WOODY WEDNESDAY Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 18

 

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopelessmeaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of his own secular view. I salute him for doing that. That is why I have returned to his work over and over and presented my own Christian worldview as an alternative.

My interest in Woody Allen is so great that I have a “Woody Wednesday” on my blog www.thedailyhatch.org every week. Also I have done over 30 posts on the historical characters mentioned in his film “Midnight in Paris.” (Salvador Dali, Ernest Hemingway,T.S.Elliot,  Cole Porter,Paul Gauguin,  Luis Bunuel, and Pablo Picasso were just a few of the characters.)

Today we are looking at a review of Woody Allen’s latest movie Blue Jasmine.

Blue Jasmin Movie Review

Published on Jul 26, 2013

Blue Jasmine (2013) movie review. Starring Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin and Sally Hawkins. Directed by Woody Allen. A woman reconnects with her sister after a mid-life crisis.

__________________________

____________

‘Blue Jasmine’: Woody Allen on regrets – He’s had a few

Ahead of the release of his new movie, ‘Blue Jasmine,’ Woody Allen ponders choices made and their consequences, in his characters’ lives and his own.

Woody Allen on regret: Yes, he's had a few

“I never trust people who say, ‘I have no regrets. If I lived my life again, I’d do it exactly the same way,’ said filmmaker Woody Allen, 77. “I wouldn’t.” (Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

NEW YORK — Does Woody Allen have regrets?

His new film, “Blue Jasmine,” amplifies the air of concentrated self-examination that has long been a hallmark of his work. Though marked by buoyant moments of wry humor, the film is devastating in its intense survey of a life in the free fall of mental and emotional collapse. Cate Blanchett gives a tour-de-force performance as a wealthy New Yorker who discovers that her husband has built their fortune through fraud. After losing everything, she winds up with her decidedly more downscale sister in San Francisco, left to sift through the remains of her life.

Opening July 26, “Blue Jasmine” finds Allen further exploring a thematic conceit that has been percolating through his recent movies since at least the dual stories of 2005′s “Melinda and Melinda,” as in film after film he has been pondering a series of existential what-ifs.

PHOTOS: The many movies of Woody Allen

In 2010′s “You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger,” Josh Brolin played an unhappily married man who became obsessed with what his life would be like with a woman in the apartment across the way. In the 2011 smash hit “Midnight In Paris” — for which Allen won the Oscar for original screenplay, his fourth — Owen Wilson stepped from modern day into the Jazz Age, imagining it as better than his own time. In “To Rome With Love,” Alec Baldwin played a man who seems to meet a younger version of himself in Jesse Eisenberg.

Whether in a comedic or dramatic mode, these films are all structured around a reflective, ruminative mood, as if Allen has been looking back on his celebrated, knotty life and examining the forks in the road.

“I would say, I’ve lived 77 years now, and there have been things in my life that I regret that if I could do over, I would do different,” Allen said in a recent interview that found him in a warm mood on a cold, late-spring afternoon. “Many things that I think with the perspective of having done them and having time that I would do differently. Maybe even choice of profession. Many things.

“But I think if you ask anybody that’s honest about it, there has to be a number of choices they’ve made in their life that they wished they’d made the other choice. They wished they had bought the house or didn’t buy the house, or didn’t marry the girl or did. So I have plenty of regrets. And I never trust people who say, ‘I have no regrets. If I lived my life again, I’d do it exactly the same way.’ I wouldn’t.”

-

Allen has worked for nearly 40 years in a modest suite of rooms on the ground floor of the type of politely upscale Upper East Side apartment building many know only from Woody Allen movies.

PHOTOS: Hollywood backlot moments

Off a bustling thoroughfare, past two doormen and down a tastefully appointed hallway, one finds a nondescript door with a small, unremarkable sign. Through that door is a rather cramped anteroom filled with cardboard boxes and a second, slightly shabbier door. Through there is a cluttered workroom with doors leading off in various directions. Somewhere behind there is Woody Allen. He is looking for a cough drop.

It is in this former bridge club that Allen casts his films and edits them, seeing to the unglamorous workaday details of moviemaking. He recalled when he once visited the offices of Martin Scorsese, just a few blocks away, “You would have thought that it was the law firm of Scorsese and John Foster Dulles” by comparison with his own “sleazy little operation.” He is quick to add, “I really don’t need anything more.”

Allen has maintained a startling work rate, making in essence one film a year for going on 35 years. At times it can be frustrating to keep up with his output, and there can be something haphazard about his prolificacy. This may be why “You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger” struggles to make $3 million in the U.S. one year and “Midnight in Paris” brings in nearly $57 million the next.

Allen’s relentless pace, his craftsman’s regularity rob his films of the event feeling a new work by a Scorsese or Spielberg are often met with, as if he is purposefully trying to lower expectations. Films that seem undercooked on first glance gain resonance over time, while other films lose their initial impact. Though never to be counted out entirely, Allen makes it easy to overlook any single film for the ongoing rush. In a way, it can be as if he doesn’t entirely get them all either.

“I don’t know why they like one and not another,” he said of the surprise audience response to “Midnight” compared with his other recent films. “If I could figure it out, I might be able to get rich.”

“Blue Jasmine” is, by Allen’s own speculation, less likely to find such a broad audience due to its serious, dramatic nature. The film’s structure finds Blanchett’s character reflecting upon moments from her past, looking for clues to her own downfall, creating a deep emotional resonance. She gives in some sense two performances, one as the fine society lady and the other as someone at moments akin to a babbling street crazy in a Chanel jacket.

PHOTOS: Celebrities by The Times

The film also has Allen’s typical deep bench of supporting performers, with strong turns by Baldwin, Sally Hawkins, Peter Sarsgaard, Bobby Cannavale, Louis C.K. and Andrew Dice Clay. No character is quite as they first seem, some revealing themselves to be deeper and more emotionally sensitive while others turn out shallow and self-serving.

The in-built joke of casting the rough-hewn Clay in a heady Woody Allen film, and in a pivotal, dramatic role no less, was certainly not lost on the actor. Clay recalled that when his manager first let him know Allen had reached out, his response was, “Woody Allen’s calling for me? That’s the last guy I ever thought would call for me. I thought it was like an April Fool’s joke.”

The film will likely draw comparisons to the story of Ruth Madoff, wife of disgraced financier Bernard Madoff. Though Allen downplays the connection, Blanchett did do some research into their story, as well as other society doyens deposed by the economic collapse.

“I followed that story in the paper like everyone else, but it was not an influence in any way on the movie,” Allen said of the Madoff story, while noting that he was inspired by something his wife, Soon-Yi Previn, told him of a high-society woman who had to take a job after losing her wealth.

Perhaps what drew him to the idea was an opportunity to look at the all-too-human weakness for self-delusion, the ways in which we all often have to convince ourselves of lies big and small to make it through the day and press on with our lives.

Though the two never did have a conversation regarding the big ideas of the film, Blanchett picked up a clue from an off-the-cuff comment by Allen.

On the phone from Sydney, Australia, where she has been appearing onstage in Jean Genet’s “The Maids,” Blanchett recalled, “He wouldn’t even remember saying it, but he said something along the lines of, ‘We all know the same truth, and that our lives consist of how we choose to distort it.’”

Allen prefers not to think of his work as some sort of veiled autobiography or a series of extended notes on the human condition. Perhaps belying his roots as a teenage joke-writer and early work as a nightclub comedian, he sees his goals as far more modest.

“I’m thinking of entertaining,” he says of what motivates his writing. “That I feel is my first obligation. Then, if you can also say something, make a statement or elucidate a character or create emotions in people where they’re sad or laughing, that’s all extra. But to make a social point or a psychological point without being entertaining is homework. That’s lecturing.”

PHOTOS: The many movies of Woody Allen

While his recent films have seen him traipsing across Europe, shooting in London, Barcelona, Paris and Rome – and he has just begun production on a film in the South of France – Allen saw “Blue Jasmine” as a distinctly American story. New York was an obvious location for a film touching on a financial scandal, but his choice of San Francisco as the film’s second location, home to the character of Blanchett’s sister played by Hawkins, came down to where he thought he could spend a comfortable summer.

“Her sister could have lived anyplace and it would have been fine. I couldn’t live anyplace, that was the problem,” he said.

Allen is notoriously hands-off as a director, with apocryphal stories of his meeting performers for only a few minutes during casting and then barely speaking to them during production. Yet having directed six Oscar-winning performances, he must be doing something right. As far as his leading lady, he said, “I mean, she’s Cate Blanchett, what can you do? You hire her and get out of the way.”

Though he is prone to referencing old-guard art house stalwarts such as Bergman, Fellini or Kurosawa, Blanchett compares him to filmmakers she has worked with such as David Fincher, Jim Jarmusch, Wes Anderson or Steven Soderbergh, framing him as a contemporary working filmmaker in a way his legend often precludes. Since Blanchett and Allen had never worked together, part of her preparation was to speak with other actors who had worked with him and to study the 2011 “American Masters” documentary on him.

“Frankly, I thought he thought I was awful for the bulk of the film,” Blanchett admitted, noting that for her the breakthrough came when she realized it wasn’t her, it was him.

“Once you realize that Woody is never pleased, he is never satisfied, that’s why he makes a film a year, that’s why he’s so prolific as a filmmaker,” she said. “You realize he is actually in some exquisite agony and it’s horrific for him often to hear what he’s written. It’s as much to do with himself as the actors and once you don’t take that personally, I really relished the frankness.”

-

Allen acknowledged one unintended consequence of his prolific output is that his films almost exist in some way outside of his control. Likening the process to a series of sessions of psychoanalysis, he said, unconsciously recurrent themes emerge over years of work.

With its structure that teeters between the problems of the past and the struggles of the present, “Blue Jasmine” grapples directly with the twined difficulties of looking back and moving forward, and how we can all become an unreliable narrator to ourselves.

“I think I was always reflective,” he noted, “I think that may have been a strength and a weakness. Early on, going as far back as ‘Annie Hall,’ there are all these cerebral characters talking about life, thinking about death, thinking about the meaning of life, thinking about why relationships didn’t work, always thinking and verbalizing their thoughts, always reflecting.

“I think I’m no more reflective now,” he added with a slight giggle, “at death’s door. But you do get conscious of it. But I was conscious of aging at 14.”

So if he could go back, by the way, what other profession might he have chosen?

“I might have been happier if I was a novelist,” he replied. “So instead of having to raise millions of dollars to put on these stories, the novelist sits at home; you write, if you don’t like it you throw it away. If I throw something away, I’m throwing away $100,000 every time I take a scene out. So that might have been a better thing. Or music might have been a better thing.”

He seemed to be opening up now, genuinely taking stock of his life and career and looking down roads not taken.

“If I really can go back, early, early, early in my life” — and here he clasped his hands together and pulled them back as the windup to one final curveball — “maybe a ballet dancer.”

Woody Allen — perhaps joking, perhaps not — exists, you might say, at the very intersection of the two, a playful showman amid uncompromising self-examination. As supporting evidence for either case, he added, “I was a very athletic kid.”

mark.olsen@latimes.com

Related posts:

I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I have done over 30 posts on the historical characters mentioned in the film. Take a look below:

“Midnight in Paris” one of Woody Allen’s biggest movie hits in recent years, July 18, 2011 – 6:00 am

(Part 32, Jean-Paul Sartre)July 10, 2011 – 5:53 am

 (Part 29, Pablo Picasso) July 7, 2011 – 4:33 am

(Part 28,Van Gogh) July 6, 2011 – 4:03 am

(Part 27, Man Ray) July 5, 2011 – 4:49 am

(Part 26,James Joyce) July 4, 2011 – 5:55 am

(Part 25, T.S.Elliot) July 3, 2011 – 4:46 am

(Part 24, Djuna Barnes) July 2, 2011 – 7:28 am

(Part 23,Adriana, fictional mistress of Picasso) July 1, 2011 – 12:28 am

(Part 22, Silvia Beach and the Shakespeare and Company Bookstore) June 30, 2011 – 12:58 am

(Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution) June 29, 2011 – 5:34 am

(Part 16, Josephine Baker) June 24, 2011 – 5:18 am

(Part 15, Luis Bunuel) June 23, 2011 – 5:37 am

(Part 1 William Faulkner) June 13, 2011 – 3:19 pm

I love Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris”, June 12, 2011 – 11:52 pm

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 6

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 6 I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he […]

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 5

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 5 I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he […]

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 4

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 4 I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he […]

Blue Jasmine has huge opening for Woody Allen film but I doubt it will top “Midnight in Paris” overall performance!!!!!!

Blue Jasmine — Movie Review Published on Jul 25, 2013 Blue Jasmine directed by Woody Allen and starring Cate Blanchett , Alex Baldwin, and Louis C.K. is reviewed by Ben Mankiewicz (host of Turner Classic Movies), Grae Drake (Senior Editor of Rotten Tomatoes), Alonso Duralde (TheWrap.com and Linoleum Knife podcast) and Christy Lemire (Movie critic). ___________________ […]

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 3

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 3 I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he […]

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 2

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of […]

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 1

Review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Blue Jasmine” Part 1 I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he […]

 

“Woody Wednesday” A 2010 review of Woody Allen’s Annie Hall

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of [...]

“Woody Wednesday” In 2009 interview Woody Allen talks about the lack of meaning of life and the allure of younger women

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of [...]

Woody Allen video interview in France talk about making movies in Paris vs NY and other subjects like God, etc

Woody Allen video interview in France Related posts: “Woody Wednesdays” Woody Allen on God and Death June 6, 2012 – 6:00 am Good website on Woody Allen How can I believe in God when just last week I got my tongue caught in the roller of an electric typewriter? If Jesus Christ came back today and [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Woody Allen on the Emptiness of Life by Toby Simmons

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of [...]

Woody Allen interviews Billy Graham (Woody Wednesday)

A surprisingly civil discussion between evangelical Billy Graham and agnostic comedian Woody Allen. Skip to 2:00 in the video to hear Graham discuss premarital sex, to 4:30 to hear him respond to Allen’s question about the worst sin and to 7:55 for the comparison between accepting Christ and taking LSD. ___________________ The Christian Post > [...]

“Woody Allen Wednesdays” can be seen on the www.thedailyhatch.org

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 If you like Woody Allen films as much as I do then join me every Wednesday for another look the man and his movies. Below are some of the posts from the past: “Woody Wednesday” How Allen’s film “Crimes and Misdemeanors makes the point that hell is necessary [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Great Documentary on Woody Allen

I really enjoyed this documentary on Woody Allen from PBS. Woody Allen: A Documentary, Part 1 Published on Mar 26, 2012 by NewVideoDigital Beginning with Allen’s childhood and his first professional gigs as a teen – furnishing jokes for comics and publicists – WOODY ALLEN: A DOCUMENTARY chronicles the trajectory and longevity of Allen’s career: [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 6)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 3 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 3 of 3: ‘Is Woody Allen A Romantic Or A Realist?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, Crimes and Misdemeanors, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca ______________ One of my favorite Woody Allen movies and I reviewed [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 5)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 2 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 2 of 3: ‘What Does The Movie Tell Us About Ourselves?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca _________________- One of my favorite Woody Allen movies and I reviewed it earlier but [...]

In 2009 interview Woody Allen talks about the lack of meaning of life and the allure of younger women

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of [...]

“Woody Allen Wednesdays” can be seen on the www.thedailyhatch.org

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 If you like Woody Allen films as much as I do then join me every Wednesday for another look the man and his movies. Below are some of the posts from the past: “Woody Wednesday” How Allen’s film “Crimes and Misdemeanors makes the point that hell is necessary [...]

Woody Allen on the Emptiness of Life by Toby Simmons

I have spent alot of time talking about Woody Allen films on this blog and looking at his worldview. He has a hopeless, meaningless, nihilistic worldview that believes we are going to turn to dust and there is no afterlife. Even though he has this view he has taken the opportunity to look at the weaknesses of [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 4)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 1 of 3: ‘What Does Judah Believe?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca _____________ One of my favorite films is this gem by Woody Allen “Crimes and Misdemeanors”: Film Review By [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 3)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 3 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 3 of 3: ‘Is Woody Allen A Romantic Or A Realist?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, Crimes and Misdemeanors, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca ______________ One of my favorite Woody Allen movies and I reviewed [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 2)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 2 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 2 of 3: ‘What Does The Movie Tell Us About Ourselves?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca _________________- One of my favorite Woody Allen movies and I reviewed it earlier but [...]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Part 1)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 1 of 3: ‘What Does Judah Believe?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca _____________ Today I am starting a discusssion of the movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” by Woody Allen. This 1989 [...]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 567) Murdered Thousands, Convicted for Three: The Kermit Gosnell Verdict

Open letter to President Obama (Part 567)

(Emailed to White House on 5-17-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view.

___________________

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

________________

May 14, 2013

Murdered Thousands, Convicted for Three: The Kermit Gosnell Verdict

By Drew Belsky

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/murdered_thousands_convicted_for_three_the_kermit_gosnell_verdict.html#ixzz2TMstLk1c
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on FacebookPhiladelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell was convicted yesterday on three counts of first-degree murder, not to mention a slew of other charges, including involuntary manslaughter (for the death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar), infanticide, and abortions past Pennsylvania’s legal limit.  One prosecutor is reported to have burst into tears upon hearing the verdict.

Pro-life groups expressed gratitude at justice served.  The Susan B. Anthony list released a statement “affirm[ing] the verdict,” and StandTrue’s Brian Kemper proclaimed the decision “an important victory for every baby who has ever been killed under the guise of choice.”  Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue, declared himself “ecstatic“:

For the first time, America has gotten a long hard look at the horrors that go on inside abortion clinics. We see documentation of similar shoddy practices in other abortion clinics across our country. Gosnell is not alone by any means. Now it is time for America to do some real soul searching and decide whether the abortion cartel’s unaccountable and out-of-control abuses of vulnerable women are really how we want to treat each other.

Operation Rescue, along with J.D. Mullane of PhillyBurbs.com, has exhaustively reported on the Gosnell trial from the outset — two among precious few media outlets to do so.

Lila Rose, president of Live Action, expressed caution in her acceptance of the Gosnell verdict:

Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s gruesome and inhuman crimes in Philadelphia cried out for justice, and now — for three of his born and struggling victims, at least — justice has been served.  Even as we celebrate this verdict, we honor and mourn as well those among our nation’s weakest children who did not receive “their day in court” — and we must remember that Gosnell is not an outlier within the abortion industry.  We cannot allow these “guilty” verdicts, welcome as they are, to make us complacent when it comes to the continuing abuses happening even now in abortion facilities throughout our nation.

Rose brings up an important point: in a culture dominated by the 24-hour news cycle, it will be easy for Americans to consider the abortion issue closed with the Gosnell verdict.  The pro-life movement’s challenge, as Rose says, is to keep the American people focused on how common Gosnell-like practices are in the abortion industry, and on all the unsung victims abortion effects.  That is one of the main points behind Live Action’s Inhuman investigation, currently in progress — that “Gosnell is not alone.”

Pro-abortion organizations, meanwhile, used the Gosnell verdict as best as they could to promote their sacred cow.  In a statement from NARAL Pro-Choice America, for example, president Ilyse Hogue schizophrenically condemned Pennsylvania authorities for ignoring abortion laws (“the gross negligence of authorities to enforce the law after complaints were filed against Gosnell”) in one paragraph while lobbying in another for the repeal of abortion laws (“NARAL Pro-Choice America’s annual Who Decides? publication has given Pennsylvania an ‘F’ grade precisely because it has passed medically unnecessary laws that restrict access to safe and legal abortion care.”).  A NARAL tweet in the same vein drew withering criticism, prompting NARAL to double down (to similar effect).  The organization, originally called “the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws”), might do well to recall that Gosnell operated not as a “back-alley” abortionist, but rather as a legal practitioner for decades.

Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion company in America, tweeted, “A just verdict. The jury has rightly convicted #Gosnell for his appalling crimes, ensuring no woman is victimized by him ever again.”  (Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards joined in, lukewarmly.)  Commentators came out in force, noticing the creepy evasiveness (quite common when Planned Parenthood is forced to address its grisly handiwork) with which the abortion giant ignored Gosnell’s infant victims.  As Lila Rose put it, “Why is @PPact ignoring the infant victims of Kermit #Gosnell? Horrifying that the humanity of the child is ‘bad for business.’”

Considering that Planned Parenthood, a $1.2-billion company who received $542 million in taxpayer funding in 2011, focused exclusively on the women Gosnell victimized, it might be worthwhile for Eric Ferrero, the abortion corporation’s vice president for communications, to clarify whether the organization deems Gosnell’s spine-snipping “post-birth abortions” (an Orwellian contradiction in terms) “appalling crimes.”  Unlikely, considering Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow’s cringe-inducing testimony in opposition to Florida’s born-alive infant protection bill.

Kermit Gosnell easily makes for the most headline-grabbing phenomenon to damn the pro-choice worldview at this time, but he is by no means the only one.  Notorious abortionist LeRoy Carhart killed a 33-week pregnant woman in February; Jennifer Morbelli died of complications from Carhart’s abortion procedure after Carhart himself refused to pick up his phone to help the ailing woman.  Planned Parenthood of Delaware was forced to close in April after two nurses quit for fear of losing their licenses; the women condemned the facility as running a “meat-market style of assembly-line abortions,” adding that “I couldn’t tell you how ridiculously unsafe it was.”  Abortion facilities continue to shut down, either because they are completely filthy or because they refuse to abide by the same rules as hospitals and other surgical centers.  Fence-sitters in the abortion debate should wonder why abortion clinics typically are less stringently regulated and get less frequently inspected (if at all) than tattoo parlors, veterinary clinics, and hair salons — and why organizations like Planned Parenthood and NARAL fight tooth and nail to keep this lopsided order on its head.

Former president and famed redefiner of words Bill Clinton used to bloviate that he would see abortion “safe, legal, and rare” — and his sycophants ran with the slogan.  Since then, the Democratic Party have given up on “rare,” striking it from their platform and replacing it with “regardless of ability to pay” (that is to say, forcibly funded by taxpayers).  Meanwhile, the Gosnell trial, and the extensive documentation of other Gosnells yet unpunished, proves that no number of laws can make abortion “safe” — not for the woman, and certainly not for the dismembered, scissored, and suctioned innocent child.  It might make sense, then, to finish off this insidious trifecta and do away with “legal.”

Yet our current president — a bloviator to rival Clinton — tries to invoke God’s blessing for Planned Parenthood, declaring that the abortion giant “is not going anywhere,” and gleefully tweets about free birth control on Mother’s Day.

Hopefully the horror-novel quality of the Gosnell trial and verdict will help Americans — even those who steadfastly refuse to look this evil in the face — see through the gesticulations of the most creepily pro-abortion president in our nation’s history and face facts.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker‘s deputy editor.  He is also communications director for Live Action.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/murdered_thousands_convicted_for_three_the_kermit_gosnell_verdict.html#ixzz2TMsknthh
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on FacebookPolitical Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

By Glenn McCoy – May 06, 2013

______________________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. I also respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800′s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why [...]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

 

Antony Flew’s defection from atheism was well thought out!!!!

________

Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas

______________

Atheist Lawrence Krauss loses debate to wiser Christian

Published on Sep 13, 2013

http://www.reasonablefaith.org More of this here

The Bible and Science (Part 02)

The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD)

Published on Jun 11, 2012

Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture on the cosmological argument and shows how contemporary science backs it up.

______________

__________________

Antony Flew’s defection from atheism was well thought out!!!!

Friday, April 24, 2009

Book Review: There is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind (2007).

One of my property law professors once complained about legal writers who circle around a point for many prefatory revolutions before making it, like dogs encircling a resting place before laying down. Thus, he would have loved the writing in Antony Flew’s (with Roy Abraham Varghese) There is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.

Surprisingly concise at 158 pages (sans appendices), There is a God gets right to the heart of the matter. It explains the philosophic basis for Flew’s changing his mind about God’s existence. At its core, Flew now finds the design argument persuasive, although he recasts it a bit.

“Perhaps the most popular and intuitively plausible argument for God’s existence is the so-called argument from design. According to this argument, the design that is apparent in nature suggests the existence of a cosmic Designer. I have often stressed that this is actually an argument to design from order, as such arguments proceed from the perceived order in nature to show evidence of design, and thus, a Designer. Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God.” (p. 95; emphasis in original.)

Notably, Flew characterizes his arrival at this conclusion as “a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith.” (p. 93.) He stresses that his “discovery of the Divine has proceeded on a purely natural level, wihout any reference to supernatural phenomena.” (p. 93.)

In roughly the first half of There is a God, entitled My Denial of the Divine, Flew provides his athestic background primarly as an academic and author, and in the second half, entitled “My Discovery of the Divine”, he explains how he came to believe that God exists.

Christians, for example, should not be so quick to adopt Flew as one of their own, however. Flew stresses that he makes no claim to “any personal experience of God or any experience that may be called supernatural or miraculous.” (p. 93.) On the other hand, Flex repeats an intriguing line: “As I have said more than once, no other religion [besides Christianity] enjoys anything like the combination of a charismatic figure like Jesus and a first-class intellectual like St. Paul. If you’re wanting omnipotence to set up a religion, it seems to me that this is the one to beat!” (p. 157; see also pp. 185-86.) Flew continues: “I think that the Christian religion is the one religion that most clearly deserves to be honored and respected whether or not its claim to be a divine revelation is true.” (p. 185.)

In this vein, Flew includes an excellent appendix from New Testament scholar N.T. Wright that succinctly addresses these core questions, “How Do We Know that Jesus Existed?”; “What Grounds Are There for Claiming from the Texts, That Jesus Is God Incarnate?”; and “What Evidence Is There for the Resurrection of Christ?” (pp. 187-213.) Flew responds: “I am very impressed with Bishop Wright’s approach, which is absolutely fresh. He presents the case for Christianity as something new for the first time….It is absolutely wonderful, absolutely radical, and very powerful.” (p. 213.)

Accordingly, it’s a compelling combination to find two building blocks of the Christian religion in a single, lean volume. Flew outlines the architecture for the existence of God, and Wright sketches it for Christianity. Thus, one doesn’t have to go round-and-round with redundancies or irrelevancies–like following a dog encircling his mat–to get to the heart of these crucial inquiries.

Labels: 

posted by nblaw @ 4:29 PM

______________

About Me

My Photo
Name: 
Location: Newport Beach, California, United States

Like the blog motto, my background is an intersection of law and theology. I hold three graduate degrees. Two are in law (a J.D. and an LL.M. in Taxation), and one is in theology. In law school, I served on the Law Review, and received the American Jurisprudence Award in Trial Advocacy. Likewise, my professional background is an intersection of law and education. In addition to being a named partner in an A-V rated Newport Beach, California trial and appellate law firm, emphasizing business and real estate, I’ve taught Constitutional law, civil procedure and ethics in law school. I am also a published author. I live at the beach in Southern California, am engaged and am a fitness, book, music, film and travel enthusiast. Reach me at rjr (at) reichradcliffe (dot) com. Follow me at twitter.com/nblaw

______________

Related posts:

Former Atheist Antony Flew noted that Evolutionists failed to show “Where did a living, self-reproducing organism come from in the first place?”

____   Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known […]

Educated Scholars like Antony Flew can believe in God!!!

__________ Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew rightly noted that Richard Dawkins’ “monkey theorem was a load of rubbish”

________   William Lane Craig versus Eddie Tabash Debate Uploaded on Feb 6, 2012 Secular Humanism versus Christianity, Lawyer versus Theologian. Evangelical Christian apologist William Lane Craig debates humanist atheist lawyer Eddie Tabash at Pepperdine University, February 8, 1999. Visit http://www.Infidels.org andhttp://www.WilliamLaneCraig.com ________________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee […]

Article from 2005 indicated Antony Flew abandoned atheism because of Law of Biogenesis!!!!

___________   Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known […]

The Christian influence on society is real and that is one of the reasons Antony Flew left Atheism!!!

_____________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death […]

Antony Flew, George Wald and David Noebel on the Origin of Life

___________ Does God Exist?: William Lane Craig vs Antony Flew Uploaded on Dec 16, 2010 http://drcraigvideos.blogspot.com - William Lane Craig and Antony Flew met in 1998 on the 50th anniversary of the famous Copleston/Russell debate to discuss the question of God’s existence in a public debate. Unlike Richard Dawkins, Flew was one of the most respected […]

The Fine Tuning Argument for the Existence of God from Antony Flew!

___________ ________ Jesus’ Resurrection: Atheist, Antony Flew, and Theist, Gary Habermas, Dialogue Published on Apr 7, 2012 http://www.veritas.org/talks -Did Jesus die, was he buried, and what happened afterward? Join legendary atheist Antony Flew and Christian historian and apologist Gary Habermas in a discussion about the facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Join […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Mark Oppenheimer of Time Magazine claims Antony Flew was convinced by PSEUDOSCIENCE that God exists!!!

___________ ________ Antony Flew – World’s Most Famous Atheist Accepts Existence of God Uploaded on Nov 28, 2008 Has Science Discovered God? A half-century ago, in 1955, Professor Antony Flew set the agenda for modern atheism with his Theology and Falsification, a paper presented in a debate with C.S. Lewis. This work became the most […]

A review of “There is a God” by Antony Flew March 31, 2012

________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death […]

Review of Antony Flew Book: THERE IS A GOD Article by R.C. Sproul May 2008

Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ______________ Atheist Lawrence Krauss loses debate to wiser Christian Published on Sep 13, 2013 http://www.reasonablefaith.org More of this here The Bible and Science (Part 02) The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture […]

Truth Tuesday:Francis Schaeffer on liberal theology by Peter Cockrell

Francis Schaeffer on liberal theology by Peter Cockrell

Episode 8: The Age Of Fragmentation

Published on Jul 24, 2012

Dr. Schaeffer’s sweeping epic on the rise and decline of Western thought and Culture

_______________________

I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have been on the internet reading several blogs that talk about Schaeffer’s work and the work below by Peter Cockrell  was really helpful. Schaeffer’s film series “How should we then live?  Wikipedia notes, “According to Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live traces Western history from Ancient Rome until the time of writing (1976) along three lines: the philosophic, scientific, and religious.[3] He also makes extensive references to art and architecture as a means of showing how these movements reflected changing patterns of thought through time. Schaeffer’s central premise is: when we base society on the Bible, on the infinite-personal God who is there and has spoken,[4] this provides an absolute by which we can conduct our lives and by which we can judge society.  Here are some posts I have done on this series: Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation”episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” episode 6 “The Scientific Age”  episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” episode 4 “The Reformation” episode 3 “The Renaissance”episode 2 “The Middle Ages,”, and  episode 1 “The Roman Age,” .

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthanasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

Francis Schaeffer

__________________________

Francis Schaeffer on liberal theology

Francis Schaeffer“What is the liberal theology like? It can only be paralleled with what God says in Proverbs 30:20 about the adulterous woman: ‘Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.’ What a picture! Not everyone whose theology has been somewhat infiltrated by liberal theology should be likened to this, but the real liberal theologian (whether the old liberal-type theologian or the newer existential theologian) stands in this place. They say they have done no evil by their spiritual adultery, while not only the church but the whole post-Christian culture shows the results of their unfaithfulness.

“There is no adulterous woman who has ever been so soiled as the liberal theology, which has had all the gifts of God and has turned away to a worship of something that is more destructive than Molech was to the babies whose parents were led astray from the living God to worship this idol. This is not a thing to take lightly. We must show love to the man with whom we discuss. Yes, and we fight for this at L’Abri. We must fight for the fact that he is not to be treated as less than a man. Nothing is more ugly than the orthodox man treating another man as less than a man and failing to show that he takes seriously Christ’s teaching that all men are our neighbors. We do not discuss with the liberal only to win, but to help others, and to try to help him as well. But to treat lightly what liberal theology has done — not for a moment.”

– Francis A. Schaeffer, The Church at the End of the 20th Century(Downer’s Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 1970), 126-127.

Related posts:

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part A “The Pro-life Issue” (Francis Schaeffer Quotes Part 1 includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control  and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline [...]

“Schaeffer Sunday” Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE

It is not possible to know where the pro-life evangelicals are coming from unless you look at the work of the person who inspired them the most. That person was Francis Schaeffer.  I do care about economic issues but the pro-life issue is the most important to me. Several years ago Adrian Rogers (past president of [...]

The movie “Les Miserables” and Francis Schaeffer

I got this off a Christian blog spot. This person makes some good points and quotes my favorite Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer too. Prostitution, Chaos, and Christian Art The newest theatrical release of Victor Hugo’s 1862 novel “Les Miserables” was released on Christmas, but many Christians are refusing to see the movie. The reason simple — [...]

“Schaeffer Sunday” Francis Schaeffer is one of the great evangelical theologians of our modern day

Francis Schaeffer was truly a great man and I enjoyed reading his books. A theologian #2: Rev. Francis Schaeffer Duriez, Colin. Francis Schaeffer: An Authentic Life. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008. Pp. 240. Francis Schaeffer is one of the great evangelical theologians of our modern day. I was already familiar with some of his books and his [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning infanticide and youth enthansia

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ___________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s wife Edith passes away on Easter weekend 2013 Part 7 (includes pro-life editorial cartoon)

The Francis and Edith Schaeffer Story Pt.1 – Today’s Christian Videos The Francis and Edith Schaeffer Story – Part 3 of 3 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the [...]

The Mark of the Christian by Francis Schaeffer Part 1

  THE MARK OF A CHRISTIAN – CLASS 1 – Introduction Published on Mar 7, 2012 This is the introductory class on “The Mark Of A Christian” by Francis Schaeffer. The class was originally taught at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Overland Park, KS by Dan Guinn from FrancisSchaefferStudies.org as part of the adult Sunday School hour [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning humanist dominated public schools in USA even though country was founded on a Christian base

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views concerning [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning where the Bible-believing Christians been the last few decades

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views [...]

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control  and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning religious liberals and humanists

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views concerning abortion, [...]

Open letter to President Obama (Part 566) Farm Bill Would Increase Spending 47%

Open letter to President Obama (Part 566)

(Emailed to White House on 6-6-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

I have been writing on my blog for over two years now concerning the disturbing trend of more and more people becoming dependent on the federal government for more of their income than ever before. This encourages laziness in my view and in the case of the food stamp system many people find themselves in what Milton Friedman calls the “Welfare Trap.”  (Much of this trend started under President Bush and had Republican support.) I wanted to point out that we should cut back on government spending and let the private economy do it’s magic.

We got to cut spending and this farm bill is the perfect place to start!!!

May 29, 2013 12:33PM

Farm Bill Would Increase Spending 47%

House and Senate farm subsidy supporters are pushing to enact the first big farm bill since 2008. Democratic and Republican supporters say that this year’s legislation will be a reform bill that cuts spending. Hogwash.

Last year, House farm subsidy supporters proposed a bill that would spend $950 billion over the next 10 years, while the Senate proposed a bill that would spend $963 billion. By contrast, when the 2008 farm bill passed, it was projected to spend $640 billion over 10 years. Thus, the proposed House bill would represent a 48 percent spending increase over the last farm bill, while the Senate bill would represent a 50 percent increase.

A new estimate of the House bill finds that it would spend $940 billion over 10 years, which would be a 47 percent increase over the 2008 farm bill. This new estimate is shown in the chart alongside the estimate of the 2008 farm bill.

The CBO score of the 2008 farm bill is here. Scores for the 2012 farm bill proposals are reported in this CRS report. And the new score of the House bill is here.

Since the 2008 farm bill, we’ve had five years of moderate inflation, which has eroded the value of dollars by about 8 percent. Thus, the 2013 House farm bill would increase real spending by 39 percent compared to the 2008 farm bill.

The Republican-controlled House Agriculture Committee says that its bill “saves taxpayer’s money,” “reduces deficit spending,” and “repeals outdated government programs.” That sounds good, and the GOP bill is officially scored to “save” $33 billion over 10 years. But that savings is against the CBO baseline of $973 billion in farm bill spending over 10 years, so the House bill can be said to “cut” spending by 3 percent.

Given today’s huge federal deficits, a 3 percent “cut” by Republicans is a joke in itself. But that’s only a cut against baseline, and since baseline spending has soared in recent years it’s no cut at all.

Consider, for example, that in 2008 CBO estimated that farm bill spending in 2014 would be $67 billion. But CBO is now estimating that farm bill spending in 2014 will be $99 billion. Thus, spending in this single year is $32 billion or 48 percent higher than the politicians promised it would be back in 2008. So you can see that the proposed GOP “cut” of $33 billion over 10 years is incredibly lame.

Despite the fact that politicians are claiming that the proposed new farm bill cuts spending, it’s just a mirage created by rising baselines. The truth is that the House farm bill would spend 47 percent more over 10 years than the last farm bill, or 39 percent more in inflation-adjusted dollars.

For background, see this new study by Sallie James and this essay on the history and failures of farm subsidies. Also note that three-quarters of “farm bill” spending is for food subsidies, which you can read about here. And if you’re in D.C., come and hear about the farm bill at our Capitol Hill event at noon Thursday.

 

_______________________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Related posts:

States should vote down federal spending on farm bill and return more control to states!!!!

States should vote down federal spending on farm bill and return more control to states!!!! Some say here in Arkansas that we have to do whatever it takes to support Riceland Foods, but in other states they try to protect federal government handouts to their biggest companies. We need politicians to stop looking out for […]

Congress needs to remove subsidies from the farm bill, not expand them

Congress needs to remove subsidies from the farm bill, not expand them Farm Bill Wastes More Taxpayer Money on Green Subsidies Nicolas Loris May 13, 2013 at 11:27 am Design Pics / Dave Reede/Dave Reede/Newscom Slapping the word rural in front of a bunch of green subsidies does not mean they’re not subsidies. But that’s […]

If increase in food stamps was just because of recession then why spending go from $19.8 billion in 2000 to $37.9 billion in 2007?

If the increase in food stamps was just because of the recession then why did the spending go from $19.8 billion in 2000 to $37.9 billion in 2007? The Facts about Food Stamps Everyone Should Hear Rachel Sheffield and T. Elliot Gaiser May 27, 2013 at 12:00 pm (7) Newscom A recent US News & […]

John Calipari versus Bill Self for National Title Act 2 (part 3)

Memphis Tigers John Calipari Interview 2008 Basketball Final Kansas vs. Memphis – 2008 NCAA Title Game Highlights (HD) Knoxnews.com reported: Calipari (and Kentucky) get Kansas again for title NANCY ARMOUR – AP National Writer (AP) Posted April 1, 2012 at 12:18 a.m., updated April 1, 2012 at 3:04 a.m NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Well, this […]

Alternatives to Fayetteville Finger out there? (part 16)(Billy Bob Thornton)

I certainly hope there are some alternatives to the Fayetteville Finger out there. Jason Tolbert reported that there seems to be an impasse. As predicted, the House State Agencies rejected both the Senate compromise map (linked here) passed yesterday with 20 votes and the so called “Luker Amendment” (linked here) named after its author Sen. […]

Food stamp spending has doubled under the Obama Administration

The sad fact is that Food stamp spending has doubled under the Obama Administration. A Bumper Crop of Food Stamps Amy Payne May 21, 2013 at 7:01 am Tweet this Where do food stamps come from? They come from taxpayers—certainly not from family farms. Yet the “farm” bill, a recurring subsidy-fest in Congress, is actually […]

Agriculture Dept is bloated

Agriculture: Downsizing The Federal Government Uploaded on Dec 19, 2008 Agriculture is easily the most distorted sector, with high tariffs and, in developed countries at least, large amounts of government subsidies through price supports and direct payments. On the other hand, developing countries, who have a comparative advantage in these products, cannot afford to subsidize […]

Which states are the leaders in food stamp consumption?

I am glad that my state of Arkansas is not the leader in food stamps!!! Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall, Which State Has the Highest Food Stamp Usage of All? March 19, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The food stamp program seems to be a breeding ground of waste, fraud, and abuse. Some of the horror stories […]

Open letter to President Obama (Part 255)

Government Must Cut Spending Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Dec 2, 2010 The government can cut roughly $343 billion from the federal budget and they can do so immediately. __________   President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day […]

Open letter to President Obama (Part 565) Free Trade Heroes

Open letter to President Obama (Part 565)

(Emailed to White House on 6-25-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

The federal government debt is growing so much that it is endangering us because if things keep going like they are now we will not have any money left for the national defense because we are so far in debt as a nation. We have been spending so much on our welfare state through food stamps and other programs that I am worrying that many of our citizens are becoming more dependent on government and in many cases they are losing their incentive to work hard because of the welfare trap the government has put in place. Other nations in Europe have gone down this road and we see what mess this has gotten them in. People really are losing their faith in big government and they want more liberty back. It seems to me we have to get back to the founding  principles that made our country great.  We also need to realize that a big government will encourage waste and corruptionThe recent scandals in our government have proved my point. In fact, the jokes you made at Ohio State about possibly auditing them are not so funny now that reality shows how the IRS was acting more like a monster out of control. Also raising taxes on the job creators is a very bad idea too. The Laffer Curve clearly demonstrates that when the tax rates are raised many individuals will move their investments to places where they will not get taxed as much.

______________________

I have written about 66 heroes of mine in the House of Representatives that voted “no” on President Obama’s debt ceiling increase request in 2011. I AM VERY PROUD OF THE FREE TRADE HEROES MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE BELOW. Many of these same heroes voted against the proposal to raise the debt ceiling too. Lord knows I have written a lot about that in the past. . I have praised over and over and over the 66 House Republicans that voted no on that before. If they did not raise the debt ceiling then we would have a balanced budget instantly.  I agree that the Tea Party has made a difference and I have personally posted 49 posts on my blog on different Tea Party heroes of mine.

I have written and emailed Senator Pryor over, and over again with spending cut suggestions but he has ignored all of these good ideas in favor of keeping the printing presses going as we plunge our future generations further in debt. I am convinced if he does not change his liberal voting record that he will no longer be our senator in 2014.

I have written hundreds of letters and emails to President Obama and I must say that I have been impressed that he has had the White House staff answer so many of my letters. The White House answered concerning Social Security (two times), Green Technologieswelfaresmall businessesObamacare (twice),  federal overspendingexpanding unemployment benefits to 99 weeks,  gun controlnational debtabortionjumpstarting the economy, and various other  issues.   However, his policies have not changed, and by the way the White House after answering over 50 of my letters before November of 2012 has not answered one since.   President Obama is committed to cutting nothing from the budget that I can tell.

 I have praised over and over and over the 66 House Republicans that voted no on that before. If they did not raise the debt ceiling then we would have a balanced budget instantly.  I agree that the Tea Party has made a difference and I have personally posted 49 posts on my blog on different Tea Party heroes of mine.

The problem in Washington is not lack of revenue but our lack of spending restraint. This video below makes that point.

NOW TO THE FREE TRADE HEROES!!!!!

June 4, 2013 2:58PM

Congratulations to the Free Traders of the 112th Congress

Do you remember the 112th Congress—the one that repeatedly almost shut down the government while still managing to raise taxes and spending? It turns out they did some interesting things with trade policy. The votes recorded in Cato’s congressional trade votes database have been counted, tabulated, and analyzed, and the results are mixed. The predictable legislative outcome was that with a Republican House and Democratic Senate, the 112th Congress furthered the bipartisan establishment trade policy of reciprocal tariff reduction and unilateral subsidy expansion.

The more interesting revelations come from looking at the voting records of individual members. Rather than simply noting whether a policy would promote or diminish free trade or would increase or decrease America’s engagement in the global economy, Cato’s Free Trade, Free Markets methodology distinguishes between barriers (like tariffs and quotas) and subsidies (like loan guarantees, tax credits, and price supports). This distinction enables us to place members within a two-dimensional matrix.

Free traders are those that oppose both barriers and subsidies. Interventionists are those that support both barriers and subsidies. Isolationists are those that support barriers but oppose subsidies. Internationalists are those that oppose barriers but support subsidies.

The release of this report offers a wonderful opportunity to name names. First I’d like to point out that last term, three Republican representatives voted consistently to support trade barriers. Just to be clear, these barriers are taxes expressly intended to prevent you from buying things you want. The representatives are Walter Jones of North Carolina, Frank LoBiondo of New Jersey, and Steve LaTourette of Ohio. While Walter Jones consistently opposed subsidies (making him the House’s only isolationist last term), Messrs. LoBiondo and LaTourette joined 115 Democrats as interventionists.

With that unpleasantness out of the way, I would like to offer my congratulations and gratitude to the 112th Congress’s free traders. There were 19 in the Senate and 85 in the House. The high number of free traders in the House last term is due mostly to the fact that there was only one trade subsidy vote; if there were more, I’m sure many of these names would disappear from the list, but many would not and they all deserve credit nonetheless.

Free Traders in the House of Representatives for the 112th Congress: Free Traders in the Senate for the 112th Congress:
Sandy Adams Kelly Ayotte
Todd Akin John Boozman
Justin Amash Tom Coburn
Charles Bass Bob Corker
Diane Black John Cornyn
Marsha Blackburn Jim DeMint
Paul Broun Lindsey Graham
Michael Burgess Chuck Grassley
Quico Canseco Orrin Hatch
Steve Chabot Dean Heller
Jason Chaffetz Jim Inhofe
Mike Coffman Jon Kyl
Mike Conaway Mike Lee
John Culberson John McCain
Jeff Duncan Mitch McConnell
Blake Farenthold Rand Paul
Stephen Fincher Rob Portman
Jeff Flake Jeff Sessions
Chuck Fleischmann Pat Toomey
John C. Fleming
Randy Forbes
Trent Franks
Cory Gardner
Scott Garrett
Phil Gingrey
Louie Gohmert
Paul Gosar
Tom Graves
Tim Griffin
Ralph Hall
Richard Hanna
Andy Harris
Joe Heck
Jeb Hensarling
Wally Herger
Tim Huelskamp
Bill Huizenga
Lynn Jenkins
Sam Johnson
Tim Johnson
Jim Jordan
Steve King
Jack Kingston
Raul Labrador
Doug Lamborn
Leonard Lance
Jeff Landry
James Lankford
Bob Latta
Kenny Marchant
Tom McClintock
Jeff Miller
Mick Mulvaney
Randy Neugebauer
Kristi Noem
Alan Nunnelee
Steven Palazzo
Erik Paulsen
Tom Petri
Ted Poe
Mike Pompeo
Bill Posey
Thomas Price
Ben Quayle
Todd Rokita
Thomas Rooney
Dennis Ross
Ed Royce
Paul Ryan
Steve Scalise
Jean Schmidt
David Schweikert
Austin Scott
Jim Sensenbrenner
Steve Southerland
Cliff Stearns
Marlin Stutzman
John Sullivan
Scott Tipton
Tim Walberg
Daniel Webster
Allen West
Lynn Westmoreland
Rob Woodal
Todd Young

_____________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Related posts:

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 49)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 49) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 48)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 48) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 47)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 47) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 46)

  Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 46) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 45)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 45) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 44)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 44) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 43)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 43) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 42)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 42) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 41)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 41) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 40)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 40) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 39)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 39) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 38)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 38) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 37)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 37) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 36)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 36) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 35)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 35) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 34)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 34) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 33)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 33) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 32)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 32) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 31)

Congressmen Tim Huelskamp on the debt ceiling Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 31) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative [...]

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 30)

Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 30) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 29)

 Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 29) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 28)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 28) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 27)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 27) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 26)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 26) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 25)

Uploaded by RepJoeWalsh on Jun 14, 2011 Our country’s debt continues to grow — it’s eating away at the American Dream. We need to make real cuts now. We need Cut, Cap, and Balance. The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 25) This post today is a part of a series [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 24)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 24) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 23)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 23) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 22)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 22) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 21)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 21) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 20)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 20) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 19)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 19) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 18)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 18) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 17)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 17) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 16)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 16) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, [...]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 15)

Sen Obama in 2006 Against Raising Debt Ceiling The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 15) This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from [...]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Former atheist Antony Flew said, “I was particularly impressed with Gerry Schroeder’s point-by-point refutation of what I call the MONKEY THEOREM!”

____________

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas

Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010

A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008

Is Goodness Without God is Good Enough? William Lane Craig vs. Paul Kurtz

Published on Jul 29, 2013

Date: October 24, 2001
Location: Franklin & Marshall College

Christian debater: William Lane Craig
Atheist/secular humanist debater: Paul Kurtz

For William Lane Craig: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/
For Paul Kurtz: http://paulkurtz.net/
To purchase this debate: http://apps.biola.edu/apologetics-sto…
To purchase a published version of this debate:http://apps.biola.edu/apologetics-sto…

__________________________

The Bible and Science (Part 01)

____________

Making Sense of Faith and Science

Uploaded on May 16, 2008

Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the rise of modern science itself. Presented as part of the Let There be Light series. Series: Let There Be Light [5/2003] [Humanities] [Show ID: 7338]

________________

___________

What is the “infinite monkey theorem?” Wikipedia states:

The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare.

In this context, “almost surely” is a mathematical term with a precise meaning, and the “monkey” is not an actual monkey, but a metaphor for an abstract device that produces an endless random sequence of letters and symbols. One of the earliest instances of the use of the “monkey metaphor” is that of French mathematician Émile Borel in 1913,[1] but the earliest instance may be even earlier. The relevance of the theorem is questionable—the probability of a universe full of monkeys typing a complete work such as Shakespeare’s Hamlet is so tiny that the chance of it occurring during a period of time hundreds of thousands of orders of magnitude longer than the age of the universe is extremely low (but technically not zero).

Variants of the theorem include multiple and even infinitely many typists, and the target text varies between an entire library and a single sentence. The history of these statements can be traced back to Aristotle‘s On Generation and Corruption and Cicero‘s De natura deorum (On the Nature of the Gods), through Blaise Pascal and Jonathan Swift, and finally to modern statements with their iconic simians and typewriters. In the early 20th century, Émile Borel and Arthur Eddington used the theorem to illustrate the timescales implicit in the foundations of statistical mechanics.

A chimpanzee (rather than a monkey) sitting at a typewriter. Given enough time, a hypothetical monkey (or in this case ape) typing at random would, as part of its output, almost surely produce all of Shakespeare’s plays.

__________

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins employs the typing monkey concept in his book The Blind Watchmaker to demonstrate the ability of natural selection to produce biological complexity out of random mutations.

Former atheist Antony Flew said, “I was particularly impressed with Gerry Schroeder’s point-by-point refutation of what I call the ‘monkey theorem.”

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Atheism and monkeys

Anthony Flew is a world renowned philosopher who has aggressively advocated atheism for more than 50 years. Recently he changed his mind. He says he is now convinced on the basis of reason alone that atheism is no longer a viable option. He has just published a new book entitled “There is a God; How the world’s most notorious atheist changed his mind” (He notes that the title was not his idea). In this book Flew says,

“I was particularly impressed with Gerry Schroeder’s point-by-point refutation of what I call the ‘monkey theorem.” This idea, which has been presented in a number of forms and variations, defends the possibility of life arising by chance using
the analogy of a multitude of monkeys banging away on computer keyboards and
eventually ending up writing a Shakespearean sonnet.”

Schroeder first referred to an experiment conducted by the British National Council of Arts. A computer was placed in a cage with six monkeys. After one month of hammering away at it (as well as using it as a bathroom!), the monkeys produced fifty pages—but not a single word. Schroeder noted that this was the case even though the shortest word in the English language is one letter (a or I). A is a word
only if there is a space on either side of it. If we take it that the keyboard
has thirty characters (the twenty-six letters and other symbols), then the
likelihood of getting a one-letter word is 30 times 30 times 30, which is
27,000. The likelihood of getting a one-letter word is one chance out of
27,000. (76-77)

Schroeder then calculates the probability of producing a Shakespearean sonnet. All sonnets are 14 lines long. The one he chose happened to have 488 letters in it. The chance that these monkeys would produce a sonnet like this by chance turns out to be a 1 followed by 690 zeros. If you wonder how big that is, Schroeder points out that the number of estimated particles (protons, electrons, neutrons) in the entire universe is only 1 followed by 80 zeros!.

Needless to say, the very simplest living cell is incalculably more complicated than a Shakespearean sonnet! Most of us simply don’t have enough faith to believe the universe originated without some kind of intelligent designer.

Posted by at 6:34 PM 

Labels: 

About Me

I am a library director, Bible professor, and pastor with masters’ degrees in library science and theological studies, and a doctor of philosophy in religion and society. This blog contains some of my articles, essays and posts.

________________

Related posts:

Former Atheist Antony Flew noted that Evolutionists failed to show “Where did a living, self-reproducing organism come from in the first place?”

____   Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known […]

Educated Scholars like Antony Flew can believe in God!!!

__________ Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 Debate – William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens – Does God Exist? Uploaded on Jan 27, 2011 April 4, 2009 – Craig […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew rightly noted that Richard Dawkins’ “monkey theorem was a load of rubbish”

________   William Lane Craig versus Eddie Tabash Debate Uploaded on Feb 6, 2012 Secular Humanism versus Christianity, Lawyer versus Theologian. Evangelical Christian apologist William Lane Craig debates humanist atheist lawyer Eddie Tabash at Pepperdine University, February 8, 1999. Visit http://www.Infidels.org andhttp://www.WilliamLaneCraig.com ________________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee […]

Article from 2005 indicated Antony Flew abandoned atheism because of Law of Biogenesis!!!!

___________   Does God Exist? Thomas Warren vs. Antony Flew Published on Jan 2, 2014 Date: September 20-23, 1976 Location: North Texas State University Christian debater: Thomas B. Warren Atheist debater: Antony G.N. Flew For Thomas Warren: http://www.warrenapologeticscenter.org/ ______________________ Antony Flew and his conversion to theism Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011 Antony Flew, a well known […]

The Christian influence on society is real and that is one of the reasons Antony Flew left Atheism!!!

_____________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death […]

Antony Flew, George Wald and David Noebel on the Origin of Life

___________ Does God Exist?: William Lane Craig vs Antony Flew Uploaded on Dec 16, 2010 http://drcraigvideos.blogspot.com - William Lane Craig and Antony Flew met in 1998 on the 50th anniversary of the famous Copleston/Russell debate to discuss the question of God’s existence in a public debate. Unlike Richard Dawkins, Flew was one of the most respected […]

The Fine Tuning Argument for the Existence of God from Antony Flew!

___________ ________ Jesus’ Resurrection: Atheist, Antony Flew, and Theist, Gary Habermas, Dialogue Published on Apr 7, 2012 http://www.veritas.org/talks -Did Jesus die, was he buried, and what happened afterward? Join legendary atheist Antony Flew and Christian historian and apologist Gary Habermas in a discussion about the facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Join […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Mark Oppenheimer of Time Magazine claims Antony Flew was convinced by PSEUDOSCIENCE that God exists!!!

___________ ________ Antony Flew – World’s Most Famous Atheist Accepts Existence of God Uploaded on Nov 28, 2008 Has Science Discovered God? A half-century ago, in 1955, Professor Antony Flew set the agenda for modern atheism with his Theology and Falsification, a paper presented in a debate with C.S. Lewis. This work became the most […]

A review of “There is a God” by Antony Flew March 31, 2012

________ Antony Flew on God and Atheism Published on Feb 11, 2013 Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death […]

Review of Antony Flew Book: THERE IS A GOD Article by R.C. Sproul May 2008

Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas ______________ Atheist Lawrence Krauss loses debate to wiser Christian Published on Sep 13, 2013 http://www.reasonablefaith.org More of this here The Bible and Science (Part 02) The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Scientific Evidence) (Henry Schaefer, PhD) Published on Jun 11, 2012 Scientist Dr. Henry “Fritz” Schaefer gives a lecture […]

____________

“Music Monday” Little Rock David Hodges writes another hit for Carrie Underwood

On June 28, 2013 Underwood was back on top with a song that Little Rock native David Hodges who graduated at Arkansas Baptist High School help write.

Carrie Underwood “Sees” No. 1 Again onTop 20

Carrie UnderwoodCarrie Underwood photo courtesy of Sony Music Nashville.

Carrie Underwood current single title is prophetic. She makes it two weeks straight at No. 1 on GAC’s Top 20 Country Countdown with her new video, “See You Again.” Host Nan Kelley counted down this week’s Top 20 videos, chosen by you, with Blake Shelton and Tim McGraw with Taylor Swift and featuring Keith Urban rounding out the Top 3. New videos from Taylor andFlorida Georgia Line also make the countdown!

Top 20 Photo Gallery »

Want to re-watch some of your favorite interviews? Head over to our Top 20 section for videos, photos and more! You can also catch Top 20 Extras, cast your votes and take a look at the current chart to see where your favorite videos land. Visit our Top 20 section »

This Week’s Chart:

  1. Carrie Underwood – “See You Again”
  2. Tim McGraw w/Taylor Swift ft. Keith Urban – “Highway Don’t Care”
  3. Blake Shelton – “Boys ‘Round Here”
  4. Little Big Town – “Your Side of the Bed”
  5. Tate Stevens – “Power Of A Love Song”
  6. Darius Rucker – “Wagon Wheel”
  7. Gary Allan – “Pieces”
  8. Pistol Annies – “Hush Hush”
  9. Kip Moore – “Hey Pretty Girl”
  10. The Band Perry – “DONE”
  11. Brad Paisley – “Beat This Summer”
  12. Lady Antebellum – “Goodbye Town”
  13. Hunter Hayes – “I Want Crazy”
  14. Jason Aldean – “1994”
  15. Luke Bryan – “Buzzkill”
  16. Taylor Swift featuring Ed Sheeran – “Everything Has Changed”
  17. Taylor Swift – “22”
  18. Kacey Musgraves – “Blowin’ Smoke”
  19. Katie Armiger – “Playing With Fire”
  20. Florida Georgia Line – “Round Here”

See You Again (Carrie Underwood song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“See You Again”
Single by Carrie Underwood
from the album Blown Away
Released April 15, 2013
Format Digital download
Recorded 2011
Genre Countrycountry pop
Length 4:07
Label Arista Nashville
Writer(s) Carrie Underwood, Hillary Lindsey,David Hodges
Producer Mark Bright
Carrie Underwood singles chronology
Two Black Cadillacs
(2012)
See You Again
(2013)
Audio sample
MENU
0:00

file info · help

See You Again is a song released by the American country recording artist Carrie Underwood. It was written by Underwood, Hillary Lindsey andDavid Hodges. It was released as the fourth single from Underwood’s fourth studio album, Blown Away, on April 15, 2013.[1] Underwood announced the single on her official Twitter account.[2]

Underwood debuted the song on the twelfth season of American Idol on April 4, 2013.[3]

Contents

[hide]

Content[edit]

“See You Again” tells the story of moving onwards after experiencing the death of a loved one in life. The lyrics provide hope and promise through Underwood’s strong Christian faith that one will reunite with every fallen loved one in the afterlife. The song’s opening consists of a solo piano, followed by a backing chorus and band kicking in shortly after.

“See You Again” was originally one of three songs written for the 2010 feature film The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Of the three songs that Underwood, Hodges, and Lindsey co-wrote for the film, the workers behind the project opted to choose “There’s a Place For Us.” Underwood pushed to include “See You Again” on her fourth studio album, Blown Away, during the writing process of the album.

Critical reception[edit]

The song has received positive reviews from music critics. Billboard.com described the song to be “truly a taste of heaven.” [3] Kevin John Coyne of Country Universe included the song in his personal favorite tracks from the Blown Away studio album in the website’s 2012 year-end countdown of editors’ favorite Country albums of the year,[4] as did Matt Bjorke of Roughstock for their album countdown.[5] Liv Carter of Urban Country News gave the song a “thumbs up”, adding “what pulls it over the line however, and presumably why it has become a fan-favorite, is its sincerity in wishing to bring comfort and Underwood’s confident performance.”[6] Jonathan Keefe of Slant Magazine was less favorable, saying that “the chorus of power ballad “See You Again” is marred by dated, campy arena-rock clichés.”[7]

Music video[edit]

On June 7, 2013, Good Morning America gave a first look for the music video for “See You Again”. The full video premiered soon after on ABCNews.com [8] The music video was directed by Eric Welch.[9] It showed the aftermaths of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the recent Moore, Oklahoma tornado.

Track listing

From David Hodges website:

David Hodges is a Grammy award-winning writer/producer/artist hailing from Little Rock, AR.

As the former writer and keyboardist of the band Evanescence, he and his band mates took home Best New Artist as well as the Best Hard Rock Performance trophy for their hit “Bring Me To Life” in 2004. Evanescence’s debut album Fallen has sold over 15 million copies worldwide.

David went on to write and produce Kelly Clarkson’s biggest worldwide single to date, “Because Of You”, which appeared on Clarkson’s 11 million-selling album Breakaway and garnered him the 2007 BMI Song Of The Year honor. The song was covered by Reba McEntire as the first single off her Duets album, and quickly rose up the country charts in 2007 becoming McEntire’s 30th Top 2 country single.

Hodges also penned the single, “What About Now”, which appears on American Idol Chris Daughtry’s debut album Daughtry. The 4x platinum Daughtry to date is credited as the fastest selling debut rock album in Soundscan history. “What About Now” also happens to be the first single on Westlife’s album “Who We Are.” David also won a BMI Pop award for this song.

David wrote the first single “Crush” for American Idol’s David Archuleta, which had the highest chart debut of any single since January 2007. David has since written songs for & released by Carrie Underwood, Train, Christina Perri, Celine Dion, David Cook, Lauren Alaina, The Cab, & many others.

In less than 10 years, David Hodges has been nominated for 6 Grammys & 1 Golden Globe, has won 5 BMI pop awards & 1 BMI country award, has had at least one album in the Billboard 200 for the last 8 consecutive years, and has written on albums that have sold over 50 million copies worldwide.

Related posts:

Little Rock native David Hodges has song used in “Safe Haven” trailer

Christina Perri ‘Safe Haven’ Interview- New Album Coming! Published on Feb 6, 2013 http://bit.ly/ClevverMusic – Subscribe to ClevverMusic! We caught up with “Jar of Hearts” singer Christina Perri at the Safe Haven movie premiere where her song “Arms” is featured on the soundtrack. We chatted with her on the red carpet about the song, and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Little Rock native David Hodges wrote song for “Breaking Dawn Part 2″

David Hodges is a graduate of Arkansas Baptist High School in Little Rock and he co-wrote the song “A Thousand Years,”with Christina Perri. It was featured in the movie “Breaking Dawn Part 2.” David is one of the three founding members of Evanescence and he has written for Kelly Clarkson,  Celine Dion, Reba McEntire, Carrie Underwood, […]

Katharine McPhee’s hit song co-wrote by Little Rock native David Hodges

The “American Idol” contestant-turned-actress is getting positive reviews for her role in “Smash.” The singer plays an actress who is competing for the part of Marilyn Monroe in a Broadway show. The Hollywood Reporter calls it “‘Glee’ for grownups” and Entertainment Weekly calls McPhee “mediocre” but “very likable.” Great song: Uploaded by KatharineMcPheeVEVO on Nov […]

Little Rock native David Hodges co-wrote song for “Breaking Dawn” movie

Little Rock native and Arkansas Baptist High School graduate David Hodges co-wrote a song for the blockbuster movie “Breaking Dawn” that comes out this Friday. Interview: Breaking Dawn’s Christina Perri Twi’s Hard, Dreams Big       By Leah Collins, Dose.ca Nov 1, 2011   More Images »   OMG. Christina Perri went from a […]

 

“Schaeffer Sunday” The Slippery Slope (includes the film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE)

From the website www.jeremiahproject.com:

The Slippery Slope

Once government begins to define life and humanity, there is no end to the possibilities for subjective and selective determination as to who will be allowed to live.

At one time, blacks were not recognized as human beings. This was the rationale behind the slave trade that brought black Africans to the United States. They were transported in slave ships that held them confined in the same manner that livestock is confined when shipped to the slaughter houses. In Nazi Germany, only the Aryan race was considered human, and we know the consequences of that thinking. The treatment of Jews and other non-Aryans was similar to that of animals. And the Nazi genetic experiments remain a source for horror stories even today.

Will a society which has assumed the right to kill infants in the womb – because they are unwanted, imperfect, or merely inconvenient – have difficulty in assuming the right to kill other human beings, especially older adults who are judged unwanted, deemed imperfect physically or mentally, or considered a possible social nuisance?

The next candidates for arbitrary reclassification as non-persons are the elderly. This will become increasingly so as the proportion of the old and weak in relation to the young and strong becomes abnormally large, due to the growing antifamily sentiment, the abortion rate, and medicine’s contribution to the lengthening of the normal life span. The imbalance will cause many of the young to perceive the old as a cramping nuisance in the hedonistic lifestyle they claim as their right. As the demand for affluence continues and the economic crunch gets greater, the amount of compassion that the legislature and the courts will have for the old does not seem likely to be significant considering the precedent of the non-protection given to the unborn and newborn. [Francis Schaeffer, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?]

Euthanasia
Joseph Fletcher, the popularizer of “situational ethics,” in his 1973 discussion of death with dignity gives this argument for euthanasia:

It is ridiculous to give ethical approval to the positive ending of sub-human life in utero as we do in therapeutic abortions for reasons of mercy and compassion but refuse to approve of positively ending a sub-human life in extremis. If we are morally obliged to put an end to a pregnancy when an amniocentesis reveals a terrible defective fetus, we are equally obliged to put an end to a patient’s hopeless misery when a brain scan reveals that a patient with cancer has advanced brain metastases. [Joseph Fletcher, "Ethics and Euthanasia," American Journal of Nursing, 1973.]

One is reminded of the slave holders who devoutly espoused the theory that slavery was really for the good of the black man and that in the end he would be thankful for the opportunity to share in the white man’s culture, even from the distance of the garden shed. The Nazis also argued that their victims were being sacrificed for the high end of the general good of society. Many well-meaning people are attracted to what might seem to be the beneficial aspects of some sort of euthanasia program, because they think they can be free of the guilt of responsibility.

The “right-to-die” movement is not calling for a right to die, they’re mostly talking about a right to kill. The advocates of euthanasia are asking the government and courts to step aside and allow people who are feeble and elderly to be snuffed out.

Consider the people who were “assisted” in ending their lives by Dr. Jack Kevorkian. He wasn’t killing terminally ill patients – they had Alzheimer’s and were in a lot of pain, but they were alive and walking around. Dr. Kevorkian portrays another basic belief of humanist ideology – the extermination of the old, useless, and the infirm. Kervorkian believes that he has the right to help people out of their pain if they want to die. He claims to render “a medical service,” and his lawyer is clear that “he’s not going to stop … doing the right thing.” Already the suicide doctor has had an impact on our society’s views regarding suicide and euthanasia.

Language is an important tool in convincing others of your position. Euthanasia advocates have been skillful in masking their true intent with slogans like “death with dignity” and “a right to die.” These phrases easily capture people’s attention. Everyone believes in a death with dignity.

Though I’m sure the medical community is well intentioned, it is still a fact that their idea of mercy is increasingly to dehumanize their patients, to disguise the helpless person so that not even their family recognizes them. In time, the family’s love turns to pity, which turns to horror until, to our warped hearts, murder becomes mercy.

But these slogans take on new meaning when they are interpreted by our courts. The right to die may sound wonderful – until we realize that legally it means that you can kill yourself or someone can kill you, even if you don’t want to die. Language is powerful. But when it is interpreted by the courts it becomes much more than mere slogans. It becomes the law of the land, and often that interpretation is not at all what we expected.

  • Daily, senior citizens and accident victims are starved to death because their families have been convinced that even food and water are extraordinary means to preserve their life.
  • Over one-fifth of Medicare expenses are for persons in their last year of life. Thus in fiscal year 1978, $4.9 billion dollars was spent for such persons and if just one-quarter of those expenditures were avoided through adoption of living wills, the savings under Medicare alone would amount to $1.2 billion. [ WASHINGTON POST, June 22, 1977]
  • The drug company, Hoescht AG, has been granted the first patent for a euthanasia drug developed by Michigan State University. The drug is intended for use on animals but the patent is worded to include humans. (Source: UPI)

Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court’ Roe v. Wade decision have long claimed that legalized abortion would lead to legalized euthanasia. Supporters of Roe have often scoffed at the idea, insisting that decisions to eliminate a human fetus in no way devalue the lives of born persons. Yet recent court cases in Michigan and Washington have reversed the debate: Euthanasia supporters are openly citing Roe as precedent for a constitutional right to “rational” suicide. In the case of People v. Kevorkian, a trial judge has relied partly on Roe and the later abortion case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, to find a consitutional right to assisted suicide. Jack Kevorkian’s attorney, Geoffrey Fieger argues that such a right is even better grounded than a right to abortion, because no unwilling ‘third party’ is involved.

Citing Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, on May 3, 1994, Washington U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Rothstein struck down the Washington state law that banned physician assisted suicide. Judge Rothstein stated that the terminally ill “have the same right to hasten death that they have to choose an abortion…” “Like the abortion decision, the decision of a terminally ill person to end his life involves the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime,” the judge wrote in her decision.

Government Provided Rationed Health Care
Imagine your health care needs being met by a government agency. Our country has a shortage of morals, an excess of debt and pending currency crisis. Health care is a scarce resource, and all scarce resources are rationed in one way or another. With government provided health care, as we have already seen with Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA, health care is rationed by long waits, high patient copayment requirements, doctors withholding information about treatment options, low payments to doctors that discourage some from serving public patients, and limits on payments to hospitals.

We already kill preborn children; there is violence in virtually every city; drugs and weapons are in our schools; and what a few years ago was called pornography is piped into our homes 24 hours a day on television. The people raised with these norms will constitute the government running the health care system, in which every patient will be an expense. In our present system, every patient is a potential profit.

Consider the following scenarios:

  • A 70-year old retired man needs cataract surgery. This is going to cost the bureaucracy $2,000 for some guy who wants to see, but doesn’t make any money. No surgery. (Medicare has already advocated allowing people to go virtually blind before we fix their cataracts.)
  • A 60-year old grandmother who doesn’t generate any income needs dialysis because of kidney failure. That’s going to cost thousands. Forget it.
  • A 50-year old man who makes $25,000 a year needs bypass surgery because of his chest pain. This guy may pay $3,000 a year in taxes; his surgery is going to cost $40,000. His ledger sheet doesn’t balance. No surgery.
  • A baby is born with a handicap that’s going to require frequent doctor visits, physical therapy, and multiple medications. What a drain on the system. Deny the baby adequate health care and let him die.

When euthanasia becomes law it will start out on a strictly voluntary basis for the terminally ill. Then it will become available to anyone who wants it, and finally it will be involuntary, practiced on anyone who is a strain on the system: the elderly, the handicapped, the unemployable – potentially anyone who doesn’t benefit the system.

[Nov. 5, 1997] Voters in Oregon rejected Measure 51, which would have repealed doctor-assisted suicide. The vote and the legal interpretation mean a person who is mentally competent and diagnosed as having less than six months to live could request a lethal prescription from a doctor today, wait the required 15 days, then take the drugs. Dr. William Toffler, head of Physicians for Compassionate Care, a group of doctors favoring repeal, said the vote would put “the poor, the vulnerable, the weak and the aged” at risk. “It has profound complications for the whole world,” he said. “It’s a profound paradigm shift for the practice of medicine.”

Holland has euthanasia. They started out killing the terminally ill, but have veered markedly from this approach. Some estimate that over 50% of those euthanized in Holland are killed without consent. Some of the elderly are afraid to go to the doctor, for fear they will receive involuntary euthanasia. [ Dr. Tom Tolomeo, "Big Brother, M.D.," All About Issues, July-August 1993]

Infanticide
When the United States Supreme Court made its ruling about abortion in 1973, Mr. Justice Blackmun delivered the opinion of the Court. The first section in his opinion was titled “Ancient Attitudes.” In it he referred back to pre-Christian law. He said, “Greek and Roman law afforded little protection to the unborn. If abortion was prosecuted in some places, it seems to have been based on a concept of a violation of the father’s right to his offspring. Ancient religion did not bar abortion.” Thus, as his first point, Mr. Justice Blackmun based his opinion on the practice of pre-Christian Greek and Roman law. Most people who read this did not realize the logical result concerning babies after their birth. Roman law permitted not only abortion but also infanticide. As we think this over, we ask ourselves, “Now that this door is open, how long will it be before infanticide is socially accepted and perhaps legalized?”

On June 14, 1981, the Hartford Courant ran an expose entitled “Defective Newborns Are Dying by Design” about infanticide at Yale-New Haven Hospital. The author, Diane Brozek, explained “In some of the cases… parents approached doctors about the possibility of overdose. Other times… doctors suggested the option, assuring parents they would sign the death certificate, no questions asked. The parents ended their infants’ lives with morphine or phenobarbital prescribed by the doctors and usually dissolved in a baby bottle.”

Changing attitudes toward infanticide

  • Peter Singer, who recently was seated in an endowed chair at Princeton’s Center for Human Values, said, “Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.”
  • In May 1973, James D. Watson, the Nobel Prize laureate who discovered the double helix of DNA, granted an interview to Prism magazine, then a publication of the American Medical Association. Time later reported the interview to the general public, quoting Watson as having said, “If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice only a few are given under the present system. The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have.”
  • In January 1978, Francis Crick, also a Nobel laureate, was quoted in the Pacific News Service as saying “… no newborn infant should be declared human until it has passed certain tests regarding its genetic endowment and that if it fails these tests it forfeits the right to live.”
  • At a population-control conference in Washington D.C. one speaker saw “no reason why anyone who accepted abortion should balk at infanticide.” Another urged certain medical qualifying tests for all newborns. These would determine their genetic characteristics and, thus, whether their right to life should be forfeited. Of course, at present only a few hold these ideas, but unfortunately they are presenting these ideas again and again. Taken a little more seriously each time, they become just a little more thinkable each time.
  • Forty-two percent of women studied in a medical study in France said that if they gave birth to a severely deformed baby, they would favor killing the child. Twenty percent said no, and the rest were undecided.
  • Certain segments of the church are also not without a positive opinion on the subject of infanticide. A task force of the Anglican Church of Canada reached a conclusion in a 1977 report that it could be morally right to terminate the lives of newborn infants with severe brain damage. The callousness of the report is evident in its phraseology: “Our sense and emotions lead us to the grave mistake of treating human-looking shapes as if they were human, although they lack the least vestige of human behavior and intellect. In fact the only way to treat such defective infants humanely is not to treat them as human.” Happily, the general synod of the Anglican Church in Canada did not approve the report, but that such a report came forth from an official group of a major denomination in our day says much about the direction taken by certain segments of the church in regard to infanticide.

How far have our Congressmen and Senators slid down that “slippery slope” of abortion toward infanticide? Is it right to kill a fully delivered child? Consider the exchange between Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) and Senator Russ Feingold (D., Wis.) during the Senate debate on whether to override Clinton’s veto of the ban on Partial Birth Abortions.

Sen. Santorum: “If that baby were delivered breech style and everything was delivered except for the head, and for some reason that that baby’s head would slip out – that the baby was completely delivered – would it then still be up to the doctor and the mother to decide?”

Sen. Feingold: “The standard of saying it has to be a determination, by a doctor, of health of the mother, is a sufficient standard that would apply to that situation.”

Sen. Santorum: “That doesn’t answer the question. Let’s assume the head is accidentally delivered. Would you allow the doctor to kill the baby?”

Senator Feingold: “That is a question that should be answered by a doctor, and by the woman who received the advice from the doctor.”

We cannot underestimate the enormity of the battle before us. For over a decade pro-infanticide forces have been preparing us to accept legalized infanticide. Legalized abortion has made infanticide the next logical step in the devaluation and destruction of innocent lives. Technology such as amniocentesis and ultrasound has enabled us to diagnose a variety of handicaps in the womb. We can legally kill a handicapped child or any child up until the day it is born. But what is the difference between killing a child two days before it is born or two days after its birth? The pro-infanticide forces are also using the same methods now that the pro-abortion advocates used to see abortion legalized. That is, they now focus on the “hard cases” in a way that opens the door. Later, as has happened in abortion, these “hard cases” wil be forgotten as infanticide becomes normal practice.

The potential abuse of genetic knowledge, the ever-expanding power of the government, and arbitrary law, and, indeed, the prospects for the right of the individual and for humanness are grim. Dr. James R. Sorenson, associate professor of socio-medical sciences at Boston University Medical Center, spoke at the symposium “Prenatal Diagnosis and Its Impact on Society” and said:

[There is] a developing cultural or social attitude that … a couple ought to exercise control over their reproductive fate. While a couple should have as many children as they please (within cultural “limits”), increasingly our societal view is that they should not have unwanted children. I think that this developing societal attitude can very easily extend to encompass not just control of the number of children but … control of their quality as well. In short, I am suggesting that it may become culturally acceptable and perhaps even expected that parents ought to avoid the birth of a defective child, especially when we have a technology that can help avoid such events.

The matter does not stop with malformed babies, but leads naturally to limiting the number of babies a family may have. In 1971, at the national Conference on Population Education in Washington, D.C., Martha Willing, co-director of Population Dynamics of Seattle, Washington, first proposed tax disincentives for parents who have more than two children. Then the state should proceed “to penalize deliberate violations of a small family norm and set up controls which prevent such violations.” The author continues:

After the third child is born, both mother and father will have to present themselves at a hospital to undergo sterilization procedures. If the couple does not appear, there will be no birth certificate issued to the third child, but instead a “third child paper.” The mother can be tattooed or marked to signify a third birth to any subsequent doctor. Instead of the missing parent, the child can be sterilized on the spot, insuring that this undue share of the gene pool will not be carried forward.

To quote C. Everett Koop,
“The moral question for us is not whether the suffering and dying are persons but whether we are the kind of persons who will care for them without doubting their worth.”

How we treat the sick and the unborn is not a measure of their humanity but of OUR OWN

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

Dr. C. Everett Koop pictured above.

__________

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s prayer for us in USA

 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices once [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY

The opening song at the beginning of this episode is very insightful. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE

It is not possible to know where the pro-life evangelicals are coming from unless you look at the work of the person who inspired them the most. That person was Francis Schaeffer.  I do care about economic issues but the pro-life issue is the most important to me. Several years ago Adrian Rogers (past president of [...]

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

This essay below is worth the read. Schaeffer, Francis – “Francis Schaeffer and the Pro-Life Movement” [How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, A Christian Manifesto] Editor note: <p> </p> [The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement.  It examines the place of [...]

Who was Francis Schaeffer? by Udo Middelmann

Great article on Schaeffer. Who was Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer? By Francis Schaeffer The unique contribution of Dr. Francis Schaeffer on a whole generation was the ability to communicate the truth of historic Biblical Christianity in a way that combined intellectual integrity with practical, loving care. This grew out of his extensive understanding of the Bible [...]

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Abortion debating with Ark Times Bloggers Part 7 “Deitrick Bonhoeffer took up for those who had been declared non-persons by the state”(includes video “Slaughter of the Innocents” and editorial cartoon)

 

I have debated with Ark Times Bloggers many times in the past on many different subjects. Abortion is probably the most often debated subject and I have noticed that many pro-life individuals are now surfacing on the Arkansas Times Blog.  Here are some examples. Arhogfan501 asserted: This is the beginning of the end for recreational abortion in Arkansas. Songbird777 noted: Babies have a right to live and not be chopped up for someone else’s convenience. The person using the username “baker” commented: Planned Parenthood (PPA) does not nor cannot provide mammograms, indeed no affiliate has the necessary license. PPA is an abortion provider and at some 900 plus killings a day rather prolific.

Here is another debate I got into recently on the Arkansas Times Blog and I go by the username “Saline Republican”:

On 3-22-13 on the Arkansas Times Blog Kimocat said, “Wow, Saline — you sure spend a lot of your life worrying about other people’s zygotes. But it still all boils down to whether one considers an implanted fertilized egg to be the same as a living, breathing person. I do not, and most objective people do not either. If your crazy religion thinks a fertilized egg is “a gift from God.” Fine, believe that. But stop trying to force everyone to believe it too. Your self-righteous indignation is really wearing thin.”

I responded:

I could compare this to the arguments put forth by those who wanted the abolitionists to shut up or to those like Deitrick Bonhoeffer who wrote the famous paper in April of 1933 ““The Church and the Jewish Question.”

Bonhoeffer was explicit about the church’s obligations to fight political injustice. The church, he wrote, must fight evil in three stages: The first was to question state injustice and call the state to responsibility; the second was to help the victims of injustice, whether they were church members or not. Ultimately, however, the church might find itself called “not only to help the victims who have fallen under the wheel, but to fall into the spokes of the wheel itself” in order to halt the machinery of injustice.

______________
Believe it or not lots of the opposition to Bonhoeffer came from the church. This is a human life issue and many nonbelievers have lined up to take up for the unborn children.

____________

The person using the username “Sound Policy” wrote:

Everette’s sole reason for living is to ensure that when a sperm and egg do the do si do that the end product must be carried to term. At the moment of forced birth he is finished with that end product and moves on to the next one. It’s assembly line work. Inspected by No. 666.

Malnutrition, childhood diseases, abusive parents-he doesn’t [care]!

Everette, you’re a poor excuse for a human being. And your cut and paste jobs are laughable. Never learned to think for yourself, huh?

I responded:

Sound policy said I am poor excuse for a human being. I respect you as a human being and I will continue to take up for the smallest and weakest in our society. Today that is the unborn child.

It is sad that in Jan of 1973 with the Roe v. Wade decision struck down almost every abortion law in the nation.

Proverbs 31:8-9 – Speak up for those who can’t speak for themselves

_________________

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have.  Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith pictured below.

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

Francis Schaeffer and Abortion

There is no question about it: Francis Schaeffer was a prophet. Clear indicators of being a prophet of God include the following traits:
-speaking boldly and uncompromisingly about biblical truth;
-going against the grain and challenging convention;
-speaking truths well ahead of the time, and leading the people of God to where they must be;
-proclaiming unpleasant but necessary truths, etc.

Francis Schaeffer did all this and more. He had such a vitally important ministry, and millions have been impacted by him, including myself. Such an important figure as this deserves all the promotion and endorsement that we can give him. Indeed, I wrote about him in more detail earlier: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/10/14/notable-christians-francis-schaeffer/

In many of his books, talks, lectures and articles he hammered home the need for believers to stand strong and loud for the unborn. Many in the evangelical world were simply sleeping through the abortion holocaust, which was especially unleashed with the 1973 Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision.

Here I just want to summarise some of his many words on the issue of abortion. Let me begin with his very important 1981 volume, A Christian Manifesto. In his chapter on “Revival, Revolution, and Reform” he begins this way: “As we turn to the evangelical leadership of this country in the last decades, unhappily, we must come to the conclusion that often it has not been much help. It has shown the mark of the platonic, overly spiritualized Christianity. Spirituality to the evangelical leadership often has not included the Lordship of Christ over the whole spectrum of life.”

He looks at how previous leadership did indeed get involved in the pressing battles of the day. For example, the revivals of Wesley and Whitefield impacted the whole nation, not just the spiritual landscape. The work of Wilberforce and Shaftesbury was not just about saving souls, but transforming society.

“Our evangelical leadership seems to have forgotten its heritage” he says. “Many of the evangelical leadership either were totally silent about abortion, or qualified what they did say about abortion to such an extent that they really said nothing, or less than nothing, as far as the battle for human life was concerned.”

He goes on to write: “We must understand that the question of the dignity of human life is not something on the periphery of Judeo-Christian thinking, but almost in the center of it (though not the center because the center is the existence of God Himself). But the dignity of human life is unbreakably linked to the existence of the personal-infinite God.”

And of course he rightly argued that abortion was just one part of the bigger battle we have with secular humanism: “Certainly every Christian ought to be praying and working to nullify the abominable abortion law. But as we work and pray, we should have in mind not only this important issue as though it stood alone. Rather, we should be struggling and praying that this whole other total entity – the material-energy chance worldview – can be rolled back with all its results across all of life.”

In his earlier 1976 volume, How Should We Then Live (and the 10-part film series that went with it), he looked at the 1973 ruling in some detail. He talked about the decline of absolutes in American law, and how this decision was completely arbitrary. First, it was medically arbitrary, denying the clear understanding of biology and science.

Second, it was legally arbitrary, “disregarding the intent of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.” And third, it was at “complete variance with the past Christian consensus. In the pagan Roman Empire, abortion was freely practiced, but Christians took a stand against it. In 314 the Council of Ancyra barred from the taking of the Lord’s Supper for ten years all who procured abortions or made drugs to further abortions.”

If this arbitrary law is accepted by “most modern people, bred with the concept of no absolutes but rather relativity, why wouldn’t arbitrary absolutes in regard to such matters as authoritarian limitations on freedom be equally accepted as long as they were thought to be sociologically helpful? We are left to sociological law without any certainty of limitation.”

Yes he certainly got that right. It was a prophetic insight into where things would lead, and we have certainly arrived, with euthanasia legalised in various places, and academics arguing for the acceptability of infanticide. Indeed, he made the warning quite clear back then: “The door is open. In regard to the fetus, the courts have arbitrarily separated ‘aliveness’ from ‘personhood,’ and if this is so, why not arbitrarily do the same with the aged? So the steps move along, and euthanasia may well become increasingly acceptable.”

In 1979 his book and film series, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, co-authored with C. Everett Koop, appeared. It looked at the issues of abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia, and sounded a clear alarm for evangelicals to wake up to their social responsibilities. It also argued that abortion rights logically lead to euthanasia and infanticide rights.

In The Great Evangelical Disaster written in 1984 he continues these themes. As he had done elsewhere, he warned about the dangers of accommodation. He said “we must ask where we as evangelicals have been in the battle for truth and morality in our culture. Have we as evangelicals been on the front lines contending for the faith and confronting the moral breakdown over the last forty to sixty years?

Have we been aware that there is a battle going on – not just a heavenly battle, but a life-and-death struggle over what will happen to men and women and children in both this life and the next? . . .Truth demands confrontation. It must be loving confrontation, but there must be confrontation nonetheless.

“Sadly we must say that this has seldom happened. Most of the evangelical world has not been active in the battle, or even been able to see that we are in a battle. And when it comes to the issues of the day the evangelical world most often has said nothing; or worse has said nothing different from what the world would say.

“Here is the great evangelical disaster – the failure of the evangelical world to stand for truth as truth. There is only one word for this – namely accommodation: the evangelical church has accommodated to the world spirit of the age.”

Quite so. And he was fully aware that to win some of these battles we will need to get out of our evangelical ghettoes and start working together with others wherever possible. Some of these battles are just too big and too important to simply lose by default because we are so concerned about our ecclesiastical or theological purity.

Thus Schaeffer saw no problem whatsoever in working with, say, Catholics on the abortion issue, even though he of course had theological differences with them. As he told two British journalists, “I have two words which I would recommend to anybody . . . and they are ‘ally’ and ‘co-belligerent.’ An ally is a person who is a born-again Christian with whom I can go a long way down the road . . . now I don’t say to the very end, because I’m a Presbyterian and I might not be able to form a church with a strong Baptist . . . but we can go a long way down the road – and that’s an ally.

“A co-belligerent is a person who may not have any sufficient basis for taking the right position but takes the right position on a single issue. And I can join with him without any danger as long as I realize that he is not an ally and all we’re talking about is a single issue.”

Those who find this to be a radical, novel, or alarming concept are urged to look here where I develop this concept in much more detail: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/09/02/on-co-belligerency/

Perhaps more than any other individual Schaeffer helped to put the abortion issue (and its wider implications) on the map of the evangelical world. He stirred a generation of believers to see their faith must extend beyond pietism and privatism into other areas where it really matters.

In closing, I repeat part of the quote I cited above: “We must understand that the question of the dignity of human life is not something on the periphery of Judeo-Christian thinking”. He understood that 35 years ago. Do we?

Dr. Koop with Francis Schaeffer in their film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? made it clear that unborn babies have the right to life. That point is made well in this political cartoon about abortion:

___________

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s prayer for us in USA

 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to [...]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard [...]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices once [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY

The opening song at the beginning of this episode is very insightful. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices [...]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE

It is not possible to know where the pro-life evangelicals are coming from unless you look at the work of the person who inspired them the most. That person was Francis Schaeffer.  I do care about economic issues but the pro-life issue is the most important to me. Several years ago Adrian Rogers (past president of [...]

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

This essay below is worth the read. Schaeffer, Francis – “Francis Schaeffer and the Pro-Life Movement” [How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, A Christian Manifesto] Editor note: <p> </p> [The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement.  It examines the place of [...]

Who was Francis Schaeffer? by Udo Middelmann

Great article on Schaeffer. Who was Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer? By Francis Schaeffer The unique contribution of Dr. Francis Schaeffer on a whole generation was the ability to communicate the truth of historic Biblical Christianity in a way that combined intellectual integrity with practical, loving care. This grew out of his extensive understanding of the Bible [...]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 95 other followers