I am a prolife voter. For me that is the single issue that informs my vote. If the election is between someone who supports abortion and someone who doesn’t, there is no question –regardless of party.
It has happened that my choice has been between two pro-abortion candidates. In that case I voted Republican, because the pro-abortion Republican belonged to a prolife party and would cast his vote for a pro-life Speaker of the House or Senate Majority leader. In this case my vote was ultimately pro-life.
In the case of Trump v. Clinton, there is a clear choice. She is the most pro-abortion candidate imaginable. She will appoint justices and judges who will push her anti-life agenda long after she has left office. Not only that, she will appoint pro-abortion department heads and lower level officials, as well as a pro-abortion attorney general. How many pro-life cabinet level officials were appointed by her husband or Obama? I don’t know of one.
Clinton believes that to secure the triumph of her pro-abortion ideology, those who oppose it must change their religion. Under her rule we can expect persecution.
We can’t sit this one out. Not voting is voting for Clinton.
For me, there is only one choice. I believe that one day we will all stand before the judgement and there beside the great judge will be the souls of all the unborn killed by abortion. Party, politics, economics, none of this will matter. I want to be able to say I did not forget them. Therefore, I must vote for the unborn and trust God to protect our country.
Why does it matter that the core ideology of Black Lives Matter, pro-abortion feminists, and sexual revolutionaries is NeoMarxism?
I listen to the talking heads struggle to make sense of the feminists who don’t care about women’s suffering, the BLM activists who don’t care about the lives of black men, women, and children murdered in urban ghettos, the gay activists who sabotage HIV/STD prevention programs and hide the continuing epidemic, and supposed Liberals who don’t care about freedom of religion and speech.
I felt the same frustration in the 1980’s when I was debating prochoicers. Two friends enlightened me, “They are Marxist.” They told me to read Engels The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, Shulamith Firestone’s The Dialectic of Sex, and David Horowitz’s Destructive Generation. I did and it all made sense.
The goal of NeoMarxists is class struggle leading to revolution, and all power to the oppressed. They aren’t interested in solving problems or alleviating real suffering. They oppose anything that dampens the anger of the oppressed classes.
NeoMarxists use violence, resort to name-calling, deny human rights, and don’t care how many people die. In this, they are more like the terrorists of ISIS than the traditional Liberals who have foolishly made common cause with them.
Until we understand their true objectives, and call them out, the NeoMarxists among us will continue to divide and destroy
The prestigious British medical journal The Lancet has dedicated more than a dozen articles in its June 17 issue to affirming trangenderism as “diversity and not pathology”. This is not the first time The Lancet has adopted a controversial cause and been proven wrong. In this instance, The Lancet accepted, without any supporting evidence, the claim that a transition from one sex to the other sex with or without surgical alteration is an appropriate treatment for gender dysphoria.
Gender dysphoria is the new name for Gender Identity Disorder. Dysphoria is a fancy word for unhappiness. The gender dysphoric are unhappy ecause they don’t feel comfortable as the sex they were born. They envy the other sex and want to be (or may believe contrary to the obvious evidence that they are) the other sex. They are willing to go to extremes to achieve what they covet – acceptance as the other sex. Read more…
It is long past time for those of us who are committed to faith and freedom to call out the Neo-Marxist purveyors of Political Correctness for corrupting the political process. Political Correctness is not about being polite or considerate of other people’s feelings, it is a Neo-Marxist strategy to silence common sense opposition to their radical agenda. Many may be shocked that someone would label the pushers of Political Correctness as Neo-Marxists. Since the downfall of Joe McCarthy’s anticommunist crusade in the 1950s calling people Marxists has been socially taboo. Those cognizant of the dangers posed by the Politically Correct often refer to them as Liberals or Fascists or Leftists, but these labels are inaccurate. True Liberals support free speech even for those with different opinions. The goal of the purveyors of PC Neo-Marxism is to silence the speech of anyone who disagrees with them. Fascists and Neo-Marxists are totalitarian by nature and want their opposition shut down, but Fascist are racists, sexists, and side with oppressors. PC Neo-Marxists champion the cause of the oppressed. While traditional Marxists focused on economics, PC Neo-Marxists are concerned with race and sex. Read more…
In response to my latest posts someone commented that gays were to blame for AIDS. I would not say that, rather I would say that gay men were victim of well-meaning friends. Same-sex attraction (SSA) is a preventable and treatable psychological disorder. Had that information been widely available and accepted by the general public, the gay sexual revolution with its multiple concurrent partners and unsanitary sexual acts would have been recognized for what it was: a symptom of an underlying, untreated psychological disorder. However, rather than help those struggling with SSA, the mental health professionals –without any hard research to support their decision –gave in to the demand to remove homosexuality from their list of psychological disorders in 1973. The most logical weapon against the STD/HIV/AIDS epidemic – the prevention and treatment of SSA – was discarded and gay men died terrible deaths. Think about the timing, those young men who didn’t get help in the 1970s died in the 1980s.
When the epidemic was raging, the public health professionals accepted gay behavior as unchangeable and surrendered proven strategies for controlling an STD in favor of ineffective risk reduction. They literally killed the gay men with kindness.
Lest we condemn the failure of others without bearing our share of the guilt, let us remember that people of faith did little to support the few brave therapists who were working to find effective treatments. The Church didn’t pray for those struggling, didn’t offer hope, or help. There is plenty of blame to go around.
Before there is a general surrender to the demand for transgender rights, including but not limited to bathroom rights, it is important to understand why some people claim to be transgendered.
While many people use sex and gender as though they were synonyms, sex refers to the totality of what it means to be male or female. Gender refers to how one feels about one’s sexual identity. There are two sexes, but because gender is creation of the mind there are an unlimited number of genders. Read more…
HIV/AIDS is no longer a major concern for the public in the US. It doesn’t even make the list, but the epidemic rolls on. In 2014 the CDC estimated that 36,138 men were newly infected with HIV. Of these 30,635 (83%) were gay men or the men who had sex with men (MSM). While new infections in other categories have been declining, the category MSM has been increasing.
Why? Because the Risk Reduction strategy adopted to fight the epidemic was guided by the political agenda of Gay AIDS Activists and not experts in public health. And AIDS activists are selling a failed strategy and using the crisis to sell their sexual agenda to the world. Read more…