Tuesday, May 31, 2016

#1606 (5/31) "Obama’s Hiroshima Speech Reflects His Unrealistic View of History"

"OBAMA'S HIROSHIMA SPEECH REFLECTS HIS UNREALISTIC VIEW OF HISTORY"Bruce Klingner / May 27, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/27/obamas-hiroshima-speech-reflects-his-unrealistic-view-of-history/

President Barack Obama with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. (Photo: Kimimasa Mayama / Pool/EPA/Newscom)

President Barack Obama’s speech at Hiroshima was a poignant discourse on the horrors of war. He spoke eloquently of the death of innocent lives and the hope for a better tomorrow. But his trip is fraught with the potential for misinterpretation.

As the end of his presidency approaches, Obama sought to resurrect his utopian vision of a world without nuclear weapons that he first articulated in 2009The Obama administration promised that the president’s trip would be focused on the future. But by delivering his remarks at Hiroshima, he needlessly resurrected painful and contentious historic issuesIn his remarks, the president did not explicitly apologize for the U.S. decision to use atomic weapons to end World War II as some had advocated. But he implicitly criticizes the “terrible force unleashed” at Hiroshima and laments “how often does material advancement or social innovation blind us to this truth? How easily we learn to justify violence in the name of some higher cause.” His comments reflect an aloof view disdainful of all violence, lumping aggressors and defenders together. Hiroshima was a tragedy but so were all the lives lost in the preceding years of conflict.

Visiting the National World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C., is a sobering experience. The cascade of gold stars adorning the walls are a heart-rending depiction of the 400,000 American service members who died in both the Pacific and European theaters of war. Each of the 4,048 stars represents 100 American deaths—sons, fathers, and brothers who never came home. Imagine the human tragedy if the number of gold stars were doubled, which would result from a full-scale Allied invasion of Japan.

Nor does Obama mention the millions of Japanese lives spared by the events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In his memoir, President Harry Truman wrote that after Japan rejected another plea for surrender, he had no qualms about his decision to drop the bombs “if millions of lives could be saved … I meant both American and Japanese lives.”

Emperor Hirohito announced to his subjects that he based his decision to end the war on the “new and most cruel bomb … Should we continue to fight, it would … result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation. In addition, there are estimates that 100,000 to 250,000 non-combatants in occupied Asia would have died for every month that the war was extended.

Hiroshima reflects the tragedy not just of a weapon of war, but of aggressive regimes and the wars they impose. Rather than a utopian quest to eliminate nuclear arms, he should have called on nations to band together against the despots who still threaten to impose their will over weaker neighbors.

As Americans prepare to enjoy the Memorial Day holiday, we should reflect on the meaning of the day. We honor the brave men and women of the U.S. military who for centuries have fought and made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom for ourselves and others overseas subjugated to despots. Many of those did so during the four years brought on by the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Rather than describing an idealistic vision of the future, perhaps Obama should have pondered George Orwell’s comment that “People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”

As President Ronald Reagan declared in his inauguration speech, “The price for this freedom at times has been high, but we have never been unwilling to pay that price.”

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Bruce Klingner, a senior research fellow for Northeast Asia at The Heritage Foundation's Asian Studies Center, spent 20 years in the intelligence community working at the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency. 


"Memorial Day Tributes Should Include What Soldiers Fought for"Jarrett Stepman / May 30, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/30/memorial-day-tributes-should-include-what-soldiers-fought-for/
"President Obama, You Remembered Hiroshima, Do Not Forget Pearl Harbor"By Jay Berman|May 30, 2016; http://theresurgent.com/president-obama-you-remembered-hiroshima-do-not-forget-pearl-harbor/
"On Memorial Day, Bear In Mind Those We've Lost In ‘Forgotten Wars’"Matt Vespa | May 30, 2016; http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/05/30/on-memorial-day-bear-in-mind-those-we-lost-to-socalled-forgotten-wars-n2171106

Monday, May 30, 2016

#1605 (5/30) "Remembering the Future - HONORING THE GOOD AND THE NOBLE"

"Remembering the Future - HONORING THE GOOD AND THE NOBLE"By: Chuck Colson| Breakpoint.org: May 30, 2016; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/29346
daily_commentary_05_30_16
Hi, I’m Eric Metaxas. Today as we honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country, let’s [view] Chuck Colson’s Memorial Day BreakPoint broadcast from May of 2001.

It's Memorial Day -- a time of recalling the sacrifices of those who have defended our most precious freedoms. And we're right to pause and reflect on those brave men and women willing to give of themselves in such a noble cause. But it's also important to think about how our longing for permanent peace -- unattainable in this world -- points us toward a world in which it is possible.

This longing was illustrated by two teenage boys I know. The older boy received for his fifteenth birthday a DVD player. He was allowed to pick several movies to go with it, and he chose nothing but war films: The Patriot, Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, and The Sands of Iwo Jima. Over the next few days, he and his brother were engrossed in the action, cheering whenever the good guys finally whipped the bad guys, and when peace broke out.

Now, most of us react exactly the same way to real life wars. Whenever we hear of a long, bloody battle ending somewhere in the world, we celebrate, heave a sigh of relief, and hope that maybe this time peace will last. This was especially true in the wake of the great world wars in the last century. Remember the "war to end all wars" and the "war to make the world safe for democracy"? After World War I peace lasted a scant twenty years. Many wars broke out after World War II. And despite the promises of politicians, we know in our hearts peace never really lasts that long.

Which leads to an interesting question: Why is it that humans are apparently designed to desire good and noble things we cannot possibly have?

Considering this question, the Christian apologist C. S. Lewis came to a fascinating conclusion. If our deepest desires cannot be satisfied in this world, he wrote, then we must have been made for another world. This truth was one of the factors that led to Lewis's conversion to Christianity.
The Scriptures confirm that we are designed for a different world, and they urge us to focus on the world which is yet to come. As Paul advised the Colossians, "Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth" (Col. 3:2).

Sadly, our inner longing for the good guys to win, for true peace and justice, as those two boys showed when they watched those films, has often led to tragic efforts to obtain them on earth, including dangerous Utopian schemes that ultimately destroyed millions of lives. And that's why it's so vitally important that our children understand where these longings come from. We need to teach our kids that while we should certainly fight for justice and freedom here on earth, we must do so in the knowledge that our true desire for peace and justice will only be satisfied ultimately in heaven.

As we celebrate this Memorial Day, there'll be no shortage of classic war films on TV. If your kids decide to watch one, help them understand why we like such movies: because God designed us to hunger for a world where there's lasting peace.

One day, as the prophet Isaiah wrote, men will "beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, [and] neither shall they learn war anymore." Until then, however, we honor those who fought our wars and sacrificed for a peace that is transitory, but it's a reflection of the peace which is to come.

Here are some other ideas on how your family can honor the fallen: Support a worthy veterans relief organization; Pray for the families of those who gave their lives; Or why not take your children to visit a national military cemetery nearby? For more information, visit BreakPoint.org and click on this commentary.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION Eric had some great suggestions for Memorial Day. Visit a state or national military cemetery. Click here for a comprehensive list. And check out the links below for a few of the many veterans relief organizations. Of course, before supporting any charity, be sure to do a little research. You can start by checking out “Support Our Troops” at Charity Navigator.

ORGANIZATIONS
Fisher House Foundation - https://www.fisherhouse.org/

The USO - https://www.uso.org/

Air Warrior Courage Foundation - http://www.airwarriorcourage.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"‘They Stood For Something and We Owe Them Something’: Reagan’s 1986 Memorial Day Speech'" Video Team / May 29, 2016; http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/29/they-stood-for-something-and-we-owe-them-something-reagans-1986-memorial-day-speech/

Sunday, May 29, 2016

#1604 (5/29) SUNDAY SPECIAL: "How Will You Honor the Fallen? - REVIVING MEMORIAL DAY"

"How Will You Honor the Fallen? - REVIVING MEMORIAL DAY" - By: Eric Metaxas|Breakpoint.org: May 27, 2016; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/29345 [AS I SEE IT: I'd like to challenge you to join me in taking time each day to PRAY FOR OUR MILITARY. We desperately need leaders with wisdom and honor to 1) insist ensure we are equipped to effectively defend ourselves; 2) develop effective strategies to DEFEAT (and not just engage for a time) those hostile to us; 3) stand up to those who would weaken our forces and lower morale through ill-advised actions of secular correctness; 4) our enlisted and veterans are WELL cared for and NEVER made to feel forgotten; and 5) do everything possible to ensure the speedy return of our POWs and MIAs. (Do you know there are still over 8,000 soldiers from the Korean War whose remains have still not been identified and returned?) We also need to be keeping the families of our enlisted, fallen, captured or missing in our prayers. I also pray that every Christian in the military from those in boot camp to those on the Joint Chiefs of Staff will boldly and effectively share their faith with those in their circle of influence. May God birth a great spiritual awakening through the believers in the military! - Stan]
daily_commentary_05_27_16
So, how is your Memorial Day shaping up? Heading to the pool or the beach? Having friends over for a barbecue? Or maybe catching that sale at the car dealership? Yep, Memorial Day is almost here: the semi-official start of summer with a three-day weekend thrown in. So much to do. In fact, if you go to Google and type in “Memorial Day what to do,” you’ll get all kinds of activities in your area: food and film fests, music concerts, baseball games.

And you might, just might, learn how you can honor America’s war dead. I say might, because Memorial Day has morphed—for the most part—from a day of remembrance to, as one city magazine put it, a “beloved three-day weekend [to] get a taste of all of the exciting outdoor events as . . .  summer officially kicks into gear.”

Now, there’s nothing wrong with relaxing with friends and families and celebrating the arrival of summer. But I want to challenge you and your family to find ways to pay homage to those who have given their lives for the sake of our country and our freedoms. And I have some suggestions for you. 

But first, a little context. Since the Revolutionary War, more than 1.3 million Americans have died during our nation’s armed conflicts. More than half of those were casualties on both sides of the Civil War. If you can imagine, more than two percent of the American population perished during that savage conflict—that would be like 7.7 million Americans dying today.

It was after that great conflagration that Americans, primarily in the northern states, chose a day to honor the war dead: May 30th, 1868, was the first Decoration Day, as it was called because citizens were asked to decorate the graves of the fallen. After World War I, the day became a time for remembering all war dead, not just those of the Civil War. It wasn’t until 1968 that Congress moved the date from May 30 to the last Monday in May. And in 1971, Memorial Day officially became a federal holiday.

So, what can we do to remember and show our gratitude?

   First, fly the flag. At home and in your town. You might want to check over at your local town hall and ask if the flag will be displayed properly on Monday: Flown at half-mast until noon. As the USMemorialDay.org website puts it, “The half-staff position remembers the more than one million men and women who gave their lives in service of their country. At noon, their memory is raised by the living, who resolve not to let their sacrifice be in vain, but to rise up in their stead and continue the fight for liberty and justice for all.”

Second, attend your local Memorial Day parade. Don’t be shy: Don your patriotic gear and stand with your fellow citizens.

Third, visit a national cemetery and decorate graves. Or simply walk the grounds quietly and pray.

Fourth, you might attend a memorial service. Many Veterans of Foreign War posts hold special services to honor the dead.

Fifth, take your children to a military museum or battlefield. Teach them about the sacrifices made by so many. Instill in them a respect for the men and women who to this day volunteer to serve their country in the armed forces—knowing they may be called on to make the ultimate sacrifice.

Sixth, observe the National Moment of Remembrance at 3:00PM on Monday. Since 2000, Americans have been asked to “voluntarily and informally observe in their own way a Moment of Remembrance and respect, pausing from whatever they are doing for a moment of silence or listening to Taps.”

Finally, consider donating to organizations that help our nation’s veterans and families. And get your church to reach out to military families in your area.

So yes. Enjoy your long weekend. But find a way to honor those who, through their sacrifice, made this weekend possible.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

RESOURCES - Take time on Monday with your family to honor the fallen. Check the resources below.
"How to Honor the Dead on Memorial Day" - WikiHow entry- http://m.wikihow.com/Honor-the-Dead-on-Memorial-Day 

"Memorial Day observance" - http://www.usmemorialday.org/

For a list of reliable charities that benefit veterans and their families, go to Charity Navigator, a website that ranks charitable organizations. Search “veterans.” - https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?keyword_list=veterans&Submit2=Search&bay=search.results

Saturday, May 28, 2016

#1603 (5/28) PRO-LIFE SAT: "Two Pro-Life Students Spoke With Several Pro-Choice Girls About Abortion. Here’s What Happened"

"TWO PRO-LIFE STUDENTS SPOKE WITH SEVERAL PRO-CHOICE GIRLS ABOUT ABORTION. Here’s What Happened"Josh Brahm, May11, 2016 |http://www.lifenews.com/2016/05/11/two-pro-life-students-spoke-with-several-pro-choice-girls-about-abortion-heres-what-happened/ [AS I SEE IT: Yes, this is a rather long article but it is excellent in giving you an idea of what pro-life students such as these are doing on college campuses throughout the U.S. to educate young women about abortion and their options. Please join me in praying for their efforts as well as those of thousands of sidewalk counselors and pregnancy resource counselors to do the same as well as to share Christ. Praise God for the faithfulness of these young women! And be sure to check out the free MP3 offer at the end of this article. - Stan
Pictured: Dialogue story - Rachel and Chloe talking to students at Aquinas College.
I want to share one more dialogue story from our outreach last month at Aquinas College. Two fantastic students from the Students for Life club at University of Michigan, Rachel Crawford and Chloe Alberta, spoke to several pro-choice girls. This is what happened.

Chloe begins the story this way: Towards the end of our day of outreach, Rachel and I had a conversation with two girls, who I’ll call Amber and Linda. Initially they were very hesitant to participate in the poll, because, as Amber informed us, they didn’t really like to think about the issue of abortion and didn’t really have an opinion on it.

Grabbing my handy fetal development chart from the ERI outreach brochure, I asked: “Would you mind if I tell you why it is extremely important to me that people think about abortion?” I showed them the fetal development chart and told them that I believe that human life begins at the moment of fertilization, and that that human life deserves to be protected.

I asked them in the name of having ALL the information possible, in order to make the MOST informed decision, would they be willing to look at a picture that shows what an abortion looks like? They declined because, “It’s probably really disturbing.” “You’re right,” I said. “It’s extremely disturbing and I really have trouble looking at them too.” I explained to them that I see that horrible image of the death of an unborn child, and I see one of the biggest human rights violations of our time. And I cannot be silent about that, and I think that is why it is so important to have an opinion about abortion and not let those human lives be looked over.

Later, Josh added something that I hadn’t thought of before. He said that if pro-lifers are right, thousands of innocent human lives are being ended, and if we are wrong, we are trying to make a medical procedure that’s morally tantamount to having a mole removed illegal. So either way, you should have an opinion about abortion.

Rachel tells the next part of the story this way:  Amber and Chloe had a thought provoking conversation about graphic images and why abortion is an important issue. However, I wasn’t completely satisfied with them walking away with just that small pebble of thought in their shoe. So I asked the other girl, Linda, how she felt about abortion. (I also directly offered to show her a graphic

She said: “I don’t know, I think it needs to be legal but I am not sure to the specifics. Like in the case of rape I think that a woman should have the right to have an abortion.” 
I responded, “A sexual assault that results in a pregnancy is a super difficult thing to think about. I also think that sexual assault in general is a real problem. I really think we need more resources for women who are forced into a tough situation like that.” (small pause) “Can I ask you about something that may seem a little strange?”
Linda: “Yeah, sure.”
I then used a thought experiment I heard from Josh Brahm: “So I want us to imagine a situation in which a woman has survived a rape and becomes pregnant. And let’s say she is getting all the help and healing that we can give her. Like let’s say she has support from family and friends as well as a good counselor to talk with. She chooses to keep her baby boy and parent him so the community assists her financially too. And everything seems to be going as good as it can for her, despite the terrible thing that she had to go through. Her attacker is even in jail! But then as her son is just turning two he starts to look like the man who raped her. His very appearance causes her a lot of emotional distress and she is so upset that she wants to kill her toddler. Do you think she should be able to?”

Linda: “Well, of course not, no. I don’t think she should, but abortion is different than that.”
Rachel: “Why is abortion different?”
Linda: “I am not sure.”
Rachel: “Chloe, can I see that prenatal development chart?” Showing Linda and Amber: “So there is a certain weird logic in the way I think about this,” pointing at the embryo: “I think that this human embryo is just as valuable as this human toddler here. And because I think that they are morally equal, I logically argue that any reason that isn’t good enough for killing the toddler is also not good enough for killing the embryo. Does that make sense? I bring up this story because I want to see if we can agree that we all feel the same about bad situations, they are bad! But we disagree about whether or not these two humans are the same in a moral way!”

At this point there was a lot of nodding and a little giggling because I got really excited when I was explaining my view. The excitement only increased as I went on:

Rachel: “So the real question is, why the heck am I so passionate about this issue of abortion? Because I think the unborn are people and because they are being discriminated against in a big way! Can I tell you why I think that?”

Amber and Linda agreed and were laughing a little at my ridiculously peppy tone. I like to tell equal rights arguments to a captivated audience and I find humor to be the quickest route to keeping the attention of the other person or people I am dialoguing with.

Rachel: “Okay! So if we look around right now at everyone we can see, can you and I agree that everyone we see should get the same basic human rights and that those human rights should be given equally?”

Amber and Linda both said yes so I continued: “Okay, I think so too! I DON’T think that society has always agreed with us though. Look at our history textbooks from high school and you’ll see that there have been some groups of humans that have been denied basic personhood rights in recent history. Blacks, Jews, and women have all been degraded as less than human in different cultures, but through social justice activists those groups are now recognized and protected as people. The reason I can see for the past discrimination of those groups is because people in power were assigning human rights based on things that didn’t matter! Race is not a good reason to deny someone the right to be free. Neither is a person’s sex! I don’t think it should be ability or intelligence or anything else that makes people different. For our rights to be equal, they have to be allotted based on something that we share equally. What I mean by all of this is that I can see there is a really big group of really tiny people who don’t have those basic human rights. That is why I am out here all day. That’s why I get super concerned when people don’t want to talk about abortion. What do you think about it?” (Click here to learn more about the most undervalued argument in the pro-life movement.)

Amber and Linda seemed like they were thinking a lot about everything I had just said. Taking pro-life philosophy and translating it into applicable terms can be difficult. They didn’t have an immediate response but still wanted to talk.

By the end of the conversation I think we gave them a new image of what the pro-life movement is, and I know that they will not feel so indifferent about abortion anymore. We talked about how much love pregnant women deserve, which they do not always receive in this day and age, especially on college campuses. This is where I always get really excited, because pro-choice people never expect to hear that I dedicate a huge amount of my time to the Pregnant on Campus Initiative in the name of helping pregnant students at the University of Michigan. I made sure Linda knew that I truly appreciated how much she cared about women being loved and accepted and achieving their goals.

Chloe ends the story this wayAfter talking to Linda for quite a while, she shared with us that she had known since she was fifteen that she would be unable to have children. I was incredibly touched that she felt comfortable enough talking to us that she could share such an intimate detail of her life. It was another reminder for me of how important it is to show kindness to every person we talk to about abortion, because even if they walk away more pro-choice than ever, they will know that at least some pro-lifers genuinely care about people – and not just the tiny ones who haven’t yet been born.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

The post “Dialogue Story: Rachel and Chloe at Aquinas College” originally appeared at the Equal Rights Institute blog. Click here to subscribe via email and get exclusive access to a FREE MP3 of Josh Brahm’s speech, “Nine Faulty Pro-Life Arguments and Tactics.”

Friday, May 27, 2016

#1602 (5/27) "The Horrors of Hiroshima in Context"

"THE HORRORS OF HIROSHIMA IN CONTEXT"Victor Davis Hanson Victor Davis Hanson |: Apr 21, 2016; http://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2016/04/21/draft-n2151484 [AS I SEE IT: Though this article was written at the time of Sec. Kerry's visit over a month ago, it contains chilling statistics about the war I have not heard of before. As a Japanese-American, the atrocities of those of my ethnicity is a continued source of great sorrow and shame. As this article focuses on the actions of the aggressor nations who started this war, I find it appalling to read elsewhere that the Prime Minister of Japan will not reciprocate the President's visit and visit Pearl Harbor. Shame! - Stan]
The Horrors of Hiroshima in Context
The dropping of two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 remains the only wartime use of nuclear weapons in history. No one knows exactly how many Japanese citizens were killed by the two American bombs. A macabre guess is around 140,000. The atomic attacks finally shocked Emperor Hirohito and the Japanese militarists into surrendering. John Kerry recently visited Hiroshima. He became the first Secretary of State to do so -- purportedly as a precursor to a planned visit next month by President Obama...

The horrific bombings are inexplicable without examining the context in which they occurred.

In 1943, President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill insisted on the unconditional surrender of Axis aggressors. The bomb was originally envisioned as a way to force the Axis leader, Nazi Germany, to cease fighting. But the Third Reich had already collapsed by July 1945 when the bomb was ready for use, leaving Imperial Japan as the sole surviving Axis target.

Japan had just demonstrated with its nihilistic defense of Okinawa -- where more than 12,000 Americans died and more than 50,000 were wounded, along with perhaps 200,000 Japanese military and civilian casualties -- that it could make the Americans pay so high a price for victory that they might negotiate an armistice rather than demand surrender.

Tens of thousands of Americans had already died in taking the Pacific islands as a way to get close enough to bomb Japan. On March 9-10, 1945, B-29 bombers dropped an estimated 1,665 tons of napalm on Tokyo, causing at least as many deaths as later at Hiroshima.Over the next three months, American attacks leveled huge swaths of urban Japan. U.S. planes dropped about 60 million leaflets on Japanese cities, telling citizens to evacuate and to call upon their leaders to cease the war.

Japan still refused to surrender and upped its resistance with thousands of Kamikaze airstrikes. By the time of the atomic bombings, the U.S. Air Force was planning to transfer from Europe much of the idle British and American bombing fleet to join the B-29s in the Pacific. Perhaps 5,000 Allied bombers would have saturated Japan with napalm. The atomic bombings prevented such a nightmarish incendiary storm. The bombs also cut short plans for an invasion of Japan -- an operation that might well have cost 1 million Allied lives, and at least three to four times that number of well-prepared, well-supplied Japanese defenders.

There were also some 2 million Japanese soldiers fighting throughout the Pacific, China and Burma -- and hundreds of thousands of Allied prisoners and Asian civilians being held in Japanese prisoner of war and slave labor camps. Thousands of civilians were dying every day at the hands of Japanese barbarism. The bombs stopped that carnage as well.

The Soviet Union, which signed a non-aggression pact with Japan in 1941, had opportunistically attacked Japan on the very day of the Nagasaki bombing. By cutting short the Soviet invasion, the bombings saved not only millions more lives, but kept the Soviets out of postwar Japan, which otherwise might have experienced a catastrophe similar to the subsequent Korean War.

World War II was the most deadly event in human history. Some 60 million people perished in the six years between Germany's surprise invasion of Poland on Sept. 1, 1939, and the official Japanese surrender on Sept. 2, 1945. No natural disaster -- neither the flu pandemic of 1918 nor even the 14th-century bubonic plague that killed nearly two-thirds of Europe's population -- came close to the death toll of World War II.

Perhaps 80 percent of the dead were civilians, mostly Russians and Chinese who died at the hands of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Both aggressors deliberately executed and starved to death millions of innocents.

World War II was also one of the few wars in history in which the losers, Japan and Germany, lost far fewer lives than did the winners. There were roughly five times as many deaths on the Allied side, both military and civilian, as on the Axis side.

It is fine for Secretary of State Kerry and President Obama to honor the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims. But in a historical and moral sense, any such commemoration must be offered in the context of Japanese and German aggression. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan started the respective European and Pacific theaters of World War II with surprise attacks on neutral nations. Their uniquely barbaric war-making led to the deaths of some 50 million Allied soldiers, civilians and neutrals -- a toll more than 500 times as high as that of Hiroshima.

This spring we should also remember those 50 million -- and who was responsible for their deaths.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

Thursday, May 26, 2016

#1601 (5/26) "These Boots Are Made For ... Fighting?"

"THESE BOOTS ARE MADE FOR... FIGHTING?" - Tony Perkins, Washington Update, May 24, 2016; http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA16E32&f=WU16E12

After the last seven and a half years, it's safe to say that the greatest threat to our military is the administration in charge of it. The legacy of the Obama administration will not be advancing the war against global jihad, but rather advancing the culture war -- which started with the toppling of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and continued on to the latest phase of the military's sexual revolution: open transgenderism and opening the draft to women. In this administration, gender isn't just being redefined in bathrooms, but on battlefields, where this president seems all too content to assign America's wives and daughters to the most dangerous ground combat units in the world.

And unfortunately, he's had plenty of help. In the Senate, where members are debating the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Navy veteran John McCain (R-Ariz.) gave the effort a helping hand by including an amendment into the bill from three female Republicans, Senators Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Joni Ernst (Iowa), and Deb Fischer (Nebr.), that would require women to register for selective service -- a decision that even his primary challenger couldn't believe. Dr. Kelli Ward, who's trying to unseat the longtime senator, is already making McCain's position a campaign issue. Like most parents, she can't imagine a nation ordering her child to war. "I have a 20-year-old daughter, Katie, and when I think of her being forced to go into combat, especially in the Middle East against the barbarians who are there. Who are basically salivating at the prospect of getting their hands on our young women... I have no qualms about women who want to volunteer and who want to go and do whatever they want to do in our military -- but to force them to a draft is unacceptable in my opinion."

As a father of three girls, I couldn't agree more. I will support my daughters if they decide to serve in the military, but I will not stand by if the government tries to draft them in the military. What does it say about a nation that sends its mothers and daughters to fight its battles?

In part, this is all the unfortunate byproduct of opening infantry and other front line positions to women, which Defense Secretary Ash Carter approved earlier this year over the objections of military leaders. When the DOD removes the barriers to women serving in all positions, it removes most barriers to drafting them as well. And while some senators seem either oblivious to the risks or too frightened to fight the political correctness, plenty of conservatives are standing up to the members of both parties who want to use our military as the laboratory for social change.

"I cannot in good conscience vote to draft our daughters into the military, sending them off to war, and forcing them into combat," Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) argued. Together with Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cruz is doing everything he can to strip the language out of the high chamber's NDAA. He'll have the support of more than six dozen conservative leaders, veterans, and activists -- including FRC's Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (U.S. Army-Ret.). In a letter representing hundreds of thousands of American families, the group urged every member of the Senate to join Mike Lee in pushing back on the real war on women.

"We strongly support the heroic, capable, and honorable women who choose and will serve our country in the military..." the group writes. "There are exceptional women who are capable of meeting or exceeding the combat standards put forth by each branch. We support them as we do all individuals willing to put their lives on the line for the greatest nation in the history of the world. However, the female draft discussion should revolve around combat readiness, efficiency, and national security, and weeding through applicants that are overwhelmingly biologically unable to meet combat standards would be a logistical nightmare and would force the lowering of combat standards. The capabilities of these rare women should not mean all appropriately aged women are involuntarily eligible for combat."

Not to mention, they write, "Women are not clamoring for this 'opportunity.' Only 15 percent of our active-duty military forces are women. We find it demeaning to suggest that women who have instead chosen to serve our nation in other civilian roles -- such as manufacturing, commerce, medicine or even caring for their children -- are not contributing to our nation. They are indeed!" 

At the very least, this issue deserves to be a standalone bill, debated out in the open after a thorough and transparent review. Congress needs to decide: Is the military's goal to be the great societal equalizer -- or the most lethal fighting force in the world? 

Contact Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte (202-224-3324), Joni Ernst (202-224-3254), and Deb Fischer (202-224-6551), and let them know that it's one thing for our daughters to choose to fight and quite another to force them to.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

#1600 (5/25) "Five Things You Can Do about Transgender Restrooms - SPEAK OUT, TAKE ACTION"

"Five Things You Can Do about Transgender Restrooms - SPEAK OUT, TAKE ACTION"By: Eric Metaxas| Breakpoint.org: May 19, 2016; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/29302
daily_commentary_05_19_16
The government’s staggering overreach [on May 13th] smacks more of colonial tyranny than anything I can remember. Parents are rightly outraged, but what can we do?

My BreakPoint colleague, John Stonestreet, and I are both dads.  In fact, we are both dads of daughters. Thus, [the recent] bathroom edict from the Obama Administration hit particularly close to home, since it is girls like our daughters that are the most vulnerable.

But what can we do? As we like to say at the Colson Center, outrage is not a strategy. So I’d like to propose five things.

First, as John said on Monday, we have to understand the issue. This is a biggie, folks, on a number of levels: government overreach and ideological extortion, denial of biological realities, equivocation with civil rights, and on and on. At BreakPoint.org, we’ve compiled the best resources we could find to explain the gravity of this staggering exercise in government tyranny.

Second, we have to speak out. As American citizens, we should contact our state leaders and encourage them not to allow this blatant violation of state sovereignty—which it is—to go unchecked. As parents, we should contact our school boards and principals, and demand to know how they plan to protect all the children in the school in light of this edict.

Third, it’s time to talk to your children about the transgender issues. Yes, it’s uncomfortable. And none of us thought we’d have to add this to our plan in raising our children, but at times, our culture leaves us no choice. We all need to have “the talk” with our children, and today “the talk” includes not only the birds and the bees, but also gender, identity, marriage, and how to hold convictions about these things with courage, grace, and truth.

If you don’t talk to your children about these things, someone else—the media, the schools, the government, their peers—will.

And there’s a lot to cover. Happily, there’s a new resource hot off the press, and it couldn’t be more timely. John Stonestreet, along with our partners at AXIS and Sean McDowell have produced a “Family Conversation Kit” on gender, sex, and marriage.This four-part series includes video teaching, with examples from popular culture to discuss with your kids, and tons of resources to look at together. And it offers something absolutely necessary, a clear description of God’s created intent for us as image-bearers, male and female, and how that enables His vision for sex and marriage. Come to BreakPoint.org/gender, and we’ll tell you how you can purchase this digital download—it’s worth every penny, trust me. It will set the stage for the conversation you must have with your kids. It is great for schools, small groups, and youth groups, too.

Fourth, Christians need to be clear on who the enemy is not. Many gender-confused school children are themselves the victims of very bad ideas. They’re being misled by those who would advance theories and policies that deny observable biological realities. Ideas have consequences, and bad ideas have victims. Your family, your church, and your Christian community may be called upon to do victim care. Develop a plan now.

And finally, parents need to seriously consider alternative educational options. My family has chosen private education, and John’s family homeschools. Some families may feel they have no choice but to send their kids to public schools, and I get that. But there are more options than ever when it comes to educational alternatives. A line in the sand has been crossed, folks. Christian parents need to investigate other options. And churches need to jump in the process too, innovating opportunities for those families currently unable to take advantage of the alternatives.

So come to BreakPoint.org. We’ve got lots of resources there to help, and remember, at BreakPoint.org/gender we have information on the Family Conversation Kit on gender, sex, and marriage.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

RESOURCES Download the Family Conversation Kit today, and get the tools you need to start those dialogs with family, friends and co-workers. As Eric said, it's important that we engage with others and discuss the issues that are relevant and timely in our culture. Check out the links below for more resources.

Family Conversation Kit: Gender, Sexuality, MarriageAXIS.org

How to Have That Difficult Conversation You've Been Avoiding - John Townsend, Henry Cloud | Zondervan Publishing | December 2005

Critical Conversations: A Christian Parents' Guide to Discussing Homosexuality with Teens
- Tom Gilson | Kregel Publications | February 2016

How to Talk to a Skeptic: An Easy-To-Follow Guide for Natural Conversations and Effective Apologetics
- Donald J. Johnson | Bethany House Publishers | October 2013

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

# 1599 (5/24) "Yes, Iran Is Still Hostile to the US"

"YES, IRAN IS STILL HOSTILE TO THE US" - Bridget Mudd / May 12, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/12/yes-iran-is-still-hostile-to-the-us/

The Obama administration, struggling to salvage what’s left of its self-described “positive legacy,” is unlikely to reverse course with Iran. (Photo: Handout/Reuters/Newscom)

The Obama legacy is already unraveling. Last week, President Barack Obama’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, revealed that the nuclear deal with Iran was based on a giant lie he sold to the American public.

Rhodes admitted to concocting a narrative about the U.S.-Iranian negotiations in order to create the impression that the U.S. was dealing with “moderates” in Tehran, not hard-liners who continue to call for “Death to America,” and that the nuclear deal would help to strengthen the “moderates.” In order to convince media, Congress, and the American public of his creative narrative, Rhodes undertook a painfully simplistic, yet emotionally compelling, messaging campaign. He posed the Iran deal as a choice between war and peace. It was not that simple. Foreign policy seldom is. But this messaging worked: Congress let the deal stand.

But look what we’re left with—an Iran that hasn’t changed despite the “transformative” agreement.

Iran has actually escalated hostile activity since the agreement came into effect. Over the past few months, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has repeatedly challenged U.S. naval forces in the Persian Gulf. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps test-fired rockets within 1,500 yards of a U.S. carrier, flew drones over U.S. warships, detained and humiliated American sailors, and launched a series of missiles, including two with the subtle slogan “Israel must be wiped out” written in Hebrew across their fronts—as Vice President Joe Biden happened to be visiting Israel.

Most recently, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz to the U.S. In the statement, Hussein Salami, deputy commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, noted that, “after all, we have no enemies in the region except for America.”

The message is clear: Appeasement hasn’t worked, and the Obama administration has somehow missed this point.

The Obama administration, struggling to salvage what’s left of its self-described “positive legacy,” is unlikely to reverse course with Iran. Instead of pushing back against these provocations, the administration has downplayed these aggressions and repeatedly made concessions in order to satisfy Tehran and maintain its manufactured reality of peace in our day. Inaction and indifference only encourages bad behavior.

The Heritage Foundation’s Jim Phillips noted in his recent paper that the administration’s treatment of Iran runs the risk that: "Iran will interpret U.S. inaction as an invitation to stage further interventions, challenges, and provocations … [repeated U.S. appeasements] also has had a corrosive impact on U.S. credibility that has exacerbated concerns among GCC allies, already alarmed by the administration’s nuclear deal and Middle East flip-flips."

It will be left to the next administration to repair the damage inflicted by Obama’s Middle East policies. In the meantime, Congress has an important role to play. In order to safeguard U.S. national interests in the Middle East, Congress should hold Iran accountable on nuclear, terrorism, ballistic missile, and human rights issues through oversight hearings and legislation.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Bridget Mudd is a research assistant in the Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at The Heritage Foundation.

Monday, May 23, 2016

# 1598 (5/23) "Our Constitutional Right to Privacy Is Missing From Bathroom Debate"

"OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY IS MISSIN FROM BATHROOM DEBATE"Matt Sharp / May 17, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/17/our-constitutional-right-to-privacy-is-missing-from-bathroom-debate/

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It should be common sense that every person is entitled to privacy when using the restroom, changing, or showering, but unfortunately, some have eliminated common sense from the discussion. 

What else can explain the decision by dozens of school districts across the country, retailing giant Target, and even the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice to voluntarily adopt and promote policies that strip away privacy for everyone, allowing men into women’s restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa?

Why does privacy even matter? Sure, our courts have recognized that it’s a constitutionally protected right. And our society has long structured itself around the need to allow privacy for the sexes in intimate settings. But why?

When discussing freedom of speech, one of our most precious rights, the Supreme Court has often emphasized that the right is most important for those whose speech is most vulnerable to censorship.
The majority’s views aren’t the ones that need protection. The minority’s views, the ones that may subject the speaker to abuse, are the ones that the First Amendment was designed to protect. The same is true of the right to privacy. So who are the vulnerable ones in our society most in need of privacy?

Stephanie has several children that came to her through a foster program. Her children are beautiful, vibrant, and overflowing with joy. If you met them on the street, you would never suspect that two of her daughters had suffered severe molestation and rape by men that they trusted. For these girls, feeling safe and secure in private settings—such as bedrooms, bathrooms, and locker rooms—is necessary to heal. And to feel safe, these girls need to know that their private spaces will not be invaded by a male.

You would think that the school these girls attend would be especially protective of them. You would be wrong. The school voluntarily adopted a policy that would allow boys into the girls’ restrooms, locker rooms, and even hotel rooms on school trips. The school callously ignored Stephanie’s explanation that the presence of a boy in these private settings would be a trigger event for her daughters, causing severe psychological harm and setting back the progress they had made.
Stephanie was told, “It isn’t a big deal.”

Another mother, Verity, has a daughter with Down syndrome. As parents of these precious souls will tell you, their children are the best thing that has ever happened to them. But parenthood comes with challenges. Verity wants her daughter to have independence and to be able to take care of herself. Her daughter, unfortunately, doesn’t always know how to handle every situation she encounters. Verity naturally worries that, if her daughter is forced to share a restroom or locker room with a male, her daughter could be easily taken advantage of. Separate facilities for boys and girls add an extra layer of protection for Verity’s daughter by preventing those with ill motives from taking advantage of open access to enter into women’s restrooms unquestioned.

There are millions of stories like Stephanie’s and Verity’s, millions of people for whom privacy is especially important in order to heal and to feel safe. By protecting privacy for everyone, we protect privacy for the most vulnerable among us.

So before we sacrifice this constitutionally protected right at the altar of gender identity politics, let us consider the consequences, especially when options exist to accommodate everyone without violating anyone’s privacy. Let us consider the victims of sexual abuse, those with mental and physical challenges, and the young girls who simply do not want to be forced to change next to a boy.

For them, privacy is not a luxury. It is a necessity.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Matt Sharp is legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom and represents students and parents in two federal lawsuits against the Obama administration for exceeding its authority in pushing school districts to open bathrooms to the opposite sex.

"Sexual Abuse Survivors Talk About ‘Devastating Implications’ From Transgender Bathroom Laws"Leah Jessen / May 11, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/11/sexual-abuse-survivors-talk-about-devastating-implications-from-transgender-bathroom-laws/
"Man Allowed to Use Women’s Locker Room at Swimming Pool Without Citing Gender Identity" - Mariana Barillas / February 23, 2016; http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/
"DOJ’s Lawsuit Against North Carolina Is Abuse of Power" - Roger Severino / May 09, 2016; http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/09/dojs-lawsuit-against-north-carolina-is-abuse-of-power/

Sunday, May 22, 2016

# 1597 (5/22) SUNDAY SPECIAL: "Kneeling for Healing..."

"KNEELING FOR HEALING ..."May 16, 2016; http://www.frc.org/updatearticle/20160516/kneeling-healing [AS I SEE IT: I pray that EVERY church in America be participating in this call for prayer. If you go to it's website, you'll see that it has nothing to do with putting on any fancy program but simply taking time during worship to stop and pray corporately as a body of Christ for our nation and ourselves. Nothing could be simpler. PLEASE CHALLENGE YOUR PASTOR TO DO SO AS I HAVE MINE. - Stan]

On Sunday, July 3rd, a day before the 4th, millions of believers in churches large and small will fall to their knees in prayer and cry out to God for America, acknowledging our dependence upon Him, before we break out our fireworks and hot dogs to celebrate Independence Day. Millions of Americans (nearly the entire population) participated in America's first-such nation-wide time of prayer, called by the 2nd Continental Congress in 1775, at the outbreak of the War for Independence. Churches in all 50 states will participate in the Call2Fall that Sunday.

If our government can redefine our values and America complies, they can do anything. Christians and Christianity are fast becoming enemies of the state and there will be consequences. We cannot surrender our churches, families, schools, culture, and laws. We cannot remain spectators, either as parents, churches, or citizens. Our apathy, compromise, private, and public sins are ever before us. 

That is the "why" of Call2fall. In 1775, after resolving to proclaim America's first "Call2fall," John Adams wrote Abigail: "We have appointed a Continental fast. Millions will be upon their knees at once before their great Creator, imploring His forgiveness and blessing [and His smiles on American Council and arms." Millions did pray; they were heard; and God united the people of 13 colonies as one people. The American cause and the rag-tag Continental Army that did not yet exist prevailed against all odds, to win liberty and become the most God-blessed nation on earth.

America faces formidable enemies, none more than our own compromise with sin. Our hope is God's promise in 2 Chronicles 7:14. May God help to acknowledge our sins and national dependence on God, Sunday, July 3rd, before we celebrate Independence on the 4th of July! 

Urge your pastor to lead your church in the Call2Fal. If not, huddle your family or prayer group, and join us. Visit our website: Call2Fall.com and click "I'm in." 

Churches can sign up here.[https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=CHECKOUT&dmy=CEC6A235-F52F-6D96-08365771C61AE531&srcItem=PG16D07&fromItem=&x=0&CFID=65978372&CFTOKEN=e423b222829fc00a-BF50A59F-D836-E62E-B2C31EA0C7FB069E

It's not too late. If we meet God's conditions, He can and will heal our land! Please help us spread the word!

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Franklin Graham: Christians Must Pray and Then Vote:"05-20-2016;
http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2016/may/franklin-graham-christians-must-pray-and-then-vote?cpid=EU_CBNNEWS

"The only hope for our nation today is Almighty God. The most important thing we can do as Christians is pray. It is our only hope... If we take God out, He will leave. He blessed us more than any nation on earth, but his hand is being removed and the only thing we can do is pray…and go vote."

Saturday, May 21, 2016

# 1596 (5/21) PRO-LIFE SAT: "Shocking Report Shows 54% of Women Getting Abortions are Christians"

"SHOCKING REPORT SHOWS 54% OF WOMEN GETTING ABORTIONS ARE CHRISTIANS"-Micaiah Bilger, May 13, 2016 | http://www.lifenews.com/2016/05/13/shocking-report-shows-54-of-women-getting-abortions-are-christians/ [AS I  SEE IT: 1) This headline more accurately should say that 54% identify themselves as Christians. Only 13% (see article below) say they are evangelical; whether or not the remaining 41% truly have a relationship with God or just a religion about God should be considered; 2) don't miss the good news that fewer teens are choosing abortions. and so this very well could be a more pro-life generation; and 3) I was once talking with my then pastor and he very matter-of-factly shared that there were several couples in the church who were considering having an abortion. I have a hard time thinking of how anyone in a "pro-life" evangelical church could even consider such a "choice." But then I'm not surprised when I realize that that pastor - and most "pro-life" pastors I've known - never spoke out against abortion from the pulpit. Churches must not just SAY they are pro-life, but need to BE pro-life. - Stan]
  Praying woman hands
An extensive new U.S. study revealed that 54 percent of women who have abortions identify as Christians.

The Guttmacher Institute released a new report this week that examines the demographics of women who had abortions between 2008 and 2014 in the U.S. Among the more hopeful signs, the report found that fewer teens are having abortions than in past decades. However, the data also indicated that racial minorities continue to be targeted by the abortion industry.

The report also looked at women’s religious affiliations. Though the number of women who identify as Christians is high, it is lower than past decades, according to the report.

According to the research:
     The majority of abortion patients indicated a religious affiliation: Seventeen percent identified as mainline Protestant, 13% as evangelical Protestant and 24% as Roman Catholic, while 8% identified with some other religion. Thirty-eight percent of patients did not identify with any religion. The proportion of women who identified as mainline Protestant declined by 24% since 2008, whereas the proportion with no affiliation increased by 38%. The proportion identifying as Catholic decreased by 15% from the earlier survey, though this change was only marginally significant.

The abortion index for Catholic women showed that their relative abortion rate was nearly the same as that for all women (1.1). Mainline Protestants were slightly underrepresented among abortion patients (0.8), while evangelical Protestants had an abortion rate that was half of the national average. Patients with no affiliation were overrepresented among abortion patients, having a relative abortion rate of 1.8. The abortion index had declined slightly for mainline Protestants, and had increased slightly for those with no affiliation.

Past research has found similar results. A 2015 report from LifeWay research found that more than 4 in 10 women who had abortions were churchgoers when they ended their unborn child’s life, LifeNews reported.

Among women who have had an abortion, according to the study:
     Two-thirds (65 percent) say church members judge single women who are pregnant.
     A majority (54 percent) thinks churches oversimplify decisions about pregnancy options.
     Fewer than half (41 percent) believe churches are prepared to help with decisions about unwanted pregnancies.
     Only 3 in 10 think churches give accurate advice about pregnancy options.

A strong majority of the post-abortive women who were surveyed identified as Christians, with 43 percent saying they had attended church monthly or even more often at the time of their abortion, according to the study. The LifeWay study did not indicate when these women had abortions.

Scott McConnell, vice president of LifeWay Research, previously told the Baptist Press that the data shows a huge opportunity for churches to reach out to pregnant and post-abortive women.

“Women are perceiving judgment from the church, and that’s probably partly because there are clear teachings in the Bible including about how and why we make judgments,” McConnell said. “However, if they don’t start experiencing something different than what they’ve seen in the past, these numbers aren’t going to change.”

The Guttmacher data indicates that a change may be occurring. Fewer Christian women and teens are having abortions, likely a result of an expanding emphasis on compassionate, caring pro-life outreach. Christian-based programs like 40 Days for Life and the thousands of pregnancy resource centers across the U.S. are reaching more women every year with resources, encouragement and hope for themselves and their unborn babies.

Roland C. Warren, president and CEO of Care Net, one of the largest pregnancy resource networks in North America, previously said he is hopeful that Christians are reaching more unborn babies and their moms. “While much work needs to be done to equip the church to help women and men with their pregnancy decisions, there are positive signs that many churches will be receptive to efforts to implement programming that addresses this need,” Warren said.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Here is an encouraging article that shows how one pastor speaking out on abortion in his sermon alerted someone to be more concerned.] 
"I Didn’t Always Vote Pro-Life, But Something Astounding Changed My Mind"Maria Gallagher,  May 20, 2016 | http://www.lifenews.com/2016/05/20/i-didnt-always-vote-pro-life-but-something-astounding-changed-my-mind/ 

Friday, May 20, 2016

#1595 (5/20) "What McConnell’s Surrender on Women’s Draft Shows About GOP Leadership"

"WHAT MCCONNELL'S SURRENDER ON WOMEN'S DRAFT SHOWS ABOUT GOP LEADERSHIP"Genevieve Wood / May 19, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/19/what-mcconnells-surrender-on-womens-draft-shows-about-gop-leadership/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkdNNU5EbGlOR1JoTW1VMyIsInQiOiJ0VVRsTFV1b0xtNVgrYkFTWERlZzh3Zkd2WkdpYnFDMmZhUXNudElOZ0lkblY5b1BTcG1lYXZzVktQalYya2o1XC9obFdwVE9SVFNtTGdrdEFrVFhJcmtDZ3lhbURUOVpTc2VLck1pazMrS1U9In0%3D

Welcome to what leadership looks like in Washington in the year 2016. (Photo: Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has apparently given up on another battle front: Stopping America’s young women from being forced into military combat.  

That isn’t exactly what he said this week when asked his views on whether women should be made to register for the draft, but it’s the logical outcome of his position.  The question arose because the National Defense Authorization Act, likely to come to the Senate floor next week, contains language to draft women.

Here is what McConnell said, according to the New York Times:
     "First of all, I don’t anticipate going back to the draft. The professional voluntary Army has been very successful. We’re talking here about registration for Selective Service, should we ever go back to a draft. And given where we are today, with women in the military performing virtually all kinds of functions, I personally think it would be appropriate for them to register just like men do."

That is a very good example of a politician trying to have it both ways—kind of a “I’m for something because it won’t happen but if it does happen I support it.” Welcome to what leadership looks like in Washington in the year 2016.

In reality, the debate over the draft is an outcome of a larger debate we never had—whether America’s daughters should be forced into military combat. As McConnell himself admitted, it’s because all roles in the military, including combat, are now open to women that it only seems fair to force women to be part of any future draft.

The debate over whether women in combat is good for them, for the military, or for society at large never occurred because that would have meant taking on the Obama administration. And as anyone who has followed past political skirmishes between GOP congressional leadership and the Obama White House might predict, this was another hill the GOP just wasn’t willing to charge.

Late last year, the Obama administration handed down another “we know better than anyone else, including experts” mandate declaring all military combat positions must be open to women. This was done despite studies conducted by branches of our own military that raised serious red flags about the performance of co-ed units. And oh, the American people had had no say, either. Yet it was done with little to no objection by Republicans in Congress.

This is what happens when social experiments, political agendas, and being scared of your own shadow becomes more important than standing up and doing what is best for the country.

The mission of our armed forces must be the standard for determining who plays what roles in them. And evidence evaluating the effectiveness of putting women in direct combat should not be ignored. A study conducted over 9 months in 2013 by the Marine Corps’ Gender Integration Force evaluated 134 ground combat tasks. The results? All-male units outperformed co-ed units in 69 percent of the tasks. Female training course completion rates lagged well behind men and the injury rate among women was much higher.

These realities drive up casualties and costs and they reduce our military’s effectiveness. That is not only a threat to women and men wearing our country’s uniform, but also a threat to all of us they are sworn to protect.

Congress should prohibit any measure that would force women to register for the draft and be forced into combat roles. You can’t be for one and not be for the other and lawmakers such as McConnell shouldn’t pretend otherwise. If you’re for women being drafted, you’re for women in combat.   

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Genevieve Wood advances policy priorities of The Heritage Foundation as senior contributor to The Daily Signal. 

Thursday, May 19, 2016

# 1594 (5/19) "The Nuns Fought the Law (and the Nuns Won) - A VICTORY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM"

"The Nuns Fought the Law (and the Nuns Won) - A VICTORY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM"By: Eric Metaxas| Breakpoint.org: May 18, 2016;
http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/29305
daily_commentary_05_18_16
Lots of bad news out there lately. But not today. Today we’ll talk about a big win for religious freedom.

On May 15th, the Supreme Court handed a big victory to the Little Sisters of the Poor and other Christian organizations that refused to go along with the HHS contraceptive mandate.

Not that you would know this if all you had to go on was the reaction of the mainstream media. When they weren’t downplaying the impact of the court’s three-page ruling remanding the cases to the lower courts, they were all-but-ignoring the story. For instance, at the time this commentary is being written, there is no—that would be zero, zip, nada—mention of the story at the Washington Post’s homepage. There’s room for a story about a remake of the “Rocky Horror Picture Show” that has some LGBT activists upset, and a story about a food truck owner who sacrificed his family’s pet poodle in the backyard barbecue, but nothing about a ruling about the first freedom, freedom of religion. Are you shocked?

To understand why the Supreme Court’s action is good news, a little background is in order. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the law that formed the basis of the Little Sisters’ legal challenge to the HHS Mandate, a federal law that “substantially burdens” religious freedom can only be upheld if it meets the following criteria: it furthers a “compelling governmental interest,” and it furthers that interest in the “least restrictive way” possible.

While various parties challenged whether providing free contraception and abortifacients really constitutes a “compelling governmental interest,” the real argument was whether the Obama administration had chosen the least-restrictive means.

The administration insisted that its “accommodation,” in which the Little Sisters and others had to hire an insurance company that would provide the objectionable coverage, and then soothe their consciences by signing a form, was the least-restrictive means possible.

But as the Becket Fund, which represented the Little Sisters, pointed out during oral arguments this past March, the government had to admit that it “did have other ways to deliver the services without using the Little Sister’s plan or forcing them to participate.” This prompted the Court to propose a compromise solution, which we told you about in April. The Little Sisters, Wheaton College, and the other groups challenging the mandate indicated that the proposal formed the basis of an acceptable compromise, which, in turn, led to Monday’s order.

This unanimous order vacates previous lower court orders and removes the threat of ruinous fines from over the heads of the groups. It orders “lower Courts to help the government choose an alternative method of providing the services” that does not require the participation of the religious groups. While, like all settlements, this outcome leaves some important issues unresolved—for instance, the legitimacy of excluding the likes of Exxon from the mandate while including nuns and Christian colleges—it’s a big victory.

As David French of National Review put it, it’s “the second time a unanimous Supreme Court has turned back the Obama administration’s regulatory efforts to restrict religious freedom.” Four years ago, in its Hosanna-Tabor decision, the Court rejected the administration’s attempt to define who was and wasn’t a “minister” for purposes of federal law.

It’s an outcome that looked unlikely in the aftermath of the unexpected death of Justice Scalia. But in the end, to paraphrase the title of an old song, the nuns fought the law and the nuns won. And that is worth celebrating.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

RESOURCESWhen it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices. . . Proverbs 11:10a(RSV)
"Unanimous Win for Little Sisters of the Poor at Supreme Court"The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty | May 16, 2016; http://www.becketfund.org/little-sisters-supreme-court-victory/
"The Little Sisters of the Poor Just Beat the Obama Administration at the Supreme Court"
David French | National Review | May 16, 2016; http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/435446/little-sisters-poor-just-beat-obama-administration-supreme-court
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Barring Nun: SCOTUS Shields Sisters from Mandate" - May 16, 2016; http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA16E20&f=WU16E07
"Little Sisters of the Poor Win Big in Obamacare Case"Roger Severino / Elizabeth Slattery/ May 16, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/16/little-sisters-of-the-poor-win-big-in-obamacare-case/

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

#1593 (5/18)"What the Transgender Bathroom Debate Means For You [As A Christian]"

"WHAT THE TRANSGENDER BATHROOM DEBATE MEANS FOR YOU [AS A CHRISTIAN]"Russell Moore, May 13, 2016|   http://www.russellmoore.com/2016/05/13/what-the-transgender-bathroom-debate-means-for-you/

 restroom
Last night the New York Times reported that the Obama Administration would issue a decree directing every public school in the nation to allow bathroom access on the basis of self-identity, not biological sex. I’m quite aware of the White House’s place in our culture wars, and even I am surprised. If anyone had suggested in 2009 that the new President’s administration would seek to target children’s bathrooms for the sake of transgender ideology, the White house would have ridiculed it as a crazy conspiracy theory. So, for those suggesting that state legislatures seeking to define such questions were working on “solutions without a problem,” well, here’s your problem. So why is this important, and what should the church do?

First of all, we should recognize what’s really happening here, and it’s much bigger than the symbol of the bathrooms. The Department of Education’s actions here mean that “gender” itself in terms of admission for all colleges accepting federal funds is ultimately a matter of identification, not biological sex. The state here wishes to use its coercive power not simply to stop mistreatment of people but to rescript the most basic human intuitions about humanity as male and female.

How, after all, does one win a culture war against one of the most basic facts of science and life: that there are two sexes? One does so by withholding the funds and recognition necessary to operate in public space, unless institutions get in line. Children, then, become pawns of the state for the state to teach what is ultimately a theological lesson, not a scientific one.

This, ultimately, won’t work. There are good reasons to put boys and girls in different bathrooms and locker rooms and sometimes sports teams, reasons that don’t impugn the dignity of people but uphold it. Sex-differentiated bathrooms and sports teams and dormitories for men and women aren’t the equivalent of, say, a terrorist Jim Crow state unnaturally forcing people apart based on a fiction, useful to the powerful, that skin color is about superiority and inferiority. Every human being knows that there are important, and necessary, differences between men and women. Without such recognition, women are harmed and men are coarsened.

Moreover, the move here toward severing self-identity from biological reality will hardly stop at “gender.” If anything, there’s much more of a case to be made that one can feel to be a different age than one’s doctor’s exam or birth certificate would show. That’s relatively indifferent if all that this means is “You’re only as old as you feel” or “I’m a Millennial trapped in a Gen-X body.” It’s something else entirely if chronological self-identity is mandated for military service or the drinking age or the age of consent. People and neighborhoods and nations and cultures cannot live this way.

In the meantime, what should the church do?

      First, we must bear witness to the goodness of what it means to live as creatures, not as self-defining gods and goddesses. God created us as human, and within humanity as male and female (Gen. 1:27). We are all sinners, so we chafe against having ourselves defined by a Creator, and not by ourselves or our ideologies. Our nakedness shames us, because our physical difference reminds us that we are not self-contained. Man needs woman, and woman needs man. I really do not contain multitudes. My maleness and your femaleness aren’t about us at all. They fit us within a much larger stream—of a species by nature and of a communion by grace.

The church must teach God’s good creation design of male and female, yes. But, beyond that, the church should teach a Christian anthropology that shows us that living within creation limits is never easy for anyone. We are all seeking to transcend our limits in various ways. The way of discipleship is to settle on the fact that we serve a God who knows more about humanity, and more about us personally, than we know about ourselves.

At the same time, the church should not see everything through the grid of gender. The Sexual Revolution, chaotically, wants to tell us that gender means nothing and that gender means everything. Neither is true. We should recognize that unbiblical caricatures of masculinity and femininity were always harmful, but now are potentially deadly. The little girl in your church who doesn’t like princess movies or dolls, and who would rather spend a Saturday in the deer stand, increasingly now is told by the culture around her that maybe she’s not a woman at all. Only a church that defines its vision of masculinity and femininity from the Word of God, not from cultural tropes, can speak to her. If you don’t have a category for a rough-and-tumble woman, like Jael, or a harp-playing man, like David, your church is handing over your children to the gender ideologies of the moment.

The truth is that the male/female sex difference is objectively real. Biological science is built off of this reality. More importantly, the mystery of Christ tells us that the male/female binary points us beyond nature to the gospel itself (Eph. 5). We must tell the truth about this. John the Baptist lost his head for saying that Herod could not have his brother’s wife. Some now will be targeted as culturally unacceptable because they tell Herod he can’t be his brother’s wife. That will take courage and compassion and, above all, it will take Christ.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

#1592 (5/17) "Congress Must Act Now to Start Rebuilding the US Military"

"CONGRESS MUST ACT NOW TO START REBUILDING THE US MILITARY" Justin Johnson / May 16, 2016 / http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/16/congress-must-act-now-to-start-rebuilding-the-us-military/ [AS I SEE IT: There was a time when the discussion seemed to always be about the military budget being too large. The assumption has always been that America has the superior military strength to meet any challenge it faces. But in recent years, the fear has continued to be expressed by our military leaders that America is becoming less and less able to effectively defend itself. We must pray that the next President will clearly see our increased danger and be focused on insuring we can not only effectively defend ourselves but also be available to help our allies when they are in need (without engaging again in pro-longed "nation-building") - Stan]

Four EA-6B Prowlers. (Photo: U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. N.W. Huertas/Released)

This week the House of Representatives takes up the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2017. Much of the debate and media coverage will revolve around a handful of controversial provisions ranging from nuclear weapons to religious freedom. These debates are important, but the most important question that Americans should ask Congress is this: Will this bill begin to rebuild the U.S. military?

The U.S. military is in rough shape and needs serious repair. Over the last few months, senior military leaders have repeatedly testified to Congress that America’s military is dangerously weak and unprepared. For example, Marine Corps mechanics have had to scavenge F-18 parts from museums to keep their planes flying. Even with the scavenging only 30 percent of those F-18’s are ready to fly today. Unfortunately, similar serious challenges face all the military services.

The 2016 Index of U.S. Military Strength looked at the size, capabilities and readiness of each part of the military and concluded that as a package the military is only “marginal” in its ability to protect America. The Army, which just became the smallest since before World War II, fell even lower to a “weak” rating due to the dramatic cuts in its size and readiness.

The trend is clear—the military is getting smaller and less ready.
     If the world were becoming more peaceful, a smaller, weaker military might be considered acceptable. But the threats against U.S. vital interests are only growing. America’s personal information and national secrets are being stolen by cyber-attacks. Terrorist organizations are alive and eager to do harm to Americans and our friends. Russia has invaded Ukraine. China is building illegal islands. North Korea has nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and Iran wants them. The reality is that these threats are not going away any time soon, so America must be prepared to defend herself. A smaller, weaker military is going to struggle to defend America.

This is why the defense bill before Congress is so important. Congress can either “rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic” or it can begin rebuilding the military. Fortunately, the bill coming to the House next week is a significant step in the right direction. The bill developed by Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, focuses on the three keys to rebuilding the military: increased readiness, increased force structure, and robust modernization. Thornberry’s bill increases the size of the Army and Marine Corps. It buys more ships for the Navy and more planes for the Air Force and funds nuclear weapons modernization. The bill increases funding for training and maintenance, the building blocks of military readiness. While rebuilding the military will take years, this bill stops the bleeding and starts the healing.

Unfortunately, instead of just increasing the overall defense budget to pay for the costs of rebuilding the military, the NDAA only partially funds operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In theory, this may force the next President to request additional funding for these operations early next year, but it would be far better to fund these operations fully now.

The bill also contains a number of potentially controversial provisions. One provision, based on a bill entitled “Draft America’s Daughters,” would require women to register for the Selective Service and be eligible for any future military drafts. Another would require new military recruits to only buy American-made running shoes. On the positive side, the bill establishes religious freedom protections for faith-based organizations that work with the government.

The bill also proposes significant defense acquisition reforms and major positive changes to the military justice system. And that’s just scratching the surface of this 1300-page bill. Other debates include the use of Russian rocket engines, military health care, missile defense, LNG permitting, and whether to keep the prison at Guantanamo Bay open. And perhaps most entertainingly, the bill includes provisions on the Sage Grouse, the Lesser Prairie Chicken, and the Burying Beetle. All [?] of these topics should be debated, and the NDAA is one of the best ongoing examples of what Congressional oversight should look like. But we must not miss the forest for the trees. All of these debates should not distract from the most important question: Is Congress going to start rebuilding our military?

The defense authorization bill is the best chance Congress has to stop the downward spiral that our military faces. Threats against our vital interests are growing while our military is shrinking. The men and women in uniform have been asked to do more with less and to stretch themselves ever thinner. At some point the military won’t be able to stretch any further and will break. Now is the time to start rebuilding the U.S. military.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Justin T. Johnson specializes in defense budgets and policies for The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for National Security and Foreign Policy.

"6 Facts Highlight Why We Need to Rebuild Our Military"Justin Johnson / May 17, 2016; http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/17/6-facts-highlight-why-we-need-to-rebuild-our-military/