About Me

Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Can One Be Sober without Being Overly Somber?

http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/



The Devil never makes good on his promises. Those who choose the seductions of evil become enmeshed in something like a gigantic Ponzi scheme. Someone always gets burned in the end. Sobriety is essentially a choice to avoid excess. For some, this may take the form of abstinence. For others, it may mean giving up something occasionally. Each person has limits set by God built into the constitutional being. When practiced diligently, sobriety becomes a virtue. Somberness can also be taken to extremes. Sobriety gives one the freedom to live in the real world, not a world of one's own choosing.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

FDA Shirks Responsibility on RU-486

http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
The decision to allow girls under the age of 18 to be given the drug Mifepristone, commonly called RU-486, is a terrible mistake. What do those clowns think that they are doing? We do not need a government agency to put a Good Housekeeping seal of approval on a highly dangerous and toxic drug which kills unborn children. Worst of all, President Obama knows this and has done nothing to take this drug off the market.

Who does our government think it is fooling?

Americans of all persuasions have stood by patiently for many years while the courts have systematically dismantled reasonable protections for our country's future citizens unborn and born. What have we gotten in return? More foolhardy bureaucratic decrees that result in the death of more American children. Enough is enough.

Rush is again right. We are not the extremists. They are.

We are not the terrorists. They are.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Jewish IQ and the Limitations on Scientific Research

http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/

An article on the front page of yesterday's Los Angeles Times highlights recent studies done by Gregorgy Cochran and Henry Harpending on the correlation between childhood neurological disorders and high IQ levels among Ashkenazi Jews.  The basic premise of their hypothesis first published in 2005 is that certain mutations affecting sphingolipids, the fat molecules that transmit nerve signals, are the cause of the neurological disorders when inherited from both parents together, and also have a heterozygote advantage when transmitted by only one of the parents.  Their findings are partly based on the improbability of all four childhood neurological disorders common within the Ashkenzai Jewish population occurring randomly in a population of that size.  The heterozygote advantage is analogous to the genes causing sickle cell anemia among persons of African descent.  The negative effects occur only upon transmission of the genetic code by both parents together, and when transmitted by only one parent the positive effect is a higher resistance to malaria.  The hypothesis goes on to state that the genetic mutation was passed down through succeeding generations because the individuals with greater intelligence levels were more successful and had more children as compared with the population as a whole.

Carrying this back into prehistory,  one wonders whether the mutation occurred within a population of Central Asia among which there were converts to Judaism, insofar as the phenomena of higher incidence of childhood neurological disorders coupled with higher intelligence levels is not found among the Sephardic Jews of North Africa, Spain and Portugal, and their descendants among the diaspora.

This hypothesis could easily be tested by checking to see whether the genetic characteristics associated with the sphingolipid mutations are present in Ashkenazim Jewish children who have higher IQ levels, and absent in their siblings with relatively lower IQ levels.  One objection to this methodology is that taking IQ tests for this purpose is not a legitimate object for scientific exploration.

If this be the case, shouldn't we also ask the question of whether experimentation on live human embryos, which is unethical because it kills living human beings, is also outside the realm of legitimate scientific inquiry?

In this context, it is somewhat ironic and puzzling that President Obama has quoted the Hippocratic Oath pledge to "first do no harm" in relation to the state of the national economy, while himself being a staunch supporter of so'called "abortion rights" and embryonic stem cell research.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Abortion as Domestic Terrorism

http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/

Having been informed by my colleague Jay Sekulow that the Department of Homeland Security is planning to target Pro-Life activists as "Right Wing Extremists", it is incumbent upon me to express my outrage. Under the Nuremberg Principles which are legal precedent for all of the nations fighting during the conflict of World War II, prosecution for crimes against humanity is not prevented because an accused was simply following orders, or because laws had been changed to make crimes against humanity, such as murder, legal within a particular nation or nations. If this had not been the case, then the Nazi war criminals could never have been prosecuted.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was a state governor before taking over at DHS. In any future prosecution of Napolitano and others at DHS for crimes against humanity, presumably after President Obama leaves office, it will be necessary to look back at her record as Governor of Arizona, Attorney General of Arizona, and US Attorney in Arizona, to find out what role she has played in domestic terrorism in promoting a culture of death which has taken the lives of literally millions of children before they had the chance to be born, often against the expressed wishes of the children's fathers who were thus reduced by the tyrannical state to the level of wimpishness notwithstanding that for the most part they are American citizens with all of the rights of citizens. Let us never forget that the rationale of the euphemistically called "pro-choice" movement, which includes Ms. Napolitano, was that before a certain level of development, embryos were not persons. Now the argument is that they are living human beings but that the mother has a right of privacy or reproductive rights which supercede their rights as persons. Remember, under the Nuremberg Principles, Ms. Napolitano will be barred from asserting that this was established case law at the time if it is found by a jury that genocide or other terroristic crimes against humanity were in fact committed. What action should be taken? First we must boot Janet Napolitano out of office. Right at the moment, President Obama is riding a wave of popularity in the polls. This will soon evaporate. At that point, make sure that our next president will take immediate action to rid the government of all pro-choice nitwits. Even to this very day, over fifty years after WWII, suspected former war criminals are being brought to justice and trial. Janet Napolitano and the other abortion facilitators will not escape justice during her lifetime. America's younger generation has suffered greatly from being deprived of siblings and friends who were killed through abortion backed by politicians including Ms. Napolitano. It will be their duty as Americans to make sure that the pro-abortion politicians are punished for their crimes.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Doesn't Obama Pick Pat or Newt as Vatican Ambassador and Get Show on Road?

http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
This post will launch my new blog "Culture of Death" which examines in depth the destructive effects of anti-life policies and activities in America and throughout the world.  The purpose of this blog is not to condemn those who are participants in this culture.  Rather it is hoped that this discussion will spur healthy dialogue to bring about real change in how we treat our fellow human beings.

The Vatican's exercise of veto power over two prospective ambassadorial candidates was caused primarily by the Democratic Party's and President Obama's complete misunderstanding and lack of sensitivity regarding the centrality to Christianity of protecting all human life from the moment of conception to natural death.  Both Caroline Kennedy and Douglas Kmiec were considered candidates for the appointment, notwithstanding their euphemistically "pro-choice" views.

Why do Obama and the Democratic Party leaders not get that Pope Benedict simply will not accept any appointment that goes against Church doctrine?  The Church is against contraception, abortion, and SSM for a reason.  It is because from the time of Christ on earth, Christians have believed that certain things are objectively evil and always are destructive to society and the individual.  Therefore any judge, statesman or politician who champions the dubious agenda promoting these things should, at the very least, be booted out of office?  If their actions are intentional they should be brought to justice and prosecuted by justice officials who have a sense of objective truth.  Bush administration actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other covert locations, while possibly counting as war crimes, pale in comparison to the gross disrespect for life, and countless murders of innocent persons.

There are many qualified faithful Catholics who would be willing to serve as US Ambassador to the Vatican.  Two who come to my mind are Patrick Buchanan and Newt Gingrich.  While it is true that Newt was divorced twice before becoming Catholic earlier this year, his first wife died and the second marriage was invalid pursuant to canon law because of the woman's prior church marriage which was still valid.  Buchanan could bring the traditionalist perspective whereas Gingrich could bring the zeal and enthusiasm of being a recent convert.

So what is Obama waiting for?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »