An odious comparison: Evangelicalism's Baalam and Rome's Jeremiah...
(Tim) So everyone's talking about Rick Warren's payoff. He gets to pray in front of millions during Senator Obama's inauguration, calling down God's presence and blessing on a ceremony centered around the national politician most committed to the slaughter of his nation's children taking God's Name in vain as he falsely promises to uphold the Constitution of these United States.
When our nation was founded, our Declaration of Independence declared our commitments this way:
"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".
Thus, in the "Preamble" to our Constitution, we state the Constitution's purpose to be to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."
Precisely how does a man swear by God's Holy Name to secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity who himself is our nation's political leader most committed to the slaughter of that posterity? The wickedness of Governor Blagojevich pales by comparison.
Selling an appointment to the U.S. Senate is child's play compared to the child slaughter which was a central plank of Senator Obama's campaign. Talk about wickedness in high places!
But no one's watching. We're all transfixed by our nation's little morality play over there on Chicago's South Side.
Also, by the vision of Evangelicalism's own Balaam, the Warrenmeister, thinking gentle thoughts about how his invocation of the Triune God can help heal our nation as we all unify behind our new President. So Rick Warren, prophet of Israel, hoists himself on his donkey...
for the long dusty journey to Washington D.C. where he will bless the cult of Molech in the Terrible Name of the Lord of the Universe.
Utter bloody hypocrisy.
Once again, Protestants can't see things clearly and it's left to the Roman Catholics to deliver the rebuke...
A little over a month ago, New York Archbishop, Cardinal Edward M. Egan, published a picture of a 20-week-old fetus in his newspaper column and declared abortion to be an act "no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin."
Eagan has further written:
Adolf Hitler convinced himself and his subjects that Jews and homosexuals were other than human beings. Joseph Stalin did the same as regards Cossacks and Russian aristocrats. And this despite the fact that Hitler and his subjects had seen both Jews and homosexuals with their own eyes, and Stalin and his subjects had seen both Cossacks and Russian aristocrats with theirs. Happily, there are few today who would hesitate to condemn in the roundest terms the self-deceit of Hitler, Stalin or even their subjects to the extent that the subjects could have done something to end the madness and protect living, innocent human beings.
One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the "Dred Scott Case" in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.
* * *
We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives [not to mention our nation's President] is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.