Posts Tagged 'jew'

Selfishness of the Pro-Abortion Movement

Does the government have the right to tell religious institutions to buy birth control and morning after abortion pills for their employees?  Is it enough to have a religious exemption for institutions whose sole goal is to spread their faith?  If you have been asking yourself these questions lately, you are asking yourself the wrong questions.

First, let’s briefly address the exemption for religious organizations who solely exist to share their faith. Those organizations are few and far between.  Very few religious organizations seek to share their faith without also offering humanitarian aid, social work with teenagers, child services, food and training for the poor.  Aid to the poor is one of the largest purposes for the church and for Christians.

The question we should be asking when it comes to the religious exemption, is what about private business owners who object to birth control and morning after pills based on religious principle?  Why don’t they get an exemption?

Here is what this debate really comes down to.  I am a Protestant Christian and we use birth control.  We oppose morning after pills.  Every month we shell out $9 for our birth control pills, and I guess we forgo a date for two to McDonalds to do it.  I would never ask anyone else to pay that $9 for me.  I especially would never ask someone who objected to birth control on religious grounds to pay for it for me.  That is the epitome of selfishness.

I guess there are people out there who can’t afford $9 a month and can’t keep it in their pants.  Don’t ask religious people to give you that birth control or morning after pill.  Don’t ask the government to violate our 1st amendment rights and force us to provide that.

As far as the pro-abortion movement, if you truly believe that “they are just going to do it anyway”, sex among 13 and 14 year olds is a free expression of love, babies are a disease that kill dreams, or whatever, then set up a foundation that collects donations and pays for birth control and morning after pills.   You could form the organization after a charitable model like Toys for Tots and deliver a year’s supply of birth control to needy teenagers every Christmas.  You could call it Kontraception for Kids.  Or how about Planned Parenthood.

Some people mistakenly think this year’s election has anything to do with banning contraception on the federal level.  No, it has to do with whether everyone will be forced to pay for each others contraception.  It has to do with whether the liberals are going to force people to go against their religious objections and pay for something they find morally reprehensible in violation of their 1st amendment rights.  Does the constitution still matter?  That is the question in this debate.  Nobody is threatening to ban birth control.

If you are on Obama’s side and think Christians, Muslims and Jews should be forced to pay for your contraception, stop and think about how selfish that request is.

Advertisements

You Might Be A Racist If…

Before you read this, I feel I need to make a disclaimer.  I disagree with the President on many issues.  I am not a racist.  Or at least, if I am subconsciously none of my black friends have told me so.  I believe that I grew up in a generation that judges people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.  I never lived through the 60’s.  I was born in 1980.  I’ll never forget the day I learned that the N-word was a racial slur.  It was explained to us by our school teacher because the kids were calling me one.   My ancestors experienced the racism of 1930’s Europe.  To me, judgments beyond pure aesthetics based on the tone of someone’s skin is somewhere between stupidity and insanity.  In addition, philosophically speaking, I believe that prejudices and presuppositions will be walls to understanding except where they are already steps built from learning.   If you have read this disclaimer, you may now read this post having built your prejudice of my position on what you have learned about me in this short paragraph.

When Barack Obama was running for President, people were encouraged to be part of history.  Some framed the entire election in that context.  Others played the card from the other direction, inciting guilt through questions of if we were ready to elect a black President.  Suddenly, for some it was no longer about his policies.

Now, from the same people who brought you outrage over Republican protesters with signs accusing Democrats of national socialism (Nazism), Democrats are comparing Republicans to Klansmen if they oppose the President.  The accusation came from Democrat Representative Hank Johnson who said that if we don’t censure Joe Wilson then next thing you know we will have anti-socialist healthcare protesters donning white sheets and terrorizing blacks.

Really?  Does he really think that calling the President a liar makes you a racist?  I wonder how he would explain this:

I checked, Pete Stark wasn’t censured.  There was a motion to censure him for his comment about Bush wanting to send kids to Iraq to get their heads blown off for President Bush’s amusement, but the censure motion was killed by Democrats.

It gets even better.  Former President Jimmy Carter has raised the bar declaring that the reason we oppose Obama on universal socialist healthcare is because we are racists.  I wonder if Carter has responded yet to the black chairman of the RNC, Michael Steele, who said Carter is “flat out wrong” on this.  Of course, Carter knows a thing or two about racism.  Carter may have thought Joe Wilson was Jewish and that would explain his hostile reaction.

It’s no wonder that so many leftists have gone off the deep end and are willing to play the race card.  It fits with the stereotype they have for conservatives.  Maureen Dowd even heard in her own mind Joe Wilson say “You lie, boy” , and fair or not, she wrote an entire editorial about it.  Of course, he didn’t say that.  In fact, Obama was lying, and pointing it out doesn’t make Joe Wilson a racist.  But in the mind of a leftist, if you disagree with a black President (as long as he’s a Democrat), it’s because he is black.

By the way, it is very important that person being oppressed by racists be a Democrat.  If you disagree with a black Republican, that’s fine.  In fact, if you are a black Republican, you might be an anti-black racist.  It seems as though Democrats are confusing political views with skin color and that can be very dangerous. Van Jones, the former green jobs czar who was forced out of his position by right-wing racists, went so far as to accuse “white polluters” of purposefully polluting “colored communities”.

Eventually, we can hope that the left will lose credibility on this desperate racism play.  People are realizing that we don’t want a healthcare plan that penalizes  you if you don’t buy it, funds abortion with tax dollars, increases the deficit by $250 billion even with cuts to medicare and $350 billion in new across the board taxes, rations healthcare based on government computer data, makes your health records the property of the government, and strangles non-government sanctioned competition.  Not wanting a government takeover of healthcare has absolutely nothing to do with the President’s level of melanin.

What will be scary is if the Democrat race card works.  A successful establishment of race motivation for everyone who disagrees with the party in power, along with vague hate-crimes legislation could be a recipe for disaster.  Or it could be exactly what the party in power is hoping for.

Update: Lee takes it the extra step as predicted


Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

Categories