Metaxas observes an amazing trend in the technological world:

But technology can also be a huge advantage in the fight to recognize and protect the sanctity of human life-every human life. For example, pro-lifers have worked diligently to place sonogram machines into pregnancy care clinics, and the presence of these high-tech wonders-which clearly show the humanity of the fetus-has no doubt contributed mightily to a substantial drop in the abortion rate, as well as a marked increase in the percentage of Americans who consider themselves to be pro-life.

It seems that our technological prowess doesn’t so much corrupt our hearts as reveal what’s in them.

You can see this principle in action in a recent article in Slate magazine. The writer, Allison Benedikt, recounts “the latest in baby-making fads,” such as midwives and birth photographers. But what really gets her attention: “Pregnant woman are Photoshopping sonograms onto their naked stomach glamour-shots.”

Imagine Demi Moore’s famous Vanity Fair cover pose with a representation of the growing human life inside her for all to see.

For Benedikt, such uses of technology are troubling-even “bad for women.” She writes, “… the more we treat fetuses like people-including them in our family photo shoots, tagging them on our Facebook walls, giving them their own Twitter accounts-the harder it will be to deny that they are people when the next, say, personhood amendment comes up, with legislators and activists arguing that ‘the unborn child’ inside a pregnant woman’s womb should have the same rights as the living among us.”

{read the whole article}

<>racers onlineцена рекламного щита

Read more

I am generally in 90% agreement with Doug on political issues. He is sober-minded, and remarkably astute when it comes to the heart of the political exchange. Here he demonstrates in seven points the fallacy of the pro-Roberts’ analysis:

1. Yesterday I sent out a tweet that offered my legal analysis of the Obamacare de . . . well, let us call it a decision. That theory was that somebody has PHOTOS of John Roberts. Not an assertion, not a charge, just an attempt to place a charitable construct upon the inexplicable. Others have argued that Roberts was being way tricksy — here and here, fer instance.

2. If John Roberts caved, for whatever reason, we should all be full of hopping indignation. But if he is a deep and tricksy thinker, then the success of his stratagem will depend entirely upon us ignoring his deep meanings, and being full of hopping indignation anyway. So fortunately, that all works out. Our duty is clear. Kick into fulmination mode and hop away.

3. Whether he intended to do this or not, there are some significant silver linings, at least as far as the next two or three tactical moves go. Obamacare was upheld as a tax. This means several things. First, the Constitution requires tax bills to originate in the House, and Obamacare originated in the Senate. A suit should be filed on that basis. Second, this means that Obamacare can now be overturned in the Senate with 51 votes instead of the 60 that were required before. In short, this was a bad decision, but it was convoluted enough to provide conservatives with significant maneuvering room. They should maneuver in it.

4. We have to function in terms of principle, and not in terms of party. The choice is not between Obama/not Obama. The actual choice is between despotism and freedom. Parties will let you down. Men will let you down. Don’t set your hope in princes, man (Ps. 118:9). The liberty-buster that Obama laid on the country was previously laid on Massachuetts by the Republican nominee. The monstrosity of Obamacare was upheld because of Roberts’ vote, and he was a Republican nominee, supposedly an arch-conservative. This significantly dilutes the force of “gotta have a Republican president for the sake of the court nominations.” It doesn’t eradicate that argument (Scalia, Alito, et al.), but it does weaken it.

5. Politically, in terms of motivation and money, this really is bad news for the big spenders. Look for the Tea Party to move from tri-corner hats and the colonial schtick to more of a Bavarian peasants with torches and pitchforks motif.

6. Conservatives will please notice that the current Republican place-holder wants to “repeal and replace” Obamacare. “Repeal,” yay. “And replace,” not so much. I don’t want him to repeal and replace it. I would prefer something along the lines of “repeal and soak with lighter fluid, followed by a torching ceremony, and a conga line dance around the flames accompanied with loud whoops and raucous singing, late into the night.” Of course, the details would have to be worked out, but it should be something quiet and dignified like that.

7. Last, and most significantly, whatever political and policy things happen in Washington, there is now a huge constitutional issue that must be addressed outside Washington, in numerous state capitals. That constitutional issue is now in front of us, whether or not a repeal of Obamacare gets through Congress and is signed by the president.

There is now, in principle, no limiting principle on the congressional power to tax, and the absence of such a limiting principle has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Even if Obamacare is repealed (as I now believe to be likely), this is now just a policy decision — the constitutional green light has been given. If Congress is deemed to have the constitutional authority to tax you for not doing whatever it is they dictate (eating brocoli, wearing blue tee-shirts, whatever), there is no other name for this than despotism. The fact that it is a nanny despotism helps not at all. The fact that their exercise of this authority is currently in abeyance matters not at all.

And so this means that we should resort to Calvin’s doctrine of the lesser magistrate, and call upon our state governors and legislatures to simply refuse to comply with Obamacare. The time has come to just say no. This is because there is no form of government more fundamentally anti-Christian than a government that recognizes, in principle, no limit to what it can require. Absolute claims are the prerogative of Deity. If this decision is allowed to stand, there is no longer any limiting principle inside the Beltway whatever. It is time for the ruling class to discover that there is still a limiting principle outside the Beltway, enforced by those who believe that the only real limiting principle is at the right hand of the Father.

Jesus is Lord — not Caesar, and not Congress.

<>online games mobiпоисковое продвижение ов цена

Read more

Read more

<>in javaсколько стоит поисковая оптимизация

Read more

The New York Times writes approvingly of Robert’s decision, indicating–of course–that they approve of his relatively refined view:

The requirement that all Americans buy health insurance is not really a mandate at all, but a tax, and is therefore constitutional since Congress clearly has the power to tax and spend.

<>it аутсорсингнедорогое продвижение ов

Read more

DeMint’s Statement:

Today, U.S. Senator DeMint (R-South Carolina) made the following statement:

“The Supreme Court may have failed to stop this government takeover of health care, but the American people will not. Since the day this law was rammed through Congress, the American people have demanded repeal, and today’s ruling doesn’t make Obamacare any less dangerous to our nation’s health. Freedom-loving Americans are disappointed, but we cannot be discouraged.

“The President’s health care law must be fully repealed as all of its promises have proven false. We were told it was not a tax hike, but this ruling confirms it is an unprecedented and enormous tax on the poor and middle class Americans. President Obama needs to explain why he is enacting this middle class tax hike over the objections of the American people during the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression.

“We were told it would lower health costs, but health care premiums are exploding. We were told that Americans could keep their personal health plans, but millions will now lose it. We were told it would improve our economy, but it is now the largest obstacle to employers hiring new workers.

“This government takeover of health care remains as destructive, unsustainable, and unconstitutional as it was the day it was passed, unread, by a since-fired congressional majority. Now as then, our first step toward real health care reform and economic renewal remains Obamacare’s full repeal, down to the last letter and punctuation mark.

“I urge every governor to stop implementing the health care exchanges that would help implement the harmful effects of this misguided law. Americans have loudly rejected this federal takeover of health care, and governors should join with the people and reject its implementation.”

“The President’s health care law will not reform anything, but is already undermining what does still work in America’s health care system. We cannot build a free market health care system on this flawed structure of centralized government control, we must repeal all of it and start over with commonsense solutions that make health care more affordable and accessible for every American. We can allow Americans to purchase lower cost plans from other states, support state high-risk pools to cover those with pre-existing conditions, medical-malpractice reform to end frivolous lawsuits, and tax equity so Americans who don’t get their health insurance from an employer are not penalized.”

“Today’s decision, however unfortunate, nonetheless represents an opportunity to all Americans, to claim their right to create a health care system of, for, and by the people, not government or special interests. The American people now have the chance and Congress has the responsibility to fully repeal this Washington takeover and reform health care ourselves, together, around the principles of individual liberty, not government mandates.

“The same freedom that made America strong and prosperous will make us healthier, too, so long as politicians remember that the health care system is supposed to serve our people, and not the other way around.”

<>online gameпродвижение калининград

Read more

The Daily Caller writes:

Obama’s health care reform law has been upheld, as a tax, in a 5-4 decision by the United States Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the four-vote bloc of progressive judges to uphold the sweeping law, after reinterpreting it as a tax-related law.

The majority opinion, authored by Roberts, said the federal government does not have the constitutional power to compel “individuals to become active in commerce… [so] the individual mandate cannot be sustained.”

But in a stunning move, Roberts reinterpreted the law, allowing it to stand, because he said the federal government has the constitutional authority to tax people — even though the law’s advocates originally denied it was a tax while pushing for its approval in 2010. The Obama administration later argued that it was a tax.

He and the four progressive judges upheld the far-reaching law as a tax law.

Roberts then said the court is not deciding whether the law is fair or wise.

“It is not our role to forbid it or comment on [the law’s] fairness,” said Robert’s decision, which was opposed by four GOP-nominated judges, including Justine Anthony Kennedy, widely considered the court’s swing vote.

Robert’s decision formally denied the claim by Democrats and progressives that the federal government has the authority to make people buy services. That’s an ideological victory for conservatives.

Yet the minority bloc of four conservative judges slammed the decision as a gross expansion of federal power, because it clears the way for further expansions of government power in the economy.

Robert’s decision to side with progressives is a disappointment for conservatives. He was nominated by President George W. Bush, and was expected to be a reliable advocate for small government.

The court also approved — but also curbed — the law’s extensive Medicaid mandate, which places fiscal pressure on states.

The decision will likely aid President Barack Obama’s defense of the unpopular law. He is expected to speak in the hours following the court’s ruling. (more…)

Read more

Bernanke’s nightmare is becoming increasingly a reality:

The House oversight committee voted Wednesday to demand a broad audit of the Federal Reserve System by congressional investigators — a major move that lawmakers said is designed to bring accountability to the murky workings of the independent central bank.

The bill was sponsored by Rep. Ron Paul, the Texas Republican who turned the push for an audit into a powerful presidential campaign slogan and whose criticism of the Fed’s monetary policy drew hundreds of thousands of voters into the political process.

It passed by voice vote, signaling the growing sense among lawmakers that the time has come for a full review.

<>интернет реклама раскрутка ов

Read more

Byron York tweets:

But what if SCOTUS upholds? Aides point out Romney hasn’t been arguing Obamacare is unconstitutional; he’s been saying it’s a bad law.

Is this Romney’s way of using the Court’s decision in his favor even if it disapproves of Obamacare?<>хороший копирайтингпродвижение ов seo раскрутка а направления

Read more

Read more