Sure, Mozilla, I’ll get a check in the mail . . .

. . . as soon as I donate to the “Christian” Left’s latest begathon (Motto: “We only beg for money 29% of the time!  Because sharing Leftist Facebook memes is super-expensive!).

From Robert Gagnon’s Facebook page, quoting Robert George of Princeton:

Apparently Mozilla is asking for financial contributions. Please don’t give them a penny.These are the people who brought shame on themselves in the Brendan Eich affair, stigmatizing an honorable and highly accomplished man and denying him his position with the company because of his support for marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife. Mozilla’s imposition of conformity of thought on its employees—something, by the way, Chik-fil-A and Hobby Lobby do not do—should itself be stigmatized, not rewarded. (Compare Mozilla with Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby employees are free to criticize the company’s position on the HHS mandates and even contribute money to groups working to uphold those mandates. Brendan Eich was forced out at Mozilla on account of his support for California Proposition 8, sending the clear message to other employees, “hold the moral and political opinions we want you to hold, or keep your mouth shut.”)

That is beautifully said.  The Gaystapo won’t allow any dissent.  Eich agreed with Obama (at the time) and stated what nearly every culture, ever, has said: Marriage is the union of man and a woman.  And for that, he had to be destroyed.

Make no mistake: The blind men of Sodom are still at it.  Just visit the “Christian” Left page to see how they are masquerading these days.

Responding to the pro-abortion “Christian” Left

Everything you need to respond to the “Christian” Left pro-abortion arguments

The “Christian” Left, which mocks the Bible every chance they get and denies its inspiration, gets all scriptural when they think they can twist it to justify something they love, like abortion.

The pro-abortion extremist ghouls at the “Christian” Left post articles like this to pretend that abortions are acceptable at any time for any reason until the first breath is taken. So they support infanticide (aka “partial-birth abortion”) even though most pro-choicers aren’t even that extreme!

Many people think that a human being is created at the time of conception but this belief is not supported by the bible. The fact that a living sperm penetrates a living ovum resulting in the formation of a living fetus does not mean that the fetus is a living human being.

That’s not what all those pesky embryology textbooks say. Then again, why would I expect anti-science religious zealots like the “Christian” Left to understand science?

And their exegesis is not only horrifically wrong but hypocritical.

According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath. After God formed man in Genesis 2:7, He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”. Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath.

So they take the rather unique creation of the first man and assume that is normative for the billions of people made since? Satan will do anything to rationalize child-killing in the womb, including have his followers say stupid things like that.

And remember, this is the Bible-mocking “Christian” Left saying this. Since when do they believe in a literal Adam? Since never! They are taking text they don’t believe and twisting it to rationalize abortion. Because that’s the kind of things fake Christians do.

Let’s look at one of their most ridiculous statements:

There is nothing in the bible to indicate that a fetus is considered to be anything other than living tissue and, according to scripture, it does not become a living being until after it has taken a breath.

Hmmm . . . I guess they’ve never read Luke 1:41.

And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

These moral freaks would have supported an abortion for John the Baptist, Jesus, or anyone else, ever.

Then they trot out their fallacious reading on Exodus 21 to support unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortions.

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. (Exodus 21:22–25, ESV)

The short version is that the key word of the passage is often not translated well and says “miscarriage” instead of “children come out.” It you study the original Hebrew it becomes very clear that Moses did not mean that if the child is killed that the penalty is less severe.

More here, with a listing of all the errors pro-aborts make with this passage.

Then they go to Numbers 5, even though the passage doesn’t even say the woman was pregnant.  It shows how desperate they are — as if they actually cared about what the Book of Numbers said.  They are welcome to show me in the Book of Numbers where it says the woman is pregnant (not there). Then they could show where she has an abortion (not there). Then they could show where God taking a life means that we can also take lives in the another fashion for any reason, including those of our own children (not there).  More here.

These wolves in sheep’s clothing don’t even believe all of the Gospels, let alone the rest of the New Testament, but they want you to believe that they take Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, etc. literally.  I’m skeptical.

If you don’t like abortion, don’t have one.

Of course they work in that deadly and fallacious sound bite.  That’s like saying, “Don’t like slavery?  Don’t have a slave!  Don’t like murder outside the womb?  Don’t murder anyone!”  And so on.

But don’t judge others who may be in terrible circumstances that you can’t possibly understand.

Abortion conditions may be psychologically complex, but they aren’t morally complex.  They wouldn’t justify killing a toddler, so why do they justify killing the same person in the womb?

When women don’t have personal choice over their own reproductive decisions they end up butchered in back alley abortions or thrown in jail for having a miscarriage.

They use the fallacious “reproductive decisions” language.  “Reproductive decisions/freedom/choice/rights/health/etc.” are false, Orwellian, anti-scientific terms. They apply to birth control, not abortion, because abortion destroys a human being who has already been reproduced. That is a scientific fact confirmed by any mainstream embryology textbook and basic logic. It is a deadly and evil phrase. Yes, they have a right to reproduce, but no, they shouldn’t have the right to kill human beings who have already been reproduced.  Never let pro-aborts get away with using that phrase.

And the scare tactics about back-alley abortions are illegitimate.  Remember that these were the people supporting the media embargo on Kermit Gosnell.  They do not care about women getting hurt as they are killing their children.

And their “thrown in jail for a miscarriage” bit is ridiculous.  Because that happened all the time pre-Roe v Wade, right?  More scare tactics.

Certain types of birth control are outlawed when a fertilized egg is classified as a “person” as well.

Good! Because we are human persons from conception.

Those who say, “If you’re a Christian, you have to be against abortion, and therefore you must vote republican,” are simply reciting talking points from false teachers.

That’s so amusing when people like Mark “Jesus is not my God” Sandlin and Chuck “Jesus is not the only way but He sure is a bigot” Currie call other people false teachers.

In the end, if abortion was such a grievous sin Jesus would have mentioned it.  He said nothing.

It wouldn’t be a “Christian” Left pro-abortion piece without the argument from silence.  The argument that Jesus never said anything about abortion (or homosexual behavior, gay-bashing, pedophilia, etc.) fails on many levels. If a church leader uses it you can be confident that he or she is ignorant and/or malicious.  Short version: Yes, He did say something about it, but the theological Left ignores or distorts it as they do with many things about Jesus and his teachings.

Medium version
—————————
Arguing from silence is a logical fallacy.

Jesus is God and part of the Trinity that inspired all scripture.

Note how Jesus defeats Darwinian evolution, oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” and same-sex parenting arguments in one simple passage. No true follower of him should disagree on any of those topics. Matthew 19:4–5 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?”

He supported the Old Testament law to the last letter.

The “red letters” weren’t silent on these topics in the sense that they reiterated what marriage and murder were.

He emphasized many other important issues that these Leftist theologians completely ignore (Hell, his divinity, his exclusivity, etc.).

He was equally “silent” on issues that these folks treat as having the utmost importance (capital punishment, war, welfare, universal health care, taxpayer-funded abortions, etc.).

He didn’t specifically mention rape, child abuse, pedophilia, bestiality and other obvious sins though that wouldn’t justify them.

Abortion and homosexual behavior simply weren’t hot topics for 1st century Jews. They actually thought children were a blessing and they had laws against homosexual behavior.

And the Gospels never claimed to include everything He said. John specifically notes that the whole world couldn’t hold it all! (John 21:25).

And Jesus never said anything about the “sin” of criticizing abortion or homosexual behavior, so it must be OK!

Long version.

—–

Do not follow the “Christian” Left.  They mock the essentials of the faith at every turn and they promote a culture of death and sexual immorality.  They will twist scripture, use fallacious fear tactics, lie and anything else they have to do to justify their views.  They note on their website that they “speak for those with no voice,” but they are hypocritical pro-abortion extremists.  They don’t love God or their neighbors in the womb.

Churchgoers who support “same-sex marriage” and abortion have nearly identical views to the world. It shows who their real father is.

1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.

——

And here’s an analysis of one of their Facebook posts:

They get so unhinged when cheer leading for abortion.  It is ghoulish.  They are like the blind men of Sodom, groping for the door after they lost their sight.

Conservative “Christian” fundamentalists honestly believe in their own minds that the end to any political debate with a Christian progressive, no matter the issue, is “Oh yeah!? Well you guys advocate killing babies!” After they make that pronouncement it’s all over for them.

So they start with a straw-man argument, as usual — as if they really know the minds of believers. We don’t think our proper views on abortion ends every debate. It is merely one of countless things they get wrong. They could have said the same thing about us thinking it is “all over” when they deny the deity of Christ, or deny that Jesus is the only way to salvation, or when they mock the Bible, or when they ask Caesar to redistribute wealth and call it charity on their part, and so on.

A fetus isn’t a person. It’s a fetus. It becomes a person when it’s BORN! Dah! People don’t celebrate their Conception Day. They celebrate their BIRTHday. People don’t buy LIFE Insurance for a fetus.

And that’s the kind of pro-abortion reasoning you get from the anti-science “Christian” Left. It is a scientific fact and basic common sense (what else would two human beings produce?) that a new human being is reproduced at fertilization. Seriously, go check out any mainstream embryology textbook. I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice. Based on the settled science, it is then simple moral reasoning that it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification, and that is what happens during 99% of abortions.

Note how their pro-abortion reasoning supports infanticide (aka “partial-birth abortion”). What they leave out in their anti-science screed is that the fetus is a human being. Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Same human being at different stages of development. Always made in the image of God and worthy of protection.

I’m almost embarrassed for them because of the silly examples they use to deny the personhood of the unborn. The size, level of development, location and degree of dependency do not dictate whether humans are persons.  Using their logic, since most people don’t buy life insurance for infants then it is OK to kill them, too.

Worse yet for the “Christian” Left: The laws of 2/3 our states consider the unborn persons — except when mommy is paying for the killing.

Abortion is a made up issue that isn’t in the Bible.

Oh, the argument from silence! It wouldn’t be a pro-abortion cheer leading session without that. Using their logic, child abuse, wife-beating, gay-bashing, and more are OK because they are specifically in the Bible.

But wait, it gets worse for them.  Remember, they insist that abortion is OK because of how they (mis-)interpret Numbers 5.  So they say it is in the Bible when they want to advance their pro-abortion cause but deny it is there when we note it is simply another form of murder.

This issue was created in the early 80’s as a political ploy to deceive Christians to think they had to vote republican.

Yeah, the Hippocratic Oath was written in the early 80’s as a political ploy. No, wait, that’s not right — it was written hundreds of years B.C. and said, “Nor will I give a woman a pessary to procure abortion.”

Even Planned Parenthood, part of the vast right-wing conspiracy was anti-abortion in the 60’s (then they figured out how profitable it was).

And early church fathers and those throughout the century were strongly anti-abortion.  Here are a few quotes from early church leaders on abortion. I’m sure the pacifists quote these left and right in their pro-life efforts:

And when we say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder, and will have to give an account to God for the abortion, on what principle should we commit murder? For it does not belong to the same person to regard the very foetus in the womb as a created being, and therefore an object of God’s care, and when it has passed into life, to kill it . . . Athenagoras of Athens, circa 180 A.D. from A Plea For The Christians

You shall love your neighbor more than your own life. You shall not slay a child by abortion. You shall not kill that which has already been generated. (Epistle of Barnabas 19.5; second century)

Do not murder a child by abortion or kill a new-born infant. (The Didache 2.2; second century catechism for young Christian converts)

It does not matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. In both instances, the destruction is murder. (Tertullian, Apology, 9.4; second century)

Those who give abortifacients for the destruction of a child conceived in the womb are murderers themselves, along with those receiving the poisons. (Basil the Great, Canons, 188.2; fourth century)

Jerome called abortion “the murder of an unborn child” (Letter to Eustochium, 22.13; fourth century).

Augustine used the same phrase, warning against the terrible crime of “the murder of an unborn child” (On Marriage, 1.17.15; fourth century).

The early church fathers Origen, Cyprian and Chrysostom likewise condemned abortion as the killing of a child.

And even the “Christian” Left new BFF, Pope Francis, leads a religious organization that has always been anti-abortion.

What shameless liars the “Christian” Left are!  They have lots of bad reasons to be pro-abortion, but their “Republicans made it up in the 80’s” lie is the worst of all.  But that’s no surprise, given that their leader is the father of lies.

A whole lot of needless human suffering has been propagated as a result of that lie.

Oh, the morbid irony of them pretending to care about human suffer when they champion this and this.

The republican platform is an Ayn Rand selfish, self-centered, renounce your neighbor ideology. It is the antithesis of everything Jesus taught. Thank God people are finally waking up to this fact as well.

What a perfectly ironic and amusing close for their screed.  Ayn Rand was pro-abortion, just like them!

With respect to her pro-abortion views, she was indeed the antithesis of everything Jesus taught — just like they are!

Abortion and “institutional racism”

Via Institutional Racism: The term “institutional racism” describes societal patterns that have the net effect of imposing oppressive or otherwise negative conditions against identifiable groups on the basis of race or ethnicity.

The “Christian” Left loves to prattle about “institutional racism,” but if anything they are the worst culprits.  Exhibit A: Their pro-abortion policies.  What could be more oppressive or negative than blacks being killed in the womb at a rate three times that of whites?

Democrats are officially pro-abortion, not pro-choice. Why? Because they want taxpayer-funded abortions, laws requiring all health care plans to cover abortions, and no restrictions on anything, including “partial-birth abortion” (aka infanticide), late term abortions, gender-selection abortions, parental notification, etc.

From their platform:

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.

Unwanted black human three times more likely to be killed than whites!  Taxpayer-funded abortions — which the Democrats want so badly that they almost lost Obamacare over it, and that which their official platform calls for — would take that rate even higher.

If the situations were reversed and conservatives supported abortion in the same way and liberals opposed it, we’d be hearing nonstop about how racist and genocidal conservatives are.

Whenever the “Christian” Left (or any Leftists) play the pathetic race card, remind them of these facts.

If they aren’t anti-abortion, they aren’t pro-black.  They are the worst perpetrators of “institutional racism.”

Gruber was right about the Left

The Left’s lack of outrage over Jonathan Gruber’s comments on the stupidity and lack of economic understanding of Obama supporters proves his points to be correct, and it proves our points about media bias and the tactics of the Left.

You’d think that the Left’s supporters would be offended by what Jonathan Gruber said about them.  “Stupidity of the American voter . . . Lack of economic understanding of the American voter . . . Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.”  Ouch.  That’s going to leave a mark.

But the key point is that he was talking about the Left, not the Right. He knew we were aware the lies.

He has the facts to support his points.  Leftists literally fail at basic economics.  And their lack of reaction proves how uninformed they are.

Could it be that they don’t know what he said, because the hopelessly biased mainstream media is “Gosnelling” the story?*

This will be golden for any election until the last politician who supported Obamacare is retired.  Hopefully some Leftists will notice the ads and wonder why no one told them about the contempt their leaders have towards them.

liberal-logic-101-1151

—–

* Kermit Gosnell is the most prolific serial killer in American history. But he was an abortionist so the media did an embargo on the story.

Trans regret

Something is very wrong with transgender people. While some may think that is mean and politically incorrect to say, Captain Obvious says it couldn’t be more factual. If something wasn’t wrong, then why would they want to undergo a radical surgery to change themselves?

The question is whether the body is wrong or whether the mind is wrong. I suggest working on the mind part, which would be much less expensive and destructive.  It is sad to see people mutilate themselves in the hopes that it will make them happier.  It is more sad to see their regret and how they are ostracized by the LGBTQX community in the same way that any ex-gay people are.

If you really love people, you will never encourage their trans desires.

Via Trouble In Transtopia: Murmurs Of Sex Change Regret:

Our culture seems pretty much “to each his own” when it comes to elective bodily mutilation and the regret thereof. And there’s a lot of regret out there. According to a British poll, a whopping 65 percent of those who’ve had various cosmetic surgeries regret it. People who regret their tattoos, plastic surgery, or more extreme body modifications (here’s a sad Buzzfeed pictorial on the effects of ear gauges) can read up on the Internet and find an open array of remedies. Plastic surgeons make money both puttin’ it in and takin’ it out.

Hollywood stars can speak openly about misgivings over their boob jobs and whatnot. Regarding her lip enhancement surgery, Courtney Love said: “I just want the mouth God gave me back.”

But the difference between Love and the guy with phantom penis syndrome is that the guy isn’t allowed to talk about his regret. Not openly. The transgender lobby actively polices and suppresses discussion of sex-change regret, and claims it’s rare (no more than “5 percent.”) However, if you do decide to “de-transition” to once again identify with the sex in your DNA, talking about it will get you targeted by trans activists. So it’s a challenge to understand the scope of regret for sex change surgery. It’s out there, but…

‘It’s Genital Mutilation’

Let’s start with Alan Finch, a resident of Australia who decided when he was 19 to transition from male to female, and in his 20s had genital surgery. But then, at age 36, Finch told the Guardian newspaper in 2004:

. . . transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists. . . .You fundamentally can’t change sex … the surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My ‘vagina’ was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan . . . the analogy I use about giving surgery to someone desperate to change sex is it’s a bit like offering liposuction to an anorexic.

Finch went on to sue the Australian gender identity clinic at Melbourne’s Monash Medical Center for misdiagnosis. He also was involved in starting an outreach to others called “Gender Menders.” The reaction from the transgender community was fast, furious, and abusive, particularly in the Susans.org discussion forum as described in Sheila Jeffrey’s book, “Gender Hurts.”

Since then, Finch’s outreach website has been archived and there is no further information online. In fact, Finch’s subsequent silence is the norm for those who change their minds. This is perhaps not surprising, given the vigor and vindictiveness of the transgender community in persecuting those who have the temerity to suggest that all is not well in sexual La-La Land. But if you look you can find rogue headlines every now and then that even Hollywood’s fawning over “all things trans” can’t quite control. There’s much evidence that the carefully crafted pictures of transgender “authenticity” and “happiness” are more fiction than fact.

Buried Stories of High-Profile Regret

Rene Richards and Mike Penner remain fairly well known as male-to-female transgenders, the former from the 1970s and the latter recently. Both have stories of misgivings and sorrows that cannot be explained away through the old standard “it’s-society’s-fault” routinely trotted out by the transgender lobby.

Tennis champion Rene Richards was one of the first to go through sex-change surgery and was something of a sensation in the 1970s. As such, you might expect Richards to be a tower of strength, offering encouragement to those in similar circumstances today. Well, not so much. This is what Richards had to say in an excerpt from a March 1999 interview attributed to Tennis Magazine (unavailable in full online):

If there was a drug that I could have taken that would have reduced the pressure, I would have been better off staying the way I was—a totally intact person. I know deep down that I’m a second-class woman. I get a lot of inquiries from would-be transsexuals, but I don’t want anyone to hold me out as an example to follow. Today there are better choices, including medication, for dealing with the compulsion to cross dress and the depression that comes from gender confusion. As far as being fulfilled as a woman, I’m not as fulfilled as I dreamed of being. I get a lot of letters from people who are considering having this operation…and I discourage them all.’ —Rene Richards, “The Liaison Legacy,” Tennis Magazine, March 1999.

I encourage you to read it all.

 

Responding to the Left’s “care” for the homeless

I’m all for finding practical solutions to homelessness and we are long-time contributors to a local Christ-based shelter.  But when the “Christian” Left is busy “caring” about the homeless with other people’s money, be sure to ask a few questions:

1. Are you willing to house them yourselves?  If not, you don’t really care about them.  That’s the homeless version of their fallacious pro-abortion argument claiming that we don’t care about the children after they are born.  We do care, of course, and do a lot with our own time and money.  And we would obviously protest infanticide and toddler-cide just as much as we oppose killing children in the womb.

2. I thought you liked government micro-managing our lives with soda sizes, making people pay for others’ birth control, etc.  Why pull up the drawbridge now?  Have you considered that there are downsides to to giving the government that much power?

3. Have you ever studied the issue carefully enough to realize that if you make it too easy to be homeless that you remove incentives for them to change?  Go talk to them yourselves!

Leftists dominate media, education and entertainment businesses

Yet we still managed to have a great showing on election night.  It shows the power of our ideas.

We should not discourage Christians from being in those businesses.  If we withdraw, what kind of results should we expect?

Also, we need to continue to be wise and work around the mainstream media.  People like Dan Patrick in Texas did it very successfully.

Via Donor Data Show Overwhelming Leftist Bias of News, Entertainment, and Academia

newspaper_print_media_liberal

entertainment_industry_liberal

academics_liberal