Friday, July 15, 2016

Thoughts are nice, but what we need is prayer

Another terrorist attack. This time at least 84 dead (as of now) in Nice, France, and dozens more injured. Now the media is instructing us to refrain from telling victims of terrorism that they are in our prayers. They prefer we just tell victims they are in our thoughts. It's more politically correct that way. But does it occur to any of them that years and years of pushing God out of our lives and out of our public square in the name of political correctness likely has a lot to do with why we are seeing such evil in our world? 

As for the evil of terrorism, we are dealing with fanatical factions of Islam who are totally against the legal and moral values of Western civilization, and who are willing to kill innocent children and adults throughout the world. I don't know about you, but my thoughts have no power over something like this. Only God does. Lifting ourselves up in prayer to God, the only One Who can change hearts is the best hope we have of eradicating evil. 

Yes we can bomb and shoot and contain these evildoers - and absolutely do need to take resolute, fierce action against this evil - but until conversion takes place, evil will continue to pop up everywhere. Further shunning God in these times is certainly not the answer. In fact, it would do us all good to remember that God is still in charge and we continue to be His hands and feet through prayer and living as witnesses of His love and peace. 

Telling the victims of terrorism that our thoughts are with them does the victims no good, nor can possibly change a terrorist's heart. In fact, it's part of the problem because it's just one more example of how a large swath of our politically correct society wants to bury its collective head in the sand and think that warm, fuzzy thoughts will fix things. On the contrary, not only do we need decisive, unapologetic action on the part of world leaders, we cannot lose sight of the fact that we must turn back to God, publicly acknowledge that we need Him now more than ever, and pray to Him for the conversion we so badly need.

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

With truth on our side, a Culture of Life can prevail

With the recent striking down by the US Supreme Court of pro-life laws, the timing of the National Right to Life Convention (NRLC) in Herndon, VA, July 7-9, couldn’t have been better – and, as a member of RTL-LIFESPAN, I couldn’t have been more pleased to attend the event in person.

Does that mean the NRLC was an entirely feel-good event? To be honest, no. After all, we were there to talk about some of the most difficult issues of our time: abortion; the growing trend of euthanasia; and the healthcare rationing inherent in “Obamacare” – to name just a few.

These are hardly happy topics. But they’re topics we need to address -- courageously, unabashedly, truthfully -- if we’re to be worthy witnesses to life. In fact, it is in that commitment to truth that we find hope of turning things around in favor of a culture of life.

So how do we share that hope, especially with those hurting from the aftermath of abortion? First, in this particular area, we need to share the truth about how abortion harms women - physically and emotionally. Denying the consequences doesn't diminish the harm, it only forces women to suppress their own trauma. By acknowledging a woman's suffering we can then offer her compassion and information on how and where she - and men, for that matter who are also affected by abortion - can find healing. 

Unfortunately, one thing we hear very little about in the “mainstream” culture is that abortion does indeed harm women. But if abortion is no big deal, like the abortion industry would have us believe, then why was one of the most common themes at the NRLC centered on the emotional and physical consequences of abortion? Why is there such a disconnection between truth and society’s willingness to admit it? 

HUSH, a documentary shown at the NRLC (www.hushfilm.com) does an incredible job of exposing this. Not only does it reveal the alarming link between abortion and breast cancer, premature birth and other risks, it exposes the astonishing silence of the abortion industry and others regarding these risks.

As HUSH details, it took only seven studies establishing the link between tobacco and cancer to get the federal government to mandate warnings on all tobacco products. Yet despite over 120 studies concluding that abortion greatly increases breast cancer risks, the National Cancer Institute and other prominent organizations refuse to even acknowledge these findings, let alone push for government mandates to warn women of the risks.

In other words, politics, not science, seems to be steering the issue right now. Denial like this makes it increasingly appalling to hear abortion advocates refer to any of this as women’s healthcare, when clearly women’s health and well-being are not the primary concerns of this billion dollar industry. Then again, to what extent can we genuinely expect those who don’t value pre-born life to value any life?

This devaluing of human life is especially evident today toward the elderly and otherwise medically challenged. Addressing this, speakers at the NRLC gave extraordinary testimonies about the need to be stalwart advocates for our and our loved ones’ healthcare. From one mother’s experience with a hospital encouraging her to stop treatment for her son’s Trisomy 18 condition, to a brother dealing with a hospital’s stonewalling to administer food and water to his elderly brother, it was chillingly clear that just because someone is in the healthcare field, it isn’t a guarantee he or she will do everything possible to save a life.

With government policy like Obamacare increasingly demanding cuts in health spending, coupled with our throwaway culture of death, we may find ourselves at the mercy of faceless bureaucrats who will decide which of our lives are worthy of the cost to preserve them. 

Even worse, we may find ourselves at the mercy of health professionals under pressure to keep costs down, the same professionals who may also share in today's rising attitude that healthcare should be less about restoring health and preserving life, and more about eliminating suffering at all costs through things like euthanasia. That’s why, by the way, it’s critical to have pro-life Will to Live documents, and even carry them with us in our wallets (e.g., in the form of a mini-card you can attach to your insurance card). Even then, you or your loved ones better keep an eye on the medical facility treating you to make sure they’re adhering to your wishes.

Despite the hard issues addressed at NRLC, the prevailing attitude was assuredly one of hope. As mentioned before, fundamental to that hope is that we have truth on our side: simply put, the value of every human life is not up for debate. But how do we present the truth of the prolife movement in the most effective way to change hearts? That is the million dollar question indeed.

Of course it starts with being witnesses ourselves to the joy and value of life. But one other thing we must continue doing is acknowledge that while facts are necessary to share, simply bombarding others with nothing but statistics, judgments, and atrocities may just further harden the hearts we want to change. To the best of our ability, we need to share the truth we know, but must share it with calmness, compassion, and love to a society desperately in need of these things. 

The bottom line is, whatever your job, whatever your vocation, whatever your place in life, you have it in you to change hearts because you have the key ingredient already in you: the truth that every life matters, from conception to natural death. It is in sharing that truth that we can ultimately make ours a Culture of Life, one heart at a time!

Friday, July 8, 2016

Without our police, our culture falls

President Obama may not have directly caused the disgusting tragedy in Dallas last night that claimed the death of five police officers in cold blood, but he is culpable of fanning the flames of racial tensions ever since he took office as president of our country by politicizing events like Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Freddie Gray.

The protests in Dallas - a city that had nothing to do with the recent deaths at the hands of police officers that ostensibly sparked the protests - began peacefully. But in the background were the incendiary words of Obama, who earlier in the day before having all the facts of the tragic shooting in MN of Philando Castile, went to the public with words of discrimination, injustice, and of course, the need for gun control.

The thing is we don't know yet what really happened in Minnestota - we only have the live streaming of the event after it occurred while a man lay bleeding to death with no medical assistance. 

As for the reason for the shootings in Dallas last night, all we know is that the police were murderously ambushed during an otherwise peaceful demonstration and some reports say that at least one of the culprits stated he hated whites and especially white cops, and wanted death for them. 

But Obama, while calling it tragic, has already started using the issue for a talking point on gun control, instead of where the conversation should begin - the crumbling of our culture from a much deeper source. 

Unfortunately such rhetoric only raises hysteria on gun control, despite that removing all the guns in the world will not stop violence -- while our most serious issue - our culture - goes unmentioned. And when the supposed leaders of our world promote rhetoric that only inflates an issue to the point of breaking, we get the chaos and violence we see in our culture.

Meanwhile, police officers, the absolute last line of defense for a civilized society, feel less and less support from the public they risk their lives to protect. Yes, there are some bad cops, and they should be dealt with. There are some bad teachers and some bad priests, too. But individual fallen human beings are not an excuse to condemn an entire group, and right now, we need to defend and support the police as a whole who defend and support us as a whole.

This is not the time for presidents or presidential candidates to be rushing to politicize tragic police events by driveling on about gun control and "Black Lives Matter", which is in truth an anti-American, divisive campaign that only inflames tensions and undermines law enforcement. It is time for real leadership that states unambiguously, unequivocally, and unabashedly that All Lives Matter, and that law enforcement is crucial to our culture in ensuring order and the safety of us all.

Politicizing violence only creates anarchy and the complete fall of our culture. It's time to stop the inflammatory rhetoric and come together as Americans to demand the restoration of civility in our land. This is not a gun issue. This is not a cop issue. This is not a racial issue. It is an American issue. But until we get a president and leadership who respect law enforcement, America will only see more chaos.



Wednesday, July 6, 2016

7 Reasons Trump is the Only Viable Option*

*Reposted from Constitution.com...

In full disclosure, I voted for Ted Cruz in the primaries. I was not a Trump supporter. As things now stand, I realize that there are those who are trying to wrest the nomination from Trump. This will only mean that we will get the evil of an Establishment Republican or most likely Hillary in November. There will be a rebellion of Trump supporters and anti-Establishment Republican voters.

Why do I believe Trump is a viable option? First, he’s not Hillary Clinton. The Clintons have deep political ties in the media, the Democrat Party, and foreign countries. Trump does not. The Clinton foundation has been paid tens of millions of dollars for political favors ( with many of those dollars coming illegally from foreign countries, including those countries who embrace Sharia Law, and hence the mistreatment of women and homosexuals).

Second, the Democrats and Establishment Republicans despise Trump. They would serve as a check on any outrageous policies he might propose. This would not be the case with Hillary. Democrats would almost unanimously support her while a fair number of left-of-center Republicans would join them.

Third, Hillary would extend the policies of President Obama. It would mean more abortions, more restrictions on religious liberty, more illegal aliens, more gun control, more taxes, more spending. Just put the word “more” before anything Obama has done, and do it for at least four years.

Fourth, Hillary would extend the eight-year judicial nomination process begun by Obama and extend it another four years, maybe eight. She would most likely nominate two new justices from the shaky conservative side of the Supreme Court. Democrat appointees almost always vote liberal, while Republican nominees can’t always be trusted (e.g., Roberts and Kennedy). With two more Democrat appointees, there will be no way to stop an unconstitutional Supreme Court from ruling unconstitutionally and Congress doing nothing about it.

Fifth, Bill Clinton will return to the White House. Hillary accuses conservatives of engaging in a “war on women” but Bill Clinton is the perpetrator of that war. It’s shocking that so many so-called feminists are “With Her” when a number of women have come forward accusing her husband of rape.

Sixth, like Obama, Hillary is an Islamist apologist. Huma Abedin is a Muslim insider who is “the co-chair of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and a person likely to have significant influence in a Hillary Clinton White House. Huma Abedin has had murky associations in the past with the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which not only is a radical Islamist group in its own right but, as Breitbart has reported, was ‘located in the offices of Saudi Arabia’s Muslim World League.’” 


Seventh, a warning from Murray N. Rothbard originally published in 1994: “Now obviously, and of course, a lot of this is Hillary’s drive to “reinvent” herself, that is, to create a duplicitous false image, to make herself less threatening to the angry American public. And surely the late-nineteenth-century Social Gospelers would be horrified at the current multi-gendered, condomaniacal Clintonian left, to say nothing of the rapid revolving of poor John Wesley in his eighteenth-century English grave. But there is definitely a direct line of descent from the Methodist Social Gospelers of the nineteenth century to St. Hillary and the monstrous Clintonian left. Mix into ‘old-fashioned Methodism’ liberal doses of Marxism, the New Left, the pagan pantheist New Age, and the multicultural and sexual revolutions, stir briskly, and you get the current ruling horror that we all face, and are trying to roll back out of our lives. We face, in short, regardless of what hairdo or persona she affects next week, the evil Witch in the White House.” 

Donald Trump may not be the best of political candidates, but Hillary Clinton most certainly is the worst.

Reposted from Constitution.com

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Abortion fans OK with harmful-to-women ruling in TX

Live Action News reports that "the pro-abortion lobby is celebrating the Supreme Court ruling yesterday which struck down Texas’ HB2, which allowed the state to regulate abortion facilities (kind of like what is required for dentists, or foot surgeons, or anyone who will be touching you). But according to abortion fans, this is great news for women, for one reason alone: in their minds, it will increase the number of abortions in Texas. For pro-abortion extremists, that is all that matters.

First of all, what is the Supreme Court doing in interfering with state law that has nothing to do with the U.S. Constitution. Demanding that any surgical facility be clean is not a violation of the Constitution. The overreach of the Supreme Court should be alarming enough. But to the people cheering the Court on, it doesn’t matter whether or not abortion is safe. It doesn’t matter if the woman undergoing an abortion is having rusty equipment inserted into her body. No, all of that is acceptable, as long as the abortion will still take place.

Make no mistake: the position of the pro-abortion lobby is clearly that an unsafe abortion is better than no abortion at all. From their actions, it appears that they would rather see women maimed or killed in botched abortions at the hands of abortionists in shoddy clinics than they would keep these women safe. And that’s what overturning this ruling does: it makes abortion less safe.

In other words, the Supreme Court has just ruled against women (and women who say they are pro-woman are hysterically happy about it). 

The entire issue with abortion regulations could arguably be traced to Kermit Gosnell. Gosnell killed babies after birth by snipping their necks. He killed at least two women. More were injured, although how many more may not ever be known. Women claim to have been forced into abortions at his hands. His clinic was disgusting, with flea-infested cats roaming the facility, leaving feces everywhere. Women were found barely conscious, moaning, on battered old recliners covered in blood-stained blankets. Jars filled with the severed feet of babies Gosnell had murdered were on display. When Gosnell butchered the abortion of Karnamaya Mongar, paramedics had trouble finding her, because the clinic was a veritable maze of hallways and doors. And once they finally did recover her, they struggled to get her out quickly, because the gurney could not fit through Gosnell’s narrow hallways.

How was this allowed to happen? Simple: for decades, authorities looked the other way. The reason why was disturbing. First was pro-abortion politics. Authorities were more concerned with abortion access than they were with women’s safety. 

The second reason was Gosnell’s clientele. The women Gosnell serviced were overwhelmingly poor women of color. It was easy to look the other way when, to authorities, these weren’t women who mattered.

After Gosnell, increased abortion regulations began to be implemented, and with good reason. It was gradually discovered that abortion facilities across the country were operating in shoddy conditions. Tanning salons, veterinary clinics, tattoo parlors, fast food restaurants — these are a few examples of businesses that were inspected more often than abortion clinics were.

Pro-abortion activists say that abortion needs to be legal so that it can be safe — to end the back-alley abortions they claim happened before Roe v. Wade was passed. Yet now, they’ve completely abandoned all pretense of keeping abortion safe. The only thing they seem to care about is keeping it legal… and that is bad news for women. It doesn’t help them; it hurts them.

Unfortunately there are Gosnells operating across the country. One of them is in Texas, an abortionist named Douglas Karpen, who has been under investigation for infanticide. Multiple Texas abortion facilities have records of serious health and safety violations.

For instance, it’s no surprise that Whole Woman’s Health fought Texas' proposed standards so much, considering their own history of health violations, including rusty and unsanitary equipment, surgical instruments that were not properly sterilized, expired and improperly labeled medications, EKG machines and defibrillators that did not work, and more.

These aren’t the only shoddy abortionists. LeRoy Carhart, Steven Chase Brigham, Nicola Riley, Harold Alexander, James Scott Pendergraft, Earl McLeod, Mandy Gittler… all of these, and many more, have risked the health of women and some have even been responsible for their deaths.

Substandard has become “the norm” for abortion facilities
Any other ambulatory surgical clinic would not be allowed to operate under the kinds of conditions found in abortion facilities. Hospital admitting privileges? Even the abortion industry used to insist upon them. But now politics has become more important than bare minimum standards of safety.

Thanks to the Supreme Court, abortion is now even less safe, and just like with Gosnell before, it’s the poor, minority women of Texas who will be the ones at risk. Wealthy women can afford to go to a "reputable clinic", with or without these regulations in place. Without them, though, poor women will be forced to take whatever care they can find, and who is it that preys on women at their most desperate and vulnerable? The shoddy abortionists like Kermit Gosnell.

The Supreme Court has just abandoned these women, has just announced that they do not deserve a facility that is held to the same standards as other surgical ambulatory centers. They do not deserve to know that the person they are trusting is reliable and trustworthy. Instead, they have to just pray that the equipment being used on them is not rusty. They have to hope that if something goes wrong, their abortionist will cooperate with emergency medical providers, as opposed to dumping them at the local emergency room.

Some people believe abortion should be legal, and that easy access is important, but that’s an entirely separate debate. Because regardless of whether or not you think abortion should be legal, for those of you who are for abortion, don't you at least feel it should be safe? (for the mother, that is...of course it is never safe for the baby). 

Yet abortion advocates who feel they are so enlightened and liberated have become slaves to the abortion industry, so much so that they are willing to compromise women’s safety as long as it means that abortion will be more widespread. 

The only people who win here are those in the abortion industry itself, who can now line their pockets with money without having to worry about women’s safety and the costs it would take to update their clinics to clean, sterile standards. It doesn’t matter how many women they maim or butcher or infect— the Supreme Court will protect the abortionists - not the women the profit off of.

And no matter what abortion activists say, that will never be good for women."

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

A woman president at any cost?

A female acquaintance of mine mentioned recently that she is supporting Hillary Clinton for president because "it's time we have a woman for president." My question is, why do we need a woman for president? Are today's women in such need of validation that they would support any female for president despite how corrupt and dishonest she is? How would having a female president change any woman's life? And how could a woman as dishonest and corrupt as Hillary Clinton be any kind of positive role model for women?

Of course when I asked this woman what she thought about how Hillary Clinton treated the 12 year-old rape victim, or what she thought of Clinton accepting millions of dollars from Middle Eastern countries that disrespect and abuse women, the money laundering she orchestrated through her husband's speaking engagements, or what she thought about Hillary's severe national security breach with her personal email server, or Hillary's cold dismissal of concerned family members of the murdered victims in Benghazi, the woman had no clue of these things.

But hey, as long as we have a female president, this acquaintance of mine is convinced her life will be better. She is not aware of Hillary's promise to raise taxes (or that, as US Senator, Hillary voted twice to raise taxes on the middle class). This woman is not aware that Hillary promises to silence all religious objection to morally reprehensible actions like abortion and euthanasia. This woman is not aware of Hillary's refusal to support closing our borders against vicious terrorists, or that Hillary, as president, would likely be recommending Supreme Court justices based on her personal ideology rather than their adherence to the Constitution. 

But she is convinced our country needs her and that women, in particular, need her. The conversation with this woman reminded me of something I have repeatedly noticed over the years: whenever I meet someone who is completely uninformed about things they always default to the Democrat/left side of the political aisle. I have never met an ignorant person who defaults to the conservative side. 

Typical of Hillary supporters, this particular woman was well versed in the pro-Hillary pop-media soundbites but woefully uninformed about the real Hillary. I personally have no problem with a female president - but I don't need a woman president, and if we do ever get one, I do care about what kind of person she is. How sad that so many women have been convinced that they need validation as women at all, let alone validation by the unfortunate likes of Hillary Clinton.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

These Catholic school students have the right idea...watch

Just wanted to share a simple reminder that when we remove God from the public square, we get the evil we're seeing today. But when we remember that God is still with us, we see what we need to do.

Watch this short video - the message is so simple, it's brilliant. 

Have a blessed day!