A Right to Live (Updated from the 1/31/2017 post)

 

“I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”

-- Ronald Reagan

My daughter critiqued my blog, back in the day, wishing that I would, more often, post happier, lighter subjects.  Would that I could; unfortunately, the ugliness of this world prohibits me from sticking my head in the sand while people are screaming at me for someone, anyone, not to forget.  My entire life I have been surrounded by teachers, friends, and even members of my family, who have found it easier to ignore an emotional issue in favor of rose-colored glasses.

Looking at the world through rose-colored glasses accomplishes little except to suck the color from reality and make us, somehow, feel better for the rosy lie, in this case, about our passive complicity in allowing the murder of innocence to continue unabated as we exercise our "divine" right to decide whether innocence will also be allowed to enjoy the self-evident truths, guaranteed by the United States Declaration of Independence, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,"  unless you are the least among us, that is, unable to speak for yourself, protect yourself, or cry out in fear of your impending death.  If Thomas Jefferson and the Second Continental Congress had any idea Americans would be intentionally condoning the wholesale slaughter of our unborn young, en masse, for convenience and the almighty dollar, I wonder who would stand in protest to the wording of this venerated document?

“The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.”

-- Thomas Jefferson

There is a stark lack of morality in marching for the murder of innocence, which transcends religion and politics. I find the specific murder of one’s own child particularly abhorrent. Being a man, I have no point of reference to a woman’s view in perpetrating this heinous crime upon herself, her mate, and her unborn child. I was raised to honor a woman as a mother, and as a man, it was my duty to put her on a pedestal, her and her child. I suppose my point of reference would, then, fall to a belief in my moral duty as a man – to protect.  After all, a man who can't wrap his mind around this one responsibility is not a real man.  Our society seems to have forgotten how to raise boys to be real men.

“Lost indeed are those who kill their own children out of folly, with no basis in knowledge, forbidding what God has provided for them...”

-- The Qur'an

When we look at the "business" of abortion, we too often see evidence of the financial corruption which comes from the volume of clients served.  Where there is financial corruption you will also find moral corruption.  Planned Parenthood derives 90% of its funds from abortions, which fairly explains its tactic of steering women toward the "choice" of abortion.  If 90% of any business is one item, then refer to the business as that in which they excel; in this case, abortion.  The last thing Planned Parenthood wants is for women to plan parenthood when the real money is in aborting their progeny, the baby.  It isn't rocket science, it's marketing.  

So this bodes the question, why don't they call it what it is, like, Abortions 'R' Us.  The answer is obvious, at least to all who want to pull their head out of the sand and open their eyes.  Planned Parenthood is in the business of murdering the innocent.  The business is immoral, the business is wrong, and the market is booming because they have women convinced that this is moral.  The last thing Murder, Inc. wants is to be scrutinized by a public that they know is waking up to their criminal bullshit.  The SCOTUS striking down Row v. Wade and giving responsibility for abortion to individual states, where it should have been in the first place, is evidence of this.

Don't believe me?  Still have your head buried deep in the sandbox (and, by the way, cats crap in those)?  I invite you to view this well-documented interview with Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood director, and listen to some revelations of what our tax dollars funded:  Western Journalism Interview - Abby Johnson

And, speaking of crap, serial killer Dr. Kermit Gosnell was convicted of murdering three infants, manslaughter of one, twenty-one felony counts of illegal late-term abortion, and 211 counts of violating the informed consent law.  Gee, sounds a lot like Planned Parenthood.  Gosnell waived his right to appeal in exchange for the courts not seeking the death penalty.  So much for his admission of guilt, yet we see the liberal Hollywood elite blackballing production of the film concerning Gosnell because it doesn't serve their agenda of legal murdering of life.  The producer of the movie, Phelim McAleer, had this to say:  "This is one of the biggest crime sprees in American history.  The book and movie will ensure that the cover-up is ended and the truth will be known.”  Well, not if Hollywood can keep the truth buried in the sand, right next to most of society's ignorant heads.  Hey, Hollywood!  Remember John Lennon? Sen. Joeseph McCarthy? Where truth is concerned, memory is short.

“It’s alright, all of us all living, saying ‘oh well there’s enough of us so we won’t have anymore, don’t let anybody else live.’ I don’t believe in that.”

-- John Lennon

Why do people wonder why even we old folks were saddened by John's passing.  His was a voice of reason in a sea of stupidity.  Oh, and he was ours first.

The Women's March, or, as I refer to them, the  League of the Perpetually Offended, participated in 670 marches across this great country and accomplished nada, zero, nothing.   Why? Because most people have awakened to the historical drone of same-o, same-o, same-o, which is so much less important than the message of murdering innocent babies that the March for Life was touting.  Really?  Let's consider the rant of selfish women against the selfless rant of women concerned about the murder of innocence.  I'm sorry; I just have no tolerance for people that sanction murdering babies as a way to make them feel more womanly:

“The fight for the right to life is not the cause of a special few, but the cause of every man, woman and child who cares not only about his or her own family, but the whole family of man.”

-- Dr. Mildred Jefferson

Our society bases its legal definition of human life on time in the womb, brain activity, whether the fetus has taken a breath, cried, and other such.  Our society gauges our legal definition of life by our desires to end it.  Does this require we look at the evidence subjectively or objectively?  Some would say a moral belief is subjective in that it is a belief not based on measurable evidence.  Yet, the objectivity of measurable evidence is, itself, colored by the monetized desire for legalized abortion of a living organism.  Our definition of how old a fetus needs to be in order to be viewed as alive seems to change with the political winds.  I'll make it easy for those with too much college education:  If you can change a definition as more information becomes available, the decision you make is, by definition, subjective.  Life, on the other hand, is defined as life, unless you have a reason to murder it.

Surgeons can, now, operate on a fetus to correct some birth defects while in the womb.  But, we miss the point that medical professionals are performing surgery on a non-living organism.  My question is why would a surgeon be concerned with correcting abnormalities in non-living entities?  Why put the mother at risk if the fetus is not alive?  Is it because it would continue to develop poorly?  Continue to develop?  I wasn't aware non-living organisms continued to develop.  I suppose you have to be a lawyer, or a Dr. Mengele, to define life as death for some selfish, immoral, reason.

Life isn't death, any more than death is life.

Having said all of this, I hold my own beliefs to be totally subjective.  I am opposed to the killing of innocent human life.  My definition of life starts when science can determine a fetus has a heartbeat which, in my humble opinion, is evidence of life, if not brain activity. I hold this definition for only one purpose - if a woman is raped, we have a pill to ensure the pregnancy never begins.  The stupidity of the offended is not a reason to murder.  Also, I think the mother has a right of choice when a doctor determines her life is at serious risk, because of the fetus, to terminate said fetus.  Or, if the fetus is evidenced to be so corrupted as to be "non-viable" and if the quality of "life" will be so miserable for the infant as to be defined as cruel and inhuman punishment to allow it to continue.

“The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.”

-- Thomas Jefferson

“I do not believe the promises of the Declaration of Independence are just for the strong, the independent, the healthy. They are for everyone-including unborn children.”

-- George W. Bush

“Our values call upon us to care about the lives of people we will never meet.”

-- Barack Obama

“If you look at it, I said, ‘It really, really troubles me, and it really, really bothers me, the whole concept of abortion.’ This was years ago, and even then it really bothered me, but I went on the other side of the line. But in thinking about it over the years, I’ve had instances, and one instance in particular, a friend had a child who they were going to abort, and now they have it, and the child is incredible. And the man, he changed his views also because of that.”

-- Donald J. Trump

As much as politics pull, tear, and try to morph the issue, Presidents since the beginning of our country have believed that life deserves every chance, and this chance "is the first and only object of good government."  

Fyodor Dostoyevsky once said, "You can judge a society by how well it treats its prisoners."  I think it would be a better, more inclusive measurement to use Mahatma Gandhi's definition, "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members."  We bury our heads in the sand and choose expediency and convenience in lieu of morality.  We want expediency for our murderers, so they get what's coming to them for what they have done against society, and yet this same society murders innocents by the thousands with no thought of justice for these unborn children.  

What is our definition of moral decay?

“And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?

-- Saint Teresa of Calcutta

E.A. Bucchianeri says, "Abortion should be listed as a weapon of mass destruction against the voiceless."  We decried the crimes of Nazis against humanity.  We decry the crimes of so many governments and terrorist regimes which practice genocide and "ethnic cleansing."  We decry these crimes even while we revel in legal excuses to practice our own brand of immoral crimes against innocence and humanity.

Women politic for “freedom of choice” in order to legally murder their unborn children, while men are asked to condone their choice.  As a real man, I see no dignity in that. As a Christian, I see no morality in that. 

It makes me wonder what a real woman sees. 

“This is a debate about our understanding of human dignity, what it means to be a member of the human family, even though tiny, powerless and unwanted”

-- Henry Hyde

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

I fervently hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with the United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and, finally, a senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world-renowned, Western Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research.

Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteered as the lead chaplain at a regional medical center.

Feel free to contact Pastor Tony: tolerantpastor@gmail.com