“Christianity has not, and does not profess to have a detailed political program. It is meant for all men at all times, and the particular program which suited one place or time would not suit another.”
This morning, in the middle of his campaign National Prayer Breakfast speech, President Obama delighted those of us who love irony by quoting C.S. Lewis. It was an interesting moment in a speech that put forth the notion that taxing the wealthy is right in line with the teachings of Jesus. I mean, Jesus did hang out with tax collectors, right? The idea that government welfare is somehow the fulfillment of Jesus’ teaching on charity is a common misconception that many people make, Christians included, and it’s the main reason that liberals believe conservatives are Christian hypocrites. Perhaps if the president visited church more often than only during campaign seasons, he might not be so confused. See, not only do we spend time praising God in church, we also gain insight from our pastors who have surely spent more time in the word of God than we have.
While Obama may have been correct in saying that government mandated, shared responsibility is equal to the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, he is incorrect to group in Jesus’ teaching, “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.” Aside from the fact that Jesus was discussing requirements from God, not the government, he was actually teaching his disciples that they were stewards of God’s gift of Revelation. Their requirement was to spread the good news of Jesus Christ. It’s the crux of Christianity that Obama seems to miss. Jesus came because we are imperfect. We could never fulfill all the requirements that the pharisees loved to lord over the people. Jesus’ coming ended the rule of law and the began the acceptance that our only way to God was through Him. Yes, Jesus very much emphasized the importance of giving to the poor, but as a reaction in joy to what we’ve been given; not because of a law. Giving out of obligation is not truly giving, it’s merely following the rules. Just ask anyone who’s ever written a check to pay their taxes, I doubt you’d find them excited.
Original post dated July 4, 2008. Reposting to get it out of the archives : )
Imagine you work in a hospital and you find a newborn wrapped up and abandoned outside the entrance. What would protocol have you do? Probably bring the child inside to receive immediate medical attention. Now what if you found that same baby in a soiled utility closet inside the hospital? Well, if you worked at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, IL before 2001 the protocol would have been to let the baby die.
At least five babies spent their last hours left to die in the soiled utility closet at Christ Hospital in 2001 alone; one even managed to live for almost 8 hours. Untold numbers suffered the same fate across the nation while Barack Obama sat on legislation to stop these horrendous acts of infanticide.
On March 27, 2001, Jill Stanek testified before the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee on her experience with babies who survived an abortion procedure at Christ Hospital.
State Senator Patrick O’Malley of Oak Lawn introduced the first draft of the state’s Born Alive Infant Protection Act, using language identical to that of federal legislation introduced in 2000 by Rep. Charles Canady, R-Fla., who had drafted his wording using that of the World Health Organization and the United Nations: The term “born alive,” with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
Barack Obama objected (pgs. 86-87) (PDF) to the idea that babies born alive in this particular manner are anything more than pre-viable fetuses because as persons they would be protected by the constitution; and in his mind that would lead to the barring of abortions. Furthermore, he didn’t want to burden doctors with having to keep a “pre-viable child” alive since the Supreme Court has determined viability and a doctor might have to actually use judgement. Although Obama voted present, the legislation passed in the Senate; but it didn’t in the House.
So Rep. O’Malley reintroduced the bill in 2002 and again, Obama objected (pgs. 31-34)(PDF). Even though the bill had been altered so an attending physician would be brought in to assist and advise on the issue of viability, Obama believed the bill would do nothing more than burden women and physicians. He also stated that if the children were, indeed, being born alive he had confidence that the doctors performing the procedures would be sure the infants were looked after. How Obama misunderstood the testimony given by Jill Stanek in 2001 is a mystery, especially considering that in 2002 she testified again and described the “comfort room” the hospital had set up in response to her first testimony.
Four months ago, Christ Hospital unveiled its “Comfort Room.” So now I can no longer say that live aborted babies are left in our Soiled Utility Room to die. We now have this prettily wallpapered room complete with a First Foto machine, baptismal gowns, a footprinter and baby bracelets, so that we can offer keepsakes to parents of their aborted babies. There is even a nice wooden rocker in the room to rock live aborted babies to death.
After voting no on the bill in 2002, Barack Obama was, for a third time, faced with the Born Alive Infant Protection Act when it was sent to the Health & Human Services Committee in 2003 – which he chaired. This time he held the bill from even being voted on; and stopped the senate sponser from adding to the bill to make it identical to the federal bill that had been signed into law by President Bush the year before. Finally, in 2005 (after Barack Obama left the state Senate) the Born Alive legislation was passed.
It has been suggested that Obama may have been influenced by his fellow Trinity United Church of Christ members who were also on the board of Christ Hospital’s parent company, Advocate Health Care, such as Dr. Jane Fisler-Hoffman and Rev. Dr. Ozzie Smith Jr., former associate pastor at TUCC under Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright, Obama’s 20 year mentor and spiritual advisor, was also on the board of Christ Hospital’s parent company from 1986-89. Also attending Obama’s church was Christ Hospital CEO, Carole Schneider. Perhaps they also influenced him on his opinion that babies are punishment for unprotected sex.
Recently, Senator Obama has made overtures to the middle on abortion. But he is, in fact, as far left as they come. In Illinois, Obama sealed the fate of infants who managed to survive abortion across the state. No matter what they did, how hard they tried; despite grasping for life that others were denying them and fighting for their first breath, the choice had been made. Why? Because Barack Obama thinks as so many on the left do – A person is the property of the state, and the baby is the property of the mother, each to be disposed of when inconvenient. Even in a soiled utility room.
Every year thousands of women train and prepare to Race for the Cure organized by Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the world’s largest breast cancer nonprofit. During October, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, almost every product on the shelves, from batteries to blenders, turns pink and contributes a portion of their sales to Susan G. Komen for the Cure. One needs not see the name to know who is behind the pink ribbon. Most people, however, do not know what is beyond the ribbon and the name for which it stands.
$731,303. That is the amount donated to Planned Parenthood by Susan G. Komen for the Cure in 2009 alone. The relationship between Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen has been documented and objected to for so long that Komen actually has an explanation letter on their website.
When I moved to small-town America in high school, I was immediately struck (dumbfounded if you will) by how many people openly supported the Republican party. “How could they all be so fooled?” I thought. They were mostly farmers and no one was wealthy; they were the furthest from my definition of a Republican. I couldn’t understand how they could vote for a party that was so selfish and certainly didn’t care about their needs.
Upon graduation, I drove as quickly as I could back to the city for college. I chose a small, private, Christian-based school because I benefited from the small class sizes that small towns afford. I had accepted Christ in my small town too, but not the Republicans. I was not surprised to find many Republicans at my college; they fit the profile – they had always attended private school and were just continuing on in that tradition because they could afford it. I aligned myself with those that had attended public school and were there on scholarship. I only talked politics with those who agreed with me.
My first real discussion on politics was when I met my husband-to-be. He was the first person to really challenge what I thought I knew and it was one year after college. He introduced me to the word Conservative and accused me of being one. Our discussions were tense, to say the least, but he was hot and smart so I stuck around. My conversion, that wasn’t really a conversion, was gradual. I’d give him my opinion of a topic and he’d enlighten me to the fact that the Republican party agreed with me and the Democrats did not. In other cases, maybe more than I care to admit, it was simply a case of following logic through to conclusion. Thinking logically took some getting used to; it’s not as pretty. After many, many discussions I was finally ready to admit that maybe Bush was not the anti-Christ; and I stepped forever away from the child I was when I voted for him in his re-election.
In another twist in the American story that only God could author, the nation’s largest social program is beginning it’s implosion at the same time the Democrats are forcing through their health care monstrosity.
This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes – nearly $29 billion more.
Since the government has nothing but IOUs to pay the $2.5 trillion in debt that is Social Security, it will have to, once again, borrow money. However, Moody’s Investors Service warned today that the U.S. is at the brink of losing it’s “AAA” credit rating; which sent stocks falling on Wall Street. In order to keep U.S. credit in good standing, Moody’s recommends harsh and potentially unpopular policies that will test social cohesion. According to their report, the U.S. could face a downgrade in rating by 2013; and that’s without the current healthcare bill that the CBO has yet to even give a cost estimate. Once downgraded the cost of borrowing money would increase, making the $2.5 trillion in Social Security debt a drop in an alarmingly overflowing bucket.
I didn’t understand the importance of words until I joined the Howe family. I was an English major in college yet a neophyte at real world application. I thought I was a Democrat until I met my husband. I was told many things about the Democrat party (and the Republican party – or rather, the dark side) while growing up. What I wasn’t told was the difference between literal and figurative speech.
My father-in-law, one of the smartest men I have ever known, has studied language his entire career. He studies the Bible and reads it from it’s original language of Hebrew to our present day language. The objective is to ensure that the original intent of each word has remained intact through time and language; which it has. Through my time in a family that values each word one chooses to use I have learned that language is extremely powerful.
“That’s not what I meant.” “Then what did you mean?” “You know what I meant!” “That’s not what you said.” And so the argument goes. As a recovering Democrat I struggle almost daily with actually saying what I mean to say. I was lead to believe that the actual words used were not important as long as the general message got across. What’s worse is that the people who conveyed that the overall message was of greater value than the words used to get there actually understood the value of carefully considered wording. They’ve continued to play the language game; only now they’ve said too much and, ironically, with a 2000+ page bill their lies are becoming… what’s that word? Transparent.
In 2001, then Senator Barack Obama used language to repeatedly stop efforts to protect infants being murdered after being born alive. He was the only one to refuse to pass the bill because the language wasn’t precise enough for him. He valued words over human life. His attention to language and the intentional use of it does not go unnoticed today.
The Obama administration has attempted to rename every hurdle they have come across since taking office and abortion is no exception. With such a remarkable history of protecting murder, Barack Obama knew before he even swore his oath to protect that the word “abortion” would have to go away. With the reversal of the “Mexico City Policy” shortly after he took office, Obama welcomed in the term “family planning” to confuse the issue. One would think family planning denotes planning a family, but it’s actually quite the opposite when spoken by Obama.
Today we find “family planning” again in the health care bill that we have been repeatedly assured does not cover abortion. Well, it doesn’t, it covers “family planning” that will be provided in Community Health Centers. The centers are funded within the health care bill so that “family planning” doesn’t receive federal funding previously barred from such activity. In other words, new money will go to the Community Health Centers because the U.S. has this bothersome history of not federally funding abortions.
Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, has said the current Senate bill that Obama and Democrats are promoting through reconciliation, “would result in direct federal funding of abortion through Community Health Centers, tax subsidies for private abortion plans that cover abortion (including some federally administered plans), and pro-abortion federal administrative mandates, among other problems.”
Luckily, it appears some Democrats may stand with pro-lifers against the language of lies. Bart Stupak (D-MI) is leading the charge that may put an end to Obamacare. Twelve Democrats in all have pledged to vote against the health care bill if it’s abortion language remains unchanged. In a twist that proves who’s really in charge, all the health care drama is playing out during the 40 Days For Life campaign; in which thousands across America are praying in front of abortion facilities. How fitting it is that the voices that never got a vote will be the ones to speak for us all.
In an administration pursuing an overseas contingency operation to ostensibly avert man-caused disasters, word replacement therapy has almost certainly just begun. In the words of the master wordsmith, Bill Clinton, ‘it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” If we didn’t learn our language lesson then, we must certainly learn it now. Otherwise, we face falling into…ahem…pragmatism.
In case you didn’t catch that, that would be Vice President Biden saying, “It’s easy being Vice President, you don’t have to do anything.” He also agreed with the person he was talking to that it’s like being the grandpa and not the parent. So let’s be clear on this – the Vice President of the United States is happy to play with you but will be handing you over to the President when you have a dirty diaper America.
As Republicans and Democrats come together today at the Blair House for the Health Care Summit, a key player is notably missing. Aside from the hope of compromise, the doctors who practice medicine everyday, and whose entire industry is at stake, have not been invited to attend.
Dr. Hal Scherz, President of Docs 4 Patient Care, represents over 3,000 doctors in every state and has been an active voice in the health care debate since May 2009. His group endorses the idea that healthcare does need to be reformed, however, they believe the politicians in Washington are missing some very important points.
For starters Dr. Scherz points out that the American Medical Association, who endorsed the House Health Care Bill, is actually not representative of the majority of doctors in America. In truth, only 17% of doctors are members of the AMA and, as D4CP notes, “the AMA betrayed the very people that it was ostensibly meant to represent. This was to protect its $100M medical coding franchise that the federal government grants the AMA as the basis by which doctors and hospitals get paid by insurance companies and the federal government — a major incentive for the group to endorse state-run medicine”.
In their Prescription for Responsible Health Insurance Reform (kudos to the literary play), Docs 4 Patient Care points out that there is no problem with healthcare. Let’s repeat that – There is no problem with healthcare. The quality of healthcare in America is the best in the world; and it is a disservice to our amazing medical community that they are often slandered in the debate. The true issues, according to D4PC, are affordable access to health insurance, rising costs and an out of control tort system.
Integral to the doctors’ plan (how shocking they might know how to fix their own profession) is competition and choice; two ideals that have been at the center of making our country as great as it was before the current administration. They propose the repeal of the McCarron-Fergusson Act (an antitrust exemption favoring insurance companies) and relaxing restrictions on internet sales of healthcare insurance across state lines. They are for the elimination of the “pre-existing” condition penalty and encourage the use of Health Savings Accounts; which are currently are great option of which many consumers are unaware. It’s their addition to the current option of Health Savings Accounts that is truly exciting though. D4PC proposes that doctors and hospitals could publish fees/rankings online so patients could actually shop around for the best rates for services. Imagine knowing the cost before you visit the doctor!
The President’s Proposal also tackles the issue of affordability by, surprise, creating a federal board tasked with reviewing rate increases and determining whether the increases are justified. Unfortunately, it does not include instructions for the insurance companies on how they are supposed to keep their doors open while being forced to insure more people and not raising premiums. As for the controversial deal between the unions and the White House, the President has addressed that issue by extending those benefits to everyone; further lowering the largest avenue of revenue for his $950 billion proposal.
While the Republican Plan and Docs 4 Patient Care both address the issue of medical lawsuits, The President’s Proposal makes no mention of it; one may assume that the White House considers it a non-issue considering the eventuality of government health care. To the Republicans’ credit, their plan seems to compliment the D4PC plan very well. Unfortunately, the party that the public places most of their trust in, the doctors, will have to watch their future debated by politicians on CSPAN with the rest of the country.
While the rest of the world focuses on Holocaust Memorial Day, the President of the United States has managed, once again, to divert all American focus squarely on himself. President Obama’s allegiances have long been questioned; and choosing to deliver his first State of the Union on this particular day does nothing to assuage the concerns of many.
Before taking office, Obama promised “unshakeable commitment” to Israel. However in the months since, the President seems most committed to demanding Israel stop expanding it’s own communities, including Jerusalem. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he has abandoned them in the face of a probable nuclear Iran.
Only one President has ever postponed a State of the Union address. After learning of the Challenger disaster, President Reagan chose to speak to a mourning nation on the subject that was closest to their hearts. Perhaps President Obama feels it has been long enough, that business should go on as usual. It raises the question though, what message does it send to the world that our President would choose today to look back on our nation; while the world looks back on over 6 million precious lives lost to a narcissistic dictator?
I’ve been hearing it in the wind. Then Huckabee literally read the eulogy for Journalism and I can stay silent no more. They keep saying journalism is dead but I must beg to differ. The msm is dead. Much like the white house of late, the media became bloated with arrogance and has imploded. They assumed America would continue to lay complacent as they piled on the lies; oh dear did I just call them liars? Well, we are silent no more. The blogosphere is alive with journalism. It’s awe-inspiring, the arrogance of the msm that they believe journalism is dead because they are no longer reporting it. Journalism is evolving beyond them and they don’t know what to do with themselves. Indeed, the press is finally free!
Yea, neither does anyone else. Because he opened his mouth and wouldn’t stop talking until he’d made it impossible to see one of his movies without thinking about him jumping off a couch. Hard to get into the movie or find the guy appealing when you know he’s actually a bit wacko. You should take note.
Moe Lane
Steve Maley
Daniel Horowitz
Jake Walker
Victoria Coates
