My Letters

There's still a chance to help send one million letters to the White House and Supreme Court! Here are a few that I've written. You are free to adopt them, but please adopt and do not copy; add your own heart to your letter.

#1

To whom it may concern:
I am writing to voice my concerns about abortion.  An abortion clearly violates the fourteenth amendment: "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". Every single abortion kills a human bing, violates the fourteenth amendment, and the very foundation of this nation: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Some may argue that the unborn, while human, are not people, but that is a dangerous road to take: who are we to define what a "person" is, if not a human being? We have tried that before, with blacks here in the U.S., and with the Jews in Nazi Germany; both of these led to terrible injustices. And now we are attacking the unborn, stripping them of their personhood, with no logical foundation for our claims except our own selfishness. This hidden holocaust is hidden no longer: the American people are waking up, and are horrified to realize their is the blood of over fifty million children on our hands. I urge you to join the fight against abortion.
Please, I am **** years old and this is not the country I want to inherit.

Sincerely,
Grace *********

#2

To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to voice my concerns about abortion.
Abortion advocates claim that abortion is about women's rights, but that does not make logical sense. Sexism has been dead for decades in the U.S. I am not against women having equal rights: I myself am a young woman, and an ambitious one! Abortion is not about women's rights. Women are physically different from men, and thus able to bear children, but being "different" does not mean they are legally "unequal". Even if we pretend that Nature has made women "unequal" (the ability become pregnant is not an inequality), that does not mean we are obliged to try to erase Nature's "mistake"--ESPECIALLY if it comes at the cost of a human life.
Abortion itself is sexist. It is insulting to women to tell them that they have to be "fixed"; that they need the right to murder their own children in order to be "equal" to men. Our fertility is not a curse. Children are not a curse. If a woman does not want to have children, that is her decision. I will not stop her. However, once a woman becomes pregnant, it's too late to choose to not have a child--she already has one, and it should not be legal for her to kill her own offspring, born or unborn. It is her responsibility to carry the child, give birth, and then, if she wishes, put the child up for adoption. I urge you to stand up against this new Sexism in America, and stop the murder of our children.
Please, I am **** years old, and this is not the country I want to inherit.
 Sincerely, 

Grace *********

 #3

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to voice my concerns about abortion.
Abortion is the greatest tragedy to ever occur in all of human history. The death casuality is enormous, 50,000,000+ in the U.S. along in the last few decades, but worse than that, the deaths are legal, by our own hands, and the slaughter doesn't even fix the problem it claims to need fixing: instead, it creates dozens more, and hurts everybody in the world, not just the life that it brutally ends.
The first obvious victim is the woman who undergoes the abortion. She is lied to about the humanity of the unborn, is not given all of the facts, and is frequently denied her right to see the ultrasound before her abortion. She is fed propaganda, in a bizarre new kind of Sexism, that says she can't be equal to a man unless she has the right to murder her own child, within her own body. She is not told about the possible increased risk of breast cancer, increased risk of miscarriages and premature births, post-traumatic stress disorder, or any of the other risks.
Abortion also victimises the father, who gets no rights. He has no say in whether his son or daughter lives or dies.
Abortion victimizes the aborted child's siblings, or future siblings; what would have been her best friend, her cousins, her husband, every life she would have touched. Gone. She leaves a hole before she is even born.
Abortion victimizes the abortionist and the abortion workers. They are deceived into thinking they are doing something wonderful for women, and by the time they find out what they've done, it's too late: they have partaken in the slaughter of millions. It must be horrific to suddenly realize what evil you have caused.
I urge you to join the fight against this terrible holocaust that is ripping apart the fabric of our nation. Please, I am **** years old and this is not the country I want to inherit.
Sincerely,
Grace *******

Notice I looked at abortion from three different angles. That's easier to do than trying to write a concise letter touching on all of them. Also, I obviously left out my age and my last name. That's in case any internet creepers happen upon my blog. :) (Note to the internet creepers: obviously my age does not have four digits, and that is not the length of my last name. The number of asterisks was completely random, so don't waste your time.)

If you hurry, you can still have them postmarked in March! The instructions for mailing them are here. (By the way, the Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally I co-organized was awesome. 250+ people showed up for my local rally, which was more than I expected! And last I checked, over 60,000 people showed up to rallies nation-wide--they're still counting! I hope you were able to attend one...NOW GO MAIL A LETTER!)

HURRY!

All images found via Google Images. No copyright infringement intended.

And We're Paranoid?

I must say, we saw this coming. I didn't expect it quite so fast, but here it is.
Direct taxpayer funding of abortion is now in place. I know, it was supposed to be illegal, wasn't it? But hey, who cares? The Obama administration sure doesn't.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is (surprise, surprise) responsible for this. It is also responsible for the HHS contraception mandate. Gasp! As explained on LifeSiteNews:

The Department of Health and Human Services this month issued a final rule regarding the exchanges required under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The rule provides for taxpayer funding of insurance coverage that includes elective abortion through a direct abortion subsidy. 

To comply with the accounting requirement, plans will collect a separate $1 abortion surcharge from each premium payer. As described in the rule, the surcharge can only be disclosed to the enrollee at the time of enrollment, and insurance plans may only advertise the total cost of the premiums without disclosing the abortion surcharge.

What really gets me is the last sentence. You can't disclose the abortion surcharge? You aren't allowed to know you're paying for abortion? Excuse me??

The pro-abortion side likes to tell the pro-life side that we're all paranoid. Hahaha, legalized contraception won't lead to abortion on demand! What religious idiots!

Yeah. Except that happened. And infringing on freedom by forcing payment for contraception also lead to infringing on freedom by forcing payment for abortion. DIRECTLY funding abortion. THIS is why we have to continue to protest the HHS contraception mandate, and any infringement on freedom. Don't expect the government to just stop there. They're going to keep going. Guaranteed. Proven by history. You have to actively fight for your freedom if you expect to keep it.

And by the way, the Obama administration has now broadened the contraception mandate to include college insurance, as well as employers. And, you guessed it, there's no conscience exemption.

I encourage you to find a local Stand Up For Religious Freedom rally to attend on March 23. There are over 100 locations now. There's even one in Alaska and one in Hawaii! All you have to do is go stand there with a sign. The bigger the crowds, the bigger the impact.

On the bright side, the Obama administration is digging its own grave. I have to wonder what the heck they're thinking. I, and everybody else I know, is absolutely LIVID. We don't want to pay for other peoples' sex lives, and certianly not for murder! If there is anything that will get people out to the polls come November, this is it! I almost hope the administration continues to do such stupid, un-American things. It could be a blessing in disguise.

By the way, have you sent a letter?

All images found via Google Images. No copyright infringement intended.

Hitler Would Be Proud

It would have been hard to miss the storm over President Obama's birth control mandate. You know, the new law that will begin forcing employers to cover contraception costs in their employees' health insurance. So if you didn't miss it, and you don't want to hear my rantings, please just read the following paragraph.

The outrage over the mandate erupted because it ignored any conscience rights of religious institutions, such as Catholic hospitals, who don't want to be forced to provide contraception. After the pressure was put on the Obama administration, they "revised" the mandate, so that instead of the employers paying for the contraception, the insurance companies are forced to provide it for free. Except this doesn't fix anything. Because the employers are still paying for the insurance. They are still paying for their employees' access to contraception. THIS FIXES NOTHING. Don't be fooled by this false revision. Keep the pressure on Washington. You can sign a petition here. (If the petition gets 25,000 signatures by March 12, then Washington has to give an official response!)

The main problem with this mandate is that it violates the first amendment right to freedom of religion. You can't order people to give away carrots to anybody who wants them if carrots violate your religion. This doesn't just go for "religious institutions" either. This goes for all employers who don't like birth control.

Naturally, there is a limit to religious freedom. If, for example, your religion requires you to sacrifice virgins to your god every year, you have to be stopped. Or if your religion requires you to not perform a life-saving heart transplant...too bad. But contraception is not life-saving or necessary. It is not a right. There is no reason to force people to give contraception to others. There's no reason to prevent people from getting contraception either, as long as it isn't an abortifacient. I don't like contraception myself, but I don't mind if you use your privilege to access and use it, so long as it doesn't impede another's right not to provide it or another's right to live.

If, in a very rare (and perhaps bizarre) circumstance, some contraception or abortion is necessary to save someone's life, then their right to life is trumped by another's right to not provide these now life-saving services, as the normal intent for both contraception and abortion (preventing having babies and killing babies) have changed into "preventing dying".

Even if this didn't impede first amendment rights, this doesn't even make sense economically. Forcing insurance companies to provide "free" contraception just makes the price of the insurance in total go up. The employers still have to pay for the insurance, so the employers are spending more on their employees' insurance, which tightens financial strain on the workplace, which, eventually, coupled with other things, leads to laid-off employees. Government mandates forcing themselves into the free market system always have bad results.

Then, President Obama had the gall to say that the birth control was "free" because it costs less than the babies that would result, therefore saving us money. WHAT?!? Since when were human lives worth only as much as the money they require?! Is abortion next, then? What about disabled people? I mean, hey, if it saves us money, why not go around killing people that cost more than they provide? That's called eugenics, and sounds quite a bit like Hitler's euthanasia program. And if it contradicts your religion to provide euthenasia for expensive less-than-worthy people, too bad, because we have a right to kill people over whom we have control.

Life, Plants, and the Death Penalty

Can they both be pro-life?

There's a debate going on in the pro-life community about what it really means to be pro-life. Much of the time, it's much fiercer than I wish it was. Some people are absolutely convinced that you have no right to claim to be pro-life if you eat animals and are for executing people. Well, I eat animals, and I am pro-death-penalty. I hope that everybody can see that we should still be able to work together to stop abortion, whether or not we have different views on the definition of pro-life--abortion is an obvious evil that needs to stop.

That being said, I decided to write about how you can be pro-life and still be for animal and criminal deaths. (Pro-abortion vegans--of which, I think, there are many--make no sense.)

I'll start with veganism. People are vegetarians for many different reasons; some believe it is healthier and/or more economical,  some believe in not killing any form of animal life if they can help it, some believe that the conditions that animals are raised to slaughter are deplorable enough that it is immoral to eat such meat, thus condoning those conditions and practices. Honestly, I have not looked into these matters much, though I know deplorable slaughterhouses do exist, and animals do have feelings and fears. I'm not for animal cruelty. God gave us this Earth and commanded us to take care of it. I'm not against animal deaths, though, because...they're animals. In an ideal situation, any animals killed would be killed humanely. However, I don't want to lose sight of the people in the world by focusing too much on animals (not using it in the biological sense, since biologically humans are animals too). Sure, let's take care of the Earth and its animal inhabitants, but let's not worship it. Our focus needs to be on humans. Is veganism the most humane/healthy/economical choice? Maybe it is. I'm open to that. But it isn't my focus in life right now.

Now, the death penalty. I believe the two main arguments against the death penalty are as follows: 1) too many innocent people are killed. 2) It's up to God to take life, and we as human beings shouldn't do it.

The first argument is debatable. I tried looking it up once and got so confused I just stopped. It's amazing how different the statistics are depending on whether the website is pro-death-penalty or not. All I know is that it's true that innocent people have been killed. I also know that science has progressed so much, the likelihood of someone being wrongly convicted keeps dropping significantly.

As for the second reason...I recently saw a bumper sticker ('cause we all know bumper stickers never lie) that said something to the effect of "It's God's job to judge terrorists. It's the military's job to arrange the meeting". While I don't quite agree with the message that this implies, it makes a very good point. We have the right to defend ourselves. The death penalty, like war, should be used sparingly and as a last resort, but freely. God commands us to turn the other cheek, but he also told David when to go to war, outlined how to give out death penalties, and I'm not going to hesitate to use the self-defense methods I know (which, I hope, will someday include a gun. Muahaha.) if some man tries to rape me. The Constitution grants everybody a right to life. But if somebody forfeits that right to life, either by killing or some other horrendous crime, then they forfeit that right to life, with full knowledge that they were forfeiting it. Criminals know that the death penalty exists. If they want to risk being executed, that's their concern. I'm not going to let them off the hook.

I am not condoning violence against abortion workers by saying this. There is a difference between the death penalty--which has been given, hopefully, by due process of law--and going out and shooting somebody who was not breaking the law (even if that law is wrong) because you think what they're doing is wrong. Even if it wasn't morally wrong, it would be (and is) counter-productive. The death penalty, like war, should be used as a last resort. We can still win this war against abortion. We are winning this war against abortion. Pro-abortioners don't have a leg to stand on. We can stop violence without using violence.

Moral Legislation

 

Hello world. I’m here to do yet another myth-busting post regarding government and abortion.

First, the Separation of Church and State. Put simply, that separation does not exist—at least not in those words. Those words in that order are nowhere in the Constitution. In fact, the words “separation” and “church” don’t appear at all. The word “religion” does though. Twice. In the same place, which is - you guessed it – the First Amendment.

“Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”



"You placed a nativity scene
within 30 feet of a blinking reindeer
display...a violation of the separation
of Church and State...you're going
downtown."



That’s it. The “separation of church and state” doesn’t exist to keep the Church out of the State—but to keep the State out of the Church.

Related to the separation of Church and State is the popular lie that you can’t legislate morality. In reality, all legislation is somebody legislating somebody’s version of morality. All legislation. There isn’t one law that isn’t related to morality. I challenge you to try to find one that doesn’t lead back to somebody somewhere’s version of morality.

So to ask a Senator to keep his religious beliefs and his personal morality out of the Congress is unrealistic. The Senator was elected because of his personal morality (though not necessarily his religion)—otherwise known as his worldview. All politicians are elected because of their personal morality. They keep a list of their opinions on their campaign websites for the public to come and scrutinize.

Now, a line does have to be drawn between religious beliefs and liberty. Sexual immorality, for example. Do I believe premarital sex is a sin? Yes I do. Should the US have a law against that? Absolutely not. That’s Big Government in the extreme.

Pro-abortioners use both the “separation of Church and State” and the “you can’t legislate morality” arguments to use against pro-lifers.

“Keep your religious beliefs off of my body!” they proclaim, “It’s none of your business whether I kill this fetus or not.”

Remember the line that needs to be drawn? Abortion is not on the same side as premarital sex. Why?

Because some “personal morality”, some “religious beliefs” are too big to be ignored. Some things are too obviously bad, too obviously hurt someone, even if you don’t believe there’s a God.

Pro-abortioners don’t support rape.

They don’t support murder.

They don’t support genocide.

They don’t support racism.

They don’t support slavery.

They don’t support animal cruelty.

They don’t support child abuse.

They don’t support violence (against born people, anyway).

All of the things listed above are (with the exception of animal cruelty) violations of basic human rights.

Um.

Abortion.

They shouldn’t support that either.

All  images found via Google Images. No copyright infringement intended.

Yay Government

Birth Control

Perhaps some of you have heard the news the government is now forcing insurance companies to cover, among other things, birth control. Because we “deserve” it. And if you haven’t heard, well…you just did.

Planned Parenthood, no huge surprise here, is celebrating this “victory for women”. Now you can prevent pregnancies (or terminate very early ones with the “morning after” pill) all for free! Yay!

Except for, you know, all the problems with this new rule.

Moral convictions aside, regulations like this are the enemy of Capitalism and small government. Short Economics-In-The-Free-Market lesson: if free birth control was really widely wanted and demanded by The People, eventually one of the insurance companies would latch onto this profit-making idea. “Come to us!” their advertisements would say, “and get free birth control!” Then all the people who wanted free birth control would flock to them. The company would make money, and the people would get free birth control. And (here’s the key) everybody who didn’t want birth control wouldn’t go to that company, wouldn’t be morally compromised by being forced to pay for the others’ free birth control.

Because the insurance companies are greedy, right?

This is why the government made them cover birth control in the first place. Insurance companies want to make money. So if they want to make money, they would add free birth control as one of their benefits and make money.

But they didn’t do this on their own. So obviously free birth control isn’t in terribly high demand. Or they would do it without the government forcing them to.

But the government is also forcing The American People to pay for the free birth control. Because the birth control isn’t free. The insurance companies pay for the birth control. And The People pay the insurance companies. See the connection? The government is forcing The People to pay for something they do not want.

Sounds like the opposite of freedom to me. They're the government. We're The People. We tell them what to do, not the other way around.

Besides that, the federal government shouldn’t be messing around in health care at all. It’s not Constitutional. I thought we wanted our “right to privacy”? Simply put:

Dear Government,

Get out of our lives.

Love (or lack thereof),  

PS: American People, I'd appreciate it if you could vote in my polls over there to the right. Thanks!

Images found via Google Images. No copyright infringement intended.

The Right to Health and Privacy

I recently watched a short video on why Planned Parenthood’s summer interns “stand with Planned Parenthood”. One of the recurring statements went along the lines of (and sometimes directly on the line of) “I stand with Planned Parenthood because reproductive health is a right, not a privilege.”

…it is?

 I wonder how all of the millions of people who have read the US Constitution could have missed that bit. Or perhaps one of us has a misunderstanding of the difference between a “right” and a “privilege”.

(First, may I say, that if you don’t believe in God, rights don’t exist, because no right and wrong exists. Sorry.)

“Right” is defined as something you have a claim on. And, if you have been deprived of that something, somebody or something should give it to you. A privilege is something that is graciously given to you that you don’t have a claim on.

(There is a difference between a God-given right and a government-granted right. I believe that the rights we have in the US are mostly one and the same. So for the sake of simplicity and conciseness, I will be assuming that they are so.)

The US constitution defines what we have a right to. To name a few: the right to life. The right to own arms. The right to peacefully protest. The right to freedom of religion. The right to freedom of speech.

But the “right” to reproductive health? Or to any kind of health, for that matter? While all the rights I just listed above are confirmed in the US Constitution, the word “health” is never mentioned. Nor is the word “privacy”.

The US Constitution does not provide rights for “health”…or “privacy”. (See my blog post on babysitting government.)

Think about it. If somebody really did have a right to health, then it would logically follow that if you are not healthy, others, or the government are required to make you healthy. It gives you a free ticket to make yourself as unhealthy as you want, and then the government is required to give you all the care you need—or, more horrifically, the government is required to make sure you don’t become unhealthy in the first place. Not only is this unrealistic, if it was going on, that would be downright scary. Talk about unlimited government control! Here in the US, I am proud to say, we are free to be stupid if we want to.

The myth of the “Right to Privacy” originated from the third and fourth amendments in the US Constition. The third amendment states that soldiers cannot “quarter” (live) in a civilian’s house without the civilian’s consent. The fourth amendment states that the government can’t give “unreasonable search and seizures” and that “[search] Warrants shall not issue, but upon probable cause”.

But there is no “right to privacy”.

And this is a good thing. The keywords in the fourth amendment are “unreasonable” and “probable”. Think about it: if there really were a right to privacy, then the government wouldn’t be able to do anything at all to punish criminals, so long as they stayed on private property. The government would be unable to investigate the homes of suspected child abusers or wife-beaters or spouse-murderers or ANYTHING that took place on private property. This isn’t limited to just houses. This encompasses anything that is not owned by the government.

Talk about scary.

Normally, I’m all for less government intervention. But there are two times I will make an exception: protection of the citizens from outside forces (“outside forces” meaning anything other than the citizen themselves), and protection of the citizens’ property.

Abortion counts in with the child abusers wife-beaters and spouse-murderers.

Of course, I'm not saying I want the government to be able to search our houses whenever they want, and it certainly would be nice if everyone was absolutely healthy. But these are not rights.

Besides…being murdered while snuggled up in your own mother’s womb. That’s the ultimate violation of the right to privacy and health. If anything gives the government a ticket to intervene, abortion does.

Images found via Google Images. No copyright infringement intended.

Happy Independence Day!

This holiday has been steadily rising in my mental “Favorite Holidays” list as my love for my country has grown. Sometimes I wish I didn’t love the USA as much as I do. It’s frustrating to love something flawed, especially when you feel like if only the world would listen to you, you could fix it all up to perfection.

Of course, I know I couldn’t fix it perfectly, even if everybody would do what I said, because I’m not perfect. What’s more, if the world listened to me, that would mean I was the absolute dictator of the world and that completely contradicts what I would be trying to do in the first place: fix the USA’s problems. Her problems break my heart. Abortion, specifically.

The USA is flawed. Every country in the world is flawed. What makes the USA special is the idea it is founded on.

Humans are basically evil. Not basically good. Evil. The US government is set up to protect us from ourselves by letting us be free. To let us be free. We are supposed to be free to be prosperous, but I’d like to point something out that gets overlooked: originally, we were also free to be idiots and fail, but more and more we’re trying to stop that freedom to fail. The remedy is, supposedly, big government. I humbly point out that this isn’t working.

The US government is here for two things: to protect us, the people, and to protect our property. That’s it. Nothing more.

We are not a democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Yes, there is a difference. A democracy is where everything is jointly decided by the people themselves. A republic is where We the People elect representatives to decide things for us. A Constitutional Republic is where the representatives are bound to obey the Constitution that the Republic is founded on.

The Constitution that we are supposed to be obeying has a tenth amendment that states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. If the Constitution doesn’t say you can do it, Federal Government, then you can’t. That's why our military is constitutional and universal health care isn't.

It’s these basic principles that are being ignored, and ignoring these basic principles is what is messing our country up.

It would be nice if government could take care of us. Government can take care of us. But there is something you have to give up in return.

When you are a toddler, your parents take care of you. They make sure you were safe and regulate how many cookies you can have and how much sleep you get. When you become an adult, you make your own decisions. You can make great decisions by looking both ways when you cross the street and regulating your own cookie intake and sleeping hours...or you can make poor decisions and pay for it with declining health. You're free to do whichever you choose.

Even if you make poor decisions occasionally, you don’t want to safeguard against poor decisions by having your parents always make your decisions for you. For one thing, that would take away all your freedom. For another, your parents are flawed too.

This is what big government is: flawed parents who aren’t always looking out for your best interests. Do you want to be a toddler and have the government babysit you, or do you want to take responsibility for your own life and sometimes fail along the way?

Happy Independence Day! Let's celebrate Freedom!