The following video is typical of the left and their agenda to silence any voice contrary to their own. Take note that the language used in the video unveils the character of some of those interviewed.
Fathers
All posts tagged Fathers
‘The Justices wrote that the previous law was incorrect. It had forced “a theory of life” on the nation, defined by the passing of “an arbitrary point in a pregnancy”.
In the June 24, 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned the 50-year-old mandate for nationwide legalized abortion, there were many excellent points of truth. But the incorrect theory of life is critical and brings up another one of the great evils of evolution theory – underlying as it does so much of what is called “a culture of death”.
The Roe v. Wade Court of 1973 had coined the term “trimesters”. It was a word invented to allow for the dehumanizing of an unborn person during the early stages of pregnancy, and thus the purposeful taking of the life. Justice Harry Blackmun admitted it was their invented “framework”1 so that they could arbitrarily divide the abortion code into three different time-frames. By doing this, they attempted to deal with the inconsistency of allowing abortion when the killing of a human being is murder. There were to be no exceptions for abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy – considered essentially a “non-human” phase of pregnancy.
The theory that human life is not present from the beginning of pregnancy owes its modern basis to the Theory of Evolution. True biological science actually affirms that each individual of any species must start their life-cycle as an exact copy of the progenitor cell. This is understood from the routinely proven biological principles of “Fixity of Species” and the “Law of Biogenesis”. Furthermore, the Bible tells us repeatedly in Genesis 1 that all created life will reproduce in no other way except “after its kind”.
You might give people in the early 1970s – especially under the pressure of the sexual revolution and women’s liberation – an excuse to have abortions. Both ultrasound scans and genetic science were not as developed as they are today. People learned they could use “science” – taught through the Haeckel embryo drawings – to argue that a fetus was not truly a human life. It is an excuse you will hear to this very day – another great evil, given “scientific support” by the pseudo-science of evolution.
Zoologist Ernst Haeckel drew his infamous embryo drawings in the year 1874. He was a zealous proponent of Darwin’s theory of evolution, and he proposed that human embryos retraced their evolutionary history as they grew in the womb. He coined the technical terminology for this supposed retracing of evolutionary history as life develops: “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”. Indeed, Charles Darwin himself was convinced of Haeckel’s argument. In fact, he declared that the similarity of vertebrate embryos in their earliest stages – which he thought demonstrated their descent from a common ancestor – was “the strongest single set of facts” supporting his theory!
You can see in Haeckel’s presentation of embryos three rows of eight different species – fish, salamander, tortoise, chick, hog, calf, rabbit and human. By separating them into three rows – showing early, middle and late stages of development – Haeckel conveniently created three divisions for the Roe v. Wade Court to split its ruling into three “trimesters”. In this way, evolution once again promoted a culture of death – as it has in undergirding Nazism, Communism, eugenics, and other false and godless philosophies.
For over 150 years, the drawings have been used in textbooks to proclaim evolution. Yet, they are known frauds with Haeckel’s “embellishments”. For instance, he drew the mammalian embryos with gill slits in place of wrinkles. There are no perforations like gills in the mammalian embryos! And yet, Haeckel said the embryos were going through a “fish” stage of development.
Even the late renowned evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in 2000: “We do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks.”
But let’s continue to think critically about the argument. What kind of proof is mere similarity? Is similarity of appearance sufficient evidence in a court of law? Or do we need better evidence to draw a conclusion – like fingerprints and DNA? I suppose if you go back all the way to fertilized egg cells, all life would look pretty similar on a macro scale – though hugely different genetically. And, if a developing baby is not “viable” until a more “independent” stage, is a baby not human until his arm and leg lengths are of adult proportions? Or maybe until she can speak? Or when he can feed himself?
We rapidly descend into infant sacrifice, for which the pagan nations around ancient Israel were judged, the Bible says. And we actually have many advocating for essentially that in our society today! On May 16, 2022, for example, after news of the pending decision had been illegally leaked, all 49 Senators of one political party voted for the most radical abortion bill proposed in the history of the United States Congress – including abortion right up to birth.
Like so much agenda-driven “research”, Haeckel did his work with an end-point in mind. In that sense, he was like anthropologist Margaret Mead and entomologist-turned-sexologist Alfred Kinsey. They both laid “scientific” groundwork for increased sexual promiscuity and deviancy through the last century. Both did “research” with an agenda driven by their own deviancy, desired outcomes and evolution-supported worldviews. Both are now thoroughly debunked.2,3 And both have been used for years to justify conclusions desired by those who push a godless and/or subversive agenda of sexual license – as has Roe v. Wade.
1 Desanctis, A., “Little Known Facts about Roe v. Wade”, National Review, Jan 23, 2017.
2 Freeman, D., Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth, Harvard University Press, 1983.
3 Reisman, J.A. and Eichel, E.W., Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People, Huntington House, 1990.
Image: Ernst Haeckel’s infamous and inaccurate embryo drawings (PD)’ https://creationmoments.com/newsletter/eventually-the-truth-prevails-one-way-or-another/?mc_cid=4265557c07&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
‘Iowa’s highest court on Friday ruled that the state’s constitution does not include a “fundamental right” to abortion, reversing its own finding from four years ago and reviving a law requiring women to wait 24 hours after an initial appointment before getting an abortion.’https://rumble.com/v18uucc-iowa-top-court-rejects-right-to-abortion.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=2
‘Moments after learning that the Supreme Court had overturned Roe v. Wade, Ivy, the supervisor at the Houston Women’s Clinic, who has worked there for nearly two decades, walked to a nearby room and pressed her fingers to her eyes, fighting back tears.‘ Sadly her tears were not for the unborn she and others murdered!!
These people do not fear death or God! Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Hebrews 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Sadly, in Australia murdering babies gets hardly a mention. However, when the murder of babies in the USA is overturned by Supreme Court the politicians speak out in favor of baby murder! ‘The US supreme court’s decision to wind back abortion rights is “a setback for women and their right to control their own bodies and their lives”, the Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese, has said.
The minister for women, Katy Gallagher, said the “devastating” decision, while directly affecting people in America, also reinforced the need for Australians “to remain vigilant because hard-fought-for wins before our parliaments can be taken away easily”.
The US supreme court on Friday overturned a ruling that had guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion for almost half a century, with at least 26 states expected to ban abortion immediately or as soon as practicable.
Albanese, who was flying to Spain for a Nato summit on Monday morning, responded to the ruling by saying people were “entitled to their own views, but not to impose their views on women for whom this is a deeply personal decision”.
“That is, in my view, one for an individual woman to make based upon their own circumstances, including the health implications,” Albanese told the ABC AM program in an interview broadcast on Monday.
“This decision has caused enormous distress. And it is a setback for women and their right to control their own bodies and their lives in the United States. It is a good thing that in Australia, this is not a matter for partisan political debate.”’https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/jun/27/devastating-australian-politicians-respond-to-us-supreme-courts-decision-on-abortion-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw
‘Another school shooting has left too many children dead. There is no way around it. And every time this happens, people sit and talk about how these things happen, why they happen and how they can be prevented.
I come back to the same conclusion every time — if we do not teach people to respect and value life from the very beginning, why are we surprised when they don’t respect or value it at any point after that?
Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in America in 1973. Fast forward about 20 years, and there was pretty consistent jump in the next generation. The generation that grew up in the 70s and 80s being told it was OK to abort unborn babies.
Fast forward another 20 years or so and there is another consistent bump.
We are a few generations into the legalized murder of unborn babies in America. We are a few generations into a human being not being considered anything more than a “choice.”
Unborn babies are considered disposable. There is a political side that refers to innocent unborn life as either “wanted” or “unwanted.”
And they tell kids and adults there is no right to life for the most vulnerable among us. They tell kids an unborn baby deserves nothing more than a 50-50 shot at life.
Through the legalized killing of unborn babies, there is no doubt we as a society have cheapened the value of life itself.
Again, we have taught generations there is no need to value or respect life from the very beginning. We’ve taught them that individuals can “choose” whether an unborn baby lives or dies.
There are all sorts of underlying issues to the violence. All sorts.
But how can we ignore the obvious? Isn’t it obvious that we have cheapened life since 1973 — when the Supreme Court green-lighted the “choice” to end the life of an unborn baby?
And now, about 50 years later, are we really shocked the value of life and the respect for life is low?
Again — if we do not respect life at the very beginning, why are we surprised when we don’t respect life at any point after that?’https://theiowastandard.com/if-our-society-doesnt-value-life-at-the-very-beginning-why-are-we-surprised-when-it-isnt-respected-at-any-point-after-that/
‘Perhaps no subject illustrates the Leftist bias in Big Science better than the abortion issue. If the leading journals and science reporters actually respected observational science, they would have to agree with the pro-life position: that human life begins at conception. Instead, they fall in line with the radical Left on this subject as well as all their other current hotbed issues. A lot has happened since April 29 when we reported on Big Science’s activity promoting abortion, and how a major Supreme Court document was leaked to the press. Take a look.
After this list of recent evidence, we will see an ID scientist with a good rebuttal from actual science and logic.
The Court is ignoring science (Diana Greene Foster in Science Magazine, 19 May 2022).
This essay appeared in America’s leading science journal from the AAAS, with no rebuttal. Foster’s title indicates that she sides with the leftists currently protesting the draft opinion in Dobbs that would overturn Roe v Wade – a document was leaked illegally by a still-unidentified staffer at the Supreme Court. Foster is claiming that her pro-abortion stance is scientific. Let’s see.
The research revealed that patients who were able to receive an abortion were more than six times more likely to report aspirational 1-year plans than those who were denied one. They are more likely to have a wanted child later and better able to take care of the children they already have. Because the majority of abortion patients are already parents, this means that being able to obtain an abortion has powerful, multigenerational impacts.
By contrast, if people are forced to carry a pregnancy to term, they are more likely to experience lasting financial hardships. After being denied an abortion, women had three times greater odds of being unemployed than those who obtained abortions and had four times higher odds of being below the federal poverty level.
Foster’s “science” consisted only of surveys of 1,000 women in the so-called Turnaway Study, commissioned by former justice Anthony Kennedy. It had nothing to do with biology. It only measured subjective feelings of women who had abortions and those who did not. Most importantly, it said nothing about the human life inside the womb. The tacit conclusion is this: if something is inconvenient, and is getting in your way, or is making you unhappy, kill it. Treat it like you would a nuisance dog or cat or gopher.
The US Supreme Court is wrong to disregard evidence on the harm of banning abortion (Nature Editorial, 5 May 2022).
The world’s leading science journal preceded by two weeks the AAAS in jumping on the bandwagon to fight the Supreme Court’s draft opinion, claiming the high moral ground: it is “wrong” to ban the killing of babies (imagine!). Nature makes similar quasi-scientific arguments that only concern the health and convenience of the woman.
Abortion bans will extract an unequal toll on society. Some 75% of women who choose to have abortions are in a low income bracket and nearly 60% already have children, according to one court brief submitted ahead of the December hearing and signed by more than 150 economists. Travelling across state lines to receive care will be particularly difficult for people who do not have the funds for flights or the ability to take time off work, or who struggle to find childcare.
So what’s their solution? Kill the baby who had nothing to do with the problem? These crocodile tears fail to point out that Planned Parenthood puts their abortion centers in poor neighborhoods that are mostly black and minority. Some 40% of abortions are of black children, even though they make up just 7% of the population. This harks back to the plan of racist eugenicist evolutionist Margaret Sanger (31 July 2020), who saw minorities as less fit than whites; abortion was her way of reducing the numbers of the poor and unfit (Fox News). Sanger’s arguments still gain traction; they were reiterated recently by Janet Yellen, Biden’s Treasury Secretary (Daily Wire, 10 May 2022). Nature‘s editors are just as guilty of promoting eugenics. Rather than helping poor women, they want to eliminate them.
Abortion funds are in the spotlight with the likely end of Roe v. Wade – 3 findings about what they do (Gretchen Ely, The Conversation, 13 May 2022).
As a social work professor who studies reproductive health care, I have led research that reviewed thousands of case records of patients who requested assistance from abortion funds to help pay for a procedure that they could not afford.
Dr Ely’s article consists only of statistics about how abortion funds are allocated to women seeking abortions, and how overturning Roe might make them harder to get. Her euphemism (linking abortion with “reproductive health care”) reveals her pro-abort position. Again, nothing is said about the vulnerable living human being inside the womb. Her silence treats “it” as a non-person.
The Lancet warns US Supreme Court over abortion (Medical Xpress, 13 May 2022).
Editors of one of the leading medical journals in the world, The Lancet in Britain, give their support to protestors who are fighting the draft Supreme Court decision. Look for any sign of balance, or any concern for the life of the unborn, or any analysis of whether the Roe decision in 1973 was a good legal decision. It’s not there. Instead, you will find slogans and hate speech that could have been shouted by Chuck Schumer, Senate Majority Leader, who literally threatened two pro-life justices (Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) from the steps of the Supreme Court during their confirmation hearings (YouTube).
“The fact is that if the US Supreme Court confirms its draft decision, women will die,” the publication said.
“The justices who vote to strike down Roe will not succeed in ending abortion, they will only succeed in ending safe abortion.”
“Alito and his supporters will have women’s blood on their hands,” it concluded, referring to justice Samuel Alito, who authored the draft majority opinion of the court that was leaked last week.
Less than 1% of abortions take place in the third trimester – here’s why people get them (Katrina Kimport, The Conversation, 17 May 2022).
Baby in the womb (Illustra media)
Kimport’s article begins with a stock photo of 9 smiling young women with the caption, “If Roe v. Wade is overturned, more people could find themselves needing a third-trimester abortion.” Is that a scientific argument for abortion? No. Like the other articles emanating from Big Science and its lapdog Big Science Media, it is another argument for the convenience of the mother. Knowing that late-term abortion is unpopular even among those who support abortion “rights,” Kimport tries to make the case that there aren’t very many of those now, but there will be more if Roe is overturned (see fear-mongering in the Baloney Detector). Her evidence is anecdotal, not scientific:
Other women described barriers that weren’t directly related to policy. One young woman, for example, was so afraid that her parents would judge her for becoming pregnant and wanting an abortion that she took no action toward getting the abortion. By the time she felt able to confide in her brother, who was able to get her an appointment for an abortion, she was in the third trimester of pregnancy.
Such an argument, though, is inconsistent, because it assumes that late-term abortion is bad. So if early-term abortion is good, where does she draw the line to where it becomes bad? Like the others, she completely overlooks the issue of whether the baby growing within the mother, with its own genome, sex and human potential, has a right to life.
Roe v. Wade FAQ: What if abortion rights law gets overturned? (Live Science, 4 May 2022).
Devoid of any pro-life arguments, this article, pretending to be objective, ends up only telling women where they can still get abortions if Roe is overturned.’ The rest of the article may be read at https://crev.info/2022/05/big-science-goes-all-in-for-abortion/
- “Instagram did take our feed post down. This is ok, fortunately we have talked with our team at YouTube and they’re keeping the documentary up there, which is most important. They did demonetise and take the video out of the algorithm. Which is all ok, we assumed this would happen,” said Cole in an update about the video.”
- “The biggest thing this does is significantly reduce the video’s reach. The more people the video reaches, the more people who can find help. This makes it where you can really only watch the video if you have a link or go directly to our channel.”
- “YouTube won’t further share it,” Cole continued. “At this point we’ll leave the message in God’s hands and trust that whoever is supposed to watch it, will watch it. You guys have supported this so much and we’re so thankful. If you feel lead, please share the documentary with people you know.”
BACKGROUND:
- Husband Cole and wife Savannah together have over 10 million Instagram followers and 13 million YouTube, subscribers.
- The pair met and married after Savannah already had her oldest daughter, Everly, whom she carried while in her teens.’https://americanfaith.com/instagram-influencers-the-labrant-familys-pro-life-video-removed-as-fans-attack-their-stance/
‘A world-famous father that everyone seemed to love and respect was a violent, mean, raging man who often mistreated his son, especially during Christmas, but that almost unbelievable truth would not be revealed for decades after it could have made a difference.
Christmas is celebrated worldwide, and for that, I am pleased even if the boozing, wild spending, partying, and general excesses usually accompany the season. It should also be an opportunity for parents to teach their children basic principles they need for adulthood. How to live does not come automatically, and it must be taught.
What a story to tell everyone: Christ was born to a virgin as angels celebrated His lowly birth. Wise men traveled hundreds of miles to worship him with many expensive gifts. King Herod the Great killed all males under two years old in Bethlehem and its coasts. There is a hurried trip by the young family to Egypt to escape a bloody king’s paranoia.
Who needs toys, trees, and tinsel with a story like that?
Santa is a fun thing to children; however, most parents make a tragic mistake by letting them think he is real. Maybe they don’t lie, but they go along with that untruth. That is a lie (even if you insist it is a white lie—no such thing), and no child should be told a lie. No parent should undercut their rightful authority by confusing children for “a little harmless fun.” The gifts came from parents and others, not from Santa.
It is not harmless.
Have your trees, toys, and tinsel but inform children that they are honoring the most incredible event in world history: God became man to provide personal salvation to anyone who merely trusts Him in simple faith. Additionally: children should be taught the qualities needed for a successful life.
I am saying Christmas should promote character. One should learn early to be a giver; to stand against tyrants; to serve others; to be humble. All of that is not natural and must be taught.
We know Christ came to provide life, but He also promised abundant life. Children need to be taught that Christ is the pattern for them. Children don’t absorb truth as a sponge absorbs water, instead, they must be taught. Even church people make the mistake of thinking it is enough to tell children the truth and expect that to settle the fact for all time. It doesn’t happen that way. Most parents major in talking, failing to follow up with teaching and training. That seldom happens and our schools and streets are overrun with thugs, made that way by uninformed, or unconcerned, or unmotivated parents.
No child has to be taught to lie, be selfish, or be unkind. With time, usually very early, each child will prove that truth since they are born with a sinful nature, a reality that makes humanists go ballistic. “How dare you suggest my innocent little children have a sinful nature.” Well, they do. That’s why Christ told Nicodemus he needed to be born again: that his first birth was not enough, and he must have a new nature through the new birth.
That’s why we have Christmas.
Since the last few generations have failed in rearing principled children, we have people in positions of power without principle. Political lying is not only accepted, it is expected. University professors, with missionary zeal, peddle ridiculous lies to our youth.
Attractive women, who are blessed with beauty and unblessed with brains, deem it appropriate to expose their bodies for the whole world to ogle. They usually decorate their body with a silver cross, whatever that means. Young adults think someone or some group or the government owes them whatever they want. They think they deserve it since they are poor, oppressed, hated, and ridiculed, doing outrageous things without accountability.
It is too late absent a radical born-again experience for those pathetic people who were failed by their parents. They were not taught biblical characteristics of always being honest, punctual, kind, generous, obedient, honorable, charitable, hard-working, dependable, respectable, and forgiving.
I saw many children in Christian homes without character during my early years because their parents had failed to teach and practice principled living. They taught the Bible but did not apply it to their lives. I determined that I would not be so dedicated to the ministry that I failed my own children. When my wife was pregnant with our son, to be followed by three beautiful blonds, I wrote the principles we would follow in making them normal, gracious, adult Christians. She was faithful in implementing those rules to her credit while I spent much of my time traveling as an evangelist and Christian apologist.
I don’t need to admit that my brood is not perfect, far from it. After all, half their genes are mine.
I am delighted with how our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren have developed. Of course, everyone reading this is saying, “Yes, but wait until they are grown.” Well, my children had enough commitment to train their children, and I think those children are training their children to be an honor to our family, Christianity, and America.
Sending children to a Christian school is not enough since teachers must be concerned with academics: science, history, geography, English, spelling, math, biology, etc. The successful school will implement Christian character into each subject, but that is not enough. Parents must talk, teach, and train their children, which requires work—consistent, persistent work. Most parents are too lazy or selfish, resulting in today’s America—bedlam, which means “a scene of uproar and confusion.”
Using the Bible, parents should train their children in biblical truth. Additional character-building materials are also available. The best help I have seen is a series written by Dr. Ed Dunlop. I was surprised to discover I deeply enjoyed reading the series a few years ago and have since recommended that series to thousands of people, schools, and home schools. It is called the Terrestria Chronicles, a medieval allegory series. The students don’t notice the abundance of character-building taking place because they are so engrossed in the story.
Be proactive now if your children are disobedient, slothful, angry, unmotivated, or even harm other children or pets. Almost all mass killers have had a history of mistreatment of animals and children. Children should be taught to not even break or destroy a toy.
The above books would be a very beneficial Christmas gift to a child. It could pay big time.
Lindsay was a handsome boy who was given whatever he wanted except love, acceptance, and training. His world-famous father often screamed obscenities at him and beat him at times. He was especially brutal during the Christmas season. He was given extra chores to do during that time, but it never seemed to satisfy his stern father. The whippings often drew blood.
He had three older brothers, but Lindsay incurred most of his father’s rage.
The public would have been shocked if the famous father’s actions had become public. That didn’t happen until many years later, and even today, few know the details.
A friend of Lindsay’s said, “Lindsay was never able to find happiness. He became a hard-drinking rounder who went from woman to woman and couldn’t find peace or success.” Because of his famous father, Lindsay was cast in a few movies that failed, as did his other endeavors, including his three marriages.
Having a famous father, Lindsay and his three older brothers formed a singing quartet and experienced a short period of success on major television shows, but he was always compared to his father. When Lindsay had a nervous breakdown, the quartet broke up.
Another failure.
After a lifetime of failure and being forced to live in the shadow of his famous and brutal father, Lindsay made a tragic decision. It was just before Christmas on December 11, that he watched Bing Crosby’s White Christmas movie in his apartment one last time. He then put a gun to his head and put a bullet in his brain.
Tragically, Lindsay’s brother Dennis killed himself with a shotgun two years later. Shockingly, their dad was Bing Crosby, the world-famous singer and movie star. However, some family members disagree with that extreme characterization of Bing.
Lindsay wrote, “I hated Christmas because of Pop, and I always will,” and continued, “It brings back the pain and fear I suffered as a child. And if I ever do myself in, it will be at Christmastime. That will show the world what I think of Bing Crosby’s White Christmas.”
Christ’s birth is the most extraordinary story ever told, but apparently, Lindsay never knew the true story of Christmas. The death of Lindsay Crosby is one of the most tragic stories ever told.
And it didn’t have to be.
Christ’s birth, death, and physical resurrection were Lindsay’s answers he and his family needed. That is because Jesus Christ makes a difference when accepted, and biblical principles are instilled in children.
The best Christmas gift you can give to your family is recognizing your sin, repenting of that sin, and receiving Christ as Savior.
Merry Christmas and a very successful New Year, the best of your life!’https://donboys.cstnews.com/a-shocking-christmas-story-unknown-by-the-world
whatyareckon 