The fiscal debate should focus of Washington’s real crisis of excessive spending

 

It is sad that the Republicans don’t get together and stop the Democrats from raising the debt ceiling limit. If they did that then Obama would do about anything they wanted!!!! It seems to me that the Republicans are a bunch of wimps though. The fiscal debate should focus of Washington’s real crisis of excessive spending

Why Are Republicans Willing to Help Obama Make America More Like Europe When the Welfare State Is Collapsing?

November 30, 2012 by Dan Mitchell

Washington frustrates me. The entire town is based on legalized corruption as an unworthy elite figure out new ways of accumulating unearned wealth by skimming money from the nation’s producers.

But one thing that especially irks me is the way people focus on the trees and forget about the forest. Politicians and journalists are now engaged in an inside-baseball game of analyzing every twist and turn of the fiscal cliff negotiations.

That’s all fine and well, but perhaps it would be a good idea to talk about the need to fix the real crisis of excessive spending instead of arguing about how fast we should be traveling in the wrong direction.

And let’s not delude ourselves. In the absence of real entitlement reform, the United States is doomed to repeat Europe’s mistakes.

And how are things going in Europe? Well, I’m glad you ask. Let’s look at some excerpts from an Associated Press report.

Another month, another record unemployment rate for the economy of the 17 European Union countries that use the euro. Figures released Friday by Eurostat, the EU’s statistics office, showed that the recession in the eurozone pushed unemployment up in the currency bloc to 11.7 percent in October, the highest level since the introduction of the euro in 1999. …Eurostat found that 18.7 million people were out of work across the eurozone, an increase of 173,000 on the previous month and 2.2 million higher than the year before. The wider 27-nation EU that includes non-euro countries such as Britain and Poland had an unemployment rate of 10.7 percent in October and a total of 25.9 million out of work. …”Talk of a `lost generation’ of young people now looks like an alarming possibility,” said Andrea Broughton, principal research fellow at the Institute for Employment Studies.

In other words, we may complain about America’s miserable track record on jobs during the Obama years, but at some point in the future we may someday look back on 8 percent unemployment as good news.

Unfortunately, the crowd in Washington doesn’t want to acknowledge that the real problem is spending. And I’m particularly irked (but not surprised) that Republicans now seem willing to go along with Obama even though they won this fight back in 2010 when they didn’t control the House and had fewer seats in the Senate. Here’s what I said to one of the local DC stations.

I realize I’m sounding glum, so let’s close out this post with a couple of amusing cartoons about America’s European future.

I’ve already shared the “European Lemming” cartoon. This one has the same theme.

Cartoon Obama Iceberg

Other Eric Allie cartoons can be enjoyed here, here , here, here, here, and here.

And here another cartoon with the same theme.

Cartoon Obama Cliff

If you like this Bok cartoon, some of my other favorites can be seen here,  here, here, here, here, here, and here.

If you still haven’t cheered up, this bit of Dave Barry humor about the European fiscal crisis is a classic, and I’d also recommend this bit of unintentional satire.

Is President Obama going to bankrupt our country by going from 10 trillion to 22 trillion in debt? (Part 18)

Senator Tom Coburn on the “Debt Bomb”

Published on May 24, 2012 by

http://www.foundry.org |

_____________

These posts are all dealing with issues that President Obama did not help on in his first term. I am hopeful that he will continue to respond to my letters that I have written him and that he will especially reconsider his view on the following import issue which deals with holding down federal spending!!! Is President Obama going to bankrupt our country by going from 10 trillion to 22 trillion in debt?

I have a lot of respect for Tea Party heroes like Tim Huelskamp , Idaho First District Congressman Raúl R. Labrador, and Justin Amash who are willing to vote against proposals that increase our spending,  and they want to pass the Balanced Budget Amendment.    

It is a fact that we must balance the budget soon. I do not believe that we can wait to balance the budget at some distant time in the future. The financial markets will not allow us a long time to get our house in order. Look at how things have been going the last four years and no matter how anyone tries to spin it, we are going down the financial drain fast and headed to Greece!!!

J.D. Foster, Ph.D.

May 24, 2012 at 6:13 pm

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney

It’s hardly rare for politicians in Washington to say things that make one wonder what color the sky is in their world. Vice President Joe Biden has offered a steady stream of examples, demonstrating again that sometimes an old dog can’t unlearn old tricks. But in the press gaggle yesterday, White House spokesperson Jay Carney dropped a doozy, suggesting anew that the Obama Administration is living in a fantasyland all its own.

Carney broke off answering a question about Baghdad to insert the following: The rate at which spending has increased is lower under President Obama than all of his predecessors since Dwight Eisenhower.

Carney went on to observe that “this President has been—has demonstrated significant fiscal restraint and acted with great fiscal responsibility.”

Well, well, let’s just look at the figures. Federal spending as a share of the economy will average over 24 percent during Obama’s term, and each and every year of that term will see a higher share than during any year since the Second World War. That apparently qualifies as “significant fiscal restraint” Obama-style.

Fiscal responsibility? Obama has had by far the largest budget deficits, driven in large part by the eruption in spending.

Obama’s Budget Continues Unprecedented Deficits

The President is responsible for submitting an annual budget to Congress and has the authority to veto legislation, including irresponsible spending. Most Administrations have run small but manageable deficits, but President Obama’s unprecedented budget deficits pose serious economic risks.

BUDGET DEFICITS AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP, BY ADMINISTRATION

Obama's Budget Continues Unprecedented Deficits

 

Source: Office of Management and Budget.

It is, of course, the job of the chief White House flak to spin answers in response to questions. But in this case, there was no question. There was only the flak attempting to inject utter nonsense into the national debate. More Kool-Aid, Mr. Carney?

Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning humanism and its arbitrary laws

Pt 1 of 2 Listen to this Important Message by Francis Schaeffer

Published on Sep 30, 2013

This message “A Christian Manifesto” was given in 1982 by the late Christian Philosopher Francis Schaeffer when he was age 70 at D. James Kennedy’s Corral Ridge Presbyterian Church.
Listen to this important message where Dr. Schaeffer says it is the duty of Christians to disobey the government when it comes in conflict with God’s laws. So many have misinterpreted Romans 13 to mean unconditional obedience to the state. When the state promotes an evil agenda and anti-Christian statues we must obey God rather than men. Acts
I use to watch James Kennedy preach from his TV pulpit with great delight in the 1980’s. Both of these men are gone to be with the Lord now. We need new Christian leaders to rise up in their stead.
To view Part 2 See Francis Schaeffer Lecture- Christian Manifesto Pt 2 of 2 video
The religious and political freedom’s we enjoy as Americans was based on the Bible and the legacy of the Reformation according to Francis Schaeffer. These freedoms will continue to diminish as we cast off the authority of Holy Scripture.
In public schools there is no other view of reality but that final reality is shaped by chance.
Likewise, public television gives us many things that we like culturally but so much of it is mere propaganda shaped by a humanistic world and life view.

_____________________________

I was able to watch Francis Schaeffer deliver a speech on a book he wrote called “A Christian Manifesto” and I heard him in several interviews on it in 1981 and 1982. I listened with great interest since I also read that book over and over again. Below is a portion of one of Schaeffer’s talks  on a crucial subject that is very important today too.
A Christian Manifesto
by Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer
This address was delivered by the late Dr. Schaeffer in 1982 at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. It is based on one of his books, which bears the same title.
Humanism gives us arbitrary laws
————

So, Humanism is the absolute certain result, if we choose this other final reality and say that is what it is. You must realize that when we speak of man being the measure of all things under the Humanist label, the first thing is that man has only knowledge from himself. That he, being finite, limited, very faulty in his observation of many things, yet nevertheless, has no possible source of knowledge except what man, beginning from himself, can find out from his own observation. Specifically, in this view, there is no place for any knowledge from God.
But it is not only that man must start from himself in the area of knowledge and learning, but any value system must come arbitrarily from man himself by arbitrary choice. More frightening still, in our country, at our own moment of history, is the fact that any basis of law then becomes arbitrary — merely certain people making decisions as to what is for the good of society at the given moment.
Now this is the real reason for the breakdown in morals in our country. It’s the real reason for the breakdown in values in our country, and it is the reason that our Supreme Court now functions so thoroughly upon the fact of arbitrary law. They have no basis for law that is fixed, therefore, like the young person who decides to live hedonistically upon their own chosen arbitrary values, society is now doing the same thing legally. Certain few people come together and decide what they arbitrarily believe is for the good of society at the given moment, and that becomes law.
The world view that the final reality is only material or energy shaped by pure chance, inevitably, (that’s the next word I would bring to you ) mathematically — with mathematical certainty — brings forth all these other results which are in our country and in our society which have led to the breakdown in the country — in society — and which are its present sorrows. So, if you hold this other world view, you must realize that it is inevitable that we will come to the very sorrows of relativity and all these other things that are so represented in our country at this moment of history.
_______
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 […]

Remembering Francis Schaeffer at 100 (Part 6)

This is one of my favorite film  clips from the movie “Whatever  Happened to the Human Race?” about the flow of history.

This year Francis Schaeffer would have turned 100 on Jan 30, 2012. I remember like yesterday when I first was introduced to his books. I was even more amazed when I first saw his films. I was so influenced by them that I bought every one of his 30 something books and his two film series. Here is an article that I got off the internet that quotes Schaeffer and it comes from Chuck Colson’s website www.breakpoint.org :

It’s a Natural
By Chuck Colson|Published Date: August 01, 2011

Clarence Thomas

Supreme

Chuck’s 1991 commentary on Justice Clarence Thomas reminds us of the importance of realizing that there is a natural law to which we are all subject – and which we must not ignore.

In politics Americans like to fall comfortably in the middle of the road. And so it’s a common tactic of politicians to present their own views as the mainstream, while painting their opponents as extremists – on the fringe.

Call it the weirdo factor. If you can’t undercut someone by rational argument, just make him look weird, out of the mainstream.

We’re seeing that very tactic at work in the debate today over Clarence Thomas’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

Judge Thomas believes in natural law – that human laws have to be measured against an objective standard of morality and justice. A higher law.

Opponents have labelled this view weird. Harvard professor Lawrence Tribe said no Supreme Court nominee in 50 years has held a natural law philosophy.

That’s a wild exaggeration. In fact, most people hold a form of natural law. How about you? Do you believe the government can pass a law that is unjust? If so, you believe in natural law. You believe a law has to measure up to some outside standard of justice; otherwise it’s unjust.

Natural law has been the dominant legal philosophy throughout Western civilization. Its roots reach back to the ancient Greeks and Romans – to Plato and Aristotle, Cicero and Seneca.

It was the dominant philosophy of law in the Middle Ages. The great theologian Thomas Aquinas related the secular concept of natural law to the Biblical concept of divine law. Both refer to an objective standard against which human laws are to be judged.

The Reformers talked about natural law, too. John Calvin wrote that God’s law is “engraved upon the minds of men” through conscience and natural law.

Our modern nations are based on the writings of men such as John Locke and Montesquieu, who offered their own theories of natural law.

Need we belabor the point any further?

Natural law has a long and venerable heritage in Western thought. It is hardly novel or unusual. And certainly not weird.

In fact, it is the only basis for human rights. Judge Thomas argues that minority rights depend upon the idea of natural law found in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration talks about certain rights as inalienable – which means a just government can’t take them away.

But rights are not inalienable unless they are based on something beyond the government.

As the late Francis Schaeffer so eloquently put it, Where do inalienable rights come from? From the state? Then they are not inalienable. Because what the state gives the state can also take away.

That’s why the Declaration of Independence says inalienable rights are endowed by the Creator. The state doesn’t create these rights; it merely acknowledges them as pre-existing by divine creation.

It’s not only Judge Thomas who believes this. Recently a Jewish rabbi named Haberman wrote that without a higher law – a law above the state – there is no standard of Justice to which we can hold the government accountable. Then there is nothing to prevent it from falling into tyranny and totalitarianism.

Rabbi Haberman knows what he’s talking about: He had to flee Germany for his life when the Nazis came to power.

For Jews, for Blacks, for all of us – the only sure basis of civil rights is natural law. And there’s nothing weird about that – whatever Clarence Thomas’s detractors may say.

Want to learn more about the crisis of ethics in America? Order your copy of the DVD series, Doing the Right Thing, and gather with some friends to study this important 6-part series on why natural law matters.

schaeffer

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer would be 100 years old this year (Schaeffer Sunday)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Extra – Interview – Part 2 Francis Schaeffer had a big impact on me in the late 1970′s and I have been enjoying his books and films ever since. Here is great video clip of an interview and below is a fine article about him. Francis Schaeffer 1912-1984 Christian Theologian, Philosopher, […]

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 How Should We Then Live 10#1 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 led by an elite: John Kenneth […]

Fellow admirer of Francis Schaeffer, Michele Bachmann quits presidential race

What Ever Happened to the Human Race? Bachmann was a student of the works of Francis Schaeffer like I am and I know she was pro-life because of it. (Observe video clip above and picture of Schaeffer.) I hated to see her go.  DES MOINES, Iowa — Last night, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann vowed to […]

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 How Should We Then Live 9#1 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 to Pessimism Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed […]

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 How Should We Then Live 8#1 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, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, […]

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 How Should We Then Live 7#1 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 on his belief that we live […]

Francis Schaeffer would be 100 years old this year (Schaeffer Sunday)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Extra – Interview – Part 2 Francis Schaeffer had a big impact on me in the late 1970′s and I have been enjoying his books and films ever since. Here is great video clip of an interview and below is a fine article about him. Francis Schaeffer 1912-1984 Christian Theologian, Philosopher, […]

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 I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in Modern Science. A. Change in conviction from earlier modern scientists.B. From an open to a closed natural system: […]

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 5-1 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 was a unique improvement. A. […]

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

How Should We Then Live 4-1 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 how to be right with […]

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

How Should We Then Live 3-1 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 many problems today with this excellent episode. He noted, “Could have gone either way—with emphasis on real people living in […]

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

How Should We Then Live 2-1 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 to authority and the approach to God.” […]

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

How Should We Then Live 1-1 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 it fell. It fell because of inward […]

Andy Rooney was an atheist

How Now Shall We LiveClick here to purchase Chuck Colson and Nancy Pearcey’s How Now Shall We Live?, dedicated to Francis Schaeffer.

Click here for a list of Francis Schaeffer’s greatest works, from the Colson Center store!
SchaefferBooks

Book review of Francis Schaeffer: An Authentic Life, by Colin Duriez

 

I have read several books about Schaeffer’s life and I hope to read this one soon.

 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2009

Francis Schaeffer: An Authentic Life, by Colin Duriez

A decade ago, my pastor at the time introduced me to Francis Schaeffer. Since then, I have read his trilogy, The God Who Is There, Escape from Reason and He Is There and He Is Not Silent, annually and read through The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer: A Christian Worldview (5 Volume Set) at least four times. Outside the Bible, Schaeffer’s writings have influenced my thinking more than any other. It is from that perspective that I read Colin Duriez’s biography, Francis Schaeffer: An Authentic Life.Admittedly, my expectations were unattainably high, but I was moderately disappointed. A characteristic of a good biography is the way an almost intimate relationship develops between the reader and the subject. When the reader puts the book down, it should be as if they’ve ended a conversation with a close friend (unless the subject is a villain—in which case the reader is anxious to leave but somehow mysteriously drawn to return). Such was not the case with this biography.

This is not to say that there were not periods of intimacy. There were, but they were isolated and disjointed. As a matter of fact, that seems to be the best descriptor for the book—disjointed. The author consistently jumps from subject to subject with very little regard for developing and focusing on a theme. Here is an example:

In those two remaining years from the move to Chalet Bijou to the beginning of an extended furlough in the United States, the work of lecturing throughout Europe on the dangers of the New Modernism and maintaining and encouraging the Children for Christ outreach continued. Mingled into it, hospitality and question times for constant visitors to Chalet Bijou became a significant element in a slowly changing focus. Fran and Edith’s perpetual activity on this “escalator” of events was punctuated in this period by a new and distinctive arrival in the family, following the disappointment and grief of a previous miscarriage. Franky, as he was known through much of his life (Francis August Schaeffer V), was born August 3, 1952. He is now well-known as the novelist Frank Schaeffer and is also a filmmaker and artist who wrote brash books in the eighties for an unwieldy evangelical constituency along the lines of his father’s concerns, such as Addicted to Mediocrity, before converting to Eastern Orthodoxy. His Calvin Becker trilogy of novels (Portofino, 1996, Saving Grandma, 1997, and Zermatt, 2003) openly mocks a “fundamentalist” and pietistic lifestyle.

And so goes most of the book. In that paragraph alone, the author spans decades of topics from Schaeffer lecturing during a furlough to the birth of a son to that son’s controversial writings. Rather than building a familiarity with the subject, the reader is left with a feeling of vertigo.

Despite the lack of coherency, it was a worthwhile read. In addition to the beneficial snippets scattered throughout the book (such as the brief section dealing with Schaeffer’s confrontation with Barth—fascinating, especially considering how he skewered Barth in his writings), overall it was encouraging. Many biographies portray giants of the faith as springing forth Athena-like, fully developed from the womb. Piper seems to have been laser-focused on his mission statement since seminary. Tozer seemed never to waver from the time he pastored a tiny rural church in West Virginia. Spurgeon evidently was born with sword in one hand and trowel in the other. Schaeffer was not that way. He developed and grew and struggled throughout his lifetime. He mellowed in some areas and maintained his fiery firmness in others. Despite the areas in which he could have improved the book, the author could not have picked a better title. Of all the things one could say about the life of Francis Schaeffer, the most accurate is that his was an authentic life. Just as he knew that God is there and is not silent, he lived authentically before Him.

Hardcover: 288 pages
Publisher: Crossway Books (May 31, 2008)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1581348576

Posted by Pastor Jimat 9:18 AM

Scott Hyland on Thomas Jefferson and Declaration of Independence

youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLypACfmtNg]

The Five Laws of Liberty is an honest examination of the biblical view of freedom. The book thoroughly examines Scripture passages that deal specifically with the concept of freedom and sheds light on Christ’s teaching on the subject. In order for freedom to flourish within relationships, every action should be governed by The Five Laws of Liberty.

__________________________

Scott Hyland, Professor of Bible at Liberty University wrote an excellent article, “What influenced Thomas Jefferson to change ‘subjects’ to ‘citizens’ in the Declaration of Independence?” Here is a portion of that  article:

On Friday July 2nd the Library of Congress announced the discovery of a word that was erased from an early draft of the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson originally wrote the word “subjects” and then replaced it with the word “citizens.” The smear had been investigated many times, but until recently there was no technology available that would allow preservation scientists to bring the covered word to light. Jefferson’s penmanship made the task even more challenging. Evidently, he tried to conceal the underlying word by matching it stroke for stroke with the word citizens.

            With the use of spectral imaging technology, research scientists were able to make the hidden word visible by passing the document through varying wavelengths of light. Preservation director Dianne van der Reyden said in an interview about this new discovery (Washington Post, July 3, 2010), “It’s quite amazing how [Jefferson] morphed ‘subjects’ into ‘citizens,’ we did the reverse morphing back to ‘subjects.’ “

            Have you ever really thought of the difference between citizens and subjects? Or why Jefferson felt the need to make the change? Did the idea even originate with Jefferson? The difference may be more theological in its origin than you think. Keep in mind that even King George III referred to the Revolution as “a Presbyterian Rebellion.” (Paul Johnson, A History of the American People, [New York: Harper Perennial, 1999], 173).

            Under Old Testament Law, individuals were subject to a priest who acted as a liaison between God and man. However, in the New Testament era, the veil was torn (Matthew 27:51) making it possible for every believer to confidently approach the throne of God (Hebrews 4:16). We were liberated from the bondage of sin by our God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who conquered death by purchasing for us a new citizenship which is in heaven (Philippians 3:20).

            Of all people, Christians truly understand what it means to be citizens because the idea was revealed and made possible through Christ. How did this idea influence our Founding Fathers? Revolutionary America was predominantly Protestant. Protestants do not submit to a priest. They believed, as individuals, that they had full authority to approach God directly on religious terms and came to understand that they had the same freedom to approach God directly on political terms.

            Therefore, the idea of subjecting oneself to an earthly king became obsolete when the King of Kings provided an opportunity for all men to govern themselves by shining His personal light into their hearts and minds. It was only a matter of time before human reasoning working together with divine revelation would come to realize this remarkable step forward and establish representative government.

            No, Jefferson did not morph subjects into citizens, God did. Jefferson was simply the instrument that God chose to use at a specific point in time to publish an idea that prevailed throughout the land. Unfortunately, if we as a nation continue to reject God’s hand, we too will soon find ourselves “morphing back to subjects.”

 

SCOTT HYLAND

, along with his three brothers, grew up in the small town of Library, Pennsylvania, where he first learned the value of hard work patriotism, and a strong Christian family. After getting married, Scott earned a Master’s Degree in Biblical Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. For the last twelve years, Scott has served as the Bible Department Head at Liberty Christian Academy in Lynchburg, VA. Scott, his wife, and their three children currently live in nearby Forest, VA.

[

Remembering Francis Schaeffer at 100 (Part 5)

 

__________________________________________________________________

Francis Schaeffer: How Should We Then Live? (Full-Length Documentary)

Published on Aug 3, 2013

Think you know world history? Think again.

As one of the foremost thinkers of the twentieth century, Francis Schaeffer long pondered the fate of declining Western culture. In this brilliant film, he analyzes the reasons for modern society’s state of affairs and presents the only viable alternative.

________________

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason

This year Francis Schaeffer would have turned 100 on Jan 30, 2012. I remember like yesterday when I first was introduced to his books. I was even more amazed when I first saw his films. I was so influenced by them that I bought every one of his 30 something books and his two film series. Here is a tribute that I got off the internet from Chuck Colson’s website www.breakpoint.org :

Enlightened Ethics?
By Chuck Colson|Published Date: August 08, 2011

The Failure of Secularized Morality

Cheat

This commentary was first published November 1, 1995.

Christina Hoff Sommers, who teaches ethics at Clark University, tells a wonderful story—one that exposes the bankruptcy of modern ethics. After Sommers had written an article arguing that a just society begins with individual virtue, one of her colleagues berated her for holding to “an antiquated, Victorian, view of ethics.”

Modern ethics, her colleague informed her, is social justice. It is concerned not with personal morality but with causes, such as saving Brazilian rain forests and preventing Third World exploitation by multinational corporations.

Three months later the same colleague came back sheepishly to Sommers and said: “I have just had a shocking experience in my ethics class. Half of my students cheated on a take-home exam. And this is an ethics course!”

The woman confessed she needed to reread Sommers’s article about private virtue. When people see how flawed the modern view of ethics is, it opens a grand opportunity for a Christian apologetic.

Our modern dilemma in ethics began with the French Enlightenment. Like Sommers’s colleague, the Enlightenment thinkers believed that Christians were wrong about individual sin, that people were good, corrupted only by social structures. So reforming social structures would produce a perfect society.

For 200 years ethicists have tried to create ethical systems without God. The result has been the dismantling of any objective standard of right and wrong, leaving the individual to act according to his or her own “personal preference.”

But what happens when someone’s “personal preference” happens to be cheating on an exam? Or stealing? Or—for example—collaborating with murderous Nazis? That is exactly what happened in the very homeland of the Enlightenment. During wartime France the Vichy government rounded up Jews and handed them over to the Nazis. Seventy-five thousand French Jews perished in the death camps. French President Jacques Chirac recently acknowledged that shameful chapter of his country’s history. “France,” he said, “the homeland of the Enlightenment, and of the rights of man . . . committed the irreparable. Breaking its word, it handed over those who were under its protection to their executioners.”

How did the Enlightenment notion of the “rights of man” break down in wartime France? Well, ethical precepts in themselves have no moral force unless individuals view themselves as responsible to a Supreme Being. The French existentialist Jean Paul Sartre understood very well that ethics had no meaning once God was removed from the equation. “It doesn’t matter how you act,” Sartre said, “as long as you ‘authenticate yourself’ by an act of the will.”

Thus, to borrow a trenchant Francis Schaeffer illustration, you can decide to help an old lady across the street—or to push her into the path of an oncoming car. For Sartre, because there is no God, it doesn’t matter what one chooses to do. (WATCH THE 9 MINUTE VIDEO CLIP FOR THE CLASSIC EXAMPLE SCHAFFER GAVE.)

So the next time someone argues that ethics has nothing to do with obedience to God, show him exactly where that logic leads. And remind him that it is precisely because God exists that there is ultimately no getting away with cheating—or, for that matter, murder.

Want to learn more about the crisis of ethics in America? Order your copy of the DVD series, Doing the Right Thing, and gather with some friends to study this important 6-part series on why natural law matters.

schaeffer

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer would be 100 years old this year (Schaeffer Sunday)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Extra – Interview – Part 2 Francis Schaeffer had a big impact on me in the late 1970′s and I have been enjoying his books and films ever since. Here is great video clip of an interview and below is a fine article about him. Francis Schaeffer 1912-1984 Christian Theologian, Philosopher, […]

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 How Should We Then Live 10#1 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 led by an elite: John Kenneth […]

Fellow admirer of Francis Schaeffer, Michele Bachmann quits presidential race

What Ever Happened to the Human Race? Bachmann was a student of the works of Francis Schaeffer like I am and I know she was pro-life because of it. (Observe video clip above and picture of Schaeffer.) I hated to see her go.  DES MOINES, Iowa — Last night, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann vowed to […]

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 How Should We Then Live 9#1 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 to Pessimism Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed […]

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 How Should We Then Live 8#1 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, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, […]

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 How Should We Then Live 7#1 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 on his belief that we live […]

Francis Schaeffer would be 100 years old this year (Schaeffer Sunday)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Extra – Interview – Part 2 Francis Schaeffer had a big impact on me in the late 1970′s and I have been enjoying his books and films ever since. Here is great video clip of an interview and below is a fine article about him. Francis Schaeffer 1912-1984 Christian Theologian, Philosopher, […]

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 I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in Modern Science. A. Change in conviction from earlier modern scientists.B. From an open to a closed natural system: […]

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 5-1 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 was a unique improvement. A. […]

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

How Should We Then Live 4-1 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 how to be right with […]

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

How Should We Then Live 3-1 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 many problems today with this excellent episode. He noted, “Could have gone either way—with emphasis on real people living in […]

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

How Should We Then Live 2-1 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 to authority and the approach to God.” […]

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

How Should We Then Live 1-1 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 it fell. It fell because of inward […]

Andy Rooney was an atheist

How Now Shall We LiveClick here to purchase Chuck Colson and Nancy Pearcey’s How Now Shall We Live?, dedicated to Francis Schaeffer.


Click here for a list of Francis Schaeffer’s greatest works, from the Colson Center store!
SchaefferBooks

Chris Petersen next Arkansas Razorback football coach?

I first read this on Jason Tolbert’s blog, but I did not take it serious. However, on Dec 2, 2012, I heard Bill Vickery say on his “Sunday Buzz” show on 103 .7 FM that a friend of his who was an agent contends that Jeff Long is working out the final details with Chris Petersen for the Arkansas Razorback football head coaching job. A lot of blogs have jumped on board with this same view. (Although some say that Petersen is moving on and channel 4 in Little Rock reports that Mike Gundy has been given an offer.) (Actually Brett Bielema was named the coach at 6pm on 12-4-12.)

Wally Hall has thrown around these names:

Art Briles, Baylor

Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State

Tommy Tuberville, Texas Tech

Chris Petersen, Boise State

Sonny Dykes, Louisiana Tech

Gus Malzahn, Arkansas State

Hog Country reports:

Petersen to be named new coach Tuesday

By on December 1, 2012 | HOG COUNTRY3 Comments

The announcement that Boise State coach Chris Petersen will be the Hogs’ next coach is expected to come Tuesday.

The long-awaited announcement for Arkansas fans should come Tuesday.

But don’t be surprised if there’s another smokescreen or two along the way.

As of Saturday evening, multiple sources have said that Boise State coach Chris Petersen is expected to be named the new Razorbacks coach Tuesday. Considering the Hogs will play Oklahoma in basketball that evening at Bud Walton Arena, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that he could be formally introduced to the fans then after an earlier press conference for the official announcement.

That’s assuming, of course, nothing changes. After the Dana Altman experience of 2007, Arkansas fans have seen just about the strangest of the strange things happen when it comes to new coaching hires. That was when the Creighton coach was hired to replace the fired Stan Heath, took the job and backed out the next day.

This one doesn’t figure to go that way.

Petersen, the 48-year-old coach of the Broncos, has compiled a gawdy 83-8 record in seven seasons at Boise (a 91.2 percent winning percentage). He took over the reins from Dan Hawkins, who accepted the Colorado job and left a team that Petersen guided to a Fiesta Bowl win over Oklahoma in 2006.

In Petersens’s most recent contract features nothing prohibitive (from the Idaho Statesman):

• Petersen’s buyout is $750,000. The school’s buyout of Petersen is $250,000 per year left on the deal, plus any guaranteed money left in the deal, plus the pro-rated amount of his longevity incentive for the year he was fired. If Petersen leaves, he must do so after the end of the season, including a bowl game. The buyout applies to three kinds of jobs: FBS head coach, assistant coach at a school in Boise State’s conference or a conference Boise State has contractually agreed to join; or NFL head coach.

• Petersen must provide written (or e-mail) notice at least 24 hours before interviewing for a coaching job at another college or with a professional team.

The only part that may cause some pause to Razorback fans is the leaving after a bowl game at the end of the season. The simple matter is most college coaches’ contract have that clause and most athletic directors ignore it unless the team is in a position to be in a BCS bowl game where it matters. Most bowl projections call for the Broncos to be in the MAACO Las Vegas Bowl on Dec. 22.

As for the 24 hours’ notice, it really depends on if Petersen and Arkansas athletics director Jeff Long have talked directly and what exactly constitutes an interview. For full reference to that, look back at all the fancy footwork in the recent Les Miles’ smokescreen that everyone had to endure for a couple of days last week. That, quite simply, provided a distraction for Long to focus on wrapping up some final details with Petersen’s representatives.

After all, Petersen reportedly has been Long’s first choice all along. All the rest of the names and other rumblings have simply been well-placed smokescreens, according to some folks in a position to know within the UA.

The bottom line is none of that will matter.

These days, contracts in sports are simply the starting point for negotiations

Related posts:

Related posts:

Wally Hall says the Hogs have their coach but it is not Gundy

Wally Hall tweeted at 12:12 pm on 12-4-12, “Hogs have their coach. Not Gundy. Should be announced today.” I reported earlier today that Gundy would be named the coach. David Bazzel was my source and he had a friend in the athletic dept. However, other news outlets differ with that. Rumors Swirl About Mike Gundy Offer […]

A look back at new Hog coach Mike Gundy’s famous 2007 rant

      Pat Bradley of the show “The Zone” on 103.7 FM the buzz said on the show today at 12:12 that CBS Sports has confirmed that Mike Gundy will be named the new Razorback football coach. I thought that we should look at some of the past things that Gundy has done and […]

Mike Gundy will be named Arkansas Razorback Football Coach!!!!

I was listening to 103.7 FM the  buzz at 11:30 and a source close to the Athletic Director told David Bazzel that Mike Gundy of Oklahoma St will be named the Razorback coach. Below is an article from earlier today that said Gundy was considering an offer. It is still unclear if Chris Petersen was […]

Chris Petersen next Arkansas Razorback football coach?

I first read this on Jason Tolbert’s blog, but I did not take it serious. However, on Dec 2, 2012, I heard Bill Vickery say on his “Sunday Buzz” show on 103 .7 FM that a friend of his who was an agent contends that Jeff Long is working out the final details with Chris […]

 

Bobby Petrino’s first interview since affair and his effort to put his marriage together

Some people have praised the way the University of Arkansas handled the firing of Bobby Petrino, and I am part of that group. However, if he puts his marriage back together I think it would be great if he returned as our head football coach at Arkansas. He has fallen from the top. He had […]

Bobby Petrino to Texas in 2013?

When I started thinking about which school would have the best chance to get Bobby Petrino in 2013, I immediately thought of Tennessee because they are in the SEC. However, there is a downside to being in the SEC. The pressure to win the conference is about the same to win the national championship. Actually […]

Bobby Petrino was a great coach and babysitter

Everybody admits that Bobby Petrino was a great coach. Take a look at this comment from Chris Smith of Forbes: Petrino has plenty of time to find a new job, and he is likely to receive several offers. Morally repugnant as he might be, Petrino’s on-field performance has been stellar. Through eight seasons as head […]

Bobby Petrino unloads one of his two Fayetteville homes

Bobby Petrino and Jessica Dorrell Bobby Petrino always had plans to live in Fayetteville the rest of his life. Why else would he have committed to the 18 million dollar buyout in his contract. He also showed that he had longterm plans to stay in Arkansas because he invested 2.5 million in a home here. […]

Is Bobby Petrino through or will he return as a top coach in the future?

Bobby Petrino and Jessica Dorrell I was so happy a few months ago with the Razorbacks’ football future firmly in Bobby Petrino’s hands. Things were going so well.  I mentioned to a friend that I was 16 back in 1977 when Lou Holtz led the Razorbacks that season to a 11-1 record and a third […]

You can buy Bobby Petrino’s motorcyle!!!

I wish the Bobby Petrino series of mistakes never started last fall. It all started with eating lunch with a young lady that was not his wife and she said, “When are you going to get around to kissing me?” The Arkansas Times blog reported today:   A Twitter from Mallory Hardin at Channel 4 […]

Bobby Petrino had the whole world at his feet

Bobby Petrino and Jessica Dorrell I read this blog this morning about Bobby Petrino and the verse “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36) really made me think a lot about our perspective on life. Bobby Petrino and the Lesson of Good Friday Posted: […]

Bobby Petrino’s actions and the fallout from them

Arkansas coach Bobby Petrino Sometimes we lose perspective on what is really important and I thought I would share this below. Will Davis Jr. is a Christian pastor and here are his thoughts: The Sad Case of Bobby Petrino 11 Apr Bobby Petrino, the three-year football coach of the Arkansas Razorbacks, has been relieved of […]

Bobby Petrino and the issue of Integrity

A good article I came upon below: A Question of Integrity Posted by Jerry Godsey in Adultery, BLOG, Family, Featured, How To Be a Man, Leadership, News Media, Sports | Monday, April 16th, 2012 If you are a college football fan, you are pretty aware of the Bobby Petrino scandal at the University of Arkansas. […]

Opinions on the morality of Bobby Petrino

Bobby Petrino and Jessica Dorrell I have read a lot of opinions throughout the USA on the morality of Bobby Petrino and I wanted to share with you some of their thoughts: 1. Columbus Ledger Enquirer 2. Marissa Levy at Fordham Law 3. Curmudgeon’s Attic 4. Vanderbilt Law School Bobby Petrino bears witness: Character Counts! […]

Why are we so accepting of infanticide?

__________

___________________

_____________________________________

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro)

Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of Truth & History (part 2)

Why is our society so accepting of infanticide? About 40 years ago the door was opened to abortion in the USA and that was the fruit of humanism. Is it much of a surprise that we find our country at the point where it is about to accept infanticide now?

Here is the article that got me thinking about this issue this morning followed by an article by David L. Skeen that agrees with my view on abortion and infanticide.

I’m not easily grossed out or nauseated. Heck, I’m on email lists for a half-dozen softball teams and you can only imagine the strange/filthy/nasty things that guys send to each other.

But I read a story about the death panels in the United Kingdom that left me discombobulated. I can’t even begin to describe how I feel.

Here’s the intro of a disturbing report in the Daily Mail.

Sick children are being discharged from NHS hospitals to die at home or in hospices on controversial ‘death pathways’. Until now, end of life regime the Liverpool Care Pathway was thought to have involved only elderly and terminally-ill adults. But the Mail can reveal the practice of withdrawing food and fluid by tube is being used on young patients as well as severely disabled newborn babies.

And here are some of the horrifying details. Read at your own risk.

One doctor has admitted starving and dehydrating ten babies to death in the neonatal unit of one hospital alone. Writing in a leading medical journal, the physician revealed the process can take an average of ten days during which a  baby becomes ‘smaller and shrunken’. The LCP – on which 130,000 elderly and terminally-ill adult patients die each year – is now the subject of an independent inquiry ordered by ministers. …Earlier this month, an un-named doctor wrote of the agony of watching the protracted deaths of babies. …‘I know, as they cannot, the unique horror of witnessing a child become smaller and shrunken, as the only route out of a life that has become excruciating to the patient or to the parents who love their baby.’ Grim Reaper with Kid…Bernadette Lloyd, a hospice paediatric nurse, has written to the Cabinet Office and the Department of Health to criticise the use of death pathways for children. She said: ‘The parents feel coerced, at a very traumatic time, into agreeing that this is correct for their child whom they are told by doctors has only has a few days to live. It is very difficult to predict death. I have seen a “reasonable” number of children recover after being taken off the pathway. …‘I have also seen children die in terrible thirst because fluids are withdrawn from them until they die. ‘I witnessed a 14 year-old boy with cancer die with his tongue stuck to the roof of his mouth when doctors refused to give him liquids by tube. His death was agonising for him, and for us nurses to watch. This is euthanasia by the backdoor.’

My first reaction is to hope that this story is wildly wrong, filled with exaggerations and lies.

My second reaction (and this is why I got so agitated) is to imagine what it must be like for the parents. They get talked into letting their kids die, which must be agonizing, and then (assuming they stick around) they have to watch them slowly starve to death or die of thirst. Wouldn’t it be better to just give your kid a fatal injection? Setting aside the moral issue of deciding to let a kid die because he’s disabled or something like that, doesn’t simple decency mean that death should be painless rather than agonizing?

My final reaction is to wonder what Paul Krugman would say about this scandalous neglect and mistreatment. During the Obamacare debate, he told us we could ignore stories about what was happening across the ocean, writing that “In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We’ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false.” So I guess starving children don’t qualify as a scare story.

P.S. If you want more horror stories about government-run healthcare in the United Kingdom click here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Abortion and infanticide

This article from the UK Telegraph from late February summarizes (and links to) an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics which argues that “newborn babies are not ‘actual persons’ and do not have a ‘moral right to life’. The academics [Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva] also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.”  Giubilini and Minerva “use the phrase ‘after-birth abortion’ rather than ‘infanticide’ to ‘emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus’.”

So less than 40 years after abortion on-demand was legalized in the US, we see an article in an academic journal making the argument that because abortion is morally acceptable, infanticide is also morally acceptable.  For Christians who have opposed abortion for decades, this development is not surprising.

In their 1979 book Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop wrote:

At a population control conference in Washington DC, as reported by editor-writer Norman Podhoretz, 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 for 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 a little more thinkable each time….

Without the Judeo-Christian base which gives every individual an intrinsic dignity as made in the image of the personal-infinite Creator, each successive horror falls naturally in place.  Combine arbitrary law (in which a small group of people may decide what is good for society at that moment of history) with the Supreme Court ruling on arbitrary abortion and the gates are opened for many kinds of killing under the guise of social good.

In his 1980 book The Right to Live, The Right to Die, Koop wrote:

It is, further, absolutely astounding to me that Justice Blackmun could have included the following sentence in his decision: “We need not resolve the question of when life begins.”  Where does this lead?  It leads to infanticide and eventually to euthanasia.  If the law will not protect the life of a normal, unborn child, what chance does a newborn infant have after birth, if in the eyes of Justice Blackmun, he might be less than normal?…

Koop quoted James Watson, who wrote in an American Medical Association publication (in 1973): “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 in the present system.”  Koop also quoted Francis Crick (in a 1978 interview): “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.”  So we can see scientific voices (Watson and Crick were Nobel laureates) arguing for infanticide decades ago.

In the US, we have seen our laws become increasingly arbitrary. In some states, euthanasia has been legalized. The Obama administration has given federal funding to embryonic stem cell research, where embryos are destroyed in the hope of finding medical cures.  Perhaps a state will legalize infanticide, probably in limited circumstances at first.  If this occurs, and the statute is challenged in the courts, how would the Supreme Court would rule on it?  In all likelihood, the Court would make another arbitrary ruling.

Our nation has drifted further and further from a fundamental commitment to a God-given right to life, which we had recognized in our Declaration of Independence.  If we continue on this path, we can anticipate successive horrors falling naturally in place.

Related posts:

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 […]

Dan Mitchell: Subsidizing unemployment means more joblessness

 

Why do we constantly extend unemployment benefits when we know that subsidizing unemployment means more joblessness?

Government Benefits Encourage Unemployment

November 29, 2012 by Dan Mitchell

It’s not something I should admit since I work at a think tank, which is based on the idea that substantive analysis can impact public policy, but I sometimes think humor and anecdotes are very effective in helping people understand issues.

On the topic of unemployment insurance, for instance, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this Michael Ramirez cartoon and this Wizard-of-Id parody have been effective in helping folks grasp the unintended consequences of excessive government benefits.

And I bet this story from Michigan and this example from Ohio will ring a bell with many people because they have some relative or buddy who also has used government benefits as an excuse to stay unemployed.

So when I went on Fox to discuss the issue, I mentioned that I had a couple of friends who goofed off instead of looking for work because they got unemployment benefits…

.

But since I am a think-tank policy wonk, I also explain that even left-wing economists such as Paul Krugman and Larry Summers agree that subsidizing unemployment means more joblessness. The academic research on this topic is virtually unanimous.

Keep in mind, by the way, that the negative impact of unemployment benefits is just the tip of the welfare-state iceberg. Professor Casey Mulligan has some very good work about the negative impact of redistribution programs, and this chart shows how dependency programs create very high implicit marginal tax rates for the less fortunate.

P.S. My opponent got screwed in terms of airtime, something that I can sympathize with since I’m often the one getting the short end of the stick, even when appearing on overseas television. This previous debate on unemployment insurance, by contrast, was very balanced.

P.P.S. If you want an example of unintentional humor, you can watch Nancy Pelosi asserting that paying people not to work is an effective means of creating jobs.