Choice is Murder


Life is one long sequence of innumerable choices, linked together by the results of those choices. With every decision we make, we are denying dozens of other possible options. Generally, that’s not a problem. Our daily choices don’t usually have negative repercussions. The word “choice” has become such a common part of our vernacular that we don’t even notice when it is being used against us. Of course I’m talking about “choice” in terms of politics, more specifically, abortion.

The Left has used the word “choice” to describe abortion for quite sometime now: “a woman’s choice,” “reproductive choice.” What Liberals will not do is describe what “choice” is. The choice they are speaking of is the choice between having a baby, and not having a baby. The means by which you do not have a baby is abortion. Abortion is the termination/execution of an infant in the womb. Choice!

According to Town Hall: “MSNBC host Thomas Roberts, in a recent segment regarding North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory’s decision to sign pro-life legislation into law, lambasted the bill as restricting women’s access to ‘choice providers,’ AKA abortion clinics.”

This is the exact quote from Roberts: “So there is only one that currently meets that benchmark which means that this is going to be the only clinic in the state for women in North Carolina for seeking out choice…How do you respond to that with such a dramatic closure of access to choice providers for women?”

Words are extremely important because they are our most effective way to convey meaning, to describe the world around us and to describe what we believe to be the truth. The scary part about words is that they can be twisted to disguise something ugly and disgusting as something mundane and possibly even beautiful. Think about it: “reproductive choice” is the same thing as “abortion,” but it sounds so much better, almost nice.

The word “abortion” has a negative connotation, probably because the act of clamping off limbs, and removing brains with a sharp suction device is a negative thing. So, because the word has gained such a bad reputation, the Left–slowly and methodically–began to use the word “choice.”

In my experience, people don’t have the need to cover something up if its not ugly. If something is lovely or beautiful–or even neutral–one does not often have to hide it. For example, Liberals are widely unsupportive of laws that would require a woman to have an ultrasound prior to having an abortion. Why is this? If “choice” is such a wonderful thing, if it is a right of women, why fight so hard against an ultrasound? If it is not a life, who cares?

Liberals care, because they know deep down inside that abortion is murder, and that 78% of women who have an ultrasound before having an abortion decide not to go through with it. In addition, fewer women having abortions mean less money in their pockets.

Bottom line: We need to be wary of the way in which the Left uses words. The Left is cunning, and they will do whatever it takes to manipulate the public into accepting abortion–excuse me, choice–as an average, run of the mill procedure.

Choices have consequences. Don’t be led to believe that the “choice” to kill an infant doesn’t have consequences. Choice is murder.

Posted in Politics2012 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Journalist Fired For Anti-Obama Column


Albert Camus said: “A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.”

One of the base principles upon which our country was founded was freedom: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press. Freedom, in its most ideal form, sustains our society on multiple levels. Specifically, freedom of the press turns stone into glass, so that we can live in a more open and transparent society. The endangerment of any freedom is a step toward tyranny, but the endangerment of press freedom is the first step. And once one step is taken, the object in motion will continue to move forward.

To me, freedom of the press means that journalists should pursue the truth at any cost, regardless of their own political orientation. Political journalists should be allowed–by the government, but also by their publishers–to write pieces that peel back the layers of Washington, revealing the muscles and organs that allow our government to function. If there is a sickness inside the body of our country, it is the journalists duty to show it to the world.

Unfortunately, many mainstream media publications are religiously Leftist, only allowing pieces that line up with their agendas. If a journalists steps outside the bounds of the Liberal agenda, they are locked away. Just such a thing is happening right now.

According to Rare: “The Chattanooga, Tenn. Times Free Press fired writer Drew Johnson for penning an op-ed entitled “Take your jobs plan and shove it, Mr. President: Your policies have harmed Chattanooga enough,” despite the fact that the editorial was widely read.”

The Times Free Press claims that Johnson was fired because he violated the Times’ headline writing policy.

I read the article, and found nothing offensive in its content. If you’d like to read it for yourself, here is the link:

So, what do we have here? We have a journalist/op-ed columnist who wrote a scathing article against the President, and was fired. We have a publication that claims he was fired because he violated headline writing policy. Something doesn’t smell right. The fact that Drew Johnson was fired so soon after penning his negative Obama piece, and the rather ridiculous reason given to explain his termination gives me the impression that this is not what it appears to be. Johnson was fired because he went against the agenda.

What does that mean for us? It means we are living in a nation where freedom of the press is being beaten to death, slowly but surely. This is obvious to those who have even the weakest observational senses, but it always bears reminding.

The press is supposed to be our friend. What happens when it turns against us? We become the enemy. Freedom of the press is a form of freedom of speech. With press freedom slowly melting away, what is next on the agenda? What will go first: freedom of religion, assembly, or speech? Once one domino has been knocked down, the others must fall as well.

If we do nothing, we must prepare to fall.

Posted in Politics2012 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Disgusting Lie Called “The War On Women.”


Walter Lippmann said: “When distant and unfamiliar and complex things are communicated to great masses of people, the truth suffers a considerable and often a radical distortion. The complex is made over into the simple, the hypothetical into the dogmatic, and the relative into an absolute.”

We live in a society in which we are often forced to dilute our intellect to accommodate the lowest common denominator. We live in a world in which complex ideas are chipped away into terribly simple ones because the general public is unwilling to stretch their brains in order to understand something outside their small, carefully constructed world.
Unfortunately, this dumbing down often leads to misunderstandings. There are so many important issues in our world that need to be thought about carefully, one of which is the oft mentioned “War on Women.” The Left in the United States constantly bring up the GOP’s supposed “War on Women.” 
The Liberal talking point is that Conservatives want to “tell women what to do with their bodies,” that they want to “force women back into the kitchen.” There are numerous lines used by the Left to try to legitimize this invented war. And because our society lowers every issue into the gutter of the “lowest common denominator,” lines are all we hear: talking points. The Left capitalizes on this, using slogans and small truth-twists to manipulate the masses.
In the following segment, I will break down both sides of the “War on Women.”
What Liberals say:
1. Conservatives want women to revert to 1950’s stereotypes, serving men as masters.
2. Conservatives don’t want women in control of their healthcare, they want men in control of womens’ healthcare.
3. Conservatives couldn’t care less about the suffering of rape victims and victims of incest.
4. Conservatives want to force upon women the burden of an unwanted child.
5. Men shouldn’t have any say in abortion law.
Those are the basics that you will hear coming out of the mouths of Liberals in reference to the “War on Women.”
What Conservatives say:
1. Conservatives want to protect the lives of unborn children, which means abolishing abortion, except in cases in which the life of the mother would be in jeopardy. In that case, it is up to the woman, the doctor and the family to decide what to do.
2. Conservatives believe that life begins at conception because all of the genetic material exists upon the union of egg and sperm. After conception, what is developing inside a woman’s body is a human being. This human being is developing in the same way that a flower seed develops after being planted and watered. A sprout emerges from the seed, but remains underground until it can breach the surface. Does the fact that the flower hasn’t yet breached the surface mean that it isn’t alive? Does it make it any less of a flower? No, it is simply in one stage of development. We, as human beings, are continuously in stages of development; a two year old isn’t as developed as a ten year old. Does that mean that a two year old is less human? No. So why is an infant inside the womb considered less human that one outside of the womb? Why do seconds matter? Why is one doctor in prison for severing the spinal chord of an infant seconds after birth, and another doctor is praised for severing the head of an infant just before birth? Is a flower not a flower until it blooms?
3. Conservatives do care about the suffering of victims of rape and incest. However, we also care about the suffering of the unborn. The fact that an infant is a result of an atrocious crime doesn’t make it any less human, it doesn’t make it terminable. In addition, Conservatives don’t believe that taking the life of an unborn child will change history; it will not erase the pain of the crime committed against a woman. Finally, only 6% of abortions are a result of rape, incest, and threats to the lives of mothers, 94% are elective. The Left wants us to believe that 99% of abortions are because of trauma. That is what is known as lying.
4. Conservatives don’t want to force a child upon anyone. There are plenty of couples that would happily adopt an unwanted child. Just because you don’t want a child doesn’t mean you are allowed to kill it.
5. As a man, I have just as much of a right to discuss abortion as a woman does. I said it. I don’t have to cut off my own hand to know it’s a bad idea; I don’t have to be black to stand against segregation. The human mind is capable of an understanding and an empathy that is far reaching.
This “War” is a lie. The issue of abortion and contraception is exceedingly complex, and to reduce it to sloganeering and talking points is dangerous and irresponsible. But that is what the Left wants. The Left knows that the lowest common denominator will respond to slogans. The Left also knows that if abortion were to be talked about intellectually, and in an open arena, they would lose the debate. They need slogans and chants, talking points and screaming spokespeople.
Don’t allow the truth to be radically distorted. Don’t be afraid of reality. The “War on Women” is an absolute lie, and if we sit back and accept the dumbed down version of life, simply because we are too lazy to think, we are contributing to the slaughter of millions, and the further lowering of our national intelligence.
Posted in Politics2012 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Obama Praises Religion: Guess Which One



In a recent speech, President Obama said: “Throughout our history, Christianity has contributed to the character of our country, and Christian-Americans, and their good works, have helped to build our nation – and we’ve seen the results. We’ve seen those results in generations of Christian immigrants – farmers and factory workers, helping to lay the railroads and build our cities…Every day, Christian-Americans are helping to shape the way that we think and the way that we work and the way that we do business. And that’s the spirit that we celebrate tonight – the dreamers, the creators whose ideas are pioneering new industries, creating new jobs and unleashing new opportunities for all of us.”

If I told you that the quote above was absolutely accurate, would you believe it? If I said that it was slightly altered, would you believe me? If you believe that it is, in fact, altered, in what way would you say it was changed? Do you think that Obama would go out of his way to praise Christians and Christianity at large? If he did, do you think the reaction would be positive?
Allow me to answer some of these questions. The quote is not wholly, word-for-word accurate. If you want the original quote, replace the word “Christianity” with “Islam,” and the word “Christian” with “Muslim.” The speech Obama gave was a tribute to the religious holiday of Ramadan. Barack Obama praised Islam and American Muslims, as well as the contribution they have made to our country.
There is nothing inherently wrong with what Obama said, but that’s not the point. When you first read the altered quote, did it shock you? It would have shocked me. If the most Liberal President in history (or any President at all) had taken to the stage to praise Christians and Christianity, can you imagine the backlash he would have received from the Press? You don’t even have to imagine, because we all know, it would be monumental.
So, what can we glean from this? The Press is suitably happy with the remarks made by the President regarding Islam. Had they been about Christianity, the reaction would have been shouts of “Crucify him!” This means that our Press is biased. Duh, right? Again, not quite the point.
What we can learn from this is that our Press is not only actively biased against Christianity, but passively biased as well. Active bias is obvious; anyone can point out an attack. But passive bias is much more dangerous; not everyone can point out an insidious incursion. Not everyone can call a passive assault. And there’s the danger. No one notices the undertow.
More often than direct, aggressive assaults, we are subject to passive, around the back incursions. We are losing the fight. Our culture is slowly becoming a wasteland. Our society is making Christianity into the enemy, and we are letting it happen. The very fact that Obama’s praise of Islam makes no waves, whereas if he were to praise Christianity, he would be subject to a tsunami of condemnation shows just how far we’ve fallen.
Beware of passive assaults. Satan loves to pretend to be an agent of light, shining so brightly that we don’t notice every single other light being consumed by darkness. When his light burns out, and we are left in utter blackness, it will be no one’s fault but ours.
Posted in Politics2012 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment