Some guy called Patrick Tomlinson tweeted what he considered to be proof positive that the “life begins at conception” crowd are hypocrites. Briefly, he proposed a situation where a pro-lifer is trapped in a burning fertility clinic and can rescue only a five-year-old child crying for help or a frozen box labeled “1000 Viable Human Embryos.” Which would you choose? The child, of course. GOTCHA! You don’t really believe life begins at conception. Ba-da-bum.
Matt Walsh skillfully and logically took his silly hypothetical to pieces. Just one paragraph of his article:
“It doesn’t matter how I value them personally. It’s their intrinsic value that matters. I value my family over your family but your family has the same intrinsic value. I’m making the decision based, as I said before, on emotion. I can see the child. I hear him crying. I’m looking him in the eyes. I grab him. It’s instinct. But there’s also some logic to it. I don’t really know how many of those embryos are still viable and whether they’ll ever be implanted and given the chance to develop. Again: this calculation WOULD NOT justify killing the embryos under any circumstance, but it would justify my decision to save the child instead. By the way, if it were a five-year-old and a 70-year-old in there, I’d save the five-year-old. If it were a five-year-old and Patrick Tomlinson in there, I’m still saving the five-year-old. Sorry, Pat. But does that mean Pat’s life has less value? Does that mean I could crush his skull and suck his brains out with a vacuum hose? No, it just means that my emotional impulse leads me to the child, not the pretentious pro-abortion dude who spends his time posing disingenuous hypotheticals.”
Tomlinson responded to Walsh’s response: “Oh Matty. If only I gave a shit what you think.”
Wait, what? Didn’t he specifically ASK pro-lifers to respond to his hypothetical?!
Walsh pithily responded with this.
Another tweeter added the cymbal crash with:
“It’s like watching Batman solve the Riddler’s puzzle, and the Riddler’s subsequent tantrum afterward.”
- Walsh’s entire response to Tomlinson’s hypothetical is worth reading.
“Catholics for Choice” (CFC) is not affiliated with the Catholic Church in any way and does not have permission to use the term “Catholic” in its name or literature. It has no membership and is funded by powerful private foundations to promote abortion as a method of population control.
From The Catechism of the Catholic Church (excerpted):
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life.
Leftist at UC Berkeley asks, “Why does a first trimester fetus have moral value?”
Ben Shapiro answers.
Ben Shapiro answers abortion question from leftist at UC Berkeley (9/14/2017) [2:31]
Congratulations to new mom Aleks Patete and her healthy new son, DJ. When Aleks went in for prenatal care, the doctor discovered she had ovarian cancer. Aleks refused to abort or undergo chemo until later in the pregnancy when her unborn son was developed enough to cope with it. At the time of the birth, Aleks was in remission.
There is currently a bit of a rift in the democrat party over pure ideology vs. trying to be inclusive. Some have argued that the party should welcome pro-life candidates in an effort to appeal to evangelicals they assume are upset with president Trump. Of course, this is all simply a façade to fool people into thinking they have softened their view on the slaughter of innocents. Then there are the hardliners who steadfastly insist there is no place in the democrat party for anyone not wholly approving of abortion at any point up until the moment of birth.
There are no ‘moderate’ democrats anymore. Haven’t been for some time. The Obamacare vote proved that. They all just have different price tags. Bart Stupak and a few pro-life democrats were reticent to sign on to the healthcare law at first. Had he remained steadfast it is a certainty he could have gotten millions of grateful citizens for heading off the coming disaster. In the end he settled for a worthless promise from Obama there would be no federal funding for abortion. This promise was forgotten the minute they cast their votes. The next election Stupak and almost all his coalition were voted out by people incensed by their cowardice. The democrat party is a pit of vipers and should be shunned by people of faith. Liberalism is their religion and abortion is their sacrament.
Hillary Wants to Preach
Religion is playing a big role in Clinton’s post-election tour. What does she have to gain from sharing her faith now?
Hillary Clinton wants to preach. That’s what she told Bill Shillady, her long-time pastor, at a recent photo shoot for his new book about the daily devotionals he sent her during the 2016 campaign. Scattered bits of reporting suggest that ministry has always been a secret dream of the two-time presidential candidate: Last fall, the former Newsweek editor Kenneth Woodward revealed that Clinton told him in 1994 that she thought “all the time” about becoming an ordained Methodist minister.
The Ghost of Hillary Still Haunts Evangelicals
She’s gone. It’s time to stop fighting the old war. It almost never fails. When I’m asked to speak to Evangelical audiences about politics, I can predict the reaction to the speech based almost entirely on the age of the audience. If a Christian is older than me, he’s often angry. If younger, usually grateful.
Younger Evangelicals (and younger conservatives more generally) saw Hillary as a corrupt choice for president. She was no more honest than Trump, but unlike Trump she was actively hostile to religious liberty and increasingly radical in her support for abortion. That’s bad enough, of course, but older Evangelicals were carrying a full quarter-century of baggage into the fight. Beginning in 1991, she wasn’t just at the center of scandal after scandal, she was on the wrong end of the culture wars, and she was an icon of the brand of arrogant, condescending feminism that most Christian conservatives openly despise. And she was in our face for decades.
Stop Calling Jesus a SocialistIt must be said that Jesus was and is not a socialist by anyone’s definition, save those of his revisionists. The Gospels do not speak of a heavenly economy of democratic access. Instead, they speak of the Kingdom of God as the advent of an impending regime change whose topsy-turvy standard of behavior threatens the lives of the unprepared. Where Jesus stands in the face of government saying his kingdom is not of this world, those aligned with him, the corpus mysticum, stand as a historical reminder that power itself is fleeting and its programs destined for collapse.
WashPost Hypes Poll: Christians ‘Far More Likely’ to Dismiss the Poor as Lazy Bums
This poll from the Post and the liberal Kaiser Family Foundation is three months old, taken from April 13 to May 1. This is not just a poll question; it’s begging for overgeneralization, with “the poor are mostly lazy” being judged by liberals as akin to “Muslims are mostly terrorists” or “Catholic priests are mostly child abusers.” As a citizen, I’d refuse to answer that on the grounds that it’s used to cast aspersions – conservative voters live in a world of ugly, unproven stereotypes.
It also implies that most Christians are largely bad Christians if they don’t favor a government-organized redistribution of wealth. Liberals, including liberal journalists, often suggest private donations to the poor somehow don’t imply Christian values half as much as supporting government action toward the poor.
NEW YORK NEEDS MONEY
CHARLIE GARD: Charlie Gard’s parents were unable to use the £1.3 million (about $1.5 million USD) they raised to transfer Charlie to the U.S. for experimental treatment. They’ve decided to start a Charlie Gard Foundation to help families in similar circumstances.
TRANNIES IN THE MILITARY: President Trump could save American taxpayers nearly $2 billion if he follows through on his plan to ban military service for severely gender-confused (“transgender”) individuals.
That is the estimate for the cost of the “transgender” military policy begun under Obama, accordign to a paper by Family Research Council.
CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME: Researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have linked chronic fatigue syndrome to variations in 17 immune-system signaling proteins, or cytokines, whose concentrations in the blood correlate with the disease’s severity.
The findings provide evidence that inflammation is a powerful driver of this mysterious condition, whose underpinnings have eluded researchers for 35 years.
“There’s been a great deal of controversy and confusion surrounding ME/CFS — even whether it is an actual disease,” said Davis. “Our findings show clearly that it’s an inflammatory disease and provide a solid basis for a diagnostic blood test.”
FAKE NEWS: The story of a nun who received Vatican permission to witness a Catholic marriage in a remote Canadian diocese with few priests has seized international attention — the implication being it may portend a new role for women in the Church. But the situation is far from unprecedented and is allowed under canon law.
I’LL POST MORE “INTERESTING BUT TOO BRIEF FOR A WHOLE BLOG” BELOW IN COMMENTS IF I FIND ANY MORE TODAY.
Democrat leaders have had nothing to say about Charlie Gard and none of their lapdogs in the media have bothered to ask any of them.
These are the same people who ridiculed the very idea that government-run health care would necessarily involve unelected bean counters making life and death decisions for patients.
Whenever a Democrat tries to convince you that single payer is the only humane system, REMEMBER CHARLIE GARD!
He who holds the gold makes the rules. With single payer, unelected bean counters and judges with who-knows-what political and religious agendas hold the gold.
For five months, Charlie Gard’s parents have been fighting a legal battle with the British single payer system to be ALLOWED to take their son out of the country for experimental treatment.
They had the money. They had TWO hospitals – in the U.S. and the Vatican – offering to take him. The U.S. even offered him citizenship.
The courts said no, no, and more no. During all this time, Charlie’s condition has deteriorated to the point where the treatment his parents sought is no longer possible.
The parents are ending their fight and the “Great” British health care system is now free to off one of its inconvenient citizens.