Yes

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Born Alive Act

The Born Alive act passed. But 183 Dem. legislators voted to deny medical care to babies who survive abortion. They voted for infanticide. https://twitter.com/GOPLeader/status/954393500363165696

They are not pro-choice.  They are pro-abortion.  They are pro-death.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/abortionist-unsettling-babies-born-alive/

A few examples of cases where babies survived their abortions only to be killed directly or denied medical care, as reported by clinic workers. Estimates are between 900 and 1200 aborted babies are born alive- annually.

 

MOre here:http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/05/1270-babies-born-alive-after-failed-abortions-in-the-united-states/

 

https://www.liveaction.org/news/abortionist-unsettling-babies-born-alive/

https://www.liveaction.org/news/1200-too-many-a-look-at-born-alive-abortion-statistics/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Elizabeth Warren’s Faux Indian Heritage

Elizabeth Warren claims she has never benefited from her claims that she’s Native American (claims she makes in the face of DNA and historical evidence to the contrary).  However, that is at odds with these facts:

“Warren also listed herself as a minority in a legal directory published by the Association of American Law Schools from 1986 to 1995. She’s never provided a clear answer on why she stopped self-identifying.

“She was also listed as a Native American in federal forms filed by the law schools at Harvard University and University of Pennsylvania where she worked.

And in 1996, as Harvard Law School was being criticized for lacking diversity, a spokesman for the law school told the Harvard Crimson that Warren was Native American.”
Those facts are taken from an article that is, overall, favourable to her.   For example, while it does mention her “Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee” recipes in the ‘Pow Wow Chow ” cookbook, it omits the information that her recipes are plagiarized from a French chef.

More significantly, the article does not explain that during her political career, Warren never made any public claims about her alleged native heritage until after 2012, when reporters discovered Harvard represented her as a Native American.  And,in fact, her first response to questions about that was to claim ignorance:

“When confronted by reporters, Warren claimed not to know why Harvard[6] was promoting her as Native American, and said that she only learned of it by reading the newspaper reports.”

But journalists (remember when we had those?) discovered she herself had claimed minority status as an American Indian at Harvard and Penn State.  She is the one who listed herself as a minority, so it’s odd she would say she has no idea why Harvard represented her as Native American.

It doesn’t mention that when asked why she listed herself as a minority she lied:

“I listed myself in the directory in the hopes that it might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something that might happen with people who are like I am. Nothing like that ever happened, that was clearly not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off,”

That explanation did not make sense[15] because the AALS faculty directory only listed Warren as “minority,” not as “Native American,” so putting herself on that list was not a way to meet other Native Americans.

Later, reporters uncovered that Warren had represented herself to both U. Penn[16] and Harvard for federal reporting purposes[17] as Native American.  Warren herself never disclosed that she had represented herself to U. Penn and Harvard as Native American, that information was discovered by reporters.

The Boston Globe[18] reported that Warren received recognition as a “minority” law professor while at U. Penn Law School:

“The University of Pennsylvania, where Warren  taught at the law school  from 1987 through 1995, listed her as a minority in a “Minority Equity  Report” posted on its website. The report, published in 2005,  well after her departure, included her as the winner of a faculty award in 1994.  Her name was highlighted in bold, the designation used for minorities in the  report.”

Investigative reporter Michael Patrick Leahy of Breitbart.com uncovered that in 1993, when Warren was a Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School, the Harvard Women’s Law Journal included Warren on a list of Women of Color in Legal Academia.[19]  It was the policy of the Law Journal to check with the persons on the list before they were listed.”

She never made any claims to Native American ancestry until she used it related to being hired by universities.  As soon as she gained tenure at Harvard she stopped making those claims, and never made them again until journalists uncovered her history- and even then, her first response was to deny that she had anything to do with it and claim she had no idea what Harvard was talking about and only heard it by reading the paper (shades of Obama). It seems obvious that of course she benefited from those claims- it’s why she only made them when and where she did.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The skincare aisle

 

 

Q

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Responses

The Victory of Reason, Stark

Theology distinguishes Christianity from other religions, says Stark. It is ‘a sophisticated, highly rational discipline that is fully developed only in Christianity.
“…theology consists of formal reasoning about God. The emphasis is on discovering God’s nature, intentions, and demands, and on understanding how these define the relationship between human beings and God. The gods of polytheism cannot sustain theology because are far too inconsequential. Theology necessitates an image of God as a conscious, rational, supernatural being of unlimited power and scope who cares about humans and imposes moral codes and responsibilities upon them, thereby generating serious intellectual questions such as Why does God allow us to sin? does the sixth commandment prohibit war? When does an infant acquire a soul?”
“To fully appreciate the nature of theology, it is useful to explore why there are no theologians in the East, Consider Taoism, the Tao is conceived of as a supernatural essence, an underlying mystical force or principle governing life, but over that is impersonal, remote, lacking consciousness, and definitely not a being. It is the “Eternal way,” the cosmic force that produces harmony and balance. According to Lao-tau, the Tao is ‘Always nonexistent,’ yet “always existent,” “unnameable,” and the “name that can be named,” both “soundless and formless, ” it is always without desires,” one might meditate forever on such an essence, but it offers little to reason about. The same applies to Buddhism and Confucianism. Althought it is true that the popular versions of these faiths are polytheistic and involve an immense array of small gods (as is true of popular Taoism as well) the ‘pure’ forms of theise aiths as pursuded by the intellectual elite, are godless, and postulate only a vage divine essence- buddha specifically denied the existence of a conscious God. The East lacks theologians because those who might otherwise take up sich an intellectual ursuit reject its first premise: the existence of a conscioius, all-powerful God.”
“In contrast, Christian theologians have devoted centuries to reasoning about what God may have really meant by various passages in scripture and over time the interpretations often have evolved in quite dramatic and extensivie ways. For example, not only does the Bible not condemn astrology but the story of the Wise Men following the star might seem to suggest that it is valid. However, in the fith century Saint Augustine reasoned that astrology is false becauseto believe that one’s fate is predestined in the stars stands in opposition to God’s gift of free will. In similar fashion, although many early Christians, including the apostle Paul, accepted that Jesus had brothers, born of Mary and fathered by Joseph, this view came increasingly into conflict with developing theological views about Mary. The matter was finally resolved in the thirteenth century when Saint Thoams aquinas analyzed the doctrine of Christ’s virgin birth to deduce that Mary did nto bear other children. “So we assert without qualification that the mother of God conceinved as a virgin gave birth as a virgin and remained a virgin after the birth. The brothers of the Lord were not natural brothers, born of the same mother, but blood-relations.”

Posted in Books | Leave a comment


  • The Common Room on Facebook

  • Amazon: Buy our Kindle Books

  • Search Amazon


    Try Audible and Get Two Free Audiobooks

  • Brainy Fridays Recommends: