The Only Birthday Planned Parenthood Cares About

/3 Comments/in , /by

One hundred years ago this month, eugenics advocate Margaret Sanger founded the organization today known as Planned Parenthood. While many on the Left will celebrate this anniversary, Planned Parenthood’s “birthday” — an irony given its grim business of preventing actual birthdays — deserves no such distinction. So rather than celebrate, we should mourn the millions of unborn children who have been denied the chance to live. Today, Americans should ask how did we get here? How did a nation that prizes life above all other rights become a massive supporter and taxpayer-funded enabler of ending that basic right? And what can we do to turn the tide and make unlimited abortion a thing of the past?

Since its inception, Planned Parenthood has been directly responsible for the deaths of nearly seven million unborn children. It was founded upon Margaret Sanger’s reprehensible belief that the human race could somehow be “improved” by ridding the world of less fortunate minorities. Never heard that? The media don’t report it

.But take a look at Sanger’s own words. In a 1923 New York Times article, Sanger explained that her goal was the “release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stock — those human weeds which threaten the blossoming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”

“Defective stock.” “Human weeds.” That’s how Sanger viewed minorities, immigrants, the disabled, and the “feeble-minded,” as her cruel determinism labeled it. All, according to Planned Parenthood’s founder, were to be marked for segregation and sterilization.

No sentiment could be further from the universal principles on which our nation was founded. Sanger rejected the very premise of our Declaration of Independence, that all people “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” And so does the organization she founded.

Over the years, Planned Parenthood has cunningly and deceptively marketed itself as an organization that exists to champion women’s health. It has tried to cloud the true mission of its business by also providing routine services that nearly any other clinic or medical provider can offer. But, unlike most other clinics, Planned Parenthood draws its main profits — not from women’s health — but from abortion on a massive scale, funded by the American taxpayer. No one should be fooled by their modern rhetoric; one hundred years later Planned Parenthood continues to operate on the principle that an unborn child — which the abortion lobby now calls a “clump of cells” or a “fetus” rather than their previous terminology of a “human weed” — is not equal to other human beings and should be eliminated.

Even more troubling, Planned Parenthood’s abortion business is growing at a ghastly rate. In 1973, Roe v. Wade opened the floodgates of industrialized abortion, and from 2012 through 2014 alone, Planned Parenthood took the lives of 978,818 children. That is almost a million unborn babies in three years. By itself, Planned Parenthood now accounts for nearly one-third of all abortions in the United States.

Planned Parenthood has profited mightily from its life-ending practices, growing into a billion-dollar behemoth that generates up to 40 percent of its clinic revenues from the hundreds of thousands of abortions it performs every year. In Planned Parenthood’s 2015 Annual Report, the group listed a total revenue of nearly $1.3 billion. And although nearly half of its funding comes from American taxpayers, Planned Parenthood nevertheless generously compensates its top officers. And it spends millions on political advertising and lobbying. In a just society, no one should profit, much less get rich, from taking innocent life. Nor should any organization engaged in the abortion business get a dime of taxpayer money.

Liberals may continue to contend that abortion and women’s health care are synonymous — look no further than the Democrat nominee who has long supported abortion without limits. But the pro-life movement’s years of work promoting a culture of life in the decades since Roe has begun to change hearts and minds. Thankfully, our nation’s younger generations are becoming more pro-life than ever before. A Gallup poll found that when compared to all other age groups, young adults were the most likely to say abortion should be illegal. More women are also turning to adoption instead of abortion, granting families who cannot have children their wish of becoming caring, loving parents.

Pro-lifers are not only changing hearts and minds, they’re also successfully encouraging states to pass laws that limit and discourage abortion, such as bans on partial birth and late-term abortion, requirements that mothers be provided with sonograms, parental notification requirements, and incentives to encourage adoption. But our work is not done. We must continue our efforts to expose the abhorrent practices of the abortion industry, and we must not stop until the culture of abortion becomes a thing of the past.

While anti-life advocates may choose to celebrate Planned Parenthood’s founding, we will instead mark this day as one of remembrance for an entire generation who never reached their first birthdays. We will recommit to building a culture of life that cares for mothers, nurtures their children at every stage of development, and rejects the destructive culture of organizations like Planned Parenthood and all those who would permit the taking of human life. (For more from the author of “The Only Birthday Planned Parenthood Cares About” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cuban Dictatorship Governed More Severely During 2 Years of US Engagement

/0 Comments/in , /by

In the waning months of his presidency, President Barack Obama issued a directive he called “irreversible,” expanding transactions related to Cuban pharmaceuticals, increasing transportation, and greater commercial opportunities between the United States and the communist dictatorship.

Part of the expanded cooperation will include doing business with state-owned enterprises on property confiscated from Americans during the revolution, said Jason I. Problete, an attorney representing American families who saw their homes and businesses taken by the Cuban government.

“Access to U.S. markets is a privilege, not a right,” Problete told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “The U.S. will be authorizing engaging with businesses stolen from Americans.”

Obama’s directive marks an expansion on his December 2014 move to normalize relations with Cuba. Notably, the directive will lift rules to make it easier to import Cuban cigars and rum by removing the monetary value restrictions on what people can bring to the U.S. when returning from Cuba.

Americans have made 5,913 certified claims against the Cuban government regarding confiscated property from the 5-decade-old revolution. Of those, about 5,000 are from families, while the rest are corporations that operated in Cuba, Problete said.

Taking steps to return property is one condition the United States placed on Cuba in order to lift the embargo. Other requirements include taking steps toward democracy and a free press. Critics complain that the Cuban government not only made no concessions, but has tightened its power grip since the Obama administration normalized relations.

“Almost two years after a policy should be enough to know what the behavior of the regime is going to be,” Cuban dissident leader Antonio Rodiles, who met with Obama in the Cuban capital of Havana this year, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “The Obama administration is moving ahead even though the regime has become more aggressive.”

On Friday, Obama touted his directive as building on the success.

“This directive takes a comprehensive and whole-of-government approach to promote engagement with the Cuban government and people, and make our opening to Cuba irreversible,” Obama said in a statement Friday. “These changes are representative of the progress I saw firsthand when I visited Havana to personally extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people.”

It was during Obama’s visit in March to Cuba that the communist government made 498 politically motivated arrests, according to the Cuban Commission for Human Rights.

In the time since Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro agreed to normalize relations, the Cuban government made 8,616 politically motivated arrests in 2015, and 7,418 in the first six months of 2016, according to the human rights group. The Cuban government increased its violations of religious freedom “tenfold” according to Christian Solidarity Worldwide, with 2,300 violations in 2015, up from 220 in 2014.

“There is no such thing as dictator-down economics,” said Ana Quintana, policy analyst for Latin America and the Western Hemisphere at The Heritage Foundation.

“There is no evidence this will help the Cuban people. It will help the Cuban government and Communist Party elite.”

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew insisted the directive would be a benefit for bringing prosperity to Cubans.

“The Treasury Department has worked to break down economic barriers in areas such as travel, trade and commerce, banking, and telecommunications,” Lew said in a statement. “Today’s action builds on this progress by enabling more scientific collaboration, grants and scholarships, people-to-people contact, and private sector growth.”

Lew’s comments illustrate another problem in the upbeat scenario framed by the Obama administration, Quintana said.

“There is no such thing as a private sector in Cuba,” Quintana said. “If it isn’t state-owned, what you have is the black market. The Cuban government owns and operates the rum and the cigar manufacturing.”

Under the new directive, the Treasury Department will allow Americans and Cubans to engage in joint medical research. Certain Cuban-made pharmaceuticals will be imported into the United States.

The Treasury is also authorizing American companies to award grants and scholarships to Cuban nationals, while also allowing U.S. entities to spend money on Cuban infrastructure. New Commerce Department rules also lift numerous trade restrictions even though the Cuban embargo is still in place.

It would take an act of Congress to lift the Cuban embargo.

Rodiles said even if the 50-year-old embargo wasn’t deemed effective, the current policy is not a sufficient substitute.

“If the previous policy was not working, don’t just change the policy to something that is not gaining the results you are seeking,” Rodiles said. “There were no commitments made by the regime. They can still do whatever they want to do.” (For more from the author of “Cuban Dictatorship Governed More Severely During 2 Years of US Engagement” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

Usually the century mark for a person, place, or thing is a momentous and joyous occasion. Not so this time.

On Sunday, Planned Parenthood turned 100. Both pro-lifers and pro-choicers are marking the organization’s birthday in hashtags: #100YearsOfAbuse and #100YearsStrong, respectively.

But the statistics that have emerged from that 100-year reign are staggering. The award for “most notable” goes to—more than 7 million abortions.

And Cecile Richards has claimed: “We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started. We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

Planned Parenthood is likely here to stay (at least for the foreseeable future), but that doesn’t mean we stop having conversations about the organization and the truth behind its practices.

Here are three ways to talk to someone in your life about Planned Parenthood.

Common Ground

Whether pro-life or pro-choice, it’s safe to assume you want women to have access to quality health care.

The definition of “quality health care” is where the two sides diverge. It seems reasonable to claim that quality health care should include a safe and clean environment where nurses and doctors provide all the information to a patient. And if that patient is pregnant, the information provided includes an ultrasound with a detectable heartbeat.

But to start with common ground means to establish the low bar of quality health care as a right we can all support. Don’t wade into the bothersome details just yet.

Examples

Though Planned Parenthood has escaped the restriction of federal funds, the facts don’t lie and are hard to deny. It’s very important to cite the numerous other health care providers, what services they perform, and their accessibility.

First, there are 20 times as many federally qualified health care centers that serve women as Planned Parenthoods. The argument that closing Planned Parenthood clinics or restricting their funds will inhibit access to quality health care for women is ridiculous. Don’t we want women to have access to a health care provider in their neighborhood? Doesn’t proximity matter?

Second, The Daily Signal cited a few interesting numbers. Planned Parenthood claims about 30 percent of all abortions in the United States every year. Compare this outrageous number to the percentage of Pap tests performed (less than 1 percent) and breast exams (less than 2 percent).

If a woman needs a mammogram (which Planned Parenthood is not licensed to perform), why not remove the middleman that Planned Parenthood has become? Don’t we want clinics that offer access to every health service instead of just a few?

Third, we’re all aware of the horrifying videos released by David Daleiden that rasied questions about the selling of baby parts by Planned Parenthood for profit. (Planned Parenthood had denied any illegal activity.) Though the organization has avoided suffering any major consequences, the videos exist and those conversations are difficult to forget.

If we care about women, it’s important to point out that altering abortions (therefore putting a woman’s health in danger) in order to make a profit is not only illegal, but heartbreaking. Women deserve the truth, and they deserve better.

Words

Words are one of the best defenses you have in this conversation. It’s “baby” vs. “fetus,” and neither side can change what terms they use because both risk losing the argument. So, stick with “unborn baby/child.” Humanize the life the other side refuses to.

Also, talk about rights. Pro-choicers love to talk about the human right to do with your body what you want. But their opinion of when the same rights do/don’t apply to an unborn child are loose (at best), and are usually defined by convenience. So, fight back.

Steal the word “rights” to talk about the unborn child and their right to dignity and respect. As medical advances show more clearly when life begins, the battle for the word “rights” becomes more important.

Just make sure that when talking about Planned Parenthood and abortion you don’t demonize the women who’ve chosen this option. Many have been lied to and felt like they had no choice. To win this argument is to show compassion—for the mother and for the baby growing inside her.

Planned Parenthood has been around for 100 years, but that doesn’t mean the organization will celebrate another century of “success”—especially with the rise of health care technology, social media, and your willingness to have a conversation about the true nature of its practice.

Gather your facts, establish common ground (remember: this is a conversation, not a shouting match), cite examples, and choose your words wisely. (For more from the author of “3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hillary Poll-Tested Obama’s Muslim Roots in 2008

/0 Comments/in , /by

Hillary Clinton made it clear where she stood during the second presidential debate.

The Democratic presidential candidate blasted Republican rival Donald Trump, because, he “never apologized for the racist lie that President Obama was not born in the United States of America.”

Whether it was actually her 2008 campaign who began that “racist lie” has been a matter of considerable debate . . .

Her 2008 presidential campaign wanted to know how voters would react to the fact that then-candidate Barack Obama’s “father was a Muslim and Obama grew up among Muslims in the world’s most populous Islamic country.”

That bombshell was contained in the Wikileaks revelations released Friday, in the form of an email chain sent in January of 2008 that cc’d current Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and longtime Clinton adviser Paul Begala. (Read more from “Hillary Poll-Tested Obama’s Muslim Roots in 2008” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

CIA Prepping for Possible Cyber Strike Against Russia

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.

Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging “clandestine” cyber operation designed to harass and “embarrass” the Kremlin leadership.

The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Vice President Joe Biden told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and that “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact” . . .

Retired Admiral James Stavridis told NBC News’ Cynthia McFadden that the U.S. should attack Russia’s ability to censor its internal internet traffic and expose the financial dealings of Putin and his associates. (Read more from “CIA Prepping for Possible Cyber Strike Against Russia” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why the Nation Is Scared of Hillary Clinton

/0 Comments/in , , /by

These are precarious times to be a Republican.

It is inarguably true that America is in desperate need of a conservative president. Voters have waited and waited, and the havoc Trump has wreaked on the party on his path to the nomination may take a while to heal. This was not the 2016 we deserved. It is, however, the one we got.

But why is everyone so scared of a Clinton presidency? Put simply: The reason everyone is so afraid of Hillary is because Congress sucks.

With polls looking unfavorable for Donald Trump, the sense of dread at having to face four years under Hillary’s watch is compounded by the knowledge that these will be another four years of unmitigated defeat and progressive disaster. Clinton will undoubtedly consolidate more power and tip the delicately balanced scales of checks and balances ever more toward the executive branch. After all, that is what progressives do — it’s in their nature to transform institutions and centralize power.

To a large extent, they have succeeded. Americans cannot help look at the presidency as the strongest and most decisive force in government. The founders, of course, had no such intent when they established our system of checks and balances. Congress was created to be the motor of the republic, to set legislative priorities, rein in the president, and reflect most directly the will of the people. But through eons of feebleness and inactivity, its muscle has atrophied.

It didn’t have to be this way. Congressional cowardice and the entire legislative culture of surrender forces Republicans to look at 2016 as their last hope of rebellion. No one can fathom a scenario in which we lose the presidency and still take part in setting the national agenda. If this was a real possibility on the minds of lawmakers, the aura of doom surrounding November 8 would not be quite so palpable.

The American people — despite the demographics, despite the media, despite presidential elections that are increasingly more personality based — have given Republicans control of the house 18 of the last 22 years. Americans clearly want a check on government.

Shortly after his decision not to go to bat to defend Trump’s politically toxic comments about women in 2005, Speaker Ryan, R-Wisc. (F, 51%) held a conference call urging his members to “do what’s best for you in your district.” Politico quoted a source on the call who described the backlash Ryan faced from some congressmen unprepared to cede the race and unable to stomach the notion of spending another presidential term playing defense as saying: “A lot of these guys feel like there is a moral imperative to beating Hillary Clinton.”

In the 115th Congress, elected Republicans once again have a chance to lead. As several recent polls indicate — in light of the favorability of a President Clinton — come 2017, voters will take their cue from leadership as to how brutal a loss this will be. Are we in for another term of untrammeled progressivism and an opposition party eager to show a liberal media and Washington insiders it can be “reasonable” and “bipartisan”? Or will we get the conservative fighters the country deserves? Fighters that can halt the liberal Clinton agenda. Don’t forget, our nation did see conservative reforms during the last Clinton administration when Republicans asserted themselves as a check on the executive.

What will truly make America great again is reviving the most important branch of government, the only one directly tethered to will of the people.

The internet response to recent polling is filled with the terror of another liberal epoch. Republicans must stop being guided by the less awful of two fears.

I’ll say it again: Hillary is especially dangerous because Congress is especially gutless.

Please, GOP: Prove me wrong. (For more from the author of “Why the Nation Is Scared of Hillary Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

People of God, Let Us Change the World Rather Than Be Changed by the World

/0 Comments/in , /by

In front of our eyes, America is descending into vulgarity, lewdness, crudeness and profanity. In front of our eyes, things which should not be spoken of in private are being shouted across the airwaves, and there seems to be almost no way to escape the bombardment of filth.

At times like this, those of us who love and fear the Lord need to be careful that we too don’t descend into this trashiness, paying careful attention lest we become desensitized and hardened along with the rest of the culture.

I don’t know if it can be demonstrated statistically, but many people believe that President Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky had a negative effect on the nation as a whole, in particular, among young people, who learned that one particular sexual act did not constitute “having sex.”

Today, with the daily attacks on Donald Trump’s past and the daily reminders of Bill Clinton’s past, with websites blasting out the most salacious headlines and with newscasters shamelessly talking about shameful things — all this by the minute and by the hour — we run the risk of being polluted by the world’s corruption without even knowing it, just like a non-smoker comes out of a smoke-filled room smelling like smoke but doesn’t even realize it.

This is a time to remember the words of Jacob (James) who wrote, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world” (Jas. 1:27).

By all means, let us “visit orphans and widows in their affliction,” and by all means, let us keep ourselves “unstained from the world.”

Last week, I posted a video expressing my grief and sadness over professing Christians who minimized so-called “locker room” talk, referring specifically to the horrific sexual comments made by Donald Trump back in 2005.

But my focus was not on Trump. My focus was on Christians saying, “It’s no big deal. All of us do things like that.” There were even Christian women who said, “Hey, I hear that from my husband and sons.” Seriously? No big deal? The kind of stuff most men and boys engage in? What kind of rubbish is that?

Followers of Jesus claiming that crass, despicable, crude, degrading talk about women is no big deal, even for themselves? Followers of Jesus calling me self-righteous and a liar if I don’t admit to engaging in similar talk? What kind of deception are they living in?

In response to my video, one individual wrote, “I guess Dr. Brown never says or minimizes anything inappropriate! Maybe Dr. Brown takes the opposite side of this issue to generate controversy for his Youtube Channel.” Another wrote, “Dr. Brown, I’m sure you have said even worst, and you don’t fool anybody; you’re no better.” What kind of world are these people living in?

It’s true that I’ve been following Jesus for the last 45 years, but my teen years were anything but holy, to the point that I was shooting heroin at the age of 15 and even broke into a doctor’s office to steal drugs for fun. I hung around with some pretty despicable and even dangerous people, and I had a miserably foul mouth.

But even then, the level of “locker room” talk heard on that tape was not something I engaged in (maybe because I wasn’t a star with that kind of access to women, even though I was filthy?).

Either way, the past is not the issue, not for me, not for you, not for Trump, not for Clinton, as long as we have asked God and people for forgiveness, as long as we have made things right, and as long as we are putting the past behind us by living new, transformed lives.

The issue, then, is how we are living today. The issue is what we think about, what we talk about, and what we do today. The issue is the purity of our hearts and the purity of our lips and the purity of our actions — and make no mistake about it, we are called to purity. And purity is downright beautiful.

This is how the Lord calls us to live (and this is just one relevant passage out of many; I encourage you to read it slowly, out loud, several times over):

Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.

For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them; for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light…. (Eph. 5:1-8)

Yes, we used to be darkness, but now, in Jesus, we are light. Let us walk as children of light!

As sons and daughters of God through faith in Jesus the Messiah, we have been given wonderful promises by God, but with those promises comes responsibility. That’s why Paul wrote, “Therefore, since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God” (2 Cor. 7:1, NIV).

As the world around us is plunging into sexual anarchy and madness, let us swim against this polluting tide, determining, with God’s help, that rather than the world changing us, we will change the world. (For more from the author of “People of God, Let Us Change the World Rather Than Be Changed by the World” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Did Sports Become So Politicized?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Colin Kaepernick makes his first start of the season at quarterback Sunday when the San Francisco 49ers take on the Buffalo Bills in Orchard Park, New York. This early-season QB change wouldn’t normally make so much news—but Kaepernick is no ordinary football player.

During the NFL preseason, Kaepernick ignited a controversy when he refused to stand for the national anthem. Players in other professional and amateur leagues followed suit, drawing cheers among some fans and gears from others.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick explained. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

Last month, I sat down with David Bozell, president of ForAmerica, to explore how sports became so politicized. Watch our interview and let us know what you think in the comments below. (For more from the author of “How Did Sports Become So Politicized?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian’

/0 Comments/in , /by

October 16, 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of Planned Parenthood’s founding by racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger. Her self-described goal was to exterminate blacks and sterilize “idiots,” “morons” and the “feeble-minded.” In one revealing letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, Sanger described how to handle the issue of black extermination:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

One of her more famous quotes makes the stomach churn:

The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

Perhaps there are those who still feel that way. Is it possible that there are abortionists who feel that they perform an act of mercy when they kill babies? The following story concerns an abortionist who believes just that.

Dr. Sarah Wallett

There are times in life when, as a Christian, we read or hear something sinful so couched in a mist of Christian ideology that our knee-jerk reaction is one of revulsion. The juxtaposition of faith and sin causes a gut-wrenching and heartsick effect and we want to correct the misunderstanding of Christian faith immediately. Such is my reaction to the story of Dr. Sarah Wallett, a self-proclaimed Christian who performs abortions because she believes “it is the most important thing that I will ever do.”

In early August, Dr. Wallett wrote in her jarring column at Refinery29 that her Christian faith is precisely why she kills unborn children. For an abortion provider to claim that ripping an unborn baby limb from limb is Christ-like is repulsive and couldn’t be further from the truth.

She described her childhood in a Christian home where her family attended church regularly, said prayers before meals and where she was taught “that it was my duty to help people in need and leave the world a better place than I found it,” and added, “The patients I see every day are so clearly people in need — and the medical care I provide them is both life-changing and, in many circumstances, life-saving.”

It calls into question the Christian teaching she actually received — where did she learn that murder was a Christ-like attribute?

She then offered up a list of complaints about the stigma she faces as an abortion provider (“there are no positive images of abortion providers or the value in the work that we do”), legislators who work to revise abortion laws (their “sole goal is clearly to make this work more difficult … create laws that interfere with the medical care I provide, because they do not like the work that I do”) and her concern about abortion laws in other states (“similar to the horrific one in Texas”).

She blasted the laws in her state of Tennessee that “do nothing to keep my patients safe,” such as OB-GYNs like Dr. Wallett having admitting privileges in a local hospital, working in an ambulatory center or providing patients with information about abortion and requiring them to have two visits to the health center prior to having an abortion. Dr. Wallett wrote that “many of these laws, in fact, harm the same women they’re supposedly intended to help,” although it isn’t clear how having access to a hospital or receiving medical information harms the patients.

The abortion provider claimed over and over again that she implements her faith throughout her work of taking tiny human lives — providing compassion and empathy to her patients who have chosen to have an abortion and feel the need to justify it to her, “a task no one should ever have to do.” “My faith teaches me to withhold judgment and to extend acceptance to all,” Dr. Wallett said as she described patients who suffered through the experience of having friends and family beg them not to have an abortion.

One can only imagine the scene of loved ones imploring a pregnant woman to choose life, that they would adopt her baby. But she ended up in the office of a compassionate and accepting killer.

Her patients also have strong faith, she said, and “[g]ood, moral women have abortions every day,” adding that it’s her duty to provide a positive “counterpoint” to the shame and misinformation pregnant women experience and hear that causes pain.

What kind of upbringing was this? How can anyone look at Scripture and believe that God would have us murder the most innocent and vulnerable among us?

The closest analogy from Scripture regarding killing one’s young is the child sacrifice to the pagan deity Molech, which was practiced by the Ammonites and later, the Israelites (1 Kings 11:1-8). God called this practice an “abomination,” and forbid the Israelites to observe the barbaric ritual. “You shall not give any of your children to devote them by fire to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord” (Lev. 18:21). Any Israelite who practiced the child sacrifice was to be put to death (Lev. 20:2).

On the contrary, the Bible is replete with scriptures telling us how much he loved and wanted us before we were born. God called us and named us when we were still in our mother’s womb (Is. 49:1). He formed us with purpose (Ps. 139:13). The Lord says children are an inheritance and a reward (Ps. 127:3). He also tells us that while a mother may not have compassion on the baby in her womb, He will never forget him or her (Is. 49:15).

Slaughtering innocent unborn children has nothing to do with Christianity. It goes against all biblical teaching of protecting human life and the most vulnerable among us. It directly violates the sixth Commandment: “You shall not kill” (Ex. 20:13).

If Dr. Wallett takes pleasure in her work of taking innocent lives, she will answer to God for that. But she cannot tie abortion to the Christian faith in any logical or truthful way. (For more from the author of “Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

UNESCO, Which Obama Wants US to Fund, Calls Israel ‘Occupying Power’ and Rewrites Jewish History

/0 Comments/in , /by

Despite the fact that the membership of UNESCO brought this situation upon itself, the Obama administration has repeatedly asked Congress to change the law to allow the U.S. to renew funding, offering a number of highly dubious assertions on how U.S. interests were being undermined by the failure to provide funding.

Congress has rightly refused.

Part of this resistance is UNESCO’s history of controversial actions and anti-Israel bias, including approving a Palestinian request to add the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and the pilgrimage route to the Palestinian World Heritage list over the objections of the U.S. and Israel.

This week, UNESCO doubled down on its efforts to appease Palestinian complaints by adopting a resolution that condemns Israel on its policies regarding Jerusalem and deliberately downplays Jewish history with the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. Specifically, the resolution repeatedly refers to Israel as the “occupying power” and accuses Israel of a long list of offenses.

Although the resolution acknowledges that the Old City of Jerusalem is sacred to Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, it refers to the “Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al-Sharif” only as Muslim holy sites and ignores the historical and religious connections of these sites to the Jewish people.

Only six Western nations—Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, the Netherlands, the U.K., and the U.S.—voted against the resolution.

Israel has suspended all professional activities with the organization. As noted by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “To say that Israel has no connection to the Temple Mount and the Western Wall is like saying that China has no connection to the Great Wall of China or that Egypt has no connection to the pyramids. By this absurd decision, UNESCO has lost what little legitimacy it had left.”

The U.S. should join Israel and cease its cooperation with UNESCO until the resolution is reversed.

Beyond UNESCO’s controversial decisions, the resistance to funding UNESCO in Congress is based on a bigger concern—that Palestinian membership in the U.N. and its specialized agencies prior to formal recognition of Israel by the Palestinians and a negotiated peace threatens U.S. and Israeli interests.

Additionally, allowing funding for UNESCO would encourage other U.N. organizations to similarly grant membership to the Palestinians. As noted by Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., and Brad Sherman, D-Calif., the funding prohibition is: “vital in successfully derailing attempts … to seek de facto recognition of a Palestinian state from the U.N. via the granting of membership to ‘Palestine’ in U.N. agencies, including UNESCO. … ”

Unfortunately, because the U.S. remains a member of UNESCO but is legally prohibited from providing funding, it is accumulating debts to the organization. This is not in our interests.

But changing the law to allow funding for UNESCO would undermine more significant U.S. interests by rewarding Palestinian efforts to avoid a negotiated peace with and recognition of Israel, accepting UNESCO’s support for that position, and encouraging other U.N. organizations to follow suit.

The next administration should act responsibly and withdraw the U.S. from UNESCO. (For more from the author of “UNESCO, Which Obama Wants US to Fund, Calls Israel ‘Occupying Power’ and Rewrites Jewish History” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.