The entire climate change industry is a shameless tautology* designed to dupe people into thinking that the only solution is to give the government more power, regardless of the costs. These ghouls will exploit any tragedy, such as the Oklahoma tornadoes, to further their agenda. Don’t be fooled.
Via Moonbattery » Remembering When Tornados Were Caused by Global Cooling.
* No matter what happens to the weather or the climate, it is because you use too much energy.
Good news: Kermit Gosnell convicted on 3 of 4 counts of murdering babies, killing 41-year-old woman.
When your legal job description is to deliberately kill innocent but unwanted human beings, it is a little weird that you would get convicted of murder. Yet because Gosnell killed the babies 30 seconds too late he will (hopefully) spend the rest of his life in jail (I doubt capital punishment will be an option given his age).
But never forget: Just because his victims were a little bigger than average and his clinics a little dirtier than average doesn’t mean he isn’t virtually indistinguishable from the other “doctors” who kill babies for a living.
This will go down in history as one of the biggest stories buried by the Liberal media. They try to ignore it, or when they do report it they treat him as an anomaly. But he’s much closer to the mean — just like Planned Parenthood. People who kill babies for a living don’t mind breaking the rules in place for killing babies for a living.
Ann Coulter makes some excellent points in Beware of Liberals Who Come in Evangelicals’ Clothing:
Any Evangelical promoting the McCain-Rubio amnesty plan has the moral framework of Planned Parenthood. Like the abortion lobby, they have boundless compassion for the people they can see, but none for those they can’t see.
One Evangelical after another told the Times that they no longer believe Americans should have control over who immigrates here on the basis of having met illegal aliens in their pews. The millions harmed by illegal immigration are left out of the equation. They don’t go to church here.
Similarly, the pro-choice crowd is brimming with compassion for girls who have gotten pregnant by accident. They’re in high school, their whole lives are ahead of them, it’s one mistake! The babies don’t count because they’re out of sight.
The Rev. David Uth, head pastor of First Baptist Orlando, said that based on “the stories out there in the pews” from illegals who “have made friends and who have become close with people here,” there was momentum in his church to “do something to address their needs.”
Mr. Uth and his parishioners will never hear stories from the thousands of Americans killed every year by illegal aliens. They won’t be sitting in the pews with those murdered and maimed in Boston last month by a conspiracy of immigrants.
They won’t hear from hospitals and school systems in border states forced into bankruptcy because they have to provide free services to illegals. They won’t chat with farmers and ranchers whose livestock and property are stolen or destroyed by illegal aliens.
It is sad to see people make un-principled decisions just because they feel sorry for someone they know. I’ve seen countless people switch positions to directly oppose the Bible just because they know someone who is gay and they want them to be “happy.” Or they become pro-choice because they feel sorry for a pregnant teen. Or they oppose immigration laws because they know an illegal alien. It is such a sad case of abandoning critical thinking skills and not thinking about the other victims and about what God says. As Christians we should be mature, clear thinkers and not let emotions lead us to take immoral positions on these issues.
There was a recent set of stabbings at a local community college that just happens to be a few miles from us. Mercifully, no one was killed or permanently injured. My youngest daughter used to take classes there and some friends currently attend there.
The TV sound was off when I first saw the news in the locker room at 24 Hour Fitness over my lunch hour, so I assumed it was gun-related. Fortunately the weapon of choice for the evil person was a knife and not a gun.
But why didn’t this continue to be newsworthy? Where are the calls for bans on knives? Oops — guns, knives and even clubs are already banned there! Where are the calls for knife registrations and knife purchase background checks? We all know that if guns had been used that the Leftist gun-grabbing ghouls and false teachers would have been trying to gut the 2nd Amendment before the bodies were cold.
Once again the students were set up to be victims because the law-abiding citizens were left unarmed. Some heroes stepped in to stop the bad guy, but if they had been armed there might have been less injuries. And if the bad guy had used a gun then many lives could have been lost because no one could have stopped him.
Once again, the illusion of consequence-free sex trumps parental rights, medical risks and more.
President Obama, Planned Parenthood and the rest of the radical Left are in favor of all children having unrestricted access to the “Plan B morning-after pill,” though for now the limit is 15 because one judge picked that age. But what if another judge says it is 14, or 10? Elections matter, and this is what you get when you stay at home or don’t understand the worldviews of those you are voting for.
Not only is this terribly dangerous for the children, but it aggressively usurps parental rights. They are saying that as a parent you have no right to know if your kids are having sex or taking powerful drugs. If it is legal for 15 yr. old children to buy them over the counter, why won’t adults buy be able to buy them and give them to kids in schools?
Like so many other birth control methods, this will give a false sense of security and increase pregnancies, abortions, diseases and emotional damage.
In nearly every other area of life and health 15 yr. olds are treated as not having the ability to make important decisions: Voting, alcohol, smoking, military service, whether to go to school, whether to take Advil at school without parental consent, drive, get tattoos, curfews and more. Yet the Left wants this powerful drug available to your daughters and sons and grandchildren.
I’m waiting for statutory rapists and pedophiles to use this and similar Leftist actions as a blanket defense. If 15 yr. old girls are mature enough to consent to sex with those 17 or younger and to purchase strong medicines by themselves, what is morally significant about their partners being 18 or over? “But your honor, the State considers the 15 yr. old to be mature enough to consent to sex with a 17 yr. old and to buy these powerful drugs. Why isn’t she mature enough to consent to sex with an 18 yr. old, or a 21 yr. old, or a 31 yr. old?”
And note that sales aren’t limited to girls. Just think about all the guys who will buy these pills and use them as part of their seduction schemes. “Just take this pill tomorrow and there will be no consequences” — right?!
Worse yet, many of the extremists don’t want an age limit at all. And in a sense they’ve already achieved their goal. Since 15 yr. old children can’t drive they typically don’t have identification, so pharmacies will ultimately have to take their word for it.
Also see Thoughts on Plan-B – Sifting Reality and Hyper-sexualized, asexual America.
.
While our culture not only accepts but applauds all sorts of deviant behavior, most people still frown on abandoning spouses or committing adultery. The exception is for gays who leave spouses and children to indulge their preferences, such as Episcopal “Bishop” Gene Robinson. Their happiness at doing the opposite of what God commands trumps any lifetime commitments they made to their spouses, and of course the feelings and needs of their children are irrelevant.
Given that, why would anyone be surprised that most media accounts about one-point-per-game NBA player Jason Collins managed to “fake” it as a heterosexual for years and waste the youth of his former fiance’? Via Jason Collins ‘outs’ himself, but fails to tell ex-fiancé he’s gay:
Eight years down the drain…
Basketball’s Jason Collins made headlines recently by telling the world he’s actually homosexual, but the one person he didn’t notify was his long-time ex, as reported by the New York Daily News on April 30, 2013.
The jilted Carolyn Moos claims that her former fiancé of eight years, Boston Celtics center Jason Collins, failed to notify her that he was homosexual, despite the fact that the two had been planning their nuptials for almost a decade.
Collins came out of the closet this past week-end, thusly being the only athlete in a major American sport who has publically identified himself as a homosexual.
Moos stated to the gossip network TMZ:
“It’s very emotional for me as a woman to have invested 8 years in my dream to have a husband, soul mate, and best friend in him.
This is all hard to understand.”
Benghazi? Let’s Talk About Collins Instead…
During today’s press conference, Barack Obama gushed on regarding his admiration for the Boston-based baller, saying he “couldn’t be prouder of him.”
Unlike the four Americans killed in the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Obama took time out of his busy schedule to place a telephone call Collins.
Even if he was “born that way” (another lie) then stringing his fiance’ on was reprehensible.
This guy waited to come out until it not only cost him nothing but will profit him greatly. I’m not seeing the bravery that results in calls from the President, etc.
Oh, and Collins claims to be a Christian. Meditate on that. And the media ignores his “Christian” view that his behavior is acceptable yet blasts a man with the nerve to politely point out authentic biblical views.
Woe to those who call good evil and evil good.
Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
I’ve mentioned this before and will probably only mention it six or seven more times, so please read carefully. Do not let the pro-abortion people get away with using terms such as pro-choice or reproductive choice. It is easy to show how false those are. And don’t let them call you anti-abortion or anti-choice without taking the time to explain why they are correct on that claim. You can take what they mean as a personal attack and use it to our advantage.
I used to try and be charitable and refer to pro-abortion people as pro-choice. I preferred to get into the facts and logic and didn’t want to get people distracted by thinking we were just calling them names. But with the latest platform of the Democratic party the most accurate term for them is pro-abortion.
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
We should take the time to explain why pro-abortion is the correct term. If you insist on taxpayer-funding of abortions, that is the opposite of choice. Your are forcing pro-life people to pay for abortions. And you are claiming that we don’t have enough abortions and that society will be better if we have more. They don’t want them to be rare, they want more of them. Those claims aren’t pro-choice, they are pro-abortion.
The majority of those who identify as “pro-choice” agree that abortion should be illegal after the first trimester, that women should have a 24 hour waiting period before having the abortion, that parental consent should be required for teens and that taxpayers shouldn’t have to fund abortions. That makes Obama and anyone supporting the Democrat’s platform the extremists.
Consider how many people who identify as pro-choice agree with pro-life positions on specific topics, then consider how radical the Democrats’ platform is (unrestricted taxpayer-funded abortions at any time, including “partial-birth abortions”/infanticide).
Regarding “reproductive choice” or “reproductive health,” just point out the irrefutable scientific fact that a new human being is created at fertilization. Therefore, abortions are designed to kill human beings who have already been reproduced. Perverse organizations like the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice have self-refuting names. It may seem subtle, but explaining how their pet terms are false undermines their credibility and helps point to the science and logic that are on our side.
These suggestions may seem unimportant, but they can make a big difference. The Left uses terms to their advantage all the time, such as “marriage equality” and the pro-abortion phrases noted above. Don’t let them get away with it. By politely pointing out how pro-abortion their policies are and how “reproductive choice” is about birth control and not abortion we can plant seeds and persuade the middle ground about the truth.
Also, use verbal Judo and turn attack phrases such as “anti-choice” or “anti-abortion” back on them. Just say, “Why yes, I am anti-abortion. Abortions kill innocent but unwanted human beings without adequate justification, so I oppose them. Thanks for noticing! You should oppose them, too.” I’m beginning to prefer the term anti-abortion over pro-life. It is accurate and it spells out the word they hate to say: Abortion.
Regarding “anti-choice,” just ask them to complete the phrase and then agree with them: “You are using ‘choice’ in the sense of choosing to crush and dismember an innocent but unwanted human being without adequate justification, so I am against that choice. You should be, too. But I favor all sorts of other choices for women: Whom to marry, what career to choose, the freedom to speak out against “same-sex marriage,” whether to fund abortions of other people, whether to own a gun, what size soft-drink to consume, whether to home school, and more. How do you feel about all of those choices?”
Via MSNBC Talking Head Calls Babies “Things That Might Turn Into Humans” – a pro-abortion “expert” made the following anti-science claims:
Oh, no. That might be bad. I seemed to have popped open the fertilized egg. We’ll put that back together. But the very idea that this would constitute a person, right? And that some set of constitutional rights should come to this. Look, I get that that is a particular kind of faith claim. It’s not associated with science. But the reality is that if this turns into a person, right, there are economic consequences, right? The cost to raise a child, $10,000 a year up to $20,000 a year. When you’re talking about what it actually costs to have this thing turn into a human, why not allow women to make the best choices that we can with as many resources and options instead of trying to come in and regulate this process?
The video didn’t show the response of the MSNBC hosts, but I doubt they told her how spectacularly she wrong she was on the scientific facts.
Pro-life reasoning is simple and accurate: It is a scientific fact (and basic common sense) that a new human being is created at fertilization. It is 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. The situations surrounding abortions are psychologically complex (pressures on the mother to abort, economic concerns, etc.) but morally simple (you don’t kill unwanted humans outside the womb for those reasons, so you shouldn’t kill them inside the womb for those reasons). Their size, level of development, location and degree of dependency are not reasons to ignore their right to life.
“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”
“A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”
Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
Note that we didn’t use religious reasoning there, though I’d be glad to share with her what God has to say in his revealed word!
She plays the typical pro-abortion word games of de-humanizing the unborn by claiming they aren’t persons, as if there was a meaningful distinction between human beings and persons and the distninction meant that the mother could have one killed but not the other.
per·son [pur-suhn] noun
1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
My guess is that if you asked her if “people of faith” were anti-science she’d probably agree. But who is really opposed to basic science and logic?
While most media outlets, politicians, pro-abortion groups and false teachers are still silent on the Kermit Gosnell infanticide case, some have realized that there is no way around it and are trying to feign outrage and hypocritically and falsely blame pro-lifers. It is your basic damage control, but they shouldn’t get away with it in the way Planned Parenthood gets a media pass when busted for hiding statutory rape and sex-trafficking.
Cases in point are the Planned Parenthood Tweet in the image below and a typical “Gosnell was so bad but it is the fault of pro-lifers” nonsense from wolves in sheep’s clothing.
So how do you “out” these people? Simple. Just point to the facts by saying:
1. Kermit Gosnell was pro-late term and “partial-birth” abortion. So are President Obama, the rest of the Democrats* and Planned Parenthood. Do you agree or disagree with them? If you agree with them, why are you and they so outraged at his actions?
2. The main horror of Gosnell was killing babies 30 seconds after it was legal. Planned Parenthood and Obama are both on record as opposing protections for infants who survive abortions. Please explain the moral significance of those 30 seconds and why one is capital murder and one is merely the morally benign or even morally good choice of the mother. Also explain whether you agree with Obama and Planned Parenthood, and why it isn’t hypocritical for PP to complain about Gosnell.
3. Kermit Gosnell was pro-taxpayer-funded abortion. So are President Obama, the rest of the Democrats* and Planned Parenthood. Do you agree or disagree with them? If you agree, then would you concede that forcing pro-lifers to pay for abortions would be more of a pro-abortion position than a pro-choice position?
4. Democrats and Planned Parenthood have aggressively fought the application of health standards and inspections of abortion clinics. This political pressure resulted in even existing laws being ignored by multiple agencies. Isn’t it hypocritical to now blame the Republicans for Gosnell’s safety issues?
5. Given the complete breakdown in oversight over Gosnell’s activities by multiple agencies and that he was only caught by accident by another agency, what makes you think that all the other abortionists run clean clinics and have adequate oversight when killing innocent but unwanted human beings?
6. Given that the Left plays the race card over all sorts of made-up things, why are they ignoring the real racism of Gosnell, and, presumably other abortion clinics — not to mention the fact that abortions kill blacks at a rate three times that of whites and that taxpayer-funded abortions will increase that ratio?
7. As bad as Gosnell was, there weren’t any documented cases of him hiding statutory rape or sex-trafficking as there have been for Planned Parenthood. They broke many laws. Should they be punished to the “full extent” for running a “criminal enterprise” as they have called for in Gosnell’s case? Should they still receive hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding?
Please ask those things as nicely as you can to let people have a “dignified surrender” and acknowledge how wrong they are on the greatest moral issue of our time.
Reminder: Keep Tweeting #gosnell as much as you can — such as with this post!
* If you vote for Democrats, you are now pro-abortion, not pro-choice. And not just pro-abortion, but pro-”partial birth” abortion (aka infanticide). 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.
If you want to require taxpayer-funded to increase abortions then you aren’t pro-choice, you are pro-abortion. Forcing pro-lifers to pay for abortions = pro-abortion. Wanting to increase the number of abortions = pro-abortion. If you are pro-”partial birth” abortion then you are really pro-legalized infanticide.
If you have a Twitter account, post about #gosnell and ask why there is a media blackout.
Why aren’t more people outraged about this? Where are the “if we can only save one child” chants? Look how many human beings Gosnell destroyed compared to Newtown.
See 9 Things You Should Know About the Gosnell Infanticide and Murder Trial for a good overview. Read them all, including the parts about the explicit racism (white women got better care) and the unsanitary conditions. Where are Jesse, Al and the mainstream media when you need them? Oh, right . . . the abortionist was black . . . and, well . . . an abortionist. So where they usually see racism in everything, including where it doesn’t exist, they ignore it when it is undeniable.
Then consider these 3 additional things:
1. The mainstream media has a blackout on this case. It has everything they would normally love — bizarre murders, cover-ups, blatant racism, etc. — but it involved an abortionist, so they keep silent. Search for Kermit Gosnell at MSNBC and Politico and you will literally get zero items, even though it is one of the most frequently searched items (more on that below).
2. President Obama and Planned Parenthood are both on record defending the killing of infants who survive abortions.
3. Killing those babies was just as evil as regular abortions on smaller human beings. The media knows this, which is why #1 is there. It is a scientific fact (and basic common sense) that a new human being is reproduced at fertilization. It is 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. The situations surrounding abortions are psychologically complex (pressures on the mother to abort, economic concerns, etc.) but morally simple (you don’t kill unwanted humans outside the womb for those reasons, so you shouldn’t kill them inside the womb for those reasons). Their size, level of development, location and degree of dependency are not reasons to ignore their right to life.
—
From Sifting Reality, this screen shot says it all. Try it yourself at http://tv.msnbc.com/?s=kermit+gosnell . The same thing happens at Politico and the LA Times.
Not. One. Story.
Just how many infanticides would an abortionist have to commit before MSNBC and Politico would find it newsworthy? How many would he have to commit before President Obama, the Democrats and the false teachers spoke out against it? Do not let them preach to you about gun control until they address this topic and the media, political and church silence. If they really cared about children they would do something about this instead of consciously ignoring it.
This screen capture is not photoshopped. I took it at 8:50 PM tonight
Please consider sharing this with everyone you can!
This is as spectacularly gruesome as any case you’ll ever read about in the media – Gosnell Worker: Baby Screamed During Live-Birth “Abortion.”
Today’s testimony during the murder trial of abortion practitioner Kermit Gosnell was no less shocking than previous days. Today, a former employee described how she heard a baby scream during a live-birth abortion.
Abortion clinic employee Sherry West described an incident which “really freaked (her) out” and related to the jury how she heard a child who was born alive following an abortion scream.
West remembered how she referred to the dead children killed in these gruesome abortion procedures as “specimens” so she could avoid the mental trauma associated with know how they died.
Why does the media go full-tilt for so many other cases yet completely ignore one as bizarre as this?
The answer, of course, is that they 90+% pro-abortion extremists and will do anything they can to cover up these murders and the filthy conditions at the abortuary.
If you haven’t heard of this case you need to seriously expand your media consumption. There is no way you are getting any sort of balance to your news.
The principles of capitalism work and have raised more people from poverty than Communists and Socialists ever dreamed of. And even though Liberals literally fail at basic economics, every now and then they accidentally get one right. See Official: NY tax breaks would apply to ‘Tonight’:
The bill expected to be voted into law in coming days would provide a 30 percent tax credit for a “relocated television production.” Past and current tax credits have gone to new productions starting in New York, such as “Law & Order.”
Hmmm . . . so if you lower taxes, a business will be more likely to come to your location. Shocking. And it stands to reason that if you raise taxes then more will leave.
Are the NY officials being irrational by offering the tax break? No, because they realize that luring the Tonight Show will have all sorts of other benefits. Too bad they don’t apply that across the board.
When you consider how the same behavior applies to countries you can see why jobs get outsourced (it isn’t just the wages).
In a move that should have surprised no one, Rob Bell has come out in favor of “same-sex 
marriage.” It reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons where the twins Terri and Sherri were speaking to Lisa:
Isn’t it amazing that the same day you got a pool is the same day we realized we liked you? The timing works out great, don’t you think?
For Rob Bell and other people bailing on biblical truths, it goes like this:
Isn’t it amazing that the same day God told me that he changed his rules on marriage it made me more popular? The timing works out great, don’t you think?
The link has the video of him explaining his “new” views (Poison Control recommends watching it if you are out of Syrup of Ipecac) where he not-so-subtly undermined the word of God and said how we need to get with the world’s changes, because God is doing something new blah blah blah. He says we should work on the “real” problems, as if the problem of saving people from sin isn’t real.
Once again someone who mocks what God said in his word wants us to believe that God is telling him all his new ideas and changes. Right. I hope that all the youth groups that showed his videos are repenting.
Here’s a graph I made for Rob (the inspiration came from the World’s Best Sunday School Teacher)::
The liberal “church” has changed in the same ways culture has: Pro-legalized abortion, anti-parental notification laws, pro-gay marriage, pro-handing out condoms to kids, etc.
Think about this: Non-believers created the anti-abortion Hippocratic Oath and it took Satan 2,500 years to convince pagans to discard it. Then it took another 15 minutes for theological Liberals to go pro-abortion.
Isn’t it amazing? What great timing! The liberal church realized it had been wrong on these important topics for nearly two thousand years, and came to that conclusion at virtually the same time as the secular culture. That makes the world like them more, I suppose.
They also decided it was too embarrassing to believe in miracles, the authority of scripture, the exclusivity of Jesus, etc. Or did that come first?
Thankfully, many churches in the West aren’t buying it and most of the churches outside the West aren’t either. The first time I was in Kenya one of the full-time missionaries, a doctor from England, kept saying how the Kenyans were really disappointed in the U.S. when they heard about churches supporting gay “marriages.” It wasn’t like they were thinking, “Gee, those brilliant Westerners know everything, perhaps we should follow them.” It was more like, “Whoa, what are they thinking?!”
1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.
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?
This post about Purchasing A Gun vs. Purchasing An Abortion made some excellent points about the many inconsistencies in how the Left approaches the Constitution, regulations and life issues. Hat tip: My favorite blogger
Let’s take a look at the differences and similarities between purchasing a gun and purchasing an abortion.
Both guns and abortions are goods or services which are produced and purchased on the free market.
When a gun is purchased, there’s a 99% chance that gun will never result in the death of a single individual. When an abortion is purchased, there is a 99% chance the abortion will result in the death of an individual.
My tax dollars aren’t used to purchase a gun for someone who can’t afford it. My tax dollars are used to purchase an abortion for a woman or a girl who can’t afford it.
You can legally use a gun to kill an attacker in self-defense, if your life is threatened. You can legally use an abortion to kill a baby for any reason, including the mother’s life being threatened by the baby.
You can get suspended from school for drawing a picture of a gun. Read here. You can get the morning after abortion pill from the school nurse.
There is a background check and a waiting period in order to purchase a gun. There is no waiting period or back ground check to purchase an abortion. For a girl under 18 there are 6 states that require at least one parents permission 24 to 48 hours before the abortion.
. . .
On the one hand the left worked to create and expand a nonexistent right, which forced their morality concerning abortion on the states and the people, and on the other hand, they want to restrict and take away a clearly stated right concerning fire arms, which would also force their morality on the states and the people.
I guess the lesson to be learned is, the left wants to force their morality on us through government coercion, rather than trying to persuade people to accept their morally superior ideas as gospel.
I encourage you to read the entire post to pick up the points about the Constitution..
In an obvious sp*m email to random bloggers, a man named Joseph invited me to link to a list of the top 100 “marriage equality” blogs on his gay dating site. Here is my response. It also goes out to the people on Facebook with the red equal sign pictures and anyone else who abuses words like equality. Remember, the warnings in Romans 1 aren’t just for those who commit the sins listed there, but for those that give approval to those who practice them.
And remember to point out that even if their lobby wasn’t wrong on both “marriage equality” and adoption by homosexuals, they can’t put forth both arguments. If gender is absolutely paramount for sexual relationships, how can it be completely irrelevant for parenting?
And here’s a list of things to mention to people who insist that “same-sex marriage” won’t hurt you.
—–
Joseph,
I’ll be glad to link to your site if you’ll make my blog (www.4simpsons.wordpress.com) one of your top 100 blogs. But I don’t think you’ll want to do that, because I respectfully disagree with your premise.
I know many gays and lesbians and am friendly and kind to them all. I would never condone harm to LGBTQ people. I am against bullying of all kinds. And if you have issues such as hospital visitation or estate planning I would support separate solutions for those (i.e., you should be able to have anyone you like visit you in the hospital, and estate taxes are ghoulish — the government should never profit from your death).
Having said all that, “same-sex marriage” is an oxymoron (“the same-sex union of a man and a woman”).
That isn’t unkind or hateful to say, it is the truth. Words mean things. The notion of “marriage equality” it is false because it implies that any union of two people is equal to real marriage. Or that the number of people in the marriage isn’t important.
But there are two very important things that same-sex unions can’t do.
1. By nature and design, 100% of children are produced by one man and one woman.
2. Only male/female relationships can provide a mother and father to a child — the intuitive ideal supported by countless studies.
Those are the reasons the government has traditionally been involved in marriages.
I realize the underlying desire of LGBTQ to feel affirmed and to silence any criticism of their lifestyles, but that is not a mature reaction.
Again, you are welcome to your relationships. You can get “married” in all sorts of false-teaching, anti-biblical “churches.” You can set up house together. I will never bother to get in the way of your lives.
But there is simply no reason for the government to get involved in your relationships. And government recognition of same-sex unions inevitably — and by design — leads to a loss of free speech and religious freedom and results in young children being taught things that are wrong.
You probably noted that the response above was free of religious views, which was by design. We don’t need religious arguments to explain why the government need not sanction same-sex unions. But out of kindness I should point out that there is a God who clearly and thoroughly revealed himself in the Bible. He is sovereign over all. He designed marriage and the ideal is one man and one woman, for life. Yes, heterosexuals break those rules too, but that doesn’t mean we should abandon all the rules. Everyone has rebelled against God and his created order but they can be forgiven if they repent and trust in Jesus. I highly encourage you to consider that. You don’t want to spend an eternity in Hell regretting that you spent this life in active rebellion against your creator. There is a better way.
