Tag Archives: Abortion

A Pride of Predators (Dedicated to Teddy Kennedy the Lion of the Senate)


The Battle at Kruger is a video depiction of lions and crocodiles attacking a Cape Buffalo calf at a watering hole at Kruger National Park in South Africa.  The youngest and weakest in the herd is ambushed, dragged into the water where a fight ensues as two crocodiles attempt to snatch the prey from the lion’s jaws.

Eventually the lions wrest the buffalo from the reptile clutch and prepare to devour the prize.  In an uncharacteristic turn of events the scattered herd regroups charging and tossing one lion into the air — freeing the little calf.  A vitalized buffalo family chases away the remaining strays and surrounds the unsteady baby within the safety of the herd.

A lesson can be gleaned from the Battle at Kruger about liberal propensity to isolate children from parents and the elderly from loved ones. The left’s culture of death eagerly guides, counsels and assists the weak and vulnerable if the effort assures empty cradles and prematurely occupied graves. With that in mind, it would be best for young and old alike to remain alert and avoid liberal watering holes if not encircled by a drove.

Hiding in the tall grass, the left cloaks eugenics in compassion, promoting death under the pretense of caring. Like all thriving hunters liberals are aware that isolation insures a successful kill.  In response, they plant seeds of alienation to sway the defenseless into believing government proxies are better equipped than family to decide whether to dispose of the unborn or decline nutrition or hydration

Take for example, Linda Douglass, communications director for the White House Office of Health Reform, separating prey from the pack by parroting pro-choice rhetoric targeting elderly Americans.  When referring to end of life counseling outlined in HR3200, Douglass plants lack of confidence in the minds of vulnerable seniors by saying, “these are such hard conversations for people to have inside their families.” The assertion in her remark is that professionals, not family members, better assist in making life and death decisions.  This type of rhetoric has herd thinning potential by granting the government unrestricted opportunity to convince the elderly to reject end of life care.

Large sections of the health care proposal sets apart useless eaters,from the national herd with words beckoning America’s elderly toward the government maw for guidance. When queried by MSNBC’s Dr. Nancy Snyderman about public discomfort with death panel rhetoric in HR 3200, Douglass used the same anti-family, liberal language used against those who support parental notification.  The Officer of Health Reform’s argument eerily paralleled radical pro-choice talking points saying, “While young women are encouraged to talk to their families, there are some circumstances in which daughters can’t discuss certain sensitive issues with their parents.”

This type of language underscores bureaucratic death merchant’s relentless desire to cut off the pregnant and aged from the influence of those who would otherwise convince them to choose life.  Every self-respecting liberal is keenly aware that morals, personal conviction and family input muddies the waters, especially when convincing children to submit to dilation and curettage.  Likewise, government provided monetary incentives are best realized if unhindered by sentiment especially when guiding quivering hands to sign “Do not resuscitate” orders.

The left is notorious for exploiting family dynamics to justify loading up shuttle buses with underage girls for excursions to abortion clinics without notifying parents. Dividing children from parents is a pretext that has proven so successful for pro-choice advocates that similar reasoning now targets the nation’s elderly.  The hope is weak calves will stray into the clutches of government appointed counselors who can then circumvent kindly kin to gain sole authorization to disconnect ventilators.

Douglass’s political correspondent skills contribute to her proficiency at hiding the end goal of biohazard bags containing one less drain on the government dole. Regardless of denials, HR 3200 requires abortion and elimination of the elderly in order to subsidize lower health care costs and bottom lines. Careful examination of the proposed health care bill exposes its true intent to steer elderly Americans toward decisions benefiting budgets and not the sanctity of life.

The Battle at Kruger is a reminder for Americans that a pride of government lions and a swarm of bureaucratic crocodiles lay in wait to pounce upon weakness in both the womb, as well as the wheelchair.  Like a group of emboldened buffalo those committed to life must politically charge aggressors and free victims from the murderous clutches of policies like abortion on demand and euthanasia.

Americans cannot allow liberal rhetoric to woo the fragile from the herd into dangerous and deadly ambushes with statements like, “these are such hard conversations for people to have inside their families.” Americans are compelled to honor and defend the weakest among us.  Commitment to life and fierce Cape Buffalo-style loyalty toward the aged and unborn restricts bureaucratic liberal lions access to the vulnerable and assures Americans safety from an ever-encroaching pride of Obama predators.

Miller, Tiller and the Principle of Sowing and Reaping

plantRegardless the reason, it is wrong for one human being to threaten, harm or take the life of another human being.  However, the Bible makes clear a very simple principle; you “reap what you sow.” The basic premise is that which springs forth is a result of the seeds you have placed in the soil of your life.   The straightforward concept of reaping and sowing seems to be something Liberals refuse to grasp or do not believe applies to them.  Oftentimes when seedlings sprout and the things they promote affect them directly Liberals seem stunned and taken aback by the result of the harvest.

Take for example the Democratic Congressman, Brad Miller of North Carolina.  Congressman Miller is a left wing Liberal who proudly endorses the Democratic culture of death.  So much so that he received a 100% rating from NARAL because of his staunch pro-choice voting record.  Congressman Miller supports the extreme left when it comes to abortion rights.  Yet, Miller refuses to speak at town hall meetings on health care out of fear.  Miller claims, “His offices received threatening phone calls, including at least one direct threat against his life.”

Congressman Miller, a strong advocate of slaughtering infants in the womb, partial-birth abortion and a health care bill that would seriously limit the life expectancy of the elderly and the infirm.  However, he apparently places high value on his own life. To protect himself he skips town hall events and hides out.  Avoiding danger, the Congressman continues to condone the extermination of those who are too helpless or frail to  escape the destruction he legislatively endorses. Miller sows death, reaps the threat of death and then whines.

Congressman Miller is a thriving politician, his message of death has caught on.  He has successfully convinced his constituents that they have the ability to choose whose life has value and whose does not and now he is being threatened by the seeds of his own ideology.  Threats against his life are something he probably didn’t foresee being a problem when he was approving legislation supporting the  transport of teenage girls across state lines for abortions.

Brad Miller is also a strong supporter of President Obama’s health care initiative. Obama’s bill sows its own seeds of threatening language when referring to the elderly; special needs and chronically ill individuals.  These vulnerable recipients of the public option face the prospect of rationed health care and being forced to choose to end their life in lieu of the high cost of medical care.  The Congressman’s sowing of support for the bill prompted his reaping a menacing phone call.

When it comes to the Biblical principle of sowing and reaping, Congressman Miller can learn from the life and death of Dr. George Tiller.  Dr. Tiller sowed death for years.  Personally responsible for untold numbers of late term abortions, the controversial doctor was ensnared in a church lobby, and shot dead.

Tiller, who referred to babies born alive during botched abortions as sloppy medicine, reaped a shoddy attempt on his life in 1993 when a gunman shot him in both arms failing to kill him.  Sixteen years later Tiller was ambushed in a house of worship in a successful attempt to take his life. Based on an unbridled reign of terror against the unborn, the doctor was murdered by someone who considered Tiller’s life lacking dignity and worth.  Dr. Tiller sowed violent death on innocence abiding peacefully and unaware and reaped death in a church, which should be the safest place on the planet outside of the womb.

President Obama, who supports the same level of violence against the unborn as Dr. Tiller, expressed shock and outrage over his murder.  Suffice it to say, Miller should take note.  Alarm and indignation at death threats and murder imposed on a life dedicated to the support of death and murder, can be likened to planting poison hemlock, expecting pink dahlias and being shocked and outraged when you harvest gnarly toxic scrubs.

Based on the brutal, criminal death of Dr. Tiller, which was wrong regardless of the cause and the fearful reaction of Congressman Brad Miller, it is incumbent upon those who support the culture of death to consider whether they will be taken at their word and made vulnerable to become victims of an ideology they spent their life working diligently to advance. Liberals need to understand the power of their death message.  Sick and twisted people hear them and are persuaded.

Liberal abortion policy has contributed to the desensitization of a nation toward death, murder, abortion and now impending euthanasia policy. Convincing a nation that life is disposable is something that impacts everyone, including Liberals.  What they need to understand is that the degradation of human life affects even those who have worked hard to accomplish that goal.   Thus, Tiller kills and is viciously and wrongfully killed and Congressman Miller supports butchery and is then threatened by some wacko with death.

The basic Biblical principle of sowing and reaping applies to Congressman Brad Miller, Dr. George Tiller, and Barack Obama and to anyone who supports the culture of death.  Its simple, “…you reap what you sow.” The proprietors of death in America need to consider a day when they may find themselves victims of the death philosophy they promoted.

Liberals need to contemplate the law of seeds resulting in harvest.  This is the course of nature and is as inescapable as George Tiller, like a fetus in a womb, being waylaid in a church lobby with no way out. Dr. Tiller died in a defenseless position mercilessly slaughtered with nowhere to run.  The person who took his life had no right to do so, just as Tiller had no right to end the life of the unborn.  As a result of his ideology, Tiller reaped a harvest of no escape and the same searing pain, fear and death he sowed.

There is a sad irony connected to Dr. Tiller’s death, though too late for him, maybe Miller needs to be reminded that what has developed in his own life may be a result of his adept ability to seed life and death issues. Congressman Brad Miller claims he is being terrorized by ominous phone calls.  If he is, he is reaping the harvest of staunch defense and belief in the right to cruelly threaten and harm others, thus encouraging harm to himself.

With the death and burning of Dr. Tiller’s field, an endeavor described by his family as “…a legacy that will never die,” Brad Miller is being offered the opportunity to reassess the harvest and till his own soil. Before the phone rings in his office a second time, it would do the North Carolina Congressman well to reconsider the seeds of a radical abortion stance and support for President Obama’s health care bill, and what type of message that sends to those looking for an excuse to take life, and in the process Miller will secure for his own life a harvest of safety and wellbeing in the future.

Stopping Beating Hearts…Within Pay Grades?

fetus3A few questions for Barack Obama, who believes that commenting on when life begins is “above his pay grade.”  Obama, Do non-living beings have a beating heart?  Mr. President, What is the difference between life and death, a heart beat or lack thereof?

If it is possible to be a non-living being with a  beating heart, it is highly probable that at some point the pro-choice community will rationalize premature burials for those they define as lifeless, while their hearts still beat.

If abortion can be justified as a choice, than the choice to end the lives of those outside of the womb can easily be justified too.  If a beating heart does not signify life, than anyone with a beating has a life in danger.

With universal health care on the horizon, with it’s rationing, poor quality, high cost and limited access Americans should be very concerned.  Congress, Senate and the President are refusing to give up their present health care and sign on to the substandard version they are foisting on us.  In like manner, those who define a beating heart as being less than life, would likely balk at having the embalming process initiated on them or a loved one, while their hearts still beat.  Yet, they still refuse to admit a heart beat is indicative of human life.

As the life force of our heart still beats within us, those who have been fortunate enough to make it out of the womb should contemplate the future.  It would be in our best interest to consider the next time we elect leaders, selecting those who consider it within their pay grade to admit the obvious, that a beating heart signifies life.

In the meantime, radical, pro choice policies threaten beating hearts everywhere of being stopped way before their time!

Obama Builds Churches Over Abortion Clinics


During his recent trip to Africa, the President of the United States visited the Ghanan Cape Coast Castle, which brutally housed African slaves in the 1600’s  awaiting shipment to Euramerican societies. The emphasis of the visit was on the harsh realities of human injustice symbolized by the, “...branding irons, neck hold irons and shackles.” Obama soberly mentioned his regret that “Sadly, evil still exists in our world, not only here, but every corner of our globe.” So poignant a statement by so eloquent a speaker.

Yet, the American president, who calls himself a Christian,  staunchly supports denying treatment to live born infants who are destined to be aborted but refuse to die. Nevertheless, he was especially impacted by the fact that the Cape Coast dungeon held its victims in coffin-like cubicles below a church.  The president expressed that it gave him pause when he realized churchgoers ignored the horror of inhumane treatment occurring right below the floor they knelt on to pray.  The president intimated that it shocked him that god-fearing people could be so deceived that while approving of evil they could be thinking they were doing something good.

What is even more appalling is that while refusing to acknowledge the grandiose nature  of his own hypocrisy the president  approves of the same type of injustice toward the unborn where saline, scalpels and suction take the place of branding irons, neck hold irons and shackles. Christian, Barack Obama boasts  prayers are posted daily to his Blackberry and, while the paparazzi snap away, he reverently lights candles in France’s Notre Dame Cathedral. Yet, he is the most ardent, liberal proprietor of the worst of all injustices that exist in the world today.  The evils he claims to strongly condemn in Ghana, he condones in America as his policies and edicts are so bad, he might as well be building and worshiping in churches built over abortion clinics.  Obama raises hymns of praise, while millions of human beings die.

So, as the screams of the innocent are drowned out by the church organ in the First Church of Obama, with his blessing and approbation horror, evil and hypocrisy live on.

Give Us Barack-Us

ecce-homo2Immorality has a way of justifying itself through consensus. If the greater majority doesn’t have a problem with something, somehow those who do are censured. Morality is presently being defined as being open to reasonable discussion, regardless of its impact on decency or culture.

In antiquity a similar dynamic existed. Thousands of years ago moral verdicts were swayed by the cry of the multitude. Imagine, the people who Jesus ministered to in healing, even those who claimed He was their Messiah were amongst the rabble demanding Pilate release Zealot Barabbas in place of the Christ. Somehow it seems unconscionable a notorious prisoner, thief and fiend would be preferred over a righteous, honest man…but he was!

Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor.   Barabbas, they answered. What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?” Pilate asked.  They all answered, “Crucify him!” Matthew 27: 21-23.

In that situation, it appeared as if consensus decided who lived and who died ultimately justifying the outcome. As the ancient crowd dispersed, even those within the throng whose conscience sensed the injustice of the choice, quelled their nagging unrest by reassuring themselves with mob accord. So it is today rejecting the honorable choice and choosing instead the popular Barabbas.

Notre Dame University invited President Barack Obama to be the commencement speaker at their 2009 graduation ceremony. Social consensus sanctioned their selection. Based on canonical teachings of the Roman Catholic Church this institution purports to support the sanctity of life and tenets, which adhere to upholding the preservation of life from conception until natural death. Yet, when given a choice between Barabbas and Jesus, the crowd of Catholic graduates,their captivated clergy and enamored administration chose one who supports the antithesis of Christian teaching, placing him in a seat of honor on a dais high and lifted up before a devoted horde determined to defend their own Barabbas.

Human beings by nature are proficient at finding a way to assuage the guilt of poor moral decisions. This was evident in the University President, Rev. John Jenkins’s introductory statements, elevating civil discussion and common ground as values that somehow take precedence over the condemnation of butchery. The right Reverend Jenkins extolled courtesy, respect and love but failed to explain how these values cancel out murder. He forfeited an opportunity to mention the finality of death and how it differs from disrespect in its opportunity to reverse past offenses. By choosing to credit the approbation of iniquity over the greatest of good, “Give us Barabbas” became Notre Dame’s graduation day anthem.

Barack Obama is the most radically, liberal abortion rights advocate to ever grace the political stage. Regardless, he was asked to address the graduating class and was slated to receive an honorary Notre Dame Law degree. A university under the auspices of a Church opposed to a law, which has cost the lives of untold millions of unborn children, presented a politician who promotes those unjust laws an honorary law degree. By placing a blood soaked stole around his neck Notre Dame issued the corporate cry, “Give us Barabbas!”

Reverend Jenkins lauded pro-abortionist Obama’s gallantry in an effort to remediate his reputation in the eyes of protesters, confused and disappointed Catholics and critics. Jenkins attempted to balance the scale that holds the remains of a fetus on one side with the weight of admirable characteristics on the other. Failing to recognize Obama’s unending attempt to sway opinion to the left, Jenkins assigned moral merit and bravery to Obama’s acceptance to come to Notre Dame and give the commencement speech saying, Others might have avoided this venue for that reason. But President Obama is not someone who stops talking to those who differ with him.” Extending Obama this type of kudos chastened all whose conviction remains unmoved. Those who continue to believe murder-is-murder and can never be compromised, discussed or viewed as an option for people of “good will. Father Jenkins’s homage to Obama echoed, “Give us Barabbas!

When Jesus entered the temple and found the money changers there, did he sit, discuss, negotiate and acknowledge all viewpoints? Did he concede intrinsic good will and openness to discussion? Did Jesus discipline those who were opposed to the moneychangers as being close minded, non-inclusive and disrespectful of differing opinions? “And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves; and he said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called a house of prayer: but ye make it a den of robbers” (Matt 21:12-17).

Jesus recognized robbers for who they were and purged the premises promptly and harshly. If Jesus had stood on behalf of life in the midst of the festivities at Notre Dame, he would have been ushered out by security. Jesus protesting Obama’s three votes in 2001, 2002 and 2003 voting against giving medical treatment to infants that survive botched abortions would have warranted his arrest. If crucifixion was the payment for the crime, Barabbas would have gone free and Jesus would have gone straight to Golgotha. Based on the graduating classes’ shouts of support and their acceptance of renowned abortion advocate in the temple, it’s no wonder, “We’re ND” and “Yes we can!” sounded strangely like, “Give us Barabbas!”

Jenkins counterbalanced the support of massacre with the perceived power of national consensus, “Welcoming President Obama to Notre Dame, and we honor him for the qualities and accomplishments the American people admired in him when they elected him.” For moral relativists like Reverend Jenkins a litany of social achievements shields a pro-choice champion. Jenkins extolled Obama’s personal accomplishments and experiences attempting to neutralize the impact of murder in the ears of his hearers. For the reverend growing up without a father, being on food stamps and going to college voids the negativity of Obama’s support for inserting a knife in the base of a skull with the intention of ending the life of a partially born human being.

As the horde dispersed and Jesus was being scourged many of the ochlos who lobbied to free Barabbas were forced to substantiate his release. So too at Notre Dame denying the acquisition of wealth, community organizing, getting elected president and visiting a dying grandparent somehow evens the playing field when it comes to brutal butchery. Father Jenkins was able to disregard the wail of the innocents based on the historic election of the first African-American President. He mentioned concern for a country that has been deeply wounded by racial hatred but discounted the abortive genocide Obama supports against his own race. Standing high upon a mound of infant corpses, Father Jenkins could see the sun soaked stone portico in the distance, choosing between morality and Barabbas, his preference was most assuredly Barabbas.

Barack Obama had a lot to say in his own defense, and for him abortion rights are a deeply held belief that he holds with conviction, commitment and policy purpose, all of which he clings to with an obvious fervor. Proverbs 14:12 says, “There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.” He even brazenly shared that he too like the protesters plans to continue to “…make his case to the public with passion and conviction, with the dichotomy of an “Open heart, open mind and fair-minded words.”

It never really mattered what Barabbas said on his own behalf, the crowd was all that mattered and their choice determined the fate of morality or immorality. Obama’s words matter little, the allure of smooth words and captivating charm cannot disguise the heap of rotting corpses behind the backdrop of patriotic flags and pithy slogans. This isn’t about Barack it’s about the multitude whose choices drive the moral direction of a nation. It’s about the consensus that we cling to in hopes of subduing aching consciences. It’s the “choice” of whom we choose to serve and when given that choice whether or not we pick Barabbas.

The roar of the Notre Dame crowd was not students hollering approval for a man that stands for everything they purport to despise. It was the moan of the unborn and their weeping echoing forth from the grave for justice. As Barack Obama looked out over an admiring sea of graduates, did he see the faces in the crowd of those who never made it out of the womb much less to college graduation.

The Gospel of Matthew has a poignant thought to contemplate as a crowd of Christians look the other way offering approbation and acclamation by choosing Barabbas and disparaging Christ.Let his blood be upon us and upon our children” (Matt 27:25). And so it will be, the blood of purity shall be upon the heads of those who relinquish  an opportunity to publicly choose to stand against the murder of innocence preferring instead to offer up the unified chant, “Give us Barack-us.”

Molech Morality

molech_26Molech was a god to whom the Israelite’s routinely sacrificed their children in order to invoke the power of the sun. They had a habit of doing this when they had turned away from Yahweh prostituting their faith for provision from a lesser source. Sacrifices to Molech took place when the first born fruit of a mother’s womb was slowly burned to death in the outstretched arms of a welcoming idol. Molech’s hungry limbs were made of metal, hollowed out, heated up on the inside and had a fire below where children, after being painfully blistered and scalded, fell headlong into the fire and were reduced to ash. And thus, Molech was pleased. It’s hard to comprehend that for these ancient peoples the promise of Molech far outweighed the value of their children, but it did!

In Biblical Hebrew culture the unfolded arms of Molech held the promise of renewed strength from the sun. The graven image was the source that insured warmth and a robust harvest. Hebrew seed was sacrificed in order to provide what antiquity deemed important for their subsistence. Worship to an idol, as a means to an end, took priority over the survival of their young. Primal primitive imposing cultures forfeited their progeny in order to assure the fulfillment of preeminent creature comfort and satisfaction of carnal needs, disregarding God’s command, “And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD” (Leviticus 18:21) (KJV).

God didn’t give the Israelites the permission to thrash out what they thought “seed” was. He didn’t ask them their opinion on the meaning of “passing through”. His command was clear and sure and when yearning overtook morality they chose to disobey.

To parallel this custom with our own secularly progressive culture it would be more apropos to use the modern English language usage of the term Molech, which refers to persons or things, which demand or require costly sacrifice. I believe that there is a direct correlation between the antiquated and the contemporary.

We look back on history and perceive ourselves to be “highly evolved ”. In order to insure the health of the economy or world peace, if asked to bring our first born to an altar to be incinerated we would bristle in disgust and refuse to comply. Regardless of how we perceive ourselves, the truth is we’re no better than the Ammonites or irreverent Israelites. Blatantly, boldly and unabashedly, we follow in the path of their example worshiping at the altar of Baal. Unlike the heathens of Molech we adulate in secret, in sterile environments, under the covering of perverted laws, not in open fields celebrating our bounty with dancing. We do not drown out the shrieks of our offspring with flutes and tambourines as they cremate. Rather our children burn and writhe in a clandestine conflagration hidden from the naked eye in a fiery inferno of saline deep within the womb.

We use words like “science” and “choice” in place of murder and slaughter and as we deceive ourselves, Molech is pleased. We have gods in our culture that demand “costly sacrifice” and we are more than willing to fulfill their call to abandon what should be considered sanctified. We rush to the fore in an effort to justify and cooperate with the never satisfied blood lust for innocence from a cadre of gods who we look to for gratification in this life. The late German philosopher, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was walked from a concentration camp and hung by the Nazi’s for speaking out against their inhumane policies, once said?

Destruction of the embryo in the mother’s womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed upon this nascent (beginning to exist or develop) life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder.

I realize this is his opinion and what right does he have to inflict his opinion on anyone? In our enlightened society self reigns supreme. We make the rules, we define moral code and we pronounce as immoral anyone who would question our personal standard of right and wrong.

The name Molech is derived from combining consonants from the Hebrew melech “king” with the vowels of boshet “shame”. Molech is the King of Shame, but not for us. We have no shame. Shame is something that we repress along with our guilt, truth and indignity. We do not have the courage to admit what intrinsically we know is true. In turn, we rush to deny human nature and continue to supply the arms of Molech with abundant gifts. We swiftly run after politicians whose goal is a culture of death and we do so to contribute to having our corporate consciousness freed from the bondage of self-reproach by drowning it out with the roar of an adoring crowd.

Beneath Molech is a foundation that we have built for our god to rest steadfastly upon. We have justified choice and made a way for selfishness and personal aspiration to take precedence. Man, self and secularism have become the proprietor of Molech, graving and hammering out the idol in gold and setting it up in the public square in place of a basic human rights and ethics. Those are the values, which stoke the fire and await the sacrifice as we dance before our idol. We forgo the wood and fire.  Instead, our tools for sacrifice are scalpels, saline and suction. We demean and diminish the worth of life in order to satisfy Molech. We are diligent as a society to substantiate our support of evil in our own minds and to endorse it in the lives of others, promoting it as righteous, upstanding and even virtuous. Molech is exceedingly pleased.

We do not hesitate to reassure ourselves that what we support is honorable. We are deluded into believing we are decent and upright. Our corporate society and culture has concluded that the value of one life takes precedence over another and we get to ordain which one. Some are allotted to die so another has the hope of wholeness? Does our self-aggrandizing altruism and compassion toward the personal desires and concern for the future of others provide rationalization for our young one’s writhing in agony in the arms of a brutal and demanding god? When helpless, defenseless infants plummet into the fire and burn up, do we rejoice because our ends justified our means? Does “choice” now take precedence over life? If the answer is even remotely yes, Molech is pleased.

As we stoke the blaze it is best to be aware that there will be no escape from the fire we ourselves have enthusiastically prepared. The day will surely come, one which is not far off, when those who sacrificed and supported human offerings at the altar of Molech are themselves in danger of being sacrificed. The same code of ethics that justified the killing of blamelessness will extend to justify the killing of all. As we are being hoisted unwillingly into the arms of Molech will we remember the value system that brought us there? Will we cry out in terror as we realize that the sacrificial system we fought so hard to defend, we ourselves have become victim to?

Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Belkis Gonzalez, Secretary of Health and Human Services


As luck would have it President Barack Obama may have found a potential Cabinet appointee today right on the front page of the Sun Sentinel and realized that he might have prematurely chosen Governor Kathleen Sebelius as head of Department of Health and Human Services. Sebelius is controversial and pro-choice projecting herself to be someone who is moderate and wants to lower the abortion rate in her state. She is a typical example of the “My Catholic faith teaches me that all life is sacred, and personally I believe abortion is wrong” group. Followed up by the schizophrenic liberal clarification, “However, I disagree with the suggestion that criminalizing women and their doctors is an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the number of abortions in our nationAbortion, not resume, could dominate Sebelius confirmation.

Like most liberals what they say and what they do are two different things. Regardless of what she “says” Sebelius always comes down on the side of extreme abortion rights, such as her veto of a bill that attempted to place restrictions on late term abortions (Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act (CARA). Sebelius has fought against parental consent or any effort to curtail late-term abortions.

She is also an ardent supporter of Dr. George Tiller a Kansas late term abortionist who admits to having performed over 60,000 abortions. Congratulations Dr. Tiller you wiped out three coliseums full of human beings, quite an accomplishment. Tiller dismisses the concern for infants born alive calling them “just sloppy medicine.” Her relationship with the renowned Dr. Tiller is personal and financial, quite radical for someone who claims that “…all life is sacred, and personally believes abortion is wrong.” I can’t imagine who Sebelius would hang out with if she had no conscience at all. Maybe she would scrub up and hand Dr. Tiller the scalpel, suction and saline and then gleefully drag the biohazard bag’s contents to the dumpster?

Shocking as it might be, Kathleen Sebelius is moderate compared to likes of our esteemed Commander in Chief when it comes to abortion. Personally, I think Barack Obama deserves someone who doesn’t play both sides of the fence when it comes to this issue because he certainly doesn’t. Not that Obama has a conscience– but he rescinded the Bush’s “conscience exemption” originally instituted to protect health care professionals who found participating in an abortion morally reprehensible to be exempt from and having the “right to refuse” participation. Can anyone say Dr. Mengle?

Nazi doctors gave the following arguments in their defense: “involuntary research on prisoners had a long history, prisoners were already sentenced to death, they were only following orders, there were no clear international ethics standards respecting research, the toleration of a lesser evil to tolerate a greater good, those who did not participate might have been killed” (Tarantola, 1993).

If Kathleen Sebelius has any scruples on the issue she very well might be the wrong person for the job. Barack Obama has consistently voted against the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA), which is a bill on the Illinois, as well as the Federal level, which would make illegal death by neglect of born alive but unwanted infants. In other words botched abortions where the unthinkable happens and the infant is born alive, you know “sloppy medicine.

Regardless of Obama’s misrepresentation of how he voted on the Illinois bill the truth is, “…he was part of the legislative committee that added that very ‘neutrality clause’ to the bill he voted against in 2003” (News Busters, Warner Todd Huston, Obama Lied About Vote Against Live Birth Abortion Ban, Media Mum, 8-13-08). Long story short, Barack Obama is so committed to making sure babies born alive during botched abortions not make it off the cold, stainless steel table still breathing that he voted against a bill that included the amendment with the Roe-protection wording, which he claimed he was so concerned about.

Obama is proving why, before becoming President, he had the reputation of being the most radical, left-wing US Senator. One reason obviously was his unabashed support of the most heartless pro-choice practice, which is late term abortion and the abandoning, without medical care, of any aborted baby “born alive.” That small detail didn’t seem to bother 52% of the American electorate who felt he was the harbinger of “Hope” and “Change.” I’m sure this voter base would heartily support any Cabinet choice he made and should applaud his appointment of like minded appointees, especially if Kathleen Stebelius shows some cracks in her armor and goes wobbly when it comes to refusing to aid a baby who has the extreme misfortune of being born alive in Barack’s hope laden America.

Obama has made clear that he doesn’t want to “burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion” by having an additional physician to attend to a live born infant. You know a sort of undermining of the original intent, which was a lifeless, dead baby. This could be a problem for Ms. Sebelius if her conscience and her Catholic faith should unexpectedly kick in.

That is why I think Obama should have someone in the position of Health and Human Services who would have the stomach to assist Dr. George Tiller after he is appointed Surgeon General. A person who will make sure that the original decision of the woman will never force her to be, as the President says, “punished with a baby.” My recommendation for the position is Belkis Gonzalez the women’s clinic worker in Hialeah Florida who “delivered a live baby during a botched procedure and then threw the infant away” she is tailored made for the Obama Administration.

Barak needn’t worry, even if Gonzalez is prosecuted, convicted and sentenced she will probably only face a year in prison, if anything at all. The woman who delivered the baby in the Miramar Woman’s Center in Hialeah waited until she was 23 weeks pregnant to decide she didn’t have, “the resources or maturity to raise a child.” Lucky for her Belkis was there. Upon giving birth to her baby girl, who she named Shanice, “She came face to face with a human being and that changed everything.” It may be above my pay scale to say so but, “Oops, we can’t have that!” So Ms. Gonzalez “…scooped the baby, placenta and afterbirth” into a red plastic bag and threw Shanice away.

The little girl had taken a breath because her small underdeveloped lungs were filled with air, meaning she had been born alive. “The baby was just treated as a piece of garbage. People all over the country are just aghast,” said the lawyer representing the mother. I beg to differ with you Mr. Brejcha the whole country is not “aghast” 52% are applauding the bravery of Ms. Gonzalez. Maybe President Obama can speak on her behalf and appeal to the judge on the basis that she will be gainfully employed by his Administration and will be operating fully under his jurisdiction and direction. Kathleen Sebelius can go back to Kansas and as far as Belkis is concerned, “You’re hired!”

Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

Race Relation Re Deux


Our country rightly honors great civil rights leader the Reverend Martin Luther King with a national holiday. We have also dedicated an entire month in our calendar year to commemorate and advance Black history. On November 4th of 2008 our nation, which is sixty-six percent Caucasian, elected a bi-racial President.

Disregarding the progress our nation has made in a speech to Justice Department employees marking Black History month, the most inspirational and inspiring thing our first black Attorney General had to say to his audience was that, “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards. It’s puzzling to me why the hope and change administration continues to attempt to stir up racial resentment in the citizenry of this country, while ignoring their own personal and career advantages. Holder’s drum beat is the same old race baiting banter that this election has proven, by its results, to be both tired and fallacious. It is true that there are “unresolved racial matters that need to be addressed”, but not the same ones our Attorney General is underscoring for political purposes and in order to secure a future voting bloc.

What politicians like Eric Holder fail to recognize is the mixed messages he sends out when he supports the policies of an administration that believes that one form of life has value and another doesn’t. To try to convince people that we’re lacking bravery in the area of race, just doesn’t hold up when your approbation is upon the destruction of the very people you are trying to gain respect for.

Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the whole left wing of their radical party can’t promote a certain philosophy for one group and then expect it to be dismissed for another. Once the value of life is diminished on any level, you give authorization to the American public, regardless of their race, to dismiss all human beings based on personal opinion, feeling and convenience at any given time, for any reason.

The same party that doesn’t want morals to be legislated by religious groups is the same one that supports abortion rights with such a religious fervor that it surpasses even a national, year-round revival meeting. Their battle hymn is, Keep your laws off my body. Liberals want God out of the public sector because they don’t want religion legislating what they feel is misplaced morality. Yet, they think racial harmony can be legislated through this same godless government by laws and edicts, which they utilize to advance a form of race relations that they hope, will benefit them on Election Day.

Liberals attempt to intimidate a nation through shame, self-reproach and racially based law to acknowledge the value and the fundamental worth of people who are different than we are in culture or color. This is based on what can only be defined as twisted sense of ethical relativism, which appears to be an obvious attempt to dispel distinct unseen remorse. In turn, liberals now become the arbitrators of a form of morality they themselves decry. They do this while at the same time encouraging the full scale slaughter of the unborn, which goes against the intrinsic human soul. Someone needs to tell them that love and respect for our brothers and sisters is not something that can be coerced on us by self-righteous politicians but comes naturally from within a pure heart regardless of what Eric Holder says.

Barack Obama’s party works hard to undermine the human worth of the unborn in the minds of the public in order to justify extreme policies. His stance diminishes the value of the life of the unborn, demeaning it to the status of a throwaway “Privacy right.” Liberals vehemently argue that individuals deserve the legal “right” to make a decision about whose life has value and whose does not. Yet, they remain blind to the possibility that they may be the ones contributing to racism by conveying a confusing, double bind message to the American public giving them undercover permission to consider a life as less than worth respecting.

Maybe Eric Holder, on behalf of his own people, should quit being a coward himself and stop advocating his own sense of morality through the advancement of racial resentment and address the following:

Blacks do, indeed, have much higher rates of abortions than whites or other minority groups. In 2000, while blacks made up 17 percent of live births, they made up more than twice that share of abortions (36 %). If those aborted children had been born, the number of blacks born would have been slightly over 50 percent greater than it was.

The comparison with whites and other minorities is striking. Whites made up 78 percent of live births, but only 57 percent of abortions. Non-black minorities had 7 percent of live births and 5 percent of abortions. If the aborted children had been born for either group, the percentage increase in the number of children born to these groups would have been less than that for blacks: 16 and 32 percent, respectively.

Data from 1973 indicate that black a woman’s share of abortions has consistently been at least twice their share of live births .

I don’t appreciate being lectured to by a representative who heads a department that is supposed to foster “justice” but supports FOCA, the most brutal form of abortion policy and the most liberal of guiding principles for a women’s right to choose. As far as I’m concerned, Holder’s support of FOCA takes away his credibility to criticize me about his conjecture that I’m not brave enough when it comes to the issue of race. If the Attorney General wants to lead the American people in the area of race relations he should start by meting out justice against a procedure that is reeking carnage upon his own people, which would exhibit on his part the bravery he thinks we lack.

Race-baiting language is a false form of secular religiosity and Holder‘s homily is misdirected and should be addressed toward the supporters of liberal abortion issues not on the citizens of this nation that respect human life, regardless of race, creed or color. We just came to the end of an administration overseen by a President who supported the “right-to-life” for the unborn and who quietly gave 4 billion dollars in aid to Africa. Bush’s generosity toward the African continent and its people goes unnoticed and unappreciated by liberals who are self-righteously focused on trying to convince us that we “… have a special responsibility to advance racial understanding.” Without fanfare and without the need for accolades or humanitarian awards Bush increased direct development and charitable aid to Africa to more than $4 billion a year from $1.4 billion in 2001, according to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. And four African nations — Sudan, Ethiopia,  Egypt and Uganda — rank among the world’s top 10 recipients in aid from the United States.”

When the newly appointed champion of justice Attorney General Eric Holder conveys his concern that, “Race issues continue to be a topic of political discussion … average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race,” maybe he should be encouraged by us to discuss the fact that for every 1,000 black babies born, there are 472 unborn black babies aborted. How about initiating a discussion like that Mr. Holder?

Attorney General Holder is the one that needs to be reminded by all thoughtful, caring human beings that as part of an administration that is dead set on “…changing the world from what it is to what they believe it should be, that millions of American’s judge the biggest act of cowardice in the area of race is being perpetrated upon the African American unborn. Maybe he should attempt to address the vicious policies enthusiastically and passionately supported by himself, his party and the first African American President and instead of continuing to point fingers maybe he should take the time to look in the mirror.

Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

%d bloggers like this: