Inevitable Death of the Dollar

I have come to believe that now...more than ever...is the time to invest in something other than paper money...like let's say...gold and precious metals! I have a very strong feeling that the dollar is now on life support and we are about to pull the plug.

It is amazing to me how insane the government has become with regard to the spending and printing of money. The federal printing presses are running twenty-four hours a day with no end in sight. Yes...it started with President Bush...much to my chagrin...but it doesn't have to continue. Can't the morons in D.C. see that this not a good idea?

STOP THE MADNESS...NOW!!!!!

I have a new favorite news program , "The Glenn Beck Show", on FOX. Glenn illustrated very concisely just what has happened to the US dollar over the past eighty years, since the start of the Great Depression. Take a look...get educated...be warned...get prepared!!!



If the Obama administration does not wake up and see the light, I fear that our great country is doomed to go the way of the dinosaurs...okay maybe not the dramatic, but you get the picture...I hope.

If this madness does not end, our society, as we know it will come to an end. Our way of life will come to an end. The prosperity that has made this country so great will come to an end...and I'm not sure any of us are going to like what we may end up with.

God help America...PLEASE!!!!

Validation (Smile)

Here is a fantastic video that deals with interpersonal relationships and how we can affect one another through positive reinforcement and just a simple smile.

This video, entitled "Validation", was posted on YouTube by hughnewman1024.



"Validation" is a fable about the magic of free parking.
Starring TJ Thyne & Vicki Davis
Writer/Director/Composer - Kurt Kuenne
Winner - Best Narrative Short, Cleveland Int'l Film Festival
Winner - Jury Award, Gen Art Chicago Film Festival
Winner - Audience Award, Hawaii Int'l Film Festival
Winner - Best Short Comedy, Breckenridge Festival of Film
Winner - Crystal Heart Award, Best Short Film & Audience Award, Heartland Film Festival
Winner - Christopher & Dana Reeve Audience Award, Williamstown Film Festival
Winner - Best Comedy, Dam Short Film Festival
Winner - Best Short Film, Sedona Int'l Film Festival

White Will Embrace What Is Right?

I was pretty annoyed when I heard the ending of the inaugural benediction given by Reverend Joseph Lowery yesterday. I am so bored with the excuses offered in behalf of, and the free passes given to, these elderly black "men of the cloth" who humiliate, degrade and malign this country and its people...especially white Americans. Enough is enough.

If you missed it, here is Reverend Lowery's closing remarks during the benediction.

"Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around ... when yellow will be mellow ... when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen."

When black will not be asked to get in back?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t we, or at least 52% of Americans, just elect the first black president? Wasn't that same black president inaugurated and sworn into office right before this prayer? That would not have been possible 50 years ago. Is that being asked to get in back?

This country has made great strides in race relations. To my knowledge, blacks are no longer asked to “go to the back of the bus” or use separate bathrooms or eat at separate lunch counters or drink out of separate drinking fountains; and they are not prohibited from realizing their dreams, if they just apply themselves and have a mind to succeed.

Today, we have black teachers and professors, doctors and lawyers, judges and politicians, military commanders and generals, business owners and corporate executives, television personalities and actors who earn millions, and professional athletes who earn more during one quarter of a game than most Americans earn in an entire year. And now we have a black president. So, what the heck does he mean, when black won’t be asked to get in back? I think we are there already. So, please, give it a rest! Are we going to be subjected to this old and overused rhetoric for the next four years? Will it ever end?

When brown can stick around?

If the illegal aliens would come to this country legally like millions of immigrants have in the past, and still do; then they would be welcomed with open arms. We would not be asking for them to be sent back to where they came from if they were not breaking the law to be here....plain and simple.

When yellow will be mellow?

What the heck does that mean? Your guess is probably better than mine, since I have no idea.

When the red man can get ahead, man?

I wholeheartedly believe that the American Indians were disgracefully mistreated by the US government and land grabbing settlers who stole their land, and I know that those who still live on the reservations they were allocated to live in poverty that is equivalent to that of third world countries. However, for most who have left the reservations, they have managed to make a better life for themselves and their families. So, I think the Reverend was just trying to hard to find something to rhyme with his insulting reference to American Indians. Does he not realize that American Indians do not like being referred to as red men?

And when white will embrace what is right?

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am sick and tired of being accused of being a racist just because my skin is white. That, to me, is a racist assumption in and of itself. But, hey, when a black man throws out a racist slur or comment, he is excused because he has been the victim for so long.

What is right? What more does Reverend Joseph Lowery think whites need to do that we haven't already done? Most of us are hard working, religious people who are doing our best to raise our families properly and provide the best life that we can for them. Many of us volunteer in our own communities and churches. We serve our fellow men and our God in whatever capacity we are able. Most of us do not look at our fellow Americans as anything but that...our fellow Americans. We do not see race, sex or age as a hindrance to what one can achieve and we celebrate those achievements. We mourn with those that mourn, laugh with those that laugh and give to those in need.

So, please, Reverend Lowery, enlightened us...tell us what more we need to do. What will make you happy?

Team Sarah Tribute to Sarah Palin

Here is great tribute to Sarah Palin by SethAdamSmith.



Come join us on Team Sarah. Be a part of a conservative grassroots effort to take back America with Sarah Palin as its leader.

Hey Serrano! Don't Mess With the Twenty-Second Amendment

I knew that it was just a matter of time before the Democrats, with their new found "power", would begin their attempts to mess with the constitution. However, I just didn't think it would happen this soon, even before "The One" has been inaugurated.

The first move comes against the twenty-second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The twenty-second Amendment was ratified on February 27, 1951 and states:

22nd Amendment

1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

The history of the twenty-second Amendment, as found on U.S. Constitution Online, is:

"Since the presidency of George Washington, only one thing could be said to be totally consistent - that no President had the job for more than two full terms. Washington had been asked to run for a third term in 1796, but he made it quite clear that he had no intention of doing so; that an orderly transition of power was needed to set the Constitution in stone. And so it was for almost 150 years.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was first elected President in 1932, and re-elected in 1936. When it came time for the Democrats to nominate a candidate for the Presidency in 1940, two things had happened. First, the Republicans had made great gains in Congress in the 1938 elections. And Hitler happened. Europe was in the throes of a great war, with trouble in the Pacific, too. A change away from Roosevelt, who had led the nation through the Great Depression, did not seem wise. He was nominated for an unprecedented third term, and won. It was not a landslide victory, however, and it is debatable that FDR would have had a third term had it not been for the war. When 1944 rolled around, changing leaders in the middle of World War II, which the United States was now fully engaged in, also seemed unwise, and FDR ran for and was elected to, a fourth term.

His life was nearly over, however, and his Vice President, Harry Truman, became President upon FDR's death less than 100 days after his inauguration. Though FDR's leadership was seen by many as a key reason that the U.S. came out of WWII victorious, the Congress was determined, once the war ended, to ensure that Washington's self-imposed two-term limit become the law of the land. Specifically excepting Truman from its provisions, the 22nd Amendment passed Congress on March 21, 1947. After Truman won a second term in 1948, it was ratified on February 27, 1951 (1,439 days). Truman could have run for a third term, but bowed out early before campaigning began."

Now the twenty-second Amendment and the U.S. Constitution is being threatened, which is sure to be only the first of many Constitutional threats we will see in the coming months and years.

Representative Jose Serrano, a Democrat from New York, is proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second amendment, thus removing the presidential term limits. H.J. Res. 5, which was introduced to the 111th Congress on January 6, 2009, states:

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

'Article---

`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'.

This is not the first time Jose Serrano has proposed this legislation. He unsuccessfully introduced legislation to repeal the twenty-second Amendment on six previous occasions:

1. H.J. Res. 19 to the 105th Congress on January 7, 1997 did not make it out of committee.
2. H.J. Res. 17 to the 106th Congress on January 6, 1999 did not make it out of committee.
3. H.J. Res. 4 to the 107th Congress on January 3, 2001 did not make it out of committee.
4. H.J. Res. 11 to the 108th Congress on January 7, 2003 did not make it out of committee.
5. H.J. Res. 9 to the 109th Congress on January 4, 2005 did not make it tout of committee.
6. H.J. Res. 8 to the 110th Congress on January 4, 2007 did not make it to committee.

He's nothing if not persistent. However, his first six attempts were basically doomed from the outset.

1. When H.J. Res. 19 was introduced to the 105th Congress, he had to deal with a Republican controlled Congress (55-45) who would have never passed legislation that would have allowed Bill Clinton to serve more than two terms.
2. When H.J. Res. 17 was introduced to the 106th Congress, he once again had to deal with a Republican controlled Congress (55-45) who would have never passed legislation that would have allowed Bill Clinton to serve more than two terms.
3. When H.J. Res. 4 was introduced to the 107th Congress, he had to deal with an incoming Republican president and an evenly split Congress (50-50), with Democrats who would have never passed legislation that allow a Republican president to serve more than two terms.
   
4. When H.J. Res. 11 was introduced to the 108th Congress, he once again had to deal with a Republican president and a Republican controlled Congress (51-48-1). There were enough Democrats to make sure no legislation was ever passed that would allow George W. Bush to serve more than two terms.
   
5. When H.J. Res. 9 was introduced to the 109th Congress, he was faced with an unpopular Republican president, a Republican controlled Congress (55-44-1) and enough Democrats to make sure no legislation was ever passed that would allow George W. Bush to serve more than two terms.
6. When H.J. Res. 8 was introduced to the 110th Congress, he was still faced with an unpopular Republican president. However, this time he had a Democrat controlled Congress (49-2-49, with the Independents voting with Democrats), which would, once again, make sure no legislation was ever passed that would allow George W. Bush to serve more than two terms.

You know what they say, "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again." His persistence may finally payoff for him and his Democrat cronies. This time he may finally have the environment he needs to get his legislation passed in Congress.

1. He has an incoming Democrat president who has made it clear how he feels about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
2. He has a Democrat controlled Congress (56-2-41, with 1 vacancy and the Independents who vote with the Democrats), which wants nothing more than to stick it to the Republican party and make sure they are neutralized and irrelevant for years to come, as well as to make sure their guy and themselves remain in power for as long as possible.
3. There might be just enough Republicans with no backbone (as we keep seeing day in and day out) that will want to look conciliatory or centrist and decide to vote for the proposal, thus giving him a two-thirds majority needed to pass both houses of Congress.
   

Our only hope might lie with the states, if by any chance it does happen to pass both houses of Congress. It might be a lot harder to get three-quarters of the states to ratify the Amendment, where currently only twenty-nine states are run by Democrat governors.

What does this mean for you and me, if this Amendment should happen to be repealed? Can you say dictatorship? How would you like to lead, or should I say controlled, by someone like Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro, or worse?

Some people might say, "What's the big deal? It will still be in the hands of the people to vote in a new president if they don't like the one in office."

My answer to that is, "How many Congressmen and women do you know who get voted back into office term after term after term, not because they have accomplished anything, but because of name recognition or because they have more money to spend than their opponent?"

Too many people are unwilling to go with the unknown, no matter how bad the known is. The office of president would be no different. It is a wonderful thing that we are guaranteed to have new blood and new ideas in the White House every eight years....even when we may not agree with those new ideas. If only it were the same for the rest of our government.

Every red-blooded, freedom loving American needs to stand shoulder to shoulder on this and every other threat to our Constitution. We need to make sure that our Constitution is preserved and that our rights are not trampled on. Let's make our voices heard loud and clear and make sure Representative Serrano's seventh attempt to thwart the twenty-second Amendment is once again defeated.

Requisite Experience?

I'm truly amazed at the Democrats on Capital Hill. NOW they're concerned about requisite experience as a requirement to work in the highest echelon of the federal government.

Obama's choice for our next surgeon general is CNN's chief medical correspondent and neurosurgeon, Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

Here's one example. According to The Hill newspaper, Obama is finding opposition from Democrat Representative John Conyers, a proponent of universal healthcare, who cites Gupta’s lack of “the requisite experience.”

Conyers wrote, “It is not in the best interests of the nation to have someone like this who lacks the requisite experience needed to oversee the federal agency that provides crucial health care assistance to some of the poorest and most under served communities in America.”

Say what? You mean experience is necessary to run cabinet posts, but it isn't necessary to run the country?

We now have a president, who I have nicknamed "stutter bug", who has never made a single executive decision because he has never run a city or a state. His governmental experience consists of serving as an Illinois State Senator for eight years and a US Senator for two years (most of which he has spent running for president) where he made no executive decisions either.

We are now faced with the grim reality of having the most liberal and least experienced man to ever hold the highest office in our nation....a man who will make critical decisions that will affect our lives in the present as well as possibly change this country for future generations. Yet, that fact didn't seem to bother the Democrats, the Obamanites or the Obama Zombies when one of their own was running for president. So why should it now?

Sarah Palin: America's Hope for the Future

May God protect and preserve Governor Sarah Palin, America's hope for the furture. Through her the phoenix will rise again.

Governor Sarah Palin Speaks Out

Here is a great video clip taken from an upcoming documentary by John Ziegler in which Governor Sarah Palin speaks out about the treatment she and her family received from the mainstream media.

Saving 4 Sarah

I am a member a very exciting website called Team Sarah, "a coalition of women dedicated to advancing the values that Sarah Palin represents in the political process. Men welcome too!"

I am writing this blog post for three reasons:
1) To invite all my family and friends to join the Team Sarah community. Team Sarah has a very aggressive goal of reaching a total membership of 100,000 by inauguration day. We currently have 64, 080 members.
2) To invite my friends and family to also join the Team Sarah group, Saving 4 Sarah. Saving 4 Sarah is a campaign fund raising club with the goal of raising as much money as possible for the hopeful presidential run of Governor Sarah Palin in 2012.
3) To invite my family and friends who do not want to join Team Sarah, but would still like to put some money aside to support a true conservative in the next presidential race, to do so on their own.

Here is a portion of the letter that we are sending out to individuals who are already members of the Team Sarah community. This explains how the campaign works (the picture below is my Saving 4 Sarah money jar that I am putting my weekly contribution into).

When we explored the realm of possibilities, we concluded that a Campaign Club for Sarah might be a bold, imaginative way to best motivate everyone. So, we started the Team Sarah Group, SAVING 4 SARAH.

You can find us @ http://www.teamsarah.org/group/saving4sarah. We strongly urge everyone who supports and defends Sarah to make a small sacrifice each week.

This is how it works. You select a shoebox, jar, coffee can or piggy bank, decorate it if you like, label it with a nickname maybe, and save just $2 every week. The way WE have it figured, that's about $325 in 3 years. If just 100,000 people follow our plan, over $30 million might be raised for Sarah's run in 2012. If you can afford more than $2, by all means do it. You may also wish to make it a family project. IT‘S YOUR MONEY. You have the final say of how to dispense it.

We are hoping for bigger things! We prefer seven-figured numbers, envisioning 1 million donors saving $300 million and possibly even 3 million or more collecting almost 1 Billion Dollar$ for Sarah.

Barack Obama amassed $650 million for his campaign by establishing a broad base of small donors early-on. He was able to return to them over and over for additional funding, whenever he needed. Well, my fellow Americans, we can do the very same thing and more!!

Please pass this email along to your good friends and frequently utilize it as a recruiting tool to gain more members for all the Team Sarah groups. This is totally a grass roots effort.. Let’s show the party bosses and stuffed-shirt elites in Washington, that WE THE PEOPLE still have clout! Saving 4 Sarah

-------------------------------------

If you think this cause is worth a little sacrifice, then please join us, either as a member of the Team Sarah community and as a member the Saving 4 Sarah group or just on your own.

Please be aware, no one from the Team Sarah website or the Saving 4 Sarah group will ever ask you to send the money directly to them. You will be responsible for sending your own contribution to the Palin campaign if and when the time comes.

I hope you will join us in helping to take back America and to put a true conservative in the White House. If Governor Palin decides to run those who support her need to be ready to help her succeed.

According to the American Mainstream Media Winning Isn't News

This article, entitled "Winning Isn't News", was posted on the Investor's Business Daily website on July 7, 2008.

Iraq: What would happen if the U.S. won a war but the media didn't tell the American public? Apparently, we have to rely on a British newspaper for the news that we've defeated the last remnants of al-Qaida in Iraq.

London's Sunday Times called it 'the culmination of one of the most spectacular victories of the war on terror.' A terrorist force that once numbered more than 12,000, with strongholds in the west and central regions of Iraq, has over two years been reduced to a mere 1,200 fighters, backed against the wall in the northern city of Mosul.

The destruction of al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) is one of the most unlikely and unforeseen events in the long history of American warfare. We can thank President Bush's surge strategy, in which he bucked both Republican and Democratic leaders in Washington by increasing our forces there instead of surrendering.

We can also thank the leadership of the new general he placed in charge there, David Petraeus, who may be the foremost expert in the world on counter-insurgency warfare. And we can thank those serving in our military in Iraq who engaged local Iraqi tribal leaders and convinced them America was their friend and AQI their enemy.

Al-Qaida's loss of the hearts and minds of ordinary Iraqis began in Anbar Province, which had been written off as a basket case, and spread out from there.

Now, in Operation Lion's Roar the Iraqi army and the U.S. 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment is destroying the fraction of terrorists who are left. More than 1,000 AQI operatives have already been apprehended.

Sunday Times (London) reporter Marie Colvin, traveling with Iraqi forces in Mosul, found little AQI presence even in bullet-ridden residential areas that were once insurgency strongholds, and reported that the terrorists have lost control of its Mosul urban base, with what is left of the organization having fled south into the countryside.

Meanwhile, the State Department reports that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government has achieved 'satisfactory' progress on 15 of the 18 political benchmarks 'a big change for the better from a year ago.'

Things are going so well that Maliki has even for the first time floated the idea of a timetable for withdrawal of American forces. He did so while visiting the United Arab Emirates , which over the weekend announced that it was forgiving almost $7 billion of debt owed by Baghdad, an impressive vote of confidence from a fellow Arab state in the future of a free Iraq.

But where are the headlines and the front-page stories about all this good news? As the Media Research Center pointed out last week, 'the CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News and CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 were silent Tuesday night about the benchmarks 'that signaled political progress.'

The war in Iraq has been turned around 180 degrees both militarily and politically because the president stuck to his guns. Yet apart from IBD, Fox News Channel and parts of the foreign press, the media doesn't seem to consider this historic event a big story.

-------------------------------------

I find it absolutely incredible that the US media continues to cover all the negatives in Iraq, while ignoring the successes. You can bet that once "The One" has taken office we will hear nothing but the positives and he will be given credit by the liberal media for any and all successes, warranted or not.

I can't imagine what is like to be a soldier laying his or her life on the line only to be constantly insulted by an ungrateful media and a bunch of ignorant politicians who should have kept their noses out of the war from the beginning.

I am so thankful to President Bush for his willingness to see this war to its end despite the insults, criticisms and lack of support. I am even more thankful to the brave men and women who sacrifice so much for the lives of their fellow Americans and others around the world.

Let's Stand Together Against the Approval of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)

This information and plea was posted on the Team Sarah website in the Conservative Christians group by one of its members named Sue. She has given me permission to post this for your information.

Those of us who truly believe in the sanctity of life and want to stand against abortion in all its forms must stand together if we ever hope to end the appalling practice of murdering the unborn.

If you are opposed to abortion then there is bad news on the horizon. For those of you who do not know, the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) is set to be signed if Congress passes it on January 21-22, 2009. The FOCA is the next sick chapter in the book of abortion. If made a law then all limitations on abortion will be lifted which will result in the following:

1) All hospitals, including Catholic hospitals will be requited to perform abortions upon request. If this happened Bishops vow to close down all Catholic hospitals - more than 30% of all hospitals in the United States.
2) Partial birth abortions would be legal and have no limitations.
3) All U.S. taxpayers would be funding abortions.
4) Parental notification will no longer be required.
5) The number of abortions will increase by a minimum of 100,000 annually.

Perhaps most importantly the government will now have control in the issue of abortion. This could result in a future amendment that would force women to have abortions in certain situations (rape, down syndrome babies, etc.) and could even regulate how many children women are allowed to have.

Needless to say, this information is disturbing, but sadly true. As Catholics, as Christians, as anyone who is against the wanton slaughter of innocent children, we must stand united in defense of life. We must stop the horrific act before it becomes law.

The Plan:

For Catholics: To say a novena (9 days of prayer) along with fasting starting on January 11th. The rosary is recommended with intentions to stop the FOCA.

For non-Catholics: Pray your strongest prayers with the same intentions or nine consecutive days. Fast if possible.

The hope is that this will branch and blossom as to become a global effort with maximum impact. We have very little time so we must act fast.

Just do three things:

1) Pass this letter to as many people as possible.
2) Do it immediately.
3) Start the prayers on January 11th and pray for nine consecutive days.

Fast if you are able. Remember with God all things are possible and the power of prayer is undeniable. We must stop this senseless act and support life.

-------------------------------------

Let's give this a try and do whatever we can to fight this growing practice. If we don't speak up for the unborn who will?

Answers to "Pro-Choice" Thinking

This excellent article was posting on the "Team Sarah" website in the "Pro-Woman, Pro-Life" group by a member with the screen name bethanyclaudia. Although she admits that she did not write this article (it was forwarded to her), she has given permission for it to be shared as much as possible.

I feel that it is worth adding to my blog, especially with the pro-abortion administration which will soon take office.

Those of us who want to stand against abortion in all its forms must have as much ammunition as we can find to fight the upcoming battle. So, here is some great ammunition for starters.

1. The "pro-choice" philosophy says, "We have the 'choice' to abort a child." It is a proven medical and scientific fact that the "choice" some people accept is the killing of a person. Defenders of slavery used this same strategy. "I'm not going to own a slave, but I don't have a right to tell you what to do." Abortion is the killing of a human being. The choice is always wrong.
"Father of Modern Genetics" Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the Senate, "To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion....it is plain experimental evidence."

Dr.Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added, "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."

Dr. McCarthy de Mere, medical doctor and law professor, University of Tennessee, testified, "The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception."

Dr. Alfred Bongiovanni, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, concluded, "I am no more prepared to say that these early stages represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty.....is not a human being."

2. The "pro-choice" philosophy says, "The government has no right to interfere in someone's personal choices." The government restricts choices all the time. Do you have a choice to steal, to drive drunk, slander other people? Every abortion kills a person who is a unique individual. That is a proven medical and scientific fact. Simply calling something a personal "choice" does not make it right. It is a personal decision to write bad checks, but it is still wrong.

3. The "pro-choice" philosophy and abortion industry say, "The government has no right to interfere in the toughest decision a woman will ever make." Well, killing your own child should be a tough decision. If a man were thinking of killing his 10 year old daughter to collect on an insurance policy, it is logical to assume that it would be a tough decision for him to make. But that does not mean it should be legal.

4. The "pro-choice" philosophy says that the government has no right to force a woman to have a child. Can you imagine a man on trial for killing his five year old saying, "The government has no right to force me to have a child". Legally protecting the lives of the unborn has nothing to do with forcing a woman to have a child. Once a woman is pregnant, she has already brought a child into the world; she is already a mother.

5. The "pro-choice" philosophy says, "The government should not be involved in the practice of medicine." First, telling doctors they can not kill someone is not practicing medicine; it is common decency. Second, the medical profession and drug industry are the most highly regulated businesses in America . The glaring exception is the abortion industry which is virtually unregulated. A school nurse can't give a child an aspirin without her parents' permission. But she can take her to get an abortion without her parents ever knowing.

6. Pro-choice people cry out, "The government has no right to tell a woman what she can or can't do with her own body." The baby inside her mother is a separate individual from her mother with her own genetic code, blood type, fingerprints, brain, beating heart, nervous system. The child in the womb feels pain independent from her mother, can be awake while she is asleep, can be healthy while her mother is sick. The baby in the womb is her own person.
By the way, the government does regulate some things we can do with our own bodies. We can't sell our bodies for sex, sell our organs to people in need of transplants, or put certain drugs into our bodies.

7. The "pro-choice" philosophy says. "A woman cannot be free unless she has the right to abortion."What kind of freedom is it to be able to kill your own child? Abortion is not a sign that women are free but that women are desperate and have been fed a lie.

8. The "pro-choice" philosophy says, "Why should a fetus have more rights than a woman?"This is the abortion industry's sleazy way of pitting mothers against their own children. Once a woman has conceived a child, she has brought a new life into the world who is as fully human as she is. The right to life does not depend on size or age but on being a human person. Does a toddler have a greater right to live than an infant? A teenager more of a right to life than a toddler? Does a strong, intelligent adult deserve to have more rights than a handicapped child? If the billion dollar abortion industry would stop pitting women against their own children and begin to show even a little compassion for the child in the womb, countless women would be saved from a lifetime of pain and regret. And countless children would be saved from death.

9. The abortion industry and "pro-choice" mindset say. "If a woman is carrying a child with a handicap, she should not be forced to have it. Handicapped children lead terrible lives." People with disabilities are no less human than any other people. They have the same right to life as a healthy person. Can you imagine a drunk driver who kills a handicapped child saying he should be let off the hook because the "quality of life" of the child he killed was not up to his standards? Do you really feel qualified to determine the quality of life of another person and then decide if he should live or die? That is exactly what you are doing if you say handicapped children should be aborted.

10. What about a single mom who just can't afford another child? Poverty is no excuse for killing children. What if a woman had four kids and lost her job? Does this give her the right to drown two of them? To suggest that someone's right to life can be denied because of his financial status is disgusting. The "poverty deserves death" idea of the abortion industry is another one of its sleazy strategies. Pro-lifers have opened well over 3000 help centers for mothers in need. The abortion industry has opened zero; it just makes billions from killing the children of the poor.

11. Pro-lifers talk about late term abortion as if they were common. They are very common. Just one example is abortionist George Tiller who has admitted to killing OVER 10,000 babies between 24 and 36 weeks. Abortionist Martin Haskell has admitted to committing so many late term abortions, he can't remember the number. Life Dynamics has both of these doctors admitting these statements on audio tape.

12. The abortion industry and "pro-choice" smoke screen say. "No one can prove when life begins. It's up to the woman to decide based on her own beliefs." No modern medical, scientific or biology text says that life begins at any other time other than conception. Life is a continuum for the moment of conception until death. We have different names for the stages of life: zygote, fetus, infant, toddled, teenager, adult, middle ager, elderly, but they are ALL STAGES OF HUMAN LIFE. Can a woman decide that her child in not fully human until she can walk on her own? Would it be OK for her to kill her child if this is what she believed? It is a proven medical and scientific fact that life begins at conception. All of your genetic material was present at the moment of conception; nothing was added later. A person is a person no matter how small.

13. The abortion industry and "pro-choice" rhetoric say, "Pro-lifers talk about abortion as killing a baby. That is not true. There is a fetus, but no baby." The word "fetus" simply describes a stage of development of human life. When the person moves from the inside to the outside of the womb, it is called by a different name such as infant or newborn despite the biological fact that fundamentally, no change has taken place. As time goes on, the person will be called by different names, but at no stage is she more or less human. When they talk about a child in the womb whom they do NOT intend to kill, even pro-choice people call her a baby. But if they intend to kill her, they attempt to dehumanize her by calling her a "product of conception", "a clump of cells", or "a potential life." Have you ever heard someone say, "My clump of cells just moved", or "My product of conception just kicked"? Or has a couple ever looked at an ultrasound of their baby in the womb and said, "Look! You can see the potential life's heart beating and sucking her thumb"? Nothing is created at birth. It is a person who comes out of her mother. And it is a person who is killed in every abortion.

14. The abortion industry says, "The world has a major problem with overpopulation. So how would we feed these children when millions are starving?" The philosophy that it's acceptable to kill certain completely innocent human beings in order to accomplish social objectives is not only the very definition of evil, it's irrational and ineffective. In America's case we are talking about a country of affluence that kills over 3000 children a day, mostly for convenience. The number of children in America who would one day starve to death for all practical purposes is zero. To kill millions of children to keep a tiny fraction of them from being hungry is lunacy.

The children in the world who are starving to death are almost exclusively in third-world nations where repressive regimes cause pain and destruction through corruption and political disputes. It is a well-proven fact that people do not starve to death because of overpopulation or because there is not enough food in the world. The earth produces more than enough food to feed every man, woman, and child. Killing children through abortion won't overthrow a totalitarian regime; it won't allow free enterprise in other countries. It won't improve farming techniques, won't build roads, won't improve food distribution systems. Using abortion as a solution to poverty does allow nations and individuals to pass the buck onto the poor and frees them from their responsibility to help those in need and reinforces a "death-as-a-solution" philosophy that just leads to more poverty and broken lives.

15. Why don't pro-lifers do something to help people who are already born?
There are over 3000 free crisis pregnancy centers in the United States funded and staffed entirely by pro-life people. Each provides some or all of the following: friendship, counseling, free sonograms, free room and board, free clothing, free baby items, medical services, assistance for other children, post-natal instruction, job placement services, legal counseling, adoptions, help for moms to continue their education, post-abortion counseling, and many other free services.
On the other hand the billion dollar abortion industry offers only one choice: a dead baby. Of the over 3000 crisis pregnancy centers in the United States, not one is funded or operated by the "pro-choice" crowd. I guess they offer only one "choice".

In our city we have wonderful Pregnancy Care Centers as well as Catholic Social Services and Lutheran Ministries, all of which provide real help for moms. But above and beyond that, the pro-life people who pray at the abortion clinic will hold a baby shower for any mother who chooses life for her baby. But the help does not stop there. They are in it for the long run. The pro-lifers are willing to help mothers find apartments, jobs, schools. We keep in touch with any of the mothers who would like us to do so and help in any way we can, even years after they have given birth. WHY? Because these mothers who choose life deserve our love and support, but even more than that, they become like family to us. Sometime you should try holding a baby who was saved from abortion, and see if you could ever believe in "choice".

The billion dollar abortion industry and "pro-choice" mindset say pro-lifers don't help women in need. This is a flat out lie. Maybe someone should ask those who make millions from abortion what they do to help society besides kill children.

16. Some children lead terrible lives. Wouldn't it be better if they were aborted? What about all of the children who will be abused because they are unwanted? We need to make sure every child is a wanted child. Do you really want to suggest we eliminate some child abuse that might occur sometime in the future by executing the potential victims today? That makes about as much sense as eradicating wife-beating by killing all married women. Of course, this type of question completely ignores the fact that abortion itself is the ultimate example of child abuse. Since abortion was made legal in 1973, we have killed children by the tens of millions, yet child abuse has increased dramatically. According the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in 1973 there were 167,000 cases of child abuse reported in the U.S. In 2002 they reported 1,694,756 child abuse investigations in the U.S. If legal abortion is going to reduce the number of unwanted and abused children by, wel l, reducing the number of children, when is this going to happen? We have killed close to 50 million children in the U.S. since 1973. How many more children do we have to kill before this plan begins to work?

17. "Abortion must be allowed for rape and incest." Rape and incest are hideous crimes; people who commit them should be punished. Nevertheless, a baby who results from rape or incest is an innocent human being with the same right to life as everyone else. Two wrongs don't make a right. Why should we add the crime of murder to these other crimes? We should not kill a child for the sins of his father. Killing an innocent human being is never justifiable.

18. What gives you religious people the right to force a woman not to have an abortion? A person does not have to be especially religious to say it's wrong to kill a child any more than you have to be religious to say it is wrong to steal money. In reality abortion is a civil and human rights issue. Just because so many people are motivated by their religious beliefs to oppose the killing of children through abortion does not make it a religious issue. If the argument is that abortion should be off limits to the law because people with religious beliefs oppose it, shouldn't everything in the Ten Commandments be off limits to the law?

19. The Bible and Jesus never say anything about abortion. The vast majority of behaviors that are immoral and illegal in America today are not mentioned in the Bible. Jesus did not give us a laundry list of every offense and sin against God. The Bible and Jesus didn't mention stock manipulation or child pornography, but it is safe to conclude that Jesus spoke against theft and lust.

The Bible and Jesus repeatedly warns against doing harm to children, shedding innocent blood, committing murder, etc. The Bible and Jesus are also perfectly clear that God is the Author and Originator of all life from the moment of conception. Both in the Old and the New Testaments. there is never a distinction between born and unborn people, nor is there any different language used to describe them. The unborn child is always refereed to in the exact same manner as the born child. Logically, we have no choice but to accept the fact that God views them as the same and intends for us to treat them in the same way.

Psalm 139: 13. You it was who fashioned my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother's womb.
Luke 1: 15. And he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb.
Luke 1: 41. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb.
Isaiah 49: 1. The Lord called me before I was born, He named me from my mother's womb.
Genesis 25:22. The children pressed on each other in the womb.
Jeremiah 1: 5. Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.
Psalm 22:10. From my mother's womb you have been my God.
Hosea 12: 3. Even in the womb Jacob supplanted his brother.
Mt 25: 40. "...Truly I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethern, you did it to me."
Mt 19: 17. "...If you would enter life, keep the commandments."
Exodus 20: 13. "YOU SHALL NOT KILL."
20. Jesus said: "...Truly I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethern, you did it to me." (Matthew 25:40)

ABORTION IS THE KILLING OF A PERSON WHO IS COMPLETELY LOVED BY GOD, HAS AN IMMORTAL SOUL, AND IS OUR SISTER OR BROTHER.

-----------------------------

"Let us ask Our Lady to give us her heart, so beautiful, so pure, so immaculate, so full of love and humility, that we may be able to receive Jesus in the Bread of Life, love Him as she loved Him, and serve Him in the distressing disguise of the poorest of the poor." Blessed Teresa of Calcutta