For a populace to swing wildly back and forth every two years is a madness that indicates there our mass of citizenry that is rocked back and forth on the waves of change, without anchor, without direction, without guiding principles grounded in fact and the realities of the universe.
My Response to Wisconsin-La Crosse Professor Bradley Butterfield’s Column Promoting Abortion in the Name of ‘Women’s Rights’ with Overpopulation the Real Target
On October 4th, UW-L English professor Bradley Butterfield had his guest view defending abortion in the name of ‘Women’s Rights’ and it was clear to me that this was really just a cover for his real agenda, which is population control. I don’t know him well enough to know if he is even aware of …
We are all bullies now: Jennifer Livingston, meet Kenneth Krause, Liberal, Atheist, Secular Humanist
When one person calls another person fat, that is bullying. When the government calls two thirds of America’s citizenry fat, we call that being ‘socially concerned.’ Who elected this government? We the people. If Kenneth Krause is a bully, so is the government, and so are all the people who told the government it was ‘ok’ to involve itself in every area of our lives. We are all bullies now.
In the decades leading up to one of the most horrific chapters in human history, the leading lights of the day openly discussed bringing about those horrors. Eugenics was posited as the rational position of all intelligent, well-meaning individuals. In journals, newspapers, academic conferences, public health offices and elsewhere, they talked about sterilizing people with or without their consent, segregating them from society, or even exterminating them. And that was in America.
So, Jesus–and Christians believe Jesus is God–goes all the way back to Genesis to state the original plan, and dispenses with any attempt to erect this caveat or that excuse. The plan was good when the world was perfect and unfallen, it was good while God lived with the Jews when they were a covenant nation, it was good after the covenant had been dissolved and the Jews were dispersed to the four winds, it was good when they were brought back together and God again walked among them.
Setting aside completely the moral or ethical issues that may compel someone to grant young illegal immigrants immunity, and even allow them to work in the US without hindrance, the approach that Obama has taken to bring it about is, to put it bluntly, the death rattle of the Republic. This article in the Politico …
Get this on your E-reader using this link and coupon for 100% off: ZC29N I must at the outset admit the debt owed to GK Chesterton, for it was on the third reading of his “Eugenics and Other Evils” that his comments about ‘the anarchy from above’ finally made sense. They made sense because they …
This article slid across my desk this morning: It turns out that our furniture first became full of flame retardants because of the tobacco industry, according to internal cigarette company documents examined by The Tribune. A generation ago, tobacco companies were facing growing pressure to produce fire-safe cigarettes, because so many house fires started with …
I recently came across an article talking about how the South Koreans have intercepted capsules filled with ground up aborted fetuses (some of us prefer the more archaic term, ‘babies,’ but I don’t want to be accused of emotionalizing the topic) en route from China to Japan, where, we are told, it is believed that …
I have now updated the collection with a foreword and two new short stories. Each of the two new stories is called “Anthony Horvath Goes to Heaven.” These two stories also have introductions. You’ll understand the similar titles after you get the series, but suffice it to say that they are written as a response to some criticisms about the fairness in contemplating the eternal fates of others, but not oneself.
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? Or, What is the proper response to killing newborn children because they are a burden to a family… or society?
authors Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argue that the same arguments that justify abortion of the fetus on demand likewise apply to the newly born. Here is the abstract:
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.