Does it Matter?

INTERNET SHOCK: COUPLE LETS YOU VOTE ON WHETHER THEY GET AN ABORTION

After my first knee jerk reaction from the attention grabbing headline. I started looking farther into the story behind the headline.

A married couple in Minnesota, who have had three miscarriages, and are pregnant for the fourth time despite bad outcomes in the past. Wants our opinion on whether to keep the child or not?

The first thing that crosses your mind is this is a hoax. The second crosses your mind that these people are lost and are a typical unmarried couple who don't want the inconvenience of a child in their life.

Well when you read the whole story,it is obvious this married couple trying for the fourth time to have a child, are going to keep their baby. They are also making a statement.

Does it matter? These people have taken this opportunity to use their real life situation to pose a question. Are we serious about defending the unborn? Are they grabbing for their 15 minutes of fame? I don't know, but as a person who believes in the sanctity of life, it doesn't matter. I appreciate the opportunity to step to the plate for my values.

As of this posting the site is showing 80% for give birth, and 19% for getting an abortion. There have also been about 3,000 votes since I have been on the site.

The Pro Life conscience of America is coming forward, and carrying the day. So now the question arises again. Does it matter? Pete and Alisha Arnold the couple who are asking this question, are calling for the Pro Life Community, to put their money where their mouth is. They are right.

It is time for us to move forward by whatever means Constitutionally necessary, and put a ban on abortion once and for all. That includes no exemption for rape and incest. I am at this time going to leave in life of the mother, because I am unsure about that. Yes an abortion doctor will come up with some kind of medical excuse. But I can't say I can come between a woman honestly deciding between her life, and her babies. I also can't say I know any women who would chose their life over their child's if they truly love the child. All other excuses for abortion are out the window in my book, as a self centered denial of God's will.

So let us win this war, let's have the Pro Life Community accomplish what it says it exists for. Until we do that, it really doesn't matter the Pro Life movement exists.

Please take a moment to vote at this website.

http://www.birthornot.com/

Because it really does matter that we stand up, and make a statement for the unborn, who cannot speak for themselves, no matter what the reason. We are asked to make this statement now. Let's make it.

The World View of Service!

Veteran's Day is a day of conflict for people of two World Views. Just like there is cultural conflict between people that celebrate Christmas, and those that don't. Veteran's Day is one of those holidays where people who value Military Service, and those who do not have a conflict.

My limited understanding of the mission of the United States Military is contained in the Declaration of Independence:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

I believe it is our job to liberate oppressed people from Governments who do not respect the unalienable rights of their citizens. Notice at the start of this declaration it says all men. It doesn't say Americans, or any other nationality. It says all men because the Rule of Natural and the unalienable rights it protects are universal. To refuse to accept that is either a misunderstanding of the highest law of any nation. Or a complete rejection of God, and the laws handed down to us from him.

The melting pot that is America has been filled for years by legal immigrants fleeing tyranny. If you check into history most tyrants usually do not value the rule of Natural Law.

The United States Military has had a fine tradition of defending those who have had their unalienable rights taken away from them. We have given our blood and treasure to defending God's law. God commands a sovereign nation formed under his laws to do so.

This would not have happened with out generations of men and women from ALL ethnic backgrounds putting their lives on the line to defend their fellow man.

I find it amazing that people who profess to believe in Natural Law don't seem to understand this. They say they are interested in Liberty, but condemn the very instrument that establishes freedom for us and the rest of mankind.

Time after time nations that have lived by the laws of man, have committed atrocities against their own citizens. It seems every time people who criticize our foreign policy, seem to take the side of the totalitarian regime they claim the United States is.

When we pay particular attention to this part of the Declaration of Independence it becomes clear what we have to do to insure unalienable universal rights for all mankind.

governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Please tell me how an oppressed people with no military capability can accomplish such a task with out our help? Critics say: Well we need to declare all of our wars. I agree. But please tell me how you declare war on a non uniformed enemy, whose homeland doesn't claim them?

Thankfully we have had people in the past who understand this mission God commands us to undertake. I thank the veterans who have participated in the past, and are currently serving on this mission. Especially those who have lost loved ones in the performance of this mission. Every one of you are Great Americans.

Hopefully some people in this country will catch on to the purpose of your mission, and appreciate it. But that will never happen until they accept God's Law, and realize we have been in the past, and currently are, in a war with an enemy who doesn't share a World View that has The Rule of God's Natural Law, as the law that binds all men.

Stagnant State!! Stagnant Results!!

I headed home from the Judge Retention Rally Tuesday Night. My World View had just won. The Rule of Natural Law had been defended. But something didn't feel right.

Today I figured out what it was. The country was looking to return to the fundamentals, through new faces that believe in Common Sense. But the status quo in Iowa is still very much in place.

Let me make this clear the status in Iowa, isn't as quo as it is in Illinois,but it is still status quo just the same. One bizarre development is while the three judges were being fired. The judge who initiated the ruling that caused the removal of the three supreme court judges. Got retained by over 60% of the vote.

It was the eighties all over again in Iowa. Team Ray/Branstad is back. How did this happen? All over the country, and even down ballot in Iowa new faces were getting elected.

Iowa voted to retain an Attorney General that should have been gone along time ago. Everyone needs to lay off Brenna Findley, she ran a good campaign for an office that really most people don't even know exists. The only thing she was guilty of was not having any prosecution experience, and Miller exploited that in the last weeks of the campaign. That weighed heavy with people who do know the office exists, and probably made the difference.

Another bizarre turn. Mike Fitzgerald got retained. Didn't he lose the IPERS money? Matt Schultz won, and he can thank the Tea Party. The Tea Party knew more than any group that his office was in charge of the integrity of the ballot. An issue they are very concerned with.

Iowa's 1st,2nd,and 3rd Congressional Districts remained in Liberal hands. Further proving that Democrats believe in the Rule of Natural Law, that states Marriage is between a man and a woman, and courts, or legislatures for that matter have no right to make a law contrary to that. The judges could not have been thrown out, without voters from these three congressional districts stating that.

As I said before it was the eighties all over again in Iowa. Why? Because this state is stagnant. We are going to lose a Congressional District, because most of the population still living in rural Iowa, are people who voted for Branstad way back when. Their kids have left for other states, or the jobs that kept those communities together left, taking the people with them. Leaving behind laid off workers with no way to replace the lost income. No one lives in rural Iowa anymore who don't have a ton of cash in the bank, or collects a ton of support from the Government.

Iowa is a stagnant state , and because of it, we got stagnant election results Tuesday Night.

What can we do to shake Iowa out of this? I really don't know. The Branstad administration will try to continue the same policies that have led to this stagnation. They will try to bribe out side companies to come into the state, through the states tax base, to create jobs. You will need to hold your newly elected Statehouse person to account. You will need to ask them. What are you doing to keep big Government off your districts back? Bringing more money in from outside of your district, by taking it from someone else's district isn't going to work anymore.

It is obvious the shake up of this stagnation must start with the Republican Party of Iowa. Most of the stagnation I talk about, has been caused by Democrats and their Big Government ideas, and Republicans who see a chance to cash in on it.

Believe it or not the Republican Party is on its way to shaking things up. Matt Strawn, and his staff, and Kraig Paulsen, and Paul Mc Kinley have taken steps this cycle, that should promote policies more responsive to the electorate. They have made the party more customer friendly, and I commend them. The reason this is not so immediately evident, is that many of the County Committees across the state, still think politics is about pot lucks, and dinners instead of getting votes. Matt has started shaking up the stagnation of the Party, and it should start showing up in the years to come.

The reason the Republican Party must lead on this is in the third party vote results. Jonathan Narcisse missed third party status by 500 votes. He is a socially conservative Libertarian. The Libertarian Party of Iowa stuck with their nominee. Eric Cooper got 14,000 votes, and Jonathan got 20,000. If these two were combined Iowa would have an alternative party. As a person who leans very Libertarian, this tells me the Libertarian Party, really doesn't have a Socially Conservative view of the Rule of Natural Law.

The shake up of the stagnation in this state will occur, when the Social Conservatives of the Republican Party, get the Moderates, who really have Socially Conservative World Views to finally speak up and say it. Reagan Democrats have proven they will stand up for Family Values, when the Republican Party gives them a Reagan type candidate. Continuing to Re Reagan RPI needs to be a priority.

Only then will things start to smell better in this state.