October 24, 2016

Powerful Abortion-Survivor Testimony and Facts about Planned Parenthood

This woman, Gianna Jessen, has a powerful testimony as a survivor of abortion. She clears up a lot of disinfo about Planned Parenthood and I'd recommend watching and learning from her experience and continued research as an activist.

Many, many people have been fooled by Planned Parenthood and the issues at hand. I believe it warrants going through each point one by one to confront the propaganda.

Myth 1:  No US abortions are funded publicly.
Facts: Public Medicaid provides abortions. “...seventeen states fund abortions for low-income women on the same or similar terms as other pregnancy-related and general health services.” https://www.aclu.org/other/public-funding-abortion

And PP provides legal attacks to increase this number, Mississippi being the latest.

Clinton wants all states to provide taxpayer funding for abortions: “The new platform approved last month in Philadelphia, however, is explicit: “We will continue to oppose—and seek to overturn—federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.””

Myth 2: Planned Parenthood (PP) aims only to provide health and safety in "women's reproductive healthcare."
Facts: Giving natural birth and offering a child for adoption is safer for the mother and there is less possible depression associated with this. Click on PP's website and the word "adoption" is not seen. Click on the "Facts on Abortion" link and you will not see the FACT that natural birth is safer than abortion and the FACT that there is less depression associated with natural birth and adoption. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/  For sake of posterity, I've made webclips showing this:

October 01, 2016

Are GMO Crops & Food Really Safe? A 2016 Summary

There is a lot of content on the Internet claiming that the debate is over, that GMO food is completely safe and that there is no threat to the environment, because certain authorities claim it is so. But the debate is really not over in 2016. A lot of “what ifs” and facts remain that challenge these claims of food and environmental safety. This subject is especially poignant considering that behemoth chemical and pesticide giant Bayer just bought GMO giant Monsanto this week.

1. What if the authorities that claim GMO food is perfectly safe personally choose organic food for themselves and their families?

2. What if the largest investors in GMO were shown to be stockpiling pure heirloom, organic non-GMO seeds for their own posterity?

3. What if the GMO food industry was set up in such a manner as to make it basically legally impossible to try to challenge the safety of GMO foods in public without a lawsuit?

4. What if GMO behemoths are creating a monopolization of agriculture within the control of an extremely limited amount of companies?

5. What if the increase of pesticides used in conjunction with GMO agriculture is inherently destroying bee populations and, thus, helping to destroy the environment in general, not just personal health?

6. What if weeds and pests have been increasingly resistant to GMO pesticides and GMO pesticide use is increasing dramatically, exacerbating the negative effects on the environment?

7. What if the long term use of glyphosate, the most popular herbicide, is destroying the soil?

8. What if large GMO companies were hiring propaganda artists to spread lies about GMO safety?

I've supported the first two points in a previous article, linked here, but wish to show evidence of the latter six points here in this post.

A Legally Protected Hazard – GMO seeds are usually patented. The use of the patented seeds, in any manner, requires contractual permission. Rich Dupre pointed out, "Ever since the introduction of genetically modified crops into the food chain, the tussle has been largely between farmers and Monsanto , which says since 1997 it has filed 145 lawsuits against farmers who've improperly reused its patented seeds, or on average about one lawsuit every three weeks for 16 straight years." Also, if a testing laboratory does not have contractual permission to test GMO seeds then theoretically it could be sued for violating intellectual patent law. I believe that this motivates independent laboratories to avoid important testing and only those under the control of GMO firms are likely to be approved for such testing. Nevertheless, Egypt did publish a study in 2012 that found GMO foods conducive to organ failure. The study was titled, “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” is the longest GMO feeding study ever to be conducted on rats.


The Monopolization of Food – Aside from water and clean air, food is a fundamental human necessity. If the US Standard Oil Company was broken up due to a threat of monopolization, how much more should the monopolization of agriculture, through patented seeds, be considered a threat? India has taken to banning GMO seeds and has pointed out the obvious threat: “Seed sovereignty is not a baseless ideological position, but a pragmatic approach. It is an integral part of food security and sovereignty of a community or a nation." Instead of raising such warnings, President Obama appointed the former vice president of Monsanto, Michael Taylor, as the head of the FDA, giving even more inherent control and protection to Monsanto and the GMO industry. Chemical giant Bayer just bought Monsanto for $66 billion, making the monopoly even bigger. It has become clear that lobbyists, not public interest, control politics and laws in the US today, even as the US Congress and President Obama ushered in the "DARK Act" in 2016 preventing readable labeling of GMO products.

September 28, 2016

UN 2030 Agenda - The Global Criminalization of Biblical Christianity

Get ready for United Nations' 2030 Agenda. US President Obama announced, "In order to realize the promise of the UN, the US must give up freedoms" when addressing the UN. Coincidentally, the UN "2030 Agenda" is replacing Agenda 21. How will this help to usher in a totalitarian one-world government? Daisy Luther of the Activist Post explains:
"Simple: it is entirely impossible to achieve what they have laid out without a one-world government, the New World Order we have heard so much about over the last few years."

While the goals may at first seem idyllic, the global totalitarianism implied, and the loss of basic civil time-honored freedoms, is nightmarish. This is the path that Hillary Clinton would have us follow. As the Lancet pointed out, the UN 2030 Agenda will be used to impose subjective secular humanist values on the entire world, as a "human right" - and thus will ultimately help to the criminalize of the traditional biblical world view.
"One theme seen throughout the 2030 Agenda document is “inclusion” or “no person left behind”. Apparently, transgender rights are now categorized as human rights so that they can be enforced on the rest of humanity." - This is in keeping with Clinton's agenda and is in diametric opposition to biblical values.

Vitit Muntarbhorn of Thailand is the first U.N. independent expert charged with investigating violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. John Fisher, Geneva director of Human Rights Watch, said his appointment on Friday “made history” and “will bring much-needed attention to human rights violations against LGBT people in all regions of the world.” as reported by WND.

September 24, 2016

List of Best Nutrition and Health Documentaries for Adults and Children

Are you being a good steward of your body and of your family's health? The chart shows obesity statistics from 1978 to 2011 in various countries, with the US displaying the worst results in increasing obesity in terms of larger industrialized nations. 
There are excellent documentaries that show the reasons why obesity is skyrocketing and what can be done about it. The bottom line is that there is big money in processed foods, in medicine, in MSM media propaganda, and in sugar lobbying, that have together kept valuable information from the public. Because some films offer simple and natural healing concepts, such as Beautiful Truth and Forks over Knives, these tend to draw the and vitriolic ire of the medical establishment.
I'm not offering any promises, claims, or certified health advice by presenting these films, just recommending that anyone interested in living a healthier and happier life should probably learn of the different views, studies and experiments that have been conducted. In my opinion, and my wife and children's opinions as well, these are the best ones we've seen. I'm sure that there are great ones that we haven't even seen yet. We don't agree with everything in each film, but most of it does make sense and seems very helpful. If you've never heard of "The China Study" you should probably watch Forks Over Knives, just to be aware of the largest nutrition and health study in history. As Christians, we are to be good stewards of all that God has given us, including our bodies. 

Recommended Documentary Films Available at Public Libraries and Netflix:

Films that Both Adults and Children Would Like:

That Sugar Film (2014): (pretty funny)

Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead (2010): (adventurous travelogue)

Beautiful Truth (2008): (15-year old boy narrates)

Films Geared Towards Adults:

Fed Up (2014): (American version with Katie Couric)

Forks Over Knives (2011)

Food Matters (2008)

Food, Inc. (2008)

(Chart Credit of Obesity rates from around the world by Mark Kelly, Heartspring.net © 2012).

Tags: Best health films, best nutrition films, top documentaries on health and nutrition, funny documentaries on nutrition, film about organic foods, raw food film, the China Study, international obesity chart 1978 to 2011

September 20, 2016

Obama Blames Indie News For "Misinformation" - Set To Shut Off Internet Freedom

A Gallup Poll showed trust in mainstream news is at an all time low. 

Published September 14, 2016, the Gallup Poll displays a chart that has MSM news corporations and Hillary Clinton panicking. Trust in mainstream news is at an all time low, with only 32% trusting it.. The establishment means of manipulating public opinion is crashing and burning. Most of the MSM news supporting Hillary Clinton is so extremely and blatantly biased and unobjective that people are increasingly flocking to alternative indie news sources. One point of grave concern is, however, that Obama apparently intends to relinquish US control of Internet freedom to parties that most likely will be more totalitarian in their approach.

1. President Obama lashed out at alternative news sites and bloggers claiming that "misinformation" was being spread, shortly after this Gallup Poll was released by the pollsters on September 18th. This was ironic considering that the MSM has obviously become the main culprit when it comes to misinformation and distortion.

2. CNN then followed suit in the blame game, claiming that Donald Trump is, “taking credit for that drop in trust". CNN is perhaps at the top of the list, when it comes to MSM bias, disinfo and propaganda. See here, here and here for recent examples.
3. President Obama is now set to relinquish Internet freedom on October 1, 2016 to the globalist powers that be, that are not exactly freedom loving. This could jeopardize the presidential election and will likely wipe out Internet free speech in the long run. The Hill asks, "Why change it now and so close to the election?"

August 12, 2016

Video: 2016 Fiji Rugby Team Sings Hymn of Thanks to God After Winning Gold Medal

In case you haven't seen this... the Fiji rugby team won gold, and it was actually the very first Olympic medal in the country's history. And after the men sang a hymn, "We Will Overcome by the Blood of the Lamb" - with great emotion, they prayed and thanked God, giving God all the glory for their victory!
Pretty inspiring moment, I think. NBC probably didn't censor this because they had no clue what they were singing about. 

"The LORD reigns, let the earth rejoice; Let the many islands be glad." (Psalms 97.1 NASB)

Click the following link for the NBC video of the players singing:


Tags: Free video of Fiji rugby team signing hymn of praise to God at Rio Olympics 2016, Christian athletes Rio Olympics, Fiji rugby team video, 

August 10, 2016

Is Michael Phelps' Christian Testimony Missing Something?

I've read a number of catchy headlines implying that Michael Phelps is a true Christian with a powerful Christian testimony, but there is something important missing in each account, that is, Christ. Phelps told ESPN that the The Purpose Driven Life book, “turned me into believing there is a power greater than myself and there is a purpose for me on this planet.”
Michael Phelps has broken several kinds of world records. When he won his 19th Olympic medal, he officially had won the most Olympic medals in history. He is truly an astounding athlete. However, there was a low point in Phelp's life, after he had already become famous as an Olympic swimmer, when he was heavily into drugs and feeling suicidal. It was at this point Phelps hit "rock bottom" about the time photos surfaced of Phelps taking a hit off a bong. "I was like a time bomb, waiting to go off. I had no self-esteem, no self-worth. There were times (when) I didn't want to be here. It was not good. I felt lost," he said. At his low point, Phelps received guidance from Christian and NFL linebacker, Ray Lewis, per this account:

August 02, 2016

Key Points on the "Christian Vote" in 2016

There is a tendency today for Christians to avoid discussing politics. But stakes are higher in this presidential election and I'm hoping that you'd like to be informed. I'll address common objections to politics by Christians and then move on to aspects of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Wayne Grudem, a Christian ethics teacher for 39 years, wisely encourages Christians to respectfully discuss and debate politics in the US. His article, "Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice" emphasized that: "...we need to keep talking with each other – because democracies function best when thoughtful citizens can calmly and patiently dialog about the reasons for their differences."
The discussion of ideas is a part of a normal democracy
Firstly, those involved directly in ministry work often feel that any talk of politics will jeopardize their non-profit tax status. And this shunning of political talk can reverberate through entire church congregations. This position, in my opinion, is not helpful to society regarding the Church's historical role as salt and light, and may even imply subservience to the state over the conscience. Secondly, an opinion is that political conversations might thwart evangelism. Amy Gannet considers evangelism the top priority of the Church and, therefore, directs others to avoid any political involvement, just to be safe. This may be her personal conviction, but she offers no reason why her generalization should apply to all Christians. Personally and prayerfully following conscience, many find that reducing abortions, or other issues, may take precedence over evangelism in any given election. Thirdly, many Christians believe that talking politics is not appropriate, or it is less spiritual for Christians, because Jesus never talked politics. Again, like the previous point, this generalization does not reflect the biblical New Covenant tenet that the Holy Spirit guides all of us Christians of the universal Church today as individuals and by conscience. William Wilberforce, for example, had a very strong conviction to politically oppose slavery in England. Had he not done so, it is conceivable that slavery would have continued much longer. Fourthly, some contend that pointing out documented corruption in a political candidate is slanderous. But let's be clear, the definitions of "slander" and "libel" relate only to making false statements.

Not voting altogether

There are a number of people promoting the "purist" position that Christians should not vote at all, if candidates hold any positions that they do not agree with, or have serious character issues. If by prayer the Holy Spirit is personally guiding someone not to vote, I would agree with this purist position. But most of the reasoning I have heard to justify this position seems to be based solely on ill-founded logic. For example, Catholics and Orthodox I dialogue with oppose the, "lesser of the evils" approach and claim that this is in fact embracing a utilitarian philosophy that is not Christian. But this appears overly simplistic. On any given day, we perform numerous tasks based on the pragmatic or utilitarian approach to problem solving, to achieve the most happiness. Voting for the lesser of the evils in no way makes us official philosophical "utilitarians" than choosing to use both bleach and soap in the laundry washer makes us philosophical utilitarians. One could argue that Trump speaks with more sinful language and overtones but that Clinton acts with more evil intent, breaking more laws, therefore, Clinton is the lesser of the two evils. I would offer that these types of questions all come down to personal convictions. Romans 14.23 outlines that whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. So a key factor is to ask if we have peace and any inner convictions, after we prayerfully consider not voting altogether, or voting for a certain candidate. But we should not confuse this type of answer with excuses employing faulty logic. Philip Swicegood wrote a long article on Trump with this conclusion: "He (Trump) is not entitled to it (your vote), and you will not be helping Hillary Clinton if you choose not to." The second phrase is plainly false. If Trump and Clinton have a close election and many Christians choose not to vote simply out of apathy or frustration, clearly this could help Clinton to win.   

July 26, 2016

Wikileaks Shows How Democrat Party Exploits Hispanics

The Democrat exploitation and racism against Hispanics will probably not be mentioned in biased mainstream news. And neither will the ethical illiteracy on display with the celebration of law breaking at the Democratic National Convention (DNC). But in social media, we are the news. The main DNC strategy email reveals not one iota of interest in the needs of the Hispanic community, rather, it highlights different aspects in which Hispanics can be stereotyped as a consumer group for exploitation in the political process by Democrats for this purpose: "capture this demographic."
"The document makes sweeping generalizations about Latinos (which on planet earth is usually referred to as “racism”) in order to sell them, as “consumers,” on the Democratic vote."
Some of the comments insinuate that Hispanics do not consider facts, logic or critical thinking at all, but make decisions entirely based on "brand loyalty" and "story telling." I would find this extremely insulting if I was Hispanic. With the Democrats alleging that Trump is a racist for wanting to build a wall, it may be time to come to terms with the racism in the Democrat Party showing that Hispanics mean nothing more than basically a means to more power and control over the people.

July 12, 2016

Hillary Clinton, Socialism and Marxism in the US Democratic Party

There seems to be a lot of denial about Marxism and socialism in the United States today, especially with regard to people supporting the Democrat Party. If you've ever had to clarify this: "I did not call you or Obama a socialist or a Marxist." - then maybe you can relate to a common problem that comes up in this discussion. Unless someone self-identifies with a political stance, I would hesitate to label a person. Nevertheless, one can point out how tenets of socialism and Marxism have become widely promoted by the US Democrat Party. And deep ideological common ground helps to explain why Bernie Sanders first insinuated that Hillary was corrupt, supporting status-quo political corruption throughout her career, and then endorsed her for presidency.
To be clear, I believe that both the Republican Party and Democratic Party have become corrupted by crony capitalism and extensive corporate lobbying and that Congress has been failing to uphold reasonable checks and balances in the system on behalf of the populace, with many career politicians on both sides apparently interested mainly in extending a lucrative career and not taking any risks. In discussing the main topic, it's helpful to separate what is inclusive of socialism and Marxism versus what is exclusive. It's also important to understand that communism is a progressive agenda that actually incorporates capitalism and then socialism before achieving global communism. For this reason, the exploitation of corporate lobbyists by President Obama and Hillary Clinton, for example, can be considered perfectly in keeping with a globalist socialist-communist agenda.
The state-owned means of production is inclusive in the definition of socialism and so is the heavy regulation of business. The word "community" is really a euphemism for "government" in a basic definition of socialism: "a political and economic theory of social organization advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

June 09, 2016

Why Atheism and Polytheism are Illogical

This may be discouraging for atheists, but in accordance with the latest definitions of "atheism" by the most respected sources, atheism is illogical. It's important to use the most accurate and reputable definitions. While you probably shouldn't use a Black and Decker drill as a tool to perform medical surgery, you also probably shouldn't use Webster's dictionary for philosophical definitions, if you have philosophical sources available.

Definitions of "atheism":

"Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

"The theory or belief that God does not exist." (Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy)

Why Atheism is Illogical

Summary Argument

1) With respect to agnosticism, if atheism means, "the negation of theism" and the “denial of God's existence,” and history shows that there is no convincing evidence to demonstrate that theism and God have been negated and denied, then choosing atheism is illogical.

2) History shows that atheists have not logically demonstrated probability that theism and God have been negated and denied.
3) Therefore, with respect to agnosticism, choosing atheism is illogical.

Expanded points

1. The burden is on those who wish to affirm a belief or position to offer reason and evidence in support of such. 
2. According to Stanford, "Atheism means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." And Oxford defines atheism as, "The theory or belief that God does not exist." - with both definitions implying a positive claim is being assumed, as opposed to agnosticism, in which a lack of belief is emphasized.

3. Philosophical definitions of "atheism" in context are more appropriate than a generic description as, "a lack of belief in God" - which also could apply to agnosticism. 
4. In terms of logic, the atheist truth claim, “God does not exist,” is not an analytic truth claim and is not strictly provable. Likewise, the truth claim of atheism is not a synthetic one because it cannot be strictly demonstrated. For these reasons, atheism cannot be strictly proved.

June 06, 2016

Honoring Those That Sacrificed on D-Day - For a Just Cause and a Just War

I am deeply thankful for those that sacrificed so that I can enjoy freedom and a relatively just society. In WWII, the "enemy" attacked preemptively, without provocation, and the enemy tortured prisoners. But, increasingly, the U.S. seems to be doing those very things that we had once fought against. Just war theory has apparently become ignored in favor of profits and political hegemony. The neocons of our day apparently do not have a very firm grasp of objective moral values. This is a problem that pervades society on many levels today.

June 03, 2016

How Atheist TV Personality, Kirsten Powers was Converted

Photo Courtesy @KirsetnPowers
IMHO: Don't Discount Apologetic Discourse

Atheist TV Pundit, Kirsten Powers became a Christian in part because she realized that Christianity is more logical. She has a page in Wikipedia describing her achievements. For those that completely discount intellectual apologetics in favor of “more spiritual" theism,  you might want to consider that atheist Kirsten became a Christian apparently because she was first, “...surprised by the intellectual and intriguing sermons given by the pastor, Timothy Keller.” and, “She ended up making up her mind that Christianity was the most rational way to look at the world...” with the understanding, of course, that no one comes believe and follow Christ without the inner work of the Holy Spirit.

May 30, 2016

Barna Poll: Americans Concerned as New Moral Code Takes Over

A majority of Americans, of all ages and all demographics, express concern regarding the moral condition of the United States, from adults in general (80%) to younger Millennials (74%).
"What's right for you" is the hot new morality of self-fulfilment
“As nominally Christian moral norms are discarded what, if anything, is taking their place? Barna's research reveals the degree to which Americans pledge allegiance to the “morality of self-fulfillment,” a new moral code that, as David Kinnaman, President of Barna argues, has all but replaced Christianity as the culture’s moral norm.” The highest good, according to our society, is 'finding yourself' and then living by 'what’s right for you,'" 

May 19, 2016

Debate: "Secular Humanism Offers an Objective Basis of Morality"

(Most recent: Rick's  rebuttal posted on 05-29-16)

A secular atheist, Britlandt Abney, has offered to defend the position "Secular Humanism Offers an Objective Basis of Morality" and I wish to oppose it. This secular view has been defended by Sam Harris, but neither his argument nor any argument I have seen appears to be logically supportable.

We agreed not to rush the debate, but to begin after a few days or up to a week. I've requested the open introduction and main argument to be sent to me by email by Britlandt, The following are debate term definitions he's offered:

May 17, 2016

Atheist Debate Administrator Believes Personal Insults Are Necessary

Haunted Shore, who claims to be an administrator at the atheist-run facebook debate group “Apologetics, Philosophy, Reason and Logic”, has the opinion that it is necessary for the administrators at that group to insult people. This is especially odd considering that a rule of the group explicitly states, “No personal attacks.” Here's the quote: 
"It was not an unnecessary insult. He was simply saying that if Mark removes someone, its probably because they have done something wrong."
Then Haunted Shore goes on to offer that insulting people is supposedly OK because people don't actually turn into the insults that they are called:

“If you call someone a bad person, that does not make you a bad person. Calling someone an asshole does not make you an asshole. This shouldn't be hard to understand.” (
May 9, 2016 at 1:01 AM)

May 03, 2016

Drive-By Shooting at FB Group: Apologetics, Philosophy, Reason and Logic

At the facebook group  "Apologetics, Philosophy, Reason and Logic" I was banned from debating today in what could best be described as a drive-by shooting that lasted from 2.02PM to my being blocked at 3.01PM (see webclips below). In that period of time not one actual "strike" against me from the rule list was specifically applied to me by any administrator, while the group rules call for at least three strikes in order to be banned. There are a couple of token Christian moderators at the blog that basically don't seem to challenge atheism or the abusive behavior of the other moderators. In any event, abusive atheist group moderators are helping to confirm the truth of the gospel in a number of ways. Ron Morales, who was also banned for no valid reason, explained a pointed animosity against Christians that seriously engage there:

"I can confirm that I for one have been repeatedly insulted because of my Christian beliefs (at times by admins) with no repercussions for the atheists insulting me, even though personal attacks are an explicit violation of the rules."
Overlapping Webclips of the FB Debate Group: Apologetics, Philosophy, Reason and Logic

1. In the following thread I attempted to discuss a question offered by a group member: "How could someone know that God had imparted this knowledge to them? How could one know that it wasn't just an intelligent demon?" - I offered that the fulfillment of prophecy in scripture is an example of verifiable divinely imparted knowledge and offer a linked reference to my point. When challenged by an administrator known for his abuse, I clarified that I would defend this position, but I also pointed out that I did not wish to debate personally with a moderator at that group due to the apparent probability that I would be blocked from the group for offending a moderator.


2. Though I had simply offered valid concerns and did not mention any names or offer any personal attack, administrator Simon Birch erroneously claimed that I had made an "ad hominem attack" that was "intellectually dishonest."

April 26, 2016

Reason Why Scandinavia is #1 in Press Freedom and Corruption Control

Finland recently won first place in the 2016 World Press Freedom Index prepared by Reporters Without Borders. The top four countries are Scandinavian. And Denmark was ranked first in a separate 2015 ranking regarding the mitigation of corruption, with Finland listed as second on that list.

Scandinavian countries rely on mechanisms for constant governmental accountability

Marie ChĂȘne, the Senior Research Coordinator at Transparency International, described what she believed was the underlying main means of achieving the high ethical performance of government and increased public trust In Scandinavia, stating that there is typically a, “strong transparency and accountability mechanism in place allowing citizens to monitor their politicians and hold them accountable for their actions and decisions.”

This Scandinavian strategy is diametrically opposed to the default position that the United States has come to adopt (Now sadly ranked 41 in press freedom). Denmark's “Anti-Corruption-Portal” highlights subtle as well as more overt violations: "prohibits active and passive bribery, abuse of public office, embezzlement, fraud, breach of trust", and their whistlblower protection and anonymity laws allow for more practical government accountability, however, whistleblowers and journalists in the U.S. are usually under attack and more likely to be the only ones going to jail, and harshly punished at that. And unethical conflicts of interest abound in U.S. corporate-political lobbying, the "passive bribery" forbidden in Scandinavia.