You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘abortion’ tag.
“…all who hate Me, love and court death.” — Proverbs 8:36
“…sin, when full grown, gives birth to death.” — James 1:15a
Once again, thanks to a serendipitous trawl of the Net, I happened across two online posts, at least 15 years apart, which discuss the same topic: what America (and the rest of the West) must be on guard against.
First, from the 1990s, a few excerpts from an article by Cutting Edge Ministries‘ director, David Bay. It’s called ‘Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan’ and was originally broadcast on radio. This is one of those items which if I had read it when he originally posted it, I would have passed it by without a second glance. However, it ties in so well with what Linda Kimball (Patriots and Liberty) and I have been discussing for the past few weeks that it is really a must-see. Most emphases in bold below are mine. Those in red are mine; the rest are in the original.
The moral bankruptcy of our society is well-documented.
Few people understand why we have become morally bankrupt. However, when we look at society through the eyes of God, through the Bible, we can easily see why we are facing the unprecedented troubles today …
Now consider the following news briefs:
Three weeks ago, we showed that America has rejected our traditional Christian Values Foundation, replacing it with a Satanic Values Foundation. Once we view our daily news with this focus, we can easily see why we are facing daily crimes of great variety and incredible atrocity. But, this is only part of the horror; the rest of the story is that most Americans subscribe to many Values of Satanism without realizing that they have also fallen victim to this trap. To quickly review:
Again, we quote the Satanic Bible, the most common Values:
INDULGENCE IN:
- Personal selfishness, i.e., greed and pride.
- Physical lust.
- Anger.
The elevation of these Satanic values to the level of encouraging its members to deliberately indulge in them has produced tremendous societal effects:
- Strong desire for power over others.
- Strong desire for accumulation of wealth and material possessions.
- Strong sexual desires, to be satisfied no matter who might be harmed.
- Life becomes cheapened, losing God-given sanctity.
- Obsession with violence and murder.
- Lack of compassion or empathy for those individuals who are handicapped or who are ill.
- Obsession with death. Death symbols begin to appear in society, and followers begin to fix their minds on death. Remember, hard-core Satanism demands human sacrifice, the younger the better. If our theory is correct, we should be able to see our society killing the innocent …
The Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan works like this:
- Some practice so offensive that it can scarcely be discussed in public is advocated by a RESPECTED expert in a RESPECTED forum.
- At first, the public is shocked, then outraged.
- But, the VERY FACT that such a thing could be publicly debated becomes the SUBJECT of the debate.
- In the debate, sheer repetition of the shocking subject gradually dulls its effect.
- People then are no longer shocked.
- No longer outraged, people begin to argue for positions to moderate the extreme; or, they accept the premise, challenging, instead, the means to ACHIEVE it.
EXAMPLES: 1. DRUG LEGALIZATION
1. According to Newsweek magazine, December 25, 1989, respected American officials, both liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat, have begun to call for the legalization of drugs, claiming all our efforts have miserably failed.
2. At first, the public is shocked and outraged. This outrage has been led by other respected American officials …
3. Even discussing drug legalization at such high levels in our government gives the issue a stamp of legitimacy.
4. This war of words provides the sheer repetition necessary to dull the public’s opposition.
5. People are now becoming less shocked by the proposal.
6. No longer shocked, the focus of the debate shifts to moderating the extremes of both sides of the debate.
So we can see just as in the case of abortion, a compromise will then be reached that will legalize drugs in a limited manner. Several years later, American public opinion will have been changed sufficiently to allow for ever-wider legalization. (This point is very key: Limited acceptance of the controversial proposal is always fatal, because it opens the firmly-shut door just a crack. This tiny beginning then allows the door to be systematically opened wide.)
EXAMPLES: 2. CHANGING SEXUAL PREFERENCES
Homosexuality
TV, Newspapers, and Magazines are strongly supporting the campaign for public acceptance of homosexuality. TV shows, movies, and articles in printed media have been consistently presenting a picture of validity and normalcy in the homosexual lifestyle. Simultaneously, Governmental Agencies, certain elected officials, and our courts have been actively re-shaping laws which promote this normalcy theme. Clearly, our entire society is moving rapidly and strongly toward full acceptance, and Mass Media is leading the charge.
Remember Sodom and Gomorrah? (Genesis 18:16-19:29). God’s actions amount to a NATIONAL capital execution. Consider the scene: God’s Holy Angels, bodily incarnated as men, visit Lot’s house to warn him to flee Sodom before God’s physical judgment falls. Homosexual men have seen these angels enter Lot’s house, so they surround the house and loudly call to the angels to come outside so they could have homosexual relations with them …
The entire society of Sodom was supportive of homosexual activity … God not only condemned this societal support, He physically destroyed the cities in punishment …
We see this kind of societal support for homosexual behavior in America. But, there is more, as Lesbianism is now being promoted in women’s magazines, on T.V., and in newspapers.
We have gone through all 6 steps of the Plan are now in the process of opening the door wide.
Heterosexual Adultery
Today, we see a steady Mass Media drumbeat to convince Americans that traditional Judeo-Christian values governing heterosexual relationships is out-of-date and has been replaced. Thus, we see TV sitcoms which depict couples living together without being married and even raising children together …
Newspapers feature article after article which depict real-life situations in which men and women, living together without being married, appear happy and prosperous.
Sexual Perversions
Pornography is the avenue by which the Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan has traditionally worked in America. Both mediums of printed material and video material has changed the values of many … All the mediums of Mass Media are now running many articles on real-life stories of sexual perversions. Even when the tone of the article is negative, even horrific, sheer repetition is at work.
EXAMPLES: 3. ADVANCE DEATHMAKING As Desirable/Noble/Courageous/ Advantageous To Society
Euthanasia
Americans are being convinced that Individual Euthanasia is a right which society should protect and advance …
After the Jewish Holocaust, many Jewish scholars studied German society to discover how the nation of the Martin Luther Christian Tradition could turn into one of the greatest mass killing machines in history. One study, The Nazi Doctors, by Robert Lifton, states emphatically the Nazi Holocaust could never have occurred if the intermediate step of Euthanasia had not first occurred. The individual’s “right to die” very quickly became the government’s “right to kill“.
German Public Opinion was molded by films showing incurable people being “helped” by sympathetic physicians. Medical Committees were set up in local communities comprised of local physicians, to decide whether a person was medically incurable, and thus eligible for euthanasia. German public acceptance for Euthanasia was begun by activist doctors, was promoted by activist doctors, and throughout the Mass Death Camps, was directed by activist doctors …
This is one of the concerns I have about David Cameron’s Big Society localism. It could potentially spiral out of control very quickly, in this way or in others. Earlier this summer, the BBC featured a television show about British author Terry Pratchett, an Alzheimer’s victim, who discusses and investigates euthanasia. He would like to have it when the time comes. So, already, we have the respected source and we are becoming accustomed to the idea of death on demand.
EXAMPLES: 4. Reduce “Overpopulation” of the Earth
… What are the New Age answers to this `horrible’ over-population of the earth? We have listed just two of their answers; please understand they are utilizing the Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan to achieve their goal. Remember the supreme importance in this Plan of Point #4, creating a tremendous battle in the media and in the streets between opposing sides. This battle creates the sheer repetition necessary to erode people’s opposing attitudes.
Abortion on Demand
When all 6 points of the Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan have properly completed, the door has been opened just a crack to allow the objectionable process and only in certain circumstances. Then, the door is systematically forced open wider and wider, until the point is reached where the formerly objectionable practice is occurring constantly and for whatever reason. Clearly, we have been at this point with abortion. Since 1973, over 27 million American babies have been killed!! Every abortion prevents the population of the earth from getting larger, thus contributing to their goal of reducing the world’s population by two-thirds! …
This is true. Britain’s Daily Mail carries many stories on doctors advising abortions for the possibility (!) of a club foot or cleft palate; the latter can be operated on quite routinely and if the first cannot, custom-made orthopaedic shoes and physiotherapy enable the person to walk reasonably well. This was true even when I was growing up in the 1960s. So, if any doctor suggests an abortion for either of these conditions, just say no.
Sarah Kliff looked at American abortion data for Newsweek magazine in 2010 and from data gathered from a reproductive rights think tank, the Guttmacher Institute, calculated that 40% of American women have had abortions. 40%! She writes (emphases mine throughout):
This is, to be fair, a crude estimation. It does not factor in some teenage abortions, although it does get most of them, since both the pregnancy and abortion rates of 18- to 19-year-olds are much higher than those of 15- to 17-year-olds (see tables 2.2 and 2.3 of this Guttmacher report for the data). Nor does this estimate take into account how many of those 45 million abortions were among women having more than one, which could reduce the overall percentage. At the same time, women who had abortions pre-Roe are left out, as are those who had illegal abortions post-Roe (yes, that still happens). Working with the data that we do have on the prevalence of abortion, I think 40 percent is a pretty good, albeit imperfect, estimate.
If anything, I believe the debate among our readers really hits home one of the main points of my story: since we do not talk much about abortion, we generally underestimate just how prevalent it is.
Keep in mind that it’s not the cool, clinical procedure as presented in the media. It’s not like going for a botox treatment at lunchtime. There are many variables involved — physical and emotional. Many women live with the trauma for the rest of their lives. It can also have a knock-on effect on the way they relate with other people — friends, families, boyfriends or colleagues.
Next up from 2009, we have a post from Todd of Blue Collar Philosophy who has a train of thought similar to that of David Bay of Cutting Edge Ministries (the first article). Below are extracts from his post, ‘The Great Evangelical Collapse’. It outlines a book he hopes to publish. Todd, by the way, was a former Dead head (as in Grateful) and has a Master’s degree in the Philosophy of Religion and Ethics.
Book Summary
My manuscript centers on the conflict and influence the liberal spirit of the age is having on Christianity in America. The particular manifestation of this spirit of the world is humanist/liberal/progressive and ultimately satanic and it stands in total opposition to an orthodox/conservative biblical view of the world.
Chapter 1. Death of a Dead Head: From Jerry to Jesus
I use my testimony as an opening chapter to set up the how ideas have consequences. The ideas that are dominating American society and politics stem from the spirit of the age which stands in total opposition to the truth of God’s Word in the Bible. Ideas are inherently religious in nature and inform our notions of truth and have radically different effects on our ethical views and how we live. I explain my life and liberal world view before becoming a Christian and how radically my life changed afterward.
Chapter 2. The Dual Crisis
This chapter further details the liberal spirit of the age and its influence on America’s cultural life. The wars of the twentieth century have left mankind in a dual crisis of meaning and value. America’s consumer mentality, coupled with this crisis, has led to a fast food religious and moral outlook that ultimately places the justified self, the autonomous person at the center of the moral universe …
Chapter 3. Homosexuality: Liberation from Self-Control
This new justified self cannot be restrained in the pursuit of the satisfaction of any desire it may have. When meaning and value are assumed to be relative then everything is up for grabs including human sexuality. A radical gay rights agenda has developed around the idea that homosexuality is just another normal expression of human sexuality and ought to be accepted as such. Tolerance is no longer putting up with something one disagrees with but is now synonymous with complete acceptance which also entails promotion. I put forth a broad response to this agenda by looking at the biological, philosophical, theological, and political reasons to reject this agenda based on a sexual act.
Chapter 4. Abortion and Euthanasia: Culture of Death
The assault on the Christian view that life has value in that it was created by God has disastrous consequences for the defenseless among us. I respond to the arguments in favor of abortion and euthanasia by articulating a view of human personhood that is not relative or emergent based on some subjective criteria that constantly changes. Under this liberal view, life has value only if those who stand in power say it does and there is no way to check such arbitrary assertions. Only by grounding the value in life in it being a unique creation of God can personhood not be compromised.
Chapter 5: Democracy in Crisis
This liberal spirit is also undermining our democracy. Through relativism, multiculturalism, and pluralism the foundation of Democracy is being destroyed. Removing self-control and value will usher in a new form of totalitarian government in America. With the removal of internal restraint people see no reason to refrain from satisfying their immediate desires no matter how perverse they may be. In order for Democracy to survive people need to exercise self control …
Chapter 7: Biblically Based Renewal
The only institution that can respond and challenge this liberal spirit of the age is the Christian church. The tragedy is that the Christian church in America is falling under the same sway of this worldly spirit. Christians have accommodated and compromised their faith to such an extent that there is little difference in how they live. Christians who claim to be against abortion or say homosexuality is a sin voted for a liberal candidate like Barack Obama who would not stand against infanticide as a state Senator. He is also advocating for gay rights. There is a widening gap between what Christians say they are for and the consistent application of such affirmations to their lives. This allows for relative qualifications of the objective moral absolutes stemming from God’s Word. A Christian will assert that he or she is personally against abortion “but” and fill in the rest. Any such qualification reveals a compromised faith that in the end is no different from someone with no faith at all. Christians need to return a biblically based world view that stands alone and independent from the influences of the world. This will help begin to transform the Christian church in America so that it can address the problems in our society as well …
We have spiralled downhill considerably over the past 20 years. Think back 50 years. These events and modes of thought would have been unimaginable then. It’s certainly time to pray and study the Bible.
The American actress Jane Russell died on Monday, February 28, 2010.
My parents and their friends were born around the same time as Miss Russell. No one, even my mother’s friends who were avid fans of film gossip, ever had a bad thing to say about her.
Some of her obituaries were better than others. A few mentioned her Christianity and conservative politics in passing whilst others explored these points in more depth. These things I didn’t know. They make interesting reading. Emphases mine throughout.
Born Ernastine Geraldine Russell on June 21 1921 at Bemidji, Minnesota, she grew up in California, graduating from Van Nuys School. Though her mother had been an actress, the young Jane did not initially entertain thoughts of a career in showbusiness, opting instead for employment as a chiropodist’s assistant. But showbiz was in the blood and in 1940, she enrolled in Max Reinhardt’s Theatrical Workshop. Later, she studied with Maria Ouspenskaya, with a little modelling on the side.
That was how Howard Hughes discovered her, earmarking her immediately for the Western he planned to make with brand new stars. Russell and Jack Buetel were cast in the leading roles. Though The Outlaw was not released for many years, Hughes’s publicity machine kept the stories churning about this actress with the phenomenal embonpoint.
The Daily Mail tells us more about her youth and private life:
[She] was … the daughter of a U.S. Army lieutenant and his wife, a small-part touring actress …
At the start of her career, she found herself pregnant at 18 by her high school sweetheart, Los Angeles Rams quarterback Bob Waterfield, who later became her first husband in 1943.
As she was not married, Russell went to a back-street quack. ‘I had a botched abortion and it was terrible. Afterwards my own doctor said: “What butcher did this to you?” I had to be taken to hospital. I was so ill I nearly died.’
The abortion left her unable to bear children. During her 25-year marriage to Waterfield, which she described as ‘tempestuous’, the couple adopted a baby girl, Tracy, and a British boy and then another boy.
In 1955, Russell helped to found the World Adoption International Fund, an organisation to place children with adoptive families and which pioneered adoptions from foreign countries by Americans.
For the rest of her life, she held to the belief that abortion was wrong in any circumstances — including even rape or incest.
A born-again Christian, long before that term was in general use, she formed the Hollywood Christian Group for weekly Bible study at her home, attended by many of the leading names in the film industry.
She also joined a singing group to record gospel songs, one of which made it into the charts.
Her marriage to Waterfield ended in divorce in 1968, and in that same year she married the minor stage actor Roger Barrett, but he died three months after the wedding.
Her third husband, to whom she was married for 25 years, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel, died in 1999.
Back to the Telegraph for more about the adoption of her English son after the Second World War:
“I’m the mothering type,” she admitted, when visiting England in the early Fifties to attend the Royal Command Film Performance. High on her agenda was “to adopt a really cute little English baby boy”, as she was unable to have children … Her mother, who was accompanying her, faced an even more challenging task. “I’ve come over”, she said, “to see if I can get hold of a rare German edition of the Bible”. “That”, added her daughter, “is the secret of our family’s success – religion. Mom always was devout.”
The quest for that “cute” little boy opened up a long and bitter battle, involving questions in the House and impassioned pleas by Lt-Col Marcus Lipton, Labour MP for Brixton, for the actress to return the 15-month-old boy, Thomas Kavanagh of South Lambeth, to his rightful mother. An agreement had been reached with the boy’s parents for him to spend three months with the actress in her Hollywood home, but legislation of 1950 expressly forbade parents to allow their children to be adopted by non-British subjects. In the end, after an 11-month struggle, Miss Russell did adopt Thomas Kavanagh in America, while the parents were discharged conditionally in London “for unlawfully permitting the care and possession of the child to be transferred”.
As far as politics went, the Mail relates:
In 1971, she made her Broadway stage debut in the Stephen Sondheim musical Company, and later in the decade appeared in TV commercials for Playtex Cross-Your-Heart Bras, with the catchphrase, ‘For us full-figured gals’.
Behind the scenes, however, she had been battling alcoholism for a number of years, and in 1978, there were worldwide headlines when she was arrested for drink-driving and jailed for 96 hours.
After that, she swore off alcohol, describing herself as ‘a teetotal mean-spirited Right-wing conservative Christian bigot’.
Asked what she thought of Hollywood liberals such as George Clooney, Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn, she replied: ‘I think they’re not well.’
In later life:
she moved to Santa Maria, California, to be close to her younger son.
She was visited there in 2004 by Leonardo DiCaprio, who was filming The Aviator and wanted her to tell him what his character, Howard Hughes, was really like.
In 2006, at the age of 84, though suffering from macular degeneration of the eyes and with hearing aids in both ears, Russell put together a musical show, The Swinging Forties, which played twice a month at the Radisson Hotel in Santa Maria.
It featured herself and about a dozen of the town’s residents, including a choir director and a retired police officer.
Asked why she did it, Russell said: ‘Out of boredom, and because there was nothing much going on in town for the older folks to do.’
Another ‘old school’ star passes. It won’t be long before I stop reading film stars’ obits. The new ones just aren’t worth the time.
Jane Russell recognised her sins and duly repented. May she rest in peace and may her family walk in the comfort of almighty God.
James Delingpole, Telegraph blogger and Spectator columnist, is keen on debunking the Church of Gaia.
So, it was no surprise that he latched on to Harold Lewis’s resignation letter from the American Physical Society, whose position on climate change can be found here. The position statement is the one to which Professor Lewis refers to below. (Thanks to Dick Puddlecote for featuring the Delingpole column.)
Since then, it appears that Professor Lewis will be joining The Global Warming Policy Foundation.
Here are excerpts from Professor Lewis’s letter (emphases mine throughout):
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood … Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that …
As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce … an honest appraisal of the situation at that time …
How different it is now. The … money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1/ … In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate.
2/ The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry … and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it … In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety … The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe.
3/ In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4/ So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science … I might note that it was not easy … you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.
5/ To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses … The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6/ As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it … I think it is the money … to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department … would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst.
And so would Tobacco Control, another leviathan spanning the world. But we’ll look at the spurious science behind that in another post.
It’s all money and job-generating stuff. And, as my readers have seen, it’s also all about Church unity. No dissension, no discussion, only agreement. After all, when funding and your job are at stake, what’s to discuss?
About this, Dick Puddlecote writes:
I have looked at tobacco control ‘science’. Just about all of it. And everything described by Lewis is not only replicated therein, but is more duplicitous, more resistant to debate, more mendacious, more money-oriented, and more corrupt, than anything Lewis will have witnessed.
Based on this experience, I can also offer a prediction. Lewis will be ostracised, his name blackened, his previous work dismissed as eccentricity, his future work dismissed as funded by oil companies. He will be expunged from the scientific community and threats of similar treatment will be issued to all who dare to commission him.
Or maybe, as one of Dick’s readers noted, they’ll just say he was ‘gaga’ or an ‘embittered’ old man. I hope not, but this is how these guys work. And they’re always in it for the long Gramscian game.
Delingpole’s blog post generated nearly 1,800 comments when I read it. It may have more now. A reader, Henrybrubaker, cited in the blog Banned, had this to say (brief excerpt below):
… Eco-fascists are … extreme and they are willing to go to any lengths to protect their criminal schemes. If they are not confronted, discredited and defeated could the future bring us an eco-genocide? There are those on the side of ‘gaia’ who think that is exactly what should happen.
The greenies will scream at me ‘How dare you compare us to the Nazis, we are not the same, we don’t want to build the death camps etc…’. Perhaps not, perhaps the majoity … don’t want to kill us all. However, these people are the tools, the useful idiots, of the extremist eco-fascists. They do the ground work for people with views like Pentti Linkola, the Finnish eco-fascist who wants to destroy the majority of humanity and essentially enslave the rest …
Mr Brubaker’s comment received 54 recommendations from his fellow readers.
Stewart Cowan of Realstreet does an outstanding job of dissecting ethical issues. In ‘Is Prince Charles a eugenicist? Are you without realising?’ he explores why the heir to the throne thinks the way he does:
Prince Philip wrote in the foreword to If I Were an Animal (1986),
In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.
He notes that the Prince of Wales wishes to be known as Defender of Nature when he becomes king:
Defender of Nature? The worry is: how much do his beliefs match his dad’s?
Cowan believes that the Church of Gaia is part of eugenics:
This is how the world’s elites view humanity – as a virus; a cancer spreading across the planet and killing it. I believe the main purpose of the environment movement is to sear images like these into people’s minds so that they will either willingly accept, or more likely, be forced to go along with a managed reduction in population: eugenics.
On the 10:10 campaign, he writes:
… They really seemed to believe as Prince Philip does and also appeared to revel in the bloody murder of those who won’t go along with them.
It seems that the only difference between the Nazis and the Ecofascists is the targets to be eliminated.
The mysterious Georgia Guidestones suggest the world’s population should be limited to half a billion people. These elite atheist globalist “Ten Commandments” are as follows. (Some of these should already be familiar as the groundwork was begun a long time ago)
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion – faith – tradition – and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth – beauty – love – seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth – Leave room for nature – Leave room for nature.
Whoever was responsible for these words clearly thought that at least nine out of ten people must be eliminated.
Notice how much prominence that second “commandment” has in western society today: Guide reproduction wisely.
The only ‘guidestone’ that makes any sense is Number 7, however, I suspect that would be used against us instead of for us.
He notes that ‘family planning’ has been around for many decades now:
It has been made to appear totally acceptable, even wholesome.
As I have written about before, Marie Stopes, “pioneer” of Britain’s abortion clinics, used to send her poetry to Adolf Hitler in adoration, while calling for the compulsory sterilisation of the diseased, drunkards, or simply those of bad character.
While that hasn’t quite happened yet, family planning is considered normal and many people believe that killing unborn humans is acceptable, even a “woman’s right”. This particular cull deprives many millions a year of their part in history.
I didn’t know that about Marie Stopes, did you?
What’s next? What about:
… a euthanasia industry to match the effectiveness of the abortion factories?
This should easily be achieved in this age of family breakdowns and the seemingly increasing disrespect for the elderly. Old folk will be told it is their right to be terminated in cases of illness, even a spot of depression or a harelip. They will be encouraged to feel they are a burden to the rest of society and the environment and eventually they’ll be volunteering to jump off cliffs (or ride their wheelchairs over). There will be posters in doctors’ surgeries alongside the family planning ones.
Who knows? Euthanasia may even be incorporated into family planning. For example, if you want four children, you should plan to have all the grandparents killed off by the time the fourth child arrives. It could be promoted as a double celebration: a new life comes into the world and an old timer gives his life for the planet so as to maintain humanity in perpetual balance with nature.
Cowan’s conclusion is chilling:
You could live with that, couldn’t you? Ask yourself how many of their lies you have bought up until now.
I can think of a group with whom they might start. Can you? Hint: it’s the only minority group worldwide that has no legal or state protection anywhere, increasingly deprived of housing, recreation and employment. If you think you know who it is, do leave a comment.
One thing you won’t see contributors to Your Freedom clamouring for is a reduction in term limits for abortion.
Guido Fawkes featured a post on the subject at the end of June and got roundly caned for it by his readers. Some of his readers’ comments were truly shocking in their callousness. Guido explained the situation concisely (emphasis in the original):
It seems counter to reason that unborn babies below 24 weeks are unable to feel pain. Any mother who has been through a pregnancy will tell you that their babies react to external stimuli; light, caffeine and noise will all get a reaction from within the womb.
Yet a review by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists’ says foetuses are “undeveloped and sedated”. Since it is from their ranks that those who perform abortions are drawn, Guido questions the scientific objectivity of the report. It would certainly ease their consciences to believe that abortions are painless. Guido is sceptical, they would say that wouldn’t they?
Guido helpfully provides the link to a Daily Mail story from 2009 about a little mite who was born at 23 weeks. Whilst still undersized at the time the article was written, little Jessica is a healthy lass and her parents are justifiably proud.
The Coalition really need to address this issue quickly. There are two issues here. One is that abortion is too often being used as a means of birth control — we have been desensitised and mistakenly see life in the womb as ‘a clump of cells’. The other is that medicine has come a long way since abortion was first legalised 40+ years ago. It’s time to take a good look at our hostility to human life, as exemplified by the august Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (shudder — who’d a thunk it?), and redress the balance. Our abortion limits and use of terminations is a travesty. See the latest UK abortion stats and read more about the procedure in general.
This just in — news of a premature baby left to die at Norwich University Hospital, despite her parents’ pleas to staff, because she was born at 22 weeks instead of 23 weeks. The mind boggles. Simply unconscionable.
Some of you have been searching for this information. Here is a breakdown of abortions by number and demographic since 2006 in California alone.
White females carried the burden at 53.6%. Black females had 35% of terminations. The remainder, roughly 12%, are made up of ‘others’ and ‘unknowns’.
Make of it what you will. In total, 627,321 abortions were carried out that year — in only one state.
This is a complicated story which goes back to last year.
Perhaps you have read about Sister Margaret McBride, at the time Vice President of Mission Integration at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, Arizona, who ‘excommunicated herself’ for authorising that an abortion be performed on a mother-of-four. Sister Margaret is a Sister of Mercy. The Most Revd Thomas J Olmsted is the Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix.
Much has been written about this case. especially by secularists and non-Catholics. It has turned the nun into a type of convenient martyr for the anti-Catholic brigade. To understand the matter fully, let’s examine the facts of which we are aware and ask a few questions.
Background: The mother in question was diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension in the first trimester of her pregnancy. St Joseph’s ethics committee met and Sister Margaret took a decision in this case. Catholic Online reports that the Arizona Republic stated St Joseph’s policy on abortion in its own coverage:
The first says that physicians cannot perform direct abortions under any circumstances, including for such reasons as to save the life of the mother.
A second directive adds, however, that “operations, treatments and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted … even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.” This directive is based on the Catholic philosophical principle of double effect, which says that if the treatment sought addresses the direct causes of the woman’s health condition (such as radiation treatment for cancer), but never intends to kill the unborn child (even though that may happen as a secondary, but unintended, effect of the lifesaving treatment), then it is morally licit.
Hospital officials claimed that they were following the second directive by aborting the baby.
Questions:
Could Sister Margaret not have said, ‘Before we take a decision, I would like to discuss this with Bishop Olmsted and report back to you, at which time we will decide’?
With regard to double effect, how could a direct abortion not kill an unborn child?
How qualified would Sister Margaret have been as Vice President of Mission Integration to take that decision?
Abortion and saving a mother’s life: LifeSiteNews also carried this story. They spoke with Dr. Paul A. Byrne, Director of Neonatology and Pediatrics at St. Charles Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio (emphases mine):
Dr. Byrne said, “I don’t know of any [situation where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother].
“I know that a lot of people talk about these things, but I don’t know of any. The principle always is preserve and protect the life of the mother and the baby.”
Byrne has the distinction of being a pioneer in the field of neonatology, beginning his work in the field in 1963 and becoming a board-certified neonatologist in 1975. He invented one of the first oxygen masks for babies, an incubator monitor, and a blood-pressure tester for premature babies, which he and a colleague adapted from the finger blood pressure checkers used for astronauts.
Byrne emphasized that he was not commentating on what the woman’s particular treatment should have been under the circumstances, given that she is not his patient.
“But given just pulmonary hypertension, the answer is no” to abortion, said Byrne.
Byrne emphasized that the unborn child at 11 weeks gestation would have a negligible impact on the woman’s cardiovascular system. He said that pregnancy in the first and second trimesters would not expose a woman with even severe pulmonary hypertension – which puts stress on the heart and the lungs – to any serious danger.
A pregnant mother’s cardiovascular system does have “major increases,” but they only happen “in the last three months of pregnancy,” Byrne explained.
I must admit that when I read this story initially, I thought the lady was in her final trimester, only because I know a Catholic mother of five who was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension with each of her pregnancies during that time. She was always fine up until that point, at which time she had to have plenty of bed rest or risk damaging hers or her baby’s health. Fortunately, all her children are healthy, active teenagers now. Of course, I realise that not every case is the same, but this particular mother told me that her doctor warned her that everything would be fine until the final three months. That was how pulmonary hypertension worked. And, yes, she was very ill indeed during those final weeks, but neither she nor her husband ever considered an abortion.
Question:
Did Sister Margaret’s patient have a history of pulmonary hypertension? What drugs or techniques could help to minimise it?
Excommunication: This is a highly complex topic, about which you can read more at Catholic Encyclopedia. It is unusual for the Church to declare someone anathema, even f you beg them to do so. I know a man who, in his mid-20s, had meetings with bishops and a cardinal. He pleaded with each to excommunicate him, but they refused. They said that even though he was an atheist at the time he met with them, who could predict that he wouldn’t come back to the Church one day? He had done nothing to warrant excommunication other than to develop some rather eloquent (yet flawed) arguments against Christian belief.
There are differing reasons for excommunicating people and differing degrees of excommunication. Sometimes the term is used when a priest or bishop refuses to give Communion to someone in their diocese (e.g. outspoken views on abortion). This usage may render a more severe — yet unintended — meaning. In this case, we do not know if Sister Margaret is excommunicated from the Church altogether. I would bet that she is still allowed to be a Sister of Mercy and live in community, albeit under some constraints. If so, she is still a Catholic, but without receiving the Sacraments or fully participating in the Mass. Bishop Olmsted may even lift Sister’s excommunication at a future date. Sister may also have some recourse to a higher authority, perhaps at the Vatican. Let’s not get too emotive over this.
Church discipline and abortion: In any event, excommunication is an example of Church discipline — in place to protect the faithful.
Catholic teaching is highly specific when it comes to abortion. Recall that Bishop Olmsted said that Sister Margaret ‘excommunicated herself’. Here is what the Catholic Encyclopedia says that excommunication applies to:
“Those who efficaciously procure abortion.” The fruitless attempt is not punished with excommunication; authors do not agree as to whether the woman guilty of self-abortion is excommunicated.
Therefore, any Catholic who helped this lady have an abortion has effectively excommunicated himself as a result.
The Catholic Church is not the only one to have done this historically. The Didache (‘did-a-kay’) appears to have been the first Church doctrine regarding abortion. Tertullian and St Cyprian developed it and gave their rationale. Whilst I cannot speak for our Lutheran cousins today, Martin Luther had no sympathy for any woman who wanted an abortion. He wrote:
If they become tired or even die – – that does not matter, let the woman die in childbirth.
I realise that Sister Margaret’s story comes at a time when the Catholic hierarchy overlooks what paedophile priests have done. And, yes, it does look as if a bishop is exerting undue pressure on a nun. However, all historical evidence points to firm Christian and Western policies on the matter until the 20th century, when the teachings and laws on abortion were thrown to one side.
Bishop Olmsted has exercised Church discipline. And that’s how it should be. Now, let him and the other bishops get on with cleaning up the priesthood.
A new low.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, pro-choice Bay Area Democrat, did her bit for Christian evangelism recently at the Catholic Community Conference on Capitol Hill. (Nice alliteration there!) Keep in mind that Ms Pelosi is not only pro-choice but voted against a ban on partial-birth abortions.
Proof Positive brings us an excerpt which they have cited from CNSNews.com. Video at the link, if you really must. Here’s a quote from this model Catholic:
At a May 6 Catholic Community Conference on Capitol Hill, the speaker said: “They ask me all the time, ‘What is your favorite this? What is your favorite that? What is your favorite that?’ And one time, ‘What is your favorite word?’ And I said, ‘My favorite word? That is really easy. My favorite word is the Word, is the Word. And that is everything. It says it all for us. And you know the biblical reference, you know the Gospel reference of the Word.”
“And that Word,” Pelosi said, “is, we have to give voice to what that means in terms of public policy that would be in keeping with the values of the Word. The Word. Isn’t it a beautiful word when you think of it? It just covers everything. The Word.
As Proof Positive‘s Left Coast Rebel muses, why is it always okay when leftists invoke Christ but never when Republicans like Sarah Palin do? Such a double standard. If Sarah — who’s actually walked the walk of faith and has said no to an abortion (when it would have been the easy thing to do) – had said this to a group of Protestant Evangelicals, we’d have seen wall-to-wall media criticism. But Nancy, a Democrat, gets a pass. I wonder if she tried those lines on during her audience with the Pope in 2009?
Hats off to Iain Dale, a political blogger and a Scottish Tory (a rare breed indeed). Mr Dale took a break from his usual subject matter to post the latest British abortion statistics.
He writes:
I suppose the good news, if you can call it that, is that the trend is down. But Britain still carries out more abortions per head of population than virtually any other European country. Whatever side of the pro-choice, pro-life debate you happen to be on, surely we can agree that these figures continue to horrify.
His blog post has a summary of the stats, excerpted below:
- the total number of abortions was 189,100, compared with 195,296 in 2008, a fall of 3.2%
- the age-standardised abortion rate was 17.5 per 1,000 resident women aged 15-44, compared with 18.2 in 2008
- the abortion rate was highest at 33 per 1,000, for women aged 19, 20 & 21, each lower than in 2008
- the under-16 abortion rate was 4.0 and the under-18 rate was 17.6 per 1,000 women, both lower than in 2008
- 91% of abortions were carried out at under 13 weeks gestation; 75% were at under 10 weeks
- 2,085 abortions (1%) were under ground E, risk that the child would be born handicapped
One of his readers kindly sent in a link to a summary of worldwide abortion statistics in table form which gives you the opportunity to view more detail.
Of course, the debate in the comments included the usual references to ‘blastocysts’ and ‘…we are not talking about human beings here’, although most see such a high rate of abortions as an ongoing issue. Someone noted, ‘That’s like sixty-three 9/11s every year (going by death toll). Just in the UK.’
Just a reminder to those who think that a fetus is a blastocyst. The picture at the top of this post is an eight-week old fetus. Does it look like a blastocyst? No, it looks human; it has arms, legs, a head – as well as ears, fingers and toes! All that in just eight weeks.
Something to think about next time abortion comes up in conversation.
You’ll find more resources in my posts below:
Act in haste, repent at leisure
As regular Churchmouse Campanologist readers know, my posts sometimes pose the questions, ‘Do we prefer to obey man or God? And what happens at the Final Judgment?’
Damian Thompson illustrates this principle perfectly in his April 22, 2010 post about a long-time Catholic Labour MP, Greg Pope, who is now the director of the left-wing Catholic Education Service in England:
Pope presents himself as pro-life, and he is certainly a strong opponent of euthanasia. But the website publicwhip.org.uk, which compares MPs’ voting records to policy positions, gives him a pro-life rating of only 63 per cent. And no wonder: in May 2008, he voted AGAINST moves to reduce the abortion limit to 16 weeks.
He voted instead to limit abortion to a maximum of 20 weeks. Yet, an increasing number of babies born prematurely survive. Some are two or three years old now. Surely a Catholic would vote to limit the time to the barest minimum?
But, Mr Pope voted with his party, Labour, and towed the line to have a quiet life and future job prospects.
Prior to becoming an MP, Pope was an Education Social Worker. Could this have later influenced another vote of his ‘against an amendment affirming a child’s need for a father’?
I wonder if Mr Pope receives Communion and believes he is doing so in good conscience.
A shining example to us all — of what not to do as a Christian.
In the fevered excitement accompanying Nick Clegg’s rise in the polls over the past few days, how many people know exactly what the Liberal Democrats — the wheelie bin party – support? (Today’s graphic comes from the conservativehome blogs, outlining yet another LibDem policy.)
The Sun commissioned YouGov to do a poll published on Sunday, April 18. All the policy questions were taken from the Liberal Democrat platform. Interestingly, people dislike most of their policies.
Did you know about these? Questions and results which the Lib Dems are worried about:
Tax: Scrap income tax on earnings of less than £10,000 a year. The £17billion cost of this will be paid for by a tax on bigger houses, a tax on airline flights, restricting tax relief on pensions savings for higher-rate taxpayers, and attempting to clamp down on tax avoidance.
Support: 66%
Oppose: 20%
Don’t know: 14%
Defence: Replace Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system and develop a variant that is a lot cheaper but less powerful and possibly easier to detect and stop.
Support: 37%
Oppose: 37%
Don’t know: 26%
Europe: Give the European Union more powers on justice issues, bank regulation, the flow of asylum seekers, limiting climate change and cooperate more on security and defence.
Support: 18%
Oppose: 65%
Don’t know: 17%
Euro: scrap the Pound and join the Euro when the conditions are right.
Support: 21%
Oppose: 65%
Don’t know: 14%
Immigration: Give an amnesty to 1 million illegal immigrants who have lived in Britain for ten years, speak good English and don’t have a criminal record.
Support: 35%
Oppose: 49%
Don’t know: 16%
Prisons: Allow 58,000 criminals a year to do community service instead of going to prison by banning jail terms of less than six months.
Support: 33%
Oppose: 50%
Don’t know: 17%
Public sector pay: Limit pay rises for public sector workers for the next two years to £400 a year.
Support: 57%
Oppose: 24%
Don’t know: 19%
Higher education: scrap university tuition fees over six years, and increase taxes to pay for this.
Support: 31%
Oppose: 48%
Don’t know: 20%
Voting: Change the voting system for electing MPs, so that individual constituencies become much larger and parties are represented in parliament broadly in line with their national vote.
Support: 54%
Oppose: 16%
Don’t know: 29%
Energy: Stop any new nuclear power stations from being built and attempt to solve the energy crisis by coal-fired power generation plants and wind turbines instead.
Support: 32%
Oppose: 41%
Don’t know: 27%
Some of these things sound pretty good until you start thinking about what the Lib Dems are leaving out. Here are my questions:
Tax: So will there be a mansion tax on larger houses? How large does that house have to be before it qualifies? And even more tax to pay on our flights?
Europe: Give the EU more powers to step all over us? No, thank you. He says he’d give us a referendum on whether to leave the EU. That’s a sop to UKIP voters to prevent them from swinging to the Tories. Don’t believe it. How will they pose the question? It’s bound to be in some way that gets us all to say, ‘Yes! Let’s stick with the EU bureaucracy!’ Instead vote Tory to hold ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron to his cast-iron promise on this subject.
Euro: So we join when the conditions are right. What are those conditions? Who determines them? Do we get a referendum?
Immigration: Are there 1m illegal immigrants who have lived here for 10 years, speak good English and don’t have a criminal record? How do the Lib Dems know? If we have 1m of these, how many other illegal immigrants do we have living here? The mind boggles.
Public sector pay: The £400 a year — is that across the board? Is it the same for everyone’s salary? £400 a year will mean more to a lower-salaried worker than a hospital administrator.
Higher education: Will there be a mansion tax for the rich to stump up to pay? Before Labour brought in tuition fees, this cost was borne by every taxpayer.
Energy: Are coal-fired power generation plants and wind turbines enough? Why not move into nuclear power, or won’t that sit well with the party base?
This is sheer hell. And, no, Labour wouldn’t be bothered by any of this if they plan to move into a coalition government with them.
But there’s more … abortion and euthanasia
Catholic commentator Cristina Odone, writing for the Telegraph, says the Lib Dems are big on abortion and euthanasia:
This is a Jekyll and Hyde outfit. It’s not just the party of Nick Clegg, with his lovely bright wife and faith school-educated children. It’s the party of Dr Evan Harris.
Dr Harris believes in euthanasia – and, I mean, really believes. He was instrumental in ensuring that legalising euthanasia became Lib Dem party policy …
Dr Harris also believes our present abortion laws are too strict, and the fact that an astonishing fifth of pregnancies are terminated is of no great import. No wonder he is known as “Dr Death” by his critics.
… as the subject turns to the ethical or religious issue of the day – faith schools, say, or teenage pregnancies – I watch him turn pop-eyed with bilious indignation. He becomes almost a caricature of the National Humanist Society spokesman: God is bad, his followers mad.
Labour still has a rump of Christian socialists. The Tories are relatively sympathetic to faith. The Lib Dems are now the most secular party in the Britain – and not in a good way.
And still more … giving violent criminals the right to vote
The Lib Dems — since Ming Campbell was their leader — have wanted to give the right to vote to hardened criminals in preparation for their release. Labour in Birmingham have distributed leaflets to highlight this fact and include some local notorious criminals. According to a commenter on conservativehome, where this was raised, it’s because — get this –
a European Court of Human Rights decision in which judges from such long-standing democracies and respecters of human rights such as Hungary, Germany, Spain and Bulgaria have found Britain deficient.
Oh, right, so, those countries — all of which have endured totalitarianism at some point in the last century – find Britain deficient? Give over! This is what I mean by being concerned about handing even more powers to Europe! NO!
Just remember: vote yellow, get Brown.
Message to UKIP voters: It’s immaterial whether you are mad for David Cameron — vote Tory and we’ll pressure him to come good on his ‘cast-iron’ promises.
For more articles see:
‘Nick Clegg defends Liberal Democrat stance on Europe‘
‘Nick Clegg’s appeal “will last as long as an insect bite”‘ (‘clegg’ means ’horsefly’, apparently)
‘Nick Clegg tries to hide Liberal Democrat Euro-federalism’
‘Warning as Libs Lead Poll Race’
‘Absent Liberal Democrat Donor Convicted of Fraud’
‘Inconvenient truths for leaders who got debate facts wrong’
