Featured

What If Pearl Harbor Had Not Been Attacked?

Pearl Harbor
U.S.S. Arizona in flames after being bombed

December 7, 2018, was the commemoration of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor which occurred 77 years ago. That event propelled America into World War II in 1941 changing the course of world history.

The events leading to the attack reveal that Pearl Harbor Co-Commanders Admiral Kimmel and General Short ignored significant warnings from their superiors prior to the fateful Sunday. Moreover, other ignored warnings and mistakes in communication on the morning of December 7 increased the devastation.

What If It Never Happened?

What might have been the consequences if Pearl Harbor had never happened? For example, what if the warning given on November 27, 1941, had been taken more seriously,

The notice of November 27, to Kimmel, began, “This dispatch is to be considered a war warning,” went on to say that “negotiations have ceased,” and directed the admiral to “execute an appropriate defensive deployment.” Kimmel also was ordered to “undertake such reconnaissance and other measures as you deem necessary.” The communication of the same day to Short declared that “hostile action is possible at any moment” and, like its naval counterpart, urged “measures of reconnaissance.”

Perhaps the attack would have been called off if the Japanese saw the increased defensive preparation of the U.S. Navy 10 days before December 7. If that had been the case, the United States probably wouldn’t have entered WWII until later, possibly not for a long time.

Without the timely entry of America into the conflict, it is unlikely the Axis forces could have been defeated. At the very least, a victory would have cost far more in time, lives and destruction.

What Was Meant for Evil…

 

Pearl HarborLet us make no mistake. The attack on Pearl Harbor was an evil act.

The bombing was a surprise attack resulting in a decisive victory for Japan. The American casualty toll was enormous, while Japan’s was very small.

2,403 Americans were killed and 1,178 others were wounded. … Japanese losses were light… 64 servicemen killed. One Japanese sailor, Kazuo Sakamaki, was captured.

Moreover, the intent was evil as well. It was meant to destroy the American fleet and allow the Empire of Japan free reign to perhaps conquer China and all of southeast Asia.

However, what was obviously meant for evil turned out to be critical to stopping the global evil of the Axis powers. Perhaps, what man meant for evil purposes was used by God for the triumph of good over evil.

Pearl HarborToward the end of the book of Genesis in the Old Testament, we find the story of Joseph, one of Jacob/Israel’s sons. As a young man, Joseph is sold into slavery in Egypt by his own brothers. He serves faithfully and ends up in prison falsely accused of sexual crimes against his master’s wife.

Later, Joseph is released from prison by Pharoah himself in order to interpret some ominous dreams Pharoah has been having. Joseph is rewarded by being elevated to second-in-command of all of Egypt.

A few years pass and Joseph’s brothers are forced to look for food in Egypt because of a severe famine. Joseph meets them and at first, he is not recognized by his kin.

However, he reveals himself to his brothers and they respond with fear. They remember the harsh treatment they inflicted upon Joseph and fear now he will punish them from his new chair of authority.

Here is the account from chapter 50 of Genesis:

When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “It may be that Joseph will hate us and pay us back for all the evil that we did to him.” So they sent a message to Joseph, saying, “Your father gave this command before he died: ‘Say to Joseph, “Please forgive the transgression of your brothers and their sin, because they did evil to you.”’ And now, please forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father.” Joseph wept when they spoke to him. His brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.” But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. Genesis 50:15-20

War Cannot Be Sanitized

The day of December 8, 1941 President Franklin D. Roosevelt asked Congress for a declaration of war against Japan, and it was granted.

Almost four years later, WWII ended with the unconditional surrender of Japan after the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945. The horror of a nuclear catastrophe became a real possibility from that moment.

A-Bomb Terror.inset.3.12.8.2018
Atomic cloud bursting over Hiroshima, 2 minutes after the explosion, at 8:17AM

Over seven decades have passed since then. Though the threat of nuclear war remains in this world, no use of these horrific weapons has as yet been employed.

In fact, once fearsome enemy Japan has now become one of America’s strongest allies in Asia. That is unquestionably a good thing for international relations and peace.

There are at least two great lessons to be garnered from Pearl Harbor and WWII. The first is that war cannot be a sanitized event.

Attempts to make war less destructive, while somewhat laudable, are also short-sighted. Attempting to prevent war is better than trying to make war more palatable once it is upon you.

A good illustration comes from the classic sci-fi series “Star Trek.” In an episode from season one of the original series, two planets are involved in a war by computer.

Computer attacks were launched and the results recorded how many casualties from each planet there would be. In accordance with a 500-year-old agreement, those numbers of people, randomly selected, were to be killed in disintegration chambers.

Captain Kirk destroys the war computer of one planet because his crew is selected as casualties. The horror of the Planet Council to this action is countered by Captain Kirk’s reasoning.

He tells the head of the Council that they have made war so clean that they have no reason to end it. It has resulted in 500 years of war the two planets had little real motivation to actually come to peace.

Death, destruction, disease, horror. That’s what war is all about. That’s what makes it a thing to be avoided! You’ve made it neat and painless. So painless, you’ve seen no reason to stop it. Since its the only way I can save my crew, I’m going to end it for you; one way or another.

Real war, once begun, must be ended as decisively as possible by victory as quickly as possible. The horror of the cost of such a victory should always give us pause.

Evil Didn’t Get The Last Word

A second great lesson from Pearl Harbor is that evil didn’t get the last word. No matter how hopeless it seems and horrible the situation is, God is still in control in ways beyond our fathoming.

The United States was ill-prepared for war with Japan, let alone Germany and Italy on December 7, 1941. I am convinced that somehow, God had a hand in the near-miraculous turn about in less than a year.

Pearl Harbor
U.S.S. Yorktown during the Battle of Midway

In fact, less than six months later, June 4, 1942, the Battle of Midway was a stunning victory of America over the Japanese Fleet.

 

 

 

During the four-day sea-and-air battle, the outnumbered U.S. Pacific Fleet succeeded in destroying four Japanese aircraft carriers while losing only one of its own, the Yorktown, to the previously invincible Japanese navy.

Man may intend much for evil, including world war. But with courage and faith in God, the evil can be defeated, as Pearl Harbor reminds us.

Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the LORD that will stand. Proverbs 19:21 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Paul Walsh’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of DVIDSHUB’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of shehan peruma’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of United Nations Photo’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Cassowary Colorizations’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published at TIL Journal

Advertisements
Featured

The Left’s War Against Immigration [Video]

Immigration

The hottest story on the planet at the moment is taking place at the southern border of the United States. The unwashed masses of ordinary Americans are being assured by the Leftmedia’s press politburo that illegal aliens rushing the border are only a problem because of President Trump.

The now infamous photo of a woman running from tear gas with children in tow is offered as evidence of Trump’s evil intent regarding immigrants. Surely all those racist and misogynist Trump supporters will realize that the Left is only trying to help open their eyes and they will turn away from this obviously insidious man.

Of course, this means that the Left must ignore or downplay the fact that President Obama did exactly the same thing to other groups of illegal aliens trying to rush the border. Moreover, he did this on hundreds of occasions.

In truth, the Left isn’t interested in engaging the facts of the matter. Nor are they bothered about the destructive fruit of their efforts on the American citizen.

Their sole concern is the completion of their malevolent mission against America. Those people and institutions destroyed as a result are considered acceptable civilian casualties of war for the sake of the Leftist ideal.

Encouraging Illegal Aliens Harms Immigrants

ImmigrationThe truth of the matter is that encouraging illegal aliens to break in and enter the United States harms immigrants themselves. Not the leftist-lionized illegals, rather those who are legal immigrants are substantially harmed.

As a clarification to those who might wonder why I use illegal aliens to identify the wannabe invaders. I use the legal term for these persons, as should be used for we are discussing the rule of law and sovereignty of a nation.

Legal immigrants are really the only people who deserve the title of immigrant. They have earned the name because they entered America respecting the laws of America as their first act.

Many of these same people go through a grueling process to gain their citizenship as an American. A process that is costly in many respects.

These honorable and courageous people are being ignored in the current debate, much to our detriment. They are also adversely affected by invading illegal aliens, and their voices should be heard.

Those immigrants who come to America legally by visa, green card or become citizens are in the same pool of workers as any other American. Thus they suffer the same fate of seeing their wages undercut by the cheaper labor of illegals.

Legal immigrants also suffer just like other Americans with the drain on social and governmental resources caused by illegal aliens. The legal immigrant suffers as well from the increase in crime that often accompanies large numbers of illegal aliens in many areas.

Favoring Illegal Aliens Profoundly Insults Immigrants

ImmigrationThere is a very insulting message sent by the Left to immigrants with their favor of illegal aliens in America. It is the message that their patience, perseverance and hard work were the efforts of fools.

In an excellent piece by Don Feder, he writes,

My wife’s father was born and raised in Barbados. He immigrated to the United States when he was 17-years-old. Although it would have been easy for him to enter the country illegally, he chose to enter legally and stood in line for hours to be processed through Ellis Island.

He was proud to be a legal immigrant his entire life, until his death in 1985. He worked for the United States Post Office in New York City and in Arizona. He also served as an officer in the New York City Police Auxiliary.

Living in Arizona he was very familiar with the influx of illegal aliens and often spoke out against them. He believed that every person wishing to enter the United States do so legally, as he and so many others did.

The hubris of Leftism declares this immigrant a chump for following the law. By leftist thinking, illegal aliens are far more valuable than American citizens, especially those who immigrated legally.

After all, immigrants who become citizens are on record with an oath of loyalty to the United States and its Constitution. Loyal American citizens are always a source of irritation to the Marxist Left and their minions.

Immigration
Immigrants become citizens in Naturalization Ceremony at Grand Canyon National Park

The fact that a former resident of another country would renounce his homeland to become an American is even worse for the Left. That person willingly embraces what they reject; that America is a great country and patriotism is a worthy ideal.

Moreover, illegal aliens are easy to attract and recruit for the Left. They are praised by the Leftmedia and given a plethora of handouts thanks to our Left-leaning politicians.

This serves to increase a population the Left will push hard to turn into a legal voting block. Should that fail, they always have their race card to pull which facilitates not requiring ID to vote and makes voter fraud their art form.

The Border Wall Can Save Immigration

The current situation at the southern border is untenable. Dishonest politicians in collaboration with the lying Leftmedia exacerbate the problem of an illegal alien invasion.

On his November 28, 2018 radio program, Buck Sexton superbly highlighted these lies of the MSM concerning this recent “caravan” of illegals,

Number 1: “It’s mostly women and children.”
Number 2: “It’s mostly valid asylum seekers.”
Number 3: “No criminals (in the caravan)”
Number 4: “No external organizers”
Number 5: “The troop deployment is not helpful”
Number 6: “There is no threat to U.S. personnel posed by this caravan”

Border patrol agents on the scene at the border stated the following revealing the truth and countering these lies.

President Trump made solving this problem the keystone of his campaign in 2016. The promise to “build the wall,” was repeated often during the campaign as the biggest solution.

It is the one major promise which has yet to be fulfilled. In fact, there is no timeline or substantial funding for a wall at present.

This is surprising considering that both the House and Senate have been held by Republicans for the past two years. It is to the shame of many RINO “never Trumpers” that we do not have the needed security of a border wall.

Without such a physical barrier, there is no way to control the southern border onslaught America is under today. If America is under such assault, immigrants are as well.

Israel and San Diego Show Walls Work

ImmigrationThe question of a border wall’s effectiveness has already been answered. Yes, a border wall does work, both in other nations and in America.

American ally Israel and the city of San Diego have both shown positive results by using physical barriers at their borders.

In a 2017 statement by Senator Ron Johnson, R-Wis, he said concerning Israel,

Johnson, who chairs the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, released a report titled “Securing Israel: Lessons learned from a nation under constant threat of attack.” The report came after a trip Johnson made to Israel where he met the Israeli prime minister and other security officials. The report notes that the number of people illegally crossing the Israel-Egypt border was more than 16,000 in 2011 and less than 20 in 2016, a 99 percent decrease.

San Diego used to be the primary entry point for illegal aliens in the 1980s and 90s. Almost half of all border apprehensions in the United States in 1991 were in the San Diego area.

“Before this primary fence was built, migrants were coming north with no fencing, no barrier to stop them,” [San Diego Border Agent Tekae] Michael said, noting that before they began constructing the initial barrier in 1991, people were “driving basically straight on through the border.”

“So this primary fence was built to stop those huge loads of people and narcotics,” she said. These days, it’s relatively quiet. Michael notes that on this tour of the border wall, it’s unlikely we’ll encounter many people trying to cross illegally—something that would have been a common sight in the 1980s and ’90s.

ImmigrationPresident Trump was right to emphasize building the border wall during the campaign. His efforts to build the wall in the first half of his first term have been frustrated by his foes both Democrat and Republican.

The president still believes this must be done soon, and he is correct. The wall is necessary for American security despite the whining from the Left.

If the Left really cared about immigrants or immigration, they would support building the border wall. Instead, they chant at their violent protests,

No Trump, No Wall, No USA at all!

If the Left cared about immigrants, they would not support sanctuary cities that harbor illegal aliens who have committed serious crimes including rape and murder. Instead, left-leaning federal judges declare that President Trump cannot withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities.

The truth is that Leftists despise immigrants for getting in their path to an imagined Socialist “utopia.” They would rather open the border to a flood of illegals and help destroy the greatest free nation the world has yet known.

Remember me, O LORD, when you show favor to your people; help me when you save them, that I may look upon the prosperity of your chosen ones, that I may rejoice in the gladness of your nation, that I may glory with your inheritance. Psalm 106:4-5 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Travis Wise’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Matt Harriger’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Elvert Barnes’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Grand Canyon National Park’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Doryce S’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of North Charleston’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally publshed in TIL Journal

Trump Confounds the Left and They Just Don’t Get It [Video]

Trump vs. Antifa

In the first half of President Trump’s first term, political and cultural turmoil has seemed the norm. The consensus of opinion is that America is a ‘divided country.’ One can read that phrase in every news outlet from Left to Right these days.

However, far fewer would agree about the reason for the hostilities. The conservative would say the Left’s juvenile and violent behavior is the reason.

The Left would blame, surprise, (sarc) President Trump. In a manner, both of them are correct.

Blame could be assigned to the president because he has chosen to resist the mantra of the Left. He doesn’t fall into line as Republican Presidents have before.

In that manner, Trump is guilty of confounding the Left and motivating them to stir division and hatred, all the while blaming him for their actions.

Trump Confounds the Left

Inset.image.1.11.9.2018

President Donald John Trump truly confounds the Leftist Political establishment. That’s because he is unlike any politician they have yet dealt with, in three particular ways.

 

 

  1. Trump doesn’t need the job. He can afford to brush aside Leftist critics because he can be independent.
  2. Trump isn’t docile. Unlike previous presidents, he will hit back when he feels criticism is unwarranted.
  3. Trump taps into the people directly. He is masterful at circumventing the Leftmedia through social media and the internet.

These factors combined with the President’s boundless drive and the dedication of his base make him an enigma to leftists. An enigma they are not equipped to solve.

The Left is sent into apoplectic shock when trying to deal with Trump. They have thrown all the vitriol they can at this president to no apparent avail.

The Leftmedia, in particular, are extreme in their hatred for everything about President Trump. They are so absolutely sure that they are in the right that ordinary rules of decorum should not apply to them.

Here is a recent example from CNN’s Jim Acosta. He thinks he is so important that he can ignore rules everyone else has to obey.

This is but the latest of Acosta’s grandstanding and making the story about him. He was justly rewarded for his vanity and bullying by having his White House press credentials revoked.

The Left Will Never Understand

Inset.image.2.11.9.2018The idealogical Left will never understand Trump and his supporters. They are not emotionally equipped to do so.

The Left cannot tolerate discent because they believe they are the educated elite among us. Therefore, they think they are more enlightened than the rest of us and we should listen to them.

This attitude results in a narcissitic view of life. Scratch a true leftist and a grandiose self-importance lies beneath.

This has been evident to anyone who has tracked the speeches of former President Obama both in and out of office. He exemplifies the narcissism of the political Left.

In a mesmerizing video, Grabien highlights all the times Obama referenced himself in his speech at the Democratic National Convention Wednesday. The total tally: a stunning 119 times. …those 119 self-references surpass the 76 times he referenced himself in his 33-minute gun control speech on Jan 5, 2016, the 28 times he brought himself up in a 12-minute speech following a mass shooting Oct 1, 2015, and just barely edges the incredible 118 times he talked about ol’ Barry in a 33-minute speech in India on Jan. 27, 2015.

In fact, Obama used the first-person singular 199 times in a speech on the economy in Austin, TX. The 2014 remarks were 5,500 words long and,

In President Obama’s speech, he used a first person singular, on average, every 12 seconds.

The most recent exhibition of the former president’s sense of self-importance came during the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections. He decided to continue an unprecedented series of public critiques of the current holder of the presidency.

Bill Whittle gives an excellent analysis of this in a video recorded on 11/5/2018, the day before the election.

Leftist Self-Importance Leads to Fascism

Inset.image.3.11.9.2018One of the latest screeds from the Left is that President Trump is constantly ‘attacking’ the media and the First Amendment. They don’t like that he has called them “fake news,” and “the enemy of the people.”

While name-calling may not be nice, it can hardly be called an attack on freedom of the press. The “fake news” people haven’t been ordered by Trump to stop airing or printing stories, no matter how false.

CNN and their allies may call the yanking of Acosta’s credentials an attack on a free press. In reality it was preventing a showboat from monopolizing the microphone so that others in the press could exercise their rights.

Conversely, the Left has engaged in acts to supress press freedom. Back in 2013, Obama’s Department of Justice illegally spied on reporters, seized records from reporters, and even invaded the home of a journalist.

a federal SWAT raid on a reporter’s home, which resulted in the seizure of her private notes and the likely unmasking of whistleblowers within government. Following revelations about lawless spying on reporters and even charges against a journalist of being a “conspirator” by the Justice Department, the explosive story about the raid unveiled last week is causing a fresh wave of outrage — and deep concern.

The “wave of outrage” and “concern” was short-lived in the Leftmedia of that time. The story was gently pushed aside after a short period of obligatory reporting.

Inset.image.4.11.9.2018Obama was never called a “fascist” after engaging in this clearly fascistic behavior. Trump is called a fascist non-stop by every left-wing journalist, politician, and activist.

Since Trump became president, real fascism has become a common tactic of the Left. One of the leading organizations participating in this is the misnamed ‘Antifa,’ short for ‘anti-fascists.’

The cowardly thugs of Antifa are now infamous for their Gestapo-like tactics at their “protests.” People are routinely bullied, and beaten, and harassed if they express any doubt or defiance of the Left’s storm troopers known as Antifa.

One of Antifa’s satellite organizations known as “Smash Racism DC” recently protested outside in a mob outside the home of FOX News personality Tucker Carlson. He was preparing for his show but his wife was there alone fearing the screeching fascists who almost broke down Carlson’s door.

Shortly before Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson was set to begin Wednesday’s edition of his show, a mob of Antifa protestors descended on his Washington, D.C. area home to threaten him and his family with violence.

Resisting the Left’s “Resistance”

A symbolic title the radical Left has given itself is the “resistance.” This is another misnomer for these miscreants based on their phony labeling of Trump and his supporters as Nazi’s.

They have borrowed the term from the French “Resistance” against Nazi occupation in WWII. The Left uses such a term as they use most words, to bolster their own self-righteous actions.

Inset.image.5.11.9.2018Why do they continue in this hateful direction? It is because they simply cannot admit their own error.

They remind me of a line from the mini-series Nuremberg, spoken by the character of Hermann Goering to a group of fellow prisoners. One former Nazi general blurts out that Hitler should not have committed suicide.

He states that, instead, Hitler should be facing the judgment alongside them. Goering explodes opposing that view because it would mean something intolerable.

It would mean they would be giving the world license to denounce Hitler and Nazism wholesale. It would mean they would have to say, “We were wrong,” and that cannot be abided.

The Left has the same mindset as the brainwashed minions of Hitler. They would rather do or say anything rather than admit, “we were wrong.”

There are two tactics I suggest briefly to aid in resisting the ‘resistance’ movement. First off, engage in patience with prayer, followed by persistence with purpose.

Patience and prayer were presented in more detail in my last piece. Persistence with a purpose must be framed in terms of what the purpose is.

The purpose of resisting the unholy leftist ‘resistance’ is to advance toward a more free republic in a righteous manner. This requires a fully rational, reasonable and peaceful response to political and personal attacks.

It also requires a level of self-knowledge and humility which will admit that help from the LORD is necessary to succeed. Invite God to become the decision-guide for our lives and for a righteous response to the malevolent Left.

These are the best places to start as individuals and to continue with as like-minded groups. Pray, plan, and persist with patience and God’s purpose, the best purpose will prevail.

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the LORD, and turn away from evil. Proverbs 3:5-7 [ESV]

D.T.  Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001.

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Fibonacci Blue’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Veronique Debord-Lazaro’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Young Suk Yun’s Flickr page, Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Matthias Berg’s Flickr page, Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Stuart Gillespe’s Flickr page, Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of Ana Gaston’s Flickr page, Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

First published in TIL Journal

The Distinction of Duty

Duty

Number three in a Sunday series on virtue

The oath of the Boy Scouts of America reads,

On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.

This quote is probably the best application in words of what the virtue of duty requires of anyone, even if they aren’t a boy scout. Duty is defined in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary in many ways as the word can even mean a form of import tax.

However, as it applies to individual action, Merriam-Webster defines duty concisely as,

…a moral or legal obligation

In other words, it is conduct that one does out of a sense of responsibility and commitment to what one believes is right and moral. The Boy Scout oath is a good framework for examining dutiful action.

Duty to God

Worship and respectThe ultimate duty to recognize is the duty to God. It is first in both order and importance.

Today it is also the least recognized duty among the populace. One metric that is relevant here is church attendance in the nation.

The Barna research group reveals that the vast majority of Americans identify as Christian. Similar numbers also state that their faith is important or very important in their lives.

However, as the saying goes, ‘actions speak louder than words.’ The percentage drops precipitously when the numbers turn to those who actually attend church on a fairly regular basis.

When a self-identified Christian attends a religious service at least once a month and says their faith is very important in their life, Barna considers that person a “practicing Christian.” After applying this triangulation of affiliation, self-identification and practice, the numbers drop to around one in three U.S. adults (31%) who fall under this classification. Barna researchers argue this represents a more accurate picture of Christian faith in America, one that reflects the reality of a secularizing nation.

Granted, this is somewhat of a subjective measurement. In modern practice, attending a ‘religious service’ can mean doing so with a group in an online setting.

Church empty

 

 

The picture is even bleaker when European nations are considered.

The Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary predicts that five years from now, the number of Christians in Western Europe will have fallen by almost 23 percent since 1970. And actual attendance is abysmal, with less than 2 percent of the population darkening the door of a church on a regular basis in Britain, France, or Germany.

These figures should not be taken as encompassing all that is rightly considered duty and devotion to God. However, they are disturbing trends which should serve as a warning to America and the world.

Duty to Country

A duty to one’s country includes a plethora of other duties which support this obligation. For example, it might include a general duty to obey the laws, or pay your taxes, or to vote.

For those Christians who embrace their duty to God, those general duties to God are commanded in the New Testament. Romans chapter 13 is one famous passage attesting to that,

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval Romans 13:1-3 [ESV]

Beyond that, duty to country also includes items such as the urging of Scripture to pray for our leadership.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 1 Timothy 2:1-3 [ESV]

patriotismDuty to a country is most often symbolized by the epithet of patriotism and recognized most often by military service. Yet, the idea of a “peaceful and quiet life” prevailing in a national sense requires the critical duty to provide for loved ones and family as well.

The reason providing for the family and loved ones is so important is simple. Unless the family unit can prosper in any nation, the nation itself will fall into tyranny and ruin.

Duty to Others

The next important duty is our duty as individuals to be of help to others as much as we can. This duty can be easily misunderstood as simply giving charity to those in need.

However, though charity is important, it is only one aspect of helping those around us. It includes other factors such as helping our employer by performing our tasks to the best of our ability.

The most profound manifestation of duty to others is to aid and advocate for those whom the Bible calls, ‘the least of these,’ among us. This is fleshed out by Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 25:31-46.

Inset.image.4.10.28.2018In the passage, Jesus states some specific actions which characterize duties to those not as fortunate as we may be. He says these acts include feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, visiting the sick and those in prison, and clothing the naked.

What is often misunderstood is that duty to others rests upon the individual and not on the government. It is not fulfilling one’s duty to demand that the state care for the needy.

That attitude prevails in socialistic society and it can seem to be a good thing. However, it represents placing personal responsibility on others to help others, which is simply a shirking of duty.

Duty to Oneself

The final duty is the duty to oneself. This is the most misidentified duty of all in modern culture.

The order and conception of this duty is essentially correct in the Boy Scout oath. It says one should strive to be fit and healthy in body, mind, and morals.

PrideYet, in modern society, the idea of caring for or improving yourself have been inflated to the position of the first of all ‘duties.’ I have heard and read many philosophical statements and much religious preaching which promote this concept.

It is a concept at odds with God’s Word. And eventually, it leads to destructive ego-mania tearing themselves and others apart.

The movement toward exalted “self-esteem,” and “self-image” today lends itself toward arrogance in its adherents. A dangerous arrogance that makes self an idol worshiped by a fool.

The Scouts have it right because they are in agreement with the teachings of Scripture. Jesus put it this way,

And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” Mark 9:35 [ESV]

Jesus is teaching about humility here. Humility is what makes room for grace in life.

But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” James 4:6 [ESV]

Christ as servantDuty to oneself does not mean inflating your self-esteem like an ego balloon. To paraphrase the late Dr. D.James Kennedy, “God doesn’t want to give you self-esteem, He wants to give you Christ-esteem.

Christ’s example for us to follow is to serve others, to think of them before ourselves. It is not to think less of ourselves, it is rather to think of ourselves less and others more.

That is the essence of the virtue of duty. To serve God, Country, Others, and Self as best we can.

Next week we will examine the virtue of patience.

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Renee Prisble’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Basie Martins’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Jules & Jenny’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Kevin’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Tommy Truong79’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of Ugg Boy, Ugg Girl’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 6 courtesy of J. Stephen Conn’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text.

First published at TIL Journal 

The Left’s War on Science Part 4: Erroneous Economics [Video]

Economics

The first three parts of this series dealt with the leftist distortions of climate change, abortion, and transgenderismPart four examines the Left’s erroneous ideas concerning economics.

Economics is not a ‘hard’ science in the same way as physics or mathematics.  However, economics directly affects ordinary people more than most ‘hard’ sciences.

That is seen whether one is discussing a wealthy nation, such as the United States, or an impoverished country in the third world. The everyday person’s politics are often confined by necessity to economics.

Thus economics is extremely important to the lives of each of us and our loved ones. It is to everyone’s advantage to understand the essential views of economics from both the Left and the Right.

Leftist Economics Exemplify Marxism

Economic theory has many labels. Capitalism, free enterprise, and market economics are some names of the general system favored by conservatives on the Right. Marxism, Communism, Socialism are the Left’s idea of good economics.

CommunismThe basis of leftist economics is found in the economic and political views of Karl Marx. Modern Socialism and Communism trace their roots to his work as a political and intellectual revolutionary in 19th Century Europe.

In 1847, Marx and his compatriot Fredrick Engels wrote the iconic work which birthed  Communism, “The Communist Manifesto.” In short, this formed the marching orders of Communism.

The more important book came much later. The first volume of “Das Kapital” was written by Marx in 1867 containing the philosophy of Communist thought.

It was there that the economic theory of Communism came to full flower. As Marx grew older he focused his thought on Capitalism and what he perceived as its inherent evils.

Marx believed that a Capitalist system was comprised of a class of poor workers who were being exploited by the elite rich. The solution was a state-mandated and enforced “Robin Hood” approach.

That is, the state would take from the rich and give to the poor in order to eliminate both classes and make society economically equal. In the famous words of Marx,

“From each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”

It Looks Great ‘on Paper’

Image 5 9.9.2018 articleAs a hypothesis, Communism looks great…’on paper.’ The problem which persists to the present is the refusal of acolytes to admit that, in practice, Communism has failed every time it has been tried.

The most recent victim to the terrible results of Communism in practice is the beleaguered nation of Venezuela. Though it is not ‘officially’ under a Communist ‘party,’ the government is unabashedly Socialist, which is a gentle way of saying they are Communist.

Socialists are unable to see that it is the philosophy itself which is unworkable. The most recent example of such is being demonstrated in the devastated nation of Venezuela. The annual inflation rate recorded last month in that country was an astounding 46,305%!

Whether under the late Hugo Chavez or his successor, Nicolas Maduro, the destructive pattern continues. What was once the wealthiest nation in South America is now impoverished and in economic freefall.

Venezuelans are fleeing the nation because of shortages of, well, everything! From groceries to medicines, is almost completely gone.

This has forced many who haven’t yet left to turn to the black market for simple food to eat. That is if they have any money left to purchase it.

For the many unfortunates who cannot afford the ridiculously inflated prices, there is a ghastly alternative.

Aside from chubby dictator Nicolas Maduro and his fellow elites, the Venezuelan people are running out of food and medical supplies. In their starving desperation, citizens have resorted to breaking into zoos to slaughter and eat the also malnourished animals; buffalo, pigs and horses are top choices on the menu.

The destructiveness of the Marxist economic/political ideal goes far beyond even a starving populace. The errors inherent in its theory have produced a death toll far beyond anything else in world history.

The Grisly Death-toll of Leftist Economics

Socialism and deathLeftist economics became center-stage as the Communist revolution in Russia exploded in 1917. Since that time, under various names, Socialism of one form or another has killed more people than any other event, natural or man-made, in history.

Understand that Socialism has various pedigrees, but the same evil end. The Nazi party in Germany was officially known as the “National Socialist German Workers Party.”

Together with Germany’s National Socialism, the Communist Socialists such as the old USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) and Communist China have racked up a body count of over 150 million people!

The obvious question this brings to mind is why. Why has Leftist economic practice failed so miserably, and caused such misery?

My layman’s analysis pins down two large reasons for this. One is that governments are not producers of wealth. When the state controls the economy, as in Socialism, it can only control what wealth is already present.

The goal of Leftist economics is to forcibly redistribute wealth in order to eliminate the economic differences between classes in society. In short, to ‘level the playing field,’ economically.

This means that those who potentially could produce wealth as innovators or business owners have no incentive to do so. After all, if they cannot reap rewards for their efforts, why expend the time, energy and money.

Greed

Secondly, Leftism fails because it doesn’t account for the baseness of human nature. It requires a belief that people are basically good; a fatal fallacy refuted by God’s Word and history.

…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23 [ESV]

Marxist-type systems require a blind faith that the sinful nature will not sabotage the goal of redistribution. In other words, it requires people in high authority to be trusted with doling out all of everyone else’s money.

One of the best presentations about this phenomenon was given many years ago by noted economist Milton Friedman. In this short video excerpt of an interview with former TV host Phil Donohue, he presents a clear case against Socialism and for Capitalism.

The Creep of Leftist Economics in Modern America

Leftism has been on a steady creep into American society and politics for many decades. The primary venue where this asserts itself economically is in the progressive income tax system of the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS.

Noted economist Walter Williams characterizes the income tax in personal terms of morality.

Surely if a private person took money from one person and gave it to another, we’d deem it theft and, as such, immoral. Does the same act become moral when Congress takes people’s money to give to farmers, airline companies or an impoverished family? No, it’s still theft, but with an important difference: It’s legal, and participants aren’t jailed.

ObamacareIn more recent times, the calamity of Obamacare has been an example of how the state is at best incompetent as well as immoral when trying a socialistic approach to health care.

America herself received a prime example of a Socialist incompetence during the rollout of Obamacare beginning in 2011. The Federal government spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars trying and failing to build the healthcare website. Many pointed out at the time that there were a lot of people who could have done it better for a lot less.

Obamacare came under much-deserved criticism both before and after it was implemented. In part, because of that, it has been repackaged under a new label, “Medicare for all.”

This is but one of many forces pushing the free-enterprise Capitalism element out of the economy. However, it may be the most costly of all and risks virtual bankruptcy of the nation.

As the president rightly notes, this is another attempt at a government takeover of health care which would be disastrous. This must be opposed vigorously both at the ballot box and in society.

The only system which honors individual work is a free enterprise Capitalist system. The freedom of the individual is the basis on which God approaches humanity as well.

Unless the person chooses to follow the LORD, He will not force them to do so. Nor does He endorse human beings forcing their will upon others except where a violation of another’s rights is involved.

It is unwise to adopt a system in contradiction to His will. I pray we soon realize that the Left’s economics is very unwise and destructive.

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Top Image courtesy of Petras Gagilas’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Kevin Steinhardt’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Garry Knight’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of joshua_putnam’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of See-ming Lee’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of Jay Oyakawa’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published at TIL Journal

 

Elevating Emotion and Marching Toward Slavery in America [Video]

Scales of justice should be balanced with evidence

The entire world has been witness to a disgraceful display during the hearings concerning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The outrageous protests during the actual hearings contributed to a circus of Leftist anger cloaked in ridiculous costumes.

By this juncture of the Trump presidency, most observers have grown used to such clownish behavior. The fact that it can and does escalate to violence from the Left is also growing disturbingly common.

However, the depths of disgrace to which the Left can sink was not yet plumbed. That was revealed after the hearings were over and a vote for Kavanaugh was likely.

False and salacious accusations of sexual assault were then sprung by a Democratic Senator and a delay in the vote was demanded. It was the beginning of elevating emotion over reason and evidence to destroy a good man and a nation in the process.

Comparing Left and Right

I commented on this fiasco of a process in response to one of my favorite bloggers’ posts about the Kavanaugh hearings. In the comment, I noted that this kind of thing was never the case when a Democratic nominee for SCOTUS is up for approval.

 

Protest against Kavanaugh
Protestors claiming Kavanaugh is a rapist

 

However, one person took strong objection to that observation. She brought up the case of Merrick Garland from the Obama era saying that the delay and refusal to hold hearings was comparable to this salacious circus with Kavanaugh.

 

There is no moral equivalency here. The immoral behavior is ensconced firmly on the Democratic left, as they have demonstrated aptly since the 2016 election.

Garland wasn’t subjected to sensationalized examination of his high school yearbook. There was never an accusation of sexual assault or gang rape leveled at him.

Garland didn’t have threats leveled at his family. He wasn’t cursed at and mocked by protesters, some of whom were violent.

In short, Merrick Garland was never the target of personal character assassination by the Republicans. Nor would that have happened were hearings conducted for Garland’s nomination.

Credibility Is Not by Emotion Alone

The delay was to accommodate the accuser who at first insisted upon anonymity but then agreed to testify and tell her side of this “new” story. Actually, not so new, as the Senator actually had the written accusations in hand last July, two months prior to the hearings.

 

Senator FeinsteinIn the first place, this casts doubt on the sincerity of Senator Diane Feinstein of California. It seems apparent she wasn’t interested in even bringing this forward at all unless it needed to be used to stop Kavanaugh from becoming confirmed.

It is also evident that Feinstein had virtually no concern for the welfare of the accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. If she did, I wouldn’t know her name and neither would anyone else.

Moreover, this terrible farce will not serve to help real victims of sexual crimes. Instead, it will make it harder for accounts to be believed even if the stories are credible. So much for the Democrats helping women.

The media coverage almost unanimously characterized the Senate testimony of both the accuser and accused as “credible.” That is incorrect.

According to Dictionary.com, a credible statement is  “capable of being believed; believable.” What, then, determines whether or not a statement is believable?

Emotion alone cannot determine believability. Emotion can influence believability, but it cannot determine what a credible statement is.

Ms. Ford may have produced compelling testimony, but a lack of evidence voids its credibility. She could not recall the time or day or month the assault happened. She could only narrow it down to the summer of 1982, she thinks.

She wasn’t sure where the attack happened, just that it happened at a party at a house she can’t locate for anyone. She not sure who else was there, except perhaps one friend of Kavanaugh’s.

Before her testimony, Ms. Ford had never said she was absolutely sure she had been groped by Kavanaugh. During her testimony, she claimed a renewed surety that it was Kavanaugh.

Evidence Is Essential for Credibility

Justice with evidenceKavanaugh’s denial is not simply emotional, it is supported by real substance. His testimony presented evidence to bolster believability.

He produced his meticulously kept daily calendar for the summer of 1982, during high school. He also has sworn statements from his acquaintances to both his character and his activities in high school.

This is evidence which can be easily verified. Credibility, in this case, belongs to Kavanaugh and not Ms. Ford.

Unfortunately, the Senate Democrats have already accomplished one of their primary goals. Kavanaugh was to be seated after confirmation this past Monday but didn’t happen.

The new goal is to delay until the midterm elections. The legitimizing of feeling over fact here has made that goal within reach, and it could be the beginning of rampant injustice.

If emotion is given the power to make any accusation credible then the evidence is useless. If evidence becomes useless to determine guilt or innocence, anyone the powerful dislike can be accused and punished without any evidence.

All that is required is a finger pointed angrily toward an enemy with the words, “I accuse you of …” You pick the crime. It may begin with sexual violations, but it won’t stop there.

That describes the system of justice employed by the worst despotic regimes in history. Emotion overruling evidence has sent people to the Soviet Gulag and the Nazi concentration camps.

When emotion rules the day, a mere accusation is enough to condemn innocent people. In fact, we don’t have to look at history in other lands to see the process in operation.

Truth Is Not Male or Female

TruthThe new mantra since the #MeToo movement came to fruition is ‘I believe women.’ It means that women should automatically be believed when making allegations of sexual assault.

Why is this the case? Because society has been assured that no woman would lie about such a terrible crime against their person.

However, most people know this is not reality. After all, there are famous cases of women making false accusations of sexual crimes in America, and men suffering unjustly as a consequence.

Take, for example, the infamous case of false rape allegations against the Duke Men’s Lacrosse team in 2006. This video from 2007 gives an accurate account of what really happened.

Both the media and the Duke professors quickly jumped to the accuser’s side and aided and abetted the public destruction of innocent men.

All of the accused players are involved with the Innocence Project, which uses DNA evidence to overturn wrongful convictions. Said Reade Seligmann, upon his exoneration:
“This entire experience has opened my eyes to a tragic world of injustice I never knew existed. If police officers and a district attorney can systematically railroad us with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, I can’t imagine what they’d do to people who do not have the resources to defend themselves.”

Lest we forget another case closer in time, there are the false rape allegations at the University of Virginia in 2014. What began as a Rolling Stone article about a gang rape on campus ended up with a lawsuit against the magazine by the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.

The truth is that women lie and men lie about all kinds of things, including sexual assault. That is the reason facts, evidence, witnesses, and corroboration are required or injustice will pave the path to slavery.

Elevating Emotion Over Evidence is Extremely Dangerous

False idea of guiltDisregarding evidence in favor of emotional testimony is an extremely dangerous practice. The setting doesn’t have to be in a courtroom to make it so hazardous.

The court of public opinion is perhaps worse than a legal venue. That is because the public arena has far fewer rules than a court of law.

The only regulation in a free and open society which prevents an injustice is self-regulation. Unless one exercises restraint, laws are just words on paper.

If emotion overwhelms self-restraint, any law can and will be broken. Moreover, anyone can be severely hurt and not just physically.

The destruction of a person’s reputation and livelihood can be even more damaging than physical attacks. As someone once asked, “Where do you go to get your reputation back?”

The potential of this public attitude is truly a cause for great alarm. If the people become convinced that the accused is not ‘innocent until proven guilty’ it will be because evidence has been jettisoned by emotion.

When that happens, individuals in power that oppose the Socialist Left will be targeted and accused of some egregious behavior in order to be rid of them. After that is successful a few times, groups of adversaries will also have accusations aimed at them.

Some of the targeted groups will have formerly favored the Left’s agenda of Socialism. However, they will be taken down also because of their lack of fervor for eliminating the opposition.

Eventually, the majority will adjust to a society of J’accuse. They will be properly primed to grant authority to someone who will remake America into a third-world nation.

Accusing fingerAnyone who objects will have an accusatory finger pointed at them, and their family and friends. They will all be eliminated one way or another.

The fear of this will pervade the culture. The nation will be reduced to two groups. Those who go along with the government masters, and those who refuse.

Those who refuse will also consist of two groups. Those who run and hide or those who are punished.

Then, a nation that was once the wonder of the world and the flagship of freedom will fall. The Left’s march toward slavery will be complete.

That is why the power of the emotional accusation is so dangerous and goes far beyond the Kavanaugh hearings fiasco. Because if the Left can triumph here, they can and will attempt greater action to advance their evil.

Deu_19:15  A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. Deuteronomy 19:15 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles 2001

Top image courtesy of DonkeyHotey’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Mobilus in Mobili’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Jacob Freeze’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of SalFalko’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of grace mcdunnough’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of Fibonacci Blue’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 6 courtesy of Pablo Pecora’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TILJournal online

 

LGBT protest

The Left’s War on Science, Part 3: The Transgender Tragedy [Video]

 

LGBT protest

There has been a meteoric rise in the acceptance of transgenderism as a human right. It has garnered enough support from the Left that to question transgenderism is to be ‘transphobic’ and disqualified from the discussion.

The tragic fact is transgenderism is worse than unscientific. It produces substantial harm to individuals and the general public. The Left has adopted this to further a cultural narrative, regardless of the tragic consequences.

A Man Becomes a Woman and a Dragon

There is actually a man who ‘transitioned’ to appear female and went on to ‘transition’ to appear as if he were a dragon. This man’s name is Eva Tiamat.

He is featured in an article from the left-wing publication, “Vice.” The author also has ‘transitioned’ from male to the appearance of a female.

The author spent a day with the dragon lady and came away impressed. Eva revealed that he had been abandoned and brutalized as a child and young adult.

Eva had also fathered a child and recently contracted HIV. He decided to attempt becoming a ‘she,’ but found that didn’t ease his trauma.

So, he chose to attempt to become other than human.

Tiamat has undergone extreme body modification to become a dragon. Her ears and nostrils have been removed, her eyes are stained green, and she is covered in implanted horns and tattooed scales. Tiamat no longer looks human.

I have seen a photo of Eva Tiamat and there is one thing the interviewer got right, he no longer looks human. Worse, this is becoming mainstream and has been elevated to the status of legally protected human rights.

Transgender ‘Rights’ Are Becoming Legal Rights

The ‘transgender rights movement’ has gained widespread acceptance in popular culture. In fact, it is now routinely claimed that transgenderism is a basic human right.

Transgenderism rocketed to social popularity with the ‘transition’ of Bruce Jenner from a male to appearing as the ‘female’ Caitlyn Jenner. He appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair magazine’s, July 2015, issue.

Caitlyn Jenner
Jenner accepts ESPY award

He was also celebrated on ESPN’s Espy Awards later in 2015. Since then he has greatly enhanced the cultural status of the transgender movement.

Another key to cultural acceptance has been the rapid affirmation by social media on the internet. Perhaps the most infamous has been the 56 new gender categories offered by Facebook in recent years.

More alarming is the swift enshrinement of transgenderism as a legal right. This has been a trend first seen in Europe at the beginning of the 21st century.

On several occasions dating back to 1986 (Rees v UK), the European Court of Human Rights declined to get involved, but this changed in 2002 when the court held that there was a legal right to transgenderism that nation states had to recognise (Goodwin v UK).

Since then, nations in Europe, South America and recently Canada have joined the legalization train. Full legalization of transgender ‘rights’ began in Argentina.

Argentina broke ground in 2012 with a law that is considered the gold standard for legal gender recognition: anyone over the age of 18 can choose their gender identity, undergo gender reassignment, and revise official documents without any prior judicial or medical approval, and children can do so with the consent of their legal representatives or through summary proceedings before a judge.

Pro-transgender rights laws
CT Gov signs pro-transgender rights bill

There are more than 20 nations with such laws that allow legal recognition of anyone who claims to be a transsexual, even if there has been no surgical alteration. The United States has seen this movement gain legal approval in various states, beginning with Oregon.

…the state of Oregon is now giving out ID at birth with an ‘x’ in addition to a mark for ‘boy’ or ‘girl.’ It is called a non-binary identification. In other words, biological reality can be ignored by the parents and the government.

Transgenderism Is Unscientific and Delusional

Until the year 2013, it was understood that a person who wanted to attempt changing from one sex to another was mentally ill.

The Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, is the “bible” for psychiatric diagnosis. In the pre-2013 DSM-IV, anyone “identifying” as other than their biological gender had Gender Identity Disorder. As a disorder, it was a mental illness.

The current designation in the newest DSM classifies this sexual identity crisis as Gender Dysphoria. Thus is insanity normalized to start a new human rights movement.

Transgender protestAs a disorder, it was diagnosed that those asserting they were ‘trapped in the wrong sex’ were ill. Why? Because it meant denying a basic reality of existence.

Biology tells us that sexual identity is determined at the start of gestation in the womb. We are simply male or female at the genetic level, and that doesn’t change.

DNA doesn’t lie and isn’t malleable. You are what you are and it is delusional to believe otherwise.

Of course, we didn’t need science to tell us who was who a thousand years before science was formalized. We haven’t required genetics to determine what sex our child is since humanity came to be.

Yet today it is risky to enlighten transgender proponents about reality. As those who have publically dared to do so can attest, it quickly invites the wrath of the Left.

However, it is far riskier not to assert reality for that submits substance to the whim of emotion and feeling. That factor makes transgenderism very dangerous to a free society.

Transgenderism Is Dangerous to Free Society

Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson

One of the nations named above, Canada, has begun to experience significant resistance to its law favoring transgenderism. It requires referring to a transgendered person by the gender pronoun of their choice.

This resistance has come primarily from one man, Jordan Peterson. He resists this law because it requires him to use “gender-neutral” pronouns when referring to transgendered people.

Dr. Peterson is a clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, Ontario. He is a bestselling author and has become an internet sensation accumulating 1.4 million subscribers to his YouTube channel.

Peterson’s argument centers on the issue of free speech. He believes the Canadian legislation is a case of government suppressing speech it doesn’t agree with.

Canada’s new gender-neutral language requirement is spreading to their southern neighbor, the United States. Peterson has a warning for America concerning this.

If you are wondering, reasonably, why any of this might be relevant to Americans, you might note that legislation very similar to Bill C-16 has already been passed in New York City. Authorities there now fine citizens up to $250,000 for the novel crime of “mis-gendering” — referring to people by any words other than their pronouns of choice (including newly constructed words such as zie/hir, ey/em/eir and co).

The ‘trans’ agenda seeks to legislate liberty away, beginning with free speech. This is patently lethal to a free society.

Public schoolsIn public education, the Obama regime sought to normalize this by removing the distinction between the sexes in bathrooms and locker rooms. Some businesses, most famously Target stores, have embraced this with public bathrooms.

Incidents of pre-surgical males claiming the transgender mantle invading women’s and girls public bathrooms have occurred. Their claim is really all that is needed and we are to be certain that none of these are waiting to prey on children.

But we don’t have to envision that scenario. So-called authorities in the field are already using transgenderism to devastate little children.

Transgenderism Is Destructive to Children

The most disturbing aspect of the transgender movement is the targeting of children. This has now invaded our public education system at the level of grade school.

Grade school indoctrination is but the first step. As pre-pubescent children accept the ‘gender fluidity’ fairy tale, they become naturally curious.

The curiosity of these toddlers is encouraged toward transgender expression by the teachers and school administrators. Inevitably, as they grow a portion of those children will mimic what seems to please the adults in charge.

Transgender proponents wait for this moment and are prepared to exploit it. The next step is encouraging whatever children are curious and assuring them they are indeed transgender and should begin the process of ‘transitioning.’

Then shameless adults move the child toward ‘modifying’ their bodies to become the opposite sex. There are at least 45 clinics that specialize in transitioning pre-teen children through puberty.

Gender Identity ClinicsThe clinics function both as specialists in the physical procedure and as cells to recruit likely candidates among the children and their parents. Author Ryan T. Anderson gives a description of this horrifying truth.

Inside the clinic parents are presented with a Trans for Tots regime where one size fits all. A three–year–old that just finished toddling, but is sexually wise beyond his years will begin “social transitioning.” The child gets a new name, new gender and starts playing for a new team as he lives as the opposite sex. As the child approaches puberty… the child is given a drug cocktail for life that blocks the onset of puberty and as Anderson terms it, “traps the child in a prepubescent body.” …Then as early as the freshman year of high school the process of producing the right body begins. Puberty blockers are traded for hormone treatment. As the 18th birthday approaches — earlier for some particularly zealous surgeons — surgical reassignment is possible. Although the new euphemism for this is irreversible body vandalism is “gender affirmation surgery.”

The drugs administered to these children have not been well-studied and evaluated for probable harmful effects that will result. The side-effects of puberty blockers are almost wholly unknown, and it is worth noting that these are not drugs tested and approved by the FDA.

There Is No Turning Back for the Children

Danger for childrenBy the time the drugs are administered, it is too late to back out. Deceitful physician advocates assure the faint-hearted that these blockers are reversible.

The truth is these doctors don’t know what will happen if the child stops taking these drugs. However, that fact doesn’t even slow down the tragic process.

Nor has the process stood still. For example, to bolster the false claims of a ‘safe’ gender ‘reassignment,’ doctors in the U.S. are performing medically unnecessary double mastectomies on teen girls. Moreover, American tax dollars are paying for these actions under the rubric of scientific study.

The National Institutes of Health granted multiple millions of dollars for a very slanted and flawed study of the effects of puberty blockers by one Dr. Johanna Olson of Children’ Hospital of Los Angeles. She decided to go further in this experiment.

Olson decided to see how dysphoric girls felt about mastectomies. Referring to “chest dysphoria” and “chest reconstruction,” apparently avoiding the word “breast” because it connotes the stubborn biological reality of being female …Olson had 68 surgically diminished girls fill out her “novel” scale (which she acknowledged could be bogus) between one and five years after their surgery. Thirty-three of these girls were under 18 at the time of surgery. Two were only 13 years old, and five were only 14.

Olson claimed that almost none of these girls regretted their mastectomies. However, since they were all interviewed only five years or less afterward, long-term regret and harm were disregarded.

Moreover, a cardinal rule of scientific studies is that a control group must be part of such research. Without a control group, a study will only reveal one side of the equation and give a manipulated result.

Olson did not use a control group in the studies on puberty blockers or the effects of slicing off female breasts. This is unscientific and any results garnered from it are false and harmful and potentially destructive to all children in America and around the globe.

This Tragic Evil Can Be Combatted

Tragic tearJust when activist pseudo-science seems to have the upper hand, new research has brought additional ammunition against this tragic agenda. Researcher Lisa Littman has identified a phenomenon named “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria,” in a 2018 scientific study.

The research was concerned with a rapid increase in numbers of teens and young adults who were identifying as transgender without any history of such desires. There were even groups of people declaring trans-status together.

The conclusion? ROGD seems to occur more because of “social and peer contagion,” than some early gender confusion.

Other scientific facts can also be marshaled to the fight.

…the American Psychological Association’s Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology admits that prior to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of pre-pubertal children who were distressed by their biological sex eventually outgrew that distress.

This reveals it is far likelier a child who is gender-confused is experiencing a temporary condition. If left to natural processes of growth, the normal behavior will return.

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created them; male and female He created them.  Genesis 1:27 [NASB]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: New American Standard Bible, The Lockman Foundation, 1997

Featured and Top Image courtesy of David Jackmanson’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Disney ABC Television’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Dannel Malloy’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Tjook’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Gage Skidmore’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of ThoseGuys119’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 6 courtesy of Ted Eytan’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 7 courtesy of Patrick Denker’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 8 courtesy of Sarah Barrow’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

The Left’s War on Science, Part 2: The Abortion Deception [Video]

The Left's War on Science, Part 2: The 'Pro-Choice' Deception

I begin with an apology to my readers. I had planned to present the case against the radical environmentalism of the Left in this article. That is still coming so stay tuned.

However, the desperate attempts by Democrats to stop the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court suggested a change in the order. The vehemence of this opposition has an explanation that is part of the leftist war on science.

The Left fears that Kavanaugh will tip the court against legalized abortion. This drives the hysteria displayed by their minions and politicians.

In that hysteria, the Left pushes against the science of human reproduction and basic biology. They deny facts showing the humanity of the unborn for their devotion to ‘choice.’

The Left’s Utter Devotion to ‘Choice’

The Left is maniacally devoted to the concept of being “pro-choice” on abortion. It is the main motivating factor in the determined, if clownish and disgusting, efforts to stop the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.

5933214224_039f6c67df_mSome could dispute that observation by saying that hatred of President Donald Trump is the real energizer of the Left. After all, Trump has been a large focus of leftist hatred since his nomination as a presidential candidate.

However, it should be noted that Kavanaugh is not the first Supreme Court nominee to be so fervently opposed. Both Robert Bork and current Justice Clarence Thomas are prominent examples of leftist character assassination attempts.

The case of Bork ended with his nomination failing to be confirmed and a new popular leftist term, being “Borked” came to notoriety. Justice Thomas survived the false allegations of sexual misconduct to make it to the Court.

However, in all of these cases, a common denominator is a perceived threat to the hallowed ideal of the ‘right to choose’ abortion. The tactics may differ a bit from time to time, but that factor is consistent.

This complete and utter devotion to abortion on demand is based on a false claim. It is the claim that equality among the sexes means that women must be free of bearing children they had not planned or chosen to bear.

Thus pregnancy by the ‘right to choose,’ can be halted per the mother’s wish up to and including the delivery. Since legalization, there have been Supreme Court decisions which upheld it yet also allowed individual states to place some restrictions on abortion practices.

Despite these, there remain places where the child can be killed at nine months old if the mother wishes or consents. As long as the delivery is not fully completed, the federal law allows it, and the taxpayer is on the hook for the cost.

The False ‘Science’ of Roe v. Wade

Supreme CourtIn 1973 the Supreme Court decided the case of “Roe v. Wade” which effectively legalized abortion in all 50 states and at any time of pregnancy. This was easily the worst decision since the infamous 1857 “Dred Scott” case which enshrined a right to own slaves as property.

Dred Scott was later overturned. However, it helped fuel a bloodbath known as the Civil War costing over 600,000 lives before its work was done. Roe itself is not simply ‘bad’ law, it is fantasy law, a made-up tale with no basis in the Constitution.

It was much more a decision of idealistic commitment than it was of interpreting the Constitution. Shamefully, a hundred times more deaths have resulted from Roe than from Dred Scott and the Civil War. Worse, Roe is still in effect 45 years later.

There is a part of the decision which bears scrutiny for scientific purposes. Within the maze that is the actual text of Roe, is this statement.

We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

The portion which begs attention is the claim that those in the medical community cannot come to a consensus “at this point in the development of man’s knowledge” about the unborn as a human life.

The accuracy of that claim was suspect even in 1973. With the passing of time, more biological knowledge has made the claim obsolete.

The philosophical and theological views on abortion have been partially addressed in previous TIL Journal pieces. A more thorough treatment will follow in future articles.

The late Dr. Jerome Lejeune was a world-renowned geneticist in the late 20th century. He was the discoverer of the genetic cause of Down Syndrome.

Moreover, he was insistent that the child in the womb was a living human being from the point of conception onward. He despised the fact that some have used his discovery to urge abortion of Down Syndrome babies.

Scientifically, Human Life Begins at Conception

In the years following Roe Dr. Lejeune was called to testify before congressional committees concerning ‘pro-choice’ versus ‘pro-life’ legislation.

In one unusual instance, he was asked to aid in a 1989 divorce proceeding in Tennessee. The question put forth was whether embryos frozen for implantation later should be adjudicated as property or under the rubric of child custody.

…if I can say a word as a geneticist, I would say: An early human being inside this suspended time… cannot be the property of anybody because it’s the only one in the world to have the property of building himself. And I would say that science has a very simple conception of man; as soon as he has been conceived, a man is a man.”

The argument in favor of humanity at conception has only gained plausibility with the continued progress of medical science since 1973. The advent of imaging technology has allowed viewing of the entire human gestation process.

In this particular ultrasound video, the baby is seen moving at just over 8 weeks old

This technology has confirmed that the person in the womb is not ‘potential life,’ as pro-choicers claim, but that it is human and alive as a separate being in the womb.

However, little attention is paid to the consequences of denying this fact. Make no mistake, such denial only produces more evil consequences based on a belief that is both wrong and immoral.

The Baby at ‘War’ with the Mother

One of the consequences of the ‘pro-choice’ philosophy is that the mother should not view the baby within as her blessed offspring. Rather the child should be thought of much like a parasitical invader of the woman’s body.

The woman, it is said, is justified in viewing the baby as waging biological ‘war’ on their bodies. Their self-defense is to respond by declaring war against the invader with abortion.

In their view, any attempt to restrict the use of abortion is also viewed as an act of war. The language used by the Left clearly establishes this.

Inset Image.9.20.2018

screen capture from 2013

This is another case of denying the scientific knowledge of reproduction. Biology testifies that gestation is not an invasion of the female body by a parasite. For one thing, a parasite never feeds on its own species. The host is always a separate species.

Moreover, gestation is natural to reproduction for all mammalian species. Science does not view pregnancy as a parasitical condition in a female chimpanzee. There is no legitimate biological reason to do so for human beings either.

Yet, academic feminism does not accept the science. Here is an excerpt from one such academic found in Harvard magazine.

Eileen McDonagh, a visiting scholar at Radcliffe College’s Murray Research Center, seeks to rewrite the “feminine” self-sacrificing language of pregnancy and replace it with “masculine” terms of self-defense in an effort both to strengthen a woman’s right to abortion and to win universal government funding for the procedure. In her new book, Breaking the Abortion Deadlock (Oxford), McDonagh argues that doctors who perform abortions should be paid by taxpayers to stop unwanted fetuses from “kidnapping” women’s bodies, just as the government pays police officers to prevent rapists from invading the bodies of women.

Per this feminist scholars’ suggestion, this twisted view is carried to the point that it should be legally recognized and paid for regardless of anyone else’s views. In fact, this is actually played out via Planned Parenthood which taxpayers fund with hundreds of millions of dollars whether the taxpayer likes it or not.

Yes, the conditions of receiving that amount of funding include the promise that PP will not use those funds for abortion. But money is fungible and funds allocated for one project easily get moved to other priorities in large organizations.

The Push for Infanticide

1444740980_c58171d36d_mWhen scientific facts are denied the consequences which result can be terribly destructive. The tens of millions of aborted children and devastated mothers since Roe have shown that.

Yet the evil continues to grow and foster acceptance of the grossest immoralities. It has even begun to produce a nightmarish scenario where the killing of children after birth is advocated and sometimes carried out.

If it is true that abortion is justified because of the child in the womb’s dependency, the same logic would allow the disposal of a child out of the womb until a certain age… People like Princeton ethicist Peter Singer use this to propose a waiting period of 30 days before considering a baby a human person.
“In 1993, ethicist Peter Singer shocked many Americans by suggesting that no newborn should be considered a person until 30 days after birth and that the attending physician should kill some disabled babies on the spot.”

Be assured that Singer is not the only person who has promoted this. Moreover, he is not the only academic to push for the infanticide particularly of the disabled.

I have written previously on the subject of killing the disabled, unborn and born, and the movement in Europe to spread the heinous practice. However, the disabled infant is only a stepping stone for infanticide supporters.

The prize these medical ‘ethicists’ seek is the legalization and normalization of infanticide worldwide. Their arguments for this boil down to a couple of plainly understood reasons.

One reason employs utilitarianism to justify such killing. The same reasoning that relegates the baby in the womb to non-personhood, is applied to the infant after birth.

For example, according to influential medical publications, infants should not be regarded as human persons because they lack the qualifications to perceive life. Since the infant is not self-aware, for instance, he or she is not really a human person, and killing the born infant is acceptable.

The second reason involves economic concerns. It is extremely expensive to care for the disabled, and that cost grows as the disabled person grows. This rationale has been applied in many countries in Europe who actively seek to legalize some form of infanticide.

For whoever finds me [wisdom] finds life and obtains favor from the LORD, but he who fails to find me injures himself; all who hate me love death.” Proverbs 8:35-36 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of thecrazyfilmgirl’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Angela’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Matt Wade’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of furiousjethro’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Antonio Pavon’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published at TIL Journal