Choices and Chances – Does America Know the Difference?
February 22, 2010
In an era where change is touted it is becoming apparent that most of what is being offered as change is really just taking a chance. Many of the changes offered are being rejected because they seem to be flattening our freedom to make a choice, with one exception.
The stimulus bills one and two are being heralded as the best way to jumpstart the economy. If representatives had been listening to the American people as they were elected to do there would be no stimulus bill. The political class decided that we were too dumb to decide such an important matter and our choice was ignored.
We are about to take a chance on the repeal of the military's 'don't ask – don't tell' rule. We will be crushing the choice that millions of young people want to make by leaving the matter of sexual preference at the door of civilian life and getting on with unhindered service to their country. Unseen or unrecognized is the possibility that taking this chance will change the choice of untold numbers of young men and women to join the military at all.
The healthcare proposals now stalled in both houses included language that warned us that we would be taking a chance on being fined or jailed if we didn't get the proper coverage. No choice here but even worse, how could such a law be enforced? Would the government be forced to issue IDs and then run spot checks of its citizens to see if they were complying? Would a PIN be like a vehicle's VIN? Maybe they could engage electronic monitoring systems like OnStar to keep tabs on us remotely and turn in the offenders at regular intervals. How do you spell big brother?
We have been told that we should take a chance on engaging our enemies around the world in dialogue and diplomacy in all instances. Our choice to walk softly in some cases and use the big stick in others has been tabled for the moment which leaves only one pertinent question. How's that been working? Let's not make a long list of failures or mention the contempt that extremists, terrorists and whole nations have leveled at America but let's just take a gander at one well-known attempt at dialogue.
From the first attempt at dialogue in the Arab-Israeli conflict to the present there has been 25 separate accords, agreements and treaties starting with the 'Peace proposals of Count Folke Bernadotte (1947-48) on through the Oslo accords of 1993 und up to the two and even the three state proposals of late. These chances at dialogue have all failed and now the choice of retaining the rights to settle in their own land is being taken away from Israelis every single day.
We decided to take a chance with Al Gore's wistful warnings of global warming. Now with recent proof of exaggerated claims, false science and contrary science we are not so sure. Fox's Bill O'Reilly said when he saw the 'Green Police' commercial in the recent Super Bowl ads he thought it was just a spoof making fun of the over exuberance of the green machine but after reflection he wasn't so sure either. In that commercial even a cop's choice to use a Styrofoam cup for his morning coffee could put him in jail.
Let's lump closing Gitmo, ending the use of waterboarding and using the term 'man-made disasters' all together as taking one big chance that it will make America look more gentle and kind. Rather than removing the choice of someone to assault us with some act of terror wouldn't that bolster them? "If the consequences are not so dire why fear the ire?" What giant intellect decided that Hurricane Katrina, the Haitian earthquake and 9/11 can all uniformly be included in the same category? Are lumping terrorism, natural disasters and man-made disasters together really some kind of choice? On one level it certainly is a choice; it's called the choice to be dumb.
One of the biggest long shots in American history for White House PR was the decision to bring the 9/11 terrorists to trial in New York City. Now that the decision is coming under greater scrutiny we can all breathe a sigh of relief for New Yorkers who could not be expected to take it on the chin yet once again. What a chance that was! What part of New York's right to choose the trial venue was ever regarded, asked for or considered? It took a national furor to get the administration to consider the deepest feelings of the 12 million New Yorkers who are only now beginning to show signs of full recovery. This is a choice New Yorkers should never be deprived of for any reason.
The only place in American society where choice preempts, precedes and precludes taking a chance is on abortion. But if seen in the clear light of day it is the one area where we are taking the greatest chance.
Abortion denies that every citizen in every state is covered under the declaration of independence with the right to carry on with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Abortion denies an unborn child's unalienable right and declares they are not independent of their own mother. For all the criticism we may level against the tenants of the Islamic religion perhaps we should not forget the sayings of one of the Muslim's most noted poets, Kalil Gibran who said…
"Your children are not your children.
Abortion takes the chance that the nine Supreme Court justices that presided over Roe V. Wade and voted in favor of abortion in 1973 could not have made the most serious mistake in the history of American jurisprudence. Remember this is the same august body that ruled that an African American slave was chattel, (a word more commonly associated with farm animals and property) and thus had no right to own property as American citizens. (Dred Scot V. Sanford, 60 US 393, 1857) The next time you hear someone wave off the whole scourge of abortion with the old "it's the law of the land" reply, keep in mind that Dred Scot was once also the law of the land.
The same judicial body that said an African American citizen is mere chattel is also willing to say that an unborn human being is merely a fetus, a glob of indistinct flesh with no heart beat, no brain wave and no right to begin life here among the rank and file of all American citizens. Is there a chance they are miserably wrong? I would say you could bet your life on it but it is easier to bet the lives of the unborn on it. God help us.
Finally, abortion takes the biggest chance of all that God is not saddened, deeply grieved and insulted with the slaughter of innocent humans for reasons not worthy of common barn animals. How could the Bible that holds man accountable for the humane treatment of livestock (Proverbs 12:10) simply have nothing at all to say about the wasting of some fifty million human babies since 1973?
Almost as a footnote it does well to mention that the number 40 is not only biblical numerology's 'time of ample proof' but most prophecy is given generally in 40 year cycles. Those who have been preaching and standing against Roe V. Wade have been doing so for about 40 years. In 2013 Roe V. Wade will have been on the ledgers for about that long and that is also about the time most eschatologists see as the beginning of the 'great tribulation' spearheaded by the dreaded antichrist.
In the most recent Pew Research poll that organization declared that what was foremost on the minds of most Americans is the economy. Jobs and terrorism came in second and third and crime was at the bottom of a list of 13 things we consider as top priorities. Abortion didn't make the list which is ample proof that we are being desensitized to one of the worst genocides in world history.
According to Scripture our economy is more greatly threatened by our slaughter of the innocents than anyone is willing to admit. The great, timeless and immutable laws of reciprocation say that no one can continually see greater gain at the expense of someone else's right to live. It is sad to think that only the complete demise of our economy could bring us to the pause needed to ascertain this immovable truth.
Many among us still consider it a crime to assault or destroy an unborn baby at any point after conception. Perhaps abortion was included within the crime category of the Pew report but that is not implied. The Bible is not so uncertain. The message of writ is distinct and explicit to the letter. Destroying human life is wrong and there is but one cure for it which will not change until the end of time.
So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord. (De 21:9)
Michael Bresciani is the publisher of American Prophet.org since 2005. The website features the articles and reports of Rev Bresciani along with some of America’s best writers and journalists, news and reviews that have earned the site the title of "The Website for Insight." Millions have read his timely reports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook!
Visit Rev. Michael Bresciani's website at www.americanprophet.org