The effort to impeach President Trump by Democrats is motivated by their incorrect answer to the question “Does human life begin at birth or conception?”

Francis Schaeffer took note of the conservative swing in the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan and he hoped it lead to repeal of loose abortion laws in the USA. Likewise, I am glad that Donald Trump has appointed many prolife judges and because of that have tried to impeach him. Below is Donald Trump’s Response:

THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON

December 17, 2019

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

Speaker of the House of Representatives
Washington, DC. 20515

Dear Madam Speaker:

I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment
crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. This impeachment
represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat Lawmakers,
unequaled in nearly two and a half centuries of American legislative history.

The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable
under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence. They include no
crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever. You have cheapened the importance of
the very ugly word, impeachment!

By proceeding with your invalid impeachment, you are violating your oaths of of?ce, you are
breaking your allegiance to the Constitution, and you are declaring open war on American
Democracy. You dare to invoke the Founding Fathers in pursuit of this election-nulli?cation
scheme?yet your spiteful actions display unfettered contempt for America?s founding and your
egregious conduct threatens to destroy that which our Founders pledged their very lives to build.
Even worse than offending the Founding Fathers, you are offending Americans of faith by
continually saying pray for the President,? when you know this statement is not true, unless it
is meant in a negative sense. It is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it,
not 1!

Your ?rst claim, ?Abuse of Power,? is a completely disingenuous, meritless, and baseless
invention of your imagination. You know that I had a totally innocent conversation with the
President of Ukraine. I then had a second conversation that has been misquoted,
mischaracterized, and fraudulently misrepresented. Fortunately, there was a transcript of the
conversation taken, and you know from the transcript (which was immediately made available)
that the paragraph in question was perfect. I said to President Zelensky: would like you to do
us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.?
I said do u_s a favor, not m, and our country, not a campaign. I then mentioned the Attorney
General of the United States. Every time I talk with a foreign leader, I put America?s interests
?rst, just as I did with President Zelensky.

 

You are turning a policy disagreement between two branches of government into an impeachable
offense?it is no more legitimate than the Executive Branch charging members of Congress with
crimes for the lawful exercise of legislative power.

You know full well that Vice President Biden used his of?ce and $1 billion dollars of US. aid
money to coerce Ukraine into ?ring the prosecutor who was digging into the company paying his
son millions of dollars. You know this because Biden bragged about it on video. Biden openly
stated: said, ?I?m telling you, you?re not getting the billion dollars?. . .I looked at them and
said: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not ?red, you?re not getting the money.?
Well, son of a bitch. He got ?red.? Even Joe Biden admitted just days ago in an interview with
NPR that it ?looked bad.? Now you are trying to impeach me by falsely accusing me of doing

what Joe Biden has admitted he actually did.

President Zelensky has repeatedly declared that I did nothing wrong, and that there was No
Pressure. He further emphasized that it was a ?good phone call,? that don?t feel pressure,? and
explicitly stressed that ?nobody pushed me.? The Ukrainian Foreign Minister stated very
clearly: have never seen a direct link between investigations and security assistance.? He also
said there was ?No Pressure.? Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a supporter of Ukraine who
met privately with President Zelensky, has said: ?At no time during this meeting. . .was there any
mention by Zelensky or any Ukrainian that they were feeling pressure to do anything in return
for the military aid.? Many meetings have been held between representatives of Ukraine and our
country. Never once did Ukraine complain about pressure being applied?not once!
Ambassador Sondland testi?ed that I told him: ?No quid pro quo. I want nothing. I want
nothing. I want President Zelensky to do the right thing, do what he ran on.?

The second claim, so-called ?Obstruction of Congress,? is preposterous and dangerous. House
Democrats are trying to impeach the duly elected President of the United States for asserting
Constitutionally based privileges that have been asserted on a bipartisan basis by administrations
of both political parties throughout our Nation?s history. Under that standard, every American
president would have been impeached many times over. As liberal law professor Jonathan
Turley warned when addressing Congressional Democrats: ?1 can?t emphasize this enough. . .if
you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it
is an abuse of power. It?s your abuse of power. You?re doing precisely what you?re criticizing
the President for doing.?

Everyone, you included, knows what is really happening. Your chosen candidate lost the
election in 2016, in an Electoral College landslide (306-227), and you and your party have never
recovered from this defeat. You have developed a full??edged case of what many in the media
call Trump Derangement and sadly, you will never get over it! You are unwilling and
unable to accept the verdict issued at the ballot box during the great Election of 2016. So you
have spent three straight years attempting to overturn the will of the American people and nullify
their votes. You View democracy as your enemy!

Speaker Pelosi, you admitted just last week at a public forum that your party?s impeachment
effort has been going on for ?two and a half years,? long before you ever heard about a phone
call with Ukraine. Nineteen minutes after I took the oath of of?ce, the Washington Post

 

published a story headlined, ?The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun.? Less
than three months after my inauguration, Representative Maxine Waters stated, ?I?m going to
?ght every day until he?s impeached.? House Democrats introduced the ?rst impeachment
resolution against me within months of my inauguration, for what will be regarded as one of our
country?s best decisions, the ?ring of James omey (see Inspector General Reports)?who the
world now knows is one of the dirtiest cops cur Nation has ever seen. A ranting and raving
Congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib, declared just hours after she was sworn into of?ce, ?We?re
gonna go in there and we?re gonna impeach the Representative Al Green said in
May, ?I?m concerned that if we don?t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.? Again, you
and your allies said, and did, all of these things long before you ever heard of President Zelensky
or anything related to Ukraine. As you know very well, this impeachment drive has nothing to
do with Ukraine, or the totally appropriate conversation I had with its new president. It only has
to do with your attempt to undo the election of 2016 and steal the election of 2020!

Congressman Adam Schiff cheated and lied all the way up to the present day, even going so far
as to fraudulently make up, out of thin air, my conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine
and read this fantasy language to Congress as though it were said by me. His shameless lies and
deceptions, dating all the way back to the Russia Hoax, is one of the main reasons we are here
today.

You and your party are desperate to distract from America?s extraordinary economy, incredible
jobs boom, record stock market, soaring con?dence, and ?ourishing citizens. Your party simply
cannot compete with our record: 7 million new jobs; the lowest-ever unemployment for African
Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans; a rebuilt military; a completely reformed
VA with Choice and Accountability for our great veterans; more than 170 new federal judges
and two Supreme Court Justices; historic tax and regulation cuts; the elimination of the
individual mandate; the ?rst decline in prescription drug prices in half a century; the ?rst new
branch of the United States Military since 1947, the Space Force; strong protection of the Second
Amendment; criminal justice reform; a defeated ISIS caliphate and the killing of the world?s
number one terrorist leader, al-Baghdadi; the replacement of the disastrous NAFTA trade deal
with the wonderful USMCA (Mexico and Canada); a breakthrough Phase One trade deal with
China; massiVe new trade deals with Japan and South Korea; withdrawal from the terrible Iran
Nuclear Deal; cancellation of the unfair and costly Paris Climate Accord; becoming the world?s
top energy producer; recognition of Israel?s capital, opening the American Embassy in
Jerusalem, and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights; a colossal reduction in
illegal border crossings, the ending of Catch-and-Release, and the building of the Southern
Border Wall?and that is just the beginning, there is so much more. You cannot defend your
extreme policies?open borders, mass migration, high crime, crippling taxes, socialized
healthcare, destruction of American energy, late?term taxpayer-funded abortion, elimination of
the Second Amendment, radical far-left theories of law and justice, and constant partisan
obstruction of both common sense and common good.

There is nothing I would rather do than stop referring to your party as the Do-Nothing
Democrats. Unfortunately, I don?t know that you will ever give me a chance to do so.

 

After three years of unfair and unwarranted investigations, 45 million dollars spent, 18 angry
Democrat prosecutors, the entire force of the FBI, headed by leadership now proven to be totally
incompetent and corrupt, you have found Few people in high position could have
endured or passed this test. You do not know, nor do you care, the great damage and hurt you
have in?icted upon wonderful and loving members of my family. You conducted a fake
investigation upon the democratically elected President of the United States, and you are doing it
yet again.

There are not many people who could have taken the punishment in?icted during this period of
time, and yet done so much for the success of America and its citizens. But instead of putting
our country ?rst, you have decided to disgrace our country still further. You completely failed
with the Mueller report because there was nothing to find, so you decided to take the next hoax
that came along, the phone call with Ukraine?even though it was a perfect call. And by the
way, when I speak to foreign countries, there are many people, with permission, listening to the
call on both sides of the conversation.

You are the ones interfering in America?s elections. You are the ones subverting America?s
Democracy. You are the ones Obstructing Justice. You are the ones bringing pain and suffering
to our Republic for your own selfish personal, political, and partisan gain.

Before the Impeachment Hoax, it was the Russian Witch Hunt. Against all evidence, and
regardless of the truth, you and your deputies claimed that my campaign colluded with the
Russians?a grave, malicious, and slanderous lie, a falsehood like no other. You forced our
Nation through turmoil and torment over a wholly fabricated story, illegally purchased from a
foreign spy by Hillary Clinton and the DNC in order to assault our democracy. Yet, when the
monstrous lie was debunked and this Democrat conspiracy dissolved into dust, you did not
apologize. You did not recantforgiven. You showed no remorse, no
capacity for self-re?ection. Instead, you pursued your next libelous and vicious crusade you
engineered an attempt to frame and defame an innocent person. All of this was motivated by
personal political calculation. Your Speakership and your party are held hostage by your most
deranged and radical representatives of the far left. Each one of your members lives in fear of a
socialist primary challenger?this is what is driving impeachment. Look at Congressman
Nadler?s challenger. Look at yourself and others. Do not take our country down with your

party.

 

If you truly cared about freedom and liberty for our Nation, then you would be devoting your
vast investigative resources to exposing the full truth concerning the horrifying abuses of
power before, during, and after the 2016 election?including the use of spies against my
campaign, the submission of false evidence to a FISA court, and the concealment of exculpatory
evidence in order to frame the innocent. The FBI has great and honorable people, but the
leadership was inept and corrupt. I would think that you would personally be appalled by these
revelations, because in your press conference the day you announced impeachment, you tied the
impeachment effort directly to the completely discredited Russia Hoax, declaring twice that ?all
roads lead to Putin,? when you know that is an abject lie. I have been far tougher on Russia than
President Obama ever even thought to be.

 

Any member of Congress who votes in support of impeachment?against every shred of truth,
fact, evidence, and legal principle?is showing how deeply they revile the voters and how truly
they detest America?s Constitutional order. Our Founders feared the tribalization of partisan
politics, and you are bringing their worst fears to life.

Worse still, I have been deprived of basic Constitutional Due Process from the beginning of this
impeachment scam right up until the present. I have been denied the most fundamental rights
afforded by the Constitution, including the right to present evidence, to have my own counsel
present, to confront accusers, and to call and cross-examine witnesses, like the so-called
whistleblower who started this entire hoax with a false report of the phone call that bears no
relationship to the actual phone call that was made. Once I presented the transcribed call, which
surprised and shocked the fraudsters (they never thought that such evidence would be presented),
the so-called whistleblower, and the second whistleblower, disappeared because they got caught,
their report was a fraud, and they were no longer going to be made available to us. In other
words, once the phone call was made public, your whole plot blew up, but that didn?t stop you
from continuing.

More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch Trials.

You and others on your committees have long said impeachment must be bipartisan?it is not.
You said it was very divisive?it certainly is, even far more than you ever thought possible?and
it will only get worse!

This is nothing more than an illegal, partisan attempted coup that will, based on recent sentiment,
badly fail at the voting booth. You are not just after me, as President, you are after the entire
Republican Party. But because of this colossal injustice, our party is more united than it has ever
been before. History will judge you as you proceed with this impeachment Charade.
Your legacy will be that of turning the House of Representatives from a revered legislative body
into a Star Chamber of partisan persecution.

Perhaps most insulting of all is your false display of solemnity. You apparently have so little
respect for the American People that you expect them to believe that you are approaching this
impeachment somberly, reservedly, and reluctantly. No intelligent person believes what you are
saying. Since the moment I won the election, the Democrat Party has been possessed by
Impeachment Fever. There is no reticence. This is not a somber affair. You are making a
mockery of impeachment and you are scarcely concealing your hatred of me, of the Republican
Party, and tens of millions of patriotic Americans. The voters are wise, and they are seeing
straight through this empty, hollow, and dangerous game you are playing.

I have no doubt the American people will hold you and the Democrats fully responsible in the
upcoming 2020 election. They will not soon forgive your perversion of justice and abuse of
power.

 

There is far too much that needs to be done to improve the lives of our citizens. It is time for you
and the highly partisan Democrats in Congress to immediately cease this impeachment fantasy
and get back to work for the American People. While I have no expectation that you will do so, I
write this letter to you for the purpose of history and to put my thoughts on a permanent and
indelible record.

One hundred years from now, when people look back at this affair, I want them to understand it,
and learn from it, so that it can never happen to another President again.

    

ona J. Trump
President of the United States of A rica

cc: United States Senate
United States House of Representatives

Two-track mind

Future Francis Schaeffers need neither neglect nor enshrine politics

Two-track mind

This week is the 50th anniversary of Francis Schaeffer’s founding of L’Abri, and some of the thousands (indirectly, millions) his thinking affected are convening in St. Louis. Last month I wrote about one Schaeffer book that has had a big impact, How Should We Then Live? His next-to-last book, A Christian Manifesto (1981), is also worth a second look, because in it Schaeffer puts before Christians involved in politics and culture the crucial strategic question: Which track are we on?

Let’s get to that question by asking how Schaeffer defined the central problem: “The people in the United States have lived under the Judeo-Christian consensus for so long that now we take it for granted. . . . We have forgotten why we have a positive balance between form and freedom in government, and the fact that we have such tremendous freedoms without these freedoms leading to chaos. Most of all, we have forgotten that none of these is natural in the world.”

He pointed out one practical effect of that amnesia by noting that 1 million residents of Somalia had recently died in war and noting that we kill more than that each year in the United States by abortion: “In Somalia it is war. But we kill in cold blood.”

In A Christian Manifesto Schaeffer described two tracks, and did not predict which would dominate. Here’s what he wrote: “The first track is the fact of the conservative swing in the United States in the 1980 election. With this there is at this moment a unique window open in the United States . . . and we must take advantage of it in every way we can as citizens, as Christian citizens of the democracy in which we still have freedom.” He noted that movement down the first track is slow, because opponents “are deeply entrenched, they have had their own way without opposition for a long time, and they will use every means” to stay in power.

The second track, though, is worse: It leads toward authoritarian government with rule by a legal and technological elite. The only way to fight back on that track would be civil or even forceful disobedience, and those tactics manufacture new dangers: “Speaking of civil disobedience is frightening because there are so many kooky people around. . . . Such people will in their unbalance tend to do the very opposite from considering the appropriate means at the appropriate time and place.”

Schaeffer himself didn’t give much specific detail on the appropriate ways to fight politically and culturally, but he emphasized that “we must not be satisfied with mere words” from leaders. On abortion and in every area he proposed working to use political and legal means to stop or contain social evil, but he emphasized the need to develop Christian alternatives. Neglecting politics and law is “absolutely utopian in a fallen world,” but not providing alternatives “is incomplete in conviction and will be incomplete in results.”

He did want to make clear that “we are in no way talking about any kind of theocracy. . . . In the Old Testament there was a theocracy commanded by God,” but now “we must not confuse the Kingdom of God with our country.” He emphasized that “the United States was founded upon a Christian consensus,” and that “we today should bring Judeo-Christian principles into play in regard to government. But that is very different from a theocracy in name or in fact.”

Some Christian romantics yearn for the second track and even try to force it by acting in extreme ways that invite extreme reactions. And yet, since Schaeffer approved of the election of Ronald Reagan, he would be even more optimistic after viewing the 2004 election and the resultant freedom that Christians have. He would also see the great dangers that we are closer to than we were a quarter-century ago, particularly genetic manipulation. He would mourn the continuation of the abortion holocaust and push for compassionate alternatives. But I believe he would advise us to do all we can to gain first-track success.

We need wisdom regarding how to operate on the first track in a way that neither neglects nor enshrines politics. We need to discern which behaviors by Christians are helpful in our first-track climate and which are not. And we need to nurture future Francis Schaeffers by teaching our children not just what to believe but why to believe it.

On the Arkansas Times blog in the comment section the person using username “Hackett” asserted:

Life begins when the fetus is viable outside the womb, prior to that it is parasitical and lives at the discretion of the host.

I responded with this post today:

It seems to me the real argument lies in the personhood of the unborn baby. (The best evidence pointing to unborn baby being human was given by my atheist friend Dr. Kevin Henke.) If it is just a piece of material that is lifeless then the pro-life crowd has no argument. However, if it is a person then the pro-choice crowd has no argument. (A great article on the Biblical passages against abortion are found in this link.)

My pro-life evidence lies in the lives of two of the most abortion supporters of the 1970’s. Why did they change to the pro-life view? Check out the links below for the answers.

“Jane Roe” or Roe v Wade is now a prolife Christian. She’s recently has done a commercial about it.

_______________________________

I have often wondered why we got to this point in our country’s life and we allow abortion. The answer is found in the words of Schaffer.
Philosopher and Theologian, Francis A. Schaeffer has argued, “If there are no absolutes by which to judge society, then society is absolute.” Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live? (Old Tappan NJ: Fleming H Revell Company, 1976), p. 224.

Below is a clip from the film series “How Then Shall We Live?”

The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D.,

Reasoned Audacity

Bernard Nathanson, M.D.

Silent Scream, The Hand of God is “semi-autobiographical…for the study of…the…demise of one system of morality…and the painful acquisition of another more coherent, more reliable [morality]…[with] the backdrop …of abortion. p. 3.

“We live in an age of fulsome nihilism; an age of death; an age in which, as author Walker Percy (a fellow physician, a pathologist who specializes in autopsying Western civilization) argued, “compassion leads to the gas chamber,” or the abortion clinic, or the euthanist’s office.” p. 4.

“I worked hard to make abortion legal, affordable, and available on demand. In 1968, I was one of the three founders of the National Abortion Rights Action League. I ran the largest abortion clinic …and oversaw tens of thousands of abortions. I have performed thousands myself.” p. 5.

“The Hippocratic Oath states the following,

I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner, I will not give to a woman a pessary [a device inserted in the vagina, thought erroneously to initiate an abortion] to produce an abortion.

The oath is unambiguous on these matters.” p. 48.

“The World Medical Association meeting at Geneva, in 1948, in the aftermath of the revelations of the Nazi medical experiments, revised the oath marginally to include the pledge, “I will retain the utmost respect for Human Life from conception.”…in 1964 restated the theme : “The health of my patient will be my first consideration.” p.50. The unborn baby in an abortion procedure is not considered a patient.

A Ronald Reagan radio address from 1975 addresses the topics of abortion and adoption. This comes from a collection of audio commentaries titled “Reagan in His Own Voice.”

I just wanted to share with you one of the finest prolife papers I have ever read, and it is by President Ronald Wilson Reagan.

I have a son named Wilson Daniel Hatcher and he is named after two of the most respected men I have ever read about : Daniel from the Old Testament and Ronald Wilson Reagan. I have studied that book of Daniel for years and have come to respect that author who was a saint who worked in two pagan governments but he never compromised. My favorite record was the album “No Compromise” by Keith Green and on the cover was a picture from the Book of Daniel.

One of the thrills of my life was getting to hear President Reagan speak in the beginning of November of 1984 at the State House Convention Center in Little Rock.  Immediately after that program I was standing outside on Markham with my girlfriend Jill Sawyer (now wife of 25 years) and we were alone on a corner and President was driven by and he waved at us and we waved back.

My former pastor from Memphis, Adrian Rogers, got the opportunity to visit with President Ronald Reagan on several occasions and my St Senator Jeremy Hutchinson got to meet him too. I am very jealous.

Take time to read this below and comment below and let me know what you thought of his words.

June 10, 2004, 10:30 a.m.
Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation
Ronald Reagan’s pro-life tract.

EDITOR’S NOTE: While president, Ronald Reagan penned this article for The Human Life Review, unsolicited. It ran in the Review‘s Spring 1983, issue and is reprinted here with permission.

The 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. Our nationwide policy of abortion-on-demand through all nine months of pregnancy was neither voted for by our people nor enacted by our legislators — not a single state had such unrestricted abortion before the Supreme Court decreed it to be national policy in 1973 is a good time for us to pause and reflect. But the consequences of this judicial decision are now obvious: since 1973, more than 15 million unborn children have had their lives snuffed out by legalized abortions. That is over ten times the number of Americans lost in all our nation’s wars.

Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court’s result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right. Shortly after the Roe v. Wade decision, Professor John Hart Ely, now Dean of Stanford Law School, wrote that the opinion “is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.” Nowhere do the plain words of the Constitution even hint at a “right” so sweeping as to permit abortion up to the time the child is ready to be born. Yet that is what the Court ruled.

As an act of “raw judicial power” (to use Justice White’s biting phrase), the decision by the seven-man majority inRoe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But the Court’s decision has by no means settled the debate. Instead,Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.

Abortion concerns not just the unborn child, it concerns every one of us. The English poet, John Donne, wrote: “. . . any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life. We saw tragic proof of this truism last year when the Indiana courts allowed the starvation death of “Baby Doe” in Bloomington because the child had Down’s Syndrome.

Many of our fellow citizens grieve over the loss of life that has followed Roe v. Wade. Margaret Heckler, soon after being nominated to head the largest department of our government, Health and Human Services, told an audience that she believed abortion to be the greatest moral crisis facing our country today. And the revered Mother Teresa, who works in the streets of Calcutta ministering to dying people in her world-famous mission of mercy, has said that “the greatest misery of our time is the generalized abortion of children.”

Over the first two years of my Administration I have closely followed and assisted efforts in Congress to reverse the tide of abortion — efforts of Congressmen, Senators and citizens responding to an urgent moral crisis. Regrettably, I have also seen the massive efforts of those who, under the banner of “freedom of choice,” have so far blocked every effort to reverse nationwide abortion-on-demand.

Despite the formidable obstacles before us, we must not lose heart. This is not the first time our country has been divided by a Supreme Court decision that denied the value of certain human lives. The Dred Scott decision of 1857 was not overturned in a day, or a year, or even a decade. At first, only a minority of Americans recognized and deplored the moral crisis brought about by denying the full humanity of our black brothers and sisters; but that minority persisted in their vision and finally prevailed. They did it by appealing to the hearts and minds of their countrymen, to the truth of human dignity under God. From their example, we know that respect for the sacred value of human life is too deeply engrained in the hearts of our people to remain forever suppressed. But the great majority of the American people have not yet made their voices heard, and we cannot expect them to — any more than the public voice arose against slavery — until the issue is clearly framed and presented.

What, then, is the real issue? I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives — the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother? I have also said that anyone who doesn’t feel sure whether we are talking about a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of the doubt. If you don’t know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.

________________________________________________

I remember when President Carter and candidate Reagan debated in 1980 and the subject of abortion came up. Reagan said that if you were on a dusty area and you found someone laying down would you bury him without knowing for sure if he is alive or not? It is the same with the case of abortion.

Related Posts:

Abortionist Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life activist (part 11)

ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]

Abortionist Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life activist (part 10)

Dr. Bernard N. Nathanson, a leading pro-life advocate and convert to Catholicism, died at the age of 84 on Monday a week ago in his New York home, after a long struggle with cancer. The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Chapter 12 is titled To The Thanatoriums, an allusion the Walker […]

On eve of Shutdown Republicans cave on demand concerning eliminating Planned Parenthood Funding

The pro-life position is very important to a great many of the freshmen members of the House of Representatives. As you can see above in the clip from the film series Whatever Happened to the Human Race? by Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, the unborn baby is a child, but we are treating many […]

Abortionist Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life activist (part 9)(Donald Trump changes to pro-life view)

When I think of the things that make me sad concerning this country, the first thing that pops into my mind is our treatment of unborn children. Donald Trump is probably going to run for president of the United States. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council recently had a conversation with him concerning the […]

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: