The Man, The Horse, The Wolf

“A horse having a wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of his life. Being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. Whereupon he approached a man, and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the man. The man accepted the partnership at once and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if his new partner would only co-operate by placing his greater speed at the man’s disposal. The horse was willing, and allowed the man to place bridle and saddle upon him. The man mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him.

“The horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the man, and said: ‘Now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.’ “Whereupon the man laughed loudly and replied, ‘Never!’ and applied the spurs with a will.” Isaac Asimov~

A slow process takes us from freedom to tyranny. Identifying the influence of multiple elements helps us track the descent.

In our culture that once encouraged self-control, personal morality used to be just that, personal. No more.

Behavior shifted from publicly accepted mores to license, and on to the despotism of an imposed moral code. The culture that asked restraint of young and old became one that embraced “free” sex among the unmarried, including unlimited abortion, and no-fault divorce among the previously committed. From there emerged LGB, then T, and now to an assortment of alphabetical self-identities limited only by one’s imagination.

The new moral code arising from the “freedom” era requires us to embrace and approve of any sexual choice, and apparently now the push is on for any choice at any age.

Not until Bud Light and Target aimed at the young did a significant reaction occur–as if the frog in the slowly heating pot had suddenly awakened. The end result of that reaction remains to be seen.

Do not be mistaken: the young are the goal and have always been.

Eleven states require a positive classroom presentation of “LGBTQ+ history.” Only four of those allow students to opt out. Five others prohibit such teaching, but Florida for example, limits the prohibition to the early grades.

Some call for a return to basics in the public classroom. Gillian Richards says those making such assertions miss the mark.

“For years, some conservatives have responded to morally toxic content in schools by implying that proper education should be morally neutral. The left has a campaign to “teach the whole child.” These critics counter by saying, ‘No, teach just a part.'”

Richards goes on to quote C.S. Lewis: “We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”

Lewis would be shocked to find his geldings metaphor to have become so literal today.

Rochards continues, “It is a bitter irony that some Americans on the right now invoke the very thing Lewis critiqued as the cure to the ideologies that have replaced progressivism—critical theory, gender ideology, and the like.” 

An education without moral formation is, it seems, no education at all.

Richards looks back for the answer. “The Founders and early Americans saw a core part of education as cultivating virtues, morality, and religion—all of which sustain a free and prosperous society.”

Where do we find such virtues?

Primarily in history and books.

As a college instructor, I was astonished at what my students did not know. Too many didn’t know a simple timeline of America’s “big wars,” the War for Independence, the Civil War, World Wars I and II. They seemed unaware of which century, not to mention which decade important events occurred.

Here’s part of why that’s the case.

Last fall, I attended a teachers’ conference. I participated in this conference for English teachers twice before but had been absent for more than a decade. The transformation was astonishing.

I’ll paraphrase my main takeaway. “The world has changed. We can no longer teach old books.”

The world has changed indeed. But students in too many schools (not all) today are sentenced to a life of ignorance about its various transformations, both from a technological and a literary perspective.

They read books about the world today. Books focused on the issues they see, their depression, their sexual confusion, their lack of understanding mirrored back to them in a resolution of false wisdom.

We have a long way to go to get back to the basics. The journey to wisdom and virtue is further yet.

In order for our society to teach virtue, we must first embrace it ourselves. Selfishness was the seed that produced the fruit we live in today.

Asimov: The fall of Empire . . . is a massive thing, however, and not easily fought. It is dictated by a rising bureaucracy, a receding initiative, a freezing of caste, a damming of curiosity—a hundred other factors. It has been going on, as I have said, for centuries, and it is too majestic and massive a movement to stop.”

In order to rescue our nation, we must become the horse that can throw off its own bridle.

Difficult, yes.

Impossible?

Asimov thought so, but he did not know that only One who could stop the decline into desolation.

With God, all things are possible. Let’s look to Him.

Photo Credit: Pexels

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.
Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduIce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Taking Sex Seriously: The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry

Sex Must Be Taken Seriously.

Men and Women Are Different.

Some Desires Are Bad.

Loveless Sex Is Not Empowering.

Consent Is Not Enough.

Violence Is Not Love.

People Are Not Products.

Marriage Is Good.

Those are the chapter titles in Louise Perry’s book The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century. It’s the kind of information and advice a mother (one who is wise or became so the hard way) would give her daughter to help her understand how to navigate youth and early adulthood with minimal wounds of body and soul.

I write often about the consequences of abortion on all involved. Yet abortion isn’t an isolated wound. It’s one in a series of injuries that often begins with the idea that we need not take sex seriously, that sex is not about commitment, reproduction, and raising the next generation, but that it’s about amusement and recreation and can be devoid of negative consequences.

Perry asserts that women have been deceived into believing that sexual freedom benefits them even while “it so obviously serves male interests.”

Society has further convinced us that men and women are the same, which has led to the idea that women can take care of themselves without extra precautions. Such an approach. Perry argues, often places women in “the perfect environment for the would-be rapist.” There is “cultural pressure,” she says, to reject messages encouraging women to “stick together on nights out, to keep their friends safe.” Cultural pressure doesn’t end there.

Our society has fallen victim to a belief that there are no “bad desires.” This modern tenet presses us to suppress our natural and protective “moral intuition. And not just “disregarding [our inclinations against that which is unnatural] but actively resisting moral intuition” (emphasis Perry’s), such as the need to protect not only ourselves but also our children. We shouldn’t be surprised to see, she says, that after the breakdown of “sexual taboos,” all taboos would be “considered fair game.” Hence we see the assertion that children are capable of sexual desire and consent and the efforts to sexualize children and instill in them the foundational premise that “loveless sex” is harmless.

Not only is “loveless sex” not empowering, but it’s also not all that enjoyable. Perry provides solutions to help us avoid falling victim to a “sexual culture that is fundamentally not geared toward protecting your safety or wellbeing.”

Further, she does an expert job explaining inconsistencies in the jargon and results of the sexual revolution. For example, laws draw arbitrary lines between statutory rape and consensual sex because a girl has reached a particular birthday of consent.

The same girl is abused and assaulted one day and the legal prize of desire the next.

Acknowledging that there “is no other way the law could function,” Perry states that “consent has more layers to it.” That a female has said yes “may do as a legal defence, it is not a convincing moral defence” (sic) (Perry’s emphasis) because consent can be urged, manipulated, or even coerced.

Consent to sex, manipulated or otherwise, can lead to a twisted notion of consent to violence. Women who are “inexperienced or overly trusting” can “confuse jealousy for fidelity and so be drawn to” those who would have them believe that violence is love.”

Sexual manipulation extends itself to prostitution as well. When Perry explains that people are not products, she highlights contradictory, even schizophrenic, efforts in England, on one hand, to legalize prostitution, and on the other, to legally forbid sex for rent, exchanges that have emerged in college towns within the UK.

“The whole point of paid sex is that it must be paid for. It is not mutually desired by both parties — one party is there unwillingly, in exchange for money, or sometimes other goods such as drugs, food or shelter.” Perry argues, among other assertions, that sexi should be done “with” someone else, not “to” someone else (emphasis Perry’s). “Once you permit the idea that people can be products, everything is corroded.”

This book culminates in a final full chapter with a surprising chapter title considering its writer holds an evolutionary viewpoint. “Marriage Is Good” illustrates that we live in “a natural human life cycle,” either dependent on someone else or “giving away some portion of your freedom, which runs counter to what we’re all supposed to want” for the sake of someone else.

Marriage is protection for women and children, not just a ball and chain of patriarchy as many feminists have claimed for decades.

Perry’s Conclusion “Listen to Your Mother” offers advice “I would offer my own daughter” urging readers to trust their moral intuition, learn how to recognize sexually aggressive men, and protect themselves by only having “sex with a man if you think he would make a good father to your children.”

She ends with optimism that women are wising up to the harm the sexual revolution has foisted upon them.

The Case Against the Sexual Revolution is well-researched, well-documented, well-argued, and easy to read. Perry stumbles across biblical principles through study and science although not completely as she supports same-sex marriage.

She avoided any argument of abortion except to say this: “And whatever you think about the ethical status of the foetus, we should all be able to agree that an abortion is not a good thing for a woman to go through, given such medical risks as uterine damage or sepsis, not to mention the emotional consequences, which are not trivial.”

I recommend this book for the evidence she provides in support of much that Christians have argued all along with a minor caveat about a smattering of unsavory language.

The sexual revolution was a lie. Perhaps you knew that from your youth. Perhaps you, as many of us did, learned it the hard way. When an evolutionary-feminist like Louise Perry writes a scholarly book backing up that claim, liberals and conservatives alike would be wise to consult it.

The sexual revolution was a lie.

“It was a lie all along. It’s time, at last, to say so.”

And may her message be heard and heeded far and wide to the healing and wholeness of many.

Photo Credit: Pexels

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

New PP Video: How to Maximize Payment for Aborted Babies with Living Cells

The Center for Medical Progress has released a new video. When abortion doctors discuss abortions without dig, they mean digitalis, a drug that, if injected into the heart, stops it.

So when they discuss not using dig, they are doing procedures on living children. Note that in many of these cases, they are talking about unborn children at the age of 22 weeks and six days.

And dismemberment means what you think it means. They are dismembering living children.

Center for Medical Progress video

See more at https://www.daviddaleiden.com/work.php

Photo Credit: Freeart.com

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

HEADlines: The Back Alley on the Island of Dr. Moreau

Published in The Mustard Seed Sentinal, 6/26/21~

Recently, the Food and Drug Administration cleared the way for abortion medications to be available via telemedicine.

The new rule is intended to allow girls and women to end a pregnancy of 56 or fewer days from the comfort and privacy of their own homes without having to see a doctor in person.

However, with this new rule, there is no way to ensure–as an in-person physical examination would–that the unborn child is younger than 57 days–or even that the pregnancy is not ectopic (that the child is not stuck in the fallopian tube rather than residing in the uterus–a condition that is potentially deadly for the mother).

Before last month, an estimated 40 percent of American abortions, according to the AP, occurred through the chemical method. Yet the requirement that patients seeking chemical abortions meet with a doctor before obtaining abortion medications ensured that deadly complications (like ectopic pregnancies) and attempts at dangerous, late-term abortions (after 56 days) would be minimized.

Now, they can be maximized.

The rule change will be a boon to the abortion industry in several ways. For every surgical abortion, someone has to remove the child, through suction or manual dismemberment, or stab the child’s heart with a sonogram-guided injection and induce labor so the mother can deliver her dead child.

After a dismemberment abortion, someone must reconstruct the child to ensure that the abortion was complete–that there will be no parts left behind to fuel infection.

Mail order abortion meds prevent trauma to a worker having to deal with the actual killing or disposal of the bodies of dead children. Mailing pills to faceless women is much less traumatic than piercing a heart or reconstructing human body parts. And the industry will need employees with much less training. How hard is it to mail pills? Not very.

Less complex. And less costly for those in the abortion business.

Now girls and women who are aborting at home will perceive that they can escape a problem–and no one else has to know. They’ll perceive this notion because the telemarketer/abortion advisor they spoke with via phone or internet told them so, that the process will be simple, “like a heavy period,” that it won’t be so bad.

One “pro-choice” woman says her experience was “unimaginable,” “indescribable,” “the worst pain I have ever felt. . . . With every cramp I felt my heart race and my blood pressure plummet.” . . . . [She was] “nauseated, dizzy and lightheaded.” She thought she was dying.

Abby Johnson’s chemical abortion experience was similar.

After reading these accounts and understanding that so many abortions happen this way now, we might conclude that these women’s experiences were outside the norm. Yet, the complication rate for chemical abortion is four times that of surgical abortion.

Four times.

And remember, the girl or woman at home will at some point expel a baby. She is likely to see that baby and understand what she perhaps did not fully grasp at the beginning of the process: a baby who was alive and growing within her is now dead.

Other countries are currently conducting studies regarding chemical abortions for second-trimester pregnancies. That means chemical abortion for a four to six month old unborn baby to be born dead at home.

Once achieved, a quest will begin for medication to abort even older unborn children.

“Death and destruction are never satisfied.” Proverbs 27:20a.

Melanie Israel for the Heritage Foundation:

“And I would just caution people … especially if the abortion lobby has their way and abortion pills are available through telemedicine, getting it through mail order, available in retail pharmacies, or even over the counter. That’s what some abortion advocates want, just abortion pills over the counter, no prescription required, no questions asked. Imagine what that would mean in the hands of an abusive partner, a coercive partner, a trafficker.”

Ms. Israel reports that 19 states prohibit telemedicine abortions. But that the restrictions can be “wiped out at any moment” by an edict from the current administration.

In the historic discussion leading to legal abortion in America from conception to birth–the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision–abortion advocates pleaded that abortion be safe, that desperate girls and women gain protection from the butchers of “back alleys.”

Now the back alley is the very homes of these desperate girls and women. The butcher comes as a specter in the form of pills invited in by their unwary victim.

This new rule provides nothing but benefits for the abortion industry. It shifts all of the burdens from the industry to its victims. The babies and the mothers bear all the trauma, all the risk, all the cost.

It’s a cost we will never be able to count. But the cost continues to mount.

With 40 percent of abortions happening chemically, 60 percent still happen surgically. Many of those are late-term abortions. And many late-term abortions involve children born alive. Organs from aborted children, living and dead provide the means for medical “research”.

While experiments on aborted children, many of them still living, are already ongoing in our cities and at universities, they have, until recently, been privately funded.

With the Biden Administration removing limits on experimentation involving unborn children, taxpayers will now be paying for atrocities many of us would call unimaginable.

HEADlines at Mustard Seed Sentinel

Those doing the research say it’s good.

They’ve usurped the place of God–deciding the functions and fates of people whose lives should be beyond their reach.

What’s happening today in America is reminiscent of H.G. Wells’s The Island of Dr. Moreau, the fictional account of a man who washes up on the shore of an island where a mad scientist is creating human/animal hybrids–creatures who are part-human, part-animal.

Wells illustrates how animalistic humans can be, how we can be as savage, perhaps more savage than the beasts of the forest.

In today’s reality, researchers are injecting monkey embryos with hESC (human embryonic stem cells) harvested from late-term unborn children, abortion victims. Fully developed, capable of feeling pain. The goal is to produce human organs within the monkeys for transplant.

Such evil, albeit with good intentions, goes deeper than we realize. Petra Wallenmeyer provides some insight:

“People on one side of this issue [favoring such research] argue this practice is necessary for scientific advancement, will benefit vast numbers of people by developing treatments for various diseases, and is ethical because no valuable human is being harmed in this research (emphasis mine). Therefore, federal and/or state funds should be allocated for such research (i.e., through grants or awards).”

Because of the rules change, funds are now available.

But notice the ethical gymnastics involved in justifying this practice. The end result may (or may not) be something good–“a scientific advancement”–to “benefit vast numbers of people.” This assessment dictates that some humans are deserving of beneficial treatment, i.e. the receipt of transplantable organs to be gathered from animal hosts. But for that to happen, others must be deemed not valuable, therefore deserving of dissection and distribution into vials so animal hosts can produce organs for transplant.

With such methodology, scientists have already developed mice with human skin.

While it goes on around us, few are discussing the ramifications of such “work”.

One of the few, Kristen Matthews of Rice University, explains the ethical questions that may arise from this research.

“Should it (the resulting human/animal living being) be regulated as human because it has a significant proportion of human cells in it? Or should it be regulated just as an animal? Or something else?” Matthews said. “At what point are you taking something and using it for organs when it actually is starting to think and have logic?”

Or at what point will it matter if science deems “it” to be a life void of value–whether human or otherwise? And the questions press us to further ask whether any creature labeled an animal might be entitled to greater protection than one labeled human–but considered to be of no “value”.

Science has derailed when some humans are valuable to save and others are only good for spare parts.

In such a world, every person potentially can become someone not of value, available to be sacrificed for the sake of another, more highly esteemed person.

Yet there remain many who will tell us it is all good.

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;

Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;

Who substitutes bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes

And clever in their own sight! Isaiah 5: 20-21~

Photo Credits: Quesada/Unsplash and Bruce/Unsplash

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

More Broken People Broken More

Steven Stayner was seven years old in 1972 when he was kidnapped and held for seven years before escaping with another victim.

The kidnapper had convinced Steven that his parents couldn’t afford to keep him. They didn’t want him anymore. Nobody would be looking for him, the man told the child.

Steven’s kidnapper sexually abused him over the years he held him captive–until Steven entered puberty and became too old to be attractive to the abuser who then sought out and snatched a new child, Timothy White, to fulfill his lusts.

Finally, after years of abuse and the arrival of his presumed replacement, Steven took off with Timothy to save him from the horrors Steven had endured.

The two boys could then be physically safe, but left to deal with the trauma they’d suffered.

How many Stevens and Timothys are out there now?

The National Center for Victims of Crime reports that 20 percent of girls (one out of five) and five percent of boys (one out of 20) are sexually abused in the US. And, like Steven and Timothy, children are most vulnerable between the ages of seven and 14.

So when we consider what happened to those two boys, that there are others suffering today as they did then, and that Steven essentially “aged out” of the abuse he suffered when puberty began, we should pause before we as a country decide to allow medical personnel to prescribe puberty-blocking drugs to children who are confused about their gender. We should more than pause. We should stop fast.

There are children with gender confusion. And there are children who may be convinced into confusion. That these are children should be enough for us to say no to puberty-blockers before adulthood. Young people will not truly know their own minds for some time. And puberty-blocking drugs eventually destroy fertility.

A decision that may be temporary at a younger age produces irreversible effects.

Many children endure Steven’s situation today. Abusers and exploiters can groom, indoctrinate, and intimidate these children into delaying or preventing their own growth and development. We cannot discern between children whose confusion begins within themselves and those whose abusers foist confusion upon them.

Steven’s kidnapper may not have stolen another child if he could have gotten the drugs for Steven that would have kept him physically in childhood–perhaps forever.

If you think that couldn’t happen, that wouldn’t happen, that doesn’t happen, you need to entertain the idea that it IS happening–and right within our own communities.

Mary Szoch from the Family Research Council writes:

“The [recently released] Planned Parenthood annual report also showed that in 2019, there were over 200 Planned Parenthood facilities in 31 states providing services for patients who identify as transgender. As it turns out, Planned Parenthood is the second largest provider of cross-sex hormones. In an interview with Abigail Shrier, a former Planned Parenthood employee described Planned Parenthood prescribing hormones to young clients with almost no examination of their underlying problems and practically no medical oversight.

“Planned Parenthood’s foray into providing cross-sex hormones is not shocking. For years, this organization has rejected basic truths about human beings, putting profits over people daily. During the 100 years of their existence, Planned Parenthood has denied the humanity and the right to life of the unborn child. Now, Planned Parenthood is denying the reality that XX chromosomes make a person a girl and XY chromosomes make a person a boy.”

This is the same Planned Parenthood that has been accused of not reporting child sex abuse and statutory rape–of ignoring the truth about abuse and exploitation–with a great deal of regularity.

Planned Parenthood meets people every day who suffer brokenness. But the huge corporate entity that PP has become is content to sweep the pieces of brokenness under a carpet of pretense. They pretend they are helping. But they enable abuse and exploitation. They help horror continue.

Steven Stayner was a broken young man when he escaped the clutches of his abuser. But before dying in an accident as a young adult, he married and had two children.

Steven Stayner tried to put broken pieces back together.

The Steven Stayners of today will lose a large chunk of their lives–and stay physically broken forever if we don’t stop fast about puberty-blocking hormones for children.

“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; ensure justice for those being crushed.” Proverbs 31:8, NLT

Photo Credit: Unsplash

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Prayers from Prison

“Abortion thwarts the most basic of paternal impulses – a man’s instinct to protect his children.” Thomas W. Strahan

There is a Planned Parenthood facility in Montgomery County, Texas, that was the special focus of prisoners in the local jail during a recent 40 Days for Life campaign.

Forty Days for Life was meeting outside the PP at that location from 7 am to 7 pm daily during these 40 days.

But one of the participants also volunteered in the chaplaincy program at the local jail. He went to see whether the inmates of faith would be willing to cover the other 12 hours of each day in prayer.

A few days later he “returned to the Wynne unit and the offender heading up the unit prayer vigil gave me the sign-up list.  It turned out to be 12 pages full of names.  As I examined the list in semi-shock and asked several questions, I realized that each man on the list had agreed to pray for one hour each day for the whole 40 days. For example, 16 men are praying every day from 7 PM – 8 PM for the whole 40 days. Again, 16 different men from 8 PM – 9 PM.  15 men signed up for 3 AM – 4 AM and so it goes. Every hour is covered with at least 10 men who signed up to pray.”

I don’t know how abortion touched the lives of each of these inmates.

But Donna Gardner knows that abortion has touched the lives of many men incarcerated today. Gardner became involved in ministry to post-abortive, incarcerated men after an inmate spoke to a prison ministry about his guilt over participating in abortions.

“The inmate was feeling haunted because he had pressured three different women he had gotten pregnant into having abortions. Surprised that a man was talking about abortions, Lawlor invited Gardner to speak at the annual prison ministry meeting in 2011.”

Gardner believed many prisoners suffered from PTSD because of their involvement in abortions. Her research and instincts found support when “an anonymous survey issued to the inmates at both of the prisons [Martin and Okeechobee in Florida] indicated that 90 percent had been involved in an abortion experience that hurt them. . . .”

She says, ” “It’s not what you think about men in prison. They longed for their children and somehow recognized that life went wrong after their abortion experience.” 

It doesn’t seem like a natural progression of logic that men would find themselves in prison as a result of abortions in their lives.

After all, these men had histories before and after their abortion experiences that may also have contributed to their incarceration.

It didn’t seem like a logical connection to the men either–at first. “Many men are unaware that their emotions are the direct result of an abortion experience,” according to Gardner.

Emotional wounding comes from all sorts of trauma. But with nearly 62 million abortions happening in the US since Roe v. Wade in 1973, it’s time to acknowledge that the wounding is widespread.

Gardner’s program includes multiple classes. Men learn how to deal with the pain of the past. They find healing. They experience, she says, the healing power of God.”

The men are building “this beautiful brotherhood of life . . . behind the wall.”

  Only God can form such a brotherhood. Only God

Photo Credit: Unsplash, Tom Blackout

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

A Stacked Deck Against the Champions of Life

“This is a case of shooting the proverbial messenger who had the courage to document the business model of the nation’s number one abortion vendor. It was clear during the hearing that Planned Parenthood did harvest and sell infant body parts. What a miscarriage of justice to punish those who documented the disgusting practices.” Kristen Hawkins~

A San Francisco jury has found that undercover journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt are liable for damages to Planned Parenthood. The two went undercover to show the world that PP was selling unborn children’s body parts for profit.

Daleiden and Merritt planned to base their defense on the Bill of Rights. But the presiding judge prohibited a first amendment defense.

“Unfortunately, we couldn’t get Judge Orrick to back off from his insistence that the jury be instructed that the First Amendment … does not state any kind of defense to the charges in this case,” said Thomas Brejcha, founder of the Thomas More Society, in an update on the case last week.

But perhaps the judge wasn’t the unbiased authority our judicial system calls for. After the trial, Daleiden said Judge Orrick “is actually the founder of a Planned Parenthood of Northern California clinic in San Francisco. . . . 

“We tried to get him recused from this case several times a couple of years ago, and each time he or his peers in the federal judicial system looked the other way and kept him on, and Judge Orrick basically predetermined the outcome of this case from the very beginning of the trial.”

The Daleiden/Merritt case is about punishing those who would speak the truth about what Planned Parenthood’s henchmen and women did (and may still do) to turn a few extra bucks. It’s about silencing any others who may dare to speak truth about what happens behind the doors of PP.

For Planned Parenthood, it’s also about trying to reverse a public relations disaster–the truth.

And it’s about money.

Of course, Daleiden and Merritt’s attorneys plan an appeal.

In the meantime, the Little Sisters of the Poor and 30 other religious non-profit organizations await a ruling from the US Supreme Court regarding their exemption from Obamacare requirements that they provide contraception and abortion for those whom they employ.

That despite an HHS rule that exempts them from the Obamacare mandate.

Yet Obamacare excluded some corporations and government entities (the United States military, VISA, Chevron, and Pepsi, and Exxon). Will those entities provide those services out of their own surpluses–or will the employees pay them out of pocket?

This fight is clearly not about universal coverage.

Maybe these fights over the filming of truth and the sanctity of life are not just about money.

Maybe they’re not just about abortion. Maybe they’re also about power.

J.D. Mullane says it’s not the first time Pennsylvania’s Attorney General Josh Shapiro (one of only two AG’s pursuing the Little Sisters) has gone after a “little guy.”

” The AG seems to like picking on little guys like the Little Sisters. Recall how he used the full force of the state to go after a mom-and-pop lawnmower repair biz in Lower Southampton in May, alerting the media with a full-blown press conference with state police, state consumer protection officials, and ‘victims’ who, frankly, should have sought relief at a small claims hearing in district court.”

The Little Sisters of the Poor run nursing homes for abandoned elderly in poverty. They care for those with no one else to care for them at the end of their lives. At the same time, they stand up for the smallest humans at the beginning of life.

In these court cases, religious and journalistic freedom sit in the crosshairs of a weapon aimed at the champions of life–to eradicate their voices and silent witness–to take away their freedom to speak and our freedom to know.

The stakes are high. Get into the game. It’s the only way to overcome a stacked deck.

Photo Credit: Jack Hamilton, Unsplash

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

When Jurors Cry

A civil trial is underway in California in federal court although you’d never know that from watching network news sources.

Imagine you are the plaintiff. You are suing someone for $16 million. They filmed you without your permission. You go to court.

When one of your employees testifies that the videos harmed her and her family, the defense attorney points out that she has contradicted sworn statements she made in a deposition earlier that the videos had done her no harm since she had said nothing wrong.

The employee is Deborah Nucatola an “abortion provider” who spoke openly on the video recorded by David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt–the defendants in the case–about how she would alter her abortion methods in order to obtain baby body parts to sell.

Nucatola’s contradiction pried open the door to finally let the jurors see what all the furor was about. Until then, the judge had refused to let the jury members see any of the videos in question.

The video shows Nucatola munching on a salad as she cavalierly describes managing the abortion process for maximum profit. She describes how abortion site staff would meet every morning to discuss which parts were on order for that day.

A court observer provided analysis of the jury’s reaction to the film.

“The jury was stunned. It was the first time during the three-week trial that they had seen any of the debated video. It was a game changer and a huge victory for the pro-life defendants. Planned Parenthood’s star witness [Nucatola] turned into a star witness for the defense.”

One court observer said, “tears could [be] seen on the faces of some members of the jury as they watched Nucatola speaking on video ‘about liver, lungs, hearts, muscle, and calvarium (baby heads) that were harvested from the bodies of aborted babies.'”

Daleiden and Merritt have asserted that their recorded conversations always occurred in public places where others would be able to overhear. Therefore, the expectation of privacy was low, and so the recordings do not violate California law.

Further, Daleiden had earlier testified in a preliminary hearing that, before releasing the videos on the internet, he had interacted with police and public officials ten times over a one year period.

David Daleiden had not intended to release the videos to the public. He went to law enforcement. Ten times.

In the meantime, California regulators have shut down the businesses that had been buying baby body parts (often from children born alive)–and two congressional committees are investigating.

But Planned Parenthood, Nucatola’s employer has circled the wagons and is shooting back. They had hoped the jury would not see the truth the videos reveal.

The truth that they were picking apart the bodies of the most innocent humans for profit.

Now the fate of Daleiden and Merritt is up to twelve people. Twelve people looking through their own tears.

Photo Credit: Pixabay

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

What It Means to Know the Truth

Does the one who shaped the ear not hear?
    The one who formed the eye not see?
Does the one who guides nations not rebuke?
    The one who teaches
man not have knowledge? Psalm 94: 9-10~

If they lose, it will cost them 10 more years. It’s already consumed much of their past three years.

David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt are enduring a preliminary hearing to precede their trial on 15 counts of illegally recording individuals who worked for or with Planned Parenthood (and perhaps still do).

Daleiden and Merritt, you may recall, went undercover, assumed false identities, and recorded conversations with people in the abortion industry.

Several people referred to as numbered “Doe”s (the court requires the concealment of their names) admitted to Daleiden that they were harvesting organs and manipulating the abortion process to preserve desired organs–including intact brains and hearts.

That means they were adjusting the process for their own gain rather than for the mothers’ safety. It also means that some of those abortions were illegal partial-birth abortions.

One person even admitted to Daleiden that, for their work, hearts couldn’t come from babies who died during the abortion process.

They had to come from living children.

“[A]biotech company CEO who worked with Planned Parenthood could not deny that they harvested aborted babies’ hearts while they were still beating

Liberty Counsel reports other atrocious acts–and that the US Department of Justice is investigating those involved with such abortions and body parts trafficking.

Of course, much money is at stake: the price for each abortion and the money paid for the harvested body parts.

But Daleiden and Merritt face jail time for violating a law that doesn’t apply to other journalists in California.

When the issue was just unfolding three years ago, the liberal Los Angeles Times said charges against the two were “disturbing”.

It’s disturbingly aggressive for [California Attorney General] Becerra to apply this criminal statute to people who were trying to influence a contested issue of public policy.” (Emphasis the Times)

And the Times makes an astonishing parallel.

“In similar cases, we have denounced moves to criminalize such behavior, especially in the case of animal welfare investigators who have gone undercover at slaughterhouses and other agricultural businesses to secretly record horrific and illegal abuses of animals. That work, too, is aimed at revealing wrongdoing and changing public policy.”

How can two people go on trial for “behavior” that is not yet “criminalize[d]”?

And while the Times didn’t agree with Daleiden and Merritt–and while they refuse to recognize the obvious wrongdoing of Planned Parenthood–the Times recognizes that seeking out wrongdoing and pursuing the change of public policy is part of what makes us and keeps us free.

Further, in this early op-ed, the Times referred to Daleiden’s videos as “edited”–Planned Parenthood’s assertion from the beginning.

Yet one Planned Parenthood “Doe”, while at first claiming that the videos had been altered “to make her say things she didn’t say,” last week in the preliminary hearing, admitted the videos had not been edited. (The Fifth Circuit Court had ruled earlier that the tapes were unaltered.)

So now we know that it’s all really as horrible as the videos show it to be.

Daleiden and Merritt are doing our nation a great service. They have put their lives on the line to reveal the truth.

It’s sad though that the Times can’t recognize the parallel between “horrific and illegal abuses of animals” and the same kind of abuse happening to the weakest and most innocent of human beings.

It’s sad that most of the mainstream media keep the volume turned way down on this story.

It’s sad that so many Americans just don’t know what goes on behind the closed doors of Planned Parenthood.

America needs to put a stop to this abuse of the unborn.

The One who formed the ears and eyes of these innocents will hear and see. The One who teaches us knows.

And now we know the truth. That makes us responsible to protect the innocents. That means we need to stop the horror.

Now.

Photo Credit: Unsplash

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

The Dehumanizing of America

In Ohio this week, a jury refused to convict a teen accused of killing her newborn to keep her secret that she had been pregnant.

In Ohio vs. Richardson, the defense argued that the baby was stillborn.

The prosecution argued that Ms. Richardson had searched Google for “how to get rid of a baby” before giving birth.

In her own back yard, Richardson buried the newborn girl, whom officials didn’t find for two months, ensuring that evidence of any violence against the child would be beyond reach.

A doctor, whom Richardson saw only once, testified that at her only prenatal appointment–when the doctor confirmed the pregnancy and determined she was in the eighth month–Richardson made it clear that she didn’t want a baby. The doctor urged her to tell her mother–to tell someone.

But she didn’t–not even while she was in labor.

Not even as she was delivering the little girl on the floor of her bathroom in the middle of the night.

Not even, supposedly, when the child was born not breathing.

And not even after she dug a hole in the yard and covered the baby in two inches of dirt.

Ultimately, the jury found her guilty of abuse of a corpse. She will serve no jail time.

As I watched part of the proceedings against Richardson on Courttv last week, I couldn’t help but wonder how much our liberal abortion laws have affected such cases. Did it go through the minds of jurors that, but for a few days, the child could have been disposed of without dragging a teen through a trial?

In many places in this nation, it would have been legal for Richardson to abort her daughter–even when she found out she was pregnant at eight months–even right before birth. And she would never have to tell her mother.

A.E. Samaan: “Humanity has overcome the food chain, and having surpassed all other predators, has now turned to a strange form of cannibalism: humanity preys upon itself. We cull our own herd. We murder our own children. This is what we call ‘progress’.”

In Ohio, a young woman thinks she has her life back. She won’t be going to jail for murder.

She is free.

Or is she?

Photo Credit: Pixabay

Nancy E. Head’s Restoring the Shattered is out in paperback! Get your copy here!

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you credit the author.

Disclosure of Material Connection:  I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the entities I have mentioned. Restoring the Shattered is published through Morgan James Publishing with whom I do share a material connection. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”