Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Posts Tagged ‘infanticide’

Did Obama Lie About Born Alive Abortion Infanticide Bill?

Posted by Job on August 21, 2008

Not a supporter of the Sun Myung Moon paper the Washington Times (do not even read it anymore!) but still good to read. Not that his opponent, John McCain, would lift a finger to stop this infanticide either, because even if McCain personally opposes it, his new world order globalist masters wouldn’t let him touch it. 

Did Obama Lie About Born Alive Bill?

By Joel Mowbray

For the first time in this presidential cycle, social issues such as abortion took center stage this past week, courtesy of the candidates’ high-profile, back-to-back interviews at a mega-church last weekend.

Yet the mainstream media only days later is starting to address what might be the biggest story in this frame: Barack Obama – whether knowingly or not – provided false information about a controversial abortion vote he made in the Illinois Senate in 2003.

After his nationally televised interview with Pastor Rick Warren on Saturday night in Orange County, Calif., Mr. Obama sat down with Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody and went on the attack against pro-life activists, whom he said were “lying” about his vote to kill a bill protecting babies born alive following botched abortions.

At issue is an Illinois bill in 2003 called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that Mr. Obama voted against, which was modeled on federal legislation enacted the previous year declaring that in failed abortions resulting in a live birth, the baby must be given normal medical treatment. This was in response to a gruesome practice whereby abortions involving induced labor were resulting in unintended live births – and those infants were simply being left to die. It had passed the U.S. Senate without any dissent.

Mr. Obama contended that he “would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported,” but that he voted against the 2003 Illinois bill because “that was not the bill that was presented at the state level.” Except that it was.

As it turns out – and as even Mr. Obama’s campaign admitted Monday to the New York Sun – the National Right to Life Committee wasn’t lying; Mr. Obama was. The specific difference cited by Mr. Obama in the CBN interview was that the Illinois bill didn’t contain the federal legislation’s language explicitly stating that it would not “undermine Roe vs. Wade.” (This was not merely off-the-cuff, as the campaign had issued a written statement to CNN in June offering the same rationale.) Not only did the bill contain the exact provision from the federal bill, but Mr. Obama voted in favor of adding it as an amendment. After the state bill was changed to be almost identical to the unanimously passed federal law, Mr. Obama voted against it.

CNN, to its credit, did report on Obama’s Illinois actions before the Democrat’s accusation that his critics were lying. The New York Times first reported on Mr. Obama’s Illinois record two weeks ago – almost 900 words into a 1,400-word piece on page A16. In a page A18 story this Wednesday dedicated solely to the controversy, the Times’ Larry Rohter carries Mr. Obama’s water, stretching to offer excuses for his vote that even Mr. Obama did not suggest until after misstating his own record last weekend.

The highest-profile mainstream-media piece to date ran this Wednesday in The Washington Post, a page A1 article titled, “Candidates’ Abortion Views Not So Simple.” In its reporting, however, The Post seemed to dismiss the significance of Mr. Obama’s opposition to the 2003 Illinois legislation by referring to it as an “obscure law.” The Post further presents as fact the Obama position that the Illinois bill Mr. Obama opposed was solely about “pre-viable” babies. The testimony of former nurse Jill Stanek, who witnessed babies surviving botched abortions at Christ Hospital just outside Chicago, discussed babies past 20 weeks, including into the third trimester – thus not “pre-viable.”

Though understanding the legislative process is not a common strength in political journalists, most of the reporters in question are smart enough to sift through the plentiful documentation of Mr. Obama’s voting history on the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in Illinois at the Web site of the National Right to Life Committee. Further, they could even read the simple, yet thorough, narrative of National Review’s David Freddoso, who has written two stories spelling out the timeline and Obama’s actions along the way. (Some of the reporting is adapted from his new book, “The Case Against Barack Obama.”) Mr. Obama’s camp has shifted explanations this week, now claiming that the Democrat merely wanted a provision in the bill clarifying that it would not impact existing state laws. Yet as several pro-life activists have noted, Mr. Obama was the chairman of the legislature’s health committee when the bill came up again in 2003 and easily could have offered such an amendment. He didn’t.

Regardless of the reasons for his vote, Mr. Obama cannot say that his critics are lying. He did oppose a bill virtually identical to the one unanimously passed in the U.S. Senate. And now, five years later, he might end up paying a political price for that decision.

Advertisements

Posted in Christianity, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

And They Say Sin Is Not Real: Sex and debt drove man to kill wife and baby

Posted by Job on June 7, 2008

Link To Story On Man Who Murdered Wife And Child

When God finished with creation and rested, He said that it was “very good” says Genesis 1:31. The Hebrew word for “good” here is “towb [02896]“, and one of its meanings is “ethical.” So when God found creation “very good”, it does not merely refer to how pleasant it looked or its intricate machinery, though such things are clearly so and as a matter of fact is irrefutable evidence of the very existence of God according to Romans 1. Rather, it ALSO means that creation was morally pure, free from sin. The capacity to sin, however, was there. One third of the angels, including Satan, rebelled against God. But the cosmic significance of that act was of little consequence, as there was no covenant between God and the angels concerning creation. But God did make a covenant with Adam, the first man who not only represents humanity, but his named actually means mankind or humanity ([0120]); Adam would have dominion over the earth, and he could not eat from the tree of life. Did Adam ask to be in or agree to this covenant relationship? The answer is of no consequence; as sole creator and sovereign ruler of the universe, God had the right to initiate, set the terms of, and hold Adam to the terms of the covenant.

As we all know, Adam, the covenant representative of mankind, sinned by eating of the tree of life, and through him sin entered into all of creation including the human race. So, we cannot blame God for evil. We cannot even say “the devil made me do it.” No, the entire blame is upon mankind. And because mankind is wicked, evil, and totally depraved, we have events like this. 

WOBURN, Massachusetts (AP) — A British man despondent over his sex life and his mounting debt shot his wife and baby daughter to death as they lay in bed together, covered them with a comforter and then bought a one-way ticket home to England, a prosecutor told a jury Friday. Neil Entwistle, 29, is charged in the fatal shootings of his 27-year-old wife, Rachel, and their 9-month-old daughter, Lillian Rose, in January 2006.His defense attorney said Entwistle was a loving husband and father who was so crazed with grief after discovering their bodies in their Hopkinton home that he flew to England to be consoled by his parents. “Everything he said and everything he did thereafter, he did because he loved them, he did because he loved them both,” Elliot Weinstein said.

The lawyers gave their opening statements Friday in Middlesex District Court after four days of jury selection. Assistant District Attorney Michael Fabbri told jurors that Entwistle had grown increasingly unhappy after the couple moved to the United States from England, where they met in 1999. Entwistle, a computer engineer, had been unable to find a job in the U.S., had fallen into debt and began trolling the Internet for sex, Fabbri said.

In the months before the killings, Entwistle visited Web sites for escort services and began exchanging e-mails with women with whom he sought to have sex. Weinstein told the jury that both Rachel and Neil Entwistle were computer-savvy and said other people had used the computer.

“Over and over and over again during this trial, you will learn that things are not the way they first appear,” he said. Authorities believe that Neil Entwistle took his father-in-law’s gun, shot his wife and daughter and then drove 40 miles back to return the weapon.

Fabbri said Entwistle’s DNA was found on an ammunition container, a gun lock and the grip of the .22-caliber handgun. He said Rachel Entwistle’s DNA was found in and on the muzzle of the gun. Rachel Entwistle’s mother, Priscilla Matterazzo, was called as the trial’s first witness.

During cross-examination, Entwistle’s attorney Stephanie Page focused her questions on Joseph Matterazzo’s gun collection. Priscilla Matterazzo said her husband kept the guns in a locked cabinet in a bedroom but left the key on a kitchen countertop. She said her husband liked to go target shooting and had taken Neil Entwistle with him at least twice.

Some people would look at this and blame the evil of the male gender. Others would blame what they call the outdated and restrictive institution of marriage. Others would blame the proliferation of handguns. Others would blame pornography and prostitution. If those are your cases, make them. But the Bible, God’s complete revelation of Himself and His Will to mankind that is infallible and the final authority in all matters, makes it clear that such tragedies like this are the result of sin, which is failure to live up to God’s righteousness, the inability to keep God’s commandments, and the resulting lack of purity in one’s thoughts and actions. The Bible tells us that all of mankind is guilty of sin, and all of mankind is without excuse.

So does this mean that mankind is without hope? A thousand times no! God sent His Son Jesus Christ to be born into the human race as a man, to die on a cross for our sins, and to be resurrected on the third day. All who through faith believe in this Jesus Christ will have their sin guilt forgiven and live for eternity with God in a new creation that will be just as ethical as the first. (Be not deceived, for faith is not mere intellectual assent or even conviction, but it requires a human response, which is OBEDIENCE. Jesus Christ explained the difference between intellectual conviction and obedient faith in Matthew 25:32-46, and further the book of James deals with the topic heavily.) But all who do not through faith believe in Jesus Christ will spend eternity in a lake of fire with no hope, no relief, and no love.

Now this is not to say that if you have obedient faith in Jesus Christ that you will never do anything bad or wrong again. Instead, this means that obedient faith in Jesus Christ means that you will not have to suffer the cosmic eternal consequences of your sin. So while the human depravity of a man who murders his wife and baby over money and sex is a useful illustration of the nature of sin, the intention of this is not to say “believe on Jesus Christ so that you can be a good person with upright moral character and never do anything like this.” That is not the point, for the lake of fire will contain plenty of good fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. It will contain men of renown that gave themselves in acts of great courage and sacrifice. It will contain women that had a powerful loving and nurturing positive effects on the lives of many people. How is it possible for sinful people that have not been reconciled with God through Jesus Christ to lead good, decent, productive lives? That is the result of God’s common grace freely available to all men, for God still loves mankind. But common grace, and the good works done in it, is not saving grace, for indeed man is not saved by his good works but only through the work of Jesus Christ. What of the work of Jesus Christ, how could the work of this man save other men? Well Jesus Christ was not only fully man but also FULLY GOD, and that was why His works can save man when the works of other men cannot. 

Instead, the point is that obedient faith in Jesus Christ will save your eternal existence from destruction in the lake of fire. Though we can experience great joys and serve the Lord in mighty ways in this life, from an eternal perspective, that is really all that matters. The glory that Christians will inherit the eternal perfect creation is not even worthy to be compared to our experiences in this flawed one that is doomed to be destroyed!

So I encourage you, if you are unsaved, to give your life to Jesus Christ today. Follow The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in abomination, Bible, Christianity, Jesus Christ, pornea, pornography | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: