Note: To get the context of this post it is necessary to read through the Introduction in Part 1 of this series. The basis for these two posts is the book Rachel Weeping: The Case Against Abortion, by James T. Burtchaell. 3. Discharge of responsibility and brutality from average people According to Burtchaell, A third theme that rises repeatedly from the Holocaust record is the denial of responsibility…The first way of putting it is for each person to account for his killing work by pointing out that he acted under law, having submitted his judgment to those empowered to make decisions of state. (pg. 157) Or, as it has come to be known, “I was just following orders.” As one defense attorney explained at Nuremberg: If the experiment is ordered by the state, this moral responsibility of experimenter towards the experimental subject relates to the way in which the experiment is performed, not to the experiment itself. (pgs. 157, 158) Even the commandant of Auschwitz who oversaw the most efficient extermination method of the Holocaust and one of history’s most gruesome, shrugged it off on Himmler: I did not reflect on it at the time: I had been given an order, and I had to carry it out. Whether this mass extermination of the Jews was necessary of not was something on which I could not allow myself to form an opinion, for I lacked the necessary breadth of view. (pg. 158) More recently at least one supporter of abortion has moved beyond being concerned about the responsibility for the act. She forthrightly states: “Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal.” Emphasis mine. Sounds like “Life unworthy of life” to me. Though some promoters of abortion rights now accept moral responsibility, this is not universally acknowledged nor was it always the case. The former president of the National Abortion Rights Action League, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, wrote in 1974: Certainly the medical profession itself cannot shoulder the burden of this matter. The phrase, ‘between a woman and her physician’ is an empty one since the physician is only the instrument of her decision, and has not special knowledge of the moral dilemma or the ethical agony involved in the decision. (pg. 211) The doctor does not shoulder the burden? Is he or she not the one who inserts the vacuum, dismembers the child and evacuates the womb? Nathanson eventually did shoulder the blame and left the abortion industry. Medical doctors were not the only ones who disavowed responsibility. Psychiatrists did as well. Kenneth R. Niswander, professor and chairman of Obstetrics and Gynecology at ht eUniversity of California, Davis, insisted that there were virtually no psychiatric grounds for abortion…’If society wants abortion to be easier, it should have the courage to campaign for it honestly and not exploit the psychiatrist who, I contend, has no factual basis for being associated with the problem.’ (pgs. 213, 214) Shifting of blame is not the only issue. How far can it be removed when so many people have become links in the chain of death? Daniel Goldhagen’s 1997 international bestseller Hitler’s Willing Executioners (though perhaps too broad in assessing motivation) showed overwhelming evidence that the extermination of European Jews involved the energies and enthusiasm of tens of thousands of ordinary Germans. Noted scholar Hannah Arendt concluded “heinous evil generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths. Instead, these were the actions ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal.” She coined the now famous phrase: “the banality of evil.” How evil can banality become? From Rachel Weeping: There was Ilse Koch who had lampshades made of prisoner’s tattooed skin and Irma Grese of Auschwitz and Belsen, who was said to have bound together the legs of prisoners in labor so that mother and child would perish together….And there was Dr. Sigmund Rascher [who] was also detailed to Dachau, where he conducted aviator clothing tests by freezing prisoners to death, and trials of parachute function by suffocating others in high-altitude chambers, and experiments on blood coagulants by shooting prisoners and noting how long it required for them to bleed to death.” (pgs. 165, 166) The perversity of the demonic Third Reich is an interwoven tale of family men who were doting parents, lovers of their wives, and kind to children. These, who were the very devil of Hell to six-million Jews and as many as 7 million others, could be angels when dealing with their own. Perhaps one reason (besides overuse) comparisons to the Nazis tend to be rejected is the ash of the crematory covers so much of our memory. We tend to forget these “willing executioners,” to use Goldhagen’s term, could be our neighbors and co-workers. Indeed, in Nazi Germany neighbors and co-workers were exactly that. But, if there is a better word to describe the diabolical efficiency of the mass slaughter of babies than “brutality” I would lean toward “savagery.” More than 55M children killed in the U.S. alone in the last 40 years while we simultaneously herald and ignore the documentary assertion that “life” is an “inalienable right”? It is well known that a certain number of attempted abortions result in live births each year. The Alan Guttmacher Institute, no friend to the pro-life movement, estimates the number around 400. This is not a new phenomenon; it has been happening since Roe. As Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York moved into high-volume abortion work (“pregnancy interruption service”), the director of nurses reported: ‘Most nurses find the destruction of life the very antithesis of what they believe…Nurses in delivery rooms had been accustomed to every conceivable effort to save babies, even those of one to three pounds, and they found that sometimes they were ‘salting out’ bigger babies than those they had worked to save. (pg. 215) In case you do not recognized it, “salting out” is a euphemism
The Boy Scouts of America and a few questions
For the first time in its history the Boy Scouts of America is considering allowing gay scout masters and members. This comes on the heels of a doubling down on the issue just a few months ago. Attempts to break the Scouts’ no-gay policy are not new, nor were they waning. If anything they were gaining steam as corporate sponsors like Merck and UPS had begun to bail. WND’s David Kupelian believes concern over finances is the driving factor in the decision. My involvement with the Scouts is limited. I was in Cub Scouts for about a year. We met at Tony Wingate’s house down the street. He had a room full of styrofoam building blocks which were used to pummel one poor cub at the end of each meeting. Our “den mothers” were hopelessly outmatched. I have known a few Eagle Scouts over the years including my uncle and a young man for whom I was honored to write a recommendation. Without question the Scouts have helped to create good citizens, teach skills, and allow older men to influence younger men. In many instances churches have been able to influence scout troops with believers involved at leadership levels. My critique, it should be noted, is not toward the BSA’s decision as much as toward how followers of Christ might understand it. Some hold the BSA has always stood for biblical principles but was being forced to abandon them due to political correctness. The health of the BSA was already being challenged via lawsuits, and as revelations of pedophiles in the Scouts have become more broadly known. From WND again In fact, the examination of sex abuse in Scouting reveals a long-standing paradox for the nation’s most revered youth group: For 80 years the Boy Scouts of America have given boys some of the best experiences of their lives, but for 80 years some men have used the Boy Scouts of America to have sexual relations with those boys. “That’s been an issue since the Boy Scouts began,” said James Tarr, the nation’s chief Scout executive from 1979 through 1984. More than 1,100 Scouts reported being molested by Scout workers over a single 19 year period. Reflecting on these facts raises a few questions: Where were the “end-of-the-world” pronouncements when the Boy Scouts of America’s “perversion files” were made public last year? Why is it morally problematic for the Scouts to welcome gays, but not problematic for them to hide a multi-decade history of keeping molestation out of the public eye? If the two are equally problematic, why not equally speedy and earnest responses to each? Why is it problematic for churches to host a gay-friendly organization, but not problematic when the organization was “only” hiding child abuse for nearly a century? Are we seeing the reaction of people for whom gay-rights is the last domino standing, after which there are no more culture wars to fight? Is their sense of loss greater than their sense of truth? Why have Scout leaders not already been called to repentance by evangelical leaders? Why do we not emphasize that the Boy Scouts are now–and always have been–a moral organization focused on good citizenship not a gospel organization focused on discipleship? Do we even recognize the two are not the same? Why are some fighting to save moralism, rather than drawing a distinction between moralism and the saving grace of God? Why do evangelical leaders not acknowledge the words “morally straight” are ambiguous, open to interpretation, malleable, and not scripturally moored? Are some evangelical leaders not blurring the truth when they gloss over this reality: the Scouts’ generic “God” is not necessarily the God of the Bible? Which God is it that both evangelicals and Mormons can affirm without qualification? How is one God the same for Buddhists, followers of Native American religions, Muslims, Jews, Christians, those who define their own spirituality, Baha’i, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, and more all of whom are included in the BSA’s definition of “God”? If the Scouts are a Judeo-Christian organization why are more troops hosted by the Mormons than any other other single group? Does our reaction to this announcement reveal confusion over biblical Christianity and civil religion? Why would most Christians have no problem with this statement, “We have all the American values: the values of hard work, the values of integrity, the values of fairness and respect,” even though uttered by Bill Marriott explaining why his faith (Mormonism) does not interfere with his business? Are we more concerned about the loss of Americanism than finding an authentic expression of a Christ-bought church? If we are more concerned with an authentic expression of the church, why are we so afraid of a faltering culture since the church has usually shone brightest in the rubble? Will we ever grasp that “reclaiming America” is not the same as “revival”? Will we ever grasp there is no biblical mandate–or even a suggestion–that “reclaiming America” is a call on God’s people? Have we misinterpreted the fall of Christendom as the work of Satan, rather than considering it could be God destroying our most grand, safe, and preferred idol?
Newsnippets, January 26, 2013
Newsnippets, January 26, 2013 From Reuters: Obama appointments unconstitutional, Executive recess appointment power limited In a surprisingly broad ruling, the three-judge panel rejected not only the NLRB appointments but any made while the Senate is in session but on a break. That could limit recess appointments to only a few weeks a year. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also ruled that recess appointments could only be used for positions that become vacant while the Senate is in recess. “If the decision stands, it would be a significant reduction of the president’s recess power,” said John Elwood, a Washington lawyer who was deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Counsel from 2005 through 2009. “This is a big, big decision for executive power,” Elwood said. “It is one of the most important decisions in decades.” From TED: Model Cameron Russell talks about the dangers of image at TED “I always just say I was scouted, but that means nothing,” Russell says in her talk. “The real way I became a model is that I won a genetic lottery, and I am a recipient of a legacy. For the past few centuries, we have defined beauty not just as health and youth and symmetry that we’re biologically programmed to admire, but also as tall, slender figures with femininity and white skin. This is a legacy that was built for me, and that I’ve been cashing in on.” From The Art of War: Has traditional Islam lost the war for Muslim youth? (Use Google translator for article) Everything that is happening in the Islamic community in Russia makes us think that we really are on the edge of the cliff. Russia’s geopolitical enemies are trying to use the Muslim factor as a method to destabilize the situation in the Russian regions. From The Atlantic: Jaw dropping photos from a fire in Chicago From The Guardian: Hacker group Anonymous takes down US Sentencing Commission website Hacking collective threatens to make public classified material and that when Aaron Swartz killed himself ‘a line was crossed’ Hacktivist group Anonymous said Saturday it had hijacked the website of the US Sentencing Commission in a brazen act of cyber-revenge for the death of internet freedom advocate Aaron Swartz. Swartz killed himself just over two weeks ago as he faced trial for hacking an online collection of academic journals linked to MIT with the intent of releasing millions of research papers on to the internet. From Relevant Magazine: Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg to throw party for NJ governor Chris Christie Well, here’s an unexpected collision of worlds. Republican governor, headstrong firebrand and national treasure Chris Christie is going to have a fundraiser hosted by none other than Mark Zuckerberg, the world’s most powerful bro.
Female Marine captain speaks out on equality [VIDEO]
Captain Katie Petronio is a Marine Corps officer with years of experience including tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. She is against women serving in infantry positions in the Marines, saying, “As a combat-experienced Marine officer, and a female, I am here to tell you that we are not all created equal, and attempting to place females in the infantry will not improve the Marine Corps as the Nation’s force-in-readiness or improve our national security.” [Emphasis added.] Writing in the Marine Corps Gazette (the Professional Journal of the U.S. Marines) Petronio questions the source of this call to equality since, “I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming that their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality.” She provides some perspective: Shockingly, this isn’t even a congressional agenda. This issue is being pushed by several groups, one of which is a small committee of civilians appointed by the Secretary of Defense called the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service (DACOWITS). Their mission is to advise the Department of Defense (DoD) on recommendations, as well as matters of policy, pertaining to the well-being of women in the Armed Services from recruiting to employment. Members are selected based on their prior military experience or experience with women’s workforce issues. I certainly applaud and appreciate DACOWITS’ mission; however, as it pertains to the issue of women in the infantry, it’s very surprising to see that none of the committee members are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change. I say this because, at the end of the day, it’s the active duty servicemember who will ultimately deal with the results of their initiatives, not those on the outside looking in. [Emphasis added.] In other words, this is a political agenda having neither the best interests of women, the Marine Corps or the country in view. Read Petronio’s full article, “Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal.” Read my related post Women given better odds of dying in the military.
Women given better odds of dying in the military
It seems all the government has to do to make some people happy is ensure that more women will be given better chances to die. From the NYT: Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is lifting the military’s ban on women in combat, which will open up hundreds of thousands of additional front-line jobs to them, senior defense officials said on Wednesday. The groundbreaking decision overturns a 1994 Pentagon rule that restricts women from artillery, armor, infantry and other such combat roles, even though in reality women have found themselves in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, where more than 20,000 have served. As of last year, more than 800 women had been wounded in the two wars and more than 130 had died. Some feminists cannot wait for for women to die in the name of equality: “This is an historic step for equality and for recognizing the role women have, and will continue to play, in the defense of our nation,” said Democratic Senator Patty Murray from Washington, the outgoing head of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. I am sorry. The purpose of the military is to demonstrate equality? I thought it is to provide for the national defense. Another is content for women to swim–or sink–so long as no one keeps them from it: Susan Farrell, who served on a Department of Defense advisory committee that recommended that more jobs be opened to women, lauded the decision as representing “a chance for women to sink or swim on their own merits. That’s all women have ever asked for: a chance to be as patriotic, as giving of themselves, as the men are.” It sounds like Susan is ready for more women to die. WSJ notes this is merely the last in an ongoing progression: Twenty years ago, Congress lifted the ban on women flying in attack aircraft, and now the Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force all have women pilots—although women don’t serve as special-operations pilots. Female officers now serve on large submarines, and the Navy has plans to add female enlisted personnel on those vessels. The Navy also will allow women to serve on smaller classes of submarines. I am not of the opinion women cannot serve or serve with distinction in the military. It is clear they have and can. I do, however, question the wisdom of putting females, who are, in almost all cases physically weaker than men, in hand-to-hand combat situations. One struggles to fathom repeated instances in which a platoon of females, each carrying 40 pounds of equipment and facing an equal number of enemy males in close combat, emerging victorious time and again. Certainly my egalitarian friends may cry foul; some may even call me “sexist” or “chauvinistic.” That is fine. I, however, do not consider it a remnant of faltering patriarchy that I am moved, even called, to protect my family, especially my wife and daughters. If we meet a gun or knife wielding mugger on the street I will put myself between them and the attacker until my lifeless body is prone on the sidewalk. Contrariwise, if I happen to be walking down the sidewalk with a female who, owing to a need to demonstrate equality, inserts herself between the mugger and me, I might consider myself freed and run to live another day. Hey, equality is equality is it not? If she wants to be dead is that not “giving of herself”? Should I also be lifeless so “equality” is clearly demonstrated? Yes, I delve into hyperbole. A little. Perhaps the logical, non-exaggerated conclusion should, in the end, be considered by those who want to be “equal.” Equal must be equal in the glory and the blood, in the show and the shame. As the military considers sweeping changes for women in combat, the ongoing epidemic of rape in all branches of the service continues almost unabated. Repeated promises of “zero tolerance” are decreasingly believable with each new scandal. Reports the L.A. Times: As of this week, 32 basic training instructors at Lackland are under investigation stemming from sexual misconduct allegations and 59 alleged victims have been identified by the base. A report in mid-November found that a fractured command culture and “leadership gap” at Lackland helped fuel the scandal. Six basic training instructors at the base have been convicted of sexual misconduct dating to 2008 and nine trials are scheduled. Staff Sgt. Eddy C. Soto faces a possible life sentence at trial next week for the alleged rape of a female trainee. Gen. Mark Welsh III, the Air Force chief of staff, told the House Armed Services Committee, Obscene images, songs and stories “will not be accepted as part of our culture.” Uh, huh. Tell us more, General. The truth is only by devious intent or a full scale ground war could more women die in combat than currently are raped in the United States military. Estimates place the total number of female rape victims from all branches of the military at half-a-million. As in civilian life, many rapes are not reported and many that are reported are not prosecuted. Until early last year a significant number of victims had to report their attack to the very person who had raped them. That is not so much like civilian life. (Oh, and by the way, what better way to get rid of a potential witness to rape than to re-assign her to the front lines. Bible students might remember a guy named Uriah.) Although some men are raped as well–usually by heterosexuals–women bear the brunt. If you have not yet seen The Invisible War you simply must take the time to watch it. There are several places to rent or buy it online. It may be available on Netflix now. The trailer is below.
What my daughter taught me about God’s timing, by Sonya Duren
From a note Sonya posted to Facebook today: Today our oldest daughter, Beth, turns 28. As I was reflecting on how our lives changed so drastically when we went from young, carefree, newly-married couple to “what do we do with this little being who is depending on us to get it right” I couldn’t help but think of a memory that is forever burned in my heart and mind as I sat in an oncologist’s office. Marty and I had only been married about three months when we found out I was pregnant. To say we were a little surprised would be an understatement. We certainly wanted children and had already planned our lives out to include several. We really believed God wanted me to quit my job and stay home with them as long as they needed me home. At the time, I had a pretty decent job (for the 1980s) but we certainly weren’t rolling in the dough since both of our salaries were needed to pay our expenses. Our plans were that we would save as much as we could for a couple of years, buy a small house and begin our family. Being pregnant after three months of marriage didn’t go along with “the plan.” Maybe God hadn’t gotten the memo about “the plan.” Nevertheless, we went on to have our beautiful, happy, precious little girl and were thrilled beyond measure. I did quit my job and Marty received a much better job that he began on my last day of work at my job. (Isn’t God funny like that? :) No we didn’t have a lot of money. Yes, we were still in our small apartment. And, we were so happy that God didn’t get the memo about “the plan.” Fast-forward a little over two years later: After several months of unexplained weight-loss, night sweats, and bone-wearying fatigue, I was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Disease. For those of you who don’t know, this is a type of cancer that is usually associated with lymphoma. I was diagnosed at stage 2. (Walking through that minefield of emotions of being diagnosed with cancer when you are in your 20’s with a two-year old is another story for another day.) After some exploratory surgery and having my spleen removed, I was to begin 10 weeks of radiation therapy. Sitting in the doctor’s office that day going over what my life was going to be like for the next few months as I went through radiation and the recovery, my oncologist dropped the “Oh, and by the way, if you get pregnant during this time, we will strongly advise you to have an abortion due to the amount of radiation you will be receiving and the danger of letting your cancer continue if you choose to stop the treatment due to your pregnancy.” I don’t think I heard much else after that statement. My mind kept going back to “the plan.” Our plan of waiting two years. Our plan of having all of our ducks in a row before we ventured forward. Our plan that really didn’t include much faith in a God who has promised to provide for his children. Sometimes you get a life lesson in a very unusual way that stays with you for the rest of your life. That day I learned something huge about God’s timing. We can’t see what is ahead. We can’t possibly know what is better for our life than God. The blessings He has for us are immense. What may seem poor timing on our part, is perfect when God is behind it. And isn’t it just like God to use a baby to teach us this? Feel free to share your stories in the comments. Sonya will reading and interacting there today.
Parallels between abortion and the Holocaust, Part 1
In the early days of the Internet, before what we now know as social media, people exchanged ideas in forums and Usenet groups. After observing many such discussions an attorney named Mike Godwin postulated an argument that has become one of my favorite things to spring from the entire online enterprise. He said, “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” In other words, the longer an online discussion goes–regardless of topic or scope–someone at some point will bring up a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis. This statement is now known as Godwin’s Law, sometimes called Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies. The problem Godwin highlights is most comparisons are glib involving neither a valid historical nor philosophical basis.
Text and Video of President Obama’s Second Inaugural Address
The full text of President Barack Obama’s second inaugural address: Vice President Biden, Mr. Chief Justice, members of the United States Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens: Each time we gather to inaugurate a President we bear witness to the enduring strength of our Constitution. We affirm the promise of our democracy. We recall that what binds this nation together is not the colors of our skin or the tenets of our faith or the origins of our names. What makes us exceptional — what makes us American — is our allegiance to an idea articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Today we continue a never-ending journey to bridge the meaning of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they’ve never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth. (Applause.) The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed. And for more than two hundred years, we have. Through blood drawn by lash and blood drawn by sword, we learned that no union founded on the principles of liberty and equality could survive half-slave and half-free. We made ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together. Together, we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers. Together, we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. Together, we resolved that a great nation must care for the vulnerable, and protect its people from life’s worst hazards and misfortune. Through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumbed to the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone. Our celebration of initiative and enterprise, our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility, these are constants in our character. But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation and one people. (Applause.) This generation of Americans has been tested by crises that steeled our resolve and proved our resilience. A decade of war is now ending. (Applause.) An economic recovery has begun. (Applause.) America’s possibilities are limitless, for we possess all the qualities that this world without boundaries demands: youth and drive; diversity and openness; an endless capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention. My fellow Americans, we are made for this moment, and we will seize it — so long as we seize it together. (Applause.) For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it. (Applause.) We believe that America’s prosperity must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class. We know that America thrives when every person can find independence and pride in their work; when the wages of honest labor liberate families from the brink of hardship. We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is an American; she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own. (Applause.) We understand that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time. So we must harness new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, reach higher. But while the means will change, our purpose endures: a nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American. That is what this moment requires. That is what will give real meaning to our creed. We, the people, still believe that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity. We must make the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit. But we reject the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future. (Applause.) For we remember the lessons of our past, when twilight years were spent in poverty and parents of a child with a disability had nowhere to turn. We do not believe that in this country freedom is reserved for the lucky, or happiness for the few. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us at any time may face a job loss, or a sudden illness, or a home swept away in a terrible storm. The commitments we make to each other through Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, these things do not sap our initiative, they strengthen us. (Applause.) They do not make us a nation of takers; they free
Remember the media types who published gun owners names? [VIDEO]
Remember the recent dust-up over the news outlet posting gun-owner names and addresses online? They took the map offline. Here’s a summary from Reuters: A New York newspaper pulled the names and addresses of thousands of gun permit holders from its website on Friday, ending a fierce battle over the data published after the Connecticut elementary school massacre. The Journal News, which serves suburbs just north of New York City in Westchester and Rockland counties, cited in part New York’s new gun control law, which allows permit holders to request confidentiality, for its decision to take the data down. The newspaper, owned by the Gannett Co, published a map with the names and addresses of permit holders in the areas it serves last month in the aftermath of the massacre of 20 children and six adults at the school in Newtown, Connecticut. The publication created an uproar among gun enthusiasts, and the Journal News felt threatened enough by the outcry over the map to hire a private security company to protect its employees. State gun-owner groups had called for an advertising boycott until the newspaper removed the information from its website. [Emphasis mine.] This week the organization Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership reported on a Project Veritas. Members took to the streets–literally–to demonstrate the depths of media hypocrisy on this issue. Acting under the organizational name Citizens Against Senseless Violence, they contacted select media members and politicians (including Attorney General Eric Holder) offering free yard signs. The signs (pictured) read “This Home Is Proudly Gun Free.” If this is legit, and it appears to be, you will see on this video as clear an example of duplicitous behavior as you are ever likely to witness. Worth all of your 10 or so minutes.
The list of Obama’s 23 executive orders on gun control
I’m still looking for the one that calls for the confiscation of all legal weapons. (See a brief explanation on the purpose and use of executive orders historically.) It’s also important to remember not everything the president writes is an executive order. From Yahoo News: 1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system. 2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. 3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. 4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks. 5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun. 6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers. 7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. 8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission). 9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations. 10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement. 11. Nominate an ATF director. 12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations. 13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. 14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. 15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies. 16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes. 17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities. 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers. 19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education. 20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover. 21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges. 22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations. 23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health. There is more in the list about mental health than gun ownership. I thought that’s what gun owners were hoping to see. Honestly, I do not know why gun-control advocates are not more upset about these EOs than 2nd amendment defenders. They seem pretty benign to me. The same is indicated by Forbes: It does not appear that any of the executive orders would have any impact on the guns people currently own-or would like to purchase- and that all proposals regarding limiting the availability of assault weapons or large ammunition magazines will be proposed for Congressional action. As such, any potential effort to create a constitutional crisis—or the leveling of charges that the White House has overstepped its executive authority—would hold no validity. C’mon folks, even Slate realizes how wigged out this all became. From political reporter David Weigel: And also: Me. For a while on Wednesday, I referred to Obama’s “executive orders,” printing the list of actions in full, but muffing the terminology. Why did all of us do that? You know, I think the pre-game panic about the very idea of Obama “signing executive orders” — I think that got into our heads. The result, ironically, was that a lot of people learned that Obama did something very scary — 23 ORDERs, above and beyond the will of Congress! — that he didn’t do, at all. If nominating an ATF director was done by “an executive order,” the Senate wouldn’t have to confirm him. So which of the lazy journalists got it wrongest? One point goes to Carl Azus, for referring incoherently to “laws that don’t have to be approved by Congress.” Another to Brooke Baldwin, who addes the drama of Obama “signing” these 23 orders as children watched, even though CNN had a camera on Obama as he didn’t do that. But the Marvel No-Prize surely goes to Cavuto, for his scary count-off of “23, 23!” orders that suggest a “president out of control.” Honesty should have led Weigel to the conclusion most of us have already reached: his profession is overflowing with those both lazy and out of control. It is clear enough to the rest of the world, it should be clear to them.