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

Top 5 ‘Bottomless Pinocchios’ of the national socialist left

Published

on

By

Top 5 Bottomless Pinocchios of the national socialist left

That perfect paragon of journalistic ‘objectivity’, the Washington Post, introduced a new rating for lies. We applied them to the left.

The Washington Post has developed a new rating system – the ‘Bottomless Pinocchio’ – for a false claim repeated over and over. This is somewhat ironic since the leftist media excels in the practice. While we will try to keep this to the more egregious and discrete lies of the left, a few notes on their other types of lies are in order.

The labeling and language lies of the left

Even the labels they apply to themselves aside from being socialist are falsehoods. These are people who work against the cause of liberty on a daily basis while pretending to be liberal. It’s a post-modernism community that has the false front of being ‘progressive’, that would prefer to use the judiciary to impose their socialist national agenda rather than democratic means.

Then there is the game of lying by language the left plays to excess. Time was, global cooling was the existential threat to woman and mankind, until it stopped getting cooler. Then global warming became the existential threat until it stopped getting warmer. Accordingly, they hit on the deception of working against it doing either, so no matter what happens, they can claim they are right because the climate has always changed. This also gave them a nice bonus in tarring any who opposes their control agenda as being a ‘climate change denier’ – even though no one actually denies the climate changes. Better yet, they have been able to shorten it up to the ultimate insult of labeling their opposition as ‘climate deniers’ as if people would actually deny reality itself.

These will be the top 5 ‘Bottomless Pinocchios’ of the left. These are lies that are recycled repeatedly by the left in their effort at distorting reality to the point where gun free zones actually keep people safe, no one is starting a conversation about gun confiscation and societal slavery can really work.

 Bottomless Pinocchio 5: People have a ‘right’ to health care

This is one of the left’s favourites in trying to reshape (or ‘reform’) reality. Like many other variations of the ‘people have a right to’ line, this stems from the concept of Coercive or Collective Rights, whereby people have the ‘right’ to force others to provide them with the vestiges of this ‘right’. These are contrasted with Natural Rights possessed by everyone, the right to self-preservation, the right to property, the right of freedom of expression.

Having a ‘right’ to health care, or ‘right’ to feel safe, or a ‘right’ to not be offended, generally entails that someone else has to provide for this ‘right’. In the case of healthcare, providing this ‘right’ would mean that medical professionals would be required to sacrifice their time and labour in this effort. Citizens would also be forced to contribute their property. There is a word for when people are forced to provide their time and effort to others. It’s called slavery.

In point of fact the phrase should really be people have a ‘right’ to enslave others. But the folks who pretend to support liberty can’t say that directly, hence they use the ‘right to’ lie.

Bottomless Pinocchio 4: Gun free zones work as advertised

This one is slightly different from the others in that even leftists know they will be laughed off the public stage if they said this out loud. Rather, they imply the idea with their policy agenda of incessantly working towards gun confiscation, supposedly rendering the entire world a global ‘gun-free’ zone such as the latest example in France.

Expanding what doesn’t work always seems to be a hallmark of the left. Never mind that something doesn’t function in one area, extend it elsewhere so it’ll work… somehow.

Anyone familiar with logic can easily see why these don’t work, since those bent on evil will tend to go where they will have little opposition. Unfortunately, as with the fact that there are only two genders, leftists don’t seem to be able to comprehend that which is bloody obvious. They seem to have the misguided idea that a rule or a sign will stop a mass murderer.

The facts bear this out given that most mass shootings take place in ‘gun-free’ zones. This has been the situation for almost 30 years.

The problem for the left is that they can’t actually admit to their absolute failure in this area. Were they to do this, it would mean an end to their whole gun confiscation agenda. Thus they perpetuate that it’s a myth that defensive gun uses exist or that a ‘good guy (or gal) with a gun’ will deter these tragedies. It means that they continue to put people at risk for the sake of their disarmament agenda, without the hint of guilt on their part.

Bottomless Pinocchio 3 : No one is talking about gun confiscation

Finding cases where leftists have demanded gun confiscation has become as easy as shooting fish in a barrel (pardon the pun Peta). The past few years have seen an increase in these demands from the left to the point that it’s occurred more than 70 times not counting excerpts, syndication and reprints. Repeating this lie enables leftists to keep the discussion to the next incremental step instead of their final solution to the liberty problem.

Still, the liberty grabber left persists in propagating this enormous lie. It does several things for them. It short circuits the negative effects of gun confiscation such as leaving the innocent defenseless against criminals and the government. It lulls some into a false sense of security as to the left’s long term goal for the cause of liberty.

This perennial lie is also necessary to get some to accept governmental overreach in controlling their personal property. They have used this same technique in getting people to register their guns accompanied by the solemn promise that they won’t use it to confiscate guns, after which their guns are confiscated.

Bottomless Pinocchio 2: Failed socialist experiments weren’t really socialist

It would seem this little ditty began when the socialist-left started trying to claim that a certain National Socialist German Workers’ Party wasn’t actually a National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The Left actually tried to reverse reality, making a party with a collectivist ideology of the left to one of an individualist ideology of the right. The problem for them is that those on the pro-liberty, conservative right, by definition favour lower taxes and limited government. Hardly something the Nazis were known for.

Leftists will often times try to deflect the facts of the matter given the very name of the party: ‘Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei’. But consider the words of the translator of Mein Kampf:

Finally, I would point out that the term Social Democracy may be misleading in English, as it has not a democratic connotation in our sense. It was the name given to the Socialist Party in Germany. And that Party was purely Marxist; but it adopted the name Social Democrat in order to appeal to the democratic sections of the German people.
James Murphy. Abbots Langley, February, 1939

Later on, they played this little game with virtually every other socialist regime. Miraculously enough, before these socialist regimes ran out of other people’s money the left labelled them as one of their own. Then in the blink of an eye, they would ping-pong from left to right almost overnight when they inevitably failed.

The problem for the left is that they have nothing on George Orwell. We’re supposed to simply ignore basic facts from history, beginning with the very words that socialists have used to describe themselves. These socialist regimes also followed collectivist precepts. But in an instant these facts are swept away, in favour of a new reality where Red is Blue and Blue is Red.

Bottomless Pinocchio 1: Socialism can actually work

This is a basic survival lie of the left. They cannot accede to the fact of 400 years of the failure of the ideas of their base ideology, so they must pretend it can work… somehow. Just as they can pretend to be liberal while working to tear down liberty, but that’s another subject.

Since their agenda of societal slavery has never worked, they have to deflect the argument with the aforementioned ‘socialism has never been tried before’ and ‘failed socialist experiments weren’t really socialist’ lies. Or pretending that non-socialist nations are really socialist.

The bottom line is that socialism can never work because it runs counter to basic human physiology. One will always see less of a behaviour that is negatively reinforced, while more will be seen with behaviour that is positively reinforced. The fundamental results of reward and punishment cannot be ignored, and yet this is what socialists have as the basis of their ideology.

Consider that the experiment of socialism has been conducted in situations around the world for over 400 years with the same result: failure. It should be obvious by now to most intelligent people that it cannot work, and yet the national socialist-left still persists in trying to turn that which is impossible into something that is possible, no matter who has to suffer and die.

The takeaway

In many ways the left should stay away from pronouncing judgement on falsehoods when they are so rife with them. Leftist lies keep them afloat in the sea of politics. We have shown that not only are they false, but they must be retold in order for the left to survive.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Dr Paul Lim tells how he went from atheist to Christian… at Yale

Published

on

Dr Paul Lim tells how he went from atheist to Christian at Yale

Universities aren’t usually considered likely venues for people to turn to the Christian faith. Ivy League universities rife with atheist professors are even less likely than most to yield a conversions to the faith. If anything, they’re efforts are often directly focused on converting Christians into abandoning their faith.

Dr Paul Lim tells a different tail. His personal journey from South Korea to California, then Pennsylvania on to Yale, is an exception to the rule. His journey is not common, but then again who’s to say what sort of journey to embracing Jesus Christ can be considered common?

It’s not too long, clocking in at just over 48 minutes, and much better than your average network television hour. If you already believe, it may help you open the eyes of others. If you don’t believe, your eyes may be opened.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

How likely is it that a single protein can form by chance?

Published

on

How likely is it that a single protein can form by chance

To really answers the question of whether life was created or came about by random chance, we need to take a mathematical look at things. It may be easier to form our opinions based on something we read in a junior high science book, but there really is more to it than the surface questions asked and answered by scientists and theologians alike.

For the faithful, it comes down to faith. For the scientific, it also comes down to faith. Whose faith is more likely to be correct?

Part of the answer can be found in this short video. Those who think there’s no faith associated with scientific theories clearly don’t understand the mathematics behind the science they claim to hold dear.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report