by Lawrence Fox
It has been postulated that
we differ with U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama simply because the President’s
policies are pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, anti-capitalist, anti-religious, and
anti-gun ownership. I suppose the gist
of their argument is that credible opposition to Obama’s policies
Our Fearless Leader |
American National Anthem.
President Barack Hussein Obama is a pure ideologue, a person whose whole way of thinking is rooted in a Marxist materialist ideal without any introspection or debate. President Barack Hussein Obama, while being idolized at Notre Dame University in May 2009 (see The Shame of Notre Dame University), stated that “Faith to be honest and sincere requires an element of doubt; the absence of total assent of the mind.” Barack was not talking about the concept of theological discovery, otherwise known as “faith seeking understanding.” No, Barack was pitting his materialistic ideology against a Catholic teaching formed by the marriage of Faith and Reason, which maintains that human life begins at conception.
I cannot recollect a single speech
given by Barack Hussein Obama, which expressed an element of sincere dialogue (an
openness to listen to someone else). His
entourage of friends, appointments to political positions, and his policies
simply demonstrate a leftist myopia.
For example, of all the people he could have
chosen in the United States as the head of the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS),
Barack picked an excommunicated Catholic, the former Kansas Governor Kathleen
Sebelius. The governor was privately excommunicated for her public advocacy for
“abortion on demand;” and for her personal protection of the infamous partial
birth abortionist and psychopath George Tiller.
The Catholic Conference of
Bishops never got a clue from the Sebelius appointment that Obama was telling
them to stick their moral fortitude up their ordained “you know what.” In other words, his speech at Notre Dame was
completely insincere as it related to honest dialogue on “life issues.” The
majority of Americans, who do not support abortion, were not credible
constituents in Obama’s mind. “Women in order to be free and successful need
ready access to contraception and abortion,” so argued the President.
Many pro-life Catholics were
shocked that the same Catholic Conference of Bishops began to engage the
President when he proposed the government takeover of health care. Many Catholic bishops advocated for universal
coverage even for those individuals who were in the country illegally, as long
as the government respected the moral conscience of all healthcare providers.
They did not understand that
President Barack Hussein Obama was a pure ideologue, inflexibly attached to his
perfect Marxist society. Obama listened to none of it. He denuded -- by
executive order -- the “Medical Conscience Clause” previously signed by President
George W. Bush. Further, HHS Mandates within Obama Care demand that every
institution’s medical plan – regardless of religious sentiments - participate
in the funding of abortion, contraception, the morning-after pill, and
sterilization. Again, he basically said,
“stick your moral fortitude up your…”
The supposed Constitutional
Law Student Barack Obama demonstrated either a complete ignorance of the 1st
Amendment to the Constitution (Government shall not prevent the free exercise
of religion) or he was arguing that elements of the U.S. Constitution are an impediment
to something he believed to be universally greater, i.e. a Communist utopia.
With the appointment of Kathleen Sebelius, President
Barack Obama articulated the ideological notion that the injection of saline
solution into a mother’s womb for the purpose of burning flesh off the unborn
child was a form of health care. And he further articulated the notion that the
horrific practice known as partial-birth abortion -- jamming scissors in the
brain of a struggling partly born child -- was an integral part of health care.
And to think that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development – sponsored by
the Catholic Conference of Bishops – funded the community organizing activities
of the once-youthful Barack Hussein Obama.
When President Barack Hussein
Obama selected Judge Sonia Maria Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United
States, he argued “Sonia as a Hispanic and Female (redundant fact) would bring
increased empathy towards minorities as a member of the Supreme Court.” For an
alleged constitutional lawyer, the argument was sophomoric. What about a
demonstrated ability to apply the original intent of the U.S. Constitution as a
means of bringing justice to all segments of society? For Barack, everything is
a class struggle.
Karl Marx argued that the
institutions which stood against the Communist utopia (the material kingdom of
God as they called it) are Capitalism, The Church, and the Institution of Marriage. All
three had
to be exposed, ridiculed, and forcibly removed from the public square. Once
humanity no longer thought in terms of private ownership, life and ethics, and
the traditional family as an integral part of self-identify, then humanity
would be able to accept the ideal that the State is god – the arbiter of
wealth, justice, human dignity and self-identity.
Karl Marx |
This Marxist ideology
(dialectical materialism) is foundational with every position advocated by progressives
(abortion on demand, universal health care, sodomy rights, earth first, equal
pay for equal job, expanded roles for women in combat, condom and needle distribution,
drug legalization, domestic partnership, etc.).
Polemics and policies advocating the government re-distribution of
personal wealth, government universal mandated health care, ethics void of
religious debate, and committed sodomy as a type of marriage are substantially Marxist
in nature.
While running for President
of the United States, candidate Barack was asked by a reporter: “When do you
think human life begins?” Candidate Barack responded: “The question is above my
pay grade.” In other words, there existed a void in Candidate Barack’s thought,
making it impossible for him to rationally engage in one of the most important philosophical,
ethical, scientific, and religious issues of the day. In essence, there existed in Barack’s mind not
an intuition, nor an opinion, nor an article of faith, nor personal knowledge
nor understanding worth defending on the matter. “Questions about the origins of human life
are theological and all too personal to debate in the public square.” (Barack
Obama)
And so religious persons may
only have one valid position on life. And it must be ambivalent, relative,
subjective, and personal even when the government dictates that they pay for it
as with the HHS Mandate.
To assume that a man who
attended both Columbia and Harvard University with a supposed emphasis in constitutional
law never discussed or debated the matter is incredible. Candidate Barack Obama
was either being disingenuous or his education was myopically free of any dialogue.
In contrast, Candidate John
McCain was asked the same question, “When does human life begin?” He answered,
“At the moment of conception.” President William Jefferson Clinton, who vetoed
two partial birth abortion bans, was asked the same question. “Human life
(personhood) begins when the physical body emerges from the woman and takes its
first breath.”
His argument was based upon a
personal exegesis of Genesis 2:7: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of
the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living soul.” The maniacal press should
have had a field day with his response. The president was publicly admitting
that he made decisions on abortion based upon his personal biblical exegesis.
So much for the sacred leftist cow known as “Separation of Faith from Politics.”
On a similar note, Vice
President Joseph Biden stated during the 2012 vice presidential debate, “I
personally believe that human life begins at conception and I believe I do not
have the right to impose my belief upon others.” The maniacal press then had the right to ask,
“Is it correct to conclude – based upon your remarks -- that every law and tax that
you voted on was completely void of personal religious and moral conviction?”
And so candidate Barack -- whose mind is void of substance on the subject
of human conception, gestation and personhood -- becomes president of the
United States. Two days after being elected, Obama repealed by Executive Order,
the Mexico City Accord, which restricted the use of taxpayer money to fund abortion
activities around the world. For a man with no opinion on when human life
began, why was he compelled to make us pay for the murder of the world’s unborn
children?
President Obama then reversed
a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. He said taxpayers
should fund increased embryonic stems cell research -- the art of bringing
about a new human life and then destroying it for medical research – because science
and not religious dialogue should be basis for such “medical” activities.
As every fool knows science makes no ethical
judgments. The development of the atomic bomb was pure
science. The assembly of gas chambers in Europe was pure science. The Jack
Kevorkian machine of death is pure science.
The ability to bring about a conception using In Vitro Fertilization procedures
and then bring about the child’s death is pure
science. Every human action has
a moral consequence (good or bad). But what would one expect from a man who
possesses no personal intuition, opinion, faith, personal knowledge nor
understanding on the subject of human conception, gestation and personhood.
Dr. Jack Kevorkian's Death Machine |
Deliberately obscured behind
the stem cell fiasco is the simple fact that embryonic stem cell research has
been conducted worldwide and in the United States for many years through private
funding and with no discernible cures or promises.
The financially broke State
of California passed a billion dollar bond measure to fund embryonic stem cell
research when private monies began drying up. Private donators recognized they
were throwing money into a black hole with no long-term results in sight. California realized the number of viable
embryos was disappearing. Young girls were being recruited and paid to ingest
drugs for the purpose of forcibly ovulating so that eggs could be harvested and
then inseminated in a petri-dish for ongoing medical research. What used to be
“Girls Gone Wild” was now “Ovaries Gone Wild.” But ongoing adult and cord blood
stem cell research has brought about discernible cures without any ethical
quandaries.
So President Barack Obama -- who
possesses not an intuition, an opinion, an article of faith, personal knowledge
nor understanding on the matter of human conception -- immediately upon
becoming president rules that American taxpayers must fund abortion and
embryonic stem cell research. These are the actions of a pure Marxist Ideologue.
Obama supported embryonic
stem research because of his support for abortion. To support the one gives
credence to the other. Adult stem cell research was already working. This form
of medical science is notably morally, ethically, and scientifically sound.
Anyone familiar with human transplants knows that the introduction of organs
foreign to the host body requires the steady injection of anti-rejection drugs.
Treatment using the host’s own adult stem cells or organs developed by their
own adult stem cells does not require the use of anti-rejection drugs. Embryonic
stem cells are not your own cells. They are the cells of someone else.
On the campaign trail, Barack
mused, "When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important
prevention is education, which should include -- abstinence education and
teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not something
casual. But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know,
information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters, 9 years
old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and
morals. But if they make a mistake, I
don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at
the age of 16. You know, so it doesn't make sense to not give them
information."
So let us see. Barack will
teach his daughters about some form of chastity, and about contraception and
condoms, which do not prevent the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases.
The horrific truth is that the human papillomavirus – a sexually transmitted
disease and a major contributor to cervical cancer – is not prevented during sex by the use of contraception,
the dental dam, nor the condom.
Barack (the father)
essentially stated: “Daughters, if you are not going to be chaste, then at
least pretend like you are wise and foolish at the same time.” The ideologue can
neither guide his own daughters on purity nor provide the honest-to-God facts
about the contraction of STDs. He leaves that up to Planned Parenthood, which
profits from abortion. And what leads to abortion, promiscuity and false
information about contraception.
Barack identified his two
daughters as miracles. So let us see, he
is saying his daughters are miracles (an expression of personal faith) but his potential
unplanned grandchildren are “instruments of punishment.”
Language is a powerful tool
especially when used in propaganda. Former Illinois Senator Obama stated that
unwanted children are mistakes and instruments of punishment. Hidden within the
mumbo jumbo about sex education was the staple ideological diatribe: “Every
child should be a wanted child and therefore abortion must be available and
un-restricted.” This is the same argument the leftist Illinois senator and presidential
candidate John Bayard Anderson made while debating candidate Ronald Reagan in
the 1980 elections. Ronald Reagan adroitly responded, “Those who argue that
position were obviously not aborted.”
During his first campaign, Barack
told an audience that Middle America simply “clings to their guns and
religion.” This gave rise to the expression the “bitter clingers” to mischaracterize
the right. It seems Barack was upset that Middle America was not buying his message
of “hope” and “change.”
How is a Marxist ideologue
formed?
Imagine for a moment being dumped
by a black father and then dumped by an anti-American white mother into the
arms of a grandmother – whom you later identify as a “typical white person.” Your formative years are fairly traumatic. Your
pain and search for identify become a fertile field upon which Marxism and Class
Struggle (jihad) are planted and take root. There is no doctrine of forgiveness
in Marxism and the concept of Class Struggle. There is only submission to the
State. Your mother takes you to a foreign land which possesses a language that also
speaks of struggle (jihad) and submission (Islam). Only this time submission refers
to a personage which commands its prophet to wage war (jihad) against infidels where
ever he finds them. The ideological drum beat is well rooted and reaching out.
Capitalism is evil. Christianity is evil. America is evil and the white man
will never understand you. Truth is dialectical always changing and always
moving towards a materialistic solution to all human suffering and forms of
imagined injustice. The ends justify the means since there is no forgiveness. Justice
is not that which supports virtue but a hammer which roots out inequality all
over the land. Your ideology reaches maturity within various prestigious halls
of higher education. You find your groove in the company you keep including: unrepentant
terrorists and members of the Weather Underground, 20 plus years in an Afro-centered
liberation church. You nurture relationships with family members that have ties
with the Muslim Brotherhood. You have among your confidants a person who
identifies the mass murderer Mao Tse Tung as a favorite political philosopher. In
essence you surround yourself with people who share a common ideology that
truth is dialectical always changing and always moving towards a materialistic
solution to all human suffering and forms of imagined injustice. It is a justice not rooted in virtue, but a hammer which
roots out inequality all over the land. You are elected President of the United
States and you tell the American people that through you, America will be
completely transformed.
As such, I differ with
President Barack Hussein Obama not because of this or that issue but because
every action and word that he breathes flows from a destructive ideology. He is
a Marxist Ideologue after all.
I can't verify all the claims you make. I checked out one and it turned out to be false. So, I can't really trust any of your other claims. Kathleen Sebelius has not been excommunicated.
ReplyDeleteBill, I understand your confusion. She has not been officially excommunicated by Rome, but she has been told by her bishop that she cannot receive Holy Communion. It amounts to the same thing. Also anyone who procures an abortion or advocates for abortion on demand is automatically excommunicated. That is Church teaching.
ReplyDelete"In 2009, Archbishop Raymond Burke, prefect for the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court of the Catholic Church, also advised Sebelius that she should refrain from communion. This was in reaction, at least in part, to her veto as governor of proposed laws that would have limited abortions in Kansas. “After pastoral admonition, she obstinately persists in serious sin,” said Archbishop Burke." see http://cal-catholic.com/wordpress/2012/11/19/faces-of-the-american-holocaust-kathleen-sebelius/
But you should be able to find other references to this event now that I've given you the context.
If she was not "officially excommunicated" then it is misleading to put that adjective before her name. The rest of the article is just hate mongering against the President. He is not a Marxist. Besides, one cannot rightfully say that everything that Marx said is wrong. His intentions were right. He just underestimated human nature, which admittedly is counteracted by religion both in a good way and a bad way.
ReplyDeleteThe truth of the matter is that much of what Obama stands for goes against the teachings of the Catholic Church and it is the teachings that are wrong, not the President.
I assure you you don't understand the meaning of excommunicate. Her excommunication would not be handled by Rome especially since her bishop took care of the matter. That is who we obey, the bishop of our diocese and not the US Catholic Conferences of Bishops. They have no authority. Her bishop told her she could not go to communion. That is the meaning of excommunicate. You cannot communicate -- you cannot receive communion. In the early church the way you recognized a neighboring diocese as being authentically Catholic is you brought the Eucharist from your diocese to their diocese. If it was not accepted, they were saying you are not in union with Rome, or vice versa. Some dioceses became Arian or adopted other heresies and whether your bishop would "communicate" with their bishop determined whether they were Catholic or heretics.
ReplyDeleteBut that is beside the issue. Barack Obama had no respect for the Catholic Church and its teachings or he would not have appointment Kathleen Sebelius. She is excommunicated, officially by her own bishop, and he is union with Rome.
So you like Marx. I'm not surprised. God bless you. Susan Fox
" In May 2008, Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann said that Kathleen Sebelius should stop receiving communion because of her support for abortion rights, and that she should not again take it unless she publicly stated that she opposed abortion rights"
ReplyDeleteIf that is what you consider "excommunicated" then fine. Have it your way. Karl Marx has been referred to as the father of modern sociology. All I am saying is that he cannot be totally dismissed just because some of his philosophies were misapplied or taken to extremes. I didn't say I like him. It doesn't matter whether I like him or not. He has made his mark on the modern world. Some of it good, some of it bad.
Bill: I guess what to say to you after reading your tirade against Barack Obama is that somewhere deep down inside you there exist a bubble of hate, you should maybe do some soul searching, also maybe some deep mental thinking on the latest Pope Francis discussions that is published on this web site and do some deep soul searching on what you concentrate your thinking on, maybe a different pathway exploring love and all its positive attributes instead of such heavy negative thinkings that result in tearing down structures instead of building them up.
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI apologize if you think Bill does not like Barack Obama. I can't speak for him, but from what I have heard of his comments he actually favors a number of positions that Barack espouses. Bill is a commentator on this blog. The person you are trying to castigate is probably my husband Lawrence Fox, who is blog co-author. Lawrence does not hate Barack Obama. He hates what Barack stands for -- his positions. He detests his positions. Why does he detest his positions? It is his charity. Lawrence sees the pain and suffering other people must go through because people in authority hold such detestable positions. That is the hate you are sensing. It is a hatred for that type of thinking. We would blame Satan for originating the thinking that we hate, and we would not hold an ignorant person responsible for his positions. Barack had a very difficult childhood. We do pray for him. It is up to God to judge. A person -- like say Hitler -- certainly did horrible things, but we hope at the last minute he converted. We hope everyone repents before the last second. We like St. Francis, who tried to save Satan from hell, and Abraham who interceded for Sodom and Gomorrah.
God bless you for your charitable remark and reminder that our only enemy is the evil one. Susan Fox P.S. thank you for liking my article on the Pope.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteIt may be more prudent to ask the obvious:
Identify what in the story is evidence of hate?
The content of the story is objective and demonstrates the fact that an ideologue was voted into the White House who is promoting the culture of death.
Lawrence Fox