While human rights all over the world are being abused and denied – especially those of children still in the womb, there are vast numbers of people who are more concerned with the humane treatment of animals and even plants. In fact, they have gone beyond seeking humane treatment for animals to the insistence upon granting animals human rights. Here are a few examples:
Peter Singer’s Great Ape Project that seeks to create a “moral community of equals” between human beings and chimpanzees, gorillas, and other primates, is now the public policy of Spain.
Pregnant pigs have been given the constitutional right not to be kept in crates by the voters of Florida. (That may be proper animal welfare policy, but pigs should not be granted “constitutional rights”).
The European Court of Human Rights has accepted an appeal from Austria’s Supreme Court’s refusal to grant formal personhood to a chimpanzee.
Switzerland has declared the “intrinsic dignity” of plants.
Ecuador has given “rights” to “nature” in its new constitution that are co-equal with that of human beings.
A-list Hollywood movies have adopted the anti-humanism of the Deep Ecology. (a radical ideology that, among other agenda items, seeks to reduce human population to 500 million). The remake of old science fiction The Day the Earth Stood Still exemplifies these disturbing changes. In the original, the alien came to earth to save humankind from itself. In the new version, the alien—played by mega star Keanu Reeves—comes to earth to obliterate the human race, literally, to “save the Earth.”
Quoting Andrew Norman Wilson:
“Like most educated people in Britain and Northern Europe (I was born in 1950), I have grown up in a culture that is overwhelmingly secular and anti-religious. The universities, broadcasters and media generally are not merely non-religious, they are positively anti.
To my shame, I believe it was this that made me lose faith and heart in my youth. It felt so uncool to be religious. With the mentality of a child in the playground, I felt at some visceral level that being religious was unsexy, like having spots or wearing specs.
This playground attitude accounts for much of the attitude towards Christianity that you pick up, say, from the alternative comedians, and the casual light blasphemy of jokes on TV or radio.
It also lends weight to the fervour of the anti-God fanatics, such as the writer Christopher Hitchens and the geneticist Richard Dawkins, who think all the evil in the world is actually caused by religion.”
Emotional abuse is the hardest to determine, but I truly believe it is the most prevalent form of child abuse in our nation. This brings us back to the theme of this chapter. The worth we, as parents, communicate to our children through our attitudes, words, and deeds either enables or cripples our children’s potential in life.
Children are easy targets of adult sarcastic humor. When they make us angry, we yell and scream. Often, we are venting frustrations that may have nothing to do with them. They are a captive audience and safe targets. They often serve as our “whipping boy” when we cannot have things our own way. We may wish to do otherwise, but our own negative emotions and frustrated desires get in the way. Our unspoken philosophy of “serve me” and “meet my needs” is revealed by the actions and words directed at our children.
I don’t claim that the average parent purposefully sets out to leave emotional scars upon his child’s life. Yet, it happens and it seems to be happening more often as each year passes. We continue to ask, why?
The answer to this question is both very complex and very simple. Simply stated, we are inclined to sin. We have failed to live in obedience to the pattern of life prescribed for us in God’s Holy Word. We have built our lives, marriages, and families based upon the false promises of TV commercials and soap operas. We have believed we can have everything and have it our way. We have lost the will to deny our baser instincts and have given free reign to the desire of the moment. The story of the mother in South Carolina who drowned both of her children because she believed they were getting in the way of her romance with her lover may be considered an extreme example of the actions of a very sick person. I believe, however, it is the logical result of the culture of narcissism that prevails in our world today. (Continued tomorrow)
From: The Pen of Aaron Klein
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in to her official advisory council the head of an Arab American organization whose officials have labeled deadly anti-U.S. jihadists as “heroes” and opposed referring to Hamas as a terrorist organization.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, or ADC, also has close ties to anti-Israel professor Rashid Khalidi, whose association with President Obama stirred controversy during last year’s presidential campaign.
The ADC also leads the opposition to domestic anti-terrorism measures taken after the 9-11 attacks, such as watch lists, background check delays for visas and an initiative meant to more comprehensively screen visitors from select Mideast countries or specific individuals labeled as possible national security threats.
Quoting Walter E. Williams:
“In addition to an abhorrence of democracy, and the recognition that government posed the gravest threat to liberty, our founders harbored a deep distrust and suspicion of Congress. This suspicion and distrust is exemplified by the phraseology used throughout the Constitution, particularly our Bill of Rights, containing phrases such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage or violate. Today’s Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a particular measure is a good idea or bad idea should determine passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt.”
“The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?” —Isaiah 33:14.
From: The Pen of Jonathan Edwards
It may be inquired, “Who are the sinners in Zion?” I answer, “They are those who are in a natural condition among the visible people of God.” Zion, or the city of David of old, was a type of the church; and the church of God in Scripture is perhaps more frequently called by the name of Zion than by any other name. And commonly by Zion is meant the true church of Christ, or the invisible church of true saints. But sometimes by this name is meant the visible church, consisting of those who are outwardly, by profession and external privileges, the people of God. This is intended by Zion in this text.
The greater part of the world are sinners: Christ’s flock is and ever hath been but a little flock. And the sinners of the world are of two sorts: those who are visibly of Satan’s kingdom, who are without the pale of the visible church; and those who do not profess the true religion nor attend the external ordinances of it. Beside these there are the sinners in Zion. Both are the objects of the displeasure and wrath of God; but His wrath is more especially manifested in Scripture against the latter. Sinners in Zion will have by far the lowest place in hell. They are exalted nearest to heaven in this world, and they will be lowest in hell in another. The same is meant by hypocrites. Sinners in Zion are all hypocrites, for they make a profession of the true religion. They attend God’s ordinances and make a show of being the worshippers of God; but all is hypocrisy.