But it gets worse, when we do not have faith. When we do not belief that anything good can come our way, then everything is impossible, and when impossible sets in, nothing seem to change anymore.

It does no harm to have faith once in awhile, and it doesn’t kill to belief that things could be better. When a person has faith, their mind is conscious of what could and might be. The mind will not drag a person’s day and night down, you’d wake up feeling a sense of meaning in life, and go to bed peacefully. If you have a religion, then pray to your God to help you get through what you are going through. Because although we are physically alone in to fight this world alone, with faith, God is always with us to get through everything.

If you do not have a religion or belief in a God, then just belief that life cannot possible stay bad forever, what goes down, must come up. And like a graph in a chart, up and down is the part and parcel of life. If you can’t see it that way, then perhaps pick a religion and start believing. Does it kill to belief that there is a God watching over us? And if you say if there is a God, then why is the world the way it is? Well, God has forsaken the world, for this is a sinful, cheating world, but he has not forsaken the people of the world who live in it. And if you intend to question the work of the Lord, and ask him to give you a better life, then understand this, “do not put God to the test”.

Either way, life go round in circles, and a bad trip even if it seems to last forever will eventually get better. Also look at the reflection of your life, and analyze if there is perhaps something you are doing wrong, or what could be happening to you may be karma biting you in the ass. 

This line, along with many other lines that will be mentioned further on into the essay, is from the famous Declaration of Independence, a document that made the Unites States of America walk on its own two legs instead of relying on England as a cane. However, this line doesn’t just mean that all men are created equal. As a student studying in courses of American History, I believe that this lines states that all men, no matter the race, the philosophy the man produces in one’s mind, the sexual orientation, or skills and abilities that the specific man has should not matter to another man in America, because all of the men have been created by God himself as equal, despite the matters that were listed above. But, at the time of the written document, which happens to be in 1776, black men, women, and children were slaves working on plantations and most were being beaten by their owners. This excerpt has also stated that men are created equal, not women, therefore saying that not all people living on the new land have the same freedom as white men who have land (according to later on in the DOI, an abbreviation for the Declaration of Independence).

Freedom, as defined in Merriam dictionary, is liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another (definition 1b). We apply this word in our everyday vocabulary for both angelic and demonic purposes, but this definition of freedom has not been applied fully in the U.S. until the mid 20th century.  How is this so?

….Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

According to the document of America’s based freedom, we have the right to the pursuit of happiness. Now, this term can be seen in many different angles, just as your everyday shooter game, but in the general fixture of the term, this means that we have the right to be happy and to be ourselves. In the past, we have gone to wars, actual real-life wars, for prejudice thoughts, beliefs, and blamings. Take World War 2 for an example. Who was the almighty leader of such an act that aghasted billions of people, and exterminated many of them? Adolf Hitler. He was an icon of evil and demonic traits, and some may even call him the devil who walked on Earth, but he was prejudice upon the Jewish culture, which, to this day, has set up stereotypes for Germans globally. This is an example of what has been known as a violation of the Declaration of Independence, since the war overseas and on land...and the recession of the 1940s shook the nation and startled many American citizens out of their own happiness and comfort. With that being said, the nation has changed because we now have entitled ourselves into being less prejudice and discriminating and following the actual legally-binded document (that is protected by the U.S. authorities) that states the factors that us Americans should, as a matter of fact, have.

For an example, if an Dominic Republican black male decided to spend his time with a German white male, then there would be no harm done to either males, because the issue of racial segregation has been erased off the board of disputes. Also, the issue of gender differentuality has come to an end in the late 1970s, because women finally had more abilities to produce the same quality of work in a specific occupation that required “masculine” abilities, which most men thought was blatant that women could not work as hard.

To conclude, even though some of society’s finest is quite prejudice, the discrimination levels have shrunk a bit.

I have often wondered about Jennifer’s sister Julia.  The first troubling thing to me was that she married a man with such a checkered and disturbing past, right as Jennifer reached the pinnacle of fame.  Excuse me, forgive me but my family neither consorts with or marries thugs.  All the families that I know have never been into this type of man.  Maybe it’s my generation but I came from a family with strong ties and even though our parents weren’t Bible Thumpers but still Christians, the roof didn’t have to fall in on our heads to know not to deal with certain men. And for the men to avoid certain women.  There is a snapshot with Jennifer holding up her Golden Globe and her then brother-in-law William Balfour is holding up a fifth of licker!  Jennifer was younger and maybe she didn’t realize how unflattering that snapshot was. 

It is said that Jennifer knew Mr. Balfour since she was eighth grade, so obviously he and her sister Julia always had something going on.  Jennifer also said that she disliked him immensely.  Jennifer obviously is more perceptive than meets the eye.  Her dislike was not groundless at all. 

I look at her sister, who is grossly overweight and marries this punkish-looking young man right as Jennifer  is winning awards and her star is rising.  Was there some sense of warped competition on Julia’s part or did this Balfour guy really pressure Julia  into marriage since he saw a star rising in Jennifer?  I’m a thinker too and knowing how petty some guys can be, the fact that he was dating an Award Winning Actress’s sister could have heightened his eagerness for wedlock.  You know, as if this was a major inducement for wedlock. You know with some measure of fame comes money.  The marriage ended shortly thereafter and not without threats to Julia’s family.

I wish I had known Julia because I would have told her to never trust a guy who would dare threaten the welfare of her family if he is mad at her. Her family had nothing to do with it. Men that do that have to be the weakest of the species with no moral character whatsoever.  Which makes me wonder about what people consider now as morals.  Ms. Donerson loved God, she prayed and was heavily active in her church.  It just seems that her children would have followed her way of thinking.   Her eldest daughter was estranged from her husband but was still having intimacies with him….she also had a new boyfriend which is said to be the reason this dog of a man Balfour went on a murder spree.  So you just wonder why he was allowed in the family fold in the very first place.  Not that the family had to chase him away, but why didn’t Julia just not marry him when she did?  They’d known each other a looooonnnnng time before Jennifer’s star rose at all.  They could have been married before that which is my point.   He wanted to be a part of a family with a person becoming successful.

Now back to morals as we know them.  I have sisters but  some of them have passed on.  The sister closest to my age would have just loved to see me rise.   She really would have as the rest of the family would have. She was a pretty girl to look at and no doubt, with her love for fashion, she would have remained ready and able to attend any Premier or Social Event my star status would have allowed me.  And trust me, I would not have had to worry about whomever she date or married.  She liked good, progressive guys.  Yes, and she would have wanted a little of my money too and I say this in jest because she had a big heart and would have been great to her family as well as I would.  My family, if nothing more, have been hearts.  Her love for her little money was always humorous to us.   Ans not one member of my family would have  been anything less than proud and happy and respectful towards my status.  We have a thing about going to jail, getting into trouble and embarrassing each other, so we just don’t.  Our parents raised us that way.  Believe that.  It took the tragedy of almost a whole family lost and a beautiful seven year old boy  killed to see that there just wasn’t enough respect within that small Hudson family.  I don’t believe it was intentional, just maybe they didn’t understand  things.  To be honest, it just shouldn’t have went down like it did.  We all make mistakes and for all that has happened we should pray for peace for this family though. Julia just didn’t see it, but obviously others did.   Too much damage has been done to this small family.  Peace.

Pacquiao was adamant after Obama vocalised his support for same sex marriage this week saying the president got it all wrong. It is reported that in an interview with the National Conservative Examiner while training in Los Angeles said there was a need for society to put God first.

The boxer referring to President Obama’s decision quoted Leviticus 20:13 which say “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

The president however in justification of his stand on the issue of same-sex marriage stated the Golden Rule was the base of his decision. “Love your neighbour as yourself”.

The 33-year-old boxer said he respected Obama and that he thinks the president needs to read the Bible to better society.

“God only expects man and woman to be together and to be legally married, only if they so are in love with each other,” Pacquiao said. “It should not be of the same sex so as to adulterate the altar of matrimony, like in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah of Old.” He added.

Manny “Pacman” Pacquiao  is a Roman Catholic and recently hit international news when he declared his intention of ending his boxing career to focus on religious beliefs.

Filipino boxer Manny Pacquiao

A government’s public policy should, first and foremost, serve in the interests of all the people that it governs.  Each individual should have equal representation in the decisions regarding the laws of the nation.  That being said, however, does not mean that every citizen’s political opinion carries the same merit.  There are some individuals that have spent long amounts of time researching their political ideals, thinking introspectively in order to determine whether their opinions and beliefs are just and consistent with their own worldview, and that their worldview presents an accurate depiction of how things operate. There are other individuals, however, that choose their political ideals much more recklessly, not considering the consequences of actions that would occur if the ideology they have chosen were to become the predominant political power of the land.

This distinction, in the merit of any given person’s political opinions, is important.  Note, however, that this distinction does not deal with the content of a person’s political opinion, but only on the quality.  Two otherwise equal people, having been born under different circumstances and having different experiences and accumulated memories during their lifetimes, can and will form different political opinions due to the contrasting values instilled due to these experiences.  Therefore, they can both be “right” about their political opinions, even though their opinions drastically differ.  However, the truly distinguishing factor into whether said person’s opinion is “right” is whether this opinion has been formed using careful thought to ensure that it is consistent with one’s worldview, as described previously.

With both of these factors in mind, one can see how the wide spectrum of political ideologies emerges.  Furthermore, it is often difficult to determine how much merit an individual’s political opinion carries.  A truly democratic system would tend to “average out” both the quality and content of the opinions of the voters.  This is why I believe that public policy should be influenced by political ideology, but not exclusively so.  However, there is more to it- I believe that scientific evidence should also carry a strong influence.

Science is an evolving, iterative process- as new theories crop up, the ones with the best explanatory power emerge over time.  These theories build on each other, and occasionally topple one another during a scientific revolution.  Due to this evolving behavior science as a whole has created a very unified worldview that has a great deal of power in resolving certain questions, some of which have important political consequences.  One such question may be, “Should we transition to solar power?”  If we look at the answer to this question over time, it will depend on the state of scientific research into solar energy.  In 1975, for example solar power was very inefficient and prohibitively expensive- and the answer to the question would be a resounding NO.  If we look into the future, however, solar will be more efficient and cost effective than it is now, and the answer may turn out to be a yes.  In cases such as these, where specifically applied analysis is the best way to determine the answer to a problem that effects the lives of a great number of people, I believe that science should be the primary dictator of public policy.

Religion must also be considered.  In public policy matters such as abortion, the religious beliefs of those with a large interest in the debate often influence their arguments.  For abortion in particular, and other arguments in general, there are relevant questions that science currently cannot and may never be able to answer, such as “when does life begin?”.  Many of these questions are abstract and metaphysical in nature.  In these cases, I believe that religion should be considered, but only as one among many beliefs that constitute the whole of a given individual’s opinion-influencing worldviews.  Therefore, I do not believe that religion should have any special influence on public policy.

In conclusion, I believe that science should be the primary public policy dictate in matters that are appropriate for scientific analysis.  All other public policies should be dictated by political ideology, with no special particular attention paid to religious beliefs as compared to other opinion-influencing worldviews.

           Don’t you love to go too far away places that you have never seen before? Well, from the beginning of time, our ancestors have been doing just that! Early man moved away from the tropics of Africa and Southeast Asia to the harsher lands of Europe and by the end of the last Ice Age 11,000 years ago, man had settled in every continent except Antarctica. However, we cannot call these early wanderers actual explorers. They just moved to new places mainly in search of food and better places to live. Explorers, on the other hand, set out with a definite purpose. Some were fired by the spirit of adventure, or by a burning desire to go where no man has ever gone before. Others went in search of trade and exotic items, whether it was spices from India, ivory and sandalwood from the east, or tea from China. The European explorers, who discovered America more than 400 years ago, were actually looking for gold and silver. Many explorers went in search of new sea routes that would make voyages shorter. Some explorers wanted to spread their religion to new lands. Others were sent by rulers to find new lands to conquer in order to expand their empires. In modern times, the exploration of space is still continuing, opening up new horizons of knowledge about our universe. In fact, explorers play a great role in increasing man’s knowledge, and in spreading it too. Every explorer faces immense difficulties in his task, and without doubt, explorers are men of great courage, determination and vision. We owe a deep debt of gratitude to them, for the many wonders they have unveiled for us.

We make decisions everyday and hope that we made the right choices. Making the concrete decision to stay positive is one of the patterns we need to welcome in our scope of life.

There are times life will throw a curve ball at us. That’s  inevitable. It’s what we do with this unfortunate situation and how we handle it that makes a difference. To make the absolute promise to always face your problems with dignity and hope.

Life will never be easy, however there are road blocks to build around us to discard the negative and make the decision to ride the storms with a higher power, achieving a bright plateau.

How to stay positive and content in our everyday life

©Copyright LisaMarieMottert2012

While he already had a large support base in this community, his public declaration of his stance seemed to bolster his support. By the same token, however, his statement has alienated some people from him who have redoubled efforts to help Mitt Romney win.

There are people who are steadfastly opposed to same sex marriage on the principles of the bible,  because they think it’s abnormal, and a host of other reasons. Republicans, known for their some-what religious stance and anti-gay initiatives will no doubt use this as a way to attack the Obama campaign.

All pros and cons of the announcement aside, you have to wonder just how much of an impact vice-president, Joe Biden’s, statement had on the rather abrupt decision to have the presidential interview. Nothing would have been more appalling than having the vice-president make a statement that was unsupported by the President.

Despite all the talk and debate on the presidents’ stance, this issue will play a rather small role in the upcoming election. The issue of marriage is a state problem and while the federal government is more than welcome to voice it’s opinion, it has no ultimate say in the matter. However, the debate over what constitutes marriage will have an impact on fundraisers. Obama already has a much larger war chest going into the election that Mitt Romney, who has spent a couple of millions fending off his Republican rivals. 

This is slight resurgence in the Obama campaign will aid him in a social context and prove valuable for resource provision. However, the economic situation will be the turning point of the election for many. Forecasts show that the economy will probably avoid any major step backwards going into the election. While this bodes well for the Obama campaign, it is not the news many Americans want to hear. 

Obamas stance on marriage has simply given his supporters a boost but the real issue is the economy and Mitt Romney is sure to drill that home repeatedly.

When there was an abortion clinic bombing in 2000 the left wing press was ablaze with concern about the one death due to the bombing. I too am very concerned about that death.  I counsel no one to take a life without due process no matter how righteous the cause may seem. I except here self defense and defense of someone in mortal danger because time does not permit judicial process.  Allow me to state further that if I were on a jury and a person who killed an abortionist was on trial, I would be willing to convict if the evidence pointed to guilt just the same as if they had killed a child.

Allow me to settle some confusion.  The word ‘kill’ in many versions of the Bible is translated from the Hebrew word ‘rastach’ would be far more accurately translated ‘murder’.  Most of the newer bible versions in fact use the word murder, not kill.  Remember that the KJV was translated about 1615 and is contemporary to Shakespeare’s writing which most do not understand because of the style and the shift in meanings of words in the last 400 years.

    Exod 20:13     Thou shalt not kill.    (KJV)

But I am also concerned about the deaths that occur at abortion clinics every day. The deaths that are the result of a medical procedure that is successful only if fifty percent of the patients die. These deaths are each arrived at without due process. In fact the rush to judgment that anti-death penalty persons decry when dealing with criminals has become the law of the land as we eliminate any waiting period for an abortion. We have not only taken away due process, we have even eliminated a cooling off period.

These people decry an officer shooting a suspect because the officer is judge, jury and prosecutor no matter what the circumstances. Yet in abortion, the judge, defendant, jury, and prosecutor are the woman who is seeking the abortion. The only role she does not play in the drama is that of the executioner;  the abortionist she procures. If we were to offer money to anyone but an abortionist to murder a human being, we would be guilty of a felony. Most of us could easily sit on a jury and send someone to jail for hiring a killer.  The defendant’s attorney is not present to plead the case.  Let’s get this together, nearly fifty million deaths versus one?  (Note: There have been over 1.25 million abortions each year for the last thirty nine years.  That is well over fifty million.)   And the pro-death forces get concerned when one of their accomplices, a hired killer, legal as his act may be, engaged in the slaughter of innocents dies? But do they blanch if at millions of deaths? They call evil good and good evil.

    Isa 5:20-21  20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight.    (KJV)

This was predicted by Jesus 2000 years ago. He also said that they would say, “Blessed is she who is barren.”

    Luke 23:29   For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.  (KJV)

Another View of Abortion 2/4/2000

I watched Dr. James Kennedy last Sunday and found his discussion of abortion presenting something that I have not heard from anyone else. Just as he was beginning the discussion I saw where he was going.

He likened Abortion to Slavery, in the process it is somewhat similar. I believe that we are in a critical period, one that will determine how our generation will be viewed.

There is a lot of discussion about the issue of slavery and The War of the Rebellion that started in 1861. Those who would continue slavery say that war was for state’s rights. What is the reason for their argument?  They claim it because Lincoln did not declare the Emancipation Proclamation until near the end of the war. Let us examine this premise.

The events that lead up to the war, the issues that made the conflict inevitable were all tied to the one issue of slavery. The rules for admitting new states, the Dread Scott Decision, the lengthy debates in the legislature were all centered on slavery, not state’s rights. The only issue of state’s rights was if the state could continue to allow slavery within its borders. There was no other even minor states rights issue.

And if we look at the things associated with the war we see more of the same. The soldiers in Grey were called Rebels, not states righters. The songs of the times were interesting at best. One famous one from that era has a line, “As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.” It is the well known “Battle Hymn of the Republic,” sung by the men of the Union and written to the tune of its contemporary “John Brown’s Body.” Both were the result of the times. The newspaper articles of the time were tied to the issue. It divided many.  Yes, I read period literature to discern the thought of the time, not the liberal interpretations of them formed years later by people who will lie to prove a point and who have an axe to grind.

Sure, there were those who fought for the rebellion that did so because of home ties and family. They could not go against their families. But there were many who would have looked at conflict as not their thing that fought for the Union. One example is Joshua Chandler, a College Professor, Mathematician and Theologian from Maine. He is one of the standout American citizen soldiers of all time. He had a good grasp of what the war was about, and he was a man that required a cause that was more than a political issue.

But the war brought slavery out into the open and it made it unacceptable.

And Roe v Wade may have been the watershed of abortion if we have the fortitude to make it such. Roe V Wade brought abortion out of the back alleys and placed it on the front page of the newspapers. It took it out of the back room and put it in the store front. Where it was once done in secret, it now could be done in public.

But doing it in public had a price. When it was done in a back alley, nobody but the police noticed and even they tended to call it a victimless crime. A crime where at least one of the two victims die and it is victimless! I think not!

And the price was light shed on it. When something is brought out into the light it is scrutinized.

Roe v Wade made people take a stand. You were for it or against it, there was little fence to sit on. And the fence has gotten narrower and narrower. There is so little room that even politicians, the fence sitting experts have found it difficult.  And sitting on the narrow fence is painful.

Without this exposure abortion might have gone on for years in the back rooms without being challenged. With this exposure the doctors (persons) performing the surgery had to come to work in day light and leave in day light. The clinic had to be marked so the victims could find it. And when marked the protestors could easily find it. The victims had to go there in the open.

Let’s face it, all rhetoric aside, many of the abortions before Row v Wade had to be done under reasonably safe conditions.  Few women died from the procedures.  Even under the so called safe conditions today there are women who die.  It is a surgical procedure with anesthesia and both procedures and anesthesia carry risks.

I believe this light on abortion provides us with the opportunity to rid our nation of this scourge. There are many who have left the battle, like the deserters of an army. It is time to be there. Our first duty is to prayer. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal.” Our next duty is to seek God’s face and determine if this is where we are to enter the ranks. If He does not call you to the battle, support those in battle with your prayers and encouragement. If He does, take your place, but like a good soldier, follow the command of our leader. Let no man draw you into activity that is not Godly.  This has happened to those who have committed violent acts.

We have the opportunity with abortion that the people of the 1860’s had with slavery. It persisted for years before they were able to rid the country of the curse. Let us be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves. Let us stand firm and do His will.

And the real slaves of the abortion movement are the women they claim to serve.  They are slaves to people who put their lives at risk and hold them captive.

Planned Non-parenthood

The first abortion lie is encountered when the potential client enters the facility. She is not called a patient.  This would carry the connotation that she might be undergoing some form of medical procedure or surgery with risk to her life or health. She is a “client”, nice, tidy and clean. There is no indication of the blood-letting that will be done before she is through with the “procedure”. During it she will lose enough blood to weaken her, generally more than she would lose if she donated a pint of blood – she will feel tired for weeks, just from the physical impact of the blood loss. This is a procedure that is not without risk.  Again, if we were to call it surgery we might just elicit some emotional reaction and the woman might just change her mind. She might realize her life and ability to have children could be in jeopardy (they are) and consider the impact on the life inside her body (it is about to be snuffed out).  If she knew this she might just walk out without becoming a paying client. If this were to happen too often the clinic might just have to close its doors. This happened to Hillcrest Clinic here in York, PA and it became unprofitable and was closed by the owners. I personally believe that praying people in the community caused this demise.

A second lie is that what is growing inside the woman is nothing more than a bunch of tissue. This might wash from a physical standpoint for the early first trimester surgery, but the partial birth abortion procedure which kills a child that would be viable if delivered is not distinguished in any way by those who tout abortion as a fix-all. In this later procedure the baby is much more than a blob of tissue, it is viable outside the womb. If it were just let out into the world it would live. Maybe it could be adopted if the woman, a “higher animal” had the instinct for keeping her children alive that is inborn in the “lower animals.”

Understand, I do not condone or agree with the early first trimester procedure but all of the arguments from the pro-abortion forces in pushing this early pregnancy procedure are contradicted in the partial birth and if you claim it to be the same you impeach yourself. In early first trimester they say the fetus is not viable outside the womb, it does not feel, it is a part of the mother’s body, and it is not a separate living human. So it is OK to kill it. Let’s give them that this is the case. Partial birth FLUNKS on all counts yet they make no differentiation between the two procedures. We see the pro-abortion forces caught in their own rhetoric. They find it easy to strain on a gnat and swallow a camel.

    Matt 23:23-24

    23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

    24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

    (KJV)

Jesus tagged it well. He called those who had this myopia Blind Guides.  They claim to do good but they ignore the weightier matters of the law. The people who run and promote the abortion mills are such.  They claim to be getting someone out of a problem.  In the movie “COMA” a young woman dies during a D&C that is only necessary because the woman is pregnant with a baby that is the result of an affair.  The doctor jokes early in the procedure that he is getting the lady out of a real mess.  Although this is a piece of fiction, it poignantly displays the attitude that is held by the people who provide these services for women.

A third and bigger lie is – the procedure is safe. If all risks to the non-mother, including increased breast cancer, increased suicide, infection, anesthesia risks, bleeding and other complications are considered, even a “simple early first trimester abortion” is a real risk. Even the threat of sterility that can occur has a health risk, the drugs and procedures necessary to later conceive a child all carry risks. All too often, a woman who has undergone an abortion changes her mind AFTER the procedure and gets pregnant (if she can) later.

The next invalid argument of the feminists is as follows. If you find yourself pregnant, (as if you had nothing to do with it and one morning something miraculous had happened to create this situation) and it is not convenient to carry and birth a child at this time, abort the baby, you can have another when it is more convenient. How many women do you know who have had a failed pregnancy through no fault of their own, who have never been able to become pregnant again? (I’ll answer that, “all too many.”) Why should someone expect to abort one fetus and be entrusted by God or nature if you don’t believe in God, with another? Two significant risks of abortion are sterility and bleeding that requires drastic surgery to save the woman’s life. If the uterus is badly damaged, that surgery is called a hysterectomy, surgery that at our present level of medical expertise renders the woman permanently and totally unable to have children. We may come to a point that uterine transplants are viable, but that is not the case at this time.  The last time I checked there had been one experimental uterine transplant and it had to be removed before a pregnancy was achieved.  I am sure some day we will do it successfully but at what cost?  Will the average woman be able to afford it?  What risks will she take having the procedure? For the “fortunate ones” who contracted infections, infertility clinics are making real money on women who believed that lie when they were fifteen and now at thirty they cannot have a child without medical intervention. It is interesting that the same practitioners that kill babies with the procedures that render women less fertile then benefit from procedures that help them have babies!  Still others are less fortunate.  There is no procedure to help them have a child. The old adage was pay me now or pay me later. In abortion it is pay me now and pay me later, for the surgery now, for infertility treatments, for depression, for bareness, for breast cancer later.

The forth lie – abortion is a right. It is not a right, it is not mentioned in the constitution, EVEN THOUGH THE PRO-ABORTION people say it has existed since long before that document was written. I could understand something being called a right that did not exist when the framers wrote the document, that they would not known about but for some reason they did not include abortion in the list of rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Abortion is big business, and moreover is one of the current methods of exploitation of the females in our society. The person who controls abortion controls the body of the woman who is enslaved to the procedure.  It is an enabler for men who want free sex in that they can tell the woman, if it goes wrong you get an abortion. 

Often this exploitation of women is by other women. Abortion became a right based on a court case that was a lie. The Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal was based perjury by many of those who testified. There are more than a few people who perjured themselves to make this a reality. This certainly does not make the cause more just! Can pure water come from a well that is polluted?  Even the courts use the term, “fruit of the poisoned tree” to describe evidence improperly obtained.  If evidence can be poisoned by improper action, why is a case based on lies not likewise poisoned?

There are some in the pro-abortion forces who feel abortion must be preserved at all cost. One well known feminist leader said that if abortion were outlawed, “blood would run in the streets.” This sounds to me like a threat of armed insurrection. The right to advocate such is not protected by free speech defined constitution. Nowhere is the right to break the laws of the land protected. I suggest that these be investigated for racketeering or terrorism.

When former NOW president Molly Yard heard that the Supreme Court would review Roe v. Wade in its Webster case, she said on January 8, 1989; “We are now declaring a state of emergency for the women of America. We will not go back to illegal abortions. We aren’t going to obey the law.”

Such is the immorality of the pro-abortion forces. Such is their blindness to right and wrong. They lie, and they not only advocate disobedience of a law, they advocate ARMED and VIOLENT overthrow of the government.

The fifth lie — The people promoting abortion are good people who want to help women who have a problem. (See Molly Yard’s statement in lie 4, is she considered an example of this?) This may be true in a few cases, but there are those who have run for-profit clinics under shoddy conditions to increase profits. The state of Maryland closed several such clinics in the 80’s and Pennsylvania tightened rules on clinics  in 2011 to match those for other surgical outpatient clinics. The abortionists yelled like a stuck hog.  There are also government funded ones, clinics that get government money to exist. The abortions may not be paid directly out of taxpayer funds, but many other services that help make them viable are paid for by tax monies, the abortions are a part of the services offered. Consider these economics. If a clinic has 1000 pregnant “clients” this year and gets “X” dollars, and the director’s salary is based to some degree on the budget amount so she knows if the budget increases she gets a raise, (In government it is) is it better for the director to have 1000 or 2000 pregnant clients next year? Let’s rephrase the question, “Is it better to teach abstinence and/or good birth control so the “client” doesn’t return or is it better to have the client return in a few months with another “problem pregnancy” that increases the workload?  I think anyone can figure that out.

Lie number six — We need abortion to help a woman who is a victim of rape or incest. FINE, let’s pass the law to allow abortion only if the woman wants it and if she is a victim of rape or incest. This situation accounts for less than one percent of the million (1,000,000) abortions each year. One percent of one million is ten thousand (10,000). A million is about 3000 babies a day, ten thousand is about 30 a day. The one is big business, it is mass murder. Although I do not think I could not condone it, the other is compassion for someone in distress. I personally would settle for this decrease in the slaughter, as a temporary measure, IF IT WAS STRICTLY BASED ON A CONVICTION OF THE CRIMINAL not a lie.

Lie number seven — We need abortion to help a woman with serious medical problems terminate a pregnancy that threatens her life. Again, this is a very small percentage, far lower than the one percent above. Here I feel we must leave the decision to the advice of the doctor and the conscience of the mother. The percentage is small and every day fewer medical conditions contradict the continuation of a pregnancy. If this were really the reason the number of abortions in the US every year would be measured in hundreds, not millions.  Although these are still hard for me to accept I could not prevent one of these abortions or even pressure the woman to take grievous risks.  That must be her decision.  But ironically, many women with serious medical conditions do almost anything to carry their baby.

Lie number nine, also called by me, the big lie – If abortion is made illegal, women will be forced into the back alleys to have them and be butchered. They ignore that birth control methods and distribution are better, the number should be smaller than it was before, that is unless all of the arguments by organizations like Planned Parenthood are not correct. But it is appearing that these measures are not working and in fact the efforts of Planned Parenthood and their fellow travelers could be better be likened to pouring gasoline on a fire.  The more they spend to reduce teen pregnancies the worse the numbers get.  First, pregnancy prevention devices and medications have to be deployed if they are to be effective.  Second, there is one sure way of not getting pregnant; not have intercourse.  But for these people that concept is so foreign it isn’t considered.  After all, there are choices.  Women and men can decide to not have sex outside marriage which is the root cause of most unwanted pregnancies.  They can decide to deploy birth control by taking pills, using condoms, foam, etc.

But they say that millions (thousands, tens of thousands, depending on who is talking) of women would die each year at the hands of the illegal abortionists. Come on, we are having only a million and a quarter abortions a year with abortion being legal. Will we have more abortions if it is illegal?  I think that what we are hearing is rhetoric. We have no statistics on how many died of botched abortions before Roe vs. Wade and we don’t not know how many die today.  Why?  Because the death certificate does not show complications of abortion, it shows hemorrhage, infection, anesthesia reaction, heart failure, or suicide. This is done to protect the illusion that abortion is legal and safe and to protect the abortionist.  There is no statistic on infertility and sterility that point to abortion because a woman’s right to have an abortion is private and it is protected from being passed to develop statistics. The pro-abortion crowd has made it impossible to know how many they have maimed by laws that prohibit release of information that would provide these crucial statistics. If they did not believe the numbers to be bad, why do they fight their release?

Finally, the tens of thousands of deaths argument has one killer problem.  Let’s suppose that there were ten thousand deaths of women to illegal abortions.  That would mean that for the ten years between fifteen and twenty five there would be roughly a thousand deaths a year per year of age in the years before Row V Wade, that is before 1973.  And more so, between 1972 and 1975 there should be a reduction in deaths of women in those ages.  There isn’t.  The death rate in the US for women in the 15 to 25 age range is low enough that even a change of 100 would have been noticeable.   Another lie. 

Let me ask the question, if we have to lie to preserve something, is it valid?

Let me give you some Abortion Definitions

Successful surgery – A procedure during which exactly one half of the patients die.

Therapeutic Abortion – One done for the convenience of the mother and to enhance the financial future of the doctor.

The aim of the United Nations resolution was to observe a day of peace and nonviolence but on the same day a lot of violence occurs. The same people who are in the forefront to observe the day allow violence and bombardment to achieve their commercial aims.

 Although an ever-increasing number of people worldwide, representing a wide variety of religious and spiritual traditions, have joined the purpose yet violence is on the increase.

The following objective:

“To encourage worldwide, 24-hour spiritual observations for peace and nonviolence on the International Day of Peace, 21 September in every house of worship and place of spiritual practice, by all religious and spiritually based groups and individuals, and by all men, women and children who seek peace in the world.” are the words only as scribed by the scriber to mitigate the intensity feelings of those who want real peace in the world.