RSS

Tag Archives: abortion

Trayvon Martin and the Racial Divide

Imageby Providence Crowder

Like the rest of the country, I’ve been following the Trayvon Martin case and trying to make sense of it all.  And like everyone else, I initially made some pre-judgments of my own based on the small bit of information fed to me through the mainstream media, which has been grossly misleading in its portrayal of both Martin and Zimmerman.  Once again, the media has manipulated our emotions and painted a picture of the worst kind, intentionally meant to heighten racial tensions during this already racially hostile political season.  The implication of racism is so powerful, that the race baiters and political predators, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, are using Martin’s death for political gain.  Even the President himself—Obama—couldn’t resist the temptation to invoke race in his analysis of the Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman incident, citing that “If I had a son, HE WOULD LOOK LIKE Trayvon.” 

If only the media could have its day in court because it is responsible for continually inciting racism among both blacks and whites.  On one hand, the mainstream media continually portrays blacks as violent criminals, evoking fear and distrust of black people among white Americans.  On the other hand, the media often depicts blacks as victims of white racist police brutality, of course inciting anger, hostility, and distrust of white people and police among blacks.  We know all blacks are not violent criminals and all white police are not racist, but these stories, whether they be true or not, make for the best news and biggest television and newspaper ratings.  I say, shame on the media for its part in hindering race relations in America, and shame on us for allowing the media to play on our worst fears for profit. 

Concerning the death of Trayvon Martin, I believe that this story is tragic for all involved.  Martin’s mother and father have lost their son to violence, and Zimmerman took a human life.  The crossing paths of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin have changed many lives forever.   Because of this senseless tragedy, a community is heartbroken and people all over the country are divided on this issue.  I grieve with the mother of Martin, and the rest of Martin’s family and friends.  I hope and pray that they find peace, and their hearts are comforted as they seek answers to all of their questions. 

As well, I hope and pray that Zimmerman is not unfairly tried in the court of public opinion, and that for his sake and for all’s sake that truth and justice prevails—whatever that truth may be.  I hope and pray that Zimmerman’s friends, his parents, his wife and his children are safe, regardless of the outcome of this debacle; they have already become targets of rage, as organizations such as the New Black Panthers have given a $10, 000 dollar incentive for serious harm to come to Zimmerman and his family when they put out a bounty on “the man who shot Trayvon Martin”—George Zimmerman.   

Yet, this tragedy is not unlike any other.  Trayvon Martin’s die every day!  Thanks to organizations like Planned Parenthood, many Trayvon Martin’s are killed right in their mother’s womb at the hands of abortion doctors in clinics all over America.  As of yet, no arrests have been made.  Many Trayvon Martins are killed in the streets from stray bullets as a result of gang wars.  No arrests.  Many senseless deaths and killings of black, white, brown, and yellow Trayvon Martin’s every day.  To blacks, are we so sensitive towards race and desensitized to violence that only the perception of racism can motivate us to march against violence?  It seems so.

This case is still being investigated and facts are coming out day by day.  Until Zimmerman’s day in court, I pray that calm heads prevail.  I pray for the healing of our nation and call on the violence to stop.  Let us not only be outraged at the death of Trayvon Martin, but every life that is senselessly taken.  From the womb to the tomb, every life is precious.

 
6 Comments

Posted by on March 29, 2012 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Making My Case For Life

by Povidence Crowder

I thank God that my mother was pro-life!  I am the oldest of four children and I was born a year after Roe v. Wade was the law of the land.  Had my mother not valued life, I may have never been and my story would never have been known.  She could have legally killed me in the year of my birth; she fit perfectly the profile of the modern day baby killer—a poor, uneducated, black woman living in the inner-city.  My mother and father separated before I was four, so I have a scant recollection of them being together.  What I do recall is my mother struggling to make ends meet.  I remember us being on welfare, and getting food stamps and government cheese . . . oh how delicious those grilled government cheese sandwiches were, mmmm! 

I remember occasionally looking into a bare refrigerator; I remember some winter nights sleeping in a cold house after the gas man shut off the heat for non-payment; I remember enduring the shame of going to the corner store with food stamps and trying to exit before any of my friends saw me—kids in those days cruelly mocked those on welfare—welfare was a dirty word.  We had very little material wealth, we were poor and broke . . . but my siblings and I knew we were loved.   We didn’t have much cash, so my mother got creative in order to get other items she wanted but couldn’t afford.  I recall going to the corner store at various times throughout the day to break one dollar food stamps by purchasing penny and nickel candy until my mother had enough change to buy her Newport 100 cigarettes.  If you’ve ever been on welfare, you’d understand.  I was taught at a young age that with some effort, the government system could be manipulated.  

Thankfully, it was too much effort for my mother!  She found it difficult to support a smoking habit on welfare and she found it even more difficult to support a family—those were the days before welfare became a competitive sport.  I am grateful that welfare was so uncomfortable and unpleasant, and degrading, that my mother was extremely discontent in her impoverished condition.  As well, she believed that God was not pleased that she had strayed from her Christian faith.  Resultantly, she rededicated her life to Christ and went back to school.  Through hard work and by God’s grace, she escaped the poverty trap—and she eventually quit smoking! 

I watched in amazement as my mother persevered.  She attained her GED and went on from there to complete her college degree.  After a few bumps in the road, she landed a pretty good job and has not looked back since.  Only in America could such a narrative be achievable.  My mother told me that caring for my siblings and I gave her a reason to press on when she felt like giving up on life.  Knowing that she had a responsibility to love, feed, and care for us, she says saved her life.  She was poor, but she never considered aborting us as an option.  Her belief in God gave her the conviction that abortion was wrong; it went against God’s very law, “you shall not commit murder.”  My mother instilled her Christian values and strong work ethic in us, her children.  Her story is the story of many men and women in this country who have struggled to raise children in poverty rather than see their posterity destroyed for mere convenience.    

Why then, if poverty is not the end all, do abortion proponents make poverty a central argument to support their position?  They use fear tactics to coerce women into committing unimaginable acts.  It is this trumped up fear that often drives a women to make the decision to abort her child—a daunting fear—fear  of the unknown, fear of their children growing up in poverty, fear of a lifelong responsibility, and many other fears.  As a Christian, I have a responsibility to tell these women the truth!  I have an obligation to stand against the sin of abortion and I do not deny the political ramifications of my stance.  I recognize that Christianity is a political power as much as it is a religious rite[1] because “Democracy is not served by silence.”[2] 

How in America, did we reach such a moral regression that the mass murder of unborn children does not even raise an eyebrow but on the contrary is celebrated as “choice.”  Bad law, the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade is what essentially denied unborn children personhood, making them the property of the mother, and led to the “legal” murdering of millions of unborn children in the past quarter century.  Pope John Paul II spoke out against abortion.  He basically said that the new cultural climate had made crimes against unborn children exempt from punishment because these crimes had become State sanctioned legal rights of individuals.  Even more shocking, these crimes would be committed with the assistance of health-care professionals and health-care systems.  He rightly asserted that the Church should not be silent concerning their opposition to abortion laws.

So what Roe v. Wade did in denying unborn children personhood, it denied them basic civil rights and protection under the law from violence and murder from their mother and her doctor should the mother determine that for socioeconomic or health reasons, her child was unwanted.  The same exact thing happened with bad law, 1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford, which denied blacks their citizenship and claimed that they were property of the slaveowner, and that blacks had no rights that the courts had to respect.  Wow!  In denying blacks their personhood, they had no basic civil rights and protection under the law from violence and murder from their slaveowners if their slaveowner determined that for socioeconomic or other reasons, the slave was no longer wanted or needed.  Sounds similar?

Just as the unborn are now, blacks in America and Jews in Nazi Germany were once denied the right to life.  What group will be next?  We should all be concerned when mere men can determine which groups of people have the right to live and which do not.  As a Christian, I have a duty to protect the most vulnerable in society, the defenseless—namely the unborn and others—from those who do not value their life but will change definitions and terms and make even the possibility of poverty, which all humans face, a reason for the termination of their life.  God places a value on our life; it’s a dangerous thing when we try and play God.  

The notion that the unborn is a human being is not a religious assertion but a biological fact.  They are no different than you and I except for size and development.  By design, God chose the woman’s body as the vehicle in which all humans should enter this world.  The “fetus” growing inside of the woman is not an extension of the woman’s body so that she could argue: it’s my body to do what I please.  The baby is a separate and new life with its own body and soul—a body that is properly nourished for growth and prepared for independent living through the care of the mother.  Yet some reckon that because the mother provides the shelter, she can at any time decide terminate her child and have her child violently ripped from her womb—the mother’s womb use to be the safest place on earth.  But the child’s father has no such right.  If a father killed his unborn child, all agree that he is a murderer. America cannot be looked upon as a free and civilized nation when we do not recognize and value the basic right to life of every individual. 

Scott Klusendorf, in his book, the Case for Life, raises the most pointed arguments for abortion.  He asserts that some people claim that we shouldn’t force our views on others.  Would we say such a thing if someone wanted the right to choose to kill toddlers?  Some argue their right to privacy.  If I had a two year old toddler, may I kill him as long as I do it in the privacy of the bedroom?  Some argue that poor woman cannot afford to raise children.  When human beings get expensive, may we kill them?  Or some argue that when a woman is raped, the baby is a painful reminder of the worst kind of violence against her.  True indeed, and with compassion we should care for the victim.  But how should a civil society treat innocent human beings who remind us of painful events.  Should we kill them so we can feel better? 

If the unborn are part of the human family, like toddlers, we should not kill them to make us feel better.  It’s better to suffer evil then inflict it.  Sometimes the right thing to do is not the easy thing to do.  Some say that government shouldn’t get involved in our personal decisions.  Can you imagine, even for a moment, suggesting such a thing in the instance of child abuse?  If the unborn are in fact human, then abortion is the worst kind of child abuse imaginable.  Some say that women would be forced to get dangerous back-alley abortions if abortion was restricted or made illegal.  If the unborn are human then you are arguing that some people will die while attempting to kill others so the state should make it safe and legal for them to do so. 

I pose a final question for pro-choice advocates.  In the words of Klusendorf, “Why does the high number of abortions trouble you?  After all, if abortions do not take the lives of defenseless human beings, why worry about reducing the number?  If the unborn are not human, killing them through elective abortion requires no more justification than having your tooth pulled or tonsils removed, or removing an unwanted wart.  However, if the unborn is a human being, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong.  I support a woman’s right to choose a variety of things.  But some choices are wrong, like killing innocent human beings simply because they are in the way and cannot defend themselves. “   This is my case for life.


[1] John Henry Newman, The Triple Function of the Church, 3rd ed. (National Institute for Newman Studies, 2007), under “Preface to the Third Edition,” chap. 4, The Newman Reader (accessed November 15, 2011).

 [2] “Living the Gospel Life: Challenge to American Catholics a Statement by the Catholic Bishops of the United States,” National Right to Life, http://www.nrlc.org/news/1998/NRL12.98/Gospel.html (accessed November 16, 2011).

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 26, 2012 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Why I’m Voting for Mike Huckabee

By Gregg Jackson
Monday, February 4, 2008

Okay, maybe I’m committing professional suicide.

I’m putting principle above what they’re calling “party loyalty” these days. I’m putting inalienable rights endowed by our Creator above my friendships with other conservatives in the media. I’m putting real constitutions above the celebrity “conservative” lawyers who long ago figured out that defending the actual meaning of constitutions is no way to get ahead in the world.

If I disappear you can send letters to the gulag where they send real conservatives and constitutionalists who point to conservative emperors who have no clothes.  Here goes.

I have made the decision to vote for Governor Mike Huckabee on the basis of research into actual records — rather than empty campaign double-talk.  Alone among the frontrunners, his record is conservative on the most fundamental issues. I will go even further: examining records proves that when $100 million dollars of GOP campaign propaganda is set aside, Mike Huckabee is the only real across-the-board (social and fiscal) conservative among the three front runners.

Mitt Romney is not only not a conservative on any issue, he’s not even on the left-right spectrum. He has no beliefs. No principles. No backbone. No soul. He is a soulless creature who will do and say anything to get elected.

McCain is somewhere in the middle. He has disappointed me, and many other conservatives, many times (McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy chief among them). If he becomes the GOP nominee I will support him.
I will not under any circumstances vote for Mitt Romney. Ever.

Here is why I support Mike Huckabee:

Abortion: First and foremost, I am voting for Huckabee because he is the only leading candidate who supports the core of the GOP plank – the Human Life Amendment. Mitt Romney openly opposes it. McCain has voted “pro-life” but voting is as far as he will go. He recoils from paying any price politically or personally to end the holocaust happening daily around the corner from your house. When pro-life conservatives were trying to replace career pro-abort Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court, McCain called Justice Samuel Alito “too conservative.”

We will never be safe and secure from either foreign or domestic enemies until we stop the barbaric, inhumane practice of abortion which has liquidated almost 50 million babies since Roe v Wade. I agree with those who examine providential events in American history and conclude that God has protected this nation at crucial times. If you are even open to that possibility, wouldn’t you have to agree that 50 million seems like a lot of babies to kill and still hope God will protect America? Isn’t that hypocritical of us? Outlawing abortion at the federal level is not a secondary issue.  It’s Issue Numero Uno. It’s a no-brainer. Mike Huckabee deserves every vote in America for understanding that alone. 

Senator McCain is not in favor of amending our constitution to ensure that, regardless of what state a baby is born into, he or she is guaranteed the legal right to life. How puzzling to claim to believe in the inalienable right to life and liberty yet assert that “federalism” or “states’ rights” somehow grant states a power to take innocent life. In 1860 that position was not the abolitionist position. It was the pro-slavery position. Today it is neither constitutional nor conservative. It’s just theoretically halfway between good and evil. And it won’t end the harvest of death and take the blood off our hands.

Mitt Romney is the Founding Father of government-subsidized, $50 abortion-on-demand in Massachusetts. Laws don’t get any more pro-abortion than Mitt Romney’s Orwellian health care plan…unless you go to Communist China. Even the Communist Democrats in Boston couldn’t pull that off. He is not merely “weak” or unconvincing on this issue. He’s an amoral pro-abort masquerading as a convert to the view that human life is sacred. Other than that he’s indistinguishable from Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton (both of whom have gleefully endorsed the Romney-Kennedy-Planned Parenthood healthcare plan). Enough said? He claims he was required by law to sign this healthcare bill that established abortion with a $50 co-pay as a “healthcare benefit.”  That is an insult to our intelligence and a pre-meditated lie. There is no Massachusetts’ law that requires subsidized abortion on demand. Romney also appointed a Planned Parenthood member to his healthcare advisory board and no pro-life member. Pro-life governors don’t do that. This alone puts him on the pro-abortion extreme of the spectrum — for Democrats, let alone Republicans.

Marriage: Unlike McCain who worked hard to defeat a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), Huckabee strongly supports a FMA and understands what is at stake for America, our children and grandchildren if we fail to enshrine into law that marriage is between one man and one woman. Although Governor Romney has recently staked out a position claiming to support traditional marriage, he speaks as the opportunistic politician who unilaterally imposed “same sex marriage” in Massachusetts after the law-making body that has exclusive authority to do so, refused to grant the Goodridge judges their fantasy. He did this revolutionary act — unbidden by even the judges — claiming he was just “following the law.” A lie, pure and simple, powerfully refuted by the state Constitution itself.

As many constitutional experts have tried in vain to warn the conservative elites, there is no law that allows “same sex marriage” in Massachusetts. It’s still illegal. The court merely issued a surreal and legally impotent declaratory opinion that barring same sex marriage was unconstitutional. Romney even opposed efforts to remove the judges who violated their oaths of office by ignoring the state constitution’s removal of court jurisdiction to even hear such a case. In September of 2007 we finally learned the explanation for Romney’s mysterious actions: he was carrying out a 2002 campaign promise to the homosexual “Log Cabin” Republicans.

Immigration: Although Governor Huckabee has been called the “amnesty” candidate, he has never supported “amnesty.” He is in favor of securing the border and has taken the “No Amnesty Pledge.” He has received the endorsements from Congressman Duncan Hunter and Jim Gilchrist founder of the Minuteman Project. Senator McCain was the co-author of the McCain-Kennedy-Bush “comprehensive immigration” bill that was ultimately defeated. But he now supports securing the border first. Governor Romney supported McCain-Kennedy-Bush as well and now, like McCain, claims to support securing the border first. Neither has that much credibility with me when it comes to this issue. Although I tend to trust McCain more given “Multiple Choice Mitt’s” penchant for surreal flip flops.

Foreign Policy/National Security: Governor Huckabee has the most executive experience of any candidate in either party – three or four times what Mitt Romney has, considering Romney spent so much time outside his state (212 days in his last year in office).

With nearly eleven years running a state, Governor Huckabee is by far the best qualified to manage a huge, bloated bureaucracy. He supports increasing defense expenditures from our current 3.9% of GDP level to the Reagan Era 6% of GDP level and the “Powell Doctrine” of using overwhelming force. Senator McCain lacks the executive experience but does have the actual military and government experience and is no doubt well qualified to lead the War on Islamic Jihadism. By supporting the surge even when it was not politically popular, McCain showed that he is willing to do the right thing regardless of the polls. Governor Romney is the least qualified of the three. Romney’s chief counterterrorism expert Cofer Black was condemned by the 9-11 Commission, Congressional Joint Inquiry, and the CIA Inspector General for his mismanagement of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center as contributing factors in the 9-11 attacks. This should be a major concern for voters.

2nd Amendment: Huckabee has always been a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment.  McCain has more of a mixed record on gun control laws. Romney is by far the most pro-gun control anti-2nd Amendment candidate. He has always supported the Brady Bill and the so called “Assault Weapons Ban” both of which are opposed by the NRA. As governor he boasted about having signed into law some of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

Taxes and Spending: Huckabee is, by far, the most fiscally conservative of the three. As governor he cut taxes almost 100 times and left Arkansas with an $850 million surplus. While I have some questions about his proposed” Fair Tax” which is a flat consumption based tax that would replace our federal income tax, it is by far the most aggressive fiscal proposal put forth by any candidate. While Senator McCain did oppose the Bush Tax Cuts (b/c they didn’t include enough spending cuts), he now supports making them permanent. And nobody doubts his anti-pork spending bona fides. Romney, as governor, raised taxes by over $500 million dollars. (He called them fees) leaving the Commonwealth in financial turmoil. His government run socialist healthcare plan he claimed as his signature achievement has been exposed as a catastrophe in the making. And although he derides McCain for not supporting the Bush Tax Cuts, Romney himself didn’t support them either.

Special Rights for Homosexuals: Huckabee has always been opposed to same-sex “marriage” and any special rights based on sexual orientation. McCain has more of a mixed record as one of seven other GOP senators who opposed a federal marriage amendment. Romney boosted funding for pro-homosexuality indoctrination in schools, pushed gay adoption, falsely pretending that a law forced him to, and has been the more aggressive in catering to the homosexual militants than most liberal Democrats. He argued in 1994 that he could get more accomplished for the gay agenda than Ted Kennedy and made similar promises when running for governor in 2002. He called a 2002 Massachusetts protection of marriage amendment “too extreme” and is solely responsible for illegally instituting “same sex marriage” in the Cradle of Democracy. He also supports homosexual Boy Scout leaders and homosexuals serving openly in the military.

Gregg Jackson is a radio talk show host on WRKO in Boston and author of “Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies: Issue By Issue Responses to the Most Common Claims of the Left from A to Z.”

 

Tags: , , , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.