Pro-Life is Pro-Science

In today’s culture, our universities, and public schools are controlled by the secular left. This, unfortunately, is also true for most Catholic and Protestant schools, perhaps not to the extent of public schools.  Anything having to do with religion or faith is verboten. Scientism rules the day at any of our learning institutions. Scientism is simply the belief that only the hard sciences can give us knowledge.  J.P. Moreland, a noted philosopher and theologian, and an expert on scientism says that scientism is not a doctrine of science, but of philosophy. First of all, it is self-refuting, that is, it commits suicide the minute it is uttered; it cannot be proven by science.  So, in effect, the proponents of such a view have failed to prove their own theory.  A recent book by J.P. Moreland, “Scientism and Secularism,” makes the case that scientism is not only self-refuting but not coherent.  Chapter six of this book starts with “These days, if an accepted scientific claim comes into conflict with an excepted non-scientific claim from another discipline (such as theology), which claim must be put aside?  In our culture, the scientific claim always wins.  Appealing to science always settles the issue.”

Now what has this to do the argument in support for the protection of the unborn and the dignity of human life?  Well, plenty. You see the secular educators, and that is probably over 90% of all our teachers, love to brag that they are pro-science and those of us who support the unborn are anti-science. Our view, they would say, is based on religion and opinion.   However, they ignore the elephant in the room.  It has been a scientific position that the unborn are human and that life begins at conception.  This is not new; it has been known for a very long time. Click herefor more information.  Here are a couple of quotes from the best scientific minds on this issue:

Dr. Jerome Lejeune, “Father of Modern Genetics” and discoverer of the cause of Down’s Syndrome, stated, “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion . . . it is plain experimental evidence.”

Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at Mayo Clinic, stated, “Byall the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

Now, who is anti-science? It’s breathtaking to see how easily the scientism of our culture and our universities choose to ignore their own declaration that science is the only way of knowing anything.  Even without science, you can easily understand that life begins at the first stage, conception, followed by an embryo.  All of us started that way.  Life has stages.  To say that you’re not human at the beginning but are human at a later stage, makes no logical sense.  Who is to determine when life begins, if not at the beginning when the sperm and the egg come together? 

The question that must be asked is what is the unborn?  Scott Klusendorf, one of America’s most eloquent defenders of the unborn says this is the crucial question.  Klusendorf speaks around the country in defense of the unborn. Click herefor a short three-minute video by Klusendorf on how to argue with a secular person, based on knowledge, science, philosophy and logic only.

Advertisements

What does King Herod and Illegal Immigrants Have in Common?

At this morning’s kaffeeklatsch one of the men mentioned that he had visited his mother, and both had gone to church together. He was happy to be in church with his mother until the homily began, that’s when he said he almost walked out of church.  The priest giving the homily had gone into a political harangue about the current immigration crisis at the California border where about 10,000 South American immigrants want to force their way into the United States.  The priest compared these illegal immigrants with the Biblical story of King Herod ordering the killing of all babies two years-old and under as described in the Gospel of Matthew 2:16, and the story of Joseph and Mary fleeing to Egypt with the baby Jesus.  Now what is the comparison between the two here?  None whatsoever.  Let me explain.

Joseph and Mary were ordered to flee to Egypt by “an Angel of the Lord” who told them that Herod had ordered the murder of all babies two and under. They were further instructed to stay in Egypt until told to leave (Matthew 2:13).  They did not go to Egypt for economic or other reasons; they fled to escape certain death.  Now, are the South American immigrants coming to California because an angel of the Lord ordered them?  Are they in danger of being murdered by an order of the rulers of their country?  To make such comparison is nothing short of religious fraud.  The priest who made this comparison knows nothing of the Biblical story, or if he does, he chose to twist it to match his leftist religion which I propose he is now following instead of the Bible. This is religious malpractice.

What this priest did is not uncommon.  I’ve heard deacons and priest make such comparisons in my church, although not as literal as the example above.  In one instance I heard a Deacon at my church say that governments do have a right to control their border, but in the very next sentence say that we should let all who want to come here enter undisturbed.  What?  Apparently, he was not conscious of the contradiction.  Blinded by leftist ideology rather than sound judgement.  Our political leaders are also in the same camp as the priest mentioned earlier.  Watch this video of Congressman Luis Guttierez make the comparison of illegal immigration and Joseph and Mary’s escape to Egypt (FF to 4.53 of clip).  I could not help but to notice that in this bad comparison, no one thought of the 1.2 million babies murdered in the womb yearly in the United States. I guess they are not comparable to illegal immigrants.

In other parts of the Bible, Jesus states that we must follow the law of our civil rulers. In Romans 13 we read:  “Obey the government, for God is the one who has put it there. There is no government anywhere that God has not placed in power. So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow.”   In Mark 12:17 we are told: “Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”  We don’t even need to refer to the Bible to know that we must follow the law.  For those who do not follow chaos. It makes perfect sense.  Yet, we keep hearing from some pastors and others that when it comes to immigrants, we can ignore the law.

Every country has a right to control their border.  When my family immigrated to the United States we had to follow U.S. Immigration procedures in place at the time.  We got on a list and waited for three years until our name came up.  We provided all requested documentation, completed a medical examination for the entire family, eight of us, provided proof of a waiting job in the U.S., housing, and agreed to not be a burden to the state.  This is the proper way to immigrate.  Ignoring the law and forcing yourself upon another sovereign state is not the way. Many countries will arrest anyone not properly entering their territory, as they have a right to do.

Prior to 1924, the United States had open border, then Congress decided to limit immigration by establishing quotas.  Click here to find out about the Immigration Act of 1924 it is very interesting.  

“We Call Them as we See Them;” How Activist Judges are a Threat to Democracy

In recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings, conservative nominees such as Justice Roberts, Alito, Gorshuch and Kavanaugh would say that a judge’s role is to “call balls and strikes,” meaning they rule on the law, as written, not legislate from the bench or make up a law that does not exist.  In the last week we’ve heard President Trump complain about what he called “Obama judges,” meaning that an activist judge ruled according to his ideology not the law.  As a rule conservative judges rule on the written law; judges appointed by liberal presidents tend to rule, not according to the law, but according to their ideology, not the law as written.

Example number one:  Today,  a Federal judge struck down a Mississipi abortion law, prohibiting abortions after 15 weeks. Click here to read the story.  Here is a prime example of not ruling according to a law on the books.  No, the judge ruled according to his ideology.  To support this point, the judge in this case commented that he thinks that men should not be able to rule on abortion cases.  What?  Is this a judge who follows the law?

Example number two.  In California in November 2008 over seven million Californians voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman.  One judge, overruled seven million voters.  Later, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 for same sex marriage.  Five unelected men overruled the will of the people.  Now, where did the judges find the law that said marriage can be for same-sex couples?  Is it written anywhere?  No, they ruled according to their ideology, not the law.  The judges ruled for same sex marriage based on the equal protection part of the constitutional.  But how is marriage a right under equal protection?  From time immemorial marriage has been between a man and a woman.  Where is the violation of equal protection?  Again, a ruling based on the culture of the day, not written law.  Now, I agree, you could pass a law allowing same sex marriage, if it was passed by our legislature, but in this case the judges made the law.

Look at any law passed by any state on abortion and you will find that in time a judge will overturn it.  This is law by judges not by a duly elected legislature.  This should trouble any one.  This is why it is so important that President Trump appoint as many conservatives to the bench as possible.  Only then will we have judges that rule on the law not on the culture of the day.  Professor Robert P. George of Princeton University, one of the most respected law scholars in America wrote a book on why marriage should only be between a man and a woman.  The book is called “What is Marriage?”  This is a very scholarly book which gives the philosophical, biological and rational reasons for the case for traditional marriage.  Here is a short description of the book on Amazon.com: Until yesterday, no society had seen marriage as anything other than a conjugal partner­ship: a male-female union. What Is Marriage? identifies and defends the reasons for this historic consensus and shows why redefining civil marriage is unnecessary, unreasonable, and contrary to the common good.

 

What is Truth?

In today’s Easter Gospel we read the account of Jesus before Pilate in John 18 – 19.  Pilate asks Jesus “what is truth”?  In today’s deeply divided culture we seem to have our own truth.  The left has its truth and the right theirs.  A couple of examples: 1) In the recent Congressional investigation of Russian collusion, it was discovered that the FBI may have abused the FISA Court in getting a warrant to monitor an American citizen, Carter Page.  The Republicans came out with a scathing report of such abuses.  The Democrats, on the other hand totally denied that there was any impropriety and came out with their own version of events; two different “truths.”  This is a contradiction.  You cannot have two different versions of an event and both be true.  Either one is true or the other false. 2) The other example is the situation with the Planned Parenthood (PP) tapes that showed  PP selling aborted baby parts.  The videos told one story, but there was another story by the supporters of PP and PP itself.  Click here to see some of these videos.

Recently I posted something on my Facebook page regarding Planned Parenthood and how it was exposed by these videos and someone responded with an ad hominem attack stating that the videos had been “heavily edited” and “doctored.”  Here is where we run into a logic problem.   In the book, Ten Universal Principles by Robert Spitzer, he discusses ten universal principles that are universally accepted such as The Principle of Noncontradiction, The Principle of Objective Evidence and so on.

When we argue about facts, we cannot simply assert something as a matter of subjective opinion in order to be true, this would be merely subjective verification and therefore, it could not be used to prove something to somebody else, Spitzer writes in page 16.  Additionally, something like what the person told me about the “doctored” videos earlier is simply arbitrarily asserted.  What is arbitrarily asserted without evidence can be arbitrarily denied without evidence.  So the person making the assertion about the videos being “doctored” has no proof or evidence to support claim; only an arbitray assertion.

What is so disturbing today is that reason, logic and philosophy are not even considered in our debates about what is truth as Pilate asked Jesus.  I see this especially true on the left of the political spectrum.  They never ask, is it true? or is there any evidence?  They only make statements arbitrarily.  This will not pass the reason or the logic test.  In the Planned Parenthood videos mentioned here, we heard Planned Parenthood and their supporters on the left yell and scream that the videos were not true, but all they pointed to was their own subjective opinon, no facts and no evidence.  So, what is truth?  Well, according to some, it’s whatever they say it is.

The Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail

Last November, my wife and I visited Israel on a tour called “In the Footsteps of Jesus.” One of the places we visited was Caesarea Phillipi, in northern Israel, near the Syrian border, and the ancient city of Dan.  Pagan worship took place in Caesarea Phillipi, and specifically, the worship of Pan, the pagan god. As you can see from the photo to the left, this place has a huge cave.  This cave represented the entry into Hades, or hell. Before going to the cross Jesus brought his disciples to this place and put some pointed questions to them.  No doubt, this place was significant since it represented a place of pagan worship.  Jesus asked his disciples “who do they say that I am?” One of the disciples answered:  “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”  Then Jesus asked, but who do YOU say that I am? Peter answered “you are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Jesus told Peter that He would build his church upon “this rock,” meaning Peter, and “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

In today’s culture we have an ongoing holocaust called abortion.  Since 1973, when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of abortion, over 60 million unborn human beings have been killed, and our culture calls it “women’s health,” or “choice.”  We have replaced the dignity of human life with a worship of language that has a meaning that we give it, irregardless of what the true meaning of the these words actually represent; in this case, “choice” really represents the killing of an innocent human life.  This is not an opinion.  Science has proven that life begins at conception.  Look at any Embryology book and it will define the beginning of life at conception.  No matter what we call it, we cannot mask its true meaning.

Since 1973, pro-life advocates have railed against abortion.  This has been like swimming up Niagara Falls.  Our culture, our judges and our political elites form an impenetrable barrier against us.  In 2004 a couple of young men started, what became known as 40 Days for Life, Forty days of praying outside of an abortion clinic in College Station, Texas.  This resulted in the conversion, against all odds, of the director of the clinic, Abby Johnson, to the pro-life cause; she left Planned Parenthood.  She later wrote a best-selling book called “Un Planned.”  Since then many other abortion clinic workers have switched sides. Click here to go to the  40 Days for Life web site where you can get more information.

The success of 40 Days for Life has been heart warming.  Hundreds of cities in the United States and many other cities outside the United States have 40 Days for Life campaigns.  Click here for a short video which gives a synopsis of what it is all about.

In the South Bay area of Los Angeles County and Lawndale specifically, a 40 Days for Life campaign will start on February 14, 2018 through March 25, 2018. Click here for the web page for this site with more information.  All are invited to attend.  You can choose your own time.

The Rush to Death

Five US  states, Colorado, California, Washington, Vermont and Oregon have legal assisted suicide laws.  Many more states are considering it and it looks like it will follow the same rush toward same-sex marriage.  For purpose of this post, let’s not argue the moral side of this; let’s argue about the slippery slope argument.  This law, whether you agree with it or not is like letting the horse out of the barn; once you do it, you can’t take it back.

If you look into what has happened in other countries where this law has been on the books for a long time, Belgium, and Holland for instance, you see how far the slippery slope has gotten.  Check out this article about the sad state of affairs in Holland and Belgium.  Now the slippery slope in Belgium has evolved to killing people, even without their consent.  Click here for this story.

The other slippery slope is who is in control?  Turns out, no one.  People can be killed even without their knowledge and there is no one watching.  “Safeguards”  that were put in place when these laws were passed are either ignored or are not monitored at all.  Click here for some facts.

In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece today  by J.J. Hanson, called “I Want My Doctors to Help Me Live, Not Die” Hanson states that in a 2006 Oregon study 25% of patients requesting assisted suicide were depressed and several of them went on to receive the lethal medication. The rush is on.

Shedding of Innocent Blood vs Guilty Blood

In California, last year, we had a petition drive at our church to abolish the death penalty in the state.  The people pushing this petition were those of whom I would refer as the “social justice” crowd.  These people, to a large extent, are very anti-death penalty but when it comes to abortion, they don’t even blink, or totally ignore it.  They are also on the very liberal side and vote for liberal or progressive politicians who are very pro-abortion.  This week the state of Arkansas executed two inmates on death row; for the first time in 12 years. As a pro-life person, it is always puzzling to reconcile this situation.  How can someone be against the death penalty and yet ignore abortion.  Let’s look at the statistics.  As of 2014 there have been over 57 million abortions since 1973 in the United States, that’s roughly 1.3 million per year average.  Since 1976 there have been 1,300 executions of death row inmates in the entire United States.

Death row inmates are guilty persons who have committed crimes against humanity and have been adjudicated by a court to be guilty and have been so condemned.  The unborn, on the other hand, are totally innocent and have been killed, not by a court, but by a mother who does not wish to have a baby for reasons such as “I’m not ready to be a mother,” or “it’s too inconvenient and it will interfere with my career.”  The unborn are fully human, as confirmed by science.  Click here for confirmation.    Have you seen drawings or pictures of how unborn children are ripped apart inside the mother?  Abortion doctors count all the limbs after an abortion to make sure they got the entire baby.  In the famous case of Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia, he even killed babies who came out whole in a botched abortion attempt.  The book, Gosnell, details what happened in excruciating details; you must read it to believe it.

The Bible is very specific when it come to shedding innocent blood:  Proverbs 6:16-19

There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.