Wendy Davis is Pro-life and War is Peace

Thursday, November 7, AD 2013

 

Laura Ingraham

 

 

Hattip to Mary Katharine Ham at Hot Air.  Wendy Davis, Texas State Senator, who won her Senate seat running as a pro-abort with the help of the man who was and is the head of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, and who is campaigning for governor of the Lone Star State on the strength of her ultimately futile filibuster against restrictions on abortion passed by the Texas legislature, has proclaimed herself pro-life.

Emily at Naked DC gives us the gruesome details:

She’s lagging because of a few key features of her campaign. First, it makes gun control a key issue in a state where not only are the people heavily armed, but the livestock as well. Second, she’s allied her communications with Organizing for Action’s Texas arm, which promptly ran an ad making a joke about Greg Abbott walking into the legislature, when it is abundantly clear to everyone who has ever seen Greg Abbott that he cannot walk. She had yet to talk about the cornerstone of her political career, her filibuster of a Texas law that prevents abortions after 20 weeks, which rolled the Texas abortion deadline back from 24 weeks.

She’s since corrected that oversight. Today, Wendy Davis, says she’s “pro-life.

Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth), best known for her 11-hour filibusteragainst a controversial bill aimed at severely cutting access to abortion services across the Lone Star State, said her views on abortion make her “pro-life.”

“I am pro-life,” Davis said during a campaign stop at the University of Texas at Brownsville, according to the Valley Morning Star.

“I care about the life of every child: every child that goes to bed hungry, every child that goes to bed without a proper education, every child that goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future,” Davis said. “I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.”

B—h, please.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Wendy Davis is Pro-life and War is Peace

  • A number of years ago, a pro-abortion colleague of mine tried convincing me that he was pro-life because he was anti-war, anti-poverty, anti-gun, and anti-death-row. I was shocked then that he was trying to twist the meaning of the word; I am not shocked now when I see politicians stating it.

  • “Wordsmiths.”
    Another description….”liars.”
    Many mill stones being gathered for the bottom of the lake. Maybe as they tie the stones neatly around their neck they’ll reassure themselves by saying it’s fashionable ballast for the “enlightened.”

  • Isaiah 5:20

    Ah, you who call evil good
    and good evil,
    who put darkness for light
    and light for darkness,
    who put bitter for sweet
    and sweet for bitter!

  • Pingback: The Fortunate Faith of Audrey Assad - BigPulpit.com
  • Much of the problem consists in the denial of the human being composed of body and soul; the denial of the human soul. Acknowledgement of the human soul is the basis for freedom, for it is in the human soul that all endowed unalienable human rights are vested.The devil’s strategy is divide and conquer. Having darkened the mind of man to the reality of the human soul, the devil proceeds to gain control, ownership of the human soul, to the detriment of man knowing God as our Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier.

    Wendy Davis is a good example of an individual already sold into slavery by the devil. ““I care about the life of every child: every child that (WHO, not that, as WHO denotes sovereign personhood as the beneficiary of all unalienable human rights by virtue of the human being’s existence as a child of God, made in the image of God with free will from God and freedom from the state.) goes to bed hungry, every child that -(WHO)- goes to bed without a proper education, every child that -(WHO)- goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who (finally; -WHO- as acknowledging the rational, immortal soul of the adult member of society, the voter, while downgrading the child to a thing, a chattel, owned by the state. Yet the innocence and virginity, the sovereign personhood of the newly begotten child constitutes the state, our government, even before the unborn are certified as citizens, for the innocent soul establishes JUSTICE for the state and is the standard of JUSTICE.) worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future,”

    Acknowledgment of the innocent, virginal soul of the newly begotten person in the womb will assure that our constitutional posterity will have a decent future, steeped in unalienable human rights, the freedom to reason and acknowledge almighty God as the Endower of human rights.

    Davis said. “I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.”

    Speaking to God is a human right of the First Amendment. The will to live is an act of the free will of the sovereign person. If the unborn is alive, he is thinking about God.

  • The right to life is the most fundamental right. On this right all others rest. Without it, all others are threatened and ultimately meaningless. Being “pro-life” is respecting and promoting human life from the moment of conception until natural death.

    In various periods of Church history,, the Church has had to grapple with doctrinal crises and arrive at a formula that would best express the saving truth under threat. Thus we brought. Forth such dogmas as: ” begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father”, “One God in three Persons”, “Jesus Christ, true God and true Man”, and many others.

    In today’s Church, the crisis is ultimately the “anthropological crisis”. While the actual phrase did not arise within a Council (Vatican II was not faced with the full anthropological crisis) the new phrase is based on its teaching and further developed bt Blessed John Paul II ‘s Evangelium Vitae ( theGospel of Life). That ‘doctrinal’ statement is: ” from the moment of conception until natural death”.

    With it, we confess and further the Gospel of Life; without it we are lost.

  • Check this out “Texas Democrat Wendy Davis claimed mental health issues in court” and see why it all makes sense to her.

  • “from the moment of conception until natural death”. When the sperm fertilizes the egg, God creates an immortal soul for that individual. “Ensoulment of the soul in the newly begotten, single celled (as the soul is begotten) human being enjoying his existence is aptly named “conception” as in Immaculate Conception.

  • “from the moment of conception until natural death”. I might mention here that life begins when the soul enters the single celled individual human being and life ends when the soul can no longer abide in the human body (when decomposition sets in )several days after cessation of all symptoms of life

  • Pingback: Forward Progressives — Wendy Davis Is More Pro-Life than the Pro-Life Movement

We Didn’t Mean Intellectual Diversity!

Monday, October 15, AD 2012

 

Don’t you see the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the language of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it.

George Orwell, 1984

You know that you are living in topsy-turvy times when the most close-minded institutions are colleges and universities which are purportedly dedicated to free inquiry.  A hilarious example of the type of brain-dead ideological conformity enforced at most laughably described “institutions of higher learning occurred last week:

 

Angela McCaskill was the first African-American woman to earn a Ph.D. at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C., a school for the deaf and hard of hearing. She has now worked at Gallaudet for over 20 years, and in January 2011 she was named its chief diversity officer. Last year, she helped open a resource center for sexual minorities on campus. But she has now been placed on leave because of pressure from some students and faculty. Her job is on the line.

McCaskill’s sin? She was one of 200,000 people to sign a petition demanding a referendum on a law recognizing gay marriage, which was signed by Maryland’s Democratic governor, Martin O’Malley, in March. The referendum will be on the ballot next month, and the vote is expected to be close.

 

McCaskill’s signature became public when the Washington Blade posted a database online “outing” all those who had signed the petition. Even though her signature indicated only that she wanted the decision on gay marriage to be made by the people and not by the legislature and the governor, her critics declared that it demonstrated “bias.”

 

Gallaudet University’s president, T. Alan Hurwitz, announced that he was putting McCaskill on paid leave because “some feel it is inappropriate for an individual serving as chief diversity officer” to have signed such a petition. “I will use the extended time while she is on administrative leave to determine the appropriate next steps,” said Hurwitz, “taking into consideration the duties of this position at the university.” Just last year, Hurwitz had praised McCaskill as “a longtime devoted advocate of social justice and equity causes.” But she is apparently not allowed to have private political views.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to We Didn’t Mean Intellectual Diversity!

  • Those people make Medieval Inquisitors look like cub scouts.

    It seems they oppose the “consent of the governed.” Some of them call democracy the “dictatorship of the majority.” Thing is they aren’t content with disenfranchising (using the courts to enforce their unpopular agenda) but they those so evil as to disagree with them. Che, Lenin, Stalin, et al murdered them.

    By their actions they demonstrate their world-view that we the people are either too evil or too stupid to govern ourselves.

  • And folks laugh at me when I refuse to do phone surveys….

  • Direct quotes From the Catholic Catechism

    2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.[206] Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.”[207] Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.

    2446 St. John Chrysostom vigorously recalls this: “Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs.”[238] “The demands of justice must be satisfied first of all; that which is already due in justice is not to be offered as a gift of charity”:[239]
    When we attend to the needs of those in want, we give them what is theirs, not ours. More than performing works of mercy, we are paying a debt of justice.[240]

    2408 The seventh commandment forbids theft, that is, usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner. There is no theft if consent can be presumed or if refusal is contrary to reason and the universal destination of goods. This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing . . .) is to put at one’s disposal and use the property of others.[190]