Mad Science: It's Not Just A Movie Thing Any More….

Finding new and improved ways to create and destroy human embryos - only now they are deliberately trying to create human/animal hybrids for the express purpose of destroying them for research and organ harvesting.

"One of the concerns that a lot of people have is that there's something sacrosanct about what it means to be human expressed in our DNA," says Jason Robert, a bioethicist at Arizona State University. "And that by inserting that into other animals and giving those other animals potentially some of the capacities of humans that this could be a kind of violation — a kind of, maybe, even a playing God."

It IS playing God, and it is an attack on the image of God. The Bible is clear that bestiality is prohibited: Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15-16, Deuteronomy 27:21. While this procedure doesn't involve sexual relations with animals, the end result is the same: the creation of a human/animal hybrid, created for the purpose of being studied, harvested, and destroyed. This isn't just about transplanting a human organ into an animal, it is about transplanting human stem cells (made from human skin cells, not aborted babies) into an animal with the HOPE that a particular human organ will result, but knowing that they have no way to control what actually happens:

"The uncertainty is part of what makes the work so controversial. Ross and other scientists conducting these experiments can't know exactly where the human stem cells will go. Ross hopes they'll only grow a human pancreas. But they could go elsewhere, such as to the brain.

"If you have pigs with partly human brains you would have animals that might actually have consciousness like a human," Newman says. "It might have human-type needs. We don't really know."

"That possibility raises new questions about the morality of using the animals for experimentation. Another concern is that the stem cells could form human sperm and human eggs in the chimeras.

"If a male chimeric pig mated with a female chimeric pig, the result could be a human fetus developing in the uterus of that female chimera," Newman says. Another possibility is the animals could give birth to some kind of part-human, part-pig creature."

This is the kind of stuff of which mad scientists down through the years have dreamed. While the National Institutes of Health have banned funding this research until they can find a way to ethically be good with it, the US Defense Department IS helping fund it. Our tax dollars are being used to create human/animal hybrids.

in-search-for-cures-scientists-create-embryos-that-are-both-animal-and-human

Repeal Michigan "Weapons Free" Zones….

Over the weekend in Grand Rapids, the body of a woman was found on the campus of Grand Rapids Community College (GRCC), murdered.

GRCC is one of the many so-called "weapons free" or "gun free" zones that dot the city.

The irony?

The stated reason for declaring the campus "weapons free" was for the SAFETY of employees, students, and the general public.

Here is their written policy: 

"III. Policy Statement
Possession or use of firearms, explosives or weapons or anything that is intended to be construed as a weapon is not permitted on College property.

IV. Reason for the Policy
To prohibit the possession or use of firearms, explosives or weapons on College property, as defined herein, FOR THE SAFETY OF ITS EMPLOYEES, STUDENTS, CUSTOMERS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC. [emphasis added]

V. Entities Affected by this Policy
Employees, students, vendors, visitors to the campus and the general public…

iX. Definitions
“College property” includes but is not limited to property owned, operated, managed, licensed to or leased by the College. At GRCC, all college property is used for classroom purposes.

“Weapons” shall mean any type of firearm, knife, dagger, dirk, stiletto, a double-edged non-folding stabbing instrument, taser, brass knuckles, any other type of instrument which could be used as a weapon and any type of explosive, chemicals or objects or instruments possessed for use of fighting or attacking.

“Firearms” shall mean any weapon or device from which is propelled any missile, projectile, bullet, shot, pellet or other mass by means of explosives, compressed air or gas or by means of springs, levers or other mechanical device which weapon or device shall be capable by the discharge of any such propelled missile, projectile, bullet, shot, pellet or other mass of inflicting personal injury or death upon any person.

...How to handle a situation where you see someone with a gun or other weapon?

They should immediately contact the Campus Police at extension 4010 and advise them of what they have seen. The dispatcher will ask the caller to provide him/her with a clothing description of the person they suspect. They will be asked for the last place they saw the individual and whether this person was walking, getting into a car, etc. If the person is walking, the dispatcher will want to know what direction they were moving in. If they were in a vehicle and on the street, the dispatcher will ask the same thing, what direction were they traveling?"

The stated purpose of this policy is safety.  It prohibits all weapons, INCLUDING NONLETHAL, DEFENSIVE ITEMS SUCH AS  PEPPER SPRAY, MACE, TASERS OR STUN GUNS.  The only recourse offered to anyone on campus per the policy is calling campus security - and HOPING that help arrives in time.

I have been saying this for years: ANY ORGANIZATION THAT TAKES IT UPON ITSELF TO DENY INDIVIDUALS THEIR GOD-GIVEN, CONSTITUTIONALLY-PROTECTED RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE USING ANY AND ALL MEANS AT THEIR DISPOSAL SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ALL INJURY OR DEATH ARISING FROM THAT POLICY.

Between the college campuses and medical mile, much of the downtown Grand Rapids area is designated as "weapons free," yet in recent years there have been numerous attacks on disarmed individuals in parking structures or other property relating to these organizations.  Obviously, criminals 1) don't care about such designations, 2) see them as fertile grounds on which to carry out their attacks, and 3) know that it takes time for police to arrive on the scene - by which time the damage is done and they are long gone.

So-called "weapon free", "gun free", or "pistol free" zones protect no one.  It's time to stop pretending otherwise, and it is time for the state legislature to take the following steps:

1) Eliminate so-called "weapon free" or "gun free" zones
2) Give Michigan's pre-emption law TEETH, specifically stating that schools, colleges, and universities are subject to pre-emption, and designating penalties for violating the pre-emption law
3) Hold any business/organization that takes it upon itself to enforce a "weapon free" or "gun free" policy - whether on the public OR their employees - civilly liable for any death or injury arising from the enforcement of such policy. 

4) Indemnify businesses/organizations from civil prosecution arising from lawful, defensive weapons carry and use.

And a final note to Michigan Governor Rick Snyder:  you are against the public carry of firearms because of something that happened while you were still a student at the University of Michigan.  You were a residence director in a dormitory when a man illegally carrying a firearm entered the dormitory and killed a fellow residence director, or so the story goes.  That person violated a gun free zone in order to commit a crime.

Bt what if things had been different?  What if your fellow student's right to defend himself had not been taken from him?  Might he still be alive today?  While having a firearm or mace might not have prevented his death, it would also have given him the chance to fight for his life.

Stop punishing lawful firearms carriers for the actions of a criminal.

Pres. Obama's Argentinian Two-step….

Jay Sekulow, THIS Is How You Deal With Traitors….

I have posted this to Mr. Sekulow's Facebook walls several times asking him to respond.

To-date, my request for a response has gone unanswered.

Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice, has been running a campaign to take away the US citizenship of any citizen who leaves the country to fight on behalf of ISIS or any other terrorist organization. 

The stated mission of the ACLJ is to defend the Constitution.

With that in mind, the Constitution, Article 3 Section 3, says any person who fights on behalf of America's enemies is guilty of treason, and must be tried and sentenced to the punishment determined by Congress.

The WWII example of George Dasch shows us how this should be done.

Dasch was a naturalized citizen, born in Germany, who left the US with a group of other german americans to receive training from the Nazis and return to commit acts of terrorism and sabotage. He and his group were captured within days of re-entering the US, tried, and sentenced to death. Dasch and one other conspirator had their sentences commuted to prison because they cooperated with federal agents, after which they were deported to Germany and never allowed to return; the remainder of his team were executed by electric chair - just SEVEN WEEKS after returning to the US.

THAT, Mr. Sekulow, is how you deal with traitors.

I still await your response.

We'll Skip The Wash And Head Directly To The Spin Cycle….

We now know, based on past events involving muslims,  how the White House will spin the San Bernardino shooting, even before the official statement is released: workplace violence.

From the statement issued by the White House while the search for the San Bernardino shooters was still in full-swing, it was apparent that the president was expecting the shooters to be his worst nightmare and rallying point - white, disaffected, gun-loving, conservative males. He was getting ready to threaten the nation again with some sort of executive action to put gun control into place. 

But hold on, it turns out that the shooters WEREN'T white, disaffected conservatives, they were muslims. 

It is official - the shooters are identified as Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and a woman, Tashfeen Malik, 27. Farook, according to the reports, worked at the disability center and angrily left the facility's holiday party, coming back with Malik. It is evident from the execution and arming of the attack that he had been planning this for some time. 

His brother-in-law made a televised statement this morning that he had no idea why Farook attacked the center - and he made his statement from a CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations, an organization with known ties to the muslim brotherhood and an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism funding trial a few years ago) facility, with the CAIR backdrop.  Apparently that group is trying to distance itself from the attack.

During last night's and this morning's broadcasts regarding the attack, reporters are asking the question: hours had passed since the shooting, so why were the shooters only TWO MILES from the scene of the attack? The obvious answer is that they intended to die as martyrs.

I am certain that the administration and liberals everywhere will find some way to pin the blame for this attack on America.

Active Shooters In San Bernardino - And The President Wastes No Time Politicizing The Event….

Active shooter incident in California, and the White House wastes no time politicizing the event. Here is the statement from the WH, broken down with my observations:

"Well, we don't know that much yet." 

Keep that in mind.

"It's still an active situation. FBI is on the ground offering assistance to local officials as they need it. It does appear that there are going to be some casualties. And you know, obviously our hearts go out to the victims and the families."

"The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there's some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don't happen as frequently, common sense gun safety laws, stronger background checks and you know, for those who are concerned about terrorism of, you know, some may be aware of the fact that we have a no fly list where people can't get on planes but those same people who we don't allow to fly could go into a store right now in the united states and buy a firearm and there's nothing that we can do to stop them."

1, We know NOTHING about these people. Who are they? From where did they come? Are they sadists with a beef against the developmentally disabled? Are they terrorists? They attacked a facility that serves the developmentally disabled.

2, We know NOTHING about how they obtained their weapons. Were they purchased locally, in another state, stolen, smuggled in? Since we know nothing about them, how can the president presume that changing our law is going to have ANY impact? A criminal who desires weapons will find illegal ways to obtain them, and no law is going to change that.

3, He mentions terrorism, implicitly declaring this to be a terrorist attack, yet he continues to push for unvetted people to be allowed into the country, while treating citizens with Constitutional rights as closet criminals.

4, The list to which he refers, the "no fly" or "terrorist watch list", is unConstitutional. It contains more than ONE MILLION names. Most of those people have been added to it in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments WITHOUT EVER HAVING BEEN CHARGED WITH OR CONVICTED OF ANY CRIME WHATSOEVER, merely on someone's suspicion, denying them their Constitutional RIGHT to due process. Since these people have been charged with nothing, had no opportunity to confront their accuser in open court as demanded by the Constitution, have been convicted of no crime, there is no legal basis to deny them their Second Amendment RIGHT to purchase a firearm.

"That's a law that needs to be changed, and so you know, my hope is that we're able to contain this particular shooting and, and we don't yet know what the motives of the shooters are, but what we do know is, is that there are steps we can take to make Americans safer and that we should come together in a bipartisan basis at every level of government to make these rare as opposed to normal."

Again, we have already established that we know nothing about these people, so again, the president cannot presume that using the "terrorist watch list" will stop anything. If anything needs to be changed, it is that the "terrorist watch list" needs to be eliminated. If someone truly poses a threat, then investigate them, charge them, convict them, and deal with them AS DEMANDED BY THE CONSTITUTION. As has already been well-established, a criminal who wants to obtain weapons will do so regardless of inclusion on some government list.

"We should never think that this is something that just happens in the ordinary course of events, because it doesn't happen with the same frequency in other countries."

This statement has already been thoroughly de-bunked. There are far more countries, particularly muslim countries, where such mass shootings are DAILY OCCURRENCES. Of course, that doesn't fit with the agenda.

Pray for the families effected by this tragedy. Pray for law enforcement as they work to round these animals up.

And stop politicizing tragedies. These are people - not political pawns or statements.

The "Terrorist Watch List" and Firearms Purchases….

It has become quite hip to call for denying people whose names appear on the federal terrorist watch list  their right to purchase firearms.  If the list had any validity, was based on anything other than supposition and conjecture, that demand would be reasonable.

But it's not.

There are currently over one million names on the terrorist watch list.  

That's right, one million.  

One million people whose names have been added because of SUSPECTED ties to terrorism.  Not because they have actually been charged or convicted of a crime, but because someone thinks they might be suspicious. 

And now people are screaming for these people to be prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

Here's the problem: we have this Constitutional thing called "due process." "No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," Fifth Amendment, US Constitution.

The Fourth Amendment clarifies what this means:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

There is no due process associated with the terrorist watch list.  One can be added to it for almost any reason without ever having been convicted, or even charged with, a crime of any sort. 

Prohibiting a person from purchasing a firearm who has never been charged or convicted of a crime but has been added to some secret list anyway is a violation of the Fifth Amendment, and equates to depriving them of their Constitutional rights. 

If someone is suspicious enough to be added to some secret list of possible terrorists, then do what the Constitution requires - charge them, prosecute them, PROVE THEIR GUILT IN OPEN COURT IN FRONT OF A JURY OF THEIR PEERS, and punish them.

Permit Recreational Fires on Private Property in Grand Rapids, MI

I have begun a petition to amend the ordinances of the City of Grand Rapids, MI, to permit recreational fires on private property.

The City of Grand Rapids, Michigan, prohibits ALL “open burning”, including fires contained in outdoor portable fire pits and chimeneas, and other “recreational fires”, which would include those contained in permanent fire pits.  This tramples private property rights, and infringes on our right to fully enjoy our private property.  The following is posted on the Grand Rapids Fire Department web page:

Public Information Regarding Open BurningThe Ordinance Itself - City Code - Title IX - Police Regulations - Chapter 151, Article 4, Section 9.34

(7) Open Burning. Open burning shall be prohibited.

(a)  The following exemptions shall be allowed provided they do not violate any other Sections of this Chapter. 

    (i)  The burning of wood, charcoal, coke or other accepted fuels for the preparing of food in an approved container or utensil while being used in a safe and sanitary manner... 

General Guidelines 

Cooking:

For the purpose of this ordinance, the mere presence of nearby food DOES NOT qualify as an exemption. For the food preparation to be considered, a number of factors need to be present including, but not limited to:

• The device being used for the fire is designed for the cooking of food, as its primary purpose. In addition, the fire officer in charge shall approve the device and its location, from a safety perspective. 

• The fire will be small in nature, and would depend upon the heat from the embers for cooking, rather than from flame contact. 

• When the food preparation was completed, the fire would be extinguished. 

• The gathering of food and support goods after the arrival of the fire department will exclude consideration as a cooking fire. 

• Fires on or in the ground will not be considered.

 As a policy, the Grand Rapids Fire Department will NOT participate in efforts to orchestrate an exemption. Some examples of Open Burning that are NOT allowed in the City of Grand Rapids are: 1. Outdoor Portable Fire Pits 2. Chimeneas 3. Recreational Fires Enforcement:Enforcement of this ordinance is the responsibility of the Grand Rapids Police Department. It is the policy of the Fire Department to educate residents prior to pursuing relief from an enforcement mode. Should the Fire Department respond to a report of an unauthorized burning, the officer in charge may choose to address the situation without activating the enforcement arm of the process. He/she may ask the occupant responsible for the fire to simply extinguish it, with or without the assistance of the Fire Company on scene. If the occupant agrees, the matter is considered closed. If the occupant refuses, Grand Rapids Police shall be notified. Should the Fire Department encounter repeat violations of the ordinance, the fire officer is required to notify the Police Department. August 17, 2009

Michigan, in general, and the Grand Rapids area in particular, has traditionally enjoyed the warmth of outdoor fires as a recreational past time and a pleasant way to spend time with family and friends, in addition to fire’s more utilitarian role in the preparation of food.  While concerns regarding fire safety are prudent, the Grand Rapids City Ordinance has gone too far in proscribing what kind of fires may occur on private property, specifying that only those fires used for food preparation are acceptable, and even then must meet, according to the letter of the ordinance, with the approval of the fire officer regarding the kind of device used for food preparation and the specific location of said device.  Strictly speaking, according to the letter of the ordinance, before placing an outdoor, commercially produced grill on one’s property, “... the fire officer in charge shall approve the device and its location.…”  A strict interpretation of the ordinance, then, would require city residents to obtain approval from the fire officer before placing a new grill, purchased at any of a number of area stores, in one’s own yard to insure that both the type and location of the grill meets with the approval of the city.

We whose signatures appear below do hereby petition the City of Grand Rapids, County of Kent, State of Michigan, to amend the Grand Rapids City Code, Title IX, Chapter 151, Article 4, Section 9.34 to allow recreational fires on private property when contained in:

1. Outdoor Portable Fire Pits
2. Chimeneas
3. Permanent Fire Pits,

and to rescind the requirement that outdoor, open fires and the devices used to contain them may only be used for purposes of preparing food and then only with the approval of the city fire officer.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/permit-recreational-fires-on-private-property-in-grand-rapids-mi.html

When Something Is Truly Sacred….

A Tale Of Two Exemptions….

An immigrant becoming a US citizen can now exempt him/herself from the obligation to serve in the US military/defend the US contained in the oath of citizenship:

"•May be eligible for modifications based on religious training and belief, or conscientious objection arising from a deeply held moral or ethical code.
•Is not required to belong to a specific church or religion, follow a particular theology or belief, or to have had religious training in order to qualify.
•May submit, but is not required to provide, an attestation from a religious or other type of organization, as well as other evidence to establish eligibility, (http://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-clarifies-eligibility-requirements-modifications-oath-allegiance)"

To get a religious exemption from Obamacare, on the other hand:

"How to claim an exemption for members of a religious sect opposed to accepting insurance benefits

If you’re a member of an approved religious sect or division opposed to accepting private or public insurance benefits, you qualify for a health coverage exemption.

This means you don’t have to pay the fee for any month you were a member of an approved religious sect or division.

What you need to know about this exemption

To claim this exemption you must be a member of a religious sect or division that:

Is recognized by the Social Security Administration as conscientiously opposed to accepting any insurance benefits, including Social Security and Medicare

Has been in existence since December 31, 1950

You’ll need to fill out a paper exemption application and mail it in to the Marketplace.

If you get this exemption, you won’t have to reapply for an exemption unless you turn 21 or leave your religious sect.

If you have one, send a copy of an approved IRS Form 4029 (“Application for Exemption from Social Security and Medicare Taxes and Waiver of Benefits”) with required signatures.

You can use one application to claim this exemption for anyone you’ll list on your same federal income tax return who qualifies.

Do this first

Download the religious sect exemption application (PDF) and exemption application instructions (PDF).

Ways to claim this exemption

Read the application and instructions for the exemption for members of recognized religious sects.

Be sure to include on your application everybody who’s on your tax return, even if they don’t need this exemption. If necessary, make copies of Step 2 (page 4) for each person. You need to list everyone who’ll be on your tax return so the IRS can match your information.

Complete, sign, and mail the application to the address shown on the form. When you sign the application, you agree that you’re signing under penalty of perjury. This means you’ve answered all questions correctly to the best of your knowledge and understand that you could face criminal penalties if you provide information that’s untrue.

You should get a written response from the Marketplace within 2 to 4 weeks. If your exemption is granted, the notice will include an Exemption Certificate Number (ECN) for each household member.

You’ll need the ECNs to claim the exemption on your 2015 tax return. Details will be available later in 2015. Keep the written response and ECNs in a safe place so you can find them when it’s time to file your 2015 taxes.

If you already have an ECN for membership in a religious sect opposed to insurance 

If you already have an Exemption Certificate Number from 2014 for membership in a religious sect, you can use the same ECN to complete Form 8965 of your 2015 federal tax return. You’ll need to provide that ECN on your Form 8965 every year when you file your federal taxes as long as your membership status doesn’t change.

You can also claim this exemption on your Form 8965 without an ECN. If you claim it that way, you’ll also need to claim it each year.

If you received an ECN from the Marketplace before you turned 21, you’ll need to complete a new exemption application with the Marketplace to get a new ECN when you turn 21.

If your exemption application isn’t approved

You must qualify for another exemption or pay the fee for the months of 2015 you aren’t covered. Learn more about the fee.

You can appeal the decision to deny your exemption. Learn how to appeal a Marketplace decision. (https://www.healthcare.gov/exemptions-tool/#/results/2015/details/religion)"

Anyone else see the problem here?