Sunday, July 17, 2016

Breaking news: Democrat GOTV is again a proven success


Again

Democrats deliberately stir up racial hate and fear before every election, because they need more than 90% of the black vote and a huge black turnout in order to win at the national level.

Democrats lie about racial violence, and inflame it for political gain. Scum.

It's hard to imagine anything lower. Democrats have blood on their hands. 

Friday, October 2, 2015

Oregon killer singled out Christians

From the Washington Post.
Witnesses... said he seemed to seek specific revenge against Christians, and police examined Web posts that hinted of wider antipathy toward organized faith... 
In one classroom, he appeared to single out Christian students for killing, according to witness Anastasia Boylan. 
“He said, ‘Good, because you’re a Christian, you’re going to see God in just about one second,'” Boylan’s father, Stacy, told CNN, relaying his daughter’s account while she underwent surgery to treat a gunshot to her spine.
“And then he shot and killed them.” 
Another account came from Autumn Vicari, who described to NBC News what her brother J.J. witnessed in the room where the shootings occurred. According to NBC: “Vicari said at one point the shooter told people to stand up before asking whether they were Christian or not. Vicari’s brother told her that anyone who responded ‘yes’ was shot in the head. If they said ‘other’ or didn’t answer, they were shot elsewhere in the body, usually the leg.”
Cardinal George of Chicago famously said 'I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison, and his successor will die a martyr in the streets.' We already have a Christian sent to jail for her beliefs--more will follow. And we now have Christian martyrs in America. There will be many more. 

Do you think I exaggerate? The 20th century gave us more Christian martyrs than all of the martyrs of the past 2000 years combined. The Soviets, the Nazis, the Spanish communists, the Mexican government in the Christeros War deliberately slaughtered Christians by the millions. 

Christians are undergoing a holocaust today in the Middle East, while the world, including our own government, is silent. 

May God bless our brothers and sisters who are perishing for their faith in Christ our Lord. They are with Him now, in paradise. May we live with even a tiny fraction of their courage and faith. 

Global warming fascists may get a taste of RICO

Heh.

Last week I posted about 20 global warming fascists who wrote a letter to Obama demanding RICO investigations of global warming skeptics.

Oops.

Things haven't been going so well for them since:

Uh, oh. Jagdish Shukla and the #RICO20 has captured the attention of Congress, and FOIA documents are coming out
It seems that the little Himmlers have some legal problems of their own, including using $63,000,000 of taxpayers' money to fund their little political action committee. That's a violation of federal law.

The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology sent Dr. Jagadish Shukla, the organizer of the warmist mob, this letter:
Chairman Smith: “IGES [Shukla's taxpayer-funded organization] appears to be almost fully funded by taxpayer money while simultaneously participating in partisan political activity by requesting a RICO investigation of companies and organizations that disagree with the Obama administration on climate change. In fact, IGES has reportedly received $63 million from taxpayers since 2001, comprising over 98 percent of its total revenue during that time.” 
In light of the non-profit’s decision to remove the controversial letter from its website, Smith directs IGES to preserve “all e-mail, electronic documents, and data created since January 1, 2009, that can be reasonably anticipated to be subject to a request for production by the Committee.”
As Anthony Watts said at WUWT: "The Streisand effect has been unleashed Mr. Shukla, enjoy the ride."

RICO for the goose, RICO for the gander. Nail these scum to the wall. All of them. 

How to stop spree shootings

Another spree shooting, at a college campus in Oregon. At least ten people dead, and many wounded. Please pray for the victims and their families.

There is a simple way to stop this. To stop it completely. Two things:

1) Stop reporting spree shootings in the media. These bastards are imitators, and they vent their hate and anger in a way that will give them total power (for 15 minutes) and will make them famous. Stop making them famous. The press should agree: The scumbag's name should never be mentioned. No name, and no pictures. Make the killer an non-person. Tear up his manifesto--never let it see the light of day. Never mention his name. Report about the shootings once, briefly, and then never again. The media is driving this. The media is a hateful psycho's ticket to immortal fame. Take that away and the shootings will stop.

2) Eliminate gun-free zones. Gun-free zones are spree-killing magnets--nearly all spree killings are committed in gun-free zones, for the obvious reason. A spree killer wants two things: immortal fame, and 15 minutes to vent his hate with complete power over his victims. Deny him the power. Make sure there will be people around him who will shoot back--immediately. And he won't know who. Bad guys with guns are only stopped by good guys with guns (they don't quit voluntarily), and gun-free zones simply ensure that the good guys with guns will arrive at least 15 minutes late--time to kill, time to have complete power. Take that power away. Allow responsible citizens to be armed in schools and other places where spree shooters choose to kill.

Of course the media will never stop reporting on this stuff, and as long as there are dumb-fuck Democrats there will be gun-free zones.

But don't believe for a minute that spree shootings can't be stopped. They can be stopped, quite easily. We just choose not to. 

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Conrad Black: Pope nailed it

The Pope Didn’t Attack Capitalism in His U.S. Visit
Pope Francis’s visit to Cuba and the United States last week was another tour de force, and he remains the supremely agile and likeable incumbent on a high-wire where he is admired by a full range of Catholic opinion, enjoys great popularity generally, and continues to leave the anti-Catholic Western media and conventional adherents to the multi-state established religion of atheism mute and gape-mouthed in their inability to torment him and his institution, as they did his predecessors, as an anachronism. It became much more difficult, once he said, in reference to those of homosexual orientation in the clergy who maintained their vows of sexual abstinence, “Who am I to judge?” and after he made the point in his famous interview with Civiltà Cattolica that it was not the role of the Roman Catholic Church to scold people about their sex lives but to be the ark of the Christian message and that all souls were of equal importance. The numerous media choristers and other purveyors of conventional wisdom, who had been catechismally incanting for years that the Roman Church was just a hypocrisy-and-superstition factory run by a creaking gerontocracy of celibates and closet queens trying to put a hex on any non-marital sex, have become steadily more impatient to find a new line of attack. This visit did not provide it...

No occupant of his position will please everyone, but there is a good deal of evidence that the Roman Catholic Church is strengthening appreciably in many places, and that the deafening proclamations and smug assumptions of its imminent demise have again been proved false. Francis enjoys far greater prestige and popularity than any secular leader, and he represents something a good deal more compelling than any current statesman; his first visit to the world’s most important country was a distinct success.
Again, I believe that Francis' conservative critics misunderstand what he is doing. He is not a leftist--the left in Argentina, who knew him well, hated his guts. He is an Argentinian with a profound hatred of crony capitalism, which in the U.S. is called socialism. His beliefs and instincts are Catholic to the core, and everything on faith and morals he teaches is straight out of the Catechism. We have to listen to what he says, not to what the media say about what he says.

What Pope Francis is accomplishing is quite remarkable: he is stealing (back) the memes of the Left, and showing the world that love for the poor and humility and forgiveness and stewardship of nature and simple human decency are deeply Catholic traditions that have been co-opted by the Left is a sort of demonic counterfeit.

My wife loves this pope. She is not Catholic, and not even really Christian, but she loves the guy. She told me a couple of days ago "I love him more than you do". That's not true, but it's clear that Francis is doing great things for the Church of God. 

Why are folks only "Gay" when they do good things?

You see it in the news incessantly--

"Gay couple gets married after waiting 40 years!"

"Gay actor speaks out on gender bias"

"Gay congressman sponsors bill on LGBT rights"

"Gay football player reports to training camp"

"Gay basketball star scores to win game"

"Gay CEO named to run Apple"

"Gay author wins Pulitzer Prize"

"Gay screenwriter wins Oscar"

"Gay filmmaker wins at Cannes"

"Gay musician wins Grammy Award"

"Gay man appointed Secretary of the Army"


But when a Gay man (who happens to be a Catholic priest) molests a teen boy:

"Priest arrested for molesting boy"


Odd, that. It's almost like a marketing campaign conducted by people who love homosexuality and hate Christianity. 

Looks like the Pope met with Kim Davis

Very nice.

Some of my conservative friends will say that the meeting should have been public, but I think the Pope's mission here was pastoral, and the press frenzy about such a meeting would have sucked all of the oxygen out of the room from the Pope's message of Christian charity.

It is wonderful that the Holy Father met with two very prominent victims of anti-Christian persecution in the U.S.--Davis and the Little Sisters of Mercy. 

Thursday, September 24, 2015

The mistake conservatives make about the Pope


I'll try to blog in detail on the Pope's visit and speech shortly. Short version: I love his address to Congress. One of the most beautiful speeches I've heard. He is right about everything in the speech. I ask my conservative friends to wait before they blow a gasket.

Just a brief note on a comment by my friend Ilion:
I'm sorry, Michael, but this pope is a fool, top to bottom, and he is a socialist (and he seems to be a Marxist, at least a "soft" one) ... just as almost all "intellectual" Catholics are. And while I do understand your very human impulse to put his deeds and words in the best light, you risk making yourself a fool if you go too far in doing this.
The sad fact is that there is in Catholicism a profound hatred, or at least fear, of general human freedom. This is why, for example, Catholics are always at the forefront of laying false charges against capitalism; for capitalism is just the natural result of human freedom with respect to one's labor and the fruit of one's labor.
I respectfully disagree. Pope Francis is certainly a fool--a fool for Christ, in the Pauline sense. The battle the Holy Father is engaging is a spiritual battle, not a political battle. Working for the common good, love and respect for the vulnerable, the weak, the poor, and sinners is basic Christian life. Living one's life in accordance with Matthew 25 is not socialism. Care for the poor is not Marxism, soft or otherwise.

Conservatives make a horrible mistake to create an idol of political ideology. That's what liberals do, and it is ultimately satanic, literally. Satan, as Rene Girard has pointed out, is an imitator. He imitates Christian charity to wage spiritual war on mankind--that is a particularly succinct definition of liberalism and its socialist and Marxist congeners.

Socialism is the (satanically inspired) imitation of Christian charity.

This is the conservative mistake: by denigrating Christian charity as so beautifully expressed by the Pope, we abandon all the best motives and works of man to the Left. I can't imagine a more unwise thing a conservative can say than: "all the stuff the Pope is saying about love and respect and human decency is socialist".

!

Is human dignity socialist? Is care for the foreigner socialist? Is love for the poor socialist? Is respect for our neighbor socialist? Is mercy for sinners socialist? Is forgiveness socialist? Is sacrifice to help the less fortunate socialist?

Why not just hand the socialists the victory trophy right now and get it over with?

Goodness gracious, Satan pops a champagne bottle every time a conservative says such things. Hell's agenda is this: to portray evil as good, and good as evil. To equate the Pope's entirely Christian exhortations--exhortations that come right out of the Lord's words in the New Testament and right out of 2000 years of Catholic magisterium-- with evil is to do the devil's work for him.

Sometimes, I suspect, the devil loves conservatives.

Conservatives are the natural defenders of Christian culture. Conservatives should enthusiastically embrace the Pope's beautiful exposition of Christian morality. I believe that the Pope is (very shrewdly) proving to be the Left's worst enemy, because he's taking back Christian charity from Marxists and socialists and liberals who have expropriated it for ends that are plainly evil.

The task before conservatives is to show that socialism is fake Christian morality. Socialism is an impostor. Socialism is a lie--a clever stratagem from the father of lies. Conservatives lend powerful credibility to Satan's lie when they insist that Christian charity is socialism.

Conservative values--freedom (the freedom to work towards God's purposes for our lives), hard work, respect for the natural world, rule of law, centrality of the family, traditional marriage, chastity--are the means to achieve the ends of Christian charity, an end so eloquently evoked by the Holy Father in his breathtakingly beautiful speech. 

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Planned Parenthood: the video

Abortion-lovers have claimed that Carly Fiorina wasn't telling the truth about that Planned Parenthood video showing the intact fetus baby alive on a platter about to have his organs removed for sale.

A PAC has released this. You can see the baby's heart beating, and he's moving his legs.

It's hard to watch.

Monday, September 21, 2015

"[Planned Parenthood] helps prevent more than 500,000 abortions a year"

Ed Brayton has a real howler:
Getting rid of Planned Parenthood would significantly increase the number of unwanted pregnancies (studies have found that PP helps prevent more than 500,000 abortions a year)...
Wow. Planned Parenthood dispenses contraceptives (especially to poor minority women), so it's really saving lives! There's fewer little (black) babies to abort!

New Planned Parenthood motto:
"Prevent 'em now or kill 'em later."
Too bad the Nazi doctors didn't think of this defense at the Nuremberg trials: "Hey we gave the Jews contraceptives and we sterilized a lot of them, so think of how many lives we saved!"

Nice way to tip-toe around a holocaust.  

About the Pope...



Pope Francis is currently in Cuba, bring Christ and the Catholic idea to that beleaguered isle. He has come under substantial attack from conservatives who believe that he should not visit Cuba, or that he should do more to denounce the Castro regime. Many of these conservatives also believe that the Pope is a leftist and that he has Communist sympathies.

I don't agree. First, I must note that I take second place to no one in my hatred of communism. Socialism in general, and communism in particular, are raw evil, and they are the scourge of modern man. Castro(s) is a totalitarian thug, and he should be tried for crimes against humanity. I'd love to give the Cuban community in Miami a few minutes alone with the guy. He's get the justice he deserves.

That said, I think that conservatives seriously misread this Pope. Francis is not a leftist. He is an orthodox Catholic, and his teaching on economics and government and the environment are mainstream Catholic teaching, straight out of the Catechism. The content of his teaching is little different from that of St. John Paul II or Pope Benedict, or from the teachings of any of the modern popes.

Francis does provide a different emphasis, which is his privilege. Each Pope stresses the things he believes need to be stressed. And what Pope Francis is stressing-- mercy, care for the poor, care for sinners, the very real problem of gluttony (in the sense of compulsive consumption), lust for wealth and possessions, and all of the enormous dangers and evils of capitalism-- are things that really need to be stressed. Goodness, look at the filth and greed and lust for possessions that is poured on us each day by advertisers and media. It makes Sodom and Gomorrah look like a convent. We are so embedded in our culture that we often fail to see our own depravity.

Francis is right about most things--Laudato Si is a beautiful encyclical. His emphasis is nearly perfect, and he really nails the evils of opulent Western society. It is the responsibility of Catholics and all people of good will to listen to him carefully. He has much to teach humanity, and nearly all of it is good.

A couple of provisos are in order. I believe that Pope is wrong about global warming-- AGW is an obvious scientific hoax, and I'm disappointed that he doesn't see it. And I believe that Francis has not sufficiently condemned socialism, which is pure evil, as opposed to capitalism, which is concupiscence, but not evil in itself. And there is no question that capitalism has been a tremendous engine of prosperity for billions of people--it is the most successful anti-poverty program mankind has ever known, without parallel.

But capitalism has dangers just like sex and food have dangers. All are inherently good, but all can be misused in very sinful ways.I think the Pope's political heritage, which seems to be not communist nor capitalist but Peronist, influences his thinking on economics and leads him to wrongly deemphasize some of the evil of socialism.

And I do caution readers to pay attention only to what Pope Francis says and does--his actual words and actions, not to what the media says about him. The media coverage is utterly mendacious, and should be ignored.

The Pope's visit to Cuba and America is a pastoral visit, not a political visit. He is coming to care for his sheep, and the Catholics in the prison that is Cuba desperately need his guidance and inspiration, which presupposes diplomacy and tact. I hope his pastoral visit to America is similarly one of inspiration and love of Christ and our neighbor, and that the politics--particularly the distortions of the politics by the liberal media and to a lesser extent by conservatives--doesn't get in the way. 

A plug for a great book: "SJW's Always Lie; taking down the thought police"



I just read Vox Day's new book SJW's Always Lie. It's an ebook on Kindle. I can't recommend it highly enough.

Day (aka Theodore Beale) has had his share of run-ins with the libtard thought police (Beale has been a major player in GamerGate), and he's a very smart and ballsy guy who really understands SJW's (Social Justice Warriors).

I'll try to post more on the book, but I should briefly mention his three Laws of SJW's:

1) SJW's always lie. They lie because their entire plan is to advance the Narrative, and the Narrative is their religion. The Narrative has no necessary connection to the truth; it is only a means of advancing their power and satisfying their egos. If there is a transient conjunction with an aspect of the Narrative and the truth (which is rare), it is accidental and still basically a lie.

SJW's always lie.

2) SJW's always double-down. Because SJW's always lie, and because the Narrative is never about any aspect of the truth, when SJW's are caught lying, they merely intensify the lies. They always double-down, even when caught red-handed lying. The Narrative must be protected at all times, and the SJW response to refutation of the Narrative is always more intense Narrative--more intense lying.

3) SJW's always project. This is a very important observation, and one that I have noticed for a while. It's quite remarkable: when an SJW is accusing an opponent of something--racism or lying or incompetence or whatever-- it is almost invariable that the accusation is precisely what the SJW himself is doing. There are no more flagrant racists in America than progressive Democrats, yet to be a progressive Democrat necessarily entails calling everyone else a racist. There is no one more responsible for gun crime in the U.S. than progressive Democrats--they govern and populate every crime-infested city and they create gun-free zones in which spree shooters can kill so easily and successfully--yet progressive Democrats accuse everyone but themselves of being responsible for gun violence. The list of SJW projections is endless. I have my own rule: if you want to know what a SJW is up to, just note what he's accusing you of. It's a remarkably reliable indicator of his motives.

Please buy Beale's book. It's a superb insight into SJW tactics and worldview, and it contains excellent strategies for dealing with SJW attacks. I'll try to post more on it.

Global Warming fascist provides a succinct description of climate science

As you're probably aware, a coterie of 20 global warming fascists wrote a letter to the Attorney General demanding criminal prosecution under RICO statutes of organizations who are skeptical of global warming "science". Here's a great link at Red State with the email addresses of the Stazi scientists. Give'em a piece of your mind.

One of the bastards--Barry A. Klinger-- provided an explanation for his effort to criminalize scientific dissent.

He quoted a RICO judgement against tobacco companies to define the five elements of fraud:
Generally, a plaintiff must prove five elements by "clear and convincing evidence" to prevail on a fraud claim. See e.g., Armstrong v Accrediting Council Continuing Educ. & Training, Inc., 961 F. Supp. 305, 309 (D.D.C. 1997). They are: (1) a false representation, (2) in reference to a material fact, (3) made with the knowledge of its falsity, (4) with the intent to deceive, and (5) on which action is taken in reliance upon the representation. ( p. 1564)
Hmmm... 'deliberate deception by false representation of facts on which action is taken' is a stunningly precise description of climate science.

R.I.C.O. prosecution is a great idea. The entire climate science community should be investigated. Let's start with their emails.   

P.Z. Myers says something really dumb about Carson and Muslims

Myers is on a roll.

Ben Carson recently said that he "would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that."

A perfectly sane viewpoint, and one I share.

Myers is shocked--shocked-- that Carson would... wait for it... violate the Constitution(?).

Myers cites the First Amendment, which prohibits Congress from making a law respecting an establishment of religion, and Article IV, which prohibits a religious test for holding public office.

*Pounds head on desk*

The Constitution constrains government from establishing a religion and from imposing a religious test to hold office, but it does not restrain American citizens from voting in accordance with their best judgement and conscience. And a candidate's most deeply held religious views are fair game-- we wouldn't elect a pagan who believed in human sacrifice.

Myers' post is one of the dumbest I've read on his blog, and that says a lot. Now it's perfectly fine to hold the opinion that a Muslim would make a fine president, and it's perfectly fine to hold the opinion that a Muslim wouldn't make a fine president. That issue can be debated, but it has nothing--nothing-- to do with the Constitution.

The Constitution constrains the government, not American voters.

And of course I agree with Carson that electing a Muslim president would be a bad idea. I mean, look how the first one worked out.




P.Z. Myers says something really dumb about Ahmed the little clock-maker



Big surprise.

Myers has been at his libtard best recently.

He bought into the Texas clock kid hoax. Little Ahmed Mohammed brought a "clock" into school--it turns out it was the guts of a 1970's electric clock (the kid didn't "make it") in a little suitcase, and the kid's dad is an Islamic nut case with an ax to grind. The whole point here was obviously to invoke a bomb scare and then blame the folks who (correctly) were alarmed about the "clock" of being Islamohpbic. Obama invites the little I.E.D. clock maker to the White House, and the loony Left internet lights up with outrage at this brazen act of Islamophobia against the enterprising little scientist who just likes to take the parts out of old electronic devices, package them like bombs, and bring 'em to school.

Looks like the kid's Islamic nut case Dad set him up to get arrested and take one for Allah.

At least he gets a White House visit out of it. Of course, if the kid shows up at the White House with an electronic device in a little suitcase with wires and circuit boards hanging out, he'll be tackled by a hundred Secret Service agents and carted off to jail in manacles and leg irons until the whole thing gets sorted out--kind of like what happened in school. If you don't believe me, try entering a government building with something like this and see what happens.

Question: if someone sent Professor Myers this "clock in a box" thing in the mail, would he duck under the desk, pee his pants, and call the police.

Damn right he would. 

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Can fetuses feel pain?



Several commentors have challenged my observation that fetuses can feel pain, probably before 10 weeks of gestation. There is actually no real debate about this: there are simply people who acknowledge the truth, and people who deny it.

Much ink has been spilled in the medical literature by scientists claiming that mature cortical development and connections are necessary for pain perception. According to the fetal pain deniers, children in the womb cannot experience pain until at least 26 (or so) weeks.

How can such an issue be resolved?

The obvious resolution is this: identify human beings who lack a cortex or who lack normal thalamocortical projections, and ascertain whether they can experience pain. "Knock out mice" are an example of the use of this strategy in determining gene function. We study the effects of the absence of a gene in deficient mice to understand the normal function of the gene.

To understand the normal experience of pain as a function of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, we should similarly study pain reaction in human beings who lack a cortex or who lack normal thalamocortical projections.

Fetuses are one such subset of human beings--the fact is that they react violently to pain at very early stages of gestation, and efforts of 12-week gestation fetuses to withdraw from noxious stimuli are very well documented (Silent Scream). Ultrasounds of fetuses undergoing various stressful procedures show obvious reactions to pain--the fetuses open their mouths as if to scream, they withdraw violently from the stimulus, and sampling of fetal blood shows massive release of stress-related hormones.

But the evidence for pain experience in the absence of normal cortex or normal thalamocortical projections goes far beyond evidence from fetuses.

There are two kinds of birth defects that leave a person without any cortex at all: hydranencephaly and anencephaly. Patients with hydranencephaly completely lack a cerebral cortex and white matter.  The usual cause is a massive stroke during prenatal life. They are  left only with a diencephalon (thalamus) and a brainstem and cerebellum. Patients with anencephaly also completely lack a cerebral cortex and white matter.  The usual cause is a genetic abnormality that precludes normal brain formation. They too are  left only with a diencephalon (thalamus) and a brainstem and cerebellum. I've taken care of scores of patients with these handicaps over 30 years. Their survival after birth is limited. Many die after several months, some live into later childhood (my longest survivor is 10 years).

They all feel pain, despite having no cortex at all. When stuck with a needle or in any way given a painful stimulus, they scream, cry, withdraw, and exhibit intense discomfort. Their autonomic response is identical to that of people without handicaps--their heartbeat increases markedly, their breathing becomes fast and shallow, etc.

They feel pain as surely as you and I feel pain. In fact, my impression is that they feel pain more intensely than people without handicaps.

Furthermore, there are tens of millions of people with neurological disabilities that severely impair cortical function or impair thalamocortical connections. These disorders include lissencephaly, microencephaly, polymicrogyria, among others. These patients often have limited life expectancies, but they all experience pain and are all treated medically with full analgesic therapy--pain killers, local and general  anesthesia for surgery, etc.

Probably the largest group of people with markedly deficient corticothalamic projections are people with perventricular leukomalacia (PVL), which is one of the most common causes of cerebral palsy. Many people with PVL have massive global loss of cerebral white matter, which is the brain tissue that comprises connections between the thalamus and the cortex.

Yet people with cerebral palsy obviously experience pain. No one but a sadist would subject a child with cerebral palsy to surgery or other painful procedures without anesthesia. To do so would be worse than malpractice. It would be an actual prosecutable crime.

The claim by some pro-abortion doctors and scientists that lack of a mature cortex or thalamocortical projections precludes the experience of pain is a damnable lie.

Pain is experienced at a subcortical (probably thalamic) level. The cortex is necessary for the interpretation of pain, but is not necessary for the experience of pain. The traditional neuroscientific teaching holds true: pain enters awareness at the thalamus, not the cortex. There is massive evidence to support this: the daily experience of tens of millions of neurologically handicapped people, who experience pain in a very real way. 

The only reason this long-understood and uncontroversial fact about the neuroscience of pain perception has been tossed down the memory hole is that this scientific fact casts a bad light on our abortion industry. Ideology trumps science, and when science conflicts with pro-abortion ideology, science gets tossed aside.

Fetuses (once they have a thalamus, which is about 7 weeks) feel pain, just as surely as children with hydranencephaly and cerebral palsy feel pain. To kill a fetus by dismemberment in the womb is the moral equivalent of killing a child with cerebral palsy by dismemberment.

Fetuses feel pain, just as people with severe neurological handicaps feel pain. That the scientific and medical profession does not universally acknowledge this simple fact is disgusting and profoundly evil.

Friday, September 11, 2015

Democrat justice

This is what they do when they're not jailing Christians:

At a congressional hearing on campus sexual assault, Colorado Rep. Jared Polis suggested that expelling students based solely on the idea that they might have committed a crime is an acceptable standard. And the hearing audience applauded him. 
Polis, a Democrat, was discussing due process and standards of evidence as they apply to colleges and universities adjudicating sexual assault. Currently, colleges must be only 50.01 percent sure that an accusation is valid before punishing an accused student (more on that later). Polis began advocating for allowing colleges to use a lower standard than that. 
"I mean, if there's 10 people that have been accused and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, seems better to get rid of all 10 people," Polis said. "We're not talking about depriving them of life or liberty, we're talking about their transfer to another university." 
For this, the audience applauded.
Democrat congressman says it's ok to expel a student for rape, even if there's only a 10% chance he did it.

And the (Democrat) audience applauds.

But think about it: if, consequent to a rape allegation, there's a 10% chance the guy committed rape, then there's a 90% chance the girl is lying.

If you expel him, you have nine times more reason to expel her.

Lord help us. 

Atheists even attack Christians in prison


Atheist Group Protests Prisoners’ Gift for Pope Francis 

Group: Prison system ‘appears to be showing impermissible favoritism to one religion’

An atheist group claimed that a hand-carved gift made by Philadelphia prisoners for Pope Francis violated the First Amendment in a recent letter
The Freedom from Religion Foundation sent a letter to Louis Giorla,Philadelphia’s commissioner of prisons, outlining concerns over prisoners being used to carve, refinish, and upholster the chair for Pope Francis ahead of his visit on Sept. 27. The pope is scheduled to meet with approximately 100 inmates at the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility. 
“[The prison system] appears to be showing impermissible favoritism to one religion over all others, and religion over non-religion, by inviting Catholic religious leaders to its facilities and then bestowing gifts on them,” Annie Laurie Gaylor, the foundation’s co-president, wrote in the letter. Gaylor noted that prisoners also made a special chair earlier this year for Charles Chaput, the Archbishop of Philadelphia. 
The foundation cited the First Amendment, which, it said, “mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and non-religion.”

The atheist totalitarians are busy at work attacking Christians in every crevice of American life.

The First Amendment of course does not mandate government neutrality between religion and non-religion--it nowhere proclaims neutrality, and the only constraint in religion is the Establishment clause that prohibits Congressional enactment of a federal church. A few Christian prisoners building a chair as a gift for Pope Francis does not establish a national church. And atheists can't put them in prison for it--they're already there.

In fact, the First Amendment explicitly favors religion over non-religion by guaranteeing Free Exercise of Religion (it says nothing about non-religion).

Atheism is a disease on the American body politic. 

New York TImes publishes its 'Jew-Tracker'

Anti-Semitism is a powerful force on the Left and is taking hold in much of the Democrat party:



NY TIMES LAUNCHES ITS JEW-TRACKER [UPDATED]

The New York Times today offers up a table examining the Democratic (but not Republican) Senators and House members opposed to Obama’s Iran agreement, noting whether they are Jewish and the proportion of Jewish constituents in their state or district. Like this:
Jew tracker copy
If they had to wear yellow stars, it'd be even easier to keep track of them.