But ... Science!
I know, I know, we all know that people who identify as "homosexual" are just plain born that way. Nothing they can do. It's a matter of birth. Except, of course, if you ask Science. Apparently there is no "gay gene." The latest studies conclude there are a "complex blend of factors that influence human sexuality, including society and the environment." Now, can we get off the "gay is like race" thing? Oh, no, probably not. Science is only valid when it agrees with you.
My point? When will we stop identifying ourselves on the basis of what gender (or whatever) we want to have sex with? I'm pretty sure 1) it isn't a valid identity and 2) we choose if we'll have sex. Can't we just stop dodging the question?
Sad
A study by the United Nations reports, "Every 40 seconds someone in the world takes their own life, a global tally of more than 800,000 suicides a year." That is incredibly sad. "The research found that suicide killed more people each year than conflicts and natural catastrophes, accounting for more than half of the world's 1.5 million violent deaths annually." That, of course, ignores the numbers of babies murdered every year. In the U.S. alone the number in 2017 was more than 878,000 babies killed by violence. Very, very sad.
Confession is Good for?
The CEO of StemExpress admitted in court that her biotech company supplies beating fetal hearts and intact fetal heads to medical researchers. She was in court for the preliminary hearing of David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress in Planned Parenthood's civil lawsuit for the release of YouTube videos exposing the horrors of abortion. According to the CMP lawyer, if you have a fetus with intact head and intact body, it indicates the baby was born alive and is a victim of an illegal partial-birth abortion.
It is said confession is good for the soul. I'm not so sure that's true in this case since it is likely not to phase either the biotech company, the pro-abortionists, or the public at large. (Try, for instance, to find a reference to this story in the general media.)
Green Thinking from Bernie
Bernie Sanders said he would support U.S. taxpayer-funded programs to provide abortions in developing countries as part of his plan to combat climate change. The thinking there is if you can decrease the human population, you can save the planet. An audience member in a CNN town hall telecast asked, "Would you be courageous enough to discuss this issue and make it a key feature of a plan to address climate catastrophe?" Bernie said he certainly would. I find it odd, of course. He highly values all the money he'd like to take from the American people ($35 trillion for universal medical coverage, $16 trillion for climate change, $47 billion a year for free college tuition for all, and counting), but would like to eliminate as many people as he can to save the planet. Seems contradictory. Oh, wait, I get it. He wants rich people's money. Eliminating the poor won't hurt.
The Bible Under Criminal Investigation
A Member of Parliament (MP) in Finland is under criminal investigation after posting Romans 1:24-27 on her Facebook page. The verses describe homosexual behavior as "dishonorable," unnatural, "shameless," and sinful. She is being investigated for "incitement against sexual and gender minorities." I cannot imagine, given these kinds of laws, why the Bible is still allowed to exist in countries with these kinds of laws. You know, the "inclusive" ones.
Speaking of Inclusive
New Zealand House Speaker Trevor Mallard is defending his decision to remove "Jesus" from Parliament prayer. He was responding to a petition to "remove religion from the Parliament prayer, oaths, and national anthem." Like you can have prayer and not religion??? The saddest thing I think he had to say was, "It might be our English heritage but I think it's not the religious view of most New Zealanders now." Say goodbye to Christianity, New Zealand. I don't think you'll like the alternative ... once you stop living off the Christian morality currently sustaining you. Oddly enough, he knowingly excluded the largest group that wanted to keep prayer as it was, but said he was "happy to take a step towards being inclusive," once again by being exclusive. (I'm just wondering, here. Is it even remotely possible to speak of being theoretically "inclusive" without being "exclusive" in practice? "Inclusive" seems always to arise as a reason for excluding.)
And Again
Purdue University made the news this week when the University Senate Leadership along with faculty has moved to ban Chick-fil-A from the campus to "promote inclusivity." (Note: the restaurant is already on campus; they want it removed.)
To be fair, the Kansas University faculty also wants Chick-fil-A banned from their campus as well ... in the name of "inclusion." At Purdue, more than 3,000 students petitioned to get the chain on campus full time. "Many people," Audrey Ruple, chair of the Purdue University Senate's Equity and Diversity Committee explained, "when they're not personally affected by the exclusionary principles of businesses, it's genuinely a blind spot." Since Chick-fil-A doesn't actually have "exclusionary principles of business," I'm not at all clear on what they're saying.
As we all know Chick-fil-A restaurants ban certain people from being served ... no, wait ... they hate certain groups ... hang on ... well, as we all know excluding those we don't like is the absolute best method of being inclusive.
Guns Don't Kill People ...
... People kill people. So the saying goes. And such would have been the case of Alyssa Hatcher, a 17-year-old who stole $1500 from her parents' bank account to attempt to hire two people to kill her parents. Now if only we had laws that would make murder illegal, that would put an end to that, right?
6 comments:
Let’s not ignore the fact that Bernie is primarily talking about aborting “brown” children, but I guess that’s not racism.
I don't know, Craig. Given that most 3rd world countries are brown or BLACK, I think they'd be included, too, wouldn't they?
Oh, they’re included. I’m just surprised that no one is outraged the Bernie is advocating population control by eliminating more brown/black children. If Trump said this there’d be outrage.
Obama's administration used the same facilities and techniques with children and families crossing the border and no one complained, but when Trump did it it was evil. Bernie advocates decreasing the non-white population and no one complains, and Trump has never suggested such a thing. Makes sense to them; not me.
Are you suggesting a double standard, how dare you.
Oh, I don't know ... I think you beat me to it.
Post a Comment