between statutory rape and the more violent form, but he used the unfortunate and false term of “legitimate” to describe the latter.  He obviously wasn’t trying to say that some rapes were legitimate in the sense of being acceptable, but that isn’t how the media and the Left are playing it.  If anything, he was implying that statutory rapes were less severe.

His broader point of defending the children of rapists from death and destruction was lost.

While Romney and Ryan were quick to do the politically expedient thing in distancing themselves from Akin, I’m disappointed that their response was an endorsement of abortion in the case of rape.  I would have preferred the following:

We disagree with Akin’s botched descriptions of “legitimate rape,” of course, because he knows and we know there is no such thing.

But we agree that as awful as any type of rape is, it is never a justification for killing the innocent human being who was conceived by the rape.  Killing the unborn does not undo the rape.

We also want to note that statutory rape is still rape, and that Planned Parenthood has a long and detailed history of systemically hiding those atrocities.  If elected, one of our first acts will be to investigate them and defund them so that victims of statutory rape and sex trafficking will be protected and that your tax dollars will not support the protection of their abusers.

If we had journalists who were even remotely unbiased, they’d do the following:

  1. Report on the statutory rape and sex trafficking cover-ups at Planned Parenthood.
  2. Give more attention to the FRC shooting, where a pro-gay person — apparently fueled by the ironic hate speech of the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Left in general — planned to shoot those who hold the same views about marriage that Barrack Obama did until a few months ago.  They were barely reporting on this story as it was.  Now it will disappear completely.
  3. Note that Akin is obviously not pro-rape.  He just misspoke in a very bad way.
  4. The current President defended infanticide.
  5. Note that the gaffes of Biden weren’t mistakes (reporting on that will disappear today as well

When this topic comes up I hope that pro-lifers will be quick to point out that all rapes are evil and that killing the children conceived in rapes is also wrong.  Ask pro-choicers if they oppose all rapes, and if so, why aren’t they alarmed that Planned Parenthood doesn’t just misspeak about rapes, as Akin did, but they systematically cover them up?

Miscellaneous

Joe Paterno liked Joe Paterno. A lot.

9 Comments

He liked him so much that he looked the other way on a serial child rapist even when the guy was caught in the act. But contacting the authorities might have affected the reputation of Joe’s program and put his friend in jail.

Sure, Joe told his boss, but that was it.  What if it was murder instead of rape?  Would he have just notified his boss?  Really, how hard is to press 3 digits on a phone to call the police?

I’m glad that Penn State has fired those involved, including Paterno.

I’m surprised that the students rioted in defense of Paterno.  Really, kids?  The Ohio State coach was fired over what was, relatively speaking, akin to stealing a paper clip.

Sadly, those kids have probably already been victimized a second time if their abuse led them to question their sexuality, as is often the case.  The Leftists will insist that they were “born that way” and steer them from the treatment and care that could help them heal from the abuse.

There is a timeless lesson here about finishing strong and doing the right thing even if it costs you.  Joe Paterno won’t be remembered for decades of winning and the most all-time victories.  He’ll be remembered as a selfish man who put his desires over the protection of victims of child rape.  Who knows how many more victims there were because of the cover-up?

Politics, Pro-life

How Herman Cain should have answered the abortion questions

1 Comment
Herman Cain
Image via Wikipedia

I believe that Herman Cain is authentically pro-life and that he would appoint judges who would interpret the Constitution properly.  But he tried to get too political in answering questions about abortion from Piers Morgan.

Please see How I wish the abortion-for-rape debate would go for a simple and effective way to navigate through the rape and incest exception questions.  This works whether you are being interviewed by a “gotcha” journalist or just having a conversation with a friend.

Pro-lifers need to quit apologizing for their views and start being more consistent.  This is not that complicated.  The unborn are unique, living human beings from conception.  That is a scientific fact.  They shouldn’t be killed because they are unwanted or as punishment for a crime someone else committed.

Also see ‘Controversy’ Over: National Right to Life Vouches for Cain’s Pro-Life Bona Fides where Stacy McCain advises how to navigate these questions.

Politics, Pro-life

These clinics should merge with Planned Parenthood

5 Comments

See Three Louisiana abortion clinics cited for failure to report child rape – Jill Stanek.  They had a host of irregularities, and I’m glad that the Louisiana authorities found them.

. . . So this abortion mill has NEVER reported ANY suspected child rapes to Louisiana authorities.

That is sickening.  What kind of monsters hide suspected child rapes?

Other findings at Causeway:

  • One of the “Physician[s],” a term I always use loosely when speaking of abortionists, “had restrictions on his medical license that did not allow him to perform deliveries.” So this guy has committed such gross malpractice in the past that Louisiana authorities have banned him from delivering patients.
  • Patient confidentiality was lax: Aborting mothers had to sign in with first and last names that others could see.
  • Ack: The vaginal ultrasound probe was not cleaned properly between uses.

Uh, what happened to that sound bite about abortions being “safe?” The link has even more example of what these clinics did wrong.

Why are abortion mills persistently and perpetually found to neglect their patients, subjecting them to significant health and safety risks?

Because Democrats will do anything to avoid restricting abortions.

They would fit in well with the Planned Parenthood model, because PP hides rape on a regular basis.  They’ve been caught so many times over a period of years on audio and video.

Defund Planned Parenthood now.