News Weakly - 1/26/19

No Bias
Perhaps you've not heard of the BDS movement. It is a movement aimed at forcing Israel to withdraw from Palestinian territory and to "stop being so mean to those poor Palestinians." It is a growing movement, even in the U.S. Congress. It is fed by stories like this one headlined "Israel kills Hamas militant" accompanied by a picture of a relative of a Palestinian militant weeping at the hospital. The story is that a riot occurred "during a violent Palestinian border protest" and an Israeli officer was wounded, so they fired back and killed a militant and wounded four other militants. But we're not supposed to think about the fact that they attacked Israelis or that Israel responded in self-defense. We're supposed to weep about the fact that someone bore the consequences of shooting at Israeli soldiers. Does the media have a bias? You'd better believe they do.

No Bias Here, Either
If you are a reasonable, fair-minded person and you see the potential need to investigate someone in case there is wrongdoing, who do you choose to do that? Do you choose disinterested but capable people or do you choose those declaring that they are dedicated to the erasure of the person to be investigated? Do you hope for an unbiased (as possible) investigation or do you hire the "hate squad" to look into it? The Democrats hired the "hate squad." They selected the self-declared "We intend to impeach Trump" (using much more colorful language) folk. Which appears as if the message is "We don't care about justice; we just want to be sure to take down our selected target."

The Ever-Changing Constitution
In this story, the constitution in question is the Iowa State Constitution, but the concept appears to prevail with all U.S. constitutions, state or federal. Last year Iowa's governor signed a fetal heartbeat law that defended the lives of living babies based on whether they had a heartbeat or not. Now, you know that wouldn't fly. "You don't own us!" the women protested. "We won't go back (to thinking that babies were of any value)," they declared. This week, the Iowa appellate court ruled that babies have no state constitutional right to be protected and that requiring that women who get pregnant are being forced to be mothers under this law. I was not aware of a constitutional "right to kill babies if I want to" law. I suppose that's why I'm not a constitutional law expert. We have very strange ideas about rights and laws, don't we? It is what you would expect when "rights endowed by the Creator" are replaced with "whatever rights I think I should have."

In Defense of Murder
In the state of New York, teens don't need to get their parent's permission to have an abortion. There is no waiting period and no state approval required. New York Medicaid covers abortion for women with low income. Now they've passed a "landmark abortion rights bill" assuring New York that their mothers can kill their babies if they want and even do it past the second trimester. Paid for by the state if necessary. Baby killing is constitutionally protected in the state of New York.

Mind you, New York isn't the first or the worst. Washington D.C. and seven other states allow mothers to execute their babies all the way up to and including the 9th month for any reason. But, hey, it gives New York room to improve, right? I'm just wondering why they haven't come out with permission for post-partum abortions. When will they allow moms to say and mean, "I brought you into this world; I'll take you out." (The Babylon Bee has a story to show what Satan thinks of this story.)

(Side note: The United States is one of only seven countries that allow abortion after the 20th week. Among them are Vietnam, China, and North Korea. We're in good company, I guess. Only 59 countries allow abortion on demand at all. Most that allow abortion allow it on the basis of specific reasons such as health of the mother, etc. Seventy-five percent of those that allow abortion on demand do not allow it past 12 weeks.)

(Joe Carter has some really good information about the intent and application of this new law, including the fact that it's not as revolutionary as we'd like to think.)

If This Global Warming Keeps Up ...
... we'll all freeze to death. At least, that how it appears. The New York Times is blaming this polar vortex we're facing on global warming. Not everyone agrees. In fact, a 2018 study suggests that these events are decreasing, not increasing. But, hey, who are you going to trust? Science or Al Gore? (Hard question since Science doesn't trust Science ... and I'm not sure who trusts Al Gore.)

The Slippery Slope in Action
You remember the Netherlands. They're the ones with legalized drugs and prostitution, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, and criminalized belief in biblical principles. It's not hard to figure with only 15% of their country claiming to believe in God. But reports are out now that 25% of the deaths in the Netherlands are induced rather than by illness or other causes. In 2017 they had 1,900 suicides and 32,000 victims of "palliative sedation," their approach to physician-assisted killing.

"Let's see ... remove God, replace human value with personal preference, legalize murder of babies and then the killing of whoever wants to go ... sure! What could go wrong?"
_________
News Weakly Postscript: I note that two of the six stories this week are about abortion and one about euthanasia. I also note that last Sunday was the "Sanctity of Life" Sunday. I don't suppose it's scientific, but it certainly looks like our world is headed more and more away from any sense of the sanctity of life. I guarantee we won't like the unintended consequences of that course.

Side Question: I'm just wondering. I read that Trump has agreed to have Congress restart the shutdown for three weeks while Congress works on a bipartisan agreement for border security. Sounds good, but who actually thinks that can be done? The GOP (largely) considers the wall an absolute necessity; the Dems consider it "immoral" (their word). What bipartisan position is there where "essential" and "immoral" meet?