The leftist assault on life is unbridled. In 1992 then-President Bill Clinton said that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” This idea was repeated in 2008 by Hillary Clinton. Since the early days of legalized abortion, the left has assured Americans and the rest of the world that abortion was only suited for extreme cases and rarely implemented. However, in recent years they have changed their rhetoric.

Abortion advocates are now arguing that the word “rare” causes a stigma and the Democratic party removed the phrase from their platform in 2012. Now abortion advocates instead prefer to use the term “unapologetic.” It should not shock us that the world is unrepentant of the sin of abortion. However, it is shocking that the left is targeting more individuals and no longer hiding their eugenics agenda to eliminate the most vulnerable among us.

The World Health Organization recently put out both a Tweet and Facebook post that created a list of birth defects, stating that “Most birth defects can be prevented and treated with access to quality maternal and newborn care. Yet, every year, they cause the deaths of close to 250,000 babies within just 1 month of birth.” Although this may seem like an innocuous statement, WHO went on to list Down Syndrome as a so-called preventable birth defect. Down’s Syndrome is not a birth defect, and the only way to prevent a child from having the chromosomal variant is abortion.

Countries worldwide have increasingly targeted children with Down Syndrome and other genetic anomalies. In Denmark, since offering chromosomal testing to women, nearly 95 percent of pregnancies determined to be of a Down Syndrome child are aborted. In Iceland, that number is almost 100 percent. Health officials worldwide are suggesting to women that they would not want to bring a child with Down Syndrome into the world. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), there are 6,000 children a year born with Down Syndrome or about 1 in every 700 births in America. Imagine if the United States adopted such a devastating policy as Denmark and Iceland. We would eliminate the potential of these children’s lives.

Some of the arguments that the left makes in favor of aborting children diagnosed with Down Syndrome is that they will negatively affect the parent’s relationship and other siblings, create a financial burden, and not have a productive or happy life. These are all myths that the Global Down Syndrome Foundation and other advocates are trying to dispel. If given a chance, children with Down Syndrome can have productive and happy lives and enrich the lives of their family and friends.

Determining the value of a life based on a medical diagnosis is a dangerous and slippery slope. If we decide that children in the womb with Down Syndrome have no value, what stops the world from determining that those born with this, and other diagnoses also lack value. The very idea of determining value in life has led to some of the worst examples of eugenics in history.

Sadly, there is a growing number of individuals on the left with this very agenda. They would have the world believe that suffering can be eliminated by ending the lives of babies inside and outside of the womb. This statement is not merely rhetoric; Maryland just introduced a bill to allow for the murder of a child up to 28 days of age to go without legal charges brought against the murderer. The possibility of individuals killing children unexpectedly born with genetic disorders under such a law is very high.

Take ACTION: If you are concerned about the increased push from the left to justify the murder of Down Syndrome babies in and outside the womb, please contact your state and federal representatives to ask them to support life, as well as supporting the rights and protection for those with Down Syndrome and other medical diagnoses.

History is undoubtedly repeating itself as we follow the path of the Nazis and determine who is allowed to live and unapologetically eliminating all others. We must recognize that all life has value regardless of the medical label applied to that baby. God creates life, and each life he creates should be cherished.

Psalms 139:13-14a teaches us:

“For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb.
I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”

Written by Julie Tisdale

In the 1880s, Sir Francis Galton coined a new term, “eugenics.” A look at the history is shocking and horrifying because of the speed with which the ideas gained widespread support. In less than 30 years, major philanthropic organizations like the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation were funding the movement, states were passing forced sterilization laws, and state fairs were hosting “better baby” competitions. Even groups like the NAACP were eventually engaged in these activities. Read through the history of eugenics in America, and it seems like just about everyone was buying in.

Of course, much has changed. Eugenics has now been rejected by the vast majority of people, and the ideas are generally considered to victimize racial minorities, the mentally ill, women, and the poor. No respectable person calls himself a eugenicist any longer.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean that the ideas and philosophy underlying the sordid history of eugenics in America has gone. For if we define eugenics as “The study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable,” then we’re forced to admit that it is still very much alive and well.

The forms have changed. Forced sterilization is no longer nearly as prevalent as it once was, and state and federal laws have been enacted to largely ban the practice. All too often, though, doctors recommend abortions for women whose babies test positive for “undesirable” traits. Genetic testing of unborn babies for a whole range of conditions is absolutely routine. And if the tests come back positive for something incurable, say Down Syndrome, the recommendation by many is that mothers abort.

The reason that many give for terminating these pregnancies is fear that the child won’t be able to reach the potential of a “normal” kid, that she may not ever be able to live fully independently, that he will be a burden to his family or society at large. And this is where we see the parallels with eugenic policies most clearly. Eugenics advocates used slogans like “Some people are born to be a burden to the rest” to argue that everyone was better off if such people were never born. It is exactly the same logic used with pregnant women today.

That alone is bad enough. The idea that we would deem a person unworthy even of being born because of a genetic condition should deeply offend anyone who believes that all people are valuable, regardless of ability or disability, intelligence, gender, race, or age. It should horrify people of faith who believe that all people are created in the image of God and therefore possess inherent dignity.

But it’s even worse than that, because the tests themselves are unreliable. The Colson Center’s BreakPoint recently reported on a series of studies that show false positive rates of prenatal screenings for various genetic conditions. These false positives range from around 50 percent for Down syndrome, to as high as 90 percent for Prader-Willi syndrome. So, the end result is that many are pressuring mothers into aborting babies who don’t even have the conditions that they think they’re avoiding. These are moms who want their babies, but are convinced by an unreliable test that they’re better off aborting. What a terrible, cruel thing to do to a woman who wants a child.

Years ago, a friend of mine went in for a routine prenatal exam, and her doctor started talking about all the usual genetic tests they were planning to run. My friend stopped the doctor and asked how many of the things they were testing for were treatable in the womb. Were they able to do anything about any of these conditions? Could they, for example, do surgery to correct a heart defect before the baby was born, thereby increasing his chances of survival? The answer, of course, was that the doctor wasn’t planning to test for anything that was treatable in the womb. The only reason to even do the tests was so that the parents could decide whether or not to abort.

This sort of cultural mindset that devalues people because of their genetic traits, because their lives are unlikely to be as economically productive, because they’re likely to require more time and money to care for than their “normal” counterparts, needs to be challenged. We need to see these sorts of screenings for what they are—a new form of eugenics. Instead of falling into the trap of believing that the world is better off without “defective people,” we should remind ourselves that all human beings are fearfully and wonderfully made by God.

This article was originally published by NCFamily.org.

With the possible exception of Adolf Hitler’s National Socialists (Nazis), socialists and communists throughout the past century have all insisted that planetary socialism is needed.

They all agreed, too, on the chief weapon in their arsenal: government indoctrination posing as “education.” From the tyrants in Moscow and Beijing to the infamous Socialist International, the goal of planetary slavery in the form of a global socialist government has long been at the forefront of collectivist thinking. And schools have long been the means.

As the tyrants of the world have discovered by experience over more than a century, subduing people under collectivist rule for any length of time can be difficult—especially if the people can read and think, and if they know their history. But if the children can be brainwashed into collectivism early on in government schools, the process becomes much easier.

And so, socialists and communists from around the world joined forces after World War II to create the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to advance that agenda.

The primary goal of this new body was simple: control education around the world, weaponizing it to advance socialism, globalism, collectivism, and other dangerous “-isms” that threaten individual freedom and self-government.

It was obvious from the beginning, and remains obvious still today, that the views of UNESCO’s leaders are entirely incompatible with a free society. Unfortunately, UNESCO now plays a dominant role in public education worldwide.

Formed in 1945 under the guise of ending war by building “defenses of peace” in “the minds of men” through education, UNESCO worked to hijack control over public schools from the very start. Where no government schools existed yet, UNESCO used American and European taxpayer money to establish them, or to bribe governments to do it. And at every step in the process, these emerging indoctrination centers marketed as “educational” institutions worked fiendishly to brainwash children into collectivism and globalism.

The historical record on this global “education” organization is clear. In fact, it was so obviously dominated by communists, socialists, crackpots, totalitarians, and subversives that President Ronald Reagan ordered a U.S. government withdrawal from UNESCO in 1983. Britain left, too, for the same reason. After some alleged “reforms,” the U.S. government rejoined in 2002. But the Trump administration once again pulled out, along with Israel, in 2018.

When announcing the U.S. exit, the Reagan administration was blunt about the problems. Speaking at a press conference, State Department spokesman Alan Romberg said UNESCO exhibited “hostility toward the basic institutions of a free society, especially a free market and a free press.”

Indeed, it was promoting communism, humanism, and even a global “licensing” regime for journalists. Romberg also noted that the outfit “politicized virtually every subject it deals with.” But that was no surprise to anyone who had been paying attention.

Founded by Globalist-Collectivist Fanatics

The very first director-general of UNESCO, Julian Huxley, who also served as executive secretary of its Preparatory Commission, was a collectivist in every sense of the term. Like John Dewey, previously exposed in detail in this series and almost universally regarded as the architect of America’s public-education system, Huxley was also a “humanist.” So devoted was he, that he even served as the first president of the British Humanist Association, working to advance these ideas with Dewey, whose Humanist Manifesto was basically socialism and communism masquerading as a religion.

Huxley was also quick to fill the ranks of UNESCO with communists and socialists, as documented extensively in the book “Freedom On the Altar: The UN’s Crusade Against God & Family” by William Norman Grigg. For instance, the chief of the Soviet “Education Ministry” served as director of UNESCO’s department of secondary education. That trend continues to the present day, with myriad card-carrying members of the Communist Party and Socialist Party literally running the powerful global agency.

Even many of the Americans who worked under Huxley at UNESCO were communists. According to testimony by Chairman Pierce Gerety of the U.S. International Organizations Employees Loyalty Board, charged with preventing communist infiltration of U.S. delegations, UNESCO had a “clique” of Americans working in it “who placed the interests of the Communists and Communist ideology … above their own country.”

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee concluded in 1956 that UNESCO was “by far the worst,” from the standpoint of “disloyal” and “subversive” (communist) Americans in global organizations. That’s because communists recognized the importance of weaponizing education.

Like Hitler and his National Socialist barbarians, Huxley was also a fervent advocate of eugenics, the idea of improving humanity by removing “undesirables” from the racial gene pool. So passionate was Huxley about breeding genetically “superior” human beings and removing “degenerates”—something he compared on numerous occasions to improving the quality of livestock—that he actually led the British Eugenics Society. Prior to founding UNESCO, he served as vice president of the eugenics group. After his term at UNESCO, he became president of the eugenics organization.

UNESCO was one of the ways in which he hoped to promote eugenics. In his infamous 1946 policy document “UNESCO: Its Purpose and Philosophy,” written during preparatory negotiations, Huxley said one of the key tasks for the organization would actually be to promote “radical” eugenics.

“Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable,” he said, explaining why UNESCO’s leadership has been so obsessed with breaking down children’s moral values.

Huxley was also open about the fact that UNESCO was working to brainwash children into accepting a socialistic world government. A fervent believer in Darwin’s theory of evolution, Huxley declared in “UNESCO: Its Purpose and Philosophy” that “political unification in some sort of world government” would even be “required” for humanity to “evolve” to the next level. “The world is in the process of becoming one,” Huxley said in the document. “A major aim of UNESCO must be to help in the speedy and satisfactory realization of this process.”

Just a few years after its founding, UNESCO was already pumping out propaganda aimed at undermining individual liberty, the family, and the nation-state in the minds of children. In a 10-part series of pamphlets headlined “Toward World Understanding,” for instance, the UN “education” agency called for using schools to promote the concept of “world citizenship.” As part of that, schools would have to “combat family attitudes” on everything from “nationalism” (patriotism) to religious beliefs on the nature of sin and reality.

When reading through UNESCO documents and the writings of its leading operatives, it becomes clear that the goals went beyond even just brainwashing children into dangerous ideologies. In fact, Huxley and his cohorts envisioned creating an entirely new system of secular morality divorced from all the major religions of the world.

Then the plan was to use government schools, psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, behavior modification and conditioning, values clarification, indoctrination, and propaganda to replace the old values and systems of morality with the new. It was audacious and extreme. But it’s working.

Before and After Huxley, More Extremism

By the early 1960s, UNESCO had decided that traditional values on sexuality needed to be replaced too. And UNESCO-guided government schools around the world were to be the primary tool to bring about the sought-after change. This would help break down the nuclear family—crucial to any free and civilized society—by promoting promiscuity and the breakdown of sexual morality.

And so, in 1964, UNESCO sponsored a conference in Germany claiming that “sex education should begin at an early age.” Since then, UNESCO has been relentless in sexualizing children, a topic that will be addressed in an upcoming piece of this series.

The trends toward socialism and communism within UNESCO only got more and more extreme. In 1970, for instance, UNESCO hosted a symposium on mass-murdering Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin in Finland.

“Lenin was a man with a mind of great clarity and incisiveness,” declared then-UN boss U Thant at the event. “His ideals of peace and peaceful coexistence among states are in line with the aims of the U.N. Charter.” Apparently nobody at the summit objected to the idea that Lenin, one of the cruelest mass murderers to ever walk the planet, shared the same values as the UN and its “education” arm.

UNESCO’s affinity for socialist and communist leaders continues to this day. Right now, French Socialist Party member Audrey Azoulay, who boasted that she “grew up in a radical left-wing family,” is leading the outfit. Before that, she served as “culture minister” in the government of former French President François Hollande. Of course, Hollande was also a member of the French Socialist Party, which is itself a member of the Socialist International, the leading global alliance of Marxist, socialist, and communist parties, including many with the blood of countless innocents on their hands.

Before Azoulay, UNESCO was run by Irina Bokova, who has a long background and pedigree with the savage Bulgarian Communist Party. Trained in the Soviet regime’s KGB-controlled State Institute of International Relations, Bokova proudly served the mass-murdering communist Bulgarian regime before she and her party reinvented themselves as “socialists.”

She hoped to have communist Chinese operative Qian Tang take over her post after leaving, but was thwarted amid an avalanche of bad publicity in Western nations.

None of this should be a surprise, considering the history of UNESCO. In fact, socialists and subversives in America were instrumental in creating the global agency. As this series explained in part 8 last week, the National Education Association (NEA) was critical. Indeed, the NEA, which has been dominated by socialists and collectivists for at least a century, was openly promoting the creation of a planetary “board of education” in its publications, with the goal of creating what they described as a “world government.”

“World organization may have four branches which in practice have proved indispensable: The legislature, the judicial, the executive, and the educational,” wrote NEA “Journal” chief Joy Elmer Morgan in a December 1942 editorial headlined “The United Peoples of the World.” “To keep the peace and insure justice and opportunity we need certain agencies of world administration such as: A police force; a board of education,” and much more.

Morgan also called for the global government to have a world currency, a new calendar to replace the Christian calendar, a “basic” language, a “board of health,” a “planning board,” a “radio-television commission,” a board to oversee “economic matters,” and much more. If that sounds like a recipe for communism and totalitarian rule, that’s because it is.

For the next three years, the NEA Journal was filled with propaganda supporting a global board of education. And just a few short years after Morgan’s call for such an institution, with powerful support from the NEA and its international allies, UNESCO was born to serve precisely that purpose out of the ashes of the failed League of Nations.

“The organized teaching profession may well take hope and satisfaction from the achievements it has already made toward world government in its support of the United Nations and UNESCO,” gushed Morgan in December of 1946 in the NEA Journal, celebrating the union’s success. “It is ours to hold ever before the people the ideals and principles of world government until the practice can catch up with those ideals.”

UNESCO was literally created to facilitate the emergence of a collectivist global system, and its own leaders spoke openly about it.

Trump’s decision to leave UNESCO was helpful, but as this series will show in the weeks ahead, the danger from this subversive agency and the U.N. itself remain significant—especially when it comes to education. Its tentacles can now be found entangled in schools across the United States and the world. If freedom is going to survive, it’s imperative that Americans become educated on the dangerous agenda of this supposed U.N. “education” agency.

This article was originally published by The Epoch Times, and is one report in a series of articles examining the origins of government education in the United States.

When an organization makes billions of dollars killing babies in the womb, it is clearly a bloodthirsty organization. And when a disproportionate number of those babies are black and Hispanic, it is clearly a racist organization.

All this is self-evident when it comes to Planned Parenthood, but recent events – the firing of Planned Parenthood’s president and a blatantly racist tweet – underscore just how deeply Planned Parenthood is a bloodthirsty and racist organization.

First there was the unexpected firing of president Leana Wen.

Her primarily failing, it appears, was that she did not have the cold-blooded killer instinct necessary to make abortion the priority of Planned Parenthood.

Perhaps it was her training as a medical doctor.

Perhaps it was a trace of the image of God that still pervaded her humanity, as much as she was still an abortion advocate.

Whatever the underlying causes may be, the broad strokes are clear. As noted by Alexandra Desanctis on National Review, “The organization has ousted its president, apparently for being insufficiently committed to pro-abortion advocacy.”

Indeed, “Planned Parenthood has long sought to downplay its commitment to abortion, calling itself a health-care organization and spreading the lie that abortion is only 3 percent of its business, even as its clinics perform between one-third and half of all abortions in the U.S. annually. The group’s leadership evidently believes this political moment demands more aggressive advocacy.

“And Wen wasn’t up to the task.”

More bluntly, cultural commentator Bill Muehlenberg put it like this: “What they are saying is this: ‘You are not blood-thirsty enough! You are not meeting your quotas! More babies MUST DIE!’ That is the mindset of PP. They are after blood – and money. That is their core business. That is why they exist.”

And he suggested that Planned Parenthood should run an ad that sounded something like this: “Wanted, an experienced baby killer who has no qualms about taking human life, nor about selling body parts of babies to others for profit. It is preferred that you resonate with past such ministries, such as the Nazi extermination camps. Having no heart and no conscience is also essential. Those who think that the vulnerable and defenceless should be our priority need not apply.”

Do you think he was exaggerating? I do not.

When it comes to Planned Parenthood’s racism, there is a spirited debate concerning the connection between Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s founder, and eugenics. Sanger’s conservative critics are sure that she wanted to reduce the number of black Americans (among other races and ethnicities), if not exterminate them entirely. Her defenders deny this passionately, also claiming that her interest in eugenics was not racial.

Yet even the left-leaning Time Magazine admitted in 2016 that Sanger did “make some deeply disturbing statements in support of eugenics, the now-discredited movement to improve the overall health and fitness of humankind through selective breeding. She did, and very publicly. In a 1921 article, she wrote that, ‘the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.’” (Time also cited her defenders who claimed that she “uniformly repudiated the racist exploitation of eugenics principles.”)

And the very left-leaning Snopes.com, in an article devoted to debunking a quote attributed to Sanger, uncovered this hardly flattering quote from a 1923 New York Times article. She wrote: “Birth Control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks — those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.” (Snopes’ emphasis.)

To my liberal, pro-abortion friends: Are you sure you want to defend Sanger against charges of racism?

But let’s not worry about 1923. Let’s look at the present, as in July 19, 2019, when Planned Parenthood tweeted,

’Black women are sexy and sexual entities, independent of anyone else’s ideas of what that means.’ For #SummerOfSex, our partnership with @WearYourVoice, @GloriaAlamrew talks about creating space for Black girls to understand their sexuality.

In one short tweet, Planned Parenthood’s motives are revealed for the world to see.

Bound4Life, a pro-life organization, noted that, “Black non-Hispanic women have the highest abortion ratio. Black women’s abortion ratio has reached 444 abortions per 1,000 live births, while non-Hispanic white women’s abortion ratio is 124 abortions per 1,000 live births.”

Apparently, however, this is not enough. More black women need to have sex. More black women need to have unwanted pregnancies. More black women need to have abortions.

This, to me, is all part of the “Jezebelic” attack on our nation. It is an attack we must resist with prayer, with truth, and with compassion. May Planned Parenthood be exposed.

This article was originally published at Townhall.com.

“Official statistics show that almost half of embryos used to help a woman conceive through in vitro fertilization were thrown away during or after the process. The embryos are created from female eggs and male sperm during the IVF process, with some introduced into the womb, put into storage, discarded as unwanted, or used in scientific experiments.” ~Andrew Hough, The Telegraph

Translation: “60 000 RM is what this person suffering from hereditary illness costs the community in his lifetime. Fellow citizen, that is your money too. Read Neues Volk. The monthly magazine of the Office of Racial Policy of the NSDAP.”

A Perfect Race of Humans

But history is no stranger to this evil concept. During Hitler’s reign, Nazi eugenics deemed certain people “unworthy of life.” This included prisoners, dissidents, and “unclean” races, but it also included those with learning disabilities, mental illnesses, physical deformities, and those with handicaps.

Nazis didn’t kill only Jews and rebellious foreigners, they killed their own “flawed” countrymen! Today, we have our own eugenics (meaning “well born”) philosophies going on. And, for many, it involves their own children!

I have a shocking revelation for you. Are you ready? Today’s leaders who support the bloody atrocity of abortion on demand, even to the point of promoting the cold-blooded whim-killing of a perfectly healthy infant moments before birth, go beyond what even Hitler promoted! Yes, today’s abortion practices are even worse than those of the Nazis!

While Hitler would have preferred me dead (and possibly required it), he would have condemned the abortion of babies he viewed as physically and mentally fit. His insane obsession with a pure and unblemished race indeed led him to the killing of innocents, but his murder spree was limited to his own warped perception of the worthy vs. the unworthy (“unclean races,” “deformed children,” “physically disabled,” and “feeble-minded”).

“The exposure of the sick, weak, deformed children, in short, their destruction, was more decent and in truth a thousand times more humane than the wretched insanity of our day which preserves the most pathological subject, and indeed at any price, and yet takes the life of a hundred thousand healthy children in consequence of birth control or through abortions, in order subsequently to breed a race of degenerates burdened with illnesses.” ~Adolf Hitler (Social Darwinism in European and American Thought by Mike Hawkins)

“In view of the large families of the Slav native population, it could only suit us if girls and women there had as many abortions as possible. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply…We must use every means to instill in the population the idea that it is harmful to have several children, the expenses that they cause and the dangerous effect on woman’s health… It will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics.”

“For by a single offering
He has perfected for all time
those who are being sanctified.”
~Hebrews 10:14

Written by Sean Maguire

According to the Planned Parenthood Glossary of Sexual Health Terms, “Eugenics” is “a racist, classist, and ableist movement to control who should and shouldn’t have children.”

Racism, classism, and ableism are all horrible ideas. These ideas say that a human being’s worth is based on their ethnicity, position, or abilities. Eugenics applies those ideas to reproduction, and says that only the “good” people should give birth.

Planned Parenthood is right to identify Eugenics in this way. It’s ironic, though, since Planned Parenthood was originally founded by a major advocate of Eugenics.

Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood (then called the Birth Control League) in 1921.

Margaret Sanger was a big supporter of eugenics. She held eugenic views until the day she died. Her views about promoting birth control as a way to “regenerate” the human race and eliminate “undesirables” were known around the world.

Even MSNBC admits that Margaret Sanger was a “proponent of eugenics.”  She was clear in her public writings about her goal of using birth control to prevent the “chance and chaotic breeding” of the lower classes.

She believed that white people were the superior race, that those of intelligence and means were better than those who were uneducated and stupid, and that those who were sick, diseased, or mentally infirm should never reproduce. Margaret Sanger was racist, classist, and ableist.

The Pro-Life, Pro-Family view which is guided by Biblical Christianity is not racist, classist, or ableist. The Family Foundation works to protect every human life, no matter what their ethnicity, their position, or their abilities.

God created all people in His image, not just some. There are no degrees of value based on the place someone was born.

Margaret Sanger said that the Australian Aboriginal was “the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development.” The Bible says that “God made man in his own image.” (Genesis 1:27)

Despite the fact that Eugenics is a racist, classist, and ableist movement to control who should and shouldn’t give birth, Planned Parenthood still celebrates their founder, Margaret Sanger, by giving out the “Margaret Sanger Award” every year.

The abortion industry giant still promotes abortion and birth control – particularly targeting minorities, economically disenfranchised, and weak populations.

Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenicist, and continues to promote eugenic ideas. Biblical Christianity answers them by loving all people, because all people are made in the image of God.

This article was originally published by the Family Foundation.

The world is quickly becoming over-populated. There is not enough water, food, fuel or other natural resources to sustain us all. We will soon be faced with a “survival of the fittest” class struggle, as the “have-nots” contend with the “haves” for land and property rights, in an attempt to stay alive during the coming economic apocalypse that ensues. Billions will starve to death (or worse) as every blade of grass is consumed by the ever-encroaching urban sprawl and demand for limited services.

At least this is the neo-Marxist narrative the socialist / globalist journalist, politicians and educrats want you to believe.

How Did We Get Here?

Whence did all these stories of over-population, limited resources, carbon footprint, etc. originate?

Thomas Malthus (1766-1846), wrote a book in 1798 entitled, An Essay on the Principle of Population as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society. He hypothesized that “… the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.”

Charles Darwin (1809-1888) was influenced by Malthusian theory. Darwin’s 1859 book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, created a world where only the physical reality matters. The soul of humans was diminished, and people quickly became reduced to resource-consuming units. Social Darwinism soon developed the concept that only the strongest should be allowed to survive, and that often was the “white race.” Eugenics, a practice of eliminating unwanted elements of the population through whatever pragmatic means was currently culturally accepted (or whatever you could get away with), was a driving worldview behind Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

Eugenics advocate, Margaret Sanger (1879-1966), the founder of Planned Parenthood, invented the term, “birth control,” and raised $150,000 for research leading to the first birth control pill in 1951. Sanger promoted “a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

Radical environmentalism placed the continued survival of the species as a primary virtue (with all of the devotion of a religion). We must save the planet, so we can all survive. If that means killing off large segments of our population (through abortion or other means), so be it.

Margaret Sanger, who intentionally set up abortion clinics in African-American neighborhoods, declared: “The most serious evil of our times is that of encouraging the bringing into the world of large families. The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children,” she continued “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” —“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 5: The Wickedness of Creating Large Families.

The Over-Population Myth

The real fact is that we have plenty of land and natural resources to accommodate our growing population. Of course, we should be good stewards of the earth, and find renewable resources, but we need to stop seeing children as a pestilence to be exterminated, and view them as they are; emerging innovators who can create a more sustainable future for us all.

The doomsayers with this message have consistently been proven wrong. Fifty years ago, Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb, wrote: “The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”

He also predicted the average age of death would be 42 by 1980, and the oceans could rise 250 feet because of melting ice caps (anyone wonder where Al Gore got his nonsense?). Ehrlich was certainly a false prophet. While poverty, hunger, and lack of adequate drinking water are present realities in many parts of the globe, these problems are almost always created by corrupt and oppressive governments, poor infrastructure, inefficiency (wasted food), lack of technology (shortage of water wells), war, and even cultural superstition (like in India where their religious beliefs have created food shortages by not allowing mice and rats to be killed, or cattle to be eaten for food, ceremonial bathing in drinking water, etc.).

False over-population myths have been responsible for many of the over 60 million abortions since Roe v. Wade in 1973. The truth is, there is room for every person on this planet to stand shoulder to shoulder within the city limits of Los Angeles, CA. It’s not a space issue, it’s a stewardship issue.

Despising Children

While not self-consciously pro-eugenics, the philosophical descendants of Malthus, Darwin, Sanger and Ehrlich have produces a negative view of children in our culture.

Children are not a negative drain on a society, they are, in the words of the Psalm 127 in the Bible, “a reward.” Population growth through birth rate9 is one of the prerequisites of a healthy economy. What is scary, is not child birth, but rather a massive aging population who have trusted their government to pay for their retirement (with funds long past spent). Our current Social Security system for the immense Baby Boomer generation is being funded by the current labor and taxation of Gen X and Millennials.

The problem is, in western culture, we’ve almost either killed off, or prevented the conception of, an entire generation of scientists, doctors, nurses, farmers, technicians, engineers and inventors. If we weren’t thinking of this in theological terms (considering the sovereignty of God), one might speculate that the scientist who would have discovered the universal cure for cancer may have been murdered in the womb.

A society needs a fertility rate of 2.1 births children per (hopefully married) woman to sustain population levels and maintain a stable economy. What we see happening in many part of Europe is a society driving full speed towards an economic cliff (not to mention a moral one!).

Demographics from the World Bank demonstrate a fall in global fertility rates from about 5.0 in 1960, to under 2.5 today. In 2015 in Europe the 10 worst economies, (with their accompanying birthrates beside it) were (from worst to better): Finland (1.6), Greece (1.3), Estonia (1.6), Portugal (1.3), Austria (1.5), Netherlands (1.7), Italy (1.4), Belgium (1.7), France (2.0), and Germany (1.5). None of these countries are above the 2.1 threshold for sustainability.

Muslims are quickly taking over population centers in Europe through a much higher than average birth rate. Muslims recognize the value of child-birth as a means for cultural domination. America only slightly exceeds a 2.1 growth rate, but that is due to immigration, not birth rate. As our birth rate slows to match that of Europe, we can expect to see our productivity decrease as well.

The Solution

Many nations, including China, Japan, Israel and others are seeking to encourage their citizens to have more children now, not less. The problem is, the anti-child and anti-family worldview is so ingrained in many cultures, people are now avoiding marriage and child-bearing altogether. STD’s are on the rise (so sexual activity is likely on the rise) but marriage and raising children within a committed marriage is despised.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that birth alone solves these complex economic problems. There is far more to a stable society, and robust economy that human bodies taking up land mass. What is needed is for a healthy family culture to emerge. Committed, monogamous, heterosexual marriages provide the best context for raising good citizens. Children need both fathers and mothers to help guide them into life’s complex maze of choices. We do not merely need to give birth to babies; we need to train them well how to become contributing adults. Divorce and parental absenteeism has given us a generation of lost young adults who are struggling to find their way through emotional pain, and subsequent substance abuse. They need the stability only a loving family can provide.

The key is to raise the next generation to understand their responsibility to be producers and nor mere consumers. Entertainment, government subsidies and dumbed-down educational systems have created youth who have a major entitlement complex. They’ve had free daycare, free government schooling, free meals at school, and even in many cases, free college that wasn’t merit-based. The growing acceptance of marijuana and other addictive substances have sapped ambition and is crippling what is left of the American work ethic. Many of them sit back, waiting on the government to take care of them throughout their life. Young adults like this will never successfully lead us into the future.

While information is essential for our global economy, we must also continue to produce goods and services. This is where parents are going to have to work hard to combat the indoctrination towards government dependency being inculcated in our nation’s youth from a very young age.

I’ve never been one to merely preach at others, while not taking my own advice. At the time of this writing, my wife and I are eagerly awaiting the birth of our tenth child in just a few short months. We have never been on government assistance, and we support them all, and teach them a good work ethic (age appropriate of course) from the time they are young. We homeschool them entirely by ourselves and will save taxpayers over a million dollars just between K-12 by not putting them into government schools.

We patiently endure the sarcastic and snarky comments of perfect strangers who ask us, “Do you know what causes that?!” or “Are they all yours?! Surely you aren’t planning to have more?!” Many of those casting shade at us have children who are on drugs or have been in jail for felonies. We don’t take offense at their rudeness and ignorance. We have our eyes set on a higher goal. We are preparing these young ones to be successfully in life: Physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. We are teaching them how to love and care for their neighbors, and how to solve problems, rather than create them. It’s not for the faint of heart, but our great country wasn’t built by people who shrank back from challenges. It was built by people of strong moral courage and tenacious convictions.

It is my hope that conservatives will stop reading from the playbooks of the progressive, leftist, Eugenic, social engineers, and will return to what make America great: Faith, family (including children) and freedom. These universal principles never fail. Join with me in helping to make America great again…by seeing once again that value of our children (our future).

IFI’s Annual
Faith, Family & Freedom Fall Banquet

Friday, October 5, 2018
The Stonegate in Hoffman Estates

Featuring special guest, George Barna

Secure your tickets or table now – click here or call (708) 781-9328.

Program advertisements & banquet sponsorships available.

As you know, over the past few weeks we have seen a flurry of political activity in both Washington D.C. and Springfield. We expect this whirwind to continue through much of the spring.

With the election of Donald Trump as president, we have seen the agitated Left organize their base of  pro-abortion feminists and Leftist allies. They are highly motivated, looking for any opportunity to push back wherever and whenever they can.

The energy and momentum can be seen and felt in Springfield, where pro-life lawmakers are privately expressing their concerns about the lack of energy from the Illinois pro-life community, especially as it relates to trying to stop HB 40, the bill that will permit tax-funding for abortion under Medicaid and through state government insurance policies. In fact, one conservative lawmaker told us that he has received more calls in favor of this terrible bill than calls in opposition.

Passage of HB 40 would translate into tens of thousands of additional abortions in Illinois every year. As explained in an earlier article, this law would result in a disproportionate number of black and brown babies being killed.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your state representative, urging him/her to vote NO on HB 40. Also, please call your state representative next week to remind him/her that you do not want to have our tax-dollars used to abort innocent pre-born human beings. The Capitol switchboard  is (217) 782-2000.

Former State Representative Cal Skinner correctly points out that “in a year when the budget is in more trouble than at any time in the last fifty years, it is not the time to force state agencies to spend more money than last year.” The state of Illinois is not in a position to pay for new entitlement programs, let alone a new program that denies a pre-born person his or her civil right to live.

Bulletin Insert:  Ask your pastor to share this new bulletin insert with your congregation.  The body of Christ and people of faith must speak out now.

Call to Action Bulletin Insert

More ACTION:  Contact your like-minded family and neighbors and let them know that they should speak out against these radical proposals. Forward this article to them.  Also, post your opinions on Facebook and Twitter.

Please also pray that this bill will not get the support it needs to pass out of the Illinois House of Representatives.

Help us spread the word and activate other pro-lifers
by making a tax-deductible donation to IFI:

Ever notice how the media has a knack for pulling on our heart-strings in an attempt to divert us from the real facts of the matter? In logic, this fallacy is called, “A red herring.”

A great example of this is the news coverage surrounding an amendment proposed by U.S. Representative Andy Harris (R-MD) regarding the protection of embryonic stem cells. But before we discuss the current legislation, let’s get a running start, and get some background on the issues behind it.

The Christian, pro-life position is that human life begin at conception. A normal human embryo has all 46 chromosomes innate to human development, and is already pre-programmed with the biological data needed to grow to a fully-formed adult. Every human embryo contains an eternal soul that must be protected.

The Ethics of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)

When an infertile couple is seeking to conceive, one method they may pursue is IVF. In this process, it is common for multiple embryos to be created. The ensuing problem is that some of these embryos are not used by the hopeful parents, leading to the dilemma of what to do with the frozen embryos that are left over from this procedure. Storing the embryos indefinitely can be costly, and often the parents have no practical way to bring them to full-term.

People choose different approaches to dealing with these embryos, including:

1. Donating them to another infertile couple who “adopts” their embryo and attempts a successful pregnancy and delivery (this option is rarely chosen).
2. Donating the embryos for stem-cell research.
3. Thawing without donating (thus terminating the life of the unborn embryo).

From a Christian worldview, clearly only one of these choices is viable (adopted embryos), as the other choices destroy human life.

Stem Cell Research

We must be careful in our discussion of these topics with others, that we have the issues clear in our mind. Christians are NOT opposed to stem cell research. There are different sources for stem cells, including adult stem cells derived from human fat. These stem cells offer the promise to potentially cure all sorts of physical maladies. We encourage this kind of research and hope for medical breakthroughs along with everyone else.

What we oppose, is the practice of conducting stem cell research on human embryos, because of the fact that a human life is destroyed in the process.

The Harris Amendment

So back to the current legislative situation. Military personnel who serve in our armed forces are sometimes injured in their line of duty in a way that causes permanent reproductive harm to their bodies. Our government has decided to fund IVF options for those veterans who wish to grow their families through this means.

Representative Harris has presented an amendment that specifies that any federal funding provided in any act of law may only be used to provide IVF treatments if such treatments do not result in the destruction of viable human embryos before embryo transfer. His amendment was adopted by a U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee by a vote of 29-21.

There has been an immediate push-back on this, because it would eliminate the immediate thawing, or research options, leaving only continued freezing (at a cost) or donation for embryo adoption. The argument is that this bill is not practical. It is inconvenient and will make this process more difficult for those who want to choose IVF.

The “red herring” in this story is that this involves our wounded military veterans. The media is choosing to portray this as showing a lack of support and compassion for those who have given so much (even potentially their hopes for a future family), in defense of our nation. Anyone who supports the Harris Amendment could be portrayed as unpatriotic, or unsympathetic to our troops.

What Is the Right Choice?

In any situation, we must avoid the tug of emotion and always ask ourselves, “What is the right thing to do?” Pragmatism is the view that “Whatever works is right.” The end justifies the means. It doesn’t matter what approach or method you choose, as long as you get the desired outcome. The problem with that view is that it isn’t wise or safe. Pragmatism has been behind many human atrocities in the past century, including eugenics.

As much as we want to see our veterans receive proper care and medical services, we cannot do so at the cost of human life. They put their life on the line to defend U.S. citizens, and that defense should be extended to unborn Americans as well.

A friend of mine recently put the matter as concisely and clearly as I believe it can be expressed:

“Any legislation that ends with,
‘And then the baby dies…’
is bad legislation.”

Opponents of the Harris Amendment suggest that an embryo isn’t truly human life because it is too small (size), or the embryo doesn’t have cognition (level of development), or it isn’t in the mother’s uterus (environment), or because it can’t sustain life on it’s own if unfrozen (degree of dependency).

Christian apologist, and pro-life advocate, Scott Klusendorf, has created an acronym (SLED) from these arguments that can help us to remember them, and be able to articulate a consistent and rational position on the defense of human life. None of these elements define human life. If you argue on that basis of any of them, you can easily also argue for infanticide or euthanasia.

The worth of a human life can never be equal to convenience on the scale of justice. Once intrinsic human life is devalued, on any level, it is only a matter of time until the taking of more lives will be justified by the same extended arguments.

Let us pray that efforts like Congressman Harris’ will find a hearing and that those in our nation’s leadership will seek to defend the most basic tenet of our inalienable rights: the immutable right to life.

IFI Faith, Family & Freedom Banquet

We are excited to have as our keynote speaker this year, former Congresswoman and Tea Party Caucus Leader, Michele Bachmann!  She distinguished herself by not only forming and chairing the Tea Party Caucus in 2010 in the U.S. House but also through her courageous and outspoken pro-life leadership as attested to by her rating of zero from NARAL.

Please register today before the early bird special expires.

It seems that America is now locked in an endless loop of tension and violence. Many disaffected Americans are railing out at a government they see as being abusive and vindictive. Movements like “Black Lives Matter” have pitted some African-American (and other) citizens against police officers, in a vicious cycle of street demonstrations and police force.

In some ways, these tensions are not new, and can be traced all the way to the American Civil War, through segregation, the Civil Rights Movement up to today. Americans have always been deeply divided on issues of race, and equal rights.

Now, police are being targeted in random shootings by those who feel anger at what they view as a system of oppression and tyranny.

The question is, where will all of this end?

There are really two facets to this situation that must be explored if we hope to understand the roots of this predicament.

Racism and Prejudice

What very few people stop to consider is the roots of all so-called “racial” prejudice. As Bible-believing Christians, we believe that God “has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth” (Acts 17:26). From one man, and one woman, all of the more than seven billion people on planet earth have descended. That makes all of us related by blood. We are all part of the same race: The Human Race!

Racial prejudice comes mainly out of evolutionary teachings. If you study the roots of the Eugenics movement, you will see that it is based in the view that some people groups are more highly evolved than others. Very few people know the full title of Charles Darwin’s ground-breaking 1859 book on evolution. It is called, “On Origin of Species, by Way of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.”

Over 150 years of evolutionary teaching has saturated our culture, and has convinced many that we must struggle for the strongest races to survive. The solution to prejudice is found in the hope offered in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Not only are we all equal in creation, and therefore equal in value, the Apostle Paul declared, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28).

Anarchy vs. Totalitarianism

The other consideration in this situation is the age-old struggle between a desire for freedom from authority (on the one hand) and a demand for supreme authority by the State (on the other). This tension has always existed in every society. There is a rogue spirit in humankind that wants to be free from the bonds of restriction and law. But a lawless society, where everyone makes up their own rules (moral relativism), and where people’s passions run unchecked (hedonism), is not tenable. No civilization can bear up under the weight of an antinomian mindset (a believe that all law is bad).

When a culture begins to shake itself from moral law, it soon finds itself at the mercy of an ever-encroaching government that seeks to provide stability and regulation. The response to anarchy is always totalitarianism, and the response to tyranny is almost always rebellion, which leads to the cycle of more tyranny.

This situation is only remedied when people recognize that there is a universal moral law that exists outside of themselves, and to which they are all subservient. Once again, we find the solution to both extremes within the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. The entire “Sermon on the Mount,” puts external law in the only place where it ultimately works; inside the human heart.

Until the evil of the heart is addressed, we are simply trying to put a cultural bandage on a proverbial brain tumor. No amount of political posturing will make bad people want to do good. It is only when the human heart is changed by love that we will hope to see citizens desire to do good, rather than harm, to their neighbor. It is only when we forgive, rather than seeking another eye or tooth in retaliation for harm, that we can end the vicious cycle of bloodshed and violence.

Ultimately, Christianity provides a totally unique remedy in the history of ideas. Every other worldview teaches that we must solve our own problems through human effort and initiative. Christianity, in contrast, presents us as the heart of the problem, not the solution. The Bible insists that it is only through humility and repentance that we will find healing for our own souls, and then be able to extend that grace and healing to others.

May God grant us that grace of repentance and humility as we seek to walk through the turbulent days that lie ahead.

Watching Rick Santorum during the Arizona debate reminded me of my trips to the grocery store with my eight children in tow. Having a large, Catholic family in today’s liberal, sexually revolutionized world makes you a target for evangelization by the Left. While shopping, I am stopped several times by people who want to know if they are all mine, are part of a daycare, or if they are all from the same father. That last question is my favorite. The inquisition usually ends with cute, didactic comments like “You know there are ways of preventing that.” or, “Maybe you should tell your husband to get a hobby.” It’s always great to have your sex life examined by smug, pseudo intellectual strangers in front of your children. I’ve thought about carrying around a resume with my B.A. degree colored over in yellow highlighter to prove that I’m not a total idiot — but I wouldn’t want to seem rude.

 Santorum has been drug into a similar situation. He is being portrayed as a Neanderthal, Taliban wannabe, hell bent on ripping birth control away from poor, oppressed women across the globe. The insinuation is that without the birth control pill, women everywhere would be forced to bear countless children while chained to their ovens.  Birth control believers, now whipped into a stiff peak frenzy, are rendered incapable of hearing any other position put forth by Santorum.  He is a heretic.  He has denied the Left’s belief in the Sacrament of Birth Control.  He has sinned against Women’s Health and the Commandments of their collective Rights.

 The conclusion is that the sexual revolution was the greatest victory ever won by women and right minded men. Let’s examine the facts. The birth control pill was the brain child and fondest wish of Planned Parenthood’s racist founder, Margaret Sanger. She wanted to find a “magic pill” that had the power to make parasitic babies go away. Due to her belief in eugenics, what she wanted most was to prevent the proliferation of  black babies but realized how controversial this would be to the American public. Proof of this secret “plan” is revealed in a letter that she wrote Dr. Clarence Gamble, heir to the Proctor and Gamble fortune, in December of 1939.

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” (Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.)

Margaret’s dream of a magic pill eluded her until she met Dr. Gregory Pincus. He was referred to as “Dr. Frankenstein” because of his successful in-vitro fertilization experiments on rabbits. He was vilified for making some of the nightmare science fiction scenarios imagined in “Brave New World”  a scientific reality. Sanger procured funding for Pincus to begin development of the pill.  In 1956, the birth control pill, under the name Enovid, was submitted for trials.

 By 1964, a quarter of all American couples were using the pill. Today, according to the CDC, 98 percent of women of childbearing age use birth control with 64 percent choosing the pill. While these statistics come as no shock to most, there is some lesser known information about the pill that might. Did you know that the pill prevents pregnancy in three ways? According to  The Physician’s Desk Reference, hormonal contraceptives:

• Prevent ovulation.
  
  
• Thicken the cervical mucus to prevent sperm from entering the uterus and fallopian tube.
  
  
• Alter the lining of the uterus so implantation cannot take place. The third action, if and when it occurs, is abortifacient (meaning a human life has begun but cannot continue to develop without the nourishment provided through the mother’s uterine wall). 

Yes Virginia, the birth control pill IS an abortifacient. How many unsuspecting women realize that by using the birth control pill they have not only been preventing pregnancy but aborting unknown numbers of their developing babies?

If this bit of information is not enough to rouse your concern, how about the fact that the birth control pill is listed by the World Health Organization as a class one carcinogen.  Moreover, an article titled, Birth Control Leading Carcinogen by J. Benkovic, exposes the fact that the pill is linked to a 660 percent increase in breast cancer. Wow, do you think that the Susan G. Komen Foundation knows about this? Let’s all take a moment to engage in some facetious wondering.

Why is there a blackout of information regarding the truth about the pill? Could it be that the proponents of birth control care less about “women’s health” and more about population control or dare I say it…control in general? The collective “We” seem to be slipping back into a central controlled master/servant class. Albeit today it is less about the haves and have-nots and more about the know-it-alls and the know-nothings. The pill, which promised freedom and equality to women, has proven to be the gateway drug leading to progressive Liberalism.

The Catholic Church had it right when it spoke out against artificial birth control in the 1968 Papal Encyclical titled “Humanae Vitae”.  An article from Business Insider titled Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control summarizes the issue best.  Authors Micheal Dougherty and Pascal Gobry wrote the following on the Pope Paul VI ‘s warnings.  He warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:

1. General lowering of moral standards
2. A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
3. The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men. 
4. Government coercion in reproductive matters. 

Does that sound familiar? 

Because it sure sounds like what’s been happening for the past 40 years. 

Planned Parenthood has expanded from a birth control provider into the nation’s largest abortion provider. The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform reports that approximately 3,700 abortions are performed in America each day. This is an unbelievable holocaust and for what?  Are women really better off than they were before the pill? Is having a job outside of the home really superior to raising a family?

 The objective reality of the situation is that women are forced to spend a large portion of their salaries paying for twenty year old college girls to raise their kids at daycare. And guess what, most of these women, after working an eight hour shift at their dream job, still go home and clean and cook dinner anyway. Maybe they can go paint Tom Sawyers fence when they get some free time.

Rick Santorum is just one in a long list of politicians who have been crucified for daring to speak out on moral truths. Any candidate who adheres to basic moral norms is deemed things like “crazy”, “right wing” or “unelectable.” Remember Sarah Palin? How about Pat Buchanan? It is time to stop killing the messengers.

America, much like the Titanic, was once thought to be indestructible. Our ship is on a collision course with an  iceburg of fiscal and social problems charted by Liberal elites like Barak Obama and George Bush. As we head nearer to our destruction, the Progressive left has proven that the only means of salvation that they have to offer us is a sacramental birth control pill. There is still a chance to avoid catastrophe. We must acknowledge Liberalism as the real opiate of the people and throw it’s dealers overboard before we go down with them.