Abortion: are we ready yet?

Not only your federal tax dollars go to support abortion mills.  State, County and City dollars in many areas do, too (e.g., City of Austin, in Travis County).


If a politician lacks the moral clarity to understand that killing new, innocent life is wrong, do they have the moral clarity to represent you on any other issue? Really?


What to do about it?


Certainly, we ought to elect people with the moral clarity to courageously and unequivocally say, "hell no, your freedom does not permit you to kill an innocent life or to value one free, innocent life above another."


I can think of nothing more noble and obvious than the defence of the life of the innocent unborn.


I can think of no law more unjust and illegitimate, certainly unconstitutional, more worthy of solid and tangible resistance than one that permits the indiscriminate termination of innocent new life.


Are we ready to say, "I will not comply"?


Are we ready yet to say, "the unjust law be damned; my own freedom is undeserved if I have not done everything I can to protect the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of this innocent new life"?


It seems profound cowardice to say, "I will not stand up and protect the innocent, because I fear the consequences to my own life."


Where is the fault in the above? Tell me.

On "Mormon support for the LGBT community"

Some Mormons marched in a "gay pride" parade:  http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865556863/300-plus-LDS-Church-members-march-in-Pride-parade.html


Speaking as someone who has had my own share of challenges and struggles, though not in this particular arena:

Here's the problem: it's an important distinction between loving someone who has a real challenge, and supporting and/or promoting it (e.g., "pride").

We should not "show our support" for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

We should show our love for everyone, and we *support* those who are striving to overcome life's challenges in their struggle to do so.

Those who embrace sin and deviance, we should love but not support them in their fall.

Beware those who call evil good, and good evil.

On Vaccinations

To vaccinate, or not to vaccinate?

The facts are that:

1. Some vaccines are made from aborted fetal tissue.  This is well documented, and well rationalized.  However, some may by conscience say that "regardless of what benefit may be claimed from it, no matter how long in the past, I will not be a beneficiary of a great act of harm against an innocent life."
2. Some vaccines contain (or have until very recently) forms of mercury and/or other toxins.  It seems unreasonable to say that a chemical for which even very modest exposure should generally be considered harmful, the same level of exposure should generally be considered absolutely safe, or where the exposure is cumulative, that the repeated exposure to very minor degree, but over a period of time, should generally be considered absolutely safe. 
3. There are documented cases of neurological side affects from vaccines.  I am not referring to autism here.  But it seems reasonable to state (and even the CDC has allowed for the idea that) some very small percentage of the population may have genetic and/or neurological predisposition to side affects from ingredients that are contained in the vaccines, possibly in the timeframe in life in which they are administered (for example, a newborn and an infant receive many vaccinations in rapid succession, when their body may well be the least able to absorb, process, and where appropriate to eliminate the quantities of substances received.  The periods of infancy and early childhood are developmentally many times more important than later life.

And now vaccines are promoted for everything from chicken pox to an annual flu vaccine.  


While it is unfair to say that all companies are deceptive about the full health consequences of their products when profits are at stake, as it is to say that all major corporations are evil, it is also clear that we do not yet have full disclosure.


Those who have concerns are called fear-mongers, paranoid or zealots; and yet some vaccines are pushed as "critical" and with "zero side effects" even when there has not been enough time for such claims to be reasonably researched and validated by the people making them.  In particular, many have concerns about government mandates that require the intake of substances, without the individual having the full freedom to make their own health choice on the matter (which many feel is reasonably consider to be a literal physical assault).  It is the belief of some in the CDC that, should some crisis be declared, the government would have the prerogative to forcibly administer substances to the populace.


THE REAL SOLUTION, as with dental Xrays and anything else your doctor recommends, is that you need to do the best research you can, understand the pros and cons as well as you can, and make your most considered and thoughtful best choice.  All vaccines aren't bad, and all vaccines aren't free of downsides -- possibly significant ones.  And people should be free to make their own health choices, and live with the consequences.  As children cannot make their own choices, it falls to the parents as with any other situation; it is not necessarily reasonable to hold the parent at fault for harm that comes to the child from every choice vis a vis vaccination any more than it is reasonable to fault the parent for every consequence of every other choice, such as a child who is hurt in a car accident as a result of the parent choosing to take the child in the car, rather than leaving the child bubble-wrapped at home... or the child who is hurt in a house fire from being left at home (rather than taken in the car with the parent), for that matter.