Thursday, May 09, 2019



NYT: Trump Is Right About Border Crisis

But the Times editors argue only for more funding to deal with the influx of illegals.

“President Trump is right: There is a crisis at the southern border.” But don’t take our word for it. That was The New York Times in an editorial over the weekend. The editors noted that there are indeed “record numbers of Central American families” overwhelming the border and “fueling a humanitarian crisis of overcrowding, disease and chaos.” Notably, they explain, “The Border Patrol is now averaging 1,200 daily arrests, with many migrants arriving exhausted and sick.”

The Times states flatly, “Something needs to be done. Soon.” Welcome to the party. If it wasn’t for Trump Derangement Syndrome, the Leftmedia could have been reporting honestly on the border crisis the entire time. Instead, activist journalists at the Times and elsewhere have attempted to paint Trump as a racist and a bigot for his repeated calls to address the growing problem of illegal immigration.

Even so, while the Times recognizes that there is a crisis, the editors still focus only on strained resources to provide more facilities to house and care for the influx of illegals. The Times hasn’t quite come around to calling for enforcing the Rule of Law at the border — which would actually stem the tide of illegals creating the crisis in the first place.

SOURCE  








I Was Born at 29 Weeks. That’s Why I’m Pro-Life

“My body, my choice.” This is a common slogan among those who are pro-choice.

It’s a handy little slogan. Any pro-choice woman can use it to immediately shut up a pro-life man, since his opinion doesn’t count, no matter the merits of his argument.

But what about my story?

On March 29, 1997, my parents were driving through Minnesota when my mom suddenly began having contractions. Immediately, they drove to the hospital, and two days later I was born—11 weeks early.

When my mom gave birth to me at 29 weeks, I weighed just 2 pounds and 15 ounces, though I soon dropped down to 2 pounds and 9 ounces. The doctors had delayed my birth as long as possible to allow my lungs to develop. Those extra two days were the only reason I came out breathing on my own.

I needed a feeding tube at that stage because babies born that early don’t know how to suck. Other than that, there were no complications and no problems. For this, I praise God. I just needed more time to develop.

After a five-week stay in the hospital, my parents brought me home, and I’ve lived a normal, healthy life ever since.

Back to the slogan, “My body, my choice.” Someone who is pro-choice might say my views are irrelevant because it’s only the woman’s body that is affected and not my “male” body.

But what if my mother had lived in one of the nine states or the District of Columbia, where a woman can obtain a legal abortion up to the moment of birth? What if, instead of driving to the hospital, my mom had driven to an abortion “clinic” where, in nine states, she could have legally killed me?

Does my opinion not matter, even though it was me she would have been killing?

Think about it. In nine states plus D.C., a woman can legally abort her baby who is more developed than I was when I was born. And even in states with bans in place at a certain gestational age, some states have created loopholes so broad that a woman can get an abortion up to the time of birth for virtually any reason.

The left often says a baby isn’t a person until they are viable and can survive outside the mother’s womb. Let’s say that’s the case, and that a baby becomes a person when they are viable.

Can we not all then agree that abortion should be illegal after 24 weeks, when a baby is considered “viable?” Why should it be legal to kill a baby who is as developed or is more developed than I was at birth?

Does my opinion not matter, even though it was me she would have been killing?
Recently, New York passed a law expanding access for women to have an abortion in the third trimester, after 24 weeks.

Now, for years the left supported a woman’s right to an abortion, but they wanted it to be safe, legal, and rare. Remember that language? Hillary Clinton, when campaigning for president in 2008, said that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare, and by rare, I mean rare.”

Since then, the left has moved backward.

Michelle Wolf, in a horrifying display to rational people, performed a “Salute to Abortion,” saying, “If you want an abortion, get one!” while tossing confetti from a party hat.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, in a recent town hall event with Fox News, was asked if he believed a woman should be able to abort her child up until the time of birth. He answered that “at the end of the day, the decision over abortion belongs with a woman and her physician,” and no one else.

Sanders is apparently OK with a mom driving to an abortion clinic instead of a hospital to kill their baby at 29 weeks—of the full 40 weeks for that matter—rather than give birth to a live and fully healthy baby.

Indeed, the United States is one of only seven countries to allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. If this shocks and dismays you, it should. And if you want to do something to change this, you should.

Here are a couple suggestions on ways you can take action.

First, go see the new movie “Unplanned” in theaters. It is a very well done movie that simultaneously presents the truth of abortion, while encouraging a culture of forgiveness and love.

Second, raise your voice to elected officials. There are a number of pro-life bills sitting in Congress that would protect life, but are not moving with the speed they deserve.

I am forever grateful for my mother who cared for and provided for me, especially since I was born so early. I pray we all work for an America where every child has a chance at life—a chance that I am so thankful for.

SOURCE  






Does genocide exist if the religion of its victims doesn't align itself with the agenda of the Left?

According to Open Doors USA, an organization that describes itself as “a community of Christians who come together to support persecuted believers in more than 60 countries,” an average of 345 Christians are killed, 105 churches and other Christian buildings are burned or attacked, and 219 Christians are detained without trial, arrested, sentenced, and imprisoned — every month.

Sadly those totals will only get bigger because violence against Christians is on the rise worldwide. Last Sunday, six people, including a pastor, were murdered in an attack on a Christian church in the African nation of Burkina Faso. The story barely made a ripple in the mainstream media.

A week earlier no one could ignore the coordinated atrocity that took place in Sri Lanka. A series of bombings at three churches, four hotels, and a housing project were all aimed at the country’s Christian population. Those attacks killed more than 250 and wounded more than 500 on Easter Sunday, one of Christianity’s most important holy days.

Yet what the media couldn’t ignore, they shamefully attempted to realign with the progressive agenda. “Christianity under attack? Sri Lanka church bombings stoke far-right anger in the West,” stated the headline of a piece by The Washington Post, which further noted, “The attacks, which targeted a religious minority in a predominantly Buddhist country, also resonated abroad — especially in Europe. To some, it was further proof that Christians in many parts of the world are under attack.”

Christian are under attack. Nonetheless, the WaPo article asserts otherwise, adding, “The theme of Christianity under attack has been a recurring one for many activists in the United States and Europe.”

The propagandist game being played here? The Post doesn’t like the fact that these so-called “activists” held Muslims accountable, and also criticized those that didn’t, especially those who embrace an odious double standard of quickly standing with “Muslim” victims while failing to identify Christian victims as Christian. People like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who instead referred to the Sri Lankan slaughter victims as “Easter worshippers.”

Pure coincidence? As columnist Dennis Prager doesn’t think so. “As they both spelled ‘worshipers’ the same idiosyncratic way and used the term ‘Easter worshippers,’ it is likely that either they had the same writers or Clinton copied Obama,” he writes. Prager further notes that when Muslims were victims of the New Zealand attack, both Obama and Clinton made it clear they were grieving with the “the Muslim community” and “the global Muslim community,” respectively.

In another effort to bolster the progressive narrative, the Post asserted that while Christian minorities “are targeted around the world, analysts say that the vast majority of terrorism victims globally are Muslims.”

What the Post didn’t say? The vast majority of those victims are killed by their fellow Muslims. Moreover as Open Doors reveals, Islamic oppression also fuels Christian persecution in eight of the top 10 most oppressed countries on their Worldwide Watch List.

Christians themselves are quite familiar with that loathsome reality. They have been fleeing their long-established Middle East homelands in droves. In Iraq, their numbers have decreased from 1.6 million to less than 100,000, and in Syria, from 360,000 to about 25,000. “I think we have no more hope,” declared Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, ecumenical director for the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Orthodox Church of America. “Middle East Christians have no nation that protects them openly.”

What about Europe? While France mourned the intensely covered burning of the Notre Dame Cathedral, the mainstream American media ignored the reality that 875 French churches were vandalized in 2018, with some being burned and others being smeared with feces.

The Washington Post’s take? The paper asserted “the vast majority of acts were minor.”

The Washington Post is hardly alone in the effort to downplay inconvenient facts. On Monday, a report released by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance recommended that the British media be barred from identifying the Muslim background of terrorists in its reporting. “ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom, but also for their safety,” it states.

In other words, one is either silent or “Islamophobic.” Even more arrogantly, the report cited the Brexit movement as a contributing factor that “seems to have led to a further rise in ‘anti-foreigner’ sentiment, making it even more important that the British authorities take the steps outlined in our report as a matter of priority.”

Making the suppression of the truth a priority — more familiarly known as “banning hate speech” — is the real message being sent here.

What about America? “In the last 60 years, the anti-religious, anti-American left has conducted a relentless assault on believers and their beliefs, suppressing religious liberty, stripping the public square of religious expression and memory, and, in the process, removing the underpinnings of our democratic order,” stated author David Horowitz, whose new book, Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America, spells out that agenda in no uncertain terms. “What inspired me to write this book was the realization that the left’s hatred for Christianity is also its hatred for America itself.”

That hatred is driven by the Judeo-Christian underpinnings of our nation the American Left sees as the chief impediment to the “fundamental transformation” they so fervently desire. And perhaps nothing demonstrates that hatred better than their ongoing efforts to remove or destroy historical artifacts that “offend” them — even as they seemingly remain stunningly oblivious to the searing irony that their penchant for doing so makes them exactly like ISIS.

Realistically, the Supreme Court is the only institution standing in the Left’s way, with two rulings for the Little Sisters of the Poor and Colorado baker Jack Phillips overturning lower courts more than willing to elevate leftist dogma above First Amendment protections.

Nonetheless, the assault continues: California is proposing a bill that would force priests to divulge what they hear during confession, or face possible imprisonment.

As for the Left’s obsession with Islamophobia — even as “moderate” Muslims in Saudi Arabia are on an execution spree in a nation where homosexuality is a capital offense and women remain second-class citizens in adherence with Sharia Law — it is easily explained by an ancient proverb: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

And with friends like that, one can’t expect the American Left to acknowledge the reality of Christian genocide.

SOURCE  
  





Australian radio guru slams anti-Bible verdict

If Rugby Australia have any brains, they will impose no penalty

Former Wallabies coach Alan Jones has blown up in a furious on-air tirade after Israel Folau was found guilty of a “high level” breach of his contract last night before the rugby star sent the broadcaster a message, breaking his silence on the verdict.

A three-person independent panel of chair John West QC, Rugby Australia (RA) representative Kate Eastman SC and the Rugby Union Players’ Association-appointed John Boultbee handed down the verdict and have now retired to decide on Folau’s sanction following an epic code of conduct hearing in Sydney.

RA boss Raelene Castle issued Folau with a breach notice last month following his controversial social media posts about homosexuals and other “sinners” and threatened to tear up his four-year, $4 million contract.

The 30-year-old devout Christian took to Instagram to proclaim “hell awaits” for “drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists, idolators”.

While Folau may yet be spared the sack, termination of his contract is now a possibility.

After defending Folau on the airwaves this morning, Jones — who coached the Wallabies in the 1980s and now hosts 2GB’s popular breakfast radio show — relayed a message he said he’d received from the Wallabies star.

“I’ve just had a note from Israel, he won’t mind if I’m sharing it with you because I said to him, ‘Hold your head up’,” Jones said.

“He said, ‘Alan, I’m at peace, mate. My head is held high’.”

That message came after Jones said the “Orwellian treatment” of the rugby icon, combined with various recent attacks on politicians, painted a grim picture of the state of Australia.

“The Australia that our Anzacs fought for seems to be disappearing before our very eyes,” Jones said. “It prompts you to wonder what kind of society we’re living in.

“Nothing wrong with Israel, it’s the society and those who prosecute him who are sick.

“But the cancer won’t kill us, it’s the cancer that will be removed, not Israel. The Australian people won’t accept this.

“This is not the Australia our veterans fought for and we’re going to have to take our country back by argument and by the democratic and peaceful process — not by hate and revenge or vilification and intimidation.”

Jones also read from a speech politician Mark Latham is scheduled to give today in NSW parliament, calling it “one of the most magnificent political speeches I’ve read”.

In the speech, according to Jones, Latham says: “How did our state and our nation ever come to this?

“Those claiming outrage have fabricated their position solely for the purpose of censorship.

“By excluding a committed Christian, they (Rugby Australia) are making their game less inclusive.

“No Australian should live in fear of the words they utter.

“This is a stunning intrusion on workers’ rights.”

Jones continued his attack on the Folau decision after reading Latham’s words, saying he is now “ashamed” of the sport which he once played an integral role in.

“Israel Folau, with my support and the support of millions of Australians, will take this fight every inch of the way,” Jones said.

“Rugby union preaches diversity — they really mean uniformity. They preach inclusion but they exclude Israel.

“We take oaths of office in every court of the land. The Prime Minister is sworn in with his hand on the Bible — the same bible which Israel Folau has quoted and he’s now had his dignity, his integrity, his employment, his vocation and his income stolen from him.

“I coached Australian rugby, I was proud of it, I was proud of the boys and I was proud of everything we stood for. Today, I’m ashamed of the people who’ve inherited our proud legacy.

“The battle has just begun, and it’s a battle for all Australians. If we’re not free to articulate our religious beliefs and quote from the bible, and if we’re not free to speak for fear that someone affects a hurt or is part of the offence industry, if that’s where we’ve reached in this country, we’ve reached a dark place and we are all at risk.”

The best punishment Folau can now hope for is a suspension and/or a fine. The sanction is not expected to be handed down for several days, with RA not offering a timeline on any decision.

Folau also has the right of appeal, a process that would involve a completely new three-person panel being selected.

Should he be sacked, Folau — Super Rugby’s all-time leading try-scorer and a 73-Test stalwart for the Wallabies — would be the first Australian athlete dismissed for expressing fundamental religious beliefs.

Even before it potentially reaches the courts, the Folau hearing has developed into one of the most drawn-out legal stoushes in Australian sports history. The hearing stretched 22 hours over three days, with any hopes of a “common sense” settlement — as NSW Waratahs chairman Roger Davis had hoped for on Monday — blown out of the water by Tuesday night’s sensational development.

Folau spent more than twice as long holed up at the hearing than he has played for the Waratahs in 2019.

RA initially anticipated all evidence being heard in one day, with Sunday also reserved if more time was needed. The decision was expected to be handed down on Tuesday.

Instead, the hearing resumed at the offices of Herbert Smith Freehills in Sydney’s CBD on Tuesday after some of the brightest brains in the land spent the weekend arguing the complex case at RA headquarters.

As well as the extraordinary length of the hearing, the cost of the case is also mounting, with the two parties thought to have shelled out an estimated $300,000 on legal bills since Saturday alone.

Regardless of the panel’s ultimate decision, the expenses are almost certain to keep piling up.

SOURCE  

*************************

Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here

***************************

No comments: