Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Will the Real Che Guevara Please Stand Up?

Dear Cuban-American,

The viewing of films such as "The Motorcycle Diaries" and Andy Garcia's "The Lost City, has sparked a renewed interest in Cuba, the revolution and the Cuban people.


My question is; how do Cuban-Americans today, view Che Guevara, his revolutionary deeds and his present-day cult following. It appears that the La Raza crowd in the U.S. has embraced Guevara as their hero, as evidenced by the placards with his image carried by the protesting illegal immigrants and their supporters this last Spring. Do you think these folks are just ignorant of Guevara'a exploits or is it me and my lack of understanding the man. As a Cuban-American, how do you view this Che Guevara adoration.


So, if in fact, Guevara is the only hero these activists can come up with, what say you?


Bewildered

Interested in the answer posted on the Cuban-American Blog? You should be -- it's a good one. So, for those of you more interested in historical reality than you are muddle-headed slogans and T-shirt portraits, check out the real Che Guevara right here.

Or Will the '08 Pro-Life Support Go for Brownback?

Here's a KCTV (Kansas City) report on Senator Sam Brownback's consideration of a 2008 Presidential bid.

..."I think there's room for a full-scale Ronald Reagan conservative in the field," Brownback said. "I fully agree that other people have much higher name identification than I do. No question about that. But I think what you have to look at is the policy positions they get out once you have an effective campaign.

"Brownback, who was elected in 1996, is a forceful foe of abortion and embryonic stem-cell research. He also has taken a prominent role in the fight against genocide in Sudan's Darfur region...

With the mainstream media already penciling in moderate Republicans (for moderate, read weak or AWOL altogether on the social issues) like John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Bill Frist, it is certainly not too early for "Comprehensive Conservatives" to get actively involved in promoting someone with the character, principles and track record that Sen. Brownback has.

Go, Sam, go!

Monday, November 20, 2006

Former Russian Spy Poisoned. Why?

"It sounds like a macabre detail from a Cold War spy novel."

That's how the latest report from Radio Free Europe's story begins about the poisoning case of Aleksandr Litvinenko in London. Litvinenko, a former Russian spy but now an outspoken critic of the Putin regime, was recently poisoned with toxin thallium, an ingredient in rat poison that attacks the nervous system and lungs. And he and his friends think they know exactly who was behind the vile deed.

Read the story here.

Why Does a Pro-Abortion, Pro-Homosexual Politician Earn the Spotlight of Saddleback Church's Pulpit?

Remember how Bill Clinton "played" Rev. Bill Hybels when Hybels invited the smooth pseudo-Christian to address a leaders conference at Willow Creek Church? It was a ridiculously naive move of the evangelical pastor, one that allowed a wolf in sheep's clothing a choice opportunity to distract, disarm and deceive the flock.

Well, now we've got the popular author and preacher, Rev. Rick Warren, following suit.

It apparently wasn't enough that Warren attracted quite a bit of criticism from conservatives over his recent "foot in mouth" problem of criticizing the U.S. action in Iraq while praising the government of Syria. No, Warren has decided to move further towards the liberalizing of his evangelical congregation at Saddleback Church in California by inviting Congressman Barack Obama into the Sunday morning pulpit.

Do you think that Warren will make clear in his introduction that Obama has energetically promoted the homosexual agenda or that he has, in all ways, supported abortion and worked to increase funding for Planned Parenthood?

This represents a serious default of responsibility on the part of Rev. Warren. Conversing with Obama about these matters? Certainly appropriate and part of one's Christian duty. But to leave over the pulpit to such a man, one who, like Clinton, is smooth, ambitious and well skilled in utilizing religious rhetoric to secure very irreligious ends? This is a travesty.

Steam Builds for Campaign to Start Killing Sick Kids

In the last couple of weeks, I have posted several entries here dealing with the culture of death's new promotion of "euthanizing" severely ill children: Doctor's Group in Britain Wants Permission to Kill Sick Newborns; Texas Infant Denied Medical Treatment by Court; The Anglican Church Backs the Call for Euthanizing Sick Newborns; and More On Board for Killing Newborns.

I'm sure these have alarmed and disgusted you as much as they have me. Well, here's a quick review of this sinister new campaign written by Wesley J. Smith for NRO. He shows that steam for this movement has been building for awhile, but now the leaders have gone beyond the fringe opinions of Peter Singer to the New York Times and Britain's Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology. Do check it out.

ABC Smears Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers

Lacking the character to develop fact-based news stories, the Old Guard Media continues it's sad practice of merely parroting whatever the left wing opinion leaders tell them. In this particular case, ABC "newsman" (please stifle the giggles) does a hatchet job on pro-life pregnancy centers in a report severely lacking in relevance, fairness and truth.

The talking points Dan Harris followed were, of course, provided by groups so dedicated to abortion that they no longer have respect for the pro-choice rhetoric they spout. Alternatives to abortion? Can't have 'em. Informed consent? Don't want it. Protecting a woman's health? Ignore it.

From the very beginning of the abortion rights movement and, as this campaign against pro-life CPC's clearly shows is certainly continuing, the irrational passion to increase the numbers of abortion trumps such inconveniences as a woman's health, parental involvement, social stability, the very concepts of compassion and justice, and...oh yes, the intrinsic worth of human children.

The conclusion of this LifeNews.com story includes information about contacting ABC to express your opinions of their shoddy, shameless reporting. I encourage you to follow through.

Pro-Life Congressmen Urge Amnesty International to Drop Abortion Advocacy

In a strongly worded letter addressed to Larry Cox, Executive Director of Amnesty International, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith and 73 other Members of Congress, including ten Democrats, urged the organization to either maintain the abortion neutral position or take a position in favor of life. The letter states that a decision to support or condone abortion would "significantly undermine Amnesty's reputation and effectiveness."

For the last several years Amnesty International has been asking its national branches if the organization should enter abortion advocacy by proposing abortion as a human right. A final decision could be made at Amnesty International's next international meeting that will be held in Mexico in August of 2007.


The letter, dated November 14, employs graphic description of abortion procedures to drive home the point. "Abortion methods either rip, tear and dismember or chemically poison the fragile bodies of unborn children to death." The letter adds: 'There is nothing whatsoever benign, compassionate or just about an act that utterly destroys the life of a baby."


It says that the Congressmen write "with great concern and alarm that the mission and reputation of Amnesty international is at risk." The letter stresses, "The most elemental human right of all - the right to life for all includes unborn babies."


Check out the full story in this LifeSite report.

Friday, November 17, 2006

Will Tommy Thompson Be The Pro-Lifer's Pick?


Here's the LifeNews story dealing with a possible run for the White House by Tommy Thompson, the popular Wisconsin Governor (16 years) and a former Health and Human Services Secretary.

Very interesting.

De-Funding Planned Parenthood

Here is a late October report from American Life League explaining how Planned Parenthood officials are becoming a bit more nervous about the amounts of government funding they will be receiving. I'm sure that the Democrat sweep of Congress and the Senate have the PP scalawags feeling quite a bit safer but actually now is a great time to again make your voice heard about the outlandish amounts of taxpayer money that goes to the abortion conglomerate. After all, they are already rich beyond belief from the profits of "birth control" pills, surgical abortions, and so on. And, beginning this week, the high markup dollars from the sale of "Morning After" pills will start rolling in.

So, let's remind our political representatives (Democrats and Republicans) of how tragic, unfair and socially counter-productive we believe Planned Parenthood's tax funding to be. You can use the information from STOPP to rev up your engines and increase the potency of your letters or, if in a pinch for time, you can at least avail yourself of American Life League's online petition.

A Huge Democrat Scandal (That Like Most Others Sails Under the MSM Radar)

Byron York has a fascinating look at how Democrats (and their media allies) deal with their own corruption scandals in his NRO article, "Alcee Hastings, Bribery, and the House Intelligence Committee." Here's the beginning paragraphs...

Eighteen years ago, Democratic Rep. John Conyers came to believe that Alcee Hastings, at the time a federal judge in Florida, was guilty of impeachable offenses. Hastings stood accused of conspiring to take bribes, and, although it is little remembered today, Conyers served as the chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee that investigated Hastings and unanimously recommended his impeachment. After the House voted 413 to 3 to impeach Hastings, Conyers went on to serve as one of the House impeachment managers who successfully argued before the Senate that Hastings should be convicted and removed from office.

Conyers was also the author of perhaps the most dramatic words to come from the entire impeachment saga. In the summer of 1988, after he had played a key role in drawing up the articles of impeachment, Conyers made a speech before the House in which suggested that some of the allegations against Hastings, the first black to serve on the federal bench in Florida, might have been racially motivated. But as troubling as he found that possibility, Conyers said those concerns did not change the facts of the case. And the facts pointed to Hastings’s guilt.


In the speech, Conyers looked back to civil-rights days, when corrupt judges sometimes twisted and ignored the law. “We did not wage that civil rights struggle merely to replace one form of judicial corruption for another,” Conyers said. “The principle of equality requires that a black public official be held to the same standard that other public officials are held to.…Just as race should never disqualify a person from office, race should never insulate a person from the consequences of wrongful conduct.”


Conyers’s argument won the day, and Hastings was removed from the bench. But that, of course, was not the end of Hastings’s public life. (The terms of his conviction did not bar him from holding a future public office.) In 1992, Hastings won a seat in the House from Florida’s 23rd District, which he still represents today. But he did not leave his past behind; today he, and the impeachment proceedings against him, are again in the news. After a feud between Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi and California Rep. Jane Harman knocked Harman out of the running to be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Hastings now stands in line to take charge. But complicating that is what investigators like John Conyers — who now is in line to chair the House Judiciary Committee — learned about Hastings back in the 1980s. Soon House Democrats will have to take a close look at the evidence in the Hastings case and decide whether a man judged unfit for the federal bench is qualified to hold one of the most sensitive positions in the U.S. government. This is what they’ll find...


Be sure to read on and see just what York reveals. You'll not read about it in your morning newspaper, that's for sure.

Mainstream Media Labeling: Sinister or Just Stupid?

Tim Graham posted the following over on NewsBusters.org --

The man Democratic nominated for Majority Leader, Rep. Steny Hoyer, has a lifetime American Conservative Union rating of eight percent (zero percent in 2004, 12 percent in 2005). If you'd rather have the liberal rating, Americans for Democratic Action gave him a 100 in 2004, and a 95 in 2005. This should mean that any objective reporter would describe him as a "liberal." But here's the Friday Washington Post account of his selection, headlined "Political Pragmatism Carried Hoyer to the Top," by Shailagh Murray:

"Steny H. Hoyer is a practical moderate and Nancy Pelosi is a liberal idealist, and for more than 40 years they have competed like siblings, all the way to the pinnacle of politics."

(My Note: This NY Times photo above suggests John Murtha is none too happy with the decision of his colleagues.)

ADF Is Ready for the War on Christmas

The Alliance Defense Fund is ready and eager to help Americans battle the Grinches of the ACLU. Here's a rundown of their resources, philosophy and agenda.

Meanwhile, here's a few things the ADF wants you to know:

* The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled that public schools must ban the singing of religious Christmas carols or prohibit the distribution of candy canes or Christmas cards.

* School officials do not violate the Constitution by closing on religious holidays such as Christmas and Good Friday.


* School officials are not legally obligated to recognize all other religious holidays simply because they officially recognize Thanksgiving or Christmas.

* School officials may use "Christmas Vacation" to refer to the December holiday break without offending the Constitution.


* Government-sponsored Christmas displays are not banned as some people believe. When faced with the question of whether a Christmas display is constitutional, a court simply asks, "Is the government celebrating the holiday or promoting religion?" Often, the "Three Reindeer Rule" is used by courts, whereby a judge reasons that having a sufficient number of secular objects in close enough proximity to the Christmas item (such as a crèche) renders the overall display as a constitutional community observance of the holiday.

Of Judges and the "Morning After Pill"

Here's a couple of items from the Family Research Council updates --

1) Judge Nominees in Limbo --With the clock ticking down to a Democratic takeover, President Bush is doing his best to give six judicial nominees one last shot at confirmation. Scheduling hearings in a lame-duck session will be an uphill battle, but it's a necessary one. Since 2000, the president has nominated dozens of upstanding judges, including: Terrence Boyle (NC), William James Haynes II (VA), Michael Brunson Wallace (MS), Peter Keisler (MD), Norman Randy Smith (ID), and William Gerry Myers III (ID). Five of these nominees have been resubmitted for consideration after waiting months, even years, for an opportunity guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution--the right to a full Senate vote.

If our friends in Congress don't act now, the liberal leadership certainly will, filling the bench with judges who have no qualms about rewriting the law to favor same-sex marriage, hate crimes, abortion, religious intolerance, and more. Some senators say that in the face of other last-minute priorities, these nominations should not be brought to the fore. I disagree. While legislators should spend time passing laws, it will do little good until they confirm judges who will uphold them.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has pledged to stonewall every "hard-right" nominee, saying the Democrats' single greatest failure was allowing Samuel Alito to join the Supreme Court. We urge the Senate to consider President Bush's nominees, else they are doomed to face an ideological litmus test that, under liberal leadership, conservatives are sure to fail.



2) Plan B -- This Thanksgiving, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has given the abortion movement plenty to cheer. Yesterday, the FDA announced that supplies of Plan B, the morning-after pill, will be shipped to stores across America and available for purchase over the counter to anyone age 18 or older.

While children 17 and under will still need a prescription, mothers like Senator Hillary Clinton (R-NY) are pushing the FDA to make the pills available to anyone. She argues if a teenager has access to these drugs then she's less likely to get pregnant. Maybe, but she will also be more likely to have unprotected sex and contract a deadly disease. Just the other day my daughter was told she couldn't buy spray paint at the local hardware store without proof that she was 18. Yet liberals are working overtime so girls her age can abort a baby without their parents' knowledge or consent. Something is wrong with this picture.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

American Airport Security...Not!

Just in time for holiday traveling is Debbie Schlussel's alarming update about the...ahem, "security" of American airports.

Warm up the car.

Murtha's Malevolence: "He Don't Need No Stinking Ethics Reform"

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, running in a bitter race against Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, for House Majority Leader, told a group of conservative Democrats that the ethics reform legislation that Democratic leaders have made a top priority was "total crap."

Despite dismissing the reforms, Murtha told the group he would support them because the presumptive Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California., was behind the effort.


One member told CNN that Murtha, referring to the lobbying reform bill Pelosi has advocated, said "even though it's total crap I'll vote for it and pass it because that's what Nancy wants."


Three members of the Blue Dog Coalition, who support Hoyer and wanted to remain anonymous, tell CNN that Murtha made these comments at their Tuesday evening meeting. Murtha was invited to address the group in advance of Thursday̢۪s leadership elections. Rep. Hoyer also made a pitch to the group.


A majority of the 44 member Blue Dog Coalition has publicly backed Hoyer̢۪s leadership bid.


One Democrat described members as having a "stunned reaction" and added, "this goes beyond Blue Dogs -- for any Democrat, corruption was an issue. It was the number one issue in the exit polls."


Oh yeah, Murtha's bad on ethics abuses but is Hoyer any better? Check out this L.A. Times article which gives a quick review of them both.

More On Board for Killing Newborns

The move to start legally killing sick newborns in the United Kingdom is gathering steam. Hard on the heels of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists calling for the euthanasia of disabled babies and certain high members of the Anglican Church agreeing with the call, a British bioethics council is now recommending the same thing.

This is a terribly tragic situation, a clear example that Western society has indeed become a culture of death.

Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com reports the whole sordid story here but I want to make sure you don't miss this point from the report -- "The group also said promoting euthanasia would reduce late-term abortions as parents could go ahead with the birth and kill the baby afterwards if they decide she would have too much trouble leading a healthy life."

God have mercy.

A State Department Gift for Communist Vietnam

In a move clearly designed to grease the skids for George Bush's first visit to Vietnam, as it hosts the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, the United States State Department has decided to remove Vietnam from its list of countries that severely violate religious freedom. A State official, describing Vietnam's removal from the list as one of Washington's "most significant announcements" of the year, explained that the move came in response to Hanoi's release of religious prisoners and the easing of restrictive laws regarding religious activity.

However, there are serious disagreements with the move. Diem Do, for instance, the chairman of Viet Tan, a reform party that advocates democracy and economic development of Vietnam, argues that the decision is naive and heavily influenced by pro-trade groups. "I think religious persecution is still happening inside Vietnam right now. I don't think all religious prisoners have been released yet, and even if they have released a few or a number of people, that doesn't mean that these people are free."

Furthermore, Do explained that even when released from "formal" prisons, people are often placed under house arrest. "I would say 99 percent of the time when people are released from prison, most often they are put under house arrest for two years, three years, four years after that. What does that mean? That means they simply move you from one prison to another jail."

Even within the U.S. government there are voices dissenting from the move. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a panel established under the International Religious Freedom Act, last week urged just last week that the administration NOT remove Vietnam from the "Countries of Particular Concern" list. A letter sent to Condi Rice argued, "Severe restrictions on religious freedom and abuses continue in Vietnam in all of the areas cited by the State Department when Vietnam was designated a CPC (country of particular concern) in 2004."

Ironically, the move cannot make up for what George Bush most wanted to bring to Vietnam; namely, a trade bill that would have awarded Vietnam normal trade relations. The reason for this is that the Congress failed to pass such a bill last week. There are even now frantic efforts being made by some Congressional leaders to bring bilateral trade bill up for a second vote before the President leaves Hanoi.

Would that the State Department, lawmakers, and the President would care more for human rights issues than they do for getting more breaks for supra-national businesses who, of course, have their own habit of turning a deaf ear to human rights issues.

Of Intolerance, Rudy's Antipathy for Conservatism, and Other Points to Ponder

Here's an exceptionally interesting crop of Town Hall columns you don't want to miss:

* Michael Medved weighing in on the extreme intolerance of the "liberal tolerants" -- using Elton John and his recent remarks about abolishing religion as an example.

* Terence Jeffrey's warnings about just how far left is Rudy Giuliani's positions on moral issues. Excerpt below:

...Thanks to politicians and judges who take Giuliani's position on abortion, more than 47 million babies have been aborted in America since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. Thanks to politicians and judges who take Giuliani's position on marriage, the unique legal status of the traditional family is now under siege.


Giuliani understood the link between allowing people to urinate on the streets with impunity and New York City's overall decline. Outside New York, on the Republican campaign trail, he is sure to meet many voters who understand that his positions on abortion and marriage do to our national culture exactly what the street people and pub-crawlers did to New York.


* Maggie Gallagher's musings on the elections. Excerpts below:

...African-Americans are the most reliable voting bloc for Democrats. Despite Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Dick Armey, John Ashcroft, Ryan Sager, David Kuo, and all the other sophisticated efforts to persuade evangelicals that the GOP is simply cynically using them, evangelicals turned out. According to The New York Times, "white evangelicals and born-again Christians made up about 24 percent of those who voted, compared with 23 percent in the 2004 election." Seventy percent of them voted GOP, compared to 72 percent in 2004. Evangelicals alone may not be enough. But without them, Republicans are nowhere...

...Overturning Roe. V. Wade may not be as scary as pro-choicers think. -- Even in a state as pro-life as South Dakota, only 44 percent of voters supported a law banning all abortions except to save the mother's life. Democrats should be secretly hoping that Bush gets one more Supreme Court justice who will overturn Roe. The results will be that most states will vote to legalize abortion with some exceptions, and the GOP loses a big issue.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

The Brave New Future: Podcast by Wesley J. Smith

Are We Defining A Brave New Future Where All Human Life Is Not Protected?

Are we headed for a brave new world where unconscious people are treated as if they were simply biological machines? Wesley warns that we maybe headed down that path, even though today most people believe “that treating people as mere things violates the intrinsic dignity of the individual and the equal moral worth of all human life.” And yet prominent bioethicists and philosophers are contemplating, and even championing, ideas and legislation that could lead to a bleak future where human exceptionalism is ignored.


Listen to Dr. Smith's informative, affecting 7-minute audio right here. Just hit the little yellow button to begin.

Rotting From Within? The G.O.P.'s Main Troubles May Not Be the Democrats

In reviewing the elections last week and the G.O.P. meltdown they revealed, Jill Stanek has written two very provocative columns over at World Net Daily.

The first concerns the impact the election will have on pro-life issues and it also explores the failure of Republican ideals. The second column deals more specifically with the inroads into the Republican power ranks of homosexual activists and how that inclusion has moved sanctity of life matters far into the background.

Both columns are bold, perceptive and both are important reads.

The Nanny State: Mother Goose Style

Here is the Nanny State in all its glory.

Check out what's going down in England with this remarkable report from the Evening Standard (U.K.). And please note that the required reading to "put kids right" is not Bible lessons or Church catechisms but...uh, nursery rhymes! Sigh.

Parents could be forced to go to special classes to learn to sing their children nursery rhymes, a minister said. Those who fail to read stories or sing to their youngsters threaten their children's future and the state must put them right, Children's Minister Beverley Hughes said. Their children's well-being is at risk 'unless we act', she declared. And Mrs Hughes said the state would train a new 'parenting workforce' to ensure parents who fail to do their duty with nursery rhymes are found and 'supported'.

The call for state intervention in the minute details of family life followed a series of Labour efforts to reduce anti-social behaviour and improve educational standards by imposing rigorous controls on the lives of the youngest children.
Mrs Hughes has established a national curriculum to set down how babies are taught to speak in childcare from the age of three months. Her efforts have gone alongside a push by other ministers to determine exactly how parents treat their children down to how they should brush their teeth.

Tony Blair has backed the idea of 'fasbos' - efforts to identify and correct the lives of children who are likely to fail even before they are born - and new laws to compel parents to attend parenting classes are on the way.
This autumn is likely to see an extension of parenting orders that can force parents to attend parenting classes so that they can be used on the say so of local councils against parents.

For the first time, parenting orders are likely to be directed against parents whose children have committed no criminal offence...

Left Behind?


This New York Post photo is a classic:

FIND JOHN: John Kerry can only look on yesterday as Senate Dem leaders (l-r): Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid (Nev.), Patty Murray (Wash.) and Dick Durbin (Ill.) hit the Capitol.

Murtha Represents Business As Usual -- Bad Business

The political read of the day has to be John Fund's WSJ Online column in which he takes a close look at the arrogance, hypocrisy and sheer stupidity of the Democrat's championing of John Murtha. Whether it is corruption, pork-barrel deals and earmarks, or strident anti-war posturing, Murtha is extremely vulnerable on all.

Here's a sample...

..But several members are privately aghast that Mr. Murtha, a pork-barreling opponent of most House ethics reforms, could become the second most visible symbol of the new Democratic rule. "We are supposed to change business as usual, not put the fox in charge of the henhouse," one Democratic member told me. "It's not just the Abscam scandal of the 1980s that he barely dodged, he's a disaster waiting to happen because of his current behavior," another told me.

As for Abscam, a recent book by George Crile, a producer for CBS's "60 Minutes," provides damning evidence that Mr. Murtha escaped severe punishment for his role in the scandal only because then-Speaker Tip O'Neill arranged for the House Ethics Committee to drop the charges, over the objections of the committee's outside prosecutor. The prosecutor quickly resigned in protest.


Outside observers are equally aghast that Mr. Murtha could win tomorrow's election. Thomas Mann, a Brookings Institution scholar who is co-author of "The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track," told the Los Angeles Times that "John Murtha is not the right poster child" for a Democratic House that says it wants to sweep away corruption.


Melanie Sloan, the liberal head of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, was cheered on by Democrats six weeks ago when she helped reveal the Mark Foley scandal. Now she says that "Ms. Pelosi"s endorsement of Rep. Murtha, one of the most unethical members of Congress, show that she may have prioritized ethics reform merely to win votes with no real commitment to changing the culture of corruption"...

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

"Lord, Increase Our Faith"

What did the Lord Jesus do when asked by his apostles to give them more faith? Did He perform a dramatic miracle in front of them? Did He touch them and directly infuse the substantial increase they desired? Or did He do completely something unexpected?

In this 90-second "Vital Signs" radio program, Denny tells the story of just what did happen.

More Troubles for the Episcopalians

There are several intriguing stories over on Virtue Online concerning the problems of Pennsylvania Episcopal Bishop Charles E. Bennison -- problems that are going unresolved and therefore creating a tragic ripple effect for the already troubled denomination. However, the report I found most interesting was David Virtue's detailed review of the 223rd Diocesan Convention in Philadelphia. In that report, David explains the charges against Bennison (especially the financial misappropriations and cover up of his minister brother's sexual abuse) but also shows the resolve of many lay Episcopalians to call the Bishop to account.

The impact of this fight will go way beyond this diocese. Indeed, reading the comments following the story reveals it already has.

"Abortion Belittles Women"

Dolores O'Riordan, lead vocalist of The Cranberries: "I am in no position to judge other women, you know. But I mean, why did she get pregnant? It's not good for women to go through the procedure [abortion] and have something living sucked out of their bodies. It belittles women. Even though some women say, 'Oh, I don't mind to have one,' every time a woman has an abortion, it just crushes her self-esteem smaller and smaller and smaller." (Source: You! June/July 1996)

Beware the Ortho Evra "Birth Control" Patch

Enjoying unlimited sexual pleasure but yet, at all costs, avoiding childbirth has become an irrational passion in the West -- even when those costs mean women submitting themselves to the unnatural violence perpetrated by an abortionist or ingesting powerful drugs that dangerously alter their system.

How dangerously? Well, the studies show grave dangers to women from all chemical "birth control", not to mention the lethal effects these drugs can have on unborn babies when "breakthrough ovulation" has occurred.

This brief article about Johnson & Johnson's Ortho Evra Patch is just one tragic case in point.

According to Johnson & Johnson's third quarter SEC filing for 2006 , there are over “1,000 claimants who have filed lawsuits or have made claims regarding injuries allegedly due to Ortho Evra.” [1] Ortho Evra, also known as the birth control patch, is a transdermal hormonal contraceptive which is applied weekly to the skin. In addition to being a contraceptive, the patch can act as an abortifacient by preventing implantation of a fertilized egg.

Serious health problems have been associated with Ortho Evra including fatal and non-fatal blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and death. From April 2002 to December 2004, over 27,974 'adverse effects' were reported by users of Ortho Evra.[2] Many of the complaints are serious, and the patch is alleged to be responsible for over 23 deaths, including the death of 14 year old Alycia Brown.[3]


The claims keep mounting – last week a lawsuit was filed on behalf of 40 women against Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical Inc, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson and the manufacturer of Ortha Evra.. The lawsuit alleges that the Ortho Evra patch was responsible for the serious health problems, including the death of one user.[4]


"We were saddened for these women and their families but not surprised by the news of these cases," says John David Hart, of the Law Offices of John David Hart in Fort Worth, who represents women who have used the Ortho Evra patch. "All of the women we've met with and all of the research we've done suggest that this is a real problem and that women are being harmed by using this drug."[4]


Again, the rest of this Ruben Obregon article can be read right here.

How Far Left Will They Go?

With George McGovern addressing the Congress today (asking for an immediate pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq) and Nancy Pelosi strongly backing anti-war John Murtha as her deputy, Toby Harnden wonders just far left the "old guard" Democrats will try to push.

Writing in the Telegraph (U.K.), Harnden says, "The emerging Democratic consensus on bringing troops home from Iraq is a sign of the growing influence of those on the party's Left.

This threatens to undermine the chances for a new spirit of bipartisanship that President George W Bush and Democratic leaders called for after his election defeat.

It could also harm Democratic chances in the 2008 presidential election if the party is seen as too radical...."

Ah, It's Getting Clearer -- I Foresee Tax Increases in Your Future

That was fast. A mere two days after Democrats capture Congress claiming they wouldn't raise taxes, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin tells them they should do so anyway.

"You cannot solve the nation's fiscal problems without increased revenues," declared Mr. Rubin, the Democratic Party's leading economic spokesman, in a speech last Thursday. He also took a crack at economic forecasting by noting that "I think if you were to increase taxes right now, you would have probably about zero negative effect on the economy." The economics and politics here are worth parsing.


We suppose it's reassuring that Mr. Rubin now thinks the economy is strong enough to withstand a tax increase. That's a switch from his opposition to the 2003 Bush tax cuts, which he predicted would bust the budget and do little for growth. The U.S. economy proceeded to grow by an average of nearly 4% a year for three years following mid-2003, until the recent slowdown due largely to the housing slump...


Read the rest of this Wall Street Journal Online article right here.

Monday, November 13, 2006

Disappointments Come Quickly with Bob Casey

Back in July, I posted an entry here referring to Bob Casey (now the Senator-elect from Pennsylvania) as being anything but a true pro-life advocate. Indeed, Casey boldy explained in the interview I cited his flexibility on court appointments, his rape and incest exceptions, and his full support for embryonic stem cell experimentation.

Well, today in an entry over on PowerBlog entitled, "Bob Casey Already Exposes His Anti-Free Speech Intentions," there's this report:

The Senator-elect of Pennsylvania has expressed his desire to get federal law passed that would infringe upon the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans. The dust from the mid-term elections had not yet settled on Wednesday when Bob Casey, Jr. announced that he would be pushing for a federal hate crimes law that included 'sexual orientation' and 'gender identity.' This announcement came as payback for the support the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) gave Casey's campaign.

In a news release issued by the HRC on November 8th Bob Casey said, "HRC got behind my campaign early and has been a tremendous help. The energy and commitment they put behind our campaign was extraordinary. I look forward to working with HRC's incredible staff and membership, especially to advance hate crimes legislation in the Senate."


Casey ran on a pro-family, pro-life platform . . . it didn't take him long to reveal his true colors. In addition, the Federal Election Commission reveals that MoveOn.org, the far-left interest group, has "bundled" $168,591 for the Casey campaign. George Soros is one of the main contributors to MoveOn.org -- a political organization once described by The Washington Post as having "a vigorously liberal agenda."


Fidelis, a conservative Catholic organization, reported on February 27th that the Human Rights Campaign collected and donated $100,000 to Casey's campaign. They also report he received contributions from People for the American Way ($10,000), George Soros ($4,200), Hillary Rodham Clinton's PAC ($5,000) and MoveOn.org ($150,000)...

The War on Christmas Is Again Underway

It's that time of year again; namely, the season when retailers certainly hope you retain the Christmas tradition of buying gifts but who also insist on muting any religious sense of the season. There will be many who fall into this category, including Best Buy, the management of which has announced the phrase "Merry Christmas" is off limits.

Now let me emphasize at the outset here that I am convinced that the Christian's most important priority in these "wars on Christmas" is to let his/her own Christmas light shine brightly, warmly and generously. The responsibility for "keeping Christ in Christmas" is much more ours than it is that of the government or businessmen.

But, if that priority is maintained, then appeals to government and businesses to retain the traditions of Christmas are very much in order.

An example? This appeal from the American Family Association asks for you to contact Best Buy and politely request the company to change its policy. I think such appeals are proper and of tremendous value (although I suggest individual contacts are better than merely using pre-formatted e-mails). Indeed, before I made this post for Vital Signs Blog, I wrote the following note and sent it off to the founder and Chairman of Best Buy, Richard M. Schulze. I encourage you to do likewise.

Dear Mr. Schulze,

This is simply a brief request that you reconsider your decision to make "Merry Christmas" off limits in your Christmas promotions. Your decision, however well intentioned, is exactly the opposite of tolerance and understanding. It is a denial of history and much beloved cultural traditions, a denial that alienates many, many Americans who believe that Christmas is of unique importance and, therefore, shouldn't be muted by insensitive and misplaced political correctness.


You obviously want Americans to retain the Christmas tradition of buying gifts, but to then deny the very reasons for the holiday's goodwill. That is very sad, very hypocritical...and very muddle-headed. So, please desist with this anti-Christmas policy that is offensive to so many and which will surely be counter-productive to your company's profits. For instance, I will be one consumer, social leader, speaker and blogger who will pass the word about Best Buy's anti-Christmas actions.


Please, let me soon be able to report your change of heart, okay?


Sincerely, and with the warmest wishes for a blessed and merry Christmas for you and your family, I am,


Denny Hartford


This letter was sent to:
Richard M. Schulze, Founder and Chairman
Best Buy
7601 Penn Ave. South
Richfield, MN 55423

Other contact information: Phone: 1-888-237-8289
Fax: 612-292-4001
E-Mail: dick.schulze@bestbuy.com

The Anglican Church Backs the Call for Euthanizing Sick Newborns

Last week I posted a link to the Sunday Times (U.K.) story about Britain's most prestigious medical group calling for the euthanasia of sick newborns. Here now is a story dealing with the religious reactions to this callous campaign.

It's not a very good story -- you'll note that although the headline suggests the topic is going to be the reaction against the Anglican Church's support of the euthanasia call, the reporter actually concerns himself almost entirely with the Anglican's position.

And that position is alarming in the extreme.

Belarusians, "Open Your Eyes"

The groups in Belarus who have united in their attempts to oppose the totalitarian regime of Alexander Lukashenka are developing a campaign for January's elections to tell voters the truth about the country's economic and political situation. Without a free press (not to mention criminal penalties for voicing opposition to the Communist government), the facts about Belarus' increasingly precarious social and economic situation do not reach the public. Thus, the new Rasplyushchy Vochy (Open Your Eyes) campaign, a brave move by the opposition forces who are relying on meager resources, prayers and their hope for a free Belarus to yet make a difference.

Among the facts these groups want to bring to the public are:

* Belarus ranks 67th in economic and social development, behind Estonia, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Russia;

* The Ministry of Justice has not been registering political parties since 1999;


* Belarus is the sole European country whose nationals need to obtain a travel stamp for foreign trips; and


* Belarus ranks 106th worst among 155 countries in business environment, after Kazakhstan (86th), Russia (79th), Lithuania (15th) and Estonia (16th).

Friday, November 10, 2006

The Supreme's Review Partial Birth Abortion

Matt Bowman, legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, was present for the Supreme Court's hearing of arguments in its review of partial birth abortion. Here is his enlightening report.

Funding Frankenstein a Key Priority of New Congress?

...Presumptive Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has already listed funding for stem cell research as one of the top priorities of the new House...

This UPI story shows us one of the greatest dangers facing us now that the Democrats are in control.

This article is scary for other reasons too. For instance, it is very important to realize that sloppy reporting comes from sloppy thinking...which, of course, begets yet more sloppy thinking. And when the truth is hidden, nothing but scary things can result.

If you'll permit me, I'd like to do a quick run-through of this story for content and technique, recalling the journalism basics I learned way, way back in the days of my writing for the Trinidad State Trojan newspaper.

Kristyn Ecochard writes in this article, The support of stem cell research is promising but not a complete turn-around, said Jonathan Moreno, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and professor at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. "On the surface, it doesn't appear there's a veto-proof majority in the House or the Senate," he told UPI. "But people may be more open now to hearing what the scientific evidence says."

[The reporter lets this quote about "scientific evidence" stand on its own despite the fact that the real scientific evidence shows that embryonic stem cell use is a literal "dead end" -- not to mention also that the real scientific evidence clearly shows the embryos exploited in this research are living human beings. The reporter's failure to get at the truth thus creates a serious misunderstanding. And though that's standard practice nowadays, it remains illegitimate reporting.]

Again from the article, The Catholic Church's stance is that life begins at the moment of conception. However, survey results from a 2005 Johns Hopkins University study show that among U.S. Catholics, 69 percent dissent from the view of the church and approve embryonic stem cell research. Perhaps more surprisingly, the poll showed 49.5 percent of fundamental evangelical Christians approve of stem cell research, Holland said.

[Two points here. The first is that the Catholic Church "stance" isn't made on a whim. In this case, the Catholic Church's "stance" just happens to be what every scientist, every doctor, every kid with a biology textbook knows is an actuality. The way the reporter phrases this suggests otherwise. Again, bad and biased journalism.

The second point is the reporter’s implication that polls of the self-identified adherents of a religion should determine the official teaching of that religion. Weird reasoning? Sure, but to a reporter ignorant of the very concept of divine revelation (the communication from God to man of His demands), he/she is likely to believe that religion must (or should) be determined by majority vote. And yet, as is clear from the reporting trends in recent decades, there is tremendous inconsistency here. Thus, even when the overwhelming majority of...say Catholics or evangelicals agree on a position that happens to be politically incorrect, journalists find other reasons to disparage their convictions.]

And finally, Ms. Ecohard writes, In the scientific community there is still some debate as to when a child's life has begun, although most believe an embryo is a developing human life. It's still debatable, however, whether the fetus is developed enough at five days or 14 days of life.

[Dissecting a reporter's work can be maddening and so this is the last one I'll comment on, but notice the patent silliness of the opening clause here. There may be "debate" in the newsroom or among Planned Parenthood employees, but among scientists there is no more debate about when life begins than there is about the existence of gravity. Certainly, there are plenty of scientists who dismiss the value of human life at its earliest stages, but only among the most decidedly unscientific does someone dare to deny life begins at conception.

The second clause may be even more absurd. "Most believe an embryo is a developing human life." What else could they believe? And third, note the reporter’s clumsy sentence structure in her last sentence. "Developed enough" for what, for crying out loud? For them to qualify for the definition of human life? For it to be morally acceptable to kill them? Sigh.]

I could go on a bit; like mentioning the reporters failure to equally cite contrary opinions or her unnecessary use of quotation marks when she writes of "dead" embryos (trying to make dead somehow less...well, dead), and so on, but you get the idea. But it is important to read carefully such news reports and to teach others to do the same lest we fall into the traps of bias, selective omission, illogical argument, labeling, ad hominem attacks, etc. that modern reporters use.

But, putting all the sloppy reporting in this article aside, it does most certainly reveal one very important truth -- Nancy Pelosi and her pals are going to be pressing and pressing very hard to get more license and more dough for the Frankensteinian horrors of ESCR. Lord help us.

A "Health Police" Wish List

Here's a telling example of how liberalism tends not only to be remarkably inconsistent and unable to establish relevant priorities, but is also quite dangerous to individual freedom. The report involves the American Public Health Association (the world's largest organization of public health professionals, by the way) and its post-election calls for...let's see now:

* a ban on serving trans fats in restaurants,
* a treaty instituting global control of alcohol consumption,
* a cessation of abstinence-only sex education, and, oh yes,
* an "immediate initiation" of withdrawl of U.S. forces from Iraq.

Why the G.O.P. Went Down

Christian Newswire is reporting this press release from Jason S. Jones, the president of CatholicPrecincts.org. It is a succinct and spot-on review of why the G.O.P. took such a thrashing on Tuesday.

“Conservatives were shocked when President Bush tried to pass off Harriet Miers as a competent Supreme Court nominee; Conservatives were shocked when the Administration appeased the homosexual lobby by offering up Scott Bloch (head of the Office of Special Counsel) as a sacrificial lamb; and Conservatives were shocked when President Bush—with less than 90 days to the mid-term election—stated that he favored over-the-counter sales of the abortifacient Plan B drug.

“On November 7, 2006 the Republican Party Establishment was shocked to discover that Conservatives were not willing to be exploited.

“Republicans lost because of their cowardice in handling those issues of paramount importance to the Party’s base, particularly the defense of innocent human life and the preservation of traditional marriage between one man and one woman. This was evidenced by the fact that voters turned out en masse in seven out eight states to pass marriage amendments, but this did not translate into electoral success for many weak-kneed Republicans.

“In Virginia, Sen. George Allen—whose cozy relationship with Plan B manufacturer Barr Labs became a campaign issue—ran away from taking a clear stand in favor of life or marriage. He lost, but the marriage amendment passed. In Missouri, Sen. Jim Talent’s reluctance to clearly condemn the state’s pro-human cloning ballot initiative cost him his Senate seat and helped lead to the amendment’s passage. President Bush campaigned heavily for Talent, but ignored the cloning debate completely. And he and his administration’s deafening silence on the South Dakota abortion ban was equally inexcusable.

“This election strategy represents the Giuliani-McCain-Romney wing of the party whose weakness and inconsistency on these foundational matters makes them unfit to lead. For far too long the Party has treated its pro-life, pro-family conservative base like the low hanging fruit that practically falls into the basket on its own. This election was a wake up call that a Republican Party slouching toward the left does not possess a ladder tall enough to reach the coveted fruit of the conservative vote.”

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Black Tuesday: Analysis and Aftermath

After Tuesday’s election results, there’s no doubt about it -- the Republican Party, guilty of inconsistency, weakness, scandals, inability to articulate policy, an addiction to big spending, and cowardice in the face of the Democrats and the mainstream media, got an old-fashioned, bare-fisted thumping from American voters. Though the G.O.P. leaders had denied its possibility for months, one of the worst-case scenarios was realized: the U.S. Senate (as well as the Congress) is now in Democrat hands. Can you say, “Mrs. Speaker, Nancy Pelosi”? Ugh.

The Republican Party’s best hope now (and the country’s, for that matter) is that George W. Bush finally learns how to veto a bill, blessing the nation with the subsequent gridlock that might stave off further disasters…at least until the G.O.P. learns its lesson and comes back properly chastened in 2008.

Will that happen? Well, it certainly can but only if these three things occur:

1) Republicans return to their foundational principles, especially defending the right to life, smaller government, being tough on criminals here and outside our borders, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution;

2) They learn to communicate those principles effectively to the voters, learning from the example of Ronald Reagan; and,

3) They commit themselves to fight for those principles with enthusiasm, intelligence and consistency. Again, Reagan serves as a terrific mentor but so too do Senator Tom Coburn, Congressman Chris Smith and many of the vibrant voices in the new media.

Those, I grant you, are three big “ifs” – but they can (and must) be done if the G.O.P. hopes to reclaim the kind of power it has frittered away these last several years.

Of course, the political landscape is just the stage setting for a much larger tragedy; namely, the severe moral calamity which America has experienced in recent decades. For instance, it wasn’t a political party yesterday that gave us referenda in favor of embryonic stem cell research…or votes against parents being notified of their minor daughter’s impending abortion…or measures increasing gambling…or South Dakota’s failure to uphold a ban on abortion…or Arizona’s refusal to ban homosexual “marriage.” And it wasn’t Howard Dean who elected a radical Muslim to Congress nor Ted Kennedy who put a self-described Socialist into the Senate.

No, the culprits who perpetrated all of these dastardly actions were regular American citizens – citizens whose minds and consciences have been warped by government schools, by Hollywood, by journalists with a leftist agenda, by muddle-headed judges, and by the coercive leaders of labor unions – citizens whose denial of a personal God (in practice if not in actual pronouncement) makes them yearn feverishly for the false sense of security promised by the nanny state.

We have met the enemy. And he is us!

Therefore, the most immediate, practicable solution is a dramatic change of heart for America…one life at a time. Big strategies and movements and politics all have a place, certainly; but our overall goal should always be conversion. And when authentic, conversion is always intensely personal. Therefore, we must accept our responsibility as believers in and followers of Jesus Christ; namely, to serve as light bearers, joy bearers, and freedom bearers to our local community, our nation and far beyond. By our words and our lives, we invest in our culture, but always in ways that will encourage others to seek an answer for the hope that is in us.

We are commanded to be, as it were, winsome and articulate “public service ads” for our Redeemer King. This doesn’t mean we compromise. Nor, God forbid, do we run for cover. It means we faithfully preach and teach the Word while, at the same time, we live out its truths of holiness, compassion and triumphant power.

So, be of good cheer; not because of Tuesday’s results, but because of what is more important (and far more lasting) than temporal politics. After all, the Bible explains that we believers are elected too – and not by a fickle and foolish people, but by Almighty God Himself! And our election isn’t for two years or four years but for all eternity.

Congratulations! Now, get to work!

Texas Infant Denied Medical Treatment by Court

Law prof Rick Duncan sent me a "heads up" last night about the most recent travesty in our culture of death's embrace of euthanasia...

Denny: have you seen this Texas case?

Life-Support Stopped for 6-Month-Old in Houston

Excerpt:

"Yesterday Sun Hudson, the nearly 6-month-old at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, diagnosed and slowly dying with a rare form of dwarfism (thanatophoric dysplasia), was taken off the ventilator that was keeping him alive. A Houston court authorized the hospital's action, and Sun died shortly thereafter. Today's Houston Chronicle and Dallas Morning News have most of the details.

Both papers report that this is the first time in the United States a court has allowed life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn from a pediatric patient over the objections of the child's parent. (The Dallas paper quotes John Paris, a bioethicist at Boston College, as its source.) If true, the unique Texas statute under which this saga was played out contributed in no small way to the outcome.

Another "Catholic" Sabotaging Catholic Teaching

Unfortunately, there are extremist pro-abort feminists in many more places than just American universities. Case in point: Silvia Pimentel (photo at right) is a Professor of Legal Philosophy at -- get this -- the Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo. That's right; another Catholic who, in fact, isn't but whose perversity loves to sabotage the Church's teaching from the inside out. Senora Pimentel's most recent treason involves trying to destroy Nicaragua's sweeping new pro-life law.

It should be no surprise that Senora Pimentel travels in the most leftist of circles. Indeed, as the Vice President of the powerful United Nations Committee for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), she is one of the most radical of the pro-abortionists working to knock down all remaining restraints to abortion.

Pimentel agitated against the Nicaraguan Congress' intention to ban abortion in their nation, using in an open letter the tired line that a "right to therapeutic abortion is inherent in human rights" and is "protected by international treaties and conventions signed by Nicaragua." Silvia Pimentel failed to dissuade the Congress and preborn children in Nicaragua will now receive something increasingly rare in the world -- protection. But, make no mistake, Senora Pimentel will not wait to strike again at this basic moral teaching of what she brazenly still insists is "her" Church.

It doesn't matter that you are not a Nicaraguan (or even if you are not a Roman Catholic), you can still write to Bishop Joaquim Justino Carreira, the Auxiliary Bishop of São Paulo, and ask him to, unless she repents, remove Senora Pimentel from her post at the Catholic University.

Speaking up for the sanctity of life needs recognize no boundaries.

The Bishop's address is Avenida Higienopolis 890, 01238-908 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil; C.P. 1670, 01064-970 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.

9 Billion and Counting: The U.S. Government's Condom Campaign

Here's a report from LifeSite News about the ever-expanding push by the U.S. State Department to tie foreign aid to mass condom distribution. Real eradication of hunger, real infrastructure and economic development, real health education and improvement, real literacy and job training -- all of these crucial gifts the United States (and other Western nations) could liberally give to needy peoples around the world get tied up, not merely in the red tape of bureacracy, but in the latex fixation of liberals whose personal morality and planning priorities are terribly distorted.

A Post-Mortem Potpourri

There's a whole bunch of angles to examine and ponder regarding Tuesday's elections. What happened? Where are the priorities of the political leadership now and, for that matter, the voters? What can we expect from the Democrats, the Republicans, the President? And where are Christian conservatives going to go?

Among the best who are dealing well with such questions as these are the following:

* Michael Medved

* Hugh Hewitt

* Tony Blankley

* Bob Novak

* Fred Barnes

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Ouch!

Last night's big win for the Democrats was a big loss for the Republicans, for common sense, and for the state of the Republic. Details on the severity of the damage as well as encouragement for our next actions (always in order for the Christian) will be forthcoming tomorrow. I'm afraid that today I've got a gang of things to do, including writing this month's letter to our Vital Signs Ministries LifeSharer team (which I'll post here too), getting ready for an out-of-town speaking engagement, and preparations for a brief trip to Kansas City for a celebration of our 35th anniversary.

Until tomorrow, then.

And don't do anything rash, kids. The Lord Jesus remains in control of history.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Reviewing the President's Record

The much-respected evangelical theologian, Wayne Grudem, weighs in on today's election with an interesting and helpful review of the record of President Bush's administration. Grudem doesn't agree with everything the President has done -- he specifically mentions his dissent over McCain/Feingold and the President's weakness in dealing with wasteful spending -- but overall Grudem gives the administration high marks. And he points to the monumental differences between the President's record and the goals of the Democrat Party.

Concerning the President's record, I too would have to give him failing grades regarding wasteful spending, McCain/Feingold, and the fact that the "nanny state" with its ever-increasing government programs grows larger by the day. However, a monstrous failing of the President's that Grudem doesn't mention is even worse; namely, his complicity in the "morning after pill" affair in which the FDA approved these dangerous abortifacients to be sold over the counter.

But, like Wayne Grudem does in this article, I would have to emphasize that a Democrat administration would be much, much worse than anything we've seen from President Bush. On government spending, on ultra-liberal judges, on tearing apart the sanctity of life, on the spread of indecency, on same-sex marriage, on an appeasement policy in foreign affairs, and so much more, the Democrats would most certainly be worse.

So, of course, be angry at the failures of the G.O.P. and dedicate yourselves anew to making them more responsible to the grassroots conservatives like you and I who get them elected. But before you pull the levers in the voting booth today, carefully consider what America would look like if instead of President Bush, we had Democrats in charge.

Again, you'll find useful reminders in Dr. Grudem's article here.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Doctor's Group in Britain Wants Permission to Kill Sick Newborns

The Sunday Times (U.K.) reports on just about as frightening a scenario as one could imagine; namely, doctors agitating for the right to kill babies who are too sick, too expensive, and too much trouble to bother about. So much for the promise to "do no harm.

Hippocrates, call home quick.

Touting Chemical Abortion

"It depends on how you define abortion," says Ob/Gyn physician Jeff Andrews of Vanderbilt University Medical Center. But what he means is -- if you obfuscate and distort language enough, perhaps you can hide the awful truth behind the language. In this particular case, Dr. Andrews is defending the poisonous abortion drugs in the 'morning after pill."

Later in this brief news story, however, Andrews acts as if he's forgotten there are reasons for the controversy as he states this bold untruth, "Plan B could not possibly be an abortive fashion because it acts before implantation and does not affect the pregnancy after implantation. That's been proven."

Bad doctor!

"Plan B" drugs act exactly like "birth control pills", only more so because of the dramatically increased dose of the same hormones. And the science is clear and incontrovertible -- though the drug's primary purposes may be contraceptive, it also acts to severely thin the lining of the endometrium of the uterus, making it inhospitable to the developing baby when "breakthrough ovulation" has led to a fertilized egg.

And, yes, Dr. Andrews knows full well that this happens.

No, what has been proven, and proven by the drug manufacturers themselves, is that the "morning after pill" does have mechanisms that act both before and after conception. It is an abortifacient.

But in the enthusiasm for abortion, even people like Dr. Andrews here, undoubtedly responsible in applying science in other areas of their work, leave their heads (and their hearts) on the shelf.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Men of Honor, Justice and Compassion

Will today's pro-life advocates be seen as tomorrow's heroes?

I've no doubt that they will; and certainly in the history books that really count - those stored for safe-keeping in the heavenly library!

But defenders of the sanctity of human life are already enshrined in human history. Did you know that among the list of men who have stood against abortion and infanticide are the names of:

Theodore Roosevelt, J. Hudson Taylor, G. K. Chesterton, Dave Dravecky, John Calvin, St. Ambrose, Rabbi Yehuda Levin, Roy Rogers, Rosey Grier, Peter Marshall, Sen. Gordon Humphrey, Phil Simms, Dr. David Livingston, St. Basil, Lech Walesa,...

Ronald Reagan, Mike Ditka, Alan Keyes, Frank Peretti, Pat Boone, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, Fr. Val Peter, Zig Ziglar, St. Jerome, Don Feder, Tim LaHaye, Justice William Rehnquist, E.V. Hill, Nat Hentoff, Orel Hershiser, Justinian, Rep. J.C. Watts, Charlton Heston...

Alexander Solzenitsyn, Norm Geisler, Rush Limbaugh, Dr. D. James Kennedy, Meadowlark Lemon, Rep. Henry Hyde, Mark Bavaro, Dr. Jerry Falwell, Ignatius Loyola, Sen. Jesse Helms, Carman, Clement of Alexandria, Charles Colson, William Carey...

Pope John Paul II, Reggie White, Tom Selleck, Larry Burkett, Don Francisco, St. Vincent de Paul, Pat Buchanan, Wellington Boone, Augustus St. Clair, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, John MacArthur, Tim Burke, John Whitehead, Rep. Steve Largent, Joe Scheidler...

Francis Schaeffer, Martin Luther, Efrem Zimbalist Jr., Monte Coleman, Keith Green, William F. Buckley Jr., Tony Evans, Scott Wesley Brown, Justice Byron White, Chris Godfrey, Dr. Charles Swindoll, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, Pete Metzelaars, Sen. Edward Zorinsky, Dr. Jack Willke, Bishop Fulton Sheen...

Justice Clarence Thomas, John Cardinal O'Connor, Josh McDowell, William Bentley Ball, Adrian Rogers, Rep. Chris Smith, Fr. John Powell, Phil Simms, Gary Bauer, Rep. Frank Wolf, Paul Brown, Dr. Jerome Lejune, Dan Reeves, Dr. James Dobson...

Charlie Daniels, Bill McCartney, Cal Thomas, Earnest Byner, Joseph Sobran, Ed Cole, Phil Keaggy, Dr. Ray Bohlin, Tom Herr, Steve Taylor, Sen. Bill Armstrong, Justice Anthony Scalia, M.P. David Alton, Rep. Robert Dornan, Joe Gibbs, Dr. Bill Bright, Malcolm Muggeridge, A.C. Green...and on and on and on ! ! !

Pretty Impressive Group? You bet!

But, it's a list that only has full significance if your name can also be included.

For true heroes are simply men who are willing to do what needs to be done... and to do it on time!

So, how about it, gentlemen?
Are YOU aboard?

"Abortion concerns not just the unborn child, it concerns every one of us... We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life - the unborn - without diminishing the value of all human life."
President Ronald Reagan

Al Mohler Talks with Andrew Sullivan

It is a most interesting combination -- author/blogger Andrew Sullivan (a self-described conservative and practicing Catholic who nonetheless endorsed John Kerry for President and is openly homosexual) talking with Dr. Albert Mohler (the truly conservative Southern Baptist theologian).

You can listen to their conversation via MP3 from this page or read the transcript reprinted on this page.

Before or After Birth, Abortionists Will Kill Babies

Abortion is murder. And, in this dreadful example, the abortionists didn't stop even after the baby girl had survived their first assault. After all, they saw their task to be not merely ending a pregnancy...but ending a child's life.

New Episcopalian Head Bishop Thinks There Are Several Ways to God Other Than Through Jesus Christ

52-year old Katharine Jefferts Schori (shown at the right of this picture in her regalia) is a scientist, pilot, social activist, priest, and bishop. In fact, she is also now ready to begin her tenure as the Presiding Bishop in the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. Yes, she's the first woman in that lofty position and yes, she thinks the EC (USA) should continue to evolve into an ever more progressive, enlightened and liberal institution.

For instance, in this Q&A session with Time, Bishop Katherine describes the Church's primary goals to be hunger, elementary education, healing AIDS and other diseases, and development. Hmmm. Proclaiming the gospel of Christ and teaching the Word of God (a couple of items that probably would have been mentioned by someone less advanced and broad-minded a clergyperson as Bishop Katherine) did not make her list.

Indeed, Bishop Katherine desires to lead the Episcopalian flock in important new directions -- none of that old time religion for her. Thus, she explains to Time's readers that:

* "The Episcopal Church in the U.S. has come to a reasonable conclusion and consensus that gay and lesbian Christians are full members of this church and that our ministry to and with gay and lesbian Christians should be part of the fullness of our life..."

* "I firmly believe that evolution ought to be taught in the schools as the best witness of what modern science has taught us. To try to read the Bible literalistically about such issues disinvites us from using the best of recent scholarship..."

* Her prayer, she reveals to the magazine, is "That we remember the centrality of our mission is to love each other. That means caring for our neighbors. And it does not mean bickering about fine points of doctrine..."

And just what "fine points of doctrine" might Bishop Katherine be referring to? Well, how about the exclusivity of the Christian gospel itself?

In answer to the question. "Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?", Bishop Katherine replied, "We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box."

I'd like to say that with such penchants for heresy, for championing immoral causes, and their indifference to the authority of Holy Writ, that "God help the Episcopalians." But, I guess, they prefer to go on like they are...without His interference.

Western Journalism 101: Playing Lapdog to the Left

From Thomas Sowell over at National Review Online comes this strong protest of the MSM's increasing political partisanship. An excellent read about an ominous situation.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

He Who Would Be King Needs a History Lesson

I have praised Prince Charles' enlightened views on architecture over on The Book Den last year. It's too bad I cannot complement Britain's Crown Prince on his understanding of history, religion and common sense. Case in point? Charles' comments yesterday about Islam being a religion of brotherhood and peace that could solve the world's problems if devoutly followed.

Would somebody please hand the Prince a copy of G. K. Chesterton's poem, Lepanto? It might be just the thing to recall the Prince to some semblance of reality about the religion of Mohammed.

Way Beyond the Joke: Kerry's Demeaning Attitude Towards the Military

The Associated Press has uncovered John Kerry's answers to a 1972 questionaire that reveal last week's joke suggesting that the American military was filled with losers belies an attitude Kerry has held for decades.

Indeed, those 1972 answers (given to garner support from a Massachusetts peace organization) show that Kerry opposed a volunteer Army because it would be dominated by the underprivileged, be less accountable and be more prone to "the perpetuation of war crimes."

Here's the story.

Does God Even Exist?

A study released (appropriately enough) on Halloween suggests almost half of all Americans are unsure of the very existence of God. This, of course, is a radical departure from our history and its impact is as profoundly tragic as can be imagined.

Abortion. Euthanasia. Homosexuality starring in mainstream culture. Epidemics of sexually transmitted disease. Politicians garnering votes by declaring themselves for research on human embryos. Dramatic increases in violent crime. Entertainment icons with lifestyles more immoral than Caligula.

There is a reason for these things. And this survey points the finger at just what it is.

As it is written in Romans 1: 18-32, (That's a book in the Bible, by the way)...

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them."

Regarding Tuesday's Elections: Cal's Counsel

Conservatives who are upset that Republicans haven't done enough during their 12 years in control of the House and Senate and nearly six years in control of the White House need a slap in the face.

Republicans may have controlled all three branches of government, but conservatives haven't. If conservatives believe enough has not been done to advance their agenda, let them work to elect more conservatives, not hand control of Congress over to a party controlled by far-left liberals who have no intention of moderating their tone or watering down their beliefs after the election...


Read the entirety of Cal Thomas' remarks about Tuesday's elections right here.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Fr. Pavone's Pep Talk Before Kickoff

Fr. Frank Pavone talks to American Christians about voting responsibilities in this informative, encouraging audio clip.

Against Abortion in Another Life: Jesse Jackson

Jesse Jackson has, in the last couple of decades, faithfully followed the Democrat Party's line on abortion; namely, decry it (in principle) as a tragic, difficult matter but (in practice) champion abortion rights as a wonderful, indispensable part of our Constitutional heritage.

Therefore, Jackson has fought vengefully against every measure that might, in some degree, protect fetal life. He has forcefully opposed even parental notification and informed consent laws. He has defended partial birth abortion and agreed that coercive penalties be meted out to those medical professionals whose consciences cannot allow participation in such heinous acts as abortion.

Jesse Jackson has become the penultimate pro-abortion advocate.

But...it wasn't always that way.

(By the way, the link to this Jesse Jackson article came from Jill Stanek's recent commentary about Jackson's opposition to the South Dakota abortion ban. You can read Jill's article here.)

The Chicken Game

John Stossel has a column here which will confirm your worst suspicions about government foolishness and labor union ineffeciency.

And, oh yes; it may well put you off from ever eating a chicken sandwich again.

The "Evangelical Climate Initiative" -- Blinded By Bad Science and Funded By Bad Money

Lindsay Randall has written a short but quite effectual review of the forces behind the "Evangelical Climate Initiative," that misdirected, naive and scientifically unsound complaint about global warming that was signed by several religious leaders early this year. Randall's piece brings to the forefront the pro-abortion money that would like to remain hidden. Here is a part of her fine expose'.

...In February, 85 prominent evangelicals signed the "Evangelical Climate Initiative" (ECI), which is the "Christian" response to the supposed global warming problem. The document claims that "climate change is happening and is being caused mainly by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels." The ECI predicts that "millions of people could die in this century because of climate change." Today, with a total of 97 signatures, this initiative includes mega-church pastor and author Rick Warren, former President of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) Leith Anderson, and Christianity Today editor David Neff.

Interestingly, one of the biggest donors to the ECI is the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, known for its unabashed and overt support for abortion. The willingness of the Hewlett Foundation to contribute $475,000 to an evangelical initiative begs the question, "Why?" Would the Hewlett Foundation fund an evangelical initiative without trying to further its own agenda in the process?


A recent report, jointly released by the respected Institute on Religion & Democracy (IRD) and the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & Liberty (AI), posits that the real motivation behind the Hewlett Foundation's contribution is to promote population control and abortion-on-demand.


The Hewlett Foundation states on its Web site, "As populations have grown in size and affluence, so too has the negative impact on the environment caused by their greater fossil-fuel use. The real energy crisis is not that the world will run out of fossil fuels, but that the capacity of the environment to absorb pollution will be - and in some case, has already been - exhausted."


The IRD/AI paper argues that the initiative's failure to address population control indicates that "...the ECI signers seem naively unaware that such dystopic interpretations of human activity are often tied to and derived from campaigns to reduce the human population. This connection is not a coincidence. Population control is official doctrine for many environmental groups just as it is in certain circles of the U.N." It goes on to say that "...these Evangelical leaders who in good faith associated themselves with the ECI are being exploited by organizations that not only deny their biblically-based value system, but hold such beliefs in contempt..."

Lindsay Randall's isn't the only excellent expose' of the "E.C. I." found on the Concerned Women for America website; there's also this article by Pamela Wong.

And, of course, the most important response to the "E.C.I." was compiled by the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, a coalition of religious leaders, scientists, academics, and others who desire to speak and serve as biblical stewards of God's creation. This group rates scientific facts and responsible moral actions ahead of leftist mantras about global warming and therefore, their voice deserves a much wider hearing than it has received. I've blogged about this in the past but I'd like to provide to you again links to the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance and to the PDF file containing their Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action.