Connect with us

Culture and Religion

John Pavlovitz’s “Christian” fail in attacking Pro-Life position

Published

on

The abortion argument is a boring, but crucial argument. When engaging in debate with the pro-abortion side, they usually have three responses. The first is about moral personhood. This classic debate where the pro-abort argues that the unborn are not human. The second response is the classic feminist bumper sticker logic. Basically, unless you’re a woman (or identify as one), you don’t have a say.

This fallacious logic’s response to a pro-life woman is to say that’s their choice but you can’t decide for me. Lately, the pro-abortion side has come to the understanding that unless the pro-life side supports expanding entitlement programs, their logic is invalid. To me, they employ the “pro-birth” argument because the other arguments have failed the test of time, so if they can detract the conversation to other topics, they can put the pro-life side on defense. John Pavlovitz is unique in that he is attacking the pro-life side using Response #3 while claiming to be a Christian.

If you are unfamiliar, John Pavlovitz is a heretical pastor who delves in universalism and the ever so present “social justice gospel” heresy. To him, Islam worships the same God, homosexuality is not a sin, hell?, support for entitlement programs is a direct reflection of one’s compassion, and Christianity’s biggest enemy, in America, are those who are conservative theologically and politically. As a result, he’s the left’s shining religious star in their Resistance.

He posted an article claiming that the Pro-Life side is losing.

The best-case scenario right now for you, is an eventual overturning of Roe V Wade, and the criminalizing of abortion. That’s really always been the end game here, and I imagine that prospect propels you now.Yet you and I both know that this reality won’t save any lives, that it will actually endanger more.

This point is made and conveniently abandoned to avoid scrutiny. Pavlovitz didn’t want the reader focus on his miscalculation. But alas, I can’t help but do the math. Let’s say there are 300000 abortions every year in America, a low estimate but a round number for this exercise. We overturn Roe v Wade and criminalize abortion just as he says. That’s 300000 lives saved right? Not quite. I think we would all agree that the criminalizing and punishing of an act serves as a deterrence to some degree. So it’s not like these 300000 would be illegally getting an abortion. The thing is: criminals don’t follow the law; they break the law. Like the Purge movies when murder is made legally permissible, murder becomes rampant. Such is the case in America where we have some of the most permissible abortion laws in the world. So if 300000 were to be the rampant number, might I suggest 3000, 1%, would be the number of criminal abortions. 297000 lives saved right? Not quite. The pro abortion side loves to (ironically) emphasized the safety involved with abortion. If we are to presume these black market facilities to be unsafe, as they so strongly suggest, then there is the additional loss of life. Let’s say complications from mob abortionists kill 1/6 women. We could total our calculations at 300000 lives lost with abortion and 3500 lives lost with abortion outlawed. With no other metric, especially subjective ones regarding quality of life, being equal to the value of human life, a scenario without abortion has a preferable outcome. This proves John Pavlovitz point to be incredibly wrong.

The professed Christian then attacks biblical sexuality, specifically, sex is for marriage. Because this letter is addressed to actual Christians, this argument is especially secular as well as feminist.

We know this because of the Evangelical Christian teen purity culture built around abstinence has failed miserably. Its hardline stance, vilifying of sexual activity, and rejection of birth control have never prevented young people from having sex—only ensured that when they do, they will be unprepared, uneducated, and unprotected.

Forced abstinence and outlawing have only yielded more unintentional pregnancies (despite you claiming God wants them), created more parents ill-equipped to raise children, put more stress on already overwhelmed social systems, and birthed more vulnerable people who you’ve already shown you have little or no desire to care for.

I would agree that many in the Church struggle with sexual immorality. It’s disturbing and disheartening to those who follow God’s word, in their relationships, to see so many in the church who do not and furthermore remain unrepentant in their sin. The solution, to this, is not to change God’s word, which is a hardlined stance. Sex outside of marriage isn’t new and has existed far too long, and with consistency, to be considered an epidemic. Perhaps the church should change it’s approach to positively recognize the utility in following God’s word in the bedroom. Yes, we should all be anatomically informed. However, giving young girls birth control, for no medicinal purpose other than promiscuity, is unbiblical. Birth control is widely known to fail, especially with imperfect use. But as a church we should not be educating our daughters in how to properly use birth control in the event they have sex outside of marriage. We are not called to teach our children, teens, how to sin smart.

John Pavlovitz does want to save face and act as though abortions are bad, though doesn’t go so far as to say sinful. He first wants to establish that no one on the left celebrates abortion which is untrue. The argument he makes is just as ironic as that of Planned Parenthood prevents abortion.

No group of progressives or women’s rights activists or secular humanists stand around high-fiving one another when anyone chooses to terminate a pregnancy…

We all want fewer abortions too, but we also believe responsible sex education and birth control are the best way to ensure this.

If Planned Parenthood didn’t push for abortions, let alone celebrate them, I would reckon their adoption referrals would be much higher than 1 adoption for 82 abortions. The “pro-choice” organization isn’t fairly rendering options to the susceptible woman they’ve prospected (through clinics and birth control). This 82-1 is more like a final closing rate for their abortion racket. Furthermore, the most efficient means to reduce abortion is to criminalize it, as the thought exercise above shows.

Millions of people exposed to poverty, sickness, instability, adversity, and violence by and through this President—all so you can keep telling yourself this America is moving pro-life.

Pavlovitz moves to a classic and tragic case of TDS, which is a primary focus of his website. By no means is violence being promoted by the president. On the contrary Maxine Waters can be credited with an increasingly adversarial society. Trump isn’t increasing poverty in America, quite the opposite, or sickness. Instability is subjective, and while Trump isn’t a unifying figure, he doesn’t champion a pseudo-insurrectionist hashtag, like Pavlovitz. By no means is there data that shows that “life” is losing by John Pavlovitz’s own inferior metrics.

Identity Politics and Heretics

As Christians, our identity is in Jesus Christ. It is not in Trump, for or against. John Pavlovitz has his identity in (opposing) Trump. But his opposition to Trump is not due to his faith but rather a desire to maintain popularity in spite of being ousted by churches. He was a heretic before Trump, seeing as with decades of pastoral experience, he has a wavering belief in hell nor does he believe in the accuracy and authority of the bible. It’s unfortunate, but unavoidable, for Trump to be a ladder for heretics to ascend to internet fame. The left calls him the “digital pastor of the resistance” which is a slight aimed at the definitive doctrines of faith. The fellowship of Christ allows for disagreement among nonessential, like politics. But there should be unity in Christ and in essential doctrines. Christians who are not conservative in their politics need to find a different pastor to champion, one who actually knows Christ. John Pavlovitz will only mislead you.

I’ll conclude with 2 Timothy 4:1‭-‬5 NASB

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

Culture and Religion

Martha McSally continues to fight for equal rights

Published

on

Martha McSally continues to fight equal rights

It would be funny if it weren’t so sad that many in Arizona believe Democrat Kyrsten Sinema is the feminist in the Senate race. The media paints her as someone who fights for equal rights, but here’s the thing. She talks a lot. Her competitor, Martha McSally, has actually done something about equal rights throughout her life.

She was the first American female fighter pilot and the first to lead a fighter squadron. By contrast, Sinema’s feminist bona fides look a bit different:

Kyrsten Sinema Denounces Motherhood

https://moonbattery.com/kyrsten-sinema-denounces-motherhood/“These women who act like staying at home, leeching off their husbands or boyfriends, and just cashing the checks is some sort of feminism because they’re choosing to live that life. That’s bullsh**. I mean, what the f*** are we really talking about here?”

That is an actual quote from a Senate candidate, from an interview that took place in 2006, when she was already in office as a State Representative. God help us.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

What’s at stake: Nancy ‘Slippery Slope’ Pelosi wants to control your property

Published

on

By

What's at stake: Nancy ‘Slippery Slope’ Pelosi wants to control your property

Mrs. Hope for a slippery slope has promised the critical step to gun confiscation – Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.]

Anyone paying attention to the Left’s ongoing war on Liberty should take notice of the Red flag Nancy ‘Slippery slope’ Pelosi just ran up the pole. She stated that so-called universal background checks would be among Democrats’ top priorities if the party wins control of the House in the midterm elections. These are in essence, government controls over property, despite the emptional spin placed on them.

Government Control of property has no Constitutional Justification.

For starters, the national socialist Left doesn’t have the authority to control private property in this way, referring to the words of the 10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Try as we might, we couldn’t find the words ‘Government Control of Property’ in the founding documents. In point of fact, the opposite is quite the case. Even if it’s an item the Left considers to be ‘scary’ or dangerous.

Then consider this portion of the 5th amendment:

“nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

A requirement for one to get government permission to exchange one’s possessions would in effect set the government as the owner of that property. This in effect would constitute one being deprived of that property – this being explicitly prohibited by the founding documents.

Still further, consider the spirit of the 4th amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

A requirement for governmental permission for any type of exchange of property would most assuredly violate the 4th amendment. Again, control of property directly equates to ownership of said property. Government controls with Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.] would be ownership of said property.

Presumption of Innocence.

Then of course the reason that a strict government requirement of this type would presume that someone is guilty of being some sort of miscreant in the eyes of the Left [Being a gun owner and all..] So one would have to prove that isn’t the case before exercising a basic human and Constitutional right.

Finally of course, this would also violate the 2nd amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It should be logically easy to see that requiring government permission to exercise a Constitutional right would be an infringement of it. In many ways, Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.] could take the record for the most violations of the people’s Constitution rights to date.

The Precursor to Confiscation.

We’ve already proven that the national socialist Left desperately wants to ban and confiscate guns. There have been over 70 different instances in the past few years where they have openly made this demand.

This should readily explain to everyone why they obsess over a step that will do nothing for security, but everything for control over our Liberty. Their Holy Grail is to be able to send a threatening letter to every gun owner [or supposed gun owner] demanding that they turn them over for destruction.

Incremental Liberty Control.

A few years ago when the Liberty grabbers felt they had the wind at their back, with that mindset they were open and honest about how they would go about banning and confiscating guns.

First off they talked about it’s not being an overnight process as being a good thing since incrementalism is key. A massive change would mean non-compliance, so a ‘Progressive’ approach would put in place the means for confiscation over time, beginning with: Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.]

They began with a call for a national registry – they need to know who owns the guns and where they are, then:

Along with this, make private sales illegal. When a firearm is transferred, make it law that the registration must be updated. Again, make it super easy to do. Perhaps over, the internet. Dealers can log in by their FFLs and update the registration. Additionally, new guns are to be registered by the manufacturer. The object here is to create a clear paper trail from factory to distributor to dealer to owner. We want to encourage as much voluntary compliance as possible.

So the process of registration for gun confiscation starts with making ‘private sales illegal’. Yes, in a nation that values property rights, they want to make it illegal for one to exercise those rights.

Now we get down to it. The registration period has passed. Now we have criminals without registered guns running around. Probably kooky types that “lost” them on a boat or something. So remember those ATF form 4473s? Those record every firearm sale, going back twenty years. And those have to be surrendered to the ATF on demand. So, we get those logbooks, and cross reference the names and addresses with the new national registry. Since most NRA types own two or (many) more guns, we can get an idea of who properly registered their guns and who didn’t. For example, if we have a guy who purchased 6 guns over the course of 10 years, but only registered two of them, that raises a red flag.

Interesting that they use the phrase Red flag’. Now after they have their lists of gun owners they start cracking down on gun owners, raiding those who don’t comply with their edicts.

So registration is the first step. Now that the vast majority are registered, we can do what we will. One good first step would be to close the registry to new registrations. This would, in effect, prevent new guns from being made or imported.

‘we can do what we will’ isn’t that just lovely? This from people who want the law enforcement to raid anyone who may have a few guns.

The Takeaway.

Everyone should be mindful of two very important points in all of this. Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.] will do nothing to solve a problem caused by the nation’s Socialist-Left in the first place – the destruction of the family and moral underpinnings. But whether it solves the problem is irrelevant to the Left, It is but one crucial step to their final solution to the gun problem.

Those unfamiliar with this issue may wonder why the Liberty grabbers tend to obsess over this one item in their agenda over all others. It should be obvious that this sets them on the road to registration and then confiscation.

 

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Russian meddling is about dividing us, not helping Trump

Published

on

Russian meddling is about dividing us not helping Trump

Russia is meddling with our elections. They’re meddling with our entire political system. They’re meddling in our culture, freedoms, and methods of communication. I once believed they were trying to help Donald Trump become President. Now I realize they are simply elements of chaos.

Today’s report of charges filed against a Russian agent working against American interests is striking for two reasons. First, the details they’ve been able to uncover about “Project Lakhta” are astounding. Second, their strategic goal was NOT to get one person or one party into office but to sow division among the American people regardless of their political ideology.

First charge filed against Russian for interfering with elections

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/19/first-charge-filed-russian-interfering-elections/“The strategic goal of this alleged conspiracy, which continues to this day, is to sow discord in the U.S. political system and to undermine faith in our democratic institutions,” said G. Zachary Terwilliger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. “This case demonstrates that federal law enforcement authorities will work aggressively to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of unlawful foreign influence activities whenever feasible, and that we will not stand by idly while foreign actors obstruct the lawful functions of our government. I want to thank the agents and prosecutors for their determined work on this case.”

Russia didn’t want Trump or Clinton to be President. They didn’t really care who won. All they wanted and continue to want is that no matter who wins any given election, the opposition will be so hateful about the loss that they’re willing to act out more aggressively than they otherwise would have normally.

It’s finally becoming clear that Russia’s plan is much more subverted and, frankly, ingenious than anything mainstream media or the Democrats could have ever fathomed.

They are taking advantage of our freedom of speech and the technology that allows that speech to reach the masses. They’re theory is that if they can get people on both sides of the political spectrum to voice their opinions with hate rather than understanding, it will spread. Those who have practiced thoughtful debate are now becoming raving ranters. Those who once argued their points thoughtfully are now becoming trolls.

Russia is not the only negative actor in this and the trends were already pointing to this divisiveness taking hold and spreading like a virus well before Project Lakhta was conceived, but they have definitely added to the cacophony and harnessed our vilest emotional responses to be used against us.

Their goal is to push as many people towards the fringes as possible. They want the far-left and the far-right to grow. They want debates to turn into arguments, then arguments to turn into blind rage. From there, they speculated that we would be the initiators of our own destruction.

They may be right.

From the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation debacle to the illegal immigration debate to anything that has to do with gun rights, Americans on both sides of the aisle are becoming more passionate. That’s leading many to become unhinged. When enough people are unhinged, any hopes of civil discourse can be forgotten. We are getting to the point where we no longer discuss our differences. We simply try to shout our perspectives louder than those opposed to us.

The left is the easier target. I’m not just saying that as a conservative. I say that because their position on issues make it easier for them to be emotional when news breaks about an event important to them. This is why those who blame racism for everything are not only seeing racism in every aspect of American life but are feeling justified in practicing their own versions of racism.

We now see that Russia’s goal wasn’t to get Trump elected. It was to make one side or the other absolutely hate the outcome regardless of who won. They aren’t pushing a political agenda. They’re pushing a cultural apocalypse.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report
Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report