Category: abortion

A Christian checks out Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

Having only read excerpts of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals, I was pleased to have the opportunity to sit down and read it for myself in its entirety. Knowing how influential Alinksy was for the young Obama (and many others who now occupy seats of power) I am more worried than I was before now that I’ve actually read this book. Go to the library and pick up the book. You need to read it.

The subtitle of the book is “A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals.” It is not an inappropriate subtitle. Alinsky is all about pragmatism and realism. Alinsky is dismissive of ethical questions related to the question “Does the end justify the means?” He says:

The practical revolutionary will understand Goethe’s “conscience is the virtue of observers and not of agents of action”; in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of “personal salvation”; he doesn’t care enough for people to be “corrupted” for them. (pg 25, chapter titled: Of Means and Ends)

Share

All pro-lifers culpable for Tiller Killing

In my blog entry yesterday I indicated that the reason why proportion and a sense of perspective were necessary regarding the Tiller killing was because in the liberal mind, referring to abortion as murder, etc, is inflammatory language that really is ‘hate speech.’

The current hate speech legislation coming through Congress (Matthew Shepherd Act) aims to draw exactly this kind of connection, though of course this legislation is related more to homosexuality. The idea is the same, though: if anyone person commits a crime and it can be tracked back to someone who can be perceived to have ‘instigated it’ the person who did the ‘instigation’ is equally guilty and consequently should be punished under the law.

In today’s perusal of the web I found more evidence of this attempt to condemn the entire pro-life movement because of this single event. The irony is that the day after Tiller was killed, an American soldier was gunned down at a recruitment center by someone we now know was acting on Islamicist principles.

Share

Why Proportion and Perspective is Needed Regarding the Tiller Murder

Having issued a series of posts trying to establish some sense of proportion and perspective about the Tiller murder, the question has been raised as to why the emphasis.

I have my reasons.

We can go back to a post that I made not too long ago that suggested that a ‘right-wing extremist’ attack was not merely inevitable, but something that the current administration actually wants to happen.

Here is a little quote:

Here is what I think. I think that the recently admitted NSA over-collection of American domestic communications revealed that people- even decent people- are really, really, really, really, really, POed about the way things are and the way they are going. I think that material helped drive the DHS report, but I think the DHS was just looking for an excuse.

This report is likely to produce the very thing it is warning about. With this report, every conservative American became subject to the Thought Police and a target of scrutiny by the Federal government. I believe it will put some people over the edge. I believe the intent was to put them over the edge.

Share

BREAKING NEWS: Today 150,000,000 pro-lifers woke up and DID NOT kill an abortionist.

Just as in the last 35 years the almost iron clad rule has been that tens of millions of pro-lifers, who nonetheless believe that abortion is murder, have almost as a rule, not killed abortionists.

A 1 to 150,000,000 ratio comes pretty close to a ‘rule’ to me.

I’m just saying.

Share

gun control needed to stem abortionist killings in churches

It has been noted that Dr. Tiller was gunned down in his church. It is a wonder that no one has proposed the obvious: more gun control is necessary. Allow me to be the first to call for it publicly.

The first thing we need to do is make it illegal to have guns in churches in Kansas.

Then we need to make it into a crime to single out abortionists for murder. We should tack it onto the Hate Crimes legislation coming down the pike. There is nothing worse than hate inspired murder.

After that, I think we should take the National Organization of Women’s statement today and run with it. They said: “Bringing the killers to justice is not enough – the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security must root out and prosecute as domestic terrorists and violent racketeers the criminal enterprise that has organized and funded criminal acts for decades.”

Yes, let’s root them out.

Share

Tiller’s Death and the Internet and Right Wing Extremists

It is not hard to find insinuations and outright accusations that these killings represent a ‘fascist’ right wing extremist movement. Today, the self-described last in the world late-term abortionist, Dr. Warren Hern, said: “The anti-abortion movement message is, ‘Do what we tell you to do or we will kill you,’ and they do. This is a fascist movement.”

The statistics, however, do not bear this out, do they? In thirty-five years, just 8 abortionists have been killed. Between 1980 and 1989, 304 gas station attendants were killed. 115 liquor store workers were killed. 806 grocery store workers were killed. 56 Jewelry store workers were killed. You get the idea: It is more dangerous to work at a gast station, liquor store, grocery store, or jewelry store (or drive a taxi, etc) than it is to be an abortion ‘doctor.’

Share

Eugenics the Logical Consequence of Evolutionary Theory Part One

So, if it is the case that eugenics is not a logical consequence to evolutionary theory, by all means, we should wonder how it came to be so strongly associated in the first place. It isn’t enough to righteously deny a connection. For decades the most learned people on the planet believed there was.

To help promote such an investigation, I submit for your reading the positions of a certain Jacob Appel, a modern evolutionary bio-ethicist in support of eugenics, and a book called Applied Eugenics by Paul Popenoe,writing in 1918. Skip to around chapters 7 and 8 and see if you can spot the similarities between Popenoe’s arguments and Appel’s. (Earlier in, Popenoe credits the Germans for their innovation…)

For example, there is this juicy bit: “The science of eugenics is the natural result of the spread and acceptance of organic evolution, following the publication of Darwin’s work on The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, in 1859.” Page 148.

So, where did the world’s smartest men go wrong in the early part of the 20th century? And why do their arguments sound so similar to what we hear coming out of today’s politicians urging us on to ‘make sacrifices’ ‘for the good of society’?

Share

Missing Link, Scopes Monkey Trial, Science, Secularism, and Education

For you see, there was a day when the implications of evolutionary theory were more obvious and more openly admitted. Margaret Sanger, the founder of the aforementioned Planned Parenthood, openly urged abortion as a method of eugenics. And of course, since this was all science, and science is ‘neutral’, it should follow naturally that religious people can raise no objections.

Today of course eugenics has a bad rap. We can thank Hitler for that. But that doesn’t mean the implications have changed or that there aren’t ‘neutral’ scientists and secularists who advocate for eugenics today. People aren’t as dumb as secularists would like them to be. When you promote ‘survival of the fittest’ as the guiding biological principle the inevitable conclusion is that we have the moral obligation to utilize that principle according to our own terms. You just aren’t supposed to say it out loud…

Share

Christian Self-Interest the Key to Environmentalism?

I discovered today that a post a couple of weeks ago about Christians and the environment popped up on a Christian environmentalist blog. My post was ‘Shouldn’t Christians Care about the Environment?” and the brief response (if it was a response at all) was called ‘Self-interest makes Christians better ecologists.’

I actually couldn’t tell from the entry whether or not the blogger agreed or disagreed with my post. There is only one sentence: “Anthony suggests that the reason Christians make better ecologists is that they put people first.”

This isn’t much to go on but there was still something about it that compelled me to reply.

Share

Ridicule: Weapon of Choice for an Easy Victory

I think that this blog entry might be useful as a beginning of a series.  I should just post examples as I come across them.  It’s the kind of thing that you’ll notice more once you see a few examples. What I’ve noticed is that there are quite a few areas out there where arguments […]

Share

Choose Life presentation at high school in Missouri

This is the video from one of the presentations I gave last week.

Direct Link: You Are On the Front Lines: Pro-Life presentation, Lutheran North, St. Louis MO

Share

Shouldn’t Christians Want to Save the Planet?

There is no question that Christians should care about the environment. However, the infantile notion that the planet needs saving or could be saved is not what that means. This notion rests on the idea that the planet has some sort of intrinsic value, that it has the capacity to care which configuration it ends up in, and that there are things we can do for the sake of the planet just for the sake of the planet.

The interesting thing about Christian care for the environment, especially if we take the Scriptures as our guide, is that this ‘human interest’ is front and center. Genesis 1:26 has God putting mankind in charge of ‘the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ This we can properly call stewardship and as we see from the text, the value of humans and the earth is set by God, and in this equation, the earth is placed in subject to Humanity.

Share

Pro-Life Speaking in the St. Louis Area

I will be in the St. Louis area this weekend presenting my pro-life message at area churches, a high school, and on the radio. The link will take you to the dates, times, and locations.

If you’re from the area, several of the events are open to the public. I’d be happy to see you.

More information about my book, story, and message: http://www.wechoselife.com

Share

Science as Club to Snuff Debate, Choice, and Conscience

This story is a perfect illustration of scientism and its dangers to our society. The idea that something is intrinsically morally correct by virtue of being ‘scientific’ is a non sequitur, certainly, but nonetheless coming to be quite common. Science gave us the atom bomb, too, but it is self-evident that the decision to use it should be political. But can the decision to use it ever be scientific? (The movie IRobot comes to mind, here).

Is there any way to get from an observation of reality or increase in technology to “And you ought…” ?

Of course not. In short, just because the morning after pill is effective and it is only ‘unlikely’ to have the result that conservatives fear, it doesn’t follow that it should be used at all, or that it should be made available to people who are not yet legal adults. Cars are effective, too, but that doesn’t mean parents shouldn’t be in the loop as to whether or not their underage children should be allowed to drive them.

Share
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next