How Will History Judge Us?

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

It is so hard to see what is going on unless you are able to take a step back and get the panoramic view.

It’s like fighting the problem with an ever-increasing waist line.  Usually, it goes unnoticed to the one who’s growing the belly until some old pictures of past times are pulled out of the scrapbook.

“Wow!” I often respond when looking at old pictures of myself. “Look how skinny I was back then.  How did I gain so much weight?”

Eating and sitting on my butt is the short answer.  Every day that I overeat and eschew exercise, I provide an opportunity for my belly to balloon.  That is why exercise is a billion dollar industry. Trying to undo the effects of undisciplined behavior becomes very heavy lifting. Loose living is not easily overcome.

As I, and millions of others, slowly roll into our seventh decade upon this earth, it becomes harder and harder to blame others for the condition that America finds itself in. No longer can we blame our parents’ generation; but we must come to understand that when the ‘torch was passed’ to a new generation of Americans, the responsibility for the fruit grown in the vineyard must now rest upon those of us who were supposed to be ‘tending the garden’ of America.

We’ve dropped the ball. My generation, the baby boomers and the hippies, are now great grandpas and must bear the blame for what America has become. America has grown lazy, self-indulgent, and apathetic as our waistline continues to sag over our belts.  In covetousness and greed, we have eaten the inheritance of ‘our children’s children.’

How will history judge us? Well, I have a few thoughts that I’d love to share today. It has been said that hindsight is 20/20. Perhaps it is time we took a peek in the review mirror; for history will be our judge.

A century from now, if there is still a planet here, historians will look back at the latter half of the 20th century and first two decades of the 21st and scratch their heads as they ponder, “What were they thinking?” Indeed, what WERE we thinking? Those who study us will ask:

How could a nation built upon such clear-cut Christian principles have so openly and purposefully rejected the values of their forefathers?

How could the wealthiest nation in the world have allowed their currency to be removed from the gold-standard and believe that the ‘full faith and credit’ of the government was enough to keep evil men from destroying the financial system?

How could a nation built upon the nuclear family redefine that institution in such a way as to make the term nearly meaningless?

How could a nation whose laws were built upon two tablets permit the wrecking ball of litigation to remove those teachings as foundational, generational beliefs from the hearts of their children?

How could the false teaching of separation of church and state become so ingrained in the minds of Americans that public prayer would be ruled illegal?

How could a nation of laws have permitted unelected judges to determine what law is?

How could the Christian churches be so willing to yield the moral education of their children to an amoral, atheistic system designed to install the God of Government as the granter of all liberties?

How could the people have possibly fallen for the folly that there was no difference between a man and a woman, or a father and a mother, and that children would not be affected by the absence of either?

How could we have possibly allowed our children to be taught that all relationships were the same and that sex was normal no matter which appendage you chose to insert in what opening?

How did we permit ‘rights’ to be judged on such base unnatural behaviors?

How could a man with three Muslim names be elected President of the United States in the midst of the greatest surge of Islamic extremism in the history of America?

How could Christian churches permit the nation to be taught that Christians and Muslims serve the same God?

How could a nation buy into the lie that spending more than one earns will lead to financial prosperity?

How did the defense of Biblical morality become ‘hate’ while the drive for debauchery and licentiousness become loving and tolerant?

How could the churches actually believe that non-Christian governmental leaders would lead to a society where Christian values and laws would be supported?  And how could they believe that the Republican Party would become the standard bearer of the truth for millions of Bible believers?

How did the minority become powerful enough to bully the majority?

How did the preaching of sin and repentance give way to the gospel of tolerance and personal fulfillment? How did the threat of hell-fire damnation go the way of pay-phone booths?

How could America have permitted the slaughter of unborn children in the womb of their mothers for no other reason than the inconvenience of motherhood? How could they possibly have thought that there would be no consequence to such barbaric behavior?

How could the American people have permitted electronic voting in an age when computer hacking was as easy and common as the dialing of a telephone?

How could a nation that was birthed by The Black-Robed Regiment give way to pulpits filled with man-pleasing, corporate, government-controlled churches?

How could the nation embrace and teach to their children as normal a lifestyle that is incapable of reproducing progeny? How could a religion replete with examples of the ‘judgment of God’ so easily capitulate to the sinners’ cry to “Judge not?”

How did we expect God to ‘bless America’ when so much of what we did flew in the face of everything He taught us?

How will history judge us? How did my belly get so big?

How, indeed.

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Kansas Church Invites Community To Come Celebrate 42 Years Of Abortion In America

Facebook/St. James Episcopal Church

According to recent reports, St. James Episcopal Church in Wichita, Kan., is preparing to mark the 42nd anniversary of legalized abortion with a chili dinner on church grounds later this month.

Tickets range from $20 to $1,000 for the Planned Parenthood-sponsored event, which promises “an evening of stimulating conversation, refreshments and CHILI!”

The event, dubbed Chili for Choice, is one of many anniversary celebrations planned throughout the nation to mark another year of allowing American women to legally kill their unborn children. Concerts and celebrity appearances mark many of these gatherings; however, an ostensibly Christian church willing to openly endorse abortion has attracted significant social media criticism.

Some outlets called on pro-life advocates to call the church in an effort to convince leaders to reconsider its partnership with Planned Parenthood. One such call was posted online.

While a church spokesperson admitted St. James teamed up with the organization, she denied the local affiliate has performed any abortions. Nevertheless, with an event celebrating ‘choice,’ a ubiquitous euphemism for abortion, critics were not shy in expressing their displeasure.

Remarks posted in response to one EAG News report on the issue included some pointed commentary.

“Maybe they should make that chili really hot so the attendees can get used to the heat,” one reader wrote.

Others criticized the Episcopal Church in general for its increased embrace of social leftism in recent years.

h/t: EAG News

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Watch: Of This Group Of Americans, 90% Are Being Killed. This Man Is Determined To Stop It

abortionholocaust

Approximately 6,000 babies are born with Down syndrome in the U.S. every year. This number would be much higher, but 90 percent of babies who are diagnosed with Down syndrome in the womb are aborted.

Pregnant women can get a screening done that will tell them the likelihood of their child having Down syndrome. Despite the fact that the screenings are not one hundred percent accurate, and the fact that there are hundreds of families on waiting lists wanting to adopt a child with Down syndrome, many expectant mothers choose to end the life of their child after being told there is a high probability they will be born with special needs.

Doctors are not helping. One study found that almost a quarter of physicians actively encourage abortion of children with Down syndrome or emphasize the negative aspects of raising a child with special needs. Less than a third of them actually give the mothers educational materials to help them make an informed decision.

If people were made aware of the facts, perhaps their minds would change. In one study, 99 percent of parents said they loved their child with Down syndrome; and 97 percent said they were proud of their child. Seventy-nine percent said their outlook on life was more positive because of their child with Down syndrome.

Ninety-six percent of siblings said they had feelings of affection toward their special needs sibling, and 94 percent of older siblings said they felt pride for their younger siblings with special needs. Eighty-eight percent said they felt they were better people because of their sibling with Down syndrome.

When researchers interviewed people with Down syndrome, they found that 99 percent of them were happy with their lives, and 97 percent liked who they were.

These are just numbers and facts about people living with Down syndrome. There are a myriad of other disabilities that people live with every day. Some are mild, others more severe; but that doesn’t make any of those lives less precious.

Steven Crowder, the man behind the popular conservative site Louder With Crowder, comments in the video above about the hypocritical voices of leftist secularists who say one thing but do another:

“Do we really believe that they’re ‘special needs’? ‘Cause that’s the politically correct term, right? ‘Special needs’. You can’t say ‘disabled’. But then the people who say, ‘You have to say “special needs”, are the people who are saying, ‘They’re not really special at all. They’re just a burden’…

“Is that really the world we want at the end of the day, where we just choose which people to discard?”

Take a few minutes to watch the video and share it with your friends. The faces of the people in it can tell you so much more than I can through words on a page. If we can change the perception of those with special needs, we can put an end to what Crowder refers to as the Holocaust that is special needs abortion.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Brooke Shields’ Grandfather Paid To Have Her Murdered, But Her Heroic Mom Saved The Day

Photo credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Brooke Shields revealed in her latest book that her paternal grandfather paid her mother to have an abortion.

The book, There Was a Little Girl, is Shields’ second autobiographical work.

Shields writes that her grandfather “discreetly slid (my mother) an envelope and asked her to take care of the ‘situation.’”

She also writes that, upon discovering the pregnancy, her father “must have felt a sense of panic—and rightfully so. He wasn’t ready to be a father. He was just starting his life in business and was forced to travel a lot. He had less money than one would think, and he was still a baby himself.”

Shields writes that her father did not know how to handle the situation, but must have told his dad, who in turn confronted her mother.

The grandfather did meet with Shield’s mother and tried to convince her to terminate the pregnancy because it might get the father kicked off the Social Register.

Shields states: “Basically, it just wouldn’t look good for my dad to father a child with somebody from Newark.”

Shields’ mother took the cash from the grandfather but decided not to have an abortion.Instead, she went to a favorite antique store to buy a cherrywood oval coffee table.

She writes that her mother was “defiant as always” and “knew she wanted a baby and that was that.”

Shields writes that “that table would become a favorite standing stool for me as I grew up.I remember teething on it and loving to repeatedly fold the sides up and down. The table saved my life and helped me to stand.”

It’s no wonder that Shields said in an interview in 1991 that “Too many people use abortion as a form of birth control. And that’s very wrong. I could never, ever have an abortion.”

 

h/t: Breitbart

Photo credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Wendy Davis Was Right—Just Look At Obama’s Destruction Of Black America

Photo credit: Facebook/Wendy Davis

Democratic Texas State Senator and gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis was heavily criticized for a political ad she ran against her disabled Republican opponent, Greg Abbott. To clarify, she did not claim Abbott was an unfit candidate because he is disabled—that would be discriminatory.

She argued, and rightfully so, that Greg Abbott politicizes his disability; yet he actively ruled and legally fought against the blind, deaf, and those with amputees among others. Despite his successful lawsuit for the injury he incurred 30 years ago, Abbott has consistently blocked disabled Texans from suing the state for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Davis’s logic, however, reveals the same fallacies about herself. She claims as a woman to support policies that safeguard and empower women, yet has little to show for it. Consider the issue of birth control, for example. Davis, like the majority of female elected officials, claims women should have unfettered access to it. Yet, the birth control medications available and readily prescribed to healthy young women—Depo Provera, Ortho Evra, and the Nuvo Ring—are killing and/or destroying women’s health.

Davis is not “standing with” the women who cite numerous examples in class actions lawsuits of the life-long and life-threatening health conditions they suffer because of these drugs: blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, heart attacks, blood disorders, sterilization, and death. Young women are dropping dead, and Davis is silent.

But more importantly, the first black president of the United States has caused more harm to black Americans than most of his predecessors.

Barack Obama’s policies of “hope” and “change” have increased long-term unemployment by 14 percent since he took office, increased the national debt more than all of his predecessors combined, increased inflation 43 percent more than President Bush, and caused more Americans to lose their health insurance and access to medical care than ever before.

Under the first black president, black unemployment is higher; and black participation in the labor force (60.2 percent) is at its lowest since December 1977. Both unemployment and underemployment among blacks is more than double that of whites according to national labor statistics.

In Obama’s Illinois, it’s worse—less than 50 percent of blacks are employed. They face significant challenges in a state whose food-stamp enrollment outpaces job creation by nearly 2 to 1, and ranks last of all 50 states in job creation. In fact, Illinoisians are leaving the state at a rate of one person every ten minutes because of Obama’s disastrous economic policies.

Obama’s economic policies have fostered a cycle of abject poverty and erosion of societal cohesion distinguished by the largest increase in criminal activity in nearly two decades. Federal statistics reveal that violent crime since 2011 is at an all-time high, with a significant increase of racially motivated hate crimes and “violent victimizations” of whites by blacks.

Worse still, black on black violence is escalating. In 2010, for example, 55 percent of homicide victims who were shot were black. Statistics indicate that 90 percent of black murder victims are killed by blacks.

In Obama’s Chicago, a city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country, there are more murders committed than in New York City or Los Angeles. In 2012, for example, compared to Chicago’s 512 murders, there were 418 in New York City and 298 in Los Angeles. Yet, Chicago is one third smaller than New York City and has one million fewer people than Los Angeles.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom