Per Planned Parenthood’s annual report, they performed 305,310 abortions in 2007, compared to 4,912 adoption referrals. HT: Mere Comments.
It would seem that, in terms of being Pro-Choice, their act of choice is… abortion.
Colder means warmer when global warming becomes climate change except when more hurricanes result in less hurricanes before a dip in temperature preceded by a warm few years and less snow on an Olympic downhill run sixty years after record heat waves.
Oh bother!
Fumento tells us all about climate vs. weather regardless of who happens to be doing the claiming (and he links to an interesting page which tracks EVERYTHING that global warming is affecting).
From the New Mexico Independent. Actually, the headline reads,
Anti-gay marriage bill dies in committee
An excerpt,
An attempt to define marriage as between on [sic] man and one woman failed in the Senate Rules Committee Monday by a vote of 5-2.
It is indeed interesting to see how clarifying the definition of marriage, as being between one man and one woman, is twisted into being an anti-gay stance.
I suppose, to be fair, we should consider the proposed bill to also be anti-polygamy, since it referred to marriage between only one man and one woman. Perhaps the bill is anti-child as it excludes children from the equation. Anti-species? After all, there may be some individuals interested in marrying one of their pets. And, for all those narcissists out there, the bill is certainly anti-self since it would prohibit one from marrying themselves.
Joe Carter tells us, “No, Your Kid Can’t Paint Like Jackson Pollock”.
If this is a good representation of paintings [sic] by Jackson Pollock, then my reply would be:
Thank God!
The city of Chicago, in 1982, decided to forgo the Bill of Rights and banned law-abiding citizens from owning handguns. Otis McDonald, a 76 year-old resident of Chicago, appealed the law, claiming it left him vulnerable to criminals – criminals who, not surprisingly, ignore the gun ban. Currently, the Supreme Court is reviewing the appeal, with most analysts expecting a ruling on the side of the 2nd Amendment.
Starbucks will continue to allow law-abiding citizens to open-carry firearms while on their premises. Open-carry is the act of carrying a firearm on your person in a manner in which the firearm is not concealed. Were you aware that some states allow their law-abiding citizens to openly carry loaded firearms in certain public places?
On February 22nd, concealed carry of firearms, by law-abiding citizens, was reinstated in National Parks throughout the United States (subject to state laws concerning concealed carry). Concealed carry is the act of carrying a firearm on your person in a manner in which the firearm is hidden from view.
Are we seeing a trend?
Let’s assume that we all have the right to defend ourselves (the right to self-defense) if we, or our loved ones, are being attacked. Considering that the 2nd amendment gives law-abiding citizens the right to be armed, does it follow that such a condition (of having the right to self-defense) is permissible outside the confines of one’s own home?
Note that the stories I linked to, above, pertain to the actions of law-abiding citizens. Restricting the actions of the people, by law, only limits the actions of those who choose to follow said law (i.e., law-abiding citizens). Criminals, by their very nature, have always ignored the law – hence, that’s why they are criminals.
If you take a look at virtually all mass-shootings, you will note that they occur in “gun-free” zones (e.g., schools, military installations). You think there’s a reason for that? Doesn’t it make sense that, if Chicago bans guns, the criminal mind will think, “easy pickin’s”? Doesn’t it make sense that, if Starbucks allows open carry on its premises, the criminal mind will think, “um… not here, not now”? Doesn’t it make sense that, if concealed carry is allowed in National Parks, the criminal mind will think, “I wonder if that person is armed”?
As a gang-banger in Buffalo said, when asked what could be done to curtail the spike in homicides,
Buy a gun.
Yet gun hysteria remains.
New Mexico recently passed legislation regarding concealed carry in restaurants that served beer and wine. In a forum, at the New Mexico Independent, concerns were expressed over the fear of mixing alcohol and firearms. Yes, a good concern; and would restricting law-abiding citizens from carrying prevent law breakers from doing so? Forget the criminals, would we be safe from off-duty law enforcement officers in bars?
So, while al Qaeda praises the actions of the Fort Hood killer, we suspend a kindergartner for the dastardly crime of making a gun gesture with his hand. It’s time we take a rational look at gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.
From a very interesting post regarding weather, over at John’s Corner of the World, comes a link to a doubly interesting photo:
Per the caption, that’s a U.S. submarine, surfaced above the Arctic Circle, in 1959. Note how thin the ice sheeting is. Also included are images of the submarine surfaced in water, allegedly at the North Pole.
Why is the Left getting so worked up about Sarah Palin jotting down reminder notes on the palm of her hand, for her speeches? Maybe she should simply read her speeches, word for word via a teleprompter, like the President does.
The Winter Olympics have barely gotten underway and I’ve already been asked, by my children, why some guy kinda looks like a girl and some girl kinda looks like a guy…
Despite the dire predictions of Global Warming proponents, the general public doesn’t seem to be quite so concerned. Rather, the economy, jobs, and terrorism top their list of priorities. Global warming brings up the rear, ranking 21st out of 21.
Even so, the folks at NASA have launched a special website dedicated to educating our children as to the issues pertaining to number 21 (perhaps with the hopes of raising it up a few notches).
Not to worry, though, if you have to put on an extra overcoat this winter. From the Washington Post, “This winter’s extreme weather — with heavy snowfall in some places and unusually low temperatures — is in fact a sign of how climate change disrupts long-standing patterns, according to a new report by the National Wildlife Federation.”
Imagine, if you will, a documentary being broadcast on PBS, the gist of which pertains to details surrounding an attack on the United States; an attack which claimed almost 3,000 American lives. Also imagine the producers of said documentary extolling the sacrifice made by those who took part, and perished, in the attack.
No, I’m not describing an apologetic for the events of 9/11, but the recent PBS NOVA episode, Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor. From NOVA’s website,
NOVA dives beneath the waters of Pearl Harbor to trace provocative new clues to one of the most tragic events of World War II—the sinking of the USS Arizona. More than 1,000 crew members perished in the greatest single loss of life in United States naval history. For decades, it has been thought that a bomb dropped by a Japanese aircraft sank the Arizona. But the discovery of a group of Japanese midget subs in and around Pearl Harbor has raised questions about the battleship’s final hours.
While the program primarily consisted of historical investigation, pertaining to the events of December 7, 1941, I was taken aback by remarks made at the conclusion of the episode in which the remains of one of the midget submarines was found. From the show transcript,
NARRATOR: Today Admiral Ueda visits the wreck of midget sub number 5 to honor the remains of pilot Sadamu Kamita and commander Masaji Yokoyama.
KAZUO UEDA: Mr. Kamita, here is your brother. Here is Mr. Dewa who accompanied you to Pearl Harbor.
NARRATOR: A cup full of sand is carefully removed from the seafloor, beneath the sealed control room of the midget sub, and given to Admiral Ueda to take home.
AKIRA IRIYE: The remains or the spirits of the dead, ah, from the submarine would now be reunited with the sand.
NARRATOR: Admiral Ueda presents the sand to Petty Officer Dewa. He brings it to a memorial service for Japanese sailors who lost their lives in midget submarines.
AKIRA IRIYE: The sand that was brought back from Hawaii is purified now, becomes Japanese soil, so to speak.
NARRATOR: For Kichiji Dewa, the mission is at last over. For Parks Stephenson, it’s always been about bringing the facts to light.
PARKS STEPHENSON: I want their accomplishment known, so that their sacrifice will have meaning.
NARRATOR: Time may yet uncover new details in the history of Pearl Harbor. And each step we take towards the truth of the heroic and tragic events of that day, not only honors the people who lived it, but serves future generations, as the real story is finally revealed.
(emphasis added)
Color me unimpressed, but I find no reason to honor, as sacrifice, the actions of those who were responsible for the deaths of 2,400 U.S. personnel, the subsequent deaths of those U.S. personnel who fought in the Pacific theater of World War II, and those civilians, throughout the Pacific, who fell to the bloody actions of the Empire of Japan at that time.
It seems to have become politically correct to view aggressors upon our land with a sympathetic hand, in some attempt to excuse their actions as either psychologically or culturally motivated or, worse yet, somehow caused by our own actions (read: WE are the guilty party). Indeed, Mark Steyn raised such issues in his book America Alone (which I reviewed, here). As I wrote,
Steyn quotes an Arabic proverb, “A falling camel attracts many knives,” and then applies it to Europe. It is falling and, as it falls, it continues to be attacked… We’ve feminized our approach through our multi-culturalism: we ask “why?”, we try to understand, we sympathize, we concede, and we apologize – and these are all seen as signs of weakness.
Yes, and now this sympathetic sentiment is being expressed in our view of history. Oliver Stone recently remarked that,
Stalin, Hitler, Mao, McCarthy — these people have been vilified pretty thoroughly by history,
And when comparing two warring factions, motives and actions are melted into one as both the aggressor and those who are forced to fight to retain their freedom are seen as essentially the same. In the book, Flags of our Fathers, we are made witness to descriptions of the atrocities which occurred during the World War II battle of Iwo Jima. In a post I wrote for RedBlueChristian.com, I quoted the book’s author, James Bradley,
The Japanese army fought using the most ruthless tactics of any combatant in World War II. Their practice of “no surrender” meant they were unpredictable, as they fought far beyond the limits of a Westerner…
The Japanese soldier turned all Western logic on its head. If surrounded, a German would surrender; a Japanese would fight on. If wounded and disabled, an Englishman would allow himself to be taken prisoner; a Japanese would wait and blow himself and his captor up. The Marines could not treat the Japanese soldiers as they would hope to be treated. Their only choice was to exterminate him.
While the book was made into a movie, by Clint Eastwood, a companion movie, Letters from Iwo Jima, was also made and received more critical acclaim. Letters from Iwo Jima recounted the battle from the Japanese perspective, based on letters from the Japanese soldiers themselves. Hailed as an unprecedented demonstration of worldly citizenship, by Eastwood, the movie was also praised for humanizing “the enemy”, and paying honorable tribute to ill-fated men. Indeed, at ConversantLife.com, in a post listing the movie reviewer’s top 100 films of the 2000s, Letters from Iwo Jima is listed at #36 as an “other side of the story” companion piece to Flags of our Fathers.
Wow. I can’t wait to hear the “other side of the story” regarding Mohamed Atta and the other 18 terrorists responsible for the attacks on 9/11.
Our culture is deeply confused if it cannot distinguish between good and evil. To make such a distinction is not to diminish the humanity of the Japanese soldiers of World War II or of the Islamic terrorists of 9/11; such a distinction is, in fact, a deep recognition of the humanity of these individuals. Humans, created in the image of God can, and do, engage in evil acts. And the fact that there are two sides to a story does not mandate that both of those sides are valid.
“Elective abortion takes the life of an innocent human being.” – Scott Klusendorf
At Conversant Life, we have the post Dobson and Pigskin Politics, regarding the recent controversy surrounding the pro-life commercial produced for the upcoming Superbowl. Excerpts from the post,
In the article [ABC], Gary Schneeberger, a Focus on the Family spokesman, is quoted as saying, “There is nothing political or controversial about the spot.” Are you kidding me? Nothing political or controversial… right. Focus on the Family has become synonymous with both politics and controversy due to its strong alignment with crazy right-wing ideologies.
…
Regardless of where one stands on abortion, the only thing most us will take away from this commercial is that Focus on the Family ran a commercial during the Super Bowl, and the message, however good it might be, will be lost. Look, I do think abortion should be avoided in most circumstances and there are many folks on both sides of the political aisle who agree on this. But how to actually reduce the occurrence of abortions is the point of contention and Focus on the Family has unfortunately become associated with the Christian Coalition/Pat Robertson political machine on this. (FYI, Robertson says things like, “The feminist agenda encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”)
Where does one begin when addressing such illogical ranting? Does Jonathan (the post’s author) truly believe that an argument for choice – which, if pro-choice supporters wish to be consistent, is what the pro-life option really is – is, in reality, some crazy ideology? And is their argument so weak that they need to make a National Enquirer-esque link with Pat Robertson?
One has to wonder what those, like-minded with Jonathan, have to say regarding the Scott Klusendorf quote leading off this post? If, in fact, the unborn are human beings, then that changes everything. The ‘rights’ issue being discussed, then, moves from that of privacy to that of civil; from reproductive rights to life rights. As I have argued before, when faced with arguments against the pro-life movement, consider replacing the word “abortion” with that of “slavery”. The shortcomings of the pro-choice (sic) argument then become painfully clear.
Regardless of where one stands on slavery, the only thing most us will take away from this commercial is that Focus on the Family ran a commercial during the Super Bowl, and the message, however good it might be, will be lost. Look, I do think slavery should be avoided in most circumstances and there are many folks on both sides of the political aisle who agree on this. But how to actually reduce the occurrence of slaves is the point of contention…
Yeah, there’s a crazy ideology at play here, but it has nothing to do with being pro-life.
In Congress Went to Denmark, You Got the Bill, CBS reports on the cost to taxpayers for the recent Global Warming Climate Change summit in Copenhagen. Not surprisingly, the bill is over $1.1 million, which doesn’t include the President’s staff. However, what I think is the most interesting comment, regarding the trip, was made by Rep. Henry Waxman.
“It was cold… I was there because I thought it was important for me to be there,” Rep. Waxman said. “I didn’t look at it as a pleasure trip.”
Did you catch that? It was cold at, of all places, a summit on Global Warming.
Sigh.
Today marks the last day of our 21 day Daniel Fast (and… I’ve already got the coffee-maker ready for Sunday morning!).
It’s interesting how this year’s fast was so different from that of 2009. Certainly, the fact that our diet was not the same as that of last year has a role in the different fast experience. While our 2009 fast consisted of mainly salads, vegetables, and fruit, we chose to include nuts, legumes, and whole grains for 2010. And even though this change left me more satiated, I still found myself feeling somehow – full, yet unfulfilled – in the food department. Perhaps it was because of this feeling that I found myself fasting complete meals more often than I did in 2009. And while such a practice does make one feel hungry, such physical nudges are harnessed by the mind as reminders of God’s mercy, grace, love, authority, majesty, and power.
Sure, I’ve been thinking about doing my awesome (imo) smoked ribs, or homemade pepperoni pizza (this time with some mushrooms on top). I’ve sat and watched Diners, Dives, and Drive-Ins, and got the urge to make our own shredded beef tacos, along with fresh (or homemade?) corn tortillas, hot off the griddle. And then there’s our homemade spaghetti, with a meaty tomato sauce that’s been prepped with tons of garlic and steeped in red wine. Besides that, I’ve been looking forward to grabbing a double-meat burger, fries and chocolate shake, from IN-N-OUT. And all the while, I’ve come to the point of thanking God for the wonder He has created… the sights, sounds, textures, smells, and tastes. The love and care He has for us, created in His image, to not simply give us nourishment – but to lavish upon us a richness of the senses.
If the bread we eat, which we do not live alone by, is so rich, then how much more so is the Bread of Life? How sweet on the lips is the Word of God?
So, as the crackling sizzle of bacon permeates off the pan, as the intoxicating aroma of coffee wafts its way through the house, as the dark crimson enchilada sauce engulfs your enchiladas, as the tender morsel of pulled pork melts in your mouth, and as the enigmatic flavor of dark chocolate excites your taste buds, remember to thank our Heavenly Father, for His Love.
Today marks the 14th day of our Daniel Fast.
During this time of prayer and meditation on God’s Word, I’ve found that my inadequacies at engaging in a fuller prayer life are surfaced. While others about me seem to readily spout eloquently laced verbal prayers, whether in a worship service or an informal gathering, I’d rather take time to think about what I have to say, and then say it – as succinctly as possible. While some leaders extol (even direct) congregants to speak their prayers and worship “out loud”, ostensibly so others around them can hear them, I prefer to quietly direct my supplications to God. While some fellow Christians claim to have conversations with God, I tend to read the prayers in the Bible not as informal conversation, but as meditative communion. As such, it can be very frustrating for someone like myself to model his prayers as many of those in the church.
As I’ve been reading Adam McHugh’s book, Introverts in the Church, I’ve been enlightened to many aspects of introversion that I was previously unaware of. One aspect that struck me, regarding this prayer issue, is that of how the typical introvert’s mind works. In a nutshell, while an introvert is typically quiet on the outside, inside his mind is racing from thought to thought, idea to idea, recalling and analyzing past events, and so on. This is exactly the type of process that I find happening with myself (and, silly me, all this time I thought I was just daydreaming!). What McHugh states, though, is that the introvert must learn to harness this thought pattern and not just let it run unhindered. As this applies to prayer, I think one must learn to take control of the various thoughts permeating through his head, and take cues from them as prayer petitions – guides, if you will, to your supplications.
Yesterday, I read, out loud, from our church Bible, in our church sanctuary. As part of our group fast, our pastor has instituted that our congregation read the Bible within our sanctuary. It is a wonderful opportunity to have God’s Word read out loud, completely through, within the walls of the church. Individuals and families sign-up for various 1/2 hour time slots, throughout the week, and simply arrive, read, and enjoy the presence of God. In the past, we’ve had members of our deaf church participate by signing the Word, and we’ve had an Old Testament scholar read in Hebrew. My reading, yesterday, stretched from Romans 14 to I Corinthians 6.
Romans 14, from the Bible in our church sanctuary.
Image – © A. R. Lopez
If, as Pat Robertson says, Haiti is suffering God’s punishment, through the ravages of a 7.0 magnitude earthquake, because of their “pact with the devil”, then what can we expect Him to do to a country which has made a similar pact, resulting in the deaths of over 40 million innocent human beings?
