‘Over the weekend the Herald Sun ran with a story headline, “Three year olds identifying as gender diverse”.
Most three-year-olds couldn’t even pronounce the words “gender diverse” let alone understand what they mean.
Most three-year-olds would also identify as unicorns, fairies, puppy dogs or firemen.
That doesn’t mean we indulge such fantasies by labelling them reality.
We encourage children to play, explore and experiment. It is how they learn.
They also learn by understanding when playtime is over and teaching them how to deal with real life circumstances. To enable them to grow up to be healthy adults we have to teach them resilience, perseverance, delayed gratification, resourcefulness, and responsibility.
Interfering with a child’s natural development and curiosity will not bode well for society. Prescribing medications to make them drug dependant for life – having to rely on daily meds to keep up the appearance of appropriating the opposite sex – is cruel and dangerous.
There is little-to-no long term data to show just how damaging it could be. In fact, all evidence so far indicates up to 80 per cent of gender confused children will outgrow their confusion by the time they have gone through puberty if they are not interfered with.
Yet gender clinics, cheered on by extremists, seem all too happy to run down this pathway of medical transitioning.
What will be the cost to this innocent generation of children?
How many more tragic stories of de-transitioners will we have to hear before our politicians and doctors say enough is enough?’
Genesis 3:20 “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.”
Are all human beings descended from one woman? That subject has been a popular ongoing topic in news reports and magazine articles. Research supposedly shows that science has proved that all humans living today are descended from one woman. Could this be the Eve of Genesis?
You need to know, first, that this research was produced by evolutionists to support the idea of evolution. The researchers believe that a genetic material called mitochondrial DNA provides a clock that measures evolution. They studied 147 women from different parts of the world and compared their differences. Adding up those differences and how long evolution supposedly would take to produce them from one woman led them to a figure of about 200,000 years.
The scientific problems with this approach were ignored. Other possible interpretations of the data were ignored. For example, their conclusions stretch a tiny bit of assumed fact to cover 700,000% more ground than the original facts! Obviously this claim is nothing to be too sure about. None of the popular reports on this work told readers that other researchers have shown that mitochondrial DNA offers no evolutionary clock at all!
Proverbs 22:6 “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”.
‘Could it be true that we have unwittingly been telling our young people that Christianity is irrelevant?
As I present the evidence for creation and explain to young people the problems with evolution, a similar pattern has emerged with each presentation. While the information is new to them, it rings true. Soon the questions start and they begin to realize that they have been misled by those teaching evolution. Before long, though I have not been encouraging resentment, many of them begin to feel angry that they have been misled by their teachers.
When I have finished, many of them surround me to ask more questions and make comments. The words of one young man sum up why they are so vitally interested. He told me, “I just wish that my older brother had heard this message a couple of years ago. I talked with him a lot, and I just know that if he knew the Bible had intelligent answers, he would not have left the church and hurt my parents so. In fact, until I heard you, I was ready to follow him.”
Job 21:26 They shall lie down alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them.
Acts 12:23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
For those who do not believe the Creator’s Book they continue ‘Digging desperately for more climate dirt, the CBC announces that worms are coming for us. “Invasive earthworms are remaking our forests, and climate scientists are worried”. Worried about worms eating forests? Well, yes. The author, with a BA in Journalism from Concordia with a minor in Women’s Studies, informs us that the three-century-long creep of non-native earthworms through North America is releasing deadly clouds of CO2. “Although they’re usually perceived as friendly helpers in the garden, elsewhere, they can be a surprisingly destructive force.” Once again, if worms can destroy the planet, it wasn’t going to make it anyway.
You might be wondering what exactly makes worms surprisingly destructive, given that in their absence “other soil-dwelling organisms such as mites, nematodes, millipedes and fungi break down organic matter in Canadian forests”. Well, see, “In essence, worms speed up decomposition, which can be a bad thing for ecosystems used to taking it slow.” Which brings us back to this curious alarmist belief that until humans put the blade on the hockey stick climates didn’t change much.
Which is especially curious here because the story allows that “Earthworms are not native to most of North America. Until about 10,000 years ago, a vast ice sheet covered the northern third of the North American continent. Scientists think it killed off the earthworms that may have inhabited the area before the last glaciation.” Doesn’t sound like taking it slow to us. Sounds like massive upheaval.
What’s more, if the worms were only wiped out between the Eemian and the Holocene, and before that were doing their thing throughout most of the last 200 million years, they should have caused runaway warming or whatever dumb thing they were going to do long before the last glaciation. And if she were a scientist, we might ask her to explain why the last glaciation killed them off but not the roughly 16 others during the Pleistocene.
We won’t, because the syllogism, such as it is, runs like this: “Major Premise: Climate change is a runaway disaster. Minor Premise: Earthworms are part of climate change. Conclusion: Earthworms are a runaway disaster.” Works great on anything.
Even worms. And even though the holistic gardeners we have mentioned in earlier posts think that worms are good because healthy soil means healthy plants and healthy plants sequester carbon in soil. But when it comes to climate change, everything is bad and nothing is too small to cause catastrophe. And everything gets worse.
Thus the story finishes us off with “More recently, several species of Asian earthworms have made their way to the continent, and they have soil scientists particularly concerned. Originally from Korea and Japan, they are known as ‘jumping worms,’ ‘snake worms,’ or ‘crazy worms’ — named for their distinctive thrashing when disturbed. They are ravaging soils throughout the U.S., and have crossed the border into Canada.”
Isaiah 29:16 “Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?”
‘It was first discovered in 1855, but many scientists debated its existence for another 50 years. Once its existence was finally proven to everyone’s satisfaction, it was another 50 years before science had any tools to begin studying it. Finally, in the late 1980s, scientists began to learn a little about the secrets of one of the tiniest, yet most amazing structures in the body.
At the back of the eye, between the deepest layer of the retina and the cells beneath it, lies a tiny moat made up of about 10 drops of a mysterious fluid. The entire moat is thinner than a sheet of cellophane.
It seems that the clear fluid in the moat serves the surrounding light-sensing tissues of the eye in place of blood, bringing in nutrients and carrying away waste. It also transports light-sensitive chemicals needed by the light-detecting cells in the eye. In addition, it seems to glue the retina in place. More than that, the moat is rich in a growth factor. This fact makes scientists believe that the gel may also be important to repairing injuries to the retina, keeping the cells of the retina young and active, as well as helping in the growth of new cells. As one researcher said, the more they study this tiny structure, the more unexpected abilities they find – something like a bottomless suitcase.
Psalm 51:6 “Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden [part] thou shalt make me to know wisdom.”
‘Jellyfish and their cousins are often described as the simplest animals without nervous systems. Because evolutionary scientists have thought jellyfish were such simple creatures, and because many of them show up early in the fossil record, jellyfish were said to be among the earliest animals to evolve.
Marine biologists have been surprised to learn that the modern populations of jellyfish and their cousins are actually much more complex than they ever suspected. Creationists point out that because there are so many of these creatures, there was also probably a large population in the past. The more common a creature is, the more likely it is to be found in the deeper rocks of the fossil record.
More recently, scientists have learned that the supposedly simple nervous system of the jellyfish is actually not so simple. They have confirmed that at least one type of jellyfish has a nervous system with the same advanced features found only in mammals and humans. Most animals generate electrical impulses using sodium. However, like humans, this jellyfish can generate different kinds of impulses depending on whether sodium or calcium is used. Thus, the jellyfish can send twice as much information through its nervous system as most other animals!
Allowing the unborn to be born is a tragedy to some people in today’s society. Simply put, ABORTION is MURDER and these people who support abortion are therefore for MURDER! However, the grace of the Creator God even forgives and saves murderers! Saul of Tarsus is an example. The following is a dialogue concerning a “heartbeat’ bill in the state of Texas.
‘The US state of Texas has passed a law protecting unborn children in the womb by making abortion illegal from six weeks into pregnancy.
The so-called ‘Heartbeat Act’ was signed into law back in May, however on 1 September, the US Supreme Court ruled not to block the law after abortion providers and lobby groups campaigned against it.
Christian Concern’s chief executive Andrea Williams debated journalist Hilary Freeman on GB News about the new law. Shockingly, Hilary commented, “I can’t see the difference between what’s going on in Afghanistan and what’s going in Texas. … A six-week-old fetus is not a child, a heartbeat doesn’t mean anything … it’s like a parasite really, when you’re pregnant. … Before we’re born, we’re not human.”
‘Few reports have shocked me like this one. In September 2020, it was reported that scientists from the University of Pittsburgh (US) had taken the scalps from 18–20 week aborted babies, grafted them onto the backs of live mice, and watched the human skin and hair grow.1 They also took some of the babies’ internal organs, and diced them small enough to inject into the rodents. Funded by US tax dollars via the National Institute for Health (NIH) the purpose of the ‘experiment’ was to investigate disease and immune responses in ‘humanised’2 mice and rats.
Published photos of aborted babies’ scalps grafted onto humanized mice at 12 weeks (credit: Agarwal, et al).3
The scientists published their findings in the prestigious online journal, Scientific Reports (nature.com). The researchers gathered information on how the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus infects human skin. This was achieved by studying mice immune responses to human—rodent skin grafts. In the researchers’ own words:
“Full-thickness human fetal skin was processed via removal of excess fat tissues attached to the subcutaneous layer of the skin, then engrafted over the rib cage, where the mouse skin was previously excised.”3
A 20 week-old human foetus, in reality a baby with fully developed nervous system that can feel pain.
To say that those with pro-life convictions (based upon the sanctity of human life) will find such a description extremely distasteful is a huge understatement. Sadly, there is more. Simultaneously, the mice were injected with the aborted babies’ lymphoid cells (derived from thymus and spleen) and hematopoietic stem cells (blood manufacturing cells) extracted from their livers. By doing this, the rodents (termed “models” for human biological study) were ‘humanized’ with organs and skin from the babies. Some of the rodents were then infected with Staphylococcus in the newly grafted human skin to study how the grafts and mouse internal organs responded.
It was observed that healthy skin grafts lasted up to 10 weeks. Multiple layers of new human skin cells developed ‘keratinocytes’ (outer-skin cells) and ‘fibroblasts’ (structural-cells). The human skin also grew new blood vessels and immune cells. Infected skin patches were also monitored for bacterial growth and damage. The hair from the babies’ scalps continued to grow in the original colours. The photos from the research paper show the darker human hair contrasted against the fine white hair on the backs of the mice.
Human dignity vs animal rights
The published research and associated imagery should shock us to the core. Each little scalp belonged to a baby who should have been loved, cherished, and nurtured. Instead, these little ones were sacrificed on the altar of convenience, merely as medical products, ostensibly to benefit others. As we have stated before, “CMI would still oppose embryonic stem cell research, because the end of possibly saving human lives does not justify killing others, in the same way that Dr Mengele’s medical experimentation on Jews during the Holocaust were inexcusable, and would be even if it had produced numerous medical breakthroughs.”
At the end of the Scientific Reports paper, an “ethical approval” section outlines the researchers’ strict adherence to official protocols for—rodent care:
“All animal studies/experimental protocols were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of Pittsburgh and were conducted following approved guidelines, which adheres to the NIH guidelines for housing and care of laboratory animals.”3
The question arises, was the same level of care offered to the unborn babies? Absolutely not. Their lives were snuffed out and exploited in abhorrent and macabre ways. After dismemberment at abortion clinics, they were administratively “de-identified” and referred to as “human fetal tissues”:
“De-identified human fetal tissues at the gestational age of 18 to 20 weeks were obtained from medically or elective indicated termination of pregnancy through Magee-Womens Hospital of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), with the University of Pittsburgh, Health Sciences Tissue Bank. Written informed consent of the maternal donors was obtained in all cases, under a protocol reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Pittsburgh; approved guidelines and federal/state regulations were adhered to for all procedures. The use of de-identified human fetal tissues to construct humanized rodents was reviewed and approved by the University of Pittsburgh IRB Office.”3
Here, institutionalised human ethical ‘approval’ is emphasised—but it is certainly not God’s approval. He cannot condone such barbaric destruction of human life—for any cause. As Creator, God alone has the sovereign right to give or take life.
Imago dei defines humanity
The next sentence in the so-called ‘ethical approval’ section lays bare the philosophical and moral bankruptcy behind the thinking that approves such monstrous practices:
“The use of de-identified human fetal tissues did not constitute human subjects research as defined under federal regulations…” (emphasis added).2
This is the horror exposed. Unborn children are not being legally recognized as possessing human rights. Nevertheless, why, in the same sentence are fetal tissues labelled as being “human”? Which is it? Only when God’s Word is rejected as being foundational to correct moral thinking, are such contradictory and ethically repugnant statements contemplated. Such depraved reasoning inevitably leads to morally abhorrent, shocking practices, as in 2014 it was reported that some UK hospitals were being heated using incinerated aborted babies.
Unborn babies are people. They are made in God’s image and likeness (Latin: Imago dei; Genesis 1:30) and bequeathed by their Creator with the gift of life, dignity, and worth. They are also vulnerable, and should therefore be afforded special protection in law.
This kind of tax-funded research used to be banned under a succession of US administrations. The tragedy is, under recent and present governments, such restrictions were overturned,4 in which case, we can expect more horrors to come. History demonstrates that, if such ‘research’ can be done, it will be done. Tragically, the moral compass necessary for people to govern righteously in society is broken.
Conclusion
Not until people return in their thinking to the standards of God’s Word will the rights of the unborn be protected. Babies in the womb are fully human, made in God’s Image. The research described above should shock the conscience of people in every nation which practices abortion, and permits the insidious medical research that exploits it. However, the sad reality is that consciences will not be stirred unless people face up to the consequences of breaking God’s moral law. Evolutionary thinking sees humans and rodents merely as distant cousins, therefore the unborn have no inherent dignity or worth. Only Genesis provides the moral framework for protecting humans created in His Image.
References and notes
News first reported in: Trasancos, S., How aborted children are used in medical research in 2020; ncregister.com/blog/how-aborted-children-are-used, December 15 2020. Return to text.
Humanized mice carry functioning human genes, cells, tissues, and/or organs. They are commonly used as small animal models in biological and medical research for human therapeutics. Return to text.
Agarwal, Y., et al., Development of humanized mouse and rat models with full‑thickness human skin and autologous immune cells, Scientific Reports, 10:14598; September 2020 | doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71548-z. Return to text.
whatyareckon 