John Fea Watched Jim Bakker and David Barton So You Don’t Have To; About That Founders Bible

I watched the whole thing because I study this stuff, but John Fea did his readers a favor by summarizing a truly bizarre segment of the Jim Bakker Show (and that is saying something) with David Barton and Brad Cummings as guests. You should go read it.

I really can’t improve on Fea’s piece, but I want to highlight a few things. It is being reported around social media that David Barton predicted that a second civil war might happen if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Barton believes “liberal states” like California will secede. He believes that might trigger a war.

First, I seriously doubt this prophecy. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion regulation will return to the states and California will keep it legal while Alabama will outlaw it — at least for now. I believe there will be strong feelings and some might call for drastic actions, but I believe a return of regulation to the states has been anticipated for many years by both sides of the issue.

The second thing I want to notice here is the crew which cooked up this religious stew. According to Barton and Cummings (co-publisher of The Shack), they got together with Mormon Glenn Beck, seven mountain dominionist Lance Wallnau, and Rick Joyner to discuss where America is heading. I wonder which person’s god gave Joyner “the dream.”

Cummings then said that Joyner had a dream of America’s timeline from heaven’s perspective (because of course America is central in God’s mind). The bottom line is that Joyner said the time line ended with a second American civil war which this time will be “successful” in achieving equality. Let me quote what Fea had to say about this segment of the video:

Barton then affirms Joyner’s vision, and in doing so he says some accurate things about the failure of the founders to deliver on matters of racial equality.  This is a huge step for Barton. It led me to wonder where he was going this.  Where was the culture-war hook?

And then it happened.  At about the 4:50 mark Barton adds an additional layer to his interpretation of Joyner’s dream.  Rather than continuing with his mini-lecture on America’s failure in matters of race, he suggests that Joyner’s vision about a “Second American Revolution and Civil War” was actually about Roe v. Wade.  Barton says that we should expect a Civil War “over the abortion issue.”  If Roe v. Wade is overturned, California and other pro-choice states will secede from the Union and it will end in violence.

Eating this gnostic stew could be dangerous. Barton said he had to be careful how he said it, but there is no careful way to say that it may be God’s will to go to war over abortion. This is lunacy and every sane person should reject it publicly.

As I noted above, the issue will be decided by the states if Roe is overturned. However, even if states do attempt to secede, it is unthinkable to have a war where people die for a pro-life cause.

These people are so far removed from war that they don’t know what they are doing or who they are radicalizing. To them (especially Bakker and his end time food buckets), these sensationalized shows are ways to move products. Cummings and Barton are making the rounds right now to sell The Founders Bible as if it is a new thing. Rather, Barton and Cummings brought that out in 2012 after the failure of The Jefferson Lies.

About That Founders Bible

Barton and Cummings should do some soul searching on their messaging regarding slavery. In the first edition of The Founders Bible, they called slave holder and slavery advocate James Hammond of SC an American leader because he was an advocate of America as a Christian nation (see also here and here). Hammond was just alright then.

For more on historical errors in The Founders Bible, click here.

No, David Barton, Vaccines Don’t Contain Parts of Aborted Fetuses

David Barton (left); Eric Metaxas (right)

In addition to history, David Barton often tries his hand at distorting other subjects as well. On his Wallbuilders Live program (which is taped) yesterday, Barton said the following about vaccines:

This is a big fight that’s going on now with the vaccinations. There’s a whole bunch of people that do not like their kids participating in vaccinations for several reasons. One is that so many vaccinations now contain parts of aborted fetuses. So, just as a matter of conscience, “I don’t want that in my kid.”

That’s The Government Getting Involved

David:

And then there’s so many bad things happening from the newer vaccinations. We think we have to have a vaccination for everything now. If somebody gets sick, we’ve got to create a vaccination. And that’s just not accurate. That’s the government getting involved and it’s having bad consequences.

Apparently, Barton is a big fan of people getting sick and opposes medical progress. The only bad consequences come from people listening to nonsense like this and failing to immunize their children. Currently, measles cases are on the rise with more cases reported this year already than all of last year.

Pro-Life = Anti-Vax?

Associating the anti-vax propaganda with a pro-life position would be a ideological win for anti-vaxxers. That is why Barton’s distortion of the facts requires a response. If pro-life people think that actual fetal parts from abortions are in vaccines, some might refuse vaccinations on that basis.  What is the real situation?

In fact, vaccine methods were developed from cells derived from fetuses secured via therapeutic abortions before abortion was legal. The two cell lines in use today came from two subsequent abortions outside the U.S. Fetal cells allow the development of vaccine production indefinitely. As far as I can determine, the abortions were not conducted for the purpose of making vaccines, and no new abortions have taken place to create new vaccines. In other words, vaccines don’t encourage abortion, nor do vaccines use parts of a fetus in the vaccine (see this helpful summary for more information).

If vaccine use was a moral concern for a pro-life position, one would expect the Catholic Church to forbid vaccines. However, the conservative National Catholic Bioethics Center allows the use of vaccines developed from aborted fetuses.

Are there any vaccines for which there are no alternatives?

Unfortunately, at present there are no alternative vaccines available in the United States against rubella (German measles), varicella (chickenpox), and hepatitis A. All of these are grown in the cell lines WI-38 and/or MRC-5. (See note #7 of the statement of the Pontifical Academy for Life for a listing of vaccines and their source).

What do I do if there is no alternative to a vaccine produced from these cell lines?

One is morally free to use the vaccine regardless of its historical association with abortion. The reason is that the risk to public health, if one chooses not to vaccinate, outweighs the legitimate concern about the origins of the vaccine. This is especially important for parents, who have a moral obligation to protect the life and health of their children and those around them.

The NCBC reasons that the risk to the life and health of one’s own children as well as other people’s children make vaccination the greater good. The NCBC also acknowledges that there are no parts of aborted fetuses in the vaccines.

What does it mean when we say that these products are made in “descendent cells”?

Descendent cells are the medium in which these vaccines are prepared. The cell lines under consideration were begun using cells taken from one or more fetuses aborted almost 40 years ago. Since that time the cell lines have grown independently. It is important to note that descendent cells are not the cells of the aborted child. They never, themselves, formed a part of the victim’s body.

How does one know when a particular vaccine has an association with abortion?

The cell lines WI-38, MRC-5 and Walvax-2 are derived from tissue from aborted fetuses. Any product grown in these cell lines, therefore, has a distant association with abortion. The cells in these lines have gone through multiple divisions before they are used in vaccine manufacture. After manufacture, the vaccines are removed from the cell lines and purified. One cannot accurately say that the vaccines contain any of the cells from the original abortion.

Leaving aside the reasons for the original abortions (they may have been to safeguard the health of the mother), any current cells from these cell lines were never a part of the aborted fetus. There are no parts of a fetus in a vaccine.

I don’t know if Barton’s words were ignorance or a deliberate attempt to distort the facts in order to discourage vaccinations. However, it would be a very dangerous development if anti-vax propaganda became aligned with a  standard pro-life position. He should retract what he said.

Hat tip to RWW for pointing this out. 

In Second Planned Parenthood Sting Video, PP Executive Appears to Negotiate Tissue Prices (Full Video)

Full video at the end of the post.
In the mean time, here is the second sting video dropped by Center for Medical Progress which is designed to bring attention to Planned Parenthood’s policies and practices related to organ and tissue donation and/or sale.
[youtube]https://youtu.be/MjCs_gvImyw[/youtube]
I will reserve comment on this video until I see the uncut footage.
In the mean time, comments are welcome but name-calling and disrespectful comments will be deleted. Discuss the video, the full version, the ethics of secret recording, the ethics of donating and/or selling tissue and other issues. I don’t mind expressions of support for abortion or opposition to it if done without demonizing those who think differently.
Full video:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwAGsjoorvk[/youtube]

Crushed

That word haunted me as I watched the undercover video of Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services Deborah Nucatola describe the care taken by abortion providers when they decide where to crush a fetus.
Crush
Under different circumstances, a physician would take similar care not to crush the baby anywhere but in this case, care is taken to avoid damaging tissue which might have market value.
This is hard to process.
Nucatola says, “I’m going to basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
Kermit Gosnell missed an opportunity. He kept body parts in jars. Apparently, there is a market for them.
Of course, this video should lead to a legal and Congressional investigation. This video, even though heavily edited as Planned Parenthood points out in their rebuttal, raises enough questions and concerns that an investigation is warranted. Perhaps, we will find everything PP did was legal. Even if so, we may decide that some things should not be legal.
The video reminds us about what happens in an abortion. I remember interviewing Hillary Clinton’s Arkansas physician William Harrison who told me:

Anyone who has delivered as many babies as I have, and has seen hundreds of living and dead embryos and fetuses being spontaneously aborted as have I, knows exactly what we are doing when we provide an elective abortion for our patient. We are ending the life of an embryo or a fetus. Not the life of a person, but certainly a creature that might have become a person under other circumstances.

Crushed.
This video (see below) may lead to an investigation and discovery of wrongdoing. But it will almost certainly lead others to reflect about what happens in an abortion. I doubt any laws will change but I suspect some minds might.

The full version is here.
UPDATE: Planned Parenthood’s president Cecile Richards apologized for Dr. Nucatola’s “tone and statements.”

Ten Years of Blogging: League of the South President Says Being a White Supremacist is Just Fine

I write about neo-Confederate groups which I describe as organizations which have members who wish the south would have won the Civil War. Most also  can be described as white supremacist or segregationist groups. Their numbers are small but they may play a role in radicalizing peripheral members of their movement (including disturbed ones like Charleston shooter Dylann Roof) to acts of violence (and acknowledged by a League of the South leader here). I have followed the League of the South most closely because of the involvement of Michael Peroutka and his Institute on the Constitution. Peroutka is a former board member of the League and current senior instructor David Whitney is the chaplain of the MD/VA state branch.
The League was mentioned briefly in the Washington Post article on the South Carolina shootings. While the group doesn’t figure in the tragedy directly, their materials are easily available on the web and they have moved toward more public demonstrations.
In one representative post, the League’s president Michael Hill reflects on how good it is to be a white supremacist:

In what is probably one of the clearest statements of the white supremacist views of the League of the South, organization president Michael Hill penned an article calling on League members to relish the white supremacist views of their Southern heroes. Anne Arundel County Council candidate and proud League of the South member Michael Peroutka told a news conference audience that he repudiated racists in the League and would pray for them. Well, he does know Michael Hill amd so he has some repudiating and praying to do. After reading the essay, I think Hill would just laugh at Peroutka’s prayers.

Hill reminds his readers that historically Confederates and their sympathizers saw the South as “white man’s country.”

“in 1928, historian Ulrich B. Phillips called the South “a white man’s country.” [“The Central Theme of Southern History,” American Historical Review 34 (October 1928), p. 31.] From the beginning of their history in the early 17th century, Southerners had taken this statement as an unchallenged fact, and the presence of an alien race in their midst drove it home with added emphasis. Few if any Southerners, or for that matter Northerners, believed in racial equality at the time of the War for Southern Independence nor in the decades to follow. That Phillips made his non-controversial (at the time) statement more than six decades after the end of that war speaks volumes about the stubbornness of what is now vilified as “white supremacy.” Thus, I think it is safe to say that our Confederate ancestors and their descendants for at least two generations would qualify as “racists” and “white supremacists” by today’s definitions of the terms.”

That is just fine with Hill, and as it should be.

It is easy to imagine an impressionable young person adopting their ideology and then figuring out how to put it all into practice.  Read the rest of the post here.

Did Limited Access to Abortions Keep Kermit Gosnell in Business?

On one hand, the responses of Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) have not surprised me. Because they are advocacy groups, I expected them to defend abortion even as they applauded the verdicts.
On the other hand, I wondered if perhaps they would seek some common ground. Surely, everyone should be able to agree that killing babies after they are born should be condemned.  In addition, it seems that all concerned should welcome strict enforcement of laws regulating abortion as a means of finding and stopping any future Gosnell-like clinics.
Such reactions are not happening.
Planned Parenthood tweeted:

NARAL issued a statement missing any direct reference to the babies murdered by Gosnell. The statement begins by citing Ilyse Hogue, president of the group:

“Kermit Gosnell has been found guilty and will get what he deserves. Now, let’s make sure these women are vindicated by delivering what all women deserve: access to the full range of health services including safe, high-quality and legal abortion care.”

It seems to me that these statements confirm the worst fears of every pro-life advocate. Whether deliberate or not, by failing to even mention the murder of infants, these groups communicate a callous disregard for the lives of these children.
Apparently hoping to use the verdict to advance the cause, a NARAL tweet blames pro-life sentiment for Gosnell’s crimes:

NARAL spinners find numbers they like, but regarding both regulation and funding, they miss the facts of this case. Regarding funding, sources existed to pay for abortions at Gosnell’s clinic or for options other than his clinic. Delaware Pro-Choice Medical Fund paid for abortions at Gosnell’s clinic as well as at other abortion providers around the Philadelphia area. In fact, this funding source and others helped keep Gosnell going.
In 2007, three representatives from the Delaware Pro-Choice Medical Fund toured Gosnell’s Womens Medical Society in West Philadelphia. They saw nothing wrong. Even though the representatives were greeted by two people who called themselves doctors, the funders did not check credentials and continued to pay for abortions at Gosnell’s house of horrors.
When Gosnell’s crimes were first exposed in 2011, pro-choice advocates blamed the Hyde Amendment for driving women to low-cost providers like Gosnell. At that time, I responded that Gosnell had access to funding for the women who were seeking his services. As noted, various medical funds paid for abortions at his clinic. As this rate sheet demonstrates, it appears he billed Medicaid for allowed abortions. I suspect he stretched the truth on some of those billings.
As is now obvious, none of these funding sources provided adequate oversight. The funding was there but the horrors continued.
Despite the smoke screen from NARAL, one central issue in this case, whether one is pro-life or pro-choice, is the appalling lack of regulation of a so-called medical clinic.
The issue here is oversight, or rather the lack of it, and let’s not forget why that oversight was lacking. Kenneth Brody, Department of Health lawyer said there was consideration given to restarting abortion clinic regulation in 1999. However, the state did not resume inspections. Why? Brody told the grand jury:

…there was a concern that if they did routine inspections, that they may find a lot of these facilities didn’t meet [the standards for getting patients out by stretcher or wheelchair in an emergency], and then there would be less abortion facilities, less access to women to have an abortion.

Worries over access kept Gosnell unregulated. Generally, pro-choice advocacy groups oppose laws which tighten oversight on clinics. Why should those who operate properly fear rational regulation? Only those acting in the darkness fear the light. For the sake of women and babies, let the light shine.
 

Kermit Gosnell Found Guilty of Murder and Other Charges

A variety of sources are reporting what is emerging from Philadelphia. The first source I saw was this tweet from J.D. Mullane, reporter for the Bucks County Courier Times who is in the court room.

Here is the AP story which provides more details.
According to Mullane, he is guilty of most of the other 200-plus counts against him.

When this story first broke, I posted extensively about it, including some original reporting:
Gruesome abortion/murder case in Philadelphia (1/19/11)
Abortion clinic regulation scandal in PA (1/20/11)
PA Senate to hold hearings on failure of abortion clinic regulation (1/21/11)
PA Abortion clinic inspections stopped to avoid barriers to abortion(1/21/11)
Did the Hyde Amendment keep Kermit Gosnell in business? (1/25/11)
National Abortion Federation quietly removes reference to Gosnell’s Delaware clinic (1/29/11)
National abortion funding network member visited notorious Philadelphia abortion clinic (1/31/11)
National Abortion Federation suspends Delaware abortion clinic(1/31/11)

Media Blackout on the Kermit Gosnell Case May Be Lifting

The local Philadelphia press has been covering the case, but today Yahoo news carried a lengthy reprint of a story on Gosnell’s trial first published by The Atlantic. Slate’s Dave Weigel also wrote about the case and the lack of coverage. #Gosnell is now trending on Twitter. In what could be titled, “Confessions of a Pro-Choice Journalist,” add Daily Beast to that list. Now WaPo…
I was glad to see these articles which pull no punches in reporting the case of Gosnell who performed abortions in violation of numerous health codes and is accused of overseeing a killing field of women and newborn babies. The story is not for the weak but needs to be told.
When this story first broke, I posted extensively about it, including some original reporting:
Gruesome abortion/murder case in Philadelphia (1/19/11)
Abortion clinic regulation scandal in PA (1/20/11)
PA Senate to hold hearings on failure of abortion clinic regulation (1/21/11)
PA Abortion clinic inspections stopped to avoid barriers to abortion (1/21/11)
Did the Hyde Amendment keep Kermit Gosnell in business? (1/25/11)
National Abortion Federation quietly removes reference to Gosnell’s Delaware clinic (1/29/11)
National abortion funding network member visited notorious Philadelphia abortion clinic (1/31/11)
National Abortion Federation suspends Delaware abortion clinic (1/31/11)
UPDATE: Anderson Cooper’s AC360 show covered the Gosnell trial tonight.

Jake Tapper too…

Oversight Hearings on DHHS Contraception Rule Broadcast Now (VIDEO)

Interested in the DHHS controversy over contraception?

Currently, hearings are being held with representatives of the Catholic church, and the Southern Baptists. A Jewish Rabbi is also testifying. From the website:

Chairman Issa Hearing Preview Statement

Americans of all faiths have a right to practice their religion free from the fear of persecution or harassment from their government. Our nation’s founders believed this and enshrined religious freedom into the First Amendment to the Constitution.

While some Americans may not feel that government mandates forcing them to pay for contraception are an infringement on their religious beliefs, others consider it to be an assault against their freedom of conscience. A government policy that encroaches on the conscientious objections of religious groups concerns all Americans who value the protections of the First Amendment. Today, the committee will hear testimony from leaders of different faiths. They are concerned that government, under this Administration, is encroaching on their First Amendment rights.

The Administration’s actions have forced us to confront a more fundamental question about the proper role of government in our lives.

This hearing is about basic question of religious freedom, and whether or not protection will be afforded to religious institutions who wish to follow their conscience in refusing to pay for products they find morally objectionable. I look forward to hearing from today’s witnesses.

NJ abortion clinic mentioned in Planned Parenthood sting has troubled history

In the Planned Parenthood expose video revealed today, clinic manager Amy Woodruff (who has now lost her job) refers to the Metropolitan Medical Associates (the actor on the video says Metropolitan Medical Association but this appears to be the same place) as a place where teens can get an abortion with minimal oversight and no identification.

After being down for at least a couple of days, the MMA website is now working. One may also find a link to the clinic at NewJerseyabortion.com, a portal that also links to Women’s Choice Medical Center in Hackensack. The Women’s Choice Medical Center is a smaller clinic than MMA and does abortions for women who are under 14 weeks along. MMA does abortions for women under 24 weeks, according to a source at the clinic.

Recently, the organization has had some medical and regulatory problems. In 2007, the clinic was temporarily shut down due to a failed inspection of the facility following the death of a patient. The patient died as the result of a failed abortion. The inspection revealed dirty and unsafe conditions.

After the incident was reported [the death of the patient], state inspectors found dirty forceps, rusty crochet hooks used to remove IUDs and a quarter-inch of dark red “dirt and debris” under an examining table in the Engle Street clinic.

The state let the facility reopen in March 2007.

Regarding the claim on the Planned Parenthood video that MMA is an easier place for a teen to get an abortion, I note that the front page of the clinic website promotes the fact that one does not need parental consent in NJ. Most of the pictures seem to be of young teens. On the what to expect page, I could find nothing spelling out if there are any age restrictions. There was also an online discount coupon with a restriction on one use per person.