Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Pray and Act: Three core principles

There is a website called Pray and Act which is calling people to stand for three fundamental principles:
  1. The sanctity of human life
  2. The sacredness of traditional marriage
  3. Preservation of religious liberty.
The first one has to do with the sixth commandment, "Thou shalt not murder." There are seven Hebrew words for killing, but the word used in this command (Exodus 20:13) seems to convey the idea of intentional, premeditated murder. 

Those who try to argue that unborn children are not yet persons are using the same kind of argument that Nazi's used to justify killing Jews or that some in America once used to justify enslaving or killing black people. The scientific fact is that a baby is biologically human. Both Jewish and Christian tradition are very clear: Thou shalt not take
innocent human life!

The second core principle has to do with the marriage of a man and a woman. Contrary to the sophistry of some gay rights advocates, Jewish and Christian tradition are exceptionally clear: God considers sex between two people of the same sex to be such a profoundly abominable behavior that he threatened nations' existence because of it (Leviticus 18, 20). 
Note that the issue is about behavior, not orientation! This cannot just be dismissed as though the Old Testament is no longer relevant since condemnation of this behavior is repeated in the New Testament (Romans 1, 1 Cor. 6:9-10, 1 Tim. 1:9-10). 

The third core principle has to do with the preservation of religious liberty. One of Barack Obama's appointees, Chai Feldblum (a lawyer) has argued that "we should...not tolerate private beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely affect LGBT people." She also said,
"There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win…”  

To give one example, after same-sex marriage was legalized in Massachusetts, gay sex began to be taught as an acceptable lifestyle in the grade schools--to children as young as second grade! When one family wanted to have their child opt out, the school refused. They went to court and the judge determined that since same-sex marriage was public policy, the school had an obligation to teach it and parents
did not have the right to opt out. The judge didn't actually say "screw the Constitution" but he might as well have said it.

In recent years, Christians psychologists have been sued. Christian business owners have been sued. Christian organizations have been sued. Some Christians have even been jailed--all because sexual freedom is beginning to trump religious freedom in America. And this is happening now! Just wait until same-sex marriage is national public policy!


I understand why non-Christians might vote for those who do not stand for the three principles above. What I absolutely cannot understand is how people who claim to be serious about their Christian or Jewish faith, can in good conscience vote for someone who does not uphold the above principles.


I know there are some Democrats who stand up for the first principle--the sanctity of human life. I'm not aware of a single one who has faithfully supported the other two. Are there
any Democrat politicians who stand for all three of these core principles? I'd really like to know.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

"If you are not a Leftist, why are you voting Democrat?"

If you read no other article this week, please read, "If you are not a Leftist, why are you voting Democrat." I wish I could make it required reading for anyone who intends to vote this November.

If by whiskey...

Wow! What a moving speech. I'm surprised Mr. Sweat didn't become President!  (hat tip: Kevin I).

Monday, September 27, 2010

"Broader Internet Wiretap Authority"

According to Fox News,
The Obama administration is developing plans that would require all Internet-based communication services -- such as encrypted BlackBerry e-mail, Facebook, and Skype -- to be capable of complying with federal wiretap orders, according to a report published Monday.
Regardless of whether this is a good idea or a bad idea, if the Bush administration had been considering it, the Lefties would be swarming out of the woodwork to condemn it as the beginnings of totalitarianism. Will they do the same now that their man is in office?

Don't hold your breath. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Democrats and the redistribution of wealth

I think the video clip below says a lot about the Democratic Party in today's America--in their own words. They are about socialism and the redistribution of wealth. One problem (among many) with the redistribution of wealth is the way Democrats seem to envision "the poor."

I don't think I have ever heard a Democrat make a distinction between 1) the temporary poor who are poor because they are just starting out in life, 2) those who are poor because of crushing life circumstances of no fault of their own, 3) and those who are poor because of their own irresponsibility and bad behaviors.

We need to be brutally honest about this. There are many people who have or had opportunity for education but were just too lazy to study. Others are just too lazy to work!

Some people are just so obnoxious they can't keep a job because they will not get along with others. Some people are so rebellious they simply will not submit to reasonable employer requirements. Some people are so unethical they actually steal from the employer who pays them! Still others will not stay clean and sober--and will not seek or accept help.

The problem is that Democrats seem to treat "the poor" as if "the poor" is some category of moral virtue. You simply cannot treat all poor people as if they constitute a single group--especially not a single moral or virtuous group.

It is delusional think that all poor people are basically good and would be productive members of society if they were just given a chance. It is just not true. This should have been clear from the numerous low-cost government housing projects that turned into dangerous slums.

When you take money (i.e. steal) from hard-working people in order to give that money to bums, it is not only morally wrong, but it disincentivizes the hard workers and enables the bums!

This is precisely what well-meaning Democratic redistribution programs have done. They have destroyed entire generations of people by making them think that the government (i.e. other hard working taxpayers) owes them a living whether they work for it or not!

I hate to be harsh, but the Democrats have turned some of these unfortunate people into a human version of farm animals--just waiting for the next feeding at the government trough. Democrats have destroyed these people's incentive to work and their sense of self-worth.

Contrary to Jim Wallis who says on the video clip below that redistribution is the gospel, nowhere in the Gospels does Jesus teach government redistribution of wealth. In fact, St. Paul even goes so far as to say that if a man will not work he shouldn't eat (2 Thess. 3:10)!

It is important to emphasize again that there are many good, hard-working poor people who are poor through no fault of their own, for example, due to crushing medical bills or other uncontrollable life circumstances. Frankly, I want my government to take care of people who cannot take care of themselves (Ezekiel 34) and I want my government to give some breaks to good, hardworking people who are in poverty through no fault of their own (and I am quite happy to pay taxes for it). I suspect that most Republicans feel the same way.

But I want government to at least try to make a distinction between honest, hardworking people who need help, and lazy bums who will not work.

Giving government handouts to all of "the poor" just because they poor does not help the poor. It enables them and hurts them by keeping them and their children in poverty.

So why would Democratic politicians who know all of this, continue in policies that actually hurt the very people they are supposedly are trying to help? Could it be because Democratic politicians get much of their power by keeping these people at the government trough?

Monday, September 20, 2010

Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer

I recently finished reading Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer (611 pages!). Meyer is an advocate of Intelligent Design which includes the idea that science itself demonstrates that life is way too complex to have originated without a designer. The author is a geophysicist and biologist with a Ph.D. in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge.  His expertise is origin-of-life research.

Meyer begins with a discussion of the history of origin-of-life research and the discovery of DNA.  He goes on to discuss what he calls the “molecular labyrinth” and explains (in reasonably understandable language) the incredibly complex world of DNA, RNA, proteins, translation, transcription, etc., and how this relates to origin-of-life research.

Meyer explains and refutes virtually every scientific origin-of-life theory that has been proposed. He shows how Intelligent Design explains origin-of-life from a purely scientific perspective. Meyer also takes on those who attack Intelligent Design for not being a science. Not only does Meyer show that Intelligent Design is science, he shows that if attacks against Intelligent Design were applied consistently, they would exclude other sciences like geology and physics for example as well.

The book is absolutely outstanding. I’ve read several books on Intelligent Design and this stands head and shoulders above the rest. It is no wonder that the world-renowned atheist, Anthony Flew, changed his mind and came to the conclusion that atheism is scientifically impossible.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Where are all the moderate Muslims?

According to the Associated Press,
A Seattle cartoonist who became the target of a death threat with a satirical piece called "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" has gone into hiding on the advice of the FBI.
Seattle Weekly editor-in-chief Mark D. Fefer announced in Wednesday's issue that Molly Norris' comic would no longer appear in the paper.
Fefer wrote that the FBI advised Norris to move, change her name and wipe away her identity because of a religious edict issued this summer that threatened her life.
What I want to know is, where are all the "moderate Muslims" who are offended by their religion being hijacked?

When a nutty charismatic preacher in Florida announces his intention to burn copies of the Koran, Christians all over the country denounce him. But when when the threat of violent response by Muslims is so great a nutty Supreme Court Justice suggests limits on the First Amendment, "moderate Muslims" are silent.

When a prominent Imam suggests that there will be a worldwide violent response if he doesn't get his way in building a gigantic mosque/community center near ground zero--moderate Muslims are silent.


Now, when a reporter has to go into hiding because of credible threats against her life by radical Muslims, the Muslim community is silent. 


In fact, almost every week there are stories of Muslims all over the world kidnapping, imprisoning, raping, robing, torturing or slaughtering non-Muslims (or even other Muslims). And--with the exceptions of a few lone voices--"moderate Muslims are silent.


Where are all the moderate Muslims? We need to hear from you. Not just a few lone voices, but in great numbers. We need to see you marching in the streets protesting against the radicals who "hijack" your religion. Otherwise, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that "moderate Muslims" are just the silent majority who either approve of the radicals' violent agendas, or are just too scared to speak out. 


If the majority of "moderate Muslims" really silently approve of the radicals' agendas, America may be in more trouble than most people realize.


If the majority of "moderate Muslims" in America (!) are really just too afraid to speak out, then America may be in more trouble than most people realize.

Thomas Sowell on nuclear disarmament

Please take time to read this short but outstanding article on nuclear disarmament by Thomas Sowell.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Promoting Islam in public school

You've got to see this! After the ACLU, the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, American Atheists and similar groups have successfully removed every remnant of Christianity from the public schools, here is a public school actively promoting Islam and the ACLU et al. does absolutely nothing! Apparently the separation of church and state was really just about the separation of Christianity and state.

The First Amendment and burning the Koran

I can't get over the fact that a Supreme Court justice (Breyer) would seriously suggest that burning the Koran may be analogous to shouting fire in a crowed theater and would, therefore, not be protected by the first Amendment.

Taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean that speech against any group that becomes violent enough, is no longer protected by the First Amendment. So if you publicly denounce the Crips, Bloods, MS13, drug cartels--or even some homosexuals--knowing that they may react violently, your speech would no longer be protected under the First Amendment!

So I guess whatever group you belong to, if you become violent enough you can remove your opponents' right to criticize you under the Constitution!

It is truly scary to think that someone with such limited intelligence could get on the Supreme Court.

Burning the Koran might not be protected by 1st amendment?

Burning the Koran might not be protected by the First Amendment.  If Michael Moore or Bill Maher had said this it might be dismissed at the rantings of a Leftist kook, but when a justice on the Supreme Court says it--you know that our fundamental freedoms are on truly thin ice when in the hands of liberals who think the Constitution can be interpreted in light of modern standards of political correctness.

Justice Breyer suggested that burning a Koran could be like shouting fire in a crowded theater. Really? Would preaching Romans 1 in San Francisco also be outlawed due to the fact that homosexuals may riot?  Speech that can be banned simply because an opposing group may react violently is not freedom of speech at all.

Rather than addressing the serious problem of Muslim violence, a liberal Supreme Court Justice would prefer to gut our Constitution!

If you read only one article this week, please read this one.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

School districts cutting budgets? Really?

In the world of public school education it seems like no matter what the problem, the Teacher's unions and education establishment would have you believe that the answer as always, always more and more of your money. In an excellent article on Townhall this morning, John Stossel writes:
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan recently claimed:
"Districts around the country have literally been cutting for five, six, seven years in a row. And, many of them, you know, are through, you know, fat, through flesh and into bone ... ."
Really? They cut spending five to seven consecutive years?
Give me a break!
Andrew Coulson, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Educational Freedom, writes that out of 14,000 school districts in the United States, just seven have cut their budgets seven years in a row. How about five years in a row? Just 87. That's a fraction of 1 percent in each case.

Stossel goes on to show that money is not the problem. Lack of competition is the problem. Please take time to read Stossel's short but excellent article

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Repealing "don't ask, don't tell"

There is a lot of talk in the news these days about "don't-ask-don't-tell." Have you noticed that the discussion is always framed as if the issue was repealing don't ask don't tell?

When you repeal something, you go back to the way it was before. For example, when prohibition was repealed, we went back to the way it was before prohibition was passed.

So if we really "repealed" don't-ask-don't-tell we would go back to the way it was before. In other words, we would go back to the pre-Clinton days when  no gay people were allowed to serve in the military. Of course that is not what gays want.

So gay rights advocates don't really want to repeal don't-ask-don't-tell. They just frame the debate in these terms because it would not be nearly as politically effective to be honest and say,
"We were never satisfied with Bill Clinton's "don't-ask-don't-tell." It was all just a ruse to get the camel's nose in the tent. What we really want is more and more and more rights. We want gay rights to trump even the first amendment! Not even churches, religious schools or missions should be allowed to exclude openly practicing gays or even preach against homosexuality. In fact, we will never be satisfied until all public opposition to homosexuality is squashed like a bug--through intimidation, the law or even violence if necessary."
Not all gay people feel this way, of course, but this certainly seems to be the agenda of many gay rights advocates.

The point is that argument about "repealing" don't-ask-don't-tell is a dishonest political ploy designed to win the argument by framing the debate. Its a little like having a debate over whether President Obama should stop beating his wife or not. If you allow the other side to frame the debate, you've already lost.

To my knowledge, no one has even challenged the way this debate has been framed.

"Religion of Peace" members kill 18 over planned Koran burning

After hearing that a small church in America was planning to burn some Koran's, members of the "Religion of Peace" burned down two Christian missionary schools and 20 government buildings, leaving 18 dead and 80 wounded (Rediff News)!

The news that a small church was planning to burn some Koran's brought condemnation from the media, the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House, NATO, and even the Vatican. Do you think that even one of these groups will now condemn violence mentioned above?

Don't hold your breath.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Michelle Obama pushes restaurants for more healthy foods

According to the Associated Press,

First lady Michelle Obama is prodding the nation's restaurants to add more healthy options to menus, label those items more prominently and market nutritious foods to kids.
Speaking to the National Restaurant Association on Monday, Mrs. Obama pleaded with restaurants small and large to take a little butter or cream out of their dishes, use low fat milk and provide apple slices or carrots as a default side dish on the kids' menu.

I think the first lady would do well to get her husband to stop smoking and to stop pushing for the normalization of behaviors that lead to AIDS before she lectures the National Restaurant Association on healthy practices.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Obama administration sides with Saudis over 911 victims?

According to Creeping Sharia:

Today the Obama Administration filed in the Supreme Court a document that expressed the Administration’s decision to stand with a group of Saudi princes and against the right of American citizens — 9/11 family members — to have our day in court. Let there be no doubt: The filing was political in nature and stands as a betrayal of everyone who lost a loved one or was injured on September 11, 2001
We are deeply dismayed by this decision, filed by the solicitor general of the United States in response to the Supreme Court’s February 23, 2009 invitation for the government to express its views in the 9/11 families’ request to appeal a portion of the case to the Court. The Administration’s filing mocks our system of justice and strikes a blow against the public’s right to know the facts about who financed and supported the murder of 3,000 innocent people. It undermines our fight against terrorism and suggests a green light to terrorist sympathizers the world over that they can send money to al Qaeda without having to worry that they will be held accountable in the U.S. Courts for the atrocities that result.

Read the rest at the Creeping Sharia blog.

Record increase in poverty on Obama's watch

According to the AP/Washington Times:
The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.
When President Obama promised change, I don't think this is what those who voted for him had in mind.

Friday, September 10, 2010

"The Eternal Flame of Muslim Outrage"

In Townhall today, Michelle Malkin writes:

Shhhhhhh, we're told. Don't protest the Ground Zero mosque. Don't burn a Koran. It'll imperil the troops. It'll inflame tensions. The "Muslim world" will "explode" if it does not get its way, warns sharia-peddling imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Pardon my national security-threatening impudence, but when is the "Muslim world" not ready to "explode"?
At the risk of provoking the ever-volatile Religion of Perpetual Outrage, let us count the little-noticed and forgotten ways.

Michelle continues by giving examples of the constant drop-of-the-hat Muslim outrage over all kinds of perceived offences (Please read the rest of this excellent article in Townhall).

The truth is that pure Islam is an imperialistic, domination religion that seeks to bring the entire world into submission to Allah--peacefully if possibly,but violently if necessary.

While there are certainly "moderate" Muslims, the careful observer will note that Muslim outrage is NEVER over the fact that so-called radicals are hijacking their religion.

"New Study Halves the Rate of Ice Cap Melt"

Here's a shocker: A study published in Nature shows that scientific models on the melting polar ice caps were calculated incorrectly:

Climate Change: New Study Halves the Rate of Ice Cap Melt - Ecocentric - TIME.com

Wouldn't it be a good idea to get this stuff straight before we destroy the U.S. economy on hair-brained cap-and-tax schemes based on "the-sky-is-falling" scenarios?

Thursday, September 09, 2010

Beth Sheeran would not back down

At Spokane Falls Community College, Beth Sheeran created flyers and a sign that gave the following statistics about those who are aborted
Nine out of 10 Down’s Syndrome babies;
Sixty million female babies in Asian countries; 
One out of two African-American babies are aborted

The administration tried to shut her down and threatened members of a Christian student group with expulsion (the administration is no doubt filled with the same kind of liberals who preach about the need for tolerance!)

Beth wouldn't back down. Read what happened.

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Destroying Korans vs. destroying Bibles

The media, the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House and even NATO and the Vatican have all condemned pastor Terry Jones for his planned Koran burning on September 11.

Where was all this outrage when the U.S. government was confiscating and destroying Bibles?

More on International Koran burning day

Robert Spencer has a good perspective on the International Koran burning day:
Eisenhower: <em>Der F�hrer's Face</em> song could endanger troops -- no, wait... - Jihad Watch

Termination of Christian psychologist

ADF Alliance Alert � Minneapolis settles lawsuit over wrongful termination of Christian psychologist

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Man arrested for defending his family

As George Grier noticed MS-13 gang members coming on his property he ran inside telling his wife to call police. Mr. Grier grabbed a gun, stood in his door and asked them to leave. When they threatened to kill him, his wife and his babies, he fired some shots into the ground--knowing that the police's "shotspotter" technology would bring the police in a hurry.

He was right. The police came........and arrested George Grier and charged him with felony reckless endangerment with depraved indifference to human life!

This is more barbaric than the old west. At least in the Old West a man could protect his family.

International Burn a Koran Day

The Dove World Outreach Center of Gainsville, Florida (with about 50 members) has attracted international attention with its plans to hold an "International Burn a Koran Day" on September 11 this year.

Their website says their purpose and goal "is to get people to stand up." I'm all for standing up but you can take stand by teaching and preaching the truth. To burn the Koran may make some kind of symbolic statement but it really accomplishes nothing. The pastor apparently thinks he is warning people of the danger of Islam. What he is really doing is putting unnecessary road blocks in the way of reaching Muslims for Christ.

The proposed Koran burning has been widely condemned. Someone from the State Department even called the plan un-American.

Un-American? Really? It may be misguided, but un-American?

When public funds were used to display a crucifix in urine under the guise of "art" liberals defended that as freedom of speech.

When an "artist" displayed a picture of the virgin Mary spattered with dung that was also defended on the basis of free speech.

When a homosexual group advertised their annual perverted Folsom Street Fair using a picture of the Last Supper in which Jesus and the disciples were dressed in S&M outfits with sex toys on the table, no liberals labeled that as un-American?

So why is it that when Christian symbols are desecrated, liberals praise such hatred as bold stands for freedom of speech, but when some small church pastor decides to burn some Korans, he not only faces outrage by the Left, but the condemnation rises all the way to the Pentagon, the State Department and even the White House!

Monday, September 06, 2010

Iran paying Taliban to kill Americans

According to an article in the Sunday Times, Iran is not only helping to fund the war against America in Afghanistan, "Iran is paying bonuses of $1,000 for killing an American soldier and $6,000 for destroying a U.S. military vehicle."

Iran is paying to murder your sons, daughters, brothers, sisters and friends!

Shouldn't this be considered an act of war?

Saturday, September 04, 2010

"Hey pretty girl, do you want to drink this?"

On Monday in Vancouver, Washington, someone came up to Bethany, a 28 year old woman and said, "Hey pretty girl, do you want to drink this?" as she threw acid in Bethany's face. In an interview last night, Bethany said that the acid immediately burned through her clothes and she could hear and feel the acid sizzling through the flesh on her face.

Bethany is hearing impaired and if she had not purchased sun glasses only moments earlier--an act she attributes to divine intervention--she might have ended up both blind and deaf.

Now, a 41 year old woman has been attacked with acid in Arizona (KSDK).

So while the victims of the acid attack could spend the rest of their life living with the deformity and may never get over the trauma (although Bethany's faith may get her through this), their attackers, if caught, will (at most) get a few months in prison with color TV, an exercise room, free food and medical care--all at taxpayer expense, of course. Then they will be free go on with their life. Their victims, on the other hand, may never be the same.

It hardly seems fair.

Many people have condemned the Old Testament legal code requiring "an eye for an eye" as being primitive and barbaric. I suspect that most people in the ancient world would say that we are out of our minds and that it is our system that is barbaric. Their legal system showed no sympathy for the criminals. Our legal system has no sympathy for the victims.

One other point. Bethany is white and her attacker was reportedly black. If the situation had been reversed the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of this world would have spent weeks decrying this racist hate crime. But since Bethany is white, Jackson and Sharpton will likely say nothing, the media will likely not mention race, and I would be surprised if the attacker--if found--would even be charged with a hate crime.

If only we would take Dr. King seriously and start judging people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. Evil people come in all skin colors.

UPDATE: September 16, 2010.  Yes, evil comes in all skin colors and in this case the skin color is white! A police investigation showed the the "acid attack" on the Vancouver lady was a big hoax! I hope there is a stiff legal penalty for making false racist accusations like this. I don't believe in hate crimes, but if we are going to have hate crimes anyway, it seems to me that making heinous, false accusations against an entire race should be considered a hate crime.

Obama: Committing to time-honored values

Recently President Obama said, "This Labor Day we need to recommit ourselves to our time-honored values."

Really?

Like America's time-honored value of marriage between one man and one woman?

Like America's time-honored opposition to abortion?

Like America's time-honored support of the Second Amendment?

Like America's time-honored commitment to capitalism and personal responsibility?

Like America's time-honored tradition of honoring God in the public square?

The President is apparently pretty selective about which time-honored values he wants to honor. In fact, it seems as though the very essence of being a "progressive" is to throw off these "time-honored values."

Friday, September 03, 2010

Dr. Khaled Al-Haroub on the rights of religious minorities

Like a breath of fresh air is the honesty from Dr. Khaled Al-Haroub, a Muslim researcher at Cambridge University:
"We Keep Increasing Our Religious Demands Vis-a-Vis the West, While Refusing to Meet Even a Few of the Demands Made by Religious Minorities Living among Us"

"We must take stock and do some soul-searching by asking ourselves the opposite question, [namely] how people in a Muslim country would react if the Christians wanted to pray in a mosque on Sunday due to an insufficient number of churches. Or let's ask an even simpler [question]: What is the reaction in most Arab and Muslim countries to the demand of religious minorities - not only Christians but also Hindus and Sikhs - to build their own houses of worship? In practice, our countries exhibit hypocrisy and a double standard. We keep increasing our religious demands vis-à-vis the West, while refusing to meet even a few of the demands made by religious minorities living among us." (See Jihad Watch).

Rather than constantly bowing to these demands in the name of tolerance or political correctness, it would be nice if the Left would join the Right and start demanding that we see some basic human rights in some of these Muslim countries.

A summer of recovery?

Democrats in general and Joe Biden in particular promised us that this would be a summer of recovery. Well, summer is over and unemployment statistics were released today. Unemployment went up to 9.6% (didn't the Democrats promise us that if they spent hundreds of billions of stimulus dollars the unemployment would be limited to8%?). As I understand it, 283,000 jobs were lost this summer. Some recovery!

Why would anyone vote Democrat this November?

Thursday, September 02, 2010

Hamas murders four Israelis

On the eve of peace talks between Palestinians and Israelis, Hamas murdered four Israeli citizens and wounded two others.

I'm sure the nations of the world will react in outrage, the United Nations will, of course, demand an investigation into the murders (from how high in the Hamas organization did the orders come?) and the media will now spend weeks condemning these senseless killings.......

No, wait. That would only happen if Israeli's had murdered Palestinians! When Jews get murdered, the world doesn't seem to care.

For months Palestinians in Gaza fired thousands of rockets on innocent Jews in living in Israeli villages while the world community reacted with a collective yawn. But when anti-Semitic activists tried to run a legal Israeli blockade designed to prevent these weapons from being shipped to Gaza, the world community reacted with outrage, the UN demanded an investigation and the media ran stories for weeks!

And none dare call it antisemitism!

Wednesday, September 01, 2010

"parasitic human infants" and "anchor baby filth"

According to the Washington Post:

A man with an explosive device entered the Discovery Communications building in downtown Silver Spring on Wednesday afternoon and has taken a security guard hostage,

The Washington Post story points to an online posting by someone who had issues with the Discovery channel...though their is no indication yet as to whether the hostage situation is related to the online post. That manifesto demands, among other things, that the Discovery Channel do the following:
Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy
human children...

All programs on Discovery Health-TLC must stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants...

Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution
and the anchor baby filth that follows that.

Saving the Planet means saving what's left of the non-human Wildlife by decreasing the Human population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies!

Develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences about how food production leads to the overpopulation of the Human race. Talk about Evolution. Talk about Malthus and Darwin until it sinks into the stupid people's brains until they get it!!
There you have it. Malthusian science and Evolution as the savior of humanity! I guess this is what happens when Environmentalism becomes a religion--the Environment above all else. St. Paul once wrote about those who worship and serve the creation rather than the creator. He said that, "claiming to be wise, they became fools..." (Romans 1:22, 25).