The Washington Post's False Claim Of The Charlottesville Counter-protesters' Permit

The August 17 Washington Post headline broadcasts: President Trump's false claim that counter-demonstrators lacked a permit. 

The first observation is that the headline and article specify either counter-demonstrators or counter-protestors.  Not once does the reporter mention that these counter-protesters consisted of the group, AntiFa, whose Marxist/Anarchist members have used threats and violence across the country to intimidate and disrupt those with whom they disagree.  For a better understanding of AntiFa, see here and here.

This omission leaves the impression that the counter-protesters were innocent people simply standing against the evil of white supremacy.  The truth is that one hate group (AntiFa) opposed another hate group (Nazis).

This brings us to the question of the validity of Trump's claim that AntiFa did not have a permit.  The Post's analysis concludes:

"President Trump twice claimed that counterprotesters lacked a permit to demonstrate in Charlottesville. But they did have permits for rallies — and they did not need one to go into or gather near Emancipation Park, where white nationalists planned their rally. The president earns Four Pinocchios."

The article produces the permit obtained by AntiFa to refute the President's claim that they "came charging in without a permit":

"Walt Heinecke, a professor at the University of Virginia, told [Washington Post colleague Justin] Moyer that he received a 'special events certificate of approval' for events at McGuffey Park and Justice Park — sites blocks from Emancipation Park, where white nationalists had a permit for a Saturday rally. . . 

Charlottesville spokeswoman Miriam I. Dickler told Moyer that only one permit was issued for Emancipation Park — the one received by white nationalists staging the 'Unite the Right' rally. However, counter-protesters did not need permits to protest that rally, she said. 

'Please bear in mind that people do not need a permit to enter a public park, even when another event is scheduled to take place there, nor are they required to have one to be on streets or sidewalks adjacent to or outside the park,' Dickler said in an email." (emphasis mine)

From this we know that:

1. The Nazis had the only permit for Emancipation Park.
2. AntiFa did have permits for McGuffey and Justice Parks. 
3. McGuffey and Justice Parks are each blocks away from Emancipation Park.
4. The city spokeswoman says a permit is not needed to enter a public park.

This last point raises a question: If a permit is not needed to enter a public park then why did the city issue permits to both the Nazis and AntiFa?

The answer is because both groups were not just entering public parks but engaging in a rally, protest, or demonstration. And for these types of special events, the city requires a permit (see City code Sec 28-29) for, among other reasons, "the preservation of public order and safety".

In fact, that same Standard Operating Procedure defines:

3.1.3 "Demonstration" shall  refer to non-commercial expression protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution (such as picketing, political marches, speechmaking, vigils, walks, etc.) conducted on public property, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers.  This term does not include casual activity by persons which does not have an intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers . . ." (emphasis mine)

That is, the only way AntiFa did not need a permit to enter Emancipation Park was if they were engaged in "casual activity" and did not have "intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers".  Neither case was true for AntiFa or the Nazis, which is why the city issued each group permits in the first place. 

In fact, Dickler even referred to AntiFa as "counter-protesters" thereby showing they did not fall under the "casual activity" interpretation. Dickler equivocated on who required a permit.

So both groups required permits which the city issued; one to the Nazis for Emancipation Park and one to AntiFa for McGuffey and Justice Parks.  AnftFa did not have a permit for Emancipation Park which they entered and where violence ensued.

Compare this with the Post's report of Trump's statement:

You had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit, and they were very, very violent. . . . You had a lot of people in that [white nationalist] group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest, because you know — I don’t know if you know — they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit.” (emphasis mine)

AntiFa did not have a permit for Emancipation Park which they entered for the purpose of counter-protesting.  That is, they had a permit just not for the park in which they gathered!

Nit-picking that the permits for other parks satisfied the requirement or that they didn't even need a permit paints a false narrative.

The President may deserve Pinocchios for saying things like that the neo-Nazis "were there to innocently protest" or there are "good people on both sides".  The Post gets it wrong. And while they rightfully hold up the evil of the Nazis for condemnation, their manipulative analysis white washes the evils of AntiFa.

The Post earns Four Pinocchios.

AntiFa is the Antithesis of the Greatest Generation

This meme seems very popular right now in the aftermath of the Charlottesville violence and President Trump's Monday press conference.

The posters' rightly stand against the great evil of white supremacy and Nazism.  But in using this meme they have, whether by ignorance or malice, compared those who stood for freedom with a group, AntiFa, that uses fascist tactics to intimidate and crush those with whom they disagree under the guise that they are against fascism.

AntiFa is grounded in Marxism and anarchy and they use threats and violence as their tools to squash dissent.  They represent a great evil that killed and enslaved millions under communist regimes.  It is a great evil to white-wash this group.

It's possible for two things to be true at the same time: White Supremacy/neo-Nazism and Marxism/Anarchists are both evil.  Don't chest-thump against one evil while ignoring the other.

And don't dishonor the memories of those who sacrificed their lives and their bodies to save the world directly and indirectly from both evils.


Updated on 8/17/2017 with the following:
For more information on AntiFa, see these articles:

CNN - What is AntiFa

Daily Wire - Antifa

The 2016 Referendum On Our Souls

A friend on Facebook directed the following at me. My response to her follows.

Ladies and gentleman, Thomas Fleming: 

"I did not watch Trump’s 76 minute stem-winder, but if he does anything practical about the problems he denounced—unlimited immigration, insurgent Islam, criminal anarchy, and the deteriorating infrastructure that puts the experience of air travel in these United States somewhere between Moscow and Mogadishu airport--he will have justified the hope and trust so many people have put in his campaign. Even if the thieves in the bipartisan kleptocracy known as Congress frustrate his every attempt to restore sanity, some Americans, at least, will take heart from the effort.  

There is very little that I like about Mr. Trump. Indeed, he is almost everything I most detest in the modern American character: He is a blowhard and boaster, a bit of a bully, a gambler and a buffoon, a greed-crazed plutocrat, and a serial adulterer. On the other hand, he has at least two redeeming qualities. He is not a Leftist, which means he does not hate this country, its people, its religion, or its traditions; and he is not a "conservative," which means he is not smarmy hypocrite who talks all day long about values but sells out his constituents to the highest bidder and the American people to global interests... 

No one in my lifetime—certainly no “conservative Republican”—has done a thing to stop the revolutionary juggernaut that is riding down and crushing to death every wholesome tradition and vital institution. Perhaps the most pathetic people in America are those who wish to preserve the “legacy” of Ronald Reagan. Reagan’s only legacy is failure and betrayal on every major front. Oh, yes, he won the Cold War. That is a bit like saying Ronald Reagan won the GOP nomination in 1980 by defeating Harold Stassen.. 

If Ted Cruz, loyal Republican and decent Christian that he claims to be, wanted to snub Donald Trump, he could have done it very simply in Texas by turning off the television and having a good time. Instead he chose to betray his sacred party and to break his word. He has always behaved like the classic bully-- "He can dish it out but he can't take it"--but his smarmy attempt to work the tip for his own advantage showed he was not only a poor sport but a rotten showman.... 

On other hand, who cares? Let Cruz spend the rest of his life flirting with the anti-Christian NeverTrump crowd at National Review and The Weekly Standard. All of them are milk-and-water leftists, dishing out the same state-capitalist swill they stole from FDR and LBJ. “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party,” the senior neocons were forever whining, “the Democratic Party left me.” There is no more pathetic specimen in the political universe than the flotsam and jetsam left behind by the advancing revolutionary tide. 

Trump may be a braggart and a buffoon, but, thank goodness, he is not a conservative." 

H/T Darrell Dow 

Larry Rambousek

My thoughts:

If we don't like Cruz. Fine.

If we want President Trump. Fine. I may even vote Trump myself. 

The U.S. allied with Stalin to stop a greater evil at that particular moment. But let's not corrupt our character by pretending Trump is something other than a man of deeply flawed character flaws. Let us stay on message that defeats Hillary. 

And now I have Christian friends (not just Facebook acquaintances) blocking me. Trump, Cruz, Reagan are NOT our Saviours. 

Our Sovereign will judge our character. So while we may ally with a deeply flawed candidate, we must be honest about it. If we don't, the cost isn't a temporal country, it is a corrupted soul. As your brother in Christ, please be careful. 

There may be more at stake here then an election.


Originally posted on Facebook July 22, 2016

Jim Moeller's Demand to Slaughter Innocent Human Beings

NOTE: Abridged versions were submitted to the Columbian (Vancouver, WA), Camas-Washougal Post Record, and The Reflector (Battle Ground, WA).  

UPDATE: Published by the Columbian on 8/28/2015.

On August 10, 2015, posting on Washington state Republican Rep. Liz Pike's Facebook, Democrat State Rep. Jim Moeller attacked “all Republicans who insist on banning abortions because it 'kills innocent humans'” as arrogant, ignorant hypocrites for "smugly oppos[ing] ... safety regulations, gun control, raising the minimum wage, and the ACA." Moeller's meme claimed opposition to these policies also "kills innocent humans".

Moeller claimed he didn't agree with the meme yet, on August 2, he posted a similar attack in an the comments of an article on the Columbian website: "Yep. Let's talk about abortion and Planned Parenthood while we cut the poor off." He gave TANF (welfare), SNAP (food) funding, and attempts to repeal Obamacare (ACA) as examples of Republicans’ "bait and switch" tactics.

Further, Moeller fails his own standard because while he supports policies that he claims helps the innocent, he supports abortion, which kills an innocent, defenseless human being.

Under what circumstance is it ever justified to kill an innocent human being?

If Moeller really believes his claim that opposition to programs for the poor is a greater evil than abortion then I challenge him to post an aborted fetus image to his Facebook and Twitter profiles and to his website for 30 consecutive days.

That would meet his July 10 Facebook status that “accountability and transparency are … needed in government at all levels”.

He won’t because that type of transparency would reveal to everyone the truly barbaric view that Moeller actually holds.

Boy Scouts & Fundamental Transformation

I submitted the following to the Camas Washougal Post Record. I think I missed the deadline for the Aug 4 edition and they did not print it this week, so the odds are they won't:

On July 27, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) Executive Board lifted its ban on “openly” gay adult leaders.[1]   This resolution allows the local “chartered organizations to select adult leaders without regard to sexual orientation.”[2]

Gay rights activists applauded the decision. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) stated this is a “welcome step toward erasing a stain on this important organization.” [3]

False.  The Boy Scouts have always allowed homosexual scouts and leaders.  This became clear in 2013 when the BSA allowed “openly” gay scouts.[4]  In their resolution, the BSA stated their current policy:

“While the BSA does not proactively inquire about sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA.”[5]

That same day, reports appeared regarding Pascal Tessier, a 16-year old openly gay Life scout, working on his Eagle project.[6]   To obtain Eagle rank, one must be an active scout for a minimum of 12 months although other requirements can expand this timeframe greatly.

How can an OPENLY GAY scout be on track to earn his eagle if the scouts didn’t already allow gay scouts?

In fact, his older gay brother had already earned his Eagle.[7]

The issue here is “open or avowed homosexuals”.  Scouting has never emphasized sexuality.  “Openly” gay means to emphasize one’s sexual desires.  Thus, Tessier can obtain his Life rank without concern for one’s sexuality in an organization that does not emphasize sexuality. BSA builds boys into true men focused on self-sacrifice, self-discipline, and doing what is right.

The same applied to adults.  One’s sexual desires were private.  With “openly” gay leaders men, who expressly emphasize their sexuality, guide the youth.  Thus, an organization that does not emphasize sexuality MUST emphasize sexuality.

Further, claiming that a sexual desire for the same sex is normative violates the first point of the Scout Law: A Scout is trustworthy; i.e. honest and truthful.

The truth is that our bodies are made sexually for the opposite sex.  Sexual desires for the opposite sex align with our biological bodies. Same sex desires are at odds with one’s biological body.  The “openly” gay leader must deny the biological body to distract from the contradiction between his desires and his body thereby being dishonest with the way the world actually is.

Will the “openly” gay leader, tell the truth about the disease-ridden nature surrounding male homosexual sexual behavior?  For example, gay men accounted for 75% of syphilis cases in 2012.  According to the Centers for Disease Control gay men are “17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men"[8]  and are “at increased risk for STD’s like Hepatitis A, B, and C”.[9]   Expressing a sexuality as normative while ignoring its harm violates the sixth point of the Scout law: A scout is kind.

What of the Scout Law’s twelfth point – A scout is reverent? Reverence teaches that there is something greater than oneself; that it is not just about the scout; and to respect the beliefs of others.  It focuses outward, not inward.

“Openly” sexual emphasis models, for the youth, an inward focus to “who I am” rather than outward to others.

HRC expressed dismay that “an exemption for troops sponsored by religious organizations undermines and diminishes the historic nature of today's decision. Discrimination should have no place in the Boy Scouts, period.”[10]   This hardly respects others’ beliefs.

These violations of the Scout Law cannot be fixed, even in principle.  They are tied intrinsically to the notion of “openly gay” thus fundamentally transforming “this important organization”.

For years, the Boy Scouts stood up to these bullies.  In short order, the BSA will require religious charter organizations to allow “openly” gay leaders.

HRC will applaud.  Discrimination in the Boy Scouts is fine as long as HRC approves.

Developing virtue and character in young men is no longer the goal.  The scouts are being groomed for something else.


=============================
ENDNOTES
[1] Todd Leopold, “Boy Scouts change policy on gay leaders”, CNN, July 28, 2015, http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/27/us/boy-scouts-gay-leaders-feat/
[2] Ibid.
[3] Liz Halloran, “As Boy Scouts of America Takes Historic Step, Local Exemptions Will Allow Discrimination To Continue”, Human Rights Campaign, July 27, 2015, http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/as-boy-scouts-of-america-takes-historic-step-local-exemptions-will-allow-di
[4] Boy Scouts of America Statement, May 23, 2013. http://www.scouting.org/MembershipStandards/Resolution/results.aspx
  Membership Resolution, Boy Scouts of America, Jan. 1, 2014, http://www.scouting.org/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Resolution.aspx
[5] AP News, “Boy Scouts approve plan to accept openly gay boys”, Townhall.com, May 23, 2013, http://townhall.com/news/us/2013/05/23/vote-on-gay-scouts-comes-at-emotional-moment-n1604255
Staff Wire Reports, “Leaders out, members in: LDS still plan to celebrate 100 years, Idaho State Journal, May 24, 2013, A1.
[7] Robbie Brown, “Gay and Aiming for Eagle, New York Times, May 24, 2013, A16.
[8] Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Gay and Bisexual Men’s Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/STD.htm
[9]  Viral Hepatitis, Gay and Bisexual Men’s Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/viral-hepatitis.htm
[10] Todd Leopold, “Boy Scouts change policy on gay leaders”, CNN, July 28, 2015, http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/27/us/boy-scouts-gay-leaders-feat/

Being On The Right Side Of Eternity

Per Mike S. Adams on Facebook:

"This is a great time to be an American. The enemy is dismantling marriage and dismembering babies. Along with the rise of evil comes great opportunity. It is time to rise and fight knowing that although the battle will be bloody, the outcome is predetermined. We are not on the wrong side of history. We are on the right side of eternity."

Originally posted on Facebook, July 22, 2015. 

Can't Govern By Biblical Principles?

My response to Sharon Martin's "Open Letter To Sen.-Elect Lankford" published in The Oklahoma Observer on Nov. 11, 2014:

Everyone governs by a set of principles whether Biblical or not. Ms. Martin's principle is that one has "every right to live your life according to those principals, so long as you don’t hurt anyone."  By what objective standard does Martin's principle get to govern but Lankford's does not? 

Further, Martin claims that Lankford's various positions violate his Biblical principles (e.g opposition to the Affordable Care Act and minimum wage) arguing that her position is actually more Biblical. Martin advocates governing by her more Biblical principles but criticizes others trying to "govern according to [their] Biblical principals".  Her argument commits suicide.

Religion vs. Disease - A Comparison

Due to space limitations, the my Letter to the Editor "Many levels can define morality" appeared in the August 26, 2014 Columbian newspaper without citations.  Below is the letter along with the citations.  For the full analysis with citations, see the unabridged version.


Larry Little asserts, “Religion has caused more suffering and harm than all the world's diseases combined” (July 25, “Religion has caused suffering, harm” [1]). He provides four examples of purported religious-instituted harm but no diseases for comparison.

Historian Harold Lamb, author of “The Crusades: The Flame of Islam”, estimates “in the Crusades a waste of hundreds of thousands of lives”. [2] Fox’s Book of Martyrs estimates the Inquisition cost around 32,000 lives. [3] [4]

Little sets the “deaths in the thousands” in an Iraq conflict that NBC News reported originated with the battle for Mohammed’s rightful successor: “the fighting now boils down to a struggle for power, not theological doctrines”. [5]

Opposition to Israel isn’t strictly theological but is rooted in anti-Semitic calls for its annihilation, causing 65,000 deaths since 1948. [6] [7]

In contrast, PBS reports influenza (1918) killed 21 million.[8] BBC estimates the 14th century saw bubonic plague kill 200 million. [9] In fact, a Discovery Channel program states: “infectious diseases have … claimed higher casualties than wars”. [10]

And Little ignores whether those who committed evils in religion’s name were actually following that religion’s teaching.

Human beings define morality in Little’s worldview. Yet he hypocritically reaches across time and cultures imposing his man-made morality upon others, condemning the moral standard they had defined for themselves.


ENDNOTES:
[1] Little, Larry, “Religion has caused suffering, harm”, The Columbian, July 25, 2014, http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jul/25/letter-religion-has-caused-suffering-harm/. Last accessed 7/28/2014.
[2] Lamb, Harold, “The Crusades: The Flame of Islam”, Garden City Publishing Co., Inc., Garden City, NY, 1931, p. 465.
[3] Foxe, John, “Fox’s Book of Martyrs, The Project Gutenberg EBook, 2007, p.88-109.
[4] Lemieux, Simon. “The Spanish Inquisition”. History Review [serial online] December 2002;(44):44. Available from: History Reference Center, Ipswich, MA. Last Accessed: 8/18/2014.
[5] Elizabeth Chuck, “Conflict in Iraq Follows Centuries of Shiite-Sunni Mistrust, NBC News, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/conflict-iraq-follows-centuries-shiite-sunni-mistrust-n130461. Last accessed 7/28/2014.
[6] Mr. Little lists the opposition as: “Israel vs. Palestinian/Hamas/Iran/Syria/Boko Haram”.
Author’s Note: While these opponents of Israel all hold to various interpretations of Islam, Article 28 of the Hamas charter explicitly states: “Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims”. http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html?chocaid=397. Last accessed 8/17/2014.
[7] Twentieth Century Atlas – Death Tolls." RCN D.C. Metro. December 2005. http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat4.htm. Last accessed: 8/19/2014.
[8] “Worldwide flu pandemic strikes 1918 - 1919”. A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries. “The influenza commonly called ‘Spanish flu’ killed more people than the guns of World War I. Estimates put the worldwide death toll at 21,642,274. Some one billion people were affected by the disease -- half of the total human population. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dm18fl.html . Last accessed: 8/17/2018.
[9] “Decoding the Black Death”. BBC News. Oct 3, 2001. Reporting from research published in the journal Nature. “The plague, otherwise known as the Black Death, ravaged Europe and Asia between the 14th and 17th Centuries. In the 14th Century alone it is estimated to have killed 200 million people.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1576875.stm. Last Accessed: 8/17/2014.
[10] Lamb, Robert. “10 Worst Epidemics”. Discovery. Culture and History. “infectious diseases have inflicted a great deal of damage throughout the centuries. They've decimated whole populations, ended blood lines, claimed higher casualties than wars and played pivotal roles in charting the course of history.”
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-worst-epidemics.htm. Last accessed: 8/17/2014.

Has Religion Caused More Harm Than Disease?

NOTE: This is Part Two in a series dealing with a July 25 letter to The Columbian, “Religion has caused suffering, harm”.  See Part One for the first half analysis of the letter. 

In his letter, Larry Little asserts, “Religion has caused more suffering and harm than all the world's diseases combined”[i]. While he provides four examples of purported religious-instituted harm, only one has any statistics and he provides no disease examples for comparison. 

In doing so, he leaves his claim orphaned from any supporting evidence.  So let me supply the facts to see how well the Larry Little Hypothesis holds merit. 

Religious-instituted Harm

Mr. Little lists the “Crusades “, “Iraq”, “Israel vs. Palestinian/Hamas/Iran/Syria/Boko Haram” and the “Catholic Inquisition” as his four religious-instituted harms. 

Historian Harold Lamb, author of “The Crusades: The Flame”, estimates “in the Crusades a waste of hundreds of thousands of lives.[ii]   

Fox’s Book of Martyrs estimates the “Catholic Inquisition” cost around 32,000 lives.[iii] In the book, “The Spanish inquisition”, Simon Lemieux writes, “It is false to make a distinction between the political and religious roles of the Inquisition; for Spanish monarchs, as indeed for most other rulers, political and religious unity went in tandem.”[iv]  While this unity does not absolve the fact that evil occurred in religion’s name, it also means that was not the only factor as Mr. Little implies. 

Mr. Little, himself, sets the number of “violent deaths in the thousands” in an Iraq conflict that NBC News says originated with Mohammed’s death and the struggle for his rightful successor.[v] NBC states the “fighting now boils down to a struggle for power, not theological doctrines”.[vi]  

Gareth Stansfield, former United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq senior political adviser concurred.  Stanfield stated: “The struggle was over the successor to the prophet Muhammad, whether succession would go through the line of the family of the prophet, through the sons of Ali—he was Muhammad's son-in-law who was married to Fatima, his daughter—or whether it would rest with the political successors to Muhammad, the caliphs.”[vii] 

Opposition to Israel is, not strictly theological but is, rooted in anti-Semitic calls for its annihilation.  While these opponents of Israel all hold to various interpretations of Islam, Article 28 of the Hamas charter explicitly states, “Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims”.[viii]  The estimated death toll from conflicts with Israel is 65,000 since 1948.[ix]

Disease-instituted Harm

In contrast, PBS reports Influenza (1918) killed 21 million.[x]  BBC estimates the 14^th century saw Bubonic Plague kill 200 million.[xi] ABC Science reports the death toll of “75 million” in just four years.[xii]  

Mr. Little’s examples amount to hundreds of thousands of deaths compared to221 million from just two diseases.  Clearly, even if his examples were purely religious-instituted evil, the claim that religion causes more harm than disease is clearly false!  In fact, Discovery states: “infectious diseases have … claimed higher casualties than wars”.[xiii]

 

In the Name of

Moreover, Mr. Little ignores whether those who committed evils in religion’s name were following the religion’s teaching.  Greg Koukl provides this analogy: 

‘Imagine yourself a builder who sent out crews with detailed, written instructions for their work.  Instead of building, though they destroyed.  Would you be responsible?  That would depend on one thing: the written instructions.”[xiv]

 

Religious Good

Nor does Mr. Little acknowledge the good done in the name of religion. For example, Christianity originated modern education as a way to place the Bible into the hands of the common man.  All the Ivy League schools had Christian origins.  Missionaries in China, Africa, and throughout the world taught people how to read and created written language where none before existed.   

Mother Teresa and others dedicate their lives to helping the poorest.  David Livingston exposed the Arab slave trade.  William Wilberforce worked tireless to end the British slave trade.  Abolitionists worked to end slavery in America.  The Red Cross and The Salvation Army are a few organizations started upon a Christian foundation.  The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., leader of the 1960s civil rights movement, said: 

“"There must be a recognition of the sacredness of human personality.  Deeply rooted in our political and religious heritage is the conviction that every man is an heir to a legacy of dignity and worth.  Our Hebraic-Christian tradition refers to this inherent dignity of man in the Biblical term the image of God.” 

“"This idea of the dignity and worth of human personality is expressed eloquently and unequivocally in the Declaration of Independence.  “All men,” it says, “are created equal.”  They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Never has a sociopolitical document proclaimed more profoundly and eloquently the sacredness of human personality.”[xv]

 
Arbitrary vs. Non-Arbitrary Moral Standards

Beyond the factual errors and omission of evidence that compromises his narrative, Mr. Little makes a fundamental error in clear thinking. Human beings, not a supreme being, define morality in Mr. Little’s worldview. As such, no standards can exist that apply to ALL men, at ALL times, in ALL places regardless of whether they choose to follow the standard or even acknowledge it.  That would require a non-arbitrary standard outside of man. That requires a Moral Lawgiver that is outside man. 

If that Moral Lawgiver does not exist then Mr. Little correctly recognizes that men or cultures (aka groups of men) decide.  However, if men or cultures decide, then on what basis does one man or culture say their standard is more morally righteous than the standard of another man or culture? 

Yet, Mr. Little does exactly that.  He hypocritically reaches across time and cultures to impose his man-made standard upon others, condemning the moral standard those cultures had defined for themselves. 

In the end, Mr. Little betrays his own view.  He knows that men have done egregious evils but he denies the very Supreme Being that must exist for his condemnation to make sense. 

All he has left is his dislike of another’s actions.

 

That is not morality.  That is personal preference.

---

[i] Little, Larry, “Religion has caused suffering, harm”, The Columbian, July 25, 2014, http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jul/25/letter-religion-has-caused-suffering-harm/. Last accessed 7/28/2014. Mr. Little writes, “Religion has caused more suffering and harm than all the world's diseases combined. Think Crusades — that is still going on today. Think Iraq and several differing views leading to violent deaths in the thousands. Think Israel vs. Palestinian/Hamas/Iran/Syria/Boko Haram and their victims. The Catholic Inquisition led to burning witches at the stake, led to the birth of Protestantism, led to the United States, which led to "In God We Trust" on our money, which led to Hobby Lobby, which now uses less of it.”

[ii] Lamb, Harold, “The Crusades: The Flame of Islam”, Garden City Publishing Co., Inc., Garden City, NY, 1931, p. 465.

[iii] Foxe, John, “Fox’s Book of Martyrs, The Project Gutenberg EBook, 2007, p.88-109.

[iv] Lemieux, Simon. “The Spanish Inquisition”. History Review [serial online] December 2002;(44):44. Available from: History Reference Center, Ipswich, MA. Last Accessed: 8/18/2014.

[v] Elizabeth Chuck, “Conflict in Iraq Follows Centuries of Shiite-Sunni Mistrust, NBC News,   http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/conflict-iraq-follows-centuries-shiite-sunni-mistrust-n130461. Last accessed 7/28/2014.
According to Robin Wright, a joint fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace and the Woodrow Wilson Center, “The original schism between Islam's two largest sect was not over religious doctrine. It was over political leadership.”

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Conant, Eve, “Iraq Crisis: "Ancient Hatreds Turning Into Modern Realities”, National Geographic, June 18, 2014. In addition to being and a former senior political adviser for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), Gareth Stansfield is also professor of Middle East politics at the U.K.'s University of Exeter.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140618-iraq-shiite-sunni-isis-militants-maliki-borders/

Last Accessed: 8/17/2014.

[viii]  Israel vs. Palestinian/Hamas/Iran/Syria/Boko Haram.

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html?chocaid=397.  Last accessed 8/17/2014.

[ix] Twentieth Century Atlas – Death Tolls." RCN D.C. Metro. December 2005. http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat4.htm. Last accessed: 8/19/2014.

[x] “Worldwide flu pandemic strikes 1918 - 1919”. A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries. “The influenza commonly called ‘Spanish flu’ killed more people than the guns of World War I. Estimates put the worldwide death toll at 21,642,274. Some one billion people were affected by the disease -- half of the total human population. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dm18fl.html . Last accessed: 8/17/2018.

[xi] “Decoding the Black Death”. BBC News. Oct 3, 2001. Reporting from research published in the journal Nature. “The plague, otherwise known as the Black Death, ravaged Europe and Asia between the 14th and 17th Centuries. In the 14th Century alone it is estimated to have killed 200 million people.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1576875.stm. Last Accessed: 8/17/2014.

[xii] Dunham, Will. “Black death 'discriminated' between victims”. ABC/Reuters. Jan 29, 2008. “The plague of 1347 to 1351 was one of the deadliest epidemics in human history, killing about 75 million people, according to some estimates, including up to 50% of the European populations affected.”

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/01/29/2149185.htm

Last Accessed: 8/17/2014.

[xiii] Lamb, Robert. “10 Worst Epidemics”. Discovery. Culture and History. “infectious diseases have inflicted a great deal of damage throughout the centuries. They've decimated whole populations, ended blood lines, claimed higher casualties than wars and played pivotal roles in charting the course of history.”

http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-worst-epidemics.htm . Last accessed: 8/17/2014.

[xiv] Koukl, Greg. “Christianity’s Real Record”. Clear Thinking Journal. Vol. 4 No.3. Winter 1999. p. 9

[xv] King, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Ethical Demands of Integration. Dec 27, 1962.

When you are dead, you are dead?

The Columbian published a letter on July 25, 2014 that I will analyze by splitting the author’s letter into their two distinct sections.  The intact letter is available here.

Mr. Larry Little writes in his first three paragraphs: 

"Faith. The extraordinary ability to accept something as a fact when your common sense tells you it can't possibly be true.

Prayer. A verbal or mental offering to a never-seen supreme being in which there is absolutely no evidence of actual response or existence. Evidence of a prayer response is an audio recording, not that it finally rained.

Life after death? When you are dead, you are dead. You have stopped. You are not going to meet mommy and daddy again, either."

Mr. Little criticizes the religious for the “extraordinary ability to accept something as a fact when your common sense tells you it cannot possibly be true” then exempts himself by definitively claiming, “When you are dead, you are dead. You have stopped”. 

Mr. Little claim follows logically from his presupposition of realism, that only that which is perceived is real.  Since we cannot perceive what occurs beyond the grave, he concludes nothing exists.  Mr. Little cannot know this definitively.  All he can say is that no one knows.  This he does not do. 

Nor does Mr. Little ask the question of why do human beings even have a concept of “after-life”?  The concept awareness question is vastly different from the question “why would one desire an after-life?” which he dismisses as an emotional drive “to meet mommy and daddy again”. 

Yet, billions of human beings throughout history have and do have this very concept in some form. 

Mr. Little’s denial is an appeal to his own “extraordinary ability”.

 

Criticism of congresswoman unfounded

My letter responding to those calling Rep. Herrera Beutler a hypocrite for delivering a medically fragile child while voting against ObamaCare was published in The Post-Record (Camas, WA).  Letter posted below contains the citations.


Since the announcement of her daughter Abigail Rose’s birth, Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler has encountered much criticism stemming from her opposition to the Affordable Care Act and to abortion.

Rosemarie Treece’s column (“Camas congresswoman should consider the plights of other families”, August 6, 2013)[1] echoes these criticisms. While wishing Abigail, her mother and father well, Treece nevertheless criticizes Herrera Beutler for having “lack of insight into the lives of other women and her failure to allow other women to make their own reproductive decisions.”

In fact, Treece “viewed the situation as an incredible opportunity for this congresswoman to experience firsthand the agony of a family faced with the heartbreaking choices involved in managing such a pregnancy” and then faults her for not considering the “plight of other families” that have insurance via Obama Care.

Yet, these condemnations fail on at least three points:

First, USA Today reports the majority of new jobs in July are part-time partly because the new health care law “requires businesses with at least 50 employees to provide health insurance to staffers who work at least 30 hours, prompting some employers to cut employees' hours or hire more part-timers instead of adding full-time positions.”[2] Zero Hedge reports that 77% of the jobs created in 2013 are part-time.[3]

In other words, the new health law is increasing business costs such that employees do not have insurance something we were told would not happen under the AFFORDABLE Care Act.

In response, the government rolled out the “employer mandate calculation” which converts the “number of part-time employees into “full-time equivalents”[4] thereby removing the employers’ liberty to conduct their business as they see fit.

Second, Treece claims Herrera Beutler’s “situation would be much different if she were not a privileged member of society”. Perhaps, but Carolyn Shultz-Rathbun reports[5] Elijah James was born prematurely with Pierre Robin Sequence, a condition that did not allow him to breathe on his own. He was transported to two different area hospitals. He eventually arrived at Doernbecher Children’s Hospital transported by the elite OHSU PANDA Team.[6]

Nine surgeries in 18 months and still medically fragile at seven years old, Elijah continues to receive elite specialist care paid via the insurance of a father who isn’t a member of Congress and with only a high school diploma. That was costly, elite care under the old insurance. It is still unclear from “insurance companies or the state plan” if Elijah will receive future elite coverage let alone the cost.

Third, think carefully about Treece’s question “Could she imagine the pain and suffering of the mother who chooses to terminate after 20 weeks so she doesn’t have to anticipate the horrible day when she holds her newborn in her arms and watches it die?

To which the question must be asked: Does the mother’s act to intentionally end the child’s life through dismemberment rather than the unintentional death that is out of her control really reduce the mother’s pain and suffering?

And what of Treece’s other question, “What would she say to well-meaning people who ask about the baby and are unaware of the terminal diagnosis?” How about the truth? Abigail has Potter’s Syndrome and so we are doing everything we can to save and give this valuable human being a chance at life.

The reality of what abortion advocates really support springs to life in the picture of little Abigail Rose in John Hopkins University. She weighed 2 pounds, 12 ounces when she was born prematurely at 28 weeks. Why did anyone even develop an experimental technique to treat Potter’s Syndrome? Why the heroic costly measures unless Abigail, at 28-weeks’ gestation, is already a valuable and vulnerable human being.

The reality is that if this same little baby Abigail was resting inside her mother’s womb, abortion advocates say she could be “terminated” by these same doctors. After all, Treece criticizes Herrera Beutler’s support of “a bill [with no exception for fetal anomalies] that restricted abortion in the District of Columbia to women past the 20th week of pregnancy; the Beutler’s received news of their child’s condition at the 20th week.”

Thankfully, few abortion advocates would “terminate” Abigail now. Then how can it be right to kill her if she still resided in the womb.

Look at the picture[7].

END NOTES
[1] Rosemarie Treece, “Camas congresswoman should consider the plights of other families”, Camas-Washougal Post-Record, August 6, 2013, http://www.camaspostrecord.com/news/2013/aug/06/camas-congresswoman-should-also-consider-the-pligh/. Last accessed: August 8, 2013.
[2] Paul Davidson, “Many new jobs are part time and low-paying”, USA Today, August 4, 2013; http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/04/part-time-low-wage-jobs/2613483/. Last accessed: August 8, 2013.
[3] Tyler Durden, “Obamacare Full Frontal: Of 953,000 Jobs Created In 2013, 77%, Or 731,000 Are Part-Time”, August 2, 2013, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-02/obamacare-full-frontal-953000-jobs-created-2013-77-or-731000-are-part-time. Last accessed: August 8, 2013.
[4] Paul Berdard, “Sorry: Businesses cannot avoid Obamacare by switching to part-time staff”, Washington Examiner, August 1, 2013, http://washingtonexaminer.com/sorry-businesses-cannot-avoid-obamacare-by-switching-to-part-time-staff/article/2533781. Last accessed: August 8, 2013.
[5] Carolyn Shultz-Rathbun, “Herrera Beutler’s baby: a tale of two families”, Cry, Beloved Country, August 2, 2013,
http://crybelovedcountry.com/2013/08/herrera-beutlers-baby/. Last accessed: August 8, 2013.
[6] PANDA TRANSPORT, http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/health/services/doernbecher/healthcare-professionals/panda/index.cfm
[7] Marissa Harshman, “Herrera Beutler delivers prematurely; baby OK”, The Columbian, July 29, 2013. http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/jul/29/herrera-beutler-delivers-prematurely-baby-ok/. Last Accessed: August 8, 2013.