Today's Reality of Sociopolitical Abortion Right's Culture of Death Part 1 of 2

There’re additional terms for “Partial Term” and “Late Term” abortion: infanticide, maternal filicide and murder. And it is morally repugnant, indefensible and wicked. Contrary to Andrew Cuomo’s declaration that late term abortion is “a historic victory for…our progressive values…” The opposite is true. This shameless embrace of a culture of death is astonishing to every American who cherishes life. Not too long ago, the Democratic party’s stated position was that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” It was this widespread rejection of late-term abortion that led a bipartisan majority in Congress to pass the partial-birth-abortion ban in 2003. Pitilessly, how far left the Democratic party’s pendulum has swung. 

To support, let alone cheer, late-term abortions not only marks a disturbing step backward by self-styled “progressives”, it also encroaches upon every demand of human decency. As modern science has moved the point of viability ever earlier in pregnancy, most Americans have agreed that a child who can survive outside the womb deserves a chance at life. Although the beginning of humanhood may be controversial, why cannot the progressive left and the sociopolitical abortion rights movement accept the scientific answer regarding the beginning of human personhood? The widely accepted scientific answer: Human life begins at the time of conception. This being so, anyone with an open mind must conclude that human life is present throughout the entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life. One can only assume those sociopolitical abortion proponents are selectively blind to the truth or ignore the pain and suffering an aborted fetus, terminated baby or abandoned newborn. Or, simply don’t give a damn. 

To say I find the current political debate over abortion deeply troubling, including the decision by some Democrats to block a bill, from passing unanimously, called the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is an understatement. The mentioned act would require that babies born alive after a botched abortion procedure be treated no differently by doctors than any other newborn.  Imagine, we are debating whether it is ethical to strangle a child, for the mother and the physician or clinician to have a conversation while keeping the newborn comfortable, all the while considering if they want to destroy it or no. Really, we’re having a bioethical debate about what amounts to infanticide? In America, are not all of us created equal? If that equality means anything, surely it means that infanticide is wrong. Forthrightly, this shouldn’t be hard. Then again, today’s Democrats seem to be all right with taking the life of a breathing, heart beating and pain feeling human life. Are you?

Tides of Tyranny: Adherents of Collectivist Government are Blind to ...

Tides of Tyranny: Adherents of Collectivist Government are Blind to ...: What I have seen after having lived in Deutschland for seven years, visiting other Western nations, participating in various military op...

Adherents of Collectivist Government are Blind to Reality

What I have seen after having lived in Deutschland for seven years, visiting other Western nations, participating in various military operations/conflicts around the globe and having resided in America for the majority of my life, is that the radical left of the Western political spectrum is transforming into a totalitarian force in the name of anti-everything, dependent on the context and their perception thereof. In a word, those political leaders, candidates or supporters who espouse any form of collectivism as preferred type of governmental system by which a state or community is controlled either know not of what they speak or intentionally deceive a targeted populous creating awkward obscuration where there needs to be clarity and transparency. In summation, the perpetrators of such action circumvent or conceal the reality of rule by Socialist, Communalist, Collectivist, Communist or Marxist ideology. The fact is, government by Socialism refers to a collective group of select individuals that exercises executive authority in a state. They want the government to control free speech, academia and wealth distribution in the name of anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-misogyny or anti-bigotry; prejudice against differing opinions. But let me tell you: when it comes to limiting freedom of speech and distributing wealth from the affluent (rich) to the impoverished (poor), the adherents of Socialism and Marxism take the cake. They do so, all in the name of anti-colonialism, anti-capitalism, anti-fascism…. Has not history taught us that nothing good evolves out of socialist or collective form of government rule, except for those few power elitists whose buttocks are sitting in the throne of power? Those who are inept and Janus-faced will become wealthier, those who are gifted or skilled will only manage to live their lives, to a limited extent moderately unless they are willing to become corrupted, and the honest underprivileged will become poorer still. The Feminists who fight for free birth control pills and women’s choice are ignoring the fact that many Collectivist governments fail to protect its women and are heavily involved in child trafficking and sex-slavery. 

In conclusion, it is clear the leftist who seek to reap the harvests of socialism cannot see the forest for the trees. They are blind to the fact that high taxes have driven businesses big and small, to foreign lands, destroying the livelihood of multitudes of their own honest, hardworking and competent countrymen. Even the Libertarians who preach unrestricted competition (free market) miss the notion of impartiality (fair play) when it comes to economic relationship with Collectivist nations. To me, such people are not so virtuous, anti-evil nor anti-establishment; they are just too damn self-serving, naïve or too simple-minded to criticize the political and economic realities of Marx, Engel, Lenin, Mao, Nicolas Maduro…. Kamala Harris, Ocasio Cortez, Elizabeth Warren….

How Many More Must Die

How many innocent American citizens must be gunned down like Kate Steinle (age 32), Danny Oliver (47), Michael Davis (42), Ronil Singh (33), Sabrina Starr (21)…Josie Greathouse (38); stabbed like Mollie Tibbetts (24), Robert Page (76), Terry Wendover (45) …Marilyn Pharis (64); killed by vehicular negligence/homicde like Amanda Weyant (28), Edwin Jackson (26), Justin Lee (14)? Blake Zeito (20), Chrishia Odette (13) …Ellie Bryant (4). How many more U.S. families will suffer a loss of a loved via shooting, stabbing or vehicle related death/homicide? How many more loved ones, must die from drug overdoses, as a result of narco-traffickers utilization of our porous Southern border? How many more innocent victims must die at the hands of MS-13 type gang members who illegally gained entrance into the United States though our open Southern border? Now we know the answer. The message is now understood. Pelosi & Schumer made that clear in their response to Trump’s border security address and border security compromise overtures. The Democrats didn't just reject the wall. They discarded Americans like Steinle, Tibbetts, and Jackson et al.

By turning a blind eye on securing America’s Southern border, the Democratic leadership is ignoring the prime narcotics, human and sex trafficking corridor. By doing so Democrats have dismissed America’s overdose fatalities as being acceptable collateral damage; MS-13 gang victims have for the most part been conveniently forgotten by the progressive left. Again, I ask why? It's politics as usual and it's a price the Democrats are more than willing to pay for their open border’s agenda. Thus, the Democrat party have rejected everyday Americans like you and me. All this for a vote and their intense vehemence for President Trump.

The presence of non-vetted illegals serves as a stark reminder of the dangers this nation’s Law Enforcement Officers and its citizens face daily from an untold number of criminal aliens now prowling our towns, cities and states. I ask you, the reader is this what the sanctuary-loving left wants to shelter from the deportation storm? Furthermore, the border crisis is not manufactured. It's consequences are real. See below link to gain appreciation of how the atmosphere of neglect and abandonment has become tangible to many American families. www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp

Not all Deaths are Equal

Washington Post Columnist Jamal Khashoggi's death was tragic, as was the death of 26-year-old John Chau. Mainstream Media (MSM) and the progressive left spent countless days, weeks and continues to this day reporting, speculating and theorizing on Khashoggi’s death. Chau, an American Missionary was martyred by tribesman on India’s remote North Sentinel Island for his Christian faith yet was ignored by DC’s, Beltway apparatus of government, MSM and surprisingly Mainline Protestantism Denominations. Why? One can only suppose the lack of press has something to do with the Left’s liberal ideology and political agenda. Has not the left’s ideology embraced secularism and all the ills that come with it? Pollicization of the columnist’s demise and events surrounding it is another strategy the left hopes to use in driving a wedge between President Trump and the American people. Point: Other than both men being slain there was different circumstances and personal motivations involved.

Khashoggi’s death, IAW, American media outlet bobbleheads, allege that extensive evidence points to the Saudi Crown Prince as being complicit in the death of the journalist. Although, the incident could potentially fuel a political crisis between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, it is right that we not lose sight of the human aspect of what happened. Khashoggi was an asset to the Washington Post, gutsy for calling out the Saudi’s for what he found to be disconcerting events happening within the Saudi monarchy’s sphere of influence. One might rightfully conclude that naivete on Khashoggi’s part led to his ill-timed death. Certainly, he knew that returning to the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul, regardless of his professional status was unwise if not foolhardy. For this he paid the ultimate price. 

Until recently, few in the US had heard of India’s North Sentinel Island, where young American John Chau was martyred by members of an isolated tribal group. Little was known of Chau until recently. Mainstream media hardly took note of the death. But as the story spread; first the tale of a 26-year-old world traveler who sought adventure, then of a Christian missionary willing to risk his life. From what I was able gather via research, people responded with swift and occasionally derisive responses. Many considered Chau a fool, or worse, criticizing him for breaking Indian law and endangering the island’s isolated indigenous people, due to disease immunity issues. I see Chau an inspiration, even a martyr. MSM and much of our Government representatives scarcely took notice. They appear to prefer a non-American Muslim’s death to an American Missionary’s martyrdom. One man sought a marriage license, the other sought to reach a people for Christ. Though many are fascinated by the idea of a stone age tribe, Chau’s goal was not tribal tourism. He wanted to live with the Sentinelese, share the story of Jesus, and translate the Bible into their language, as his journal entries and statements from Chau’s sending mission organization, Make clear. 

Unlike the recent response to Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, the media’s response as scant as it was, and the public reaction was polarized. Some saw the young man as a martyr, dying for the cause of Christ and the salvation of lost tribe. Others saw him as a dullard, who deserved whatever he got after intruding where it was clearly expressed, he was persona non grata. Following the death of Chau, many have called missionary work a fool’s errand at best, and, at worst, a violent attempt to impose Christian beliefs on other cultures. The Great Commission means that most Christians will have to agree to disagree with those who see sharing the story of Jesus as inherently negative.

Tides of Tyranny: An Immigration Solution that Benefits America and ...

Tides of Tyranny: An Immigration Solution that Benefits America and ...: Indulge me by pondering a serious question that is routinely asked by concerned citizens as it relates to illegal immigration past and prese...

An Immigration Solution that Benefits America and Dreamers

Indulge me by pondering a serious question that is routinely asked by concerned citizens as it relates to illegal immigration past and present. Other than massive amounts of drug running, human-trafficking, disease, terrorism, and burdensome new welfare recipients, what are the benefits of open borders? As both a Retired Army Officer and Second Generation Italian-American, I contend there is little benefit for open borders. Contrary to proponents that favor an extension of the freedom of migration between countries there are valid reasons why such freedom of migration is indefensible. Primarily, such restrictions are generally based on public health, order, or safety justifications and suggest that the right to these conditions preempts the notion of freedom of movement.  

My position on immigration is characterized by shades of meaning. I am adamantly opposed to illegal immigration and rewarding benefits to those who have broken the law to enter the United States. At the same time, I am compassionate and fair minded. Citizenship in America is not a song and dance entitlement awarded to anyone and everyone who crosses our borders but, in its place, a special right to be conferred. 

For those who currently fall under the category of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), I propose a not so novel idea, that is likely shared by others. Why not have Congress pass legislation that expedites citizenship for DACA immigrants who serve in the U.S. Uniformed Military Services. In the case of those emigres who were brought here as children who fail to meet the entry standards for military recruitment an alternative would be community or designated federal services much the same as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal Program. 

Simply put, would not the suggestion of required military or community service deliver fairness to a group that merits it? From what I understand the military branches are struggling to meet, and in some cases falling short of, their recruiting goals. What better incentive for a young law-abiding Dreamer to join the military than to be rewarded with an honor that is truly earned? In the case of community service, what community does not have wants or requirements to make it a better place to live? 

Instead of asking for in-state college tuition rates, these immigrants can serve our nation and then use the GI Bill benefits they have earned. Few people wish to reward illegal behavior. This is an opportunity to pay back the United States for the honor of becoming an American citizen. I am of the opinion if someone loves America enough to potentially risk his or her life defending it, there’s more than a good chance that individual will be an asset to their nation and community.

The steps mentioned should not be viewed as a weakening of immigration reform but rather righting a wrong that has simmered long enough. This writer favors border security that includes physical barriers, immigration reform, increase in border patrol manpower, and if necessary, federalization of National Guard troops to assist in border security operations. I, unlike some Congressional ideologues have a firm stance against using taxpayers’ monies to fund sanctuary cities/states that refuse to cooperate with Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) personnel. Unlike some politicians who appallingly call for abolishing ICE and are in favor of open borders, we should recognize the essential contributions of Border Patrol and Ice agents make to America’s national security.

In summation, America needs substantive border control measures to insure the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. Fast tracking DACA immigrants for citizenship by either serving in United Sates Armed Forces or programs that directly benefit a community or its institutions is beneficial to both Dreamers and America. The personal benefits are real for a variety of reasons, including citizenship requirements and requisites of certain benefits to be determined by Congressional legislation. The time has come for the Executive and  Legislative branches of government to broker a viable immigration reform law that halts illegal entry and addresses this nation's Dreamers dilemma.