President Obama, Abortion, and Infanticide

Obama not only supported Abortion, but Voted 4 times for Infanticide

Abortion Survivor Asks: What Will You Answer?

Ad by Susan B. Anthony List

American Culture: Christianity, Brad Pitt, and Freedom of Speech

Kneel or Perish

Secularists steamroll over cultural landscape, threaten Christian dissent 

By Ed Vitagliano

(American Family Association Journal)

 

In a letter to the editor of the News-Leader newspaper in Springfield, Missouri, Jane Pitt wrote that she was a Christian and planned to vote for Mitt Romney in November. They were comments that initially attracted very little attention. 

Pitt cited Romney's pro-life views and said he shares her "conviction concerning homosexuality." The letter stated that President Barack Obama "is a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same sex marriage." 

That's when the roof blew off the house. It was made public that Jane Pitt is the mother of popular actor Brad Pitt, and a storm struck with all the angry contempt that has come to identify the intolerant left.

There were the usual news media stories accusing Jane Pitt of being "anti-gay," but the worst sort of vitriol assaulted her via Twitter. Crude sexual epithets were used to describe Pitt, she was told to partake in sexual acts in the most vulgar of ways, and outright death threats were hurled at her. 

Jane Pitt has since refused to comment any further on the episode, becoming yet another voice silenced by those on the secular left who hate Christianity. Mission accomplished.  

Cultural totalitarianism

All in a day's work, as the old expression goes. But what happened to Jane Pitt is not the result of recent work but that of a decades-long assault against the Christian foundations of our nation. 

It is not simply an effort to carve out a niche for atheists and other secular rebels who exist within the otherwise religious landscape, according to Peter Hitchens, conservative author of The Rage Against God  and the brother of the late, outspoken atheist Christopher Hitchens.  

Instead, he said, this secular offensive is "a dogmatic tyranny in the making."  

Peter Hitchens is British, and since the U.K. and the rest of Europe are down the secular road just ahead of the U.S., it is worth heeding the warnings of Christians who are already experiencing the beginning stages of this tyranny.

  

Elizabeth Kendal, an international religious liberty analyst and advocate in the U.K., said in a recent blog that Christians in the U.K. and the U.S. are on the verge of seeing the triumph of a cultural totalitarianism that will drive believers to the fringes of a once free society. Already, she said, Christians are being vilified, fired and "dragged through the courts" for resisting the new ideology. 

"These British and American Christians are not being dismissed, expelled, sued, fined, struck off and closed down because of anything they have done," Kendal insisted. "Rather, it is because of what they could not do: generally they could not affirm that all cultures, beliefs or lifestyle choices are equally good." (Emphasis in original.) 

It is an all-hands-on-deck rebellion against Almighty God in an attempt to replace His laws with a man-centered, morally relativistic ideology that demands that all rivals kneel or perish. 

Hostility toward faith

Hitchens and Kendal are not "the-sky-is-falling" alarmists. Christians are under fire in the U.S., although legal battles are still being fought and all is not lost.

For example, in 2010 Jennifer Keeton, a Christian enrolled in a graduate counseling program at Augusta State University in Georgia, objected to counseling gay and lesbian clients in a manner that affirmed the homosexual lifestyle. 

School officials threatened her with expulsion if she didn't change her views. In order to remain in the graduate program, Keeton was told she could go on probation and embark on a "remediation" plan that included attending gay pride events and sensitivity training.  

When she refused, Keeton was expelled. She sued ASU, but this summer a federal district judge ruled in favor of the university.

A similar case involving Eastern Michigan University also wound up in court. Julea Ward, a graduate student in that school's counseling program, encountered problems when she was assigned a potential client who wanted help regarding a same sex relationship.  

Ward, a Christian, said her religious convictions would not allow her to affirm such relationships, but that she was willing to refer the client to a counselor who could.

The client complained, and EMU officials gave Ward an ultimatum: She could remain in the graduate program only if she changed her religious beliefs.  

Ward sued, and initially a federal district judge ruled in favor of EMU. However, in January the 6th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and ordered a trial to commence. 

The appellate court stated, "A reasonable jury could conclude that Ward‚' professors ejected her from the counseling program because of hostility toward her speech and faith."  

Government interests

Even those Christians who own their own businesses are finding themselves squeezed by an oppressive ideology that permits no dissent.

Continued

Abortion, Supreme Court, and Roe v. Wade

Supreme Court Ruling Admits Roe v. Wade Abortions Can Be Bypassed

End Abortion on Demand; Help Congress Overturn Roe v. Wade Video

56 MILLION BABIES CONDEMNED TO PAINFUL DEATHS

A BOLD, AGGRESSIVE CAMPAIGN

A simple piece of legislation to bring the “legal” definition of life in line with the biological, in effect, bypassing Roe v. Wade

Sign petition to help end abortion-on-demand once and for all.

Dear Concerned American,

I've prepared a brief but urgent video regarding breaking news in the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade in our nation.

Please take a moment to listen to my urgent message by clicking here.

After you listen, please sign the petition to finally end abortion on demand.

Sincerely,

Rand Paul,
U.S. Senator (R-KY)

Thank you for briefing me on the National Pro-Life Alliance's campaign to pass a Life at Conception Act which will reverse Roe v. Wade and end abortion on demand.

The Supreme Court itself said in Roe that once Congress establishes the personhood of unborn children, they must be protected by the 14th Amendment.

Since the Supreme Court is waiting for someone to tell them who the law counts as persons, let’s not wait another minute!

To help in the battle for a Life at Conception Act, please sign the petition and donate if you can.

Congress Fails Ban on Sex-Selective Abortion

House Fails to Pass Sex-Selective Abortion Ban

Planned Parenthood endorses Barack Obama

Planned Parenthood is under fire for a string of undercover videos being released that show the organization clearly has no problem aiding pregnant women in their quest to abort babies if it’s not the preferred gender they desire. Planned Parenthood says they opposed abortion based on sex-selection... what’s Barack Obama say? (hint: he wouldn’t support a partial birth abortion ban and doesn’t want his kids ‘punished with a baby’). ~Glenn Beck

What is it New Yorkers love about Mayor Bloomberg? He tells them where they can and cannot smoke, what they can and cannot eat, and now how much soda they’re allowed to drink. They’re totally fine with all that -- but if someone tells them they can’t kill a baby inside the womb, well then, it’s a woman’s body & her choice! ~Glenn Beck

Newsmax:

House Fails to Pass Sex-Selective Abortion Ban

Thursday, 31 May 2012 04:32 PM

By Todd Beamon

Despite contentious debate in the U.S. House on Thursday, legislation to ban sex-selective abortions could not muster the two-thirds support necessary to pass, according to Fox News.

The final vote was 246-168 — 30 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass the Republican-backed proposal, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.

"There has never been a more pro-abortion president in the White House,” Franks said. “I'm astonished the leader of the free world would fail to protect the unborn from being aborted on the basis of sex."

Under the bill, carrying out an abortion based on the gender of the fetus would have been a federal crime. The measure targeted the aborting of female fetuses. The practice is more common to such countries as India and China, where sons are strongly preferred, but is thought to take place in the U.S.

The White House and Democratic lawmakers objected to the bill out of concern that it could end up subjecting doctors to strict punishment, suggesting the law would be difficult to follow.

"The administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.

Still, GOP lawmakers cited the opposition as further proof of the administration's abortion advocacy.

"It is inconceivable to me how our Nobel Prize-winning president can refuse to protect little girls from the violence of sex-selection abortion," Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said on Thursday.

Supporters characterized the vote as a sex-discrimination issue just as Democrats are accusing Republicans of waging a war on women. A day before the vote, Planned Parenthood attacked GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney as planning to "deny women the right to make their own medical decisions."

The legislation would have made it a federal offense, subject to up to five years in prison, to perform, solicit money to perform, or coerce a woman into a sex-selection abortion. Bringing a woman into the country for such a procedure also would be punishable by up to five years in prison.

Franks and others say evidence of sex-selection abortions exist in the United States among certain ethnic groups from countries with a traditional preference for sons. The bill notes that countries like India and China, where the practice has contributed to lopsided boy-girl ratios, have banned the practice.

Bible Study, Dinner, Traditions, and the Supreme Court

 Bible Study, Dinner, Traditions, and the Supreme Court

Bible Study and Dinner Talk Question: How might our heritage of liberty compare to the “birthright” of American families? Worth noting is this lesson from forgotten history—the ancient example of Biblical parent Rebekah, who guided her son Jacob to rescue the sacred birthright from destruction.

Isaac told his son Esau to bring him venison, and then he would give his son a blessing. Isaac, aged, blind, and dying, prepared to extend the birthright blessing to the eldest son, as was the tradition. Rebekah, however, arranged that Jacob, the younger brother, ended up receiving the birthright blessing. Rebekah’s motives might appear on the surface to be unjustified. But she had reasons, and there have been numerous instances since, in which the eldest did not receive the birthright, because of unworthiness.

Selling the Birthright, by Matthias Stomer, 1640

A study of this Bible story in Genesis reveals some sensible reasons behind Rebekah’s actions. First, the Lord had told Rebekah that Jacob was to be the birthright son. Second, many years before Isaac was to bestow this great, eternal blessing on one of his sons, Esau had shown contempt for it by selling it to Jacob for a hot meal of pottage. Dallin H. Oaks observed, “Many Esaus have given up something of eternal value in order to satisfy a momentary hunger for the things of this world.” Third, Esau married girls who were unbelievers, in direct disobedience to his parents. Fourth, Esau persisted in wickedness, without remorse.

Surely, over the years, Isaac and Rebekah had sorrowed together a great deal over Esau’s unworthy behavior. Lest we judge Rebekah too harshly, she had not forgotten that the Lord had revealed to her the destiny of the righteous Jacob. As parents do, she must have spent sleepless nights wondering how this would come to pass, especially as time paced inexorably toward the appointed moment. Perhaps by some miraculous means, the Lord would have brought about the prophecy, if Rebekah had had more faith. But at length, the moment of decision came. Isaac was dying, and perhaps he himself saw no way to change the tradition, knowing of no precedent. Nevertheless, once Isaac discovered that he had blessed the younger son, he continued to ratify the blessing. Rebekah was willing to take full responsibility for ensuring that her revelation from God was fulfilled.

In America today, our heritage of liberty might be compared to our sacred birthright. Are we losing that heritage? If so, who is taking it, and what can be done about the pottage replacing it?

What do epic heroes do? They save or rescue nations and peoples. But epic heroism can also take place in a home, within a family. In rescuing the sacred blessings of her family, Rebekah did a heroic act. Are today’s parents confident that their children and grandchildren can enjoy, unfettered, the hard-won heritage of freedom bequeathed by previous generations?

In today’s society of shifting values, most parents have serious misgivings about the future of their families. In the Biblical type-scene, the birthright blessings were in danger of falling into immoral hands. So it is today. When did the birthright begin to slip from our grasp? There is a specific event that breached the protective dike, so to speak.

In 1963 the United States Supreme Court banned prayer and Bible-reading from public schools. Trying to avoid the “establishment of religion,” the Supreme Court actually “prohibited the free exercise thereof,” and inadvertently established atheism as the state religion. Countless teachers and students have been punished for praying or reading the Bible in public schools.

When God was removed from the schools, so was accountability. Over time, as Constitutional principles have been replaced by philosophies of despotism, the slope toward the abyss of moral relativism has slickened, and slipping down it has accelerated. The destructive moral decline in our society can be traced back to the enforcement of atheism. What are the consequences of this enforced system of beliefs?

•    The theory of evolution has been taught as fact almost exclusively in the schools. Equal time to examine creation or intelligent design has been denied.
•    History is no longer taught in the schools. Christopher Columbus, George Washington, and Abraham Lincoln are no longer honored by national holidays in most schools.
•    Fornication and abortion are taught as acceptable behavior. Nevertheless, sexually active girls are three times more likely to take their own lives than those who are abstinent. Boys are eight times more likely. Two thirds of teens who have committed moral transgression wish they could go back to innocence again and desperately wish they had waited.

•    Widespread abortion is considered by some government leaders to be a national cost-saver

So, What Is to Be Done?

In the rising generation will be found tomorrow’s leaders. They are our hope for the future. They are epic heroes in training.  That training, also known as character education, is not offered in schools, because the best training manuals, containing the word of God, are banned in the schools. Nevertheless, the pattern for our solution is found in the banned books. Biblical prophets were trained at home, by their parents, or in Samuel’s case, by a priest.

Parents can rescue their families from the onslaught of unholy influences. It is simpler than you think. It doesn’t have to be formal instruction. Think of it. Rebekah’s heroic act revolved around a meal. Just gather for dinner daily and teach with scriptural epic stories, like Jesus did.

Copyright © 2011 by Christine Davidson

C.A. Davidson is author of Epic Stories for Character Education, a collection of scriptural epic stories told in easy, dinner-talk style. Additional dinner talk topics for leadership training of young adults: book reviews, sociology and culture, world history, heritage, stress management, and family traditions are provided in the Dinner Talk for Champions, a character education journal, and may be found at http://www.epicworld.info