My friends sometimes tell me that libertarians are too extreme because we tend to make “slippery slope” arguments against government expansions.
I respond by pointing out that many slopes are very slippery. Especially when dealing with politicians and bureaucrats.
- Consider the federal income tax, which started as a simple 2-page form with a top rate of 7 percent, but now has become a 75,000-page monstrosity with confiscatory rates.
Consider the Clean Water Act, which was enacted to regulate “navigable waterways,” but now has metastasized to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry land.- Consider money laundering laws, which began ostensibly to stop crooks from using ill-gotten gains, but now have become a multi-billion dollar burden that require banks to spy on all customers.
- Consider Medicaid, which the Washington Post reported, “was supposed to be a very small program with annual expenditures of about $1 billion,” but now costs taxpayersmore than $500 billion per year.
Today, we’re going to look at how some politicians want to push us down the slope as part of their war against cash.
I’ve already written about this topic four times (here, here, here, and here), but it’s time to revisit the topic because of what has just happened in Canada.
Kevin Williamson of National Review is properly disgusted by Prime Minister Trudeau’s decision to deploy financial repression against protesting truckers.
Prime Minister Trudeau has invoked, for the first time in his country’s history, Emergency Measures Act powers to shut down a domestic political protest, the so-called Freedom Convoy movement… Trudeau is not sending in the troops. He is cutting off the money. …And so he is using the Emergency Measures Act to invest himself with the unilateral power to freeze bank accounts and cancel insurance policies,
without so much as a court order and with essentially no recourse for those he targets. Canadian banks and financial-services companies will be ordered to disable clients suspected of being involved in the protests. …Using financial regulation to crush freedom of speech isn’t financial regulation — it is crushing freedom of speech by abusing the powers of a government office. …financial regulators enjoy powers that no FDR — or Napoleon, or Lenin — ever dreamt of possessing. The opportunities for mischief are serious and worrisome — and so are the opportunities for tyranny. …When the laws are enforced exclusively (or with extra vigor) against political enemies, that is not law enforcement — that is political repression. …we don’t have to send men with jackboots and billy clubs to break up protests — we have very polite Canadian bankers to do that for us.
Kevin then points out that Trudeau’s despicable actions are a very good argument for cryptocurrency.
It can be no surprise, then, that people are looking for digital platforms that protect their anonymity and keep their communications slightly beyond the reach of the long arm of the state. …And it’s even less surprising that cryptocurrencies and other escape routes from the banking system increasingly appeal to people who are neither cartel bosses nor international men of mystery. In a world in which unpopular political views can cut an individual or an organization off from the financial main stream, such innovations are necessities.
Liz Wolfe wrote about Trudeau’s overreach for Reason and also pointed out that cryptocurrencies are a valuable tool against oppressive government.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked his country’s Emergencies Act of 1988 in an attempt to snuff out anti-vaccine mandate protests that have roiled Canadian domestic politics for weeks. Invoking the act allows Trudeau to broaden Terrorist Financing Act rules to bring crowdfunding platforms and payment processors under greater government scrutiny. …cryptocurrency exchanges and crowdfunding platforms must now report large and “suspicious” transactions to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC),
thus allowing more government surveillance of who’s forking over money to the protesters. The government will also be using its expanded powers to allow financial institutions to freeze the corporate accounts of companies that own trucks used in the blockades, while suspending their insurance… This type of situation—one in which protesters are being freezed out by crowdfunding platforms, one in which the government is threatening to suppress demonstrations and surveil financial transactions—is precisely the use case for crypto, which may be why Canadian officials namechecked it in their Terrorist Financing announcement. …crypto’s real value lies in the fact that it’s much harder to trace back to its sender, allowing pseudonymous donors to support whichever political causes they want to…the liberatory promise of crypto lies in the fact that it can bypass these intermediaries and make transactions more discreet—something Trudeau’s lackeys surely know, and seem a bit threatened by.
Amen. I don’t understand cryptocurrency and I don’t own any, but I definitely think it’s important to have alternatives given the track record of government.
By the way, worries about government over-reach existed long before Trudeau decided to launch his financial assault.
Libertarian-minded people have been concerned about this issue for a long time.
Here’s some of what Larry White wrote in 2018.
Coercive anti‐cash policies abridge the freedom and reduce the welfare of peaceful individuals who prefer to use cash. …They compromise financial privacy and enable the prosecution of victimless crimes wherever banks are required to “know their customers” 
and to provide transaction records to government officials. They impose an unlegislated tax on money‐holders, and leave them no means of escape into untaxed media of exchange, whenever the central bank decides to pursue a negative interest rate policy. They harm the livelihood of small businesspeople who rely on cash sales, particularly those serving the unbanked or operating in outdoor markets, and reduce the welfare of their (mostly poor) customers by raising transaction costs.
And here are some excerpts from William Luther’s column for Reason in the same year.
The case for cash presumes that we should be free to go about our lives so long as our actions do not harm others. It maintains that governments are not entitled to the intimate details of people’s lives. …demonetization advocates hold a progressive view of government.
They think that existing laws and regulations have been rationally constructed by enlightened experts… There is, of course, an alternative view of government—one that is skeptical that laws and regulations are so rationally designed. …Some of these rules…were constructed to benefit some at the expense of others… Physical currency enables one to disobey the government. …Importantly, this argument…is a case for due process and financial privacy—bedrock jurisprudential principles in the West.
I’ll close with a few comments about what Trudeau should have done. Particularly after the road blockages lasted more than one or two days.
Instead of invoking a draconian emergency law, local Canadian governments should have used regular police powers to impose fines on truckers and- if necessary – impound their vehicles.
And if any of the truckers responded with violence, they should have been arrested and prosecuted.
For what it’s worth, this is how local governments in the United States should have responded (and should respond) to protests by Antifa and Black Lives Matter. Or to protests by any right-wing group.
The bottom line is that I’m a big believer in civil disobedience, but my tolerance drops when ordinary people are harassed, inconvenienced, and intimidated.
P.S. Luther’s point about the “progressive view of government” is not just a throwaway line. He’s referring to the mindset that first appeared during the “Progressive Era” of the early 1900s, when politicians such as Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilsondecided that government was a force for good (unlike America’s Founders, who gave us a Constitution based on the notion that government was a threat to liberty and needed to be restrained).
P.P.S. Returning to more practical issues, India is a another bad example of what happens when politicians push a nation down the slippery slope.
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Their doctor told them, too, that, when women received this type of news, they would immediately head across the street to schedule an abortion procedure. “The sooner you start over, the better off you will be emotionally,” the doctor told them.
But Herrera Beutler and her husband did not choose to “start over” in that way. They chose, instead, to hope, and pray, and even work for a miracle. They found doctors willing to believe that their unborn daughter could be saved and who tried experimental medical procedures to save her life. And, as Herrera Beutler addressed the crowd, her daughter Abigail stood beside her, holding her hand, smiling, and waving.
“I was told there was no chance of survival, but they were wrong,” Herrera Beutler went on. “And they weren’t bad people. They just had never seen a baby with this condition survive. But that’s the point. What if they’re wrong about others, too? What if, together, we can break new ground and find new treatments that will benefit more than just our own families? What if every baby was given at least a shot to reach their true potential?”
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
This is a rush transcript from “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” September 23, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST: Good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT.
In March of 1971, a bomb went off inside the U.S. Capitol Building. There was never any question about who did it, a Marxist group called the Weather Underground immediately took responsibility for it even before the explosions.
The Weathermen were not ashamed of what they did, they planned to overthrow the U.S. government and they wanted everyone to know it, yet even at the time, many Americans were not aware of this because the media immediately began telling a very different story about what happened.
“The Washington Post” for example explained that the radical left wasn’t actually to blame for the Capitol bombings, instead the culprit was something far more general something called, quote: “The easy contagion of extremism in a time of dark frustrations and deep disillusionment,” whatever that means, it probably meant there was a Republican President at the time.
The actual bombers meanwhile remained welcome in polite society. Years later, one of them became a quote, “distinguished professor” at a supposedly prestigious American university, if you can imagine.
Even now, 50 years after the fact, the whitewash of that day continues. POLITICO just ran a long piece telling us that the real villain in the 1971 terror attack on the Capitol was Richard Nixon, who by the way was not there. But according to POLITICO, the bombing quote, “Supercharged Nixon’s paranoia,” and in the end led to Watergate.
The story ends this way, “Fifty years on, it seems remarkable how fast the 1971 attack faded from collective memory.” Oh, but is it remarkable? Maybe not so remarkable. Leftists commit violence and the media covers for them? That’s something most of us are highly familiar with. It’s been happening for a very long time.
To this day, there are still a lot of Americans who think a right-winger killed JFK. Of course, the gunman was a person so committed to communism that he actually defected to the Soviet Union, but the media told the public it was a conservative, so many believed them.
The point here, the lesson that you should remember is that the first draft of history very often is a lie, and it’s not an accidental lie, it’s intentional. Partisans understand that history is among other things, a tool and they can use it to accumulate power. So they lie about something to suit their ends, they keep lying about it and before long, their lies are recorded as truth. They’re on Wikipedia and your kids believe them.
Now, we’ve watched this happen all this year in real time, we’re living through distorted history as we watch the offense of January 6th described by everyone. Here is how the media describe what happened that day that day.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TARA SETMAYER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That day will be another day that lives in infamy in American History similar to Pearl Harbor and 9/11.
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): We can now add January 6, 2021 to that very short list of dates in American History that will live forever in infamy.
JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: A hundred and fifty days since the worst single act of political violence since the Civil War.
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: The worst attack on American democracy arguably probably since the Civil War.
SCHUMER: The greatest attempted insurrection since the Civil War.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The 1/6 attacks are likely to kill a lot more Americans that were killed on the 9/11 attacks.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Though there was less loss of life on January 6th, January 6th was worse than 9/11.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: For the record, we really try our hardest not to put liars, people we know who lie for a living on television because it’s irresponsible, other channels do it every day.
But because we’re literal, let’s go through the evidence here. Only one person was killed on January 6th, and that person was an unarmed female protester who was shot in the neck without warning by a Capitol Hill police officer who happens to have a publicly documented history of extreme recklessness.
The protesters meanwhile killed no one and yet, they are telling you that those protesters were worse than the Imperial Japanese Army that attacked Pearl Harbor, killed thousands of Americans and led to the Second World War, the biggest war in history. They are also by the way worse than al- Qaeda.
So as a talking point, as a political talking point, that seems a little — how do you say — over the top, actually kind of insane. But no, it’s apt. Everybody argued that what we saw on January 6th was exactly like 9/11, Pearl Harbor, the Civil War, including a guy who writes popular histories for airport bookstores.
He assured us that historically speaking, those comparisons are entirely valid. Here’s that historian on NBC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL BESCHLOSS, NBC NEWS PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Think of the 6th of January, if those terrorists who committed that attack on our Capitol had been a little bit faster, they could have and probably would have executed the Vice President, executed the Speaker of the House, executed other Members and leaders of Congress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: They probably would have, therefore they were as bad as people who actually did. Now you look at that and you say, well that guy is stupid and that’s fair, by the way, but then you look at 15 other guys just like him saying exactly the same thing and you have to ask yourself, why are they all saying exactly the same thing? Maybe there’s a purpose here.
And that might lead you to ask, what actually happened? And how can we find out? How do we make up our minds for ourselves? It’s clearly a significant day in American History. It’s being used to change the country, so maybe we should get to the actual facts of that day, what are they?
Well, it turns out the Biden administration didn’t want to tell us what they were. They refused to release thousands of hours of surveillance footage taken from within the Capitol on January 6th. Why wouldn’t they want us to see that? Well, we’re not sure, but we know they really didn’t want us to see it. In fact they went to court to keep that footage under seal.
In one court document, the Department of Justice argued that releasing that footage from January 6 would — and we’re quoting here — “compromise the security of the United States Capitol and those who work there.” They went on to say that that footage might quote, “create a visual pathway where other bad actors could use in planning their breach point and pathway for future attacks.”
No word if ISIS-K was involved in those plans or even if ISIS-K in fact exists, but that’s not the point. The point is, they can’t let you see the video because it’s just too dangerous to American National Security.
Keep in mind, the Capitol is a public building which technically speaking you own, you’ve probably been inside because until the other day you were allowed to because it’s your country or was.
So the idea that you’re not allowed to see the inside of the Capitol is insane. The idea that the public has a clear interest in knowing what happened that day is real.
So the footage we’ve seen up to this point shot by journalists and citizens contradicted the official story line. Here for example is the Chewbacca guy wandering around the Senate, this is the dangerous terrorist, this is the al-Qaeda operative. This is the Tojo of January 6th, wandering around the senate chamber looking a lot more like a confused street performer than a dangerous terrorist.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey [bleep] man. Glad to see you guys. You guys are patriots. Look at this guy, he is covered in blood. God bless you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You good, sir? Do you need medical attention?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’m good, thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I got shot in the face. I got shot in the face with some kind of plastic bullet.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any chance I could get you guys to leave the Senate wing?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We will. I’ve been making sure they ain’t disrespecting the place.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Okay, I just want to let you guys know this is like the sacredest place.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: So you look at the guy in the Viking horns, the Chewbacca guy and you may reach the obvious conclusion, maybe psilocybin mushrooms aren’t good for you, and that’s fair. But no honest person could look at that video and decide America is under attack from terrorists.
So then you have to ask, is that what the rest of the so-called insurrection look like?
Well, now we have an answer because a Federal Judge just rejected the Biden administration’s strenuous attempts to hide the surveillance footage from January 6th.
So footage was just released. It was obtained by BuzzFeed. It covers 15 minutes on January 6th from 2:25 p.m. to 2:40 p.m. Eastern and those are key moments in the so-called insurrection.
Now right now, you’re seeing images from a surveillance camera positioned at the entrance to the Senate wing of the Capitol. You don’t see people hiding bombs or using bayonets or firing weapons, trying to take over the country in an insurrection.
You see people walking around and taking pictures. They don’t look like terrorists, they look like tourists, and all of them by the way are Americans.
The rest of the footage including shots from surveillance cameras outside the crypt of the Capitol is similar to this. You can look it all up by the way, it’s online right now and you should because you will notice that contrary to what the Department of Justice, we’re going to have to start putting air quotes around that, contrary to what D.O.J. claimed, none of the footage shows a secret route into the Capitol. Oh, that ISIS-K could use.
So why did they keep this from us? Well, here is one theory. You can compare the footage released today was what Democrats showed us during the impeachment hearings earlier this year.
Take a look at this. It is surveillance footage showing a squad of people dressed in all black systematically entering the Capitol and kicking open one of the exterior doors on the Senate side. These people appear to be well-trained and coordinated. They’re not high in hallucinogenic mushrooms.
The question is: who are they? And why don’t we know their names? And why aren’t they dressed like any of the other people in the footage that was just released?
Remember, we were attacked for saying this, but we’ve already been vindicated for it. We still don’t know how many Federal agents were involved in the events that day on January 6th, but we have very good reason to believe from court documents that it’s a significant number.
And here’s one clue. At a recent rally in Washington, the Feds managed to arrest one of their own undercover agents. There were so many Feds at the event that they lost track of each other and arrested one of them.
So we ask once again, how many Federal agents were there on January 6th? Why can’t we know? What is clear is that once again, this footage reveals the first draft of history was a total lie, an intentional distortion, a mirage created to control you. It was the work of a specific political party. It was the work of the Democratic Party.
So, it turns out, the vast majority of people inside the Capitol on January 6 were peaceful. They were not insurrectionists, they shouldn’t have been there. They weren’t trying to overthrow the government. That’s a total crock.
And with that in mind, some of the other lies about January 6th start to make more sense. Do you remember this?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the hours-long attack.
NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: They beat a Capitol police officer to death with a fire extinguisher.
COOPER: Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the fight.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He died at the age of 42 after he was bludgeoned with a fire extinguisher.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: So here’s a rule of thumb going forward if you ever watch television again or read the newspaper, when they are absolutely insistent that you believe something, when they keep beating you over the head with the same talking point again and again and again, beware. There’s a reason they’re saying when all of them are using exactly the same line, maybe there’s a reason for that. Maybe it’s coordinated. Maybe they’re lying.
In this case they were lying. Brian Sicknick was not murdered. There is no evidence of that at all. The Medical Examiner said he died of a stroke.
So the reason they told you that was because they wanted to establish a storyline before all the facts were in. That’s a common theme for virtually everything that happens in the news right now, you will notice.
Something happens, you’re not exactly sure what the outline is, you don’t know all the facts, nobody does, and all of a sudden they hang a story on it that helps them politically and they ram it down your throat, day after day after day. They used to be called propaganda, now it’s so ubiquitous, I don’t know what to call it.
You remember the lies that you heard again and again about the McCloskeys in St. Louis who were white supremacists, or the Covington kids who were, of course, also white supremacists.
Remember how they claimed that George Floyd was choked to death even though an autopsy showed he was not choked to death and he had a fatal level of fentanyl in his system and zero signs of suffocation? That’s what it said. We’re not making that up.
What medical reports don’t matter anymore? That’s true.
Remember what they said about how the laptop showed that Hunter Biden was selling access to his father for years, but no it wasn’t real?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: … super spreader events and giving Russian disinformation, spreading Russian disinformation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Disinformation that he knows to be fabricated and supplied by a foreign Intelligence Service, and despite the warning, he is still doing it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have said this entire thing is so obviously a Russian plot.
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It’s sort of a crazy quilt at this point, which has all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation. That said, it wasn’t for lack of trying.
WALLACE: Rudy basically functioning as a Russian asset by pushing Russian disinformation.
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: CNN reported on Friday, the U.S. authorities are saying, if those e-mails we just talked about are connected to an ongoing Russian disinformation effort.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: These people are so shameless. They know they’re being used by liars in the Democratic Party, in the so-called Intel Community, and they just mouth the words anyway. They say whatever they’re told to say, and then of course the tech community gets involved and shuts down all conversation about it.
Facebook and Twitter censored “The New York Post” for reporting the truth. Joe Biden went on stage in a presidential debate and repeated the lie.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN (D), THEN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We are in a situation where we have foreign company — countries trying to interfere in the outcome of our election. His own National Security adviser told him that what is happening with his buddy, well I shouldn’t — well, I will — his buddy, Rudy Giuliani, he is being used as a Russian pawn. He is being fed information that is Russian — that is not true.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: They all knew it was true at the time. They knew within hours of the first “New York Post” story that really was the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop, everybody knew it, everybody, especially, Joe Biden. His text and e-mails were all over the laptop. Of course, he knew they were real. He wrote them.
But the media lied on his behalf then Biden got elected because they covered for him and now that he is President, they can admit in fact it’s all true. Too late, it’s true.
POLITICO finally got around to confirming that every bit of “The New York Post” reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop was absolutely accurate. It wasn’t Russian disinformation, it was totally real.
When are they going to admit there was no insurrection? Never.
Candace Owens is the host of “Candace,” and we’re always grateful to have her on the show. Candace Owens, thanks so much for joining us. So when are they going to — I mean, how do they explain away this footage from inside the Capitol on January 6th, our Pearl Harbor, our 9/11, our Civil War — that shows people kind of wandering around sort of wondering how they got there?
I mean, whatever these people are, they are trespassers clearly, but they’re not a crack team of QAnon insurrectionists like they’re just not.
CANDACE OWENS, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, these people look like they’re walking around a museum. It is the truth. I looked at the footage and I was absolutely shocked that they went through such tremendous effort.
Talk about Russian disinformation. No. It’s Department of Justice misinformation. Our Department of Justice has really launched a concerted effort to divide the American people. They have been lying left and right, front and center from the very beginning and they have no shame.
The idea they had to lock down these tapes because of National Security — are you kidding me, Tucker — it’s not National Security, it’s fake news security, right? They have their propaganda arm. They have their MSNBC, they have their CNN, and they want to make sure that the American people believe the constant effort to psychologically brainwash the American people by saying, don’t worry about seeing anything, we’re going to tell you what happened in there.
And you know what? It’s sick that they said that this was akin to Pearl Harbor, this is akin to 9/11. How insulting to the victims that actually endured those real tragedies?
I mean, there’s no limit that they won’t go. There is no limit that they won’t go through. It’s so extreme this rhetoric, and I also want to say this. Looking beyond this entire situation, the most embarrassing thing is that they’re not thinking about internationally how embarrassing this looks for the American people.
Think about when Vladimir Putin sat down with MSNBC and they said to him, look what you do to political dissidents? And he basically laughed in their face and said, look at what you do your political dissidence. He brought up January 6th, and you know what? Vladimir Putin was right. We no longer have the moral high ground in the international community because of this, because we have made an absolute mockery in terms of January 6th, and we have locked up political dissidents and those political dissidents are Trump supporters.
CARLSON: I think poor Chewbacca guy who clearly posed no threat to anyone, maybe himself, but certainly not our Republic, I think he’s still in jail. Why is no one in Congress saying anything about that?
OWENS: Yes, and not even that. I mean, I remember reading a story about a teenager that was imprisoned for months and months. He was begging, writing to the judge, please, let me go. Think about this now weighed against the Black Lives Matter protest, right?
I lived in D.C. during this time. They burned our city for six weeks and we have people signing up saying that we have to make sure that we bail them out of prison immediately and guess what, by and large, they were bailed out of prison immediately no matter what they did, because it was considered justice. Social justice, they’re allowed to do whatever they want even the middle of a pandemic.
And then you have these people which essentially, it was a grandma selfie party. Once they got into the Capitol Building, it was a grandma selfie party. There were American flags. They were wandering around aimlessly and they left.
And you know what? There seems to be different consequences for those people when weighed against the Black Lives Matter protesters who were burning entire churches to the grounds and pulling statues down with rope in D.C.
CARLSON: We’ve been talking about this story for eight months and the phrase “grandma selfie party” never occurred to me and I’m ashamed. I’m feeling it, going forward.
Candace Owens, it is so good. Thanks a lot.
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Thank you for your time, and again I want to thank you for your support of the unborn little babies!
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
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. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
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.
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. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I 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.
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
The Daily Hatch 