OK, let me be upfront, my cynical levels are off the chart. I know that I’m supposed to drop into prayer mode for the victims of the Boston massacre yesterday at the annual Marathon held on Patriots’ Day, but my ability to be shocked by news headlines has wained. After my initial emotions ran their quick course, my thoughts turned to how the “left” would respond by demanding more be done in the way of giving Obama more power and removing more rights from Americans.
Over the past couple of weeks surrounding the debate over the Second Amendment, those of us on the right have put forth the reason that we have the Second Amendment in the Constitution: It was there so we could protect ourselves from the rise of a tyrant.
The left keep telling us Second Amendment is there so we can continue hunting. They act truly magnanimous in making these claims. But the Second Amendment was not given because the Founding Fathers loved hunting. It was given because they hated tyrants, specifically the tyrant they were living under in King George.
The Founding Fathers understood human nature for what it was. We are all fallen individuals with sin natures and any one of us, given the lack of restraint while in power, could rise to the level of a tyrant. This was the reason for putting the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers wanted us to be able to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. Tyrants arise when there is no restraint. The Second Amendment is part of that restraint.
This truth about the Second Amendment also negates those who are arguing that the Founding Fathers had no idea about the fire-power weapons have in our current day and age. This is a moot point, since the Second Amendment was given to protect us from the fallen, human heart in power. The power of the weapon is moot since it is the heart behind the weapon that makes it dangerous. Therefore if the government has rocket launchers, so too should the people, so that they can protect themselves from their leaders.
Another problem we have coming from the left is that our country and nation has been teaching the “inherent goodness” of humanity for so long that to suggest that someone as benevolent as Barack Hussein Obama could become a tyrant is just outside the pale of normal collective thought. How could such a nice man do something so wicked and evil like suppressing his own people?
He could do so because he already is doing so. Just his position and strong support of a woman’s ability to have her unborn child killed shows he already has the heart of a tyrant. The real reason for abortion, 99 percent of the time, is a matter of convenience on part of the woman who is pregnant. Obama supports this position and even goes further in his statements than the law allows, arguing for the right to kill a child of a botched abortion. His statements and positions on abortion show us his heart and show us that he is not beyond suppressing one class of people for the rights of another class of people.
By the way, a right is not a right if it means removing the rights of another person in order for that right to exist. Obama is more than willing to ignore the rights of the unborn for the convenience of the mother, and have tax payers pay for this convenience. I don’t know his personal reasons for taking this position, but I do know that it does show the heart of a tyrant. Any man or woman in power willing to wipe out a portion of society for the benefits of another part of society shows that they have tyrants hearts.
Therefore when we bring up the possibility that Obama could become a tyrant, we need not go far for evidence. He has already proven himself to be a tyrant in the sense that he will suppress a class of people simply for convenience sake.
This is why we need the Second Amendment in tact. It’s not there to protect our right to hunt or to shoot targets. It is there to protect our freedoms from such men as the president. If we allow this freedom to be removed, it will only embolden the tyrant that is within the president right now. The only thing keeping him from seizing the controls of this country more so is the possibility of retribution from the masses. He needs that warning and needs the reminder. He is there to serve the people, not the other way around.
One last point, the tyrant within doesn’t exist just because he is a Democrat. It exists in all of us and we need the restraints that are placed in society to keep tyrants from ruling all of us. This is why we are to pray for the president, not only that he makes wise decisions according to God’s wisdom, but also so that the Holy Spirit will restrain him in his sinfulness. We would need to pray the same thing if a Republican was in office. There are tyrants in all of us and we all need restraint.
It should be an axiom for Christ followers that while our faith should inform our politics, our politics should never inform our faith. But this particular author, as is often the case with Christian Democrats, has made an a priori commitment to supporting the Democrats and then seeks to find faith-based reasons to justify it. But here’s the uncomfortable truth such individuals must confront: while it’s certainly true that not every Republican is worthy of our support as Christians, any individual who runs under a platform that justifies the legal slaughter of innocent life made in the image of God is an unacceptable choice. Period.
Reading the list of supposed justifications for why Christians can turn a blind eye towards this outrageous offense, I imagine these Democrat apologists writing similar essays in the 1930s of how the Nazi Party was doing great things for infrastructure and social welfare programs in Germany. “Never mind that killing of the Jews thing,” they would essentially argue. That’s the underlying current of the Christian Democrat defense — “never mind the killing of the unborn beings made in God’s image thing.” That’s not to say that Democrats are Nazis, of course. It’s to say that there is something dreadfully wrong with your priorities and moral compass when you try to find ways to excuse genocide. As a believer, I cannot imagine justifying that to God.
It’s interesting, isn’t it? Christian Democrats used to find ways to justify their support of a party that promoted slavery. Now they do the same for a party promoting abortion. Tragic.
Beyond that, how lost we are as a culture when Christians in name will actively, vocally, and apparently proudly support a man (Barack Obama) who just a few short months ago called on his country to rebel against God’s own definition of the institution of marriage? This isn’t about how we treat those who practice homosexuality. This is a case where Barack Obama declared that God is a bigot — or at least that His prescription for what constitutes family is bigoted. Jesus affirmed marriage as a union of a husband and wife; Barack Obama suggested such a narrow description was discriminatory. Both can’t be right.
Please read the rest here.
That is my prayer for Tuesday’s election. I pray that it goes pro-life. I hope the LORD raises up candidates that will stand for the unborn and not just those who have that position, but will actually do something about it. It’s not good enough that a candidate has pro-life views if they do not do something about it. That is why I was so upset with George W. Bush. He had both houses of Congress and did nothing. I forgive him. But having a pro-life stance and doing nothing about it are two different things.
That is my hope for this coming Tuesday. Those who hold to pro-life views would win and those who do not hold those views would lose. I pray for that both on the national and local level. After all, as I’ve said before, does a candidate truly stand for us if he will to allow the slaughter of the most innocent in our society? The candidate that does that is truly a candidate of death and their hands are bloody.
The Bishop E.W. Jackson speaks out against the Democratic Party, saying that it is antithetical to those of us who are Christians. I’ve been saying it for years, how can the party that cherishes killing the unborn have anything to do with the Light of the World? How can the party that recognize two men in an unholy relationship have anything to do with the ONE who said it was an abomination to Him? How can the party the cherishes every level of sinful and rebellious behavior have anything to do with the One who submitted Himself to the death of the cross out of humble obedience?
The Democratic Party and Christianity are incompatible with one another. Christians should leave the party and not vote for those who stand with them.
Here is the Bishop E.W. Jackson saying the same thing from his perspective as a black Christian. I truly am encouraged by his words. Even though he is speaking mainly to black Christians, he reminds us that we need to stand with God, not some political party or candidate. God is the One who will take care of us, not the fallen government. Speaking of which see the second video in which Dr. Barbara Beller points out just how ridiculous it is for us to think that Obamacare will take care anyone at all.
I know from the title that those on the Left will immediately brand me a hater and go right to hating me and my beliefs, but that is the world we live in. They will also try to silence me since I don’t fit into their model of what is “acceptable.” Again, this is the world where we find ourselves. We live in a world that does not value truth, or those who stand for it, because the world loves darkness rather than light.
Regardless of these realities, those of us who know the truth need to be willing to stand for the truth and stand for Christ who represents that truth. This is all the president of Chick Fil-A Dan Cathy has done. He said his beliefs are that marriage is between one man and one woman, and this has the Sodomite Left in a tizzy( Sodomite is the biblical term for those who practice the sin). Never mind that the Bible, which is the center of Cathy’s faith, condemns sodomy and never mentions marriage in any context other than it being between one man and one woman.
You know the firestorm that has errupted since that was made public. We have mayors from Chicago, Boston and Philadelphia telling Chick-fil-A that they are not welcome and others on the right planning a Chick-fil-A day! I’m almost tempted to drive up to Albuquerque on Wednesday just to participate.
What I believe we are seeing are those of us who are conservative/Christian/moral, etc., getting fed up with the LEFT and their absolute intolerance of our beliefs and values. We are tired of being excoriated for following principles found in Scripture, for having beliefs that don’t lead to immorality, for having to hide the truth that sin is sin, and homosexuality is one of the biggies when it comes to God’s word. We are tired of moderate Christians (at best) embracing those who are gay and living that lifestyle, telling them that they are OK that way, and ignoring the truth of God’s word. We are tired of gays trying to redefine marriage so they can live their morally bankrupt lives. We are tired of pastors who refuse to speak to the issue because they are more concerned with being liked, than speaking the truth. (See Voddie Baucham’s piece on “Gay Is Not the New Black” for an example of one of many pastors willing to stand for the truth).
I know, gay people are people too. I’m not calling for witch hunts, or cross burnings, or lynchings or any such Democratic polices of the past. What I’m calling for is a right to believe in God’s truth and to be able to declare with the freedom we have been given by our Creator. He has made known His truth to us, and it gets old seeing those who call themselves “Christian” capitulating to values and morals that are outright condemned in Scripture. It’s time to stand up with Cathy and others like him who are tired of having the Left define what is right and wrong. Remember, the Democratic party, which is the champion of the Gay Movement, is the same party that approved the lynchings of blacks in the South. It is the same party that was on board with segregation, and now on board with the killing of innocent children. I will not join hands with such people either openly or privately. As a Christian, we need to stand up against that which is sinful, both openly and privately. This means being willing to stand against that which Scripture condemns.
That is the beauty of Scripture. Let it declare the truth of these realites. In other words, we don’t have to invent words or phrases or any other such thing in order to declare the truth. We are simply to declare what it says. That is sufficient, the Bible is sufficient for these things.
In my title, I wrote that I’m anti-gay. This is true, not because of some level of meanness I may possess toward gay people. It is true because the Bible is anti-gay. As I, and others, have pointed out many times, there is not one single passage of Scripture that says anything positive about homosexuality. Every passage that speaks to the topic condemns it outright. Let the word dwell richly in our hearts so we can see what is sinful and what is not.
The Bible is also anit-adultery, anti-lying, anti-stealing and anti-idolatry. We are to stand against all these sins as Scripture does. The Left has so artfully cast the argument to make us think and feel like we are being hateful when we speak the truth. This, of course, is the lie of the Left. They have made that which is an abomination to the LORD seem normal and many who claim Christ as our Savior have stood quietly by and said nothing out of fear of their condemnation. This must stop. We must continue to fight the good fight and declare the truth, even when that truth is not palatable to the LEFT. Am I anti-gay? Yes, I am. But that is because Scripture is as well. Where Scripture condemns, we need to stand with it. Where it embraces, we embrace as well.
We are not being mean spirited by doing so. Only as truth is proclaimed will God use it to change the hearts and minds of the lost. Being bullied by the Left into silence is actually being mean spirited because we are capitulating to the lies of Satan. We have done this for far too long. We must not be afraid of declaring the truth.
I know there are many who continue to speak the truth and have so for many years. But to those who sit by silently, and try to have gay friends so as to seem open minded, you are the ones that are truly mean spirited. You value your comfort and desire to be open-minded and accepting more than you value the gay persons eternal salvation. That is what is truly mean spirited. You have your salvation and because you desire comfort over confrontation, you are not willing to share the truth with others so that they too can have salvation as well. Any who do this need to repent, and lovingly speak the truth.
UPDATE: I got the following from Facebook friend Maria:
Kathy Stahlman Hildebrand -
There are those of us who define all sin as God defines it in Scripture. And we freely admit that we are sinners, as is declared in Scripture a…nd borne out in our lives. We count on the finished work of our Redeemer for redemption, and we hate the sin (in ourselves more than anywhere else) that sent Him to the cross and that jeopardizes our fellowship with Him. Other people do not look to Scripture for their definition of sin, and some refuse to believe there is such a thing at all. It’s logical, I guess, if they don’t believe in God, they don’t believe it is possible to sin against Him.
But what has ALWAYS seemed odd to me is how this word HATE is assigned selectively to anyone who is against a few specific sins but not against other sins. That is, if I think it’s wrong to lie or cheat, no one accuses me of “hating” liars and cheaters. I merely say what they (or I, when I do either of those things) are doing is wrong. All the politicians and Hollywood stars that think murder is wrong (unless the victim is still in the womb), do I accuse you of hating murderers? No. I don’t. HATING a person has nothing to do with it. The pro-life movement is a prime example. It is now energized and driven very much by those women who have experienced the grief of having an abortion. They do NOT hate the women who struggle with this sin; they are there to tell them they don’t have to struggle any more.
UPDATE NUMBER 2: I should have already included this, the Chick-fil-A song by comedian Tim Hawkins:
Yes, I’m extremely disappointed that the Supreme Court rule that Obamacare is nothing more than a tax increase. That being the case, the Court said that Congress has that right, so the country was just handed the largest tax increase in history.
I also recognize that there are those who do not have insurance and need it, however, I don’t believe this was the way to go. Since we are on this trajectory, now is time for Republicans to formulate a plan to end abortion through Obamacare. How? Simply by using this bureaucratic monster to delay women in getting abortion.
When a woman seeks to get an abortion, require that she must sign up for a three month course that teaches her the full implications of abortion, both biologically and psychologically. This way, she is not duped into believe that the life in her womb is just ”pregnancy material.”
Once this course has been completed, then she needs to apply to a special board of health officials that will interview each candidate for the surgical procedure to take place. Then, she must file the appropriate paper work in triplicate… submitting it to all the appropriate branches of Health and Human Services, or department heads, who must read the forms, agree that she is a candidate for aborting, and grant her the service. At this point she must apply to another committee for an assigned and appropriate physician to perform the procedure and once he has passed all the legalities to perform the abortion, then he can do so.
But wait, there is more. Since the abortion doctor must also have the right number of nurses, they must apply for permits and be authorized to help the physician in this procedure for THIS patient, and once that is approved, then they too can assist in the procedure.
Once all this is done, the child, who is now 18 years old and graduating from high school, can be aborted… only by then, it will be too late.
Honestly, I’m trying to find some empty silver lining in all this. I really am shocked that it was Justice Roberts that sided with the liberals on this issue. What an absolute disappointment.
Good news on the pro-life front. Michael J. Fox, who has been a proponent of using embryonic stem-cell research in the hunt for a cure to Parkinson’s disease has admitted that a cure will more than likely come from another source, besides stem-cell research.
Last week Fox revealed he now believes that other lines of research hold more promise. “There have been some issues with stem cells, some problems along the way,” Fox told ABC News. “An answer may come from stem cell research but it’s more than likely to come from another area.”
The rest of the story is found here.
As you may recall, Fox was a proponent of using stem-cell research in finding a cure for the disease that he has to the point that he was in a political ad to help elect Claire McCaskill to the U.S. Senate back in 2006. He purposely did not use his medicine for the filming of the commercial in order to add drama. He was heavily criticized for doing just that and then those who criticized him were then demonized. I wrote about it here (hard to believe I have posts going back to 2006).
While I was critical of him then, I’m glad to see his coming around to a more pro-life position on the matter. And no, I wasn’t one of the ones that were demonized for my criticizing him. My readership is far too small. Please note, that his turning from the pro-abort crowd’s position to the pro-life position was based upon science. Those on the pro-life side have known since this debate began that the stem-cell research being done was not likely to produce any results and hasn’t shown a lot of promise (George Bush showed this to be true in his book as well, even though he approved a certain number of embryonic stem cells to be used for research.) Hopefully, those on the left will give up their pursuit of such research.
The following are from Townhall.com and I got the idea from Jim Stanek. But here are some Sunday comics to give you something to think about. I will comment on them if I feel there is a need to.
I believe this one says the most. What is the count? Every day on average some 3,000 babies lose their lives because of this insane belief in women’s rights? The thought really weighs heavy on me that they are so into killing babies.
Again, another foolish notion from the Left. We have to have identification to buy beer, drive a car, work, fly, etc., but to vote? Nope! Somehow this is just too much burden on the poor and the Democratic Party. After all, having their dead voters show identification is just too much.
Time for Newt to get out of the race. All he is doing now is giving the race to Moderate Mitt.
It wouldn’t hurt if these guys would focus a bit more on the economy. I would love it if they would focus on abortion in a real way. But they will not. All they are going to do is give us talking points so they are pro-life, and then sit in the White House for 4 years and do nothing, just like Bush did.
For those of us who are pro-life, we had a roller coaster ride with Susan G. Komen Foundation last week. We cheered as the Susan G. Komen Foundation pulled funding for Planned Parenthood. This is due to the fact that the Planned Parenthood offers no services such as mammograms to women, pretty much just abortion services. This has been pointed out time and time again by the opponents of PP. They are in the business of killing babies, not helping women.
Because of this truth, those on the right have been after the Komen Foundation to pull funding, since it has been shown that having abortions leads to higher risk for breast cancer. If you are going to say that your organization’s purpose is the health of women, then it seems very contradictory to that purpose to support another organization that causes an increase in the disease you are trying to wipe out. In view of that, the Komen Foundation pulled funding from Planned Parenthood, or so we thought.
But alas, the Komen Foundation couldn’t stand up against Big Abortion. The power’s that be, namely liberal, feminist women, cannot have anyone dissenting and pressured the Komen Foundation into returning its funding. Komen caved.
This should not surprise us. The Susan G. Komen Foundation, while seemingly very noble in it’s pursuit, is only seemingly noble. We tend to forget that these organizations are not born out of that which is moral or biblical, therefore they have no grounding in that which is righteous, namely, God’s word. Therefore when the pressure began to build from every left-wing institution against Komen, there was no foundation of truth to keep them from being swayed. Komen exists and thrives on popular opinion. It has never made strides in its quest based upon doing what was right, but doing what was expedient.
In the first part of the week, they were merely giving in to us on the right in pulling the funding in the first place, it wasn’t a stand in true righteousness. So when the left threw its hissy fit, Komen had to give into the intolerant leftl. In other words, the lack of a moral foundation led them to be blown by every wind of doctrine, even though one breeze that blew them this week was grounded in God’s word.
This is true of every organization that is not grounded in God’s word. Doing what right is not the cause of so many organizations, doing what is expedient is. The organization may begin with altruistic motives, but altruistic motives never last when they are not grounded in truth. To the world that fails to see these contradictions, Komen can continue on seemingly looking out for the best interest of women with their right hand, even though the left hand is killing future women and leading to the defeat of the very cause in which it was started.
I like what Mark Steyn had to say about it as well:
Liberals take the same view as the proprietors of the Dar al-Islam: Once they hold this land, they hold it forever. Notwithstanding that those who give to the Foundation are specifically giving to support breast cancer research, Komen could not be permitted to get away with disrespecting Big Abortion. We don’t want to return to the bad old days of the back alley, when a poor vulnerable person who made the mistake of stepping out of line had to be forced into the shadows and have the realities explained to them with a tire iron. Now Big Liberalism’s enforcers do it on the front pages with the panjandrums of tolerance and diversity cheering them all the way. In the wake of Komen’s decision, the Yale School of Public Health told the Washington Post’s Sarah Kliff that its invitation to Nancy Brinker to be its commencement speaker was now “under careful review.” Because God forbid anybody doing a master’s program at an Ivy League institution should be exposed to anyone not in full 100 percent compliance with liberal orthodoxy. The American Association of University Women announced it would no longer sponsor teams for Komen’s “Race for the Cure.” Sure, Komen has raised $2 billion for the cure, but better we never cure breast cancer than let a single errant Injun wander off the abortion reservation. Terry O’Neill of the National Organization for Women said Komen “is no longer an organization whose mission is to advance women’s health.” You preach it, sister. I mean, doesn’t the very idea of an organization obsessively focused on breasts sound suspiciously patriarchal?
As Kate Sheppard, the “reproductive rights” correspondent of Mother Jones, tweeted triumphantly, “Overheard in the office: ‘Come at Cecile Richards, you best not miss.’”
Indeed. If you strike at the King, you must kill him. If you merely announce that, following a review of grant-eligibility procedures you’re no longer in a position to make your small voluntary donation to the King, your head will be on a pikestaff outside the palace gates. By Friday morning lockstep liberalism had done its job. All that was missing was James Carville to declare, “Drag a hundred-dollar bill through an oncology clinic awareness-raising free mammogram session, you never know what you’ll find.” After 72 hours being fitted for the liberals’ cement overcoat and an honored place as the cornerstone of the Planned Parenthood Monument to Women’s Choice, Komen attempted to chisel free and back into the good graces of the tolerant: As Nancy Brinker’s statement groveled, “We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women’s lives.”
Congratulations! Planned Parenthood certainly raised Nancy’s awareness. I wonder what color ribbon that comes with? Black and blue?
In other words, don’t mess with Big Abortion. If you disagree with them, you will pay, especially if you happen to lack any moral standing for righteousness. The Komen Foundation was built with good intentions, but good intentions are not grounded in Scripture. Since they have no moral grounding in Scripture, they are subject to blow with the winds of political correctness as we saw this past week. They will bow at the altar of feminism, holding hands with the left, and sacrifice more children on the altar of sexual freedom, even though doing so leads to defeating them in their overall purpose of providing health care for women.