The Paradox Of The Right To Choose

This picture of a 21-week fetus hand reaching up through an incision in its mother's uterus to grab the finger of the surgeon who had just performed a life-saving procedure appeared in the November 16 edition of The National Enquirer.
It should be "The Picture of the Year," or perhaps, "The Picture of the Decade."
The 21-week-old unborn baby is named Samuel Alexander Armas, and is being operated on by a surgeon named Joseph Bruner. The baby was diagnosed with spina bifida and would not survive if removed from the mother's womb.

This picture and the surgical procedure performed puts the lie to the Women's Right to Choose argument that the fetus is not a living person until he/she is delivered.

Before I continue my argument for the Right To Life advocates, of which I am a proponent. I would ask the question to the Feminist advocates. The right to chose what? The question is one of the only Philosophical arguments with a premise that does not explain it's purpose. Is it the right to kill the baby inside her womb?
If so, then why does the criminal justice division of the government consider it a double murder when a pregnant women is murdered?

Apparently Roe vs Wade didn't consider the murder situation when they decided to make the murder of unborn and partially born babies legal. But in the real world, the decisions that dictate a double murder when a pregnant woman is killed. The Fetus is considered a murder victim!

I show the picture of a public hanging in Iran to illustrate the way non-Judeo/Christian Countries demonstrate their disregard the value of human life.Have we degraded our society to the point where the Genocide of unborn children is not a concern?

A Hobson's Choice For Me

"A free choice in which only one option is offered and one may refuse to take that option." So said Hobson, the English Nobleman of the 16th Century. He ran a stable and you had one choice. The horse in the first stall, or no horse. Take it or leave it!

Yesterday the Democrats had a Hobson's choice to make and only slightly less than 12% of the population turned out to vote.
There were seven mega wealthy Democrats who courted the voters in Iowa. Some richer than others, but all of them millionaires who pretend to be the champion of the "little man"!

The three who garnered the most votes were a millionaire Senator, aka "ambulance chaser" attorney, who lives in North Carolina on 120 acres in a 28,000 square foot house. An ex-first lady who has managed to hide her wealth and avarice for power to most voters. But former Clinton confidant, Dick Morris, and his wife and partner, Eileen McGann, are positing a theory of Clinton enrichment that attempts to explain the dramatic increase--from as little as $352,000 in 2003 to as much as $50,000,000 in 2005--in Hillary Clinton's disclosed assets.
Then their is the first term African -American Senator from Illinois, who from his one parent childhood has managed to write two best-selling books, has a nice salary as a Senator and a wife with a handsome income. Earlier this year he reported assets of up to $1.14 million in addition to his Chicago home. Of all the Democrats running for President he has the least money, but he still is a privileged man with a Harvard education and mega wealthy backers like Oprah and Warren Buffet.

The thing that unites all three is their vision of the future. The three believe the Federal Government can take care of all your needs and wants from cradle to grave. In fact they are Socialists, even though they pose as rescue workers who will save US from the Horrible ills of the Free Enterprise system!
Thus the Hobson Choice!

There are 2,982,085 people living in Iowa. 354,000 went to the Caucus yesterday. 115,000 voted for Republican candidates and the Democrats garnered 239,000 voters. Hardly a death knell or victory bell for any of the winners or losers. Yet the always "truthful" New York Times printed that the results in Iowa spell doom for the Republicans while cheering Obamas victory.
"With a win in the Iowa caucuses last night, Obama shook conventional wisdom to its political core, preaching “post-partisan” comity and becoming the first African American candidate in either party to win the first-in-the-nation balloting. Obama went into a state of 3 million people, just 2 1/2 percent of whom are black, and cleaned up, topping Clinton and former vice presidential nominee John Edwards by more than eight percentage points."

I would hardly call getting 39% of 238,000 votes "cleaning up". But then we are used to the hyperbole of the Media, or are we?

The New York Times political correspondent David Brooks was so excited by the "Two Earthquakes" in Iowa that he had this so say: "Whatever their political affiliations, Americans are going to feel good about the Obama victory, which is a story of youth, possibility and unity through diversity — the primordial themes of the American experience.
And Americans are not going to want to see this stopped. When an African-American man is leading a juggernaut to the White House, do you want to be the one to stand up and say No?

All this over a man who the press wants to label as an person who can change the United States from the "horrible" Bush/Cheney Gulag to a new beginning! But what kind of new Country will we get from any of these Democrats? One that favors the Privileged few. Politicians, entertainers, finance moguls, captains of industry and all the other mega-rich who would put him/her in the White House. The rest of us will get higher taxes, more government control, open borders and a weaker military.

I for one will stand up and say no, Mr. Brooks!

What if the Pope Declared A Fatwa?

Fatawas are expected to deal with religious issues, however in exceptional cases, religious issues and political ones seem to be inextricably intertwined.

The term fatwa is used by Islamic extremists to mean "permission" to do a certain act that might be otherwise illegal under Islamic law.
Some examples of fatawa follow:
Ayatollah Ruhollah khomeini in 1989 pronounced a death sentence on Salman Rushdie, the author of The Satanic Verses.
Yusuf al-Qaradawi released a fatwa on April 14th 2004, stating that the boycott of American and Israeli products was an obligation for all who are able.

Well what is good for the goose is also good for the gander, as the saying goes!

It won't happen, but the situation in Great Britain is such an insult, that if the Catholic Church was led by a man like Khomeini, the Pope would issue a fatwa today!

First it was a crucifix upside down in a bottle of urine shown in an "art" show in New York City. Now it is a one foot high statue of Jesus with an erection!

This obscenity is on display in a gallery at Gateshead Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art. It has offended those Christians of all Christian faiths, not just Catholics,who have seen this obscene statue that is the central figure in the exhibit.
The exhibit is a traditional statue of Jesus which has been "doctored" by controversial Chinese artist Terence Koh.

Outraged visitors and church leaders have criticised the artist and Baltic Center bosses for disrespecting the Christian faith.
Dad-of-two John Monaghan, 33, of Heaton, Newcastle, said: "I feel this sculpture is overstepping the mark with regards to respect. This blogger believes it is an insult to picture The Christ in any way other that which is pictured in Sacred Scriptures. If I were Pope I would issue a holy edict condemning any Catholic to excommunication who attended this heretical exhibit!
"If other religious characters were portrayed in this way, Mohammad for example, there would be riots. It should be withdrawn immediately."
Assistant priest at St Mary's Roman Catholic Cathedral in Newcastle, the Rev Christopher Warren, branded the statue offensive.
"For Christians the image of Jesus is very special and to interpret it in a sexualised way is an affront to what we hold dear," he said.

The statue is part of the Zabludowicz Collection, owned by Newcastle-born collector Anita Zabludowicz.
She studied fine art and history at Newcastle's College of Arts and Technology before spending 10 years as an interior designer.
Koh, 30, was born in Beijing but raised in Vancouver, Canada, and lives in New York. (source the Daily Mail)

No one would think that a statue of your father, son or brother shown with his private parts would be acceptable. That is no one except an addict to pornography. Then why is there no out cry from the public over this repeated demonstration of hatred for religious symbols? Have we become so humanistic , nihilistic and decadent that we accept these obscenities as art?

God help us, and forgive us if we have!

The Neologism Of Candidates For President

In 1945 Winston Churchill said this about Socialism:
" A socialist policy is abhorrent to the British ideas of freedom. Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the object worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance".

The primary campaign rhetoric from both party's candidates, especially the Democrats, demonstrate that the voters of the United States have many "closet" Socialists to choose from.
With out exception, all the Democratic candidates advocate elimination of the present free enterprise system of Medical Care for the 13% of Americans who have no medical insurance. These 40 million probably included a majority of the estimated 20-30 million illegals presently in the U.S.
The "seven dwarfs" also advocate the amnesty solution to the illegal immigrant problem in this country. Not exactly a conservative or voter friendly position. That is unless you are an illegal with fake documents that will allow you to vote for an "Amnestyista".
You hear little about taxation reform from anyone other than my favorite candidate,Fred Thompson. The Dems. all want to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, and are proposing so many welfare programs that the only way to pay for them will be to increase all manner of Federal taxation!

When the issue of protecting the rights of the unborn, the aged and infirmed. No one candidate is out front championing the rights of those who can't defend themselves or demand equal rights with those illegals who are receiving equal protection in the name of diversity and political correctness.
Deconstructionists have seemed to dictate the parameters of the political debate.

Fred Thompson seems to have the best policy positions and the best political track record among the Republican candidates -- and the least effective presentation of himself.
If Senator Thompson can beat the odds and become president, he would probably be better than most of those who have been in the White House in recent times -- though that is not extravagant praise.credit for this comment is due Thomas Sowell, and I firmly agree with his position.

As for all the other candidates in both parties, the big question is why anyone takes them seriously as candidates to lead the nation at a time of huge dangers that terrorists will end up with nuclear weapons, whether from Iran or Pakistan.
An ambulance chaser who became wealthy by suing insurance companies, An ex-minister who agrees with the Supreme Court ruling against sodomy laws, a Republican front runner who joined Senator Feingold to strike a blow against first amendment rights in politics, and joined with the worst leftist of all, Ted Kennedy, in sponsoring amnesty for illegals.
A Democrat who believes in busing so much he will have his campaign people bus college students from Iowa who go to college in the Chicago area back to Iowa so they can vote.
He is the Fred Astaire of politics -- graceful and elegant, with a surface so pleasing to the eye that it seems mistaken, even greedy, to demand depth. No one, however, would have given Astaire control of nuclear weapons, and that is what this man is asking you to give him.

Then there is the candidate who stood by and watched her husband degrade not only the office of the Presidency, but her own marriage in the White House , and said nothing!
Her programs, which would cost billions and billions of dollars by even the most generous accounting, are simply “gifts” for the American people. No sacrifice, no cost, no strings attached at all — save the price of your vote.And If You believe that the next thing she will try to sell you is that she is a Conservative!

Happy New Year And God Save Us From Our Leaders

As we get ready to celebrate the beginning of the New Year and the National elections in 2008, there is at least one issue which should put a damper on our enthusiasm for the celebration of a new beginning in 2008.

If you have not hard about it, the Congress passed a new CAFE bill and President Bush did as he has so many other times during his seven years in office. He pulled the rug out from the little man! He signed a bill into law that will make automobiles drastically smaller and less safe on the highways to satisfy a bunch of Ecology worshipers whose theory of the Global Warming has not been conclusively been proved. As reported in this blog and many others, there are at least 400 scientist whose expertise is in climate and its relation to man made pollution, who decry the claim that man made pollution has an adverse effect on the Warming of the World.

Never mind scientific testimony. The world has apparently bought into the philosophy and religious fervor of the man who claims to have invented the Internet, Al Gore and his ilk.

The House of Representatives on Tuesday passed the revised version of the Energy Independence and Security Act, returned to it from the U.S. Senate this week. After a camera-ready trip to the White House in a Toyota Prius, the bill was signed into law by President Bush. A key provision of the bill is an increase in fuel-economy standards to average 35 mpg by 2020, which is the first time the CAFE average has been raised since the 1970s.

Also included in the bill were mandates for the U.S. fuel supply to include 36 billion gallons of biofuels — including 15 billion gallons of ethanol, with the rest from "non-food" sources — in 2022. A substance that will make the mega-farmers rich and raise the cost of most food products, that has been shown to damage the fuel injectors of cars over time.

The horrors of this bill will be born by those who have to drive on the highways with the uncontrolled behemoth trucks. To make cars more fuel efficient the auto makers will have to make vehicles for passenger travel smaller and lighter. While they do this the trucks get larger, and become more of a threat to the health an safety of the "individual" driver.

It is much easier to take on the individual than the trucking industry or the teamsters!

Recent studies by Harvard University demonstrate the dire consequences of reducing the size of passenger vehicles. Not only will more cars be blown off course when one of the double trailer trucks passes At more than 75 miles an hour. The real crisis will occur when their is a collision with one of these monsters of the highway!

Researchers at Harvard University and the Brookings Institution found that these micro-cars are not as safe as the current U.S. fleet. Their research found that for every 100 pounds shaved off cars to meet CAFÉ standards between 440 and 780 additional people were killed in auto accidents. This means that an additional total of 2,200 to 3,900 lives will be lost per model year. Adrian Lund, of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said, “Fatalities are much higher with small, lightweight vehicles.” Politicians are force-feeding the micro-cars on the American public even if that means these vehicles will be less safe.

A study in Florida concluded with the following facts: According to the 2003 Florida Department of Transportation Factbook, on average 704 traffic accidents occur in Florida each day. In 2002, there were 250,470 traffic accidents which resulted in 229,611 injuries and 3,143 deaths.

A recent visit to a Toyota dealership, the number one car being sold today in the U.S., it was discovered that only one car meets the standard passed by Congress. The Toyota Prius.Where as the smallest car made by Toyota, the Yaris, had a maximum 36 mpg on the highway, and its combined city and highway average was below the required 35 mpg. The Toyota Camry Hybrid also failed the new CAFÉ standards.

Don't think for a minute that the limousine riding Prince's and Princesses of Congress will be found driving one of the new fuel efficient and dangerous to our health cars. They will cruise up to the Embassy party's in their gas guzzling limos. You can bet on that!