Tag Archives: The fall of the West

The Island of Doctor Moreau

Posted on by
Reply

The prescience of H. G. Wells. From the Telegraph

Human tissue could be taken from the infirm without their consent and used for research

On Wednesday MPs will vote on a bill which would allow the creation of human/animal hybrid embryos to be used for stem cell research, change the conditions for granting IVF, and possibly liberalise the abortion laws.

The passage through Parliament of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill has been dogged by controversy. Failed attempts to outlaw late abortion have dominated the debate, while scientists, medical ethics experts and religious leaders have clashed over the hybrid embryo issue.

Defenders of the bill have repeatedly stressed the importance of gaining consent from anyone whose tissue is taken for the creation of human/animal hybrid embryos.

We are about to enter the age of the Chimera. Lord have mercy.

The right to indoctrinate

Posted on by
7

From the National Post:

Rights complaint filed in B. C. over cancelled course.

VANCOUVER – Two men responsible for creating a new social justice course for a B. C. high school have filed a human-rights complaint against the Abbotsford school district for its refusal to offer the course this year.

Murray and Peter Corren filed the complaint with the B. C. Human Rights Tribunal, alleging that the decision not to offer Social Justice 12 in W. J. Mouat Secondary School amounts to discrimination against students — especially those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered.

In a statement released yesterday, the Correns say the district refused to offer the course, even though more than 90 students had signed up, because some parents had complained about content dealing with sexual orientation, gender identity, homophobia and heterosexism.

The Correns, one of the first gay couples in Canada to marry, almost single-handedly forced the topics of sexual orientation, gender identity and same-sex families into schools when they launched a B. C. Human Rights Tribunal complaint against the provincial government.

You may agree or not with the teaching of this course on ‘social justice’; but how could a school district’s decision not to teach it possibly be a violation of anyone’s human rights? No-one is advocating censoring the material in the course; there is no frenzied mob gathering to burn copies of it; it is even available on the Internet for perusal by incurable insomniacs who may be looking for an untried soporific.

It appears to me to be a pile of tendentious tripe, but that’s just me. Here is an excerpt:

Students should be able to identify and define a range of concepts and terms of social justice:

e.g., ableism, ageism, anthropocentrism, colonization, conservative, consumerism, cultural imperialism, democratization, dignity, discrimination, diversity, economic imperialism, economic liberalization, empowerment, equality, equity, extremism, fairness, feminism, fundamentalism, genocide, globalization, hate crime, hegemony, heterosexism, homophobia, human rights, humanism, humility, inclusion, marginalization, misogyny, oppression, peace, persecution, power, prejudice, privilege, racism, radical, sexism, speciesism, stereotyping, systemic, transformational leadership, truth, value, worth

These words alone convey a cornucopia of codswallop; read the whole thing to judge for yourself.

The story of an abortion survivor

Posted on by
2

If this doesn’t move you, nothing will. Gianna Jessen:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Here is the ad featuring her from BornAliveTruth followed by an interview on Hannity and Colmes:

Here is her medical record, birth certificate and a 1978 newspaper clipping.

And here is Gianna’s testimony before the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee on April 22, 1996:

My name is Gianna Jessen. I am 19 years of age. I am originally from California, but now reside in Franklin, Tennessee. I am adopted. I have cerebral palsy. My biological mother was 17 years old and seven and one-half months pregnant when she made the decision to have a saline abortion. I am the person she aborted. I lived instead of died.

Fortunately for me the abortionist was not in the clinic when I arrived alive, instead of dead, at 6:00 a.m. on the morning of April 6, 1977. I was early, my death was not expected to be seen until about 9 a.m., when he would probably be arriving for his office hours. I am sure I would not be here today if the abortionist would have been in the clinic as his job is to take life, not sustain it. Some have said I am a “botched abortion”, a result of a job not well done.

There were many witnesses to my entry into this world. My biological mother and other young girls in the clinic, who also awaited the death of their babies, were the first to greet me. I am told this was a hysterical moment. Next was a staff nurse who apparently called emergency medical services and had me transferred to a hospital.

I remained in the hospital for almost three months. There was not much hope for me in the beginning. I weighed only two pounds. Today, babies smaller than I was have survived.

A doctor once said I had a great will to live and that I fought for my life. I eventually was able to leave the hospital and be placed in foster care. I was diagnosed with cerebral palsy as a result of the abortion.

My foster mother was told that it was doubtful that I would ever crawl or walk. I could not sit up independently. Through the prayers and dedication of my foster mother, and later many other people, I eventually learned to sit up, crawl, then stand. I walked with leg braces and a walker shortly before I turned age four. I was legally adopted by my foster mother’s daughter, Diana De Paul, a few months after I began to walk. The Department of Social Services would not release me any earlier for adoption.

I have continued in physical therapy for my disability, and after a total of four surgeries, I can now walk without assistance. It is not always easy. Sometimes I fall, but I have learned how to fall gracefully after falling 19 years.

I am happy to be alive. I almost died. Every day I thank God for life. I do not consider myself a by-product of conception, a clump of tissue, or any other of the titles given to a child in the womb. I do not consider any person conceived to be any of those things.

I have met other survivors of abortion. They are all thankful for life. Only a few months ago I met another saline abortion survivor. Her name is Sarah. She is two years old. Sarah also has cerebral palsy, but her diagnosis is not good. She is blind and has severe seizures. The abortionist, besides injecting the mother with saline, also injects the baby victims. Sarah was injected in the head. I saw the place on her head where this was done. When I speak, I speak not only for myself, but for the other survivors, like Sarah, and also for those who cannot yet speak …

Today, a baby is a baby when convenient. It is tissue or otherwise when the time is not right. A baby is a baby when miscarriage takes place at two, three, four months. A baby is called a tissue or clumps of cells when an abortion takes place at two, three, four months. Why is that? I see no difference. What are you seeing? Many close there eyes…

The best thing I can show you to defend life is my life. It has been a great gift. Killing is not the answer to any question or situation. Show me how it is the answer.

There is a quote which is etched into the high ceilings of one of our state’s capitol buildings. The quote says, “Whatever is morally wrong, is not politically correct.” Abortion is morally wrong. Our country is shedding the blood of the innocent. America is killing its future.

All life is valuable. All life is a gift from our Creator. We must receive and cherish the gifts we are given. We must honor the right to life.

Rule Britannia

Posted on by
2

From the Telegraph.

We knew that sharia courts were operating in Britain even before Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury gave the lecture  in February which caused such a stir.

It was said that these courts arbitrated on marriages, as Jewish courts or Catholic marriage tribunals do. Everything was to be done with the consent of both parties. More surprisingly, it seems that sharia courts are giving judgement in criminal cases. In six cases of domestic violence, according to Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.

Can you imagine what kind of consent wives involved in such cases have given to the sharia court’s jurisdiction?

Often, Muslim women marry in an Islamic ceremony without the ratification of a marriage in English law. This gives them no rights under the law of the land in the case of divorce. Nor would they have any claim to inherit under English law.

So we see the growth of sharia as a parallel jurisdiction to the law of the land, imposed on a sector of society that cannot resist it.

It’s fitting that this is being publicised at the same time as this piece of anti-Christian claptrap from the BBC:

A successful Christian children’s author says he was refused appearances on the BBC because it couldn’t be “seen to be promoting Jesus”.

G P Taylor’s first novel, Shadowmancer, spent 15 weeks at the top of the British book charts in 2003. His second book, Wormwood, sold 22,000 copies in one day.

Yet the author claims that invitations for appearances on the BBC stopped once producers found out he was a Christian.

“I had good relations with them until they realised that there were religious allegories in my stories,” he told The Sunday Telegraph.

“Once they had decided that I was promoting Christianity in my books I found the door firmly shut.”

Mr Taylor said his faith meant that he was not welcome on children’s programmes like Blue Peter.

He said: “A BBC producer told me ‘off the record’ that it was a matter of my faith and the fact that I was an Anglican priest. ‘We can’t be seen to be promoting Jesus’, he said with a laugh.”

A spokesman for the BBC denied the allegations. “Programme makers make their own editorial decisions about which guests to have on their shows. There is no truth in the claim that there is a BBC ban on G P Taylor.”

However, Mr Taylor said: “They weren’t turning me down because I was a bad guest, but because of who I am.

“I’m an Anglican priest and sadly while it’s OK to be the next Philip Pullman, it’s not all right to be a Christian writer.”

And, one imagines, the Arch-twit of Canterbury, Rowan Williams – having explained to us why sharia law in the UK is such a good idea – will have absolutely nothing to say about this blatant discrimination against the religion he is supposed to be defending.