Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Abortion Leading Cause of Death for American Hispanics and Blacks

American Hispanics and Blacks (called Non Hispanic* Black--NHB) lose more of their population to abortion than to other cause. In a study recently published on causes of death in 2009, abortion counted for 16.4% of deaths among Whites (called Non Hispanic* Whites--NHW), The percentage was quadrupled for Blacks and Hispanics. Of deaths among Blacks, 61.1% were due to abortion; for Hispanics 64% of their deaths were due to abortion.

In  the U.S. in 2009, there were 6,369,000 pregnancies among women of all racial and ethnic origins. Hispanics, NHB and NHW together accounted for 93.2% of all pregnancies. Abortions terminated 11.9% of NHW pregnancies, 17.1% of Hispanic pregnancies, and 35.5% of NHB pregnancies. The ratio of live births to a single abortion for each group was: 5.8 for NHW; 3.9 for Hispanics; and 1.4 for NHB.

For all racial and ethnic origins, there were 3,589,163 deaths (Figure 1). Abortions accounted for only 16.4% of NHW deaths, but 61.1% and 64.0% of NHB and Hispanic deaths respectively. For NHW, diseases of the heart (20.8%) and malignant neoplasms (19.6%) each account for a higher percentage of deaths than do abortions. For Hispanics and NH Blacks, deaths from abortions are 4.2 and 3.5 times, respectively, the number of deaths from diseases of the heart and malignant neoplasms combined. Homicide was ranked in the top ten causes of death for Hispanics and NHB, but abortion deaths were 79.3 and 57.5 times, respectively, the number of homicides. Suicide was ranked in the top ten causes for NHW, but abortion deaths were 12.4 times the number of suicides.
The authors of the study note that though abortion is the leading cause of death for Hispanics and Blacks there is neither "availability of consistently reported valid data" nor "allocation of sufficient resources for research" to track this information. They conclude that this is an example of science denial of the impact of abortions on deaths.
The exclusion of abortion as a cause of death, in spite of conclusive science to contrary, and the relative paucity of information and funded research on a topic of demonstrated consequence to the demographic composition of the society, may be the ultimate example of science denial. An abortion death is deemed necessary and performed by other humans in a purposeful and completely legal process. In these respects an abortion is similar to capital punishment and subject to the same clash of varying religious, political and ideological values. The appropriate role of science is to inform this societal dialogue with objective information. Labeling abortion as a preventable death is not an argument for restricting access to a legal abortion. However, refusing to acknowledge abortion as a death undermines the role of science and the value of transparency so fundamental to a free society.
_____
*Interesting that scientific measurements are done in terms of being Hispanic or not.

H/T IJR and Sarah Palin

Saturday, August 06, 2016

Trump Exposes Trump



Cruz in his minor role looks pretty good. Trump looks bad, but his off screen voters and the supporter at the end look pretty bad too.

Thursday, August 04, 2016

Trump Being Elected Will Not Result in Conservative Supreme Court Justices

Trump being elected will not result in conservative Supreme Court justices.

Point 1: Supreme Court nominees have to be confirmed by a majority vote of the U.S. Senate. (Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution) But, under current Senate rules, Supreme Court nominations can be stopped by a filibuster supported by 41 senators.

Point 2: Republicans currently hold a majority of 54 senate seats. Democrats have 44, and there are 2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats.

Point 3: Republicans have to defend 24 senate seats; Democrats only 10. Of 10 senate seats in danger of flipping, 8 are Republican. Chances of getting to 60 to prevent a filibuster are infinitesimal.

Point 4: Trump doesn't much care if Republican senators get elected. Neither Trump nor Pence are backing John McCain of Arizona or Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire (in their primaries), and Trump has been critical of both. Further, Trump isn't campaigning or raising funds for Republican senatorial candidates.

Point 5: Trump's persona and campaign style of personal attacks have made electing any Republican hard.

Point 6: Trump has flipped on so many issues, the odds of staying with his conservative justices promise are low.

Even if he wins the presidency and keeps that one promise, there's no way Democrats will confirm any conservative court nominee. The Democrats have shown they know how to play political hard ball both with a majority (Obamacare) and a minority (budget votes they don't approve of). And they will have the mainstream media backing them almost unopposed since Fox has damaged itself in the eyes of many conservatives and Republicans with its pro-Trump rationalizations.

The best hope is that Trump will be able to confirm "centrist" (read: liberal light) justices. Hillary will also have the same chance because Democrats will not have 60 votes to prevent a filibuster in the Senate. But, since Republicans don't vote their conscience but vote for political utility she will probably be able to get liberal moderates through.

So, your choice will be liberal light at best and probably liberal moderate. Is it worth the shame and danger of backing a vile, unstable candidate like Donald Trump?


Note: Post has been updated to reflect filibuster numbers. Two-thirds vote of Senate is only required on treaties.

Sunday, July 31, 2016

Albert Mohler and Russell Moore on Why Christians Should Not Vote for Trump



From Shane Vander Hart:
Last month Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, was part of a panel discussion during a Baptist21 event and he was asked about the election, what were first, second and third tier issues, and if evangelicals have always voted for the candidate that says they are pro-life and appoint conservative Supreme Court justices.
No, no, that is not what we have always done. What we have always done is vote in a fallen world for fallen candidates in a fallen political construct and done the best we could….
…. Yes I think the life issue is paramount, not stand alone, but is paramount. It is single issue dispositive to use the language of political science. I could not vote for someone that I believe would do any action that would expand the murder of the unborn or the assault upon the human dignity and sanctity of a single human life – period. So I go into the voting booth saying I can not vote for a candidate. That’s not enough. There is a difference between being single-issue dispositive and single-issue sufficient. Those are two separate things. Character is an indispensable issue.
The first time I met Bill Clinton was hours after I had been on the O’Reilly Factor calling on him to resign, and that was a quintessential awkward moment, but I was right in terms of the issues. But I could not possibly be consistent and somehow vote for someone whose character I believe eclipses Bill Clinton on so many of those very same concerns. Someone who has bragged about his adulterous affairs, someone who has given himself to the pornographic industry, basically to a form of the sex trade, and let’s just go on. In other words, I can’t being single-issue dispositive does not give an adequate political grid for when you go out. Because character is pretty much and also how prolife someone supposedly is after being so pro-abortion that they actually supported partial birth abortion.
So I find myself in a situation I never envisioned in my life as a Christian or as an American, but I am going to have to be Christian in order to be a faithful American. So I am going to find myself unable to vote for either of those two choices of our two major political parties. (emphasis added)
Dr. Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, concurred.
Yes, I will be writing in a candidate this year and the reason for that is simple. The life issue can not flourish in a culture of misogyny and sexual degradation. The life issue can not flourish when you have people calling for the torture and murder of innocent non-combatants. The life issue can not flourish when you have people who have given up on the idea that character matters. If you lose an election you can live to fight another day and move on, but if you lose an election while giving up your very soul then you have really lost it all, and so I think the stakes are really high.
And I think the issue, particularly, when you have people who have said, and we have said, and I have said for twenty years the life issue matters, and the life issue is important… When you have someone who is standing up race baiting, racist speech, using immigrants and others in our communities in the most horrific ways and we say ‘that doesn’t matter’ and we are part of the global body of Christ simply for the sake of American politics, and we expect that we are going to be able to reach the nations for Christ? I don’t think so, and so I think we need to let our yes be yes and our no be no and our never be never. (emphasis added)

Thursday, July 28, 2016

Ben Sasse and Edward Snowden Stand Up for Freedom of Religion; American Evangelicals: Crickets

A law signed this month by Russian President Vladimir Putin makes it illegal to evangelize (share your religious beliefs as true) in Russia outside church buildings. No evangelism allowed in public places or even private homes.
This week, Russian president Vladimir Putin approved a package of anti-terrorism laws that usher in tighter restrictions on missionary activity and evangelism.
Despite prayers and protests from religious leaders and human rights advocates, the Kremlin announced Putin’s approval yesterday. The amendments, including laws against sharing faith in homes, online, or anywhere but recognized church buildings, go into effect July 20.
Further, Russians are required "to report religious activity to the authorities, or face punishment him or herself."

In an eerie echo of its Soviet-era KGB past, the law also states that "every citizen is required to report religious activity to the authorities, or face punishment him or herself."
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-in-russia-under-attack-from-putins-law-banning-evangelism-outside-of-churches-166823/#MQGqfujHqqIivIcM.99

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-in-russia-under-attack-from-putins-law-banning-evangelism-outside-of-churches-166823/#8ALdQPcGdyDhPFqP.99
In an eerie echo of its Soviet-era KGB past, the law also states that "every citizen is required to report religious activity to the authorities, or face punishment him or herself."
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-in-russia-under-attack-from-putins-law-banning-evangelism-outside-of-churches-166823/#MQGqfujHqqIivIcM.99

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-in-russia-under-attack-from-putins-law-banning-evangelism-outside-of-churches-166823/#8ALdQPcGdyDhPFqP.99
Senator Ben Sasse spoke out against the new law.



Edward Snowden has also openly criticized it even though he fears retaliation.

Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the mega First Baptist Church in Dallas, did take time this month to stand up for Roger Ailes (let go from Fox for sexual harassment), but no time to comment about Russian shut down of Christian evangelism.

Jerry Falwell, Jr., President of Liberty University, has time to exult in the possibility that U.S. churches won't lose tax exemption by endorsing political candidates, but zero concern on Russian churches losing the right to openly share about Jesus.

Even Franklin Graham, whose father was the most famous evangelist of the 20th century, is upset about Target's bathroom policy but not a word about Russia prohibiting public and private evangelism outside churches.

Big exception to evangelical lack of interest is Dr. Russell Moore (here too).

It's heartbreaking that this is what major evangelical leaders are becoming under the sway of Donald Trump. Everything is egocentric. As Falwell Jr. has said:
I think the security of the country, the economy, maybe next time [evangelicals] will be looking at social issues more like they did in the past. But I think this time, I heard a very prominent pastor . . . tell me just this week that if we don’t save the country then abortion, traditional marriage, all those social issues are going to be a moot point.
Hundreds of thousands of babies will be slaughtered this year in the U.S. and 143 million Russians are stripped of the right to share their beliefs, but only U.S. security and a good economy matter to leading evangelicals. Tragic.

Tuesday, July 26, 2016

Sarah Palin Checks Out of Coherency

My friends OregonGuy and MaxRedline have urged me to comment on Sarah Palin's latest piece. So, here goes. (All bolding in the quotes is added.)

Sarah Palin's writing is becoming as strange and disconnected as her speeches. Her opinion piece yesterday reflects that in phrasing and content. The speech warns against former foes of Trump who are now supporting him. This despite the fact that less than six months ago Palin was criticizing those who didn't "celebrate" Trump's "conversion" to the pro-life cause.
"'What has been kind of sad about the situation, though, politically speaking, are groups that are pro-life and want to, they say they want to bring more people into the fold. They [are] giving Trump a hard time for his past views on abortion,' Palin explained."
By contrast, Palin can't bring herself to celebrate those who now support Trump. She wants to give them a hard time for their past views.

Here are some specific problem areas with Governor Palin's opinion article.

1. The phrasing is often strange and backhanded:
"It’s important because time is short and lessons must be learned to avoid future catastrophic capture by status quo politicos."

"Conveniently, oppressors of this nationalist revolution found a way to save face. The obvious wall-writing ...."
"A significant exposition is the billionaire Mercer family’s financial ties to Cruz ...."

"Beck and his ilk showed they don’t oppose politics of personal destruction they used to rail against with lip service."
2. There is not one word about what's wrong with the Democrats. It's all about what's wrong with Palin's/Trump's Republican and conservative opposition. The big enemies are: Cruz, Glenn Beck and the Mercer family even though the Mercer family is now supporting Donald Trump.
"Conveniently, oppressors of this nationalist revolution found a way to save face. The obvious wall-writing told them they’d lose money and influence if they continued fighting AGAINST the majority, so the donor class scattered from their polarizing candidate when Ted Cruz’s suicide vest detonated at the GOP convention."
According to Palin, the problem is keeping them in their place when they start supporting Trump.
"As you watch former haters hop aboard the Trump Train, it’s important to connect dots and understand my concern about a bunch of belated mea culpas with which we’ll now be inundated."
"Exposing political games and connections that hurt the innocent was the early battle. Now we move down the battlefield to hold culprits accountable so they won’t be rewarded with opportunity to keep screwing you, America."
"They’ll never give you credit for being right, Trump Train engineers, because we’re still just peon passengers to them, but they’d like to join you now at the cool kids table. Just remember it’s YOUR table, patriots. YOU set it. They’d better behave as your guests."
This is the ultimate "insider" view of politics. Only original true believers can be trusted. It's also "payback" politics. No big tent thinking here about welcoming, not to mention celebrating, those who come to expand the fold.

3. Palin has a strange concern about Trump supporters being destroyed even though they've won, and even the big donor Mercer family has come over.
"Friends, my concern here is all about the attempted destruction of Trump SUPPORTERS over all these months. I’ve zipped my lips long enough; it’s time to call out those who’ve tried to destroy you."
Well, actually, Palin is upset about the impact on herself.
"From fair-weather friends and “supporters” turning decisively away in the meanest of ways, to me losing jobs – literally – the moment my support for Trump was made public, we sucked it up and hung on to hope that vindication was around the corner. I was told – for the umpteenth time – my career was over for “going rogue” this election cycle."
"I’ve been asked all year questions like why it seems I’m “relegated” to outsider status of current political machines; why there’s no longer a seat at the talking heads TV table; why’d previous “friends” commence public condemnation of me despite me never changing my values, priorities or loyalties to the right causes. The question is suggested, “Don’t you know if you just go along to get along you’d be in the big shots’ good graces?”
Interesting that pro-Trump Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Jeff Sessions, Newt Gingrich have had no problems getting "a seat at the talking heads TV table"*. They're interviewed on TV a lot. Even worse, all of them spoke at the Republican National Convention. But Sarah Palin lived too far away to either speak or attend. That despite the fact that it was not too far for Alaska's 28 delegates and 25 alternates to attend and challenge the Trump nomination vote count.

One has to feel sorry for Governor Palin. She has been intense in her support for Donald Trump, and has been passed over for prime speaking and surrogate roles. However, this piece as well as Palin's recent speeches indicate why Trump has chosen the path of leaving Sarah Palin out of the spotlight.

4. Then there is Palin's claim that conservative opponents like Glenn Beck use the "politics of personal destruction". She says this even though Trump spewed lies to destroy not only Ted Cruz and his family but even Ben Carson (Carson is like a child molester; Carson lied about the belt buckle anecdote in his book).
"Beck and his ilk showed they don’t oppose politics of personal destruction they used to rail against with lip service. They actually participate in Alinsky-like tactics that make the rest of us gag at typical political shenanigans."
5. The point of this stream of consciousness piece is unclear.

Is it to make sure that new supporters (like the Mercers) are kept in a second class citizen place? (takes up 16 of the 17 paragraphs)
"They’ll never give you credit for being right, Trump Train engineers, because we’re still just peon passengers to them, but they’d like to join you now at the cool kids table. Just remember it’s YOUR table, patriots. YOU set it. They’d better behave as your guests.
Or, is it to be "joyful" and win? (takes up 1 of the 17 paragraphs)
"So now we must rise to the challenge of becoming better, not bitter, in the midst of what the obstructionists tried to do. You who knew we needed a revolution ignored the haters to find a revolutionary, and we nominated him to help make America great again. Now, validated, productive, joyful people will get our messenger over the finish line so we can begin the fight to restore America."
Not much joy in this piece. And sadly, not much coherent thinking.
_____
*To illustrate how widespread use of Trump supporters is, though he didn't speak at the convention, even Herman Cain is often on Fox with commentary on Trump and the election. Somehow Palin really burned her bridges at Fox.

Monday, July 25, 2016

Ted Cruz Convention Speech Scores High; then GOP Establishment Weighs In

Just shows how powerful the talking points people are. If you're not careful they steal truth and put in their own message like sleight of hand artists.

And then they swing the other way almost overnight. All that's necessary is that you believe them.



Thank God for bloggers and tweeters who keep bringing the truth back to the surface.

H/T Josh Painter and RedState