Seeing Both Sides, Seeing One Side

Because one side isn’t supposed to exist, in the eyes of Our Betters.

I respect and enjoy Coppedge’s work. But I wonder if he understands the nature of the war we’re in.

Still, I recommend knowing what the enemy thinks: we should not share their blindness, and — unlike them — willful ignorance does not help our cause.

From Big Science Tried to Stop Overturning Roe, by David F. Coppedge. After the article, he comments:

—<Quote begins>—

Please understand: when exploring the creation vs evolution issue, one must realize that the pro-Darwin side is extremely biased to the left. Big Science with its Darwin-only, Darwin-only (DODO) policy presents a leftist, secularist view of the world. That’s evident by looking at these “scientific” articles concerning abortion. It’s also true of any other policy issue that divides Americans: Big Science always takes the far left position on everything.

Now, you may think, well, aren’t we biased, too? But consider: we always give links to their articles. They never give links to any creation sites. At CEH you can read both sides freely, and make up your own mind who has the most scientifically-supported, reasonable position. If you trust Big Science and Big Media, you will only get their talking points. And so, yes, in a sense, we like to give out evidence for creation that the media is censoring. So who is “pro-choice” when it comes to information? Go ahead; read the best titans of academic jargon. Feel free. We’re not afraid of it. Why are they so afraid to even mention the best arguments for creation or even for intelligent design? Why can’t they honestly answer the arguments of pro-lifers? What does that tell you about the strength of their positions?

Abortion is just one of the fruits of the secular worldview of scientific materialism that celebrates Darwinian evolution. It teaches that no creation or plan brought about human existence. It teaches that we are no different from the lower animals. It teaches that a baby in the womb is just a clump of cells that can be removed if it gets in the way of convenience. Some evolutionists have taught (unscientifically) that a fetus is a lower life form, reliving its march of progress from worm to fish to mammal to human. Evolutionism leads inevitably to the view that existence is all about power, not truth: power to the woman over her baby, power to Big Science over its critics, and power to the media to support the Leftist regime.

We believe that truth is its own defense, and sunshine is the best disinfectant.

—<Quote ends>—

“Why are they so afraid to even mention the best arguments for creation or even for intelligent design? Why can’t they honestly answer the arguments of pro-lifers? What does that tell you about the strength of their positions?”

It tells us that their arguments of the Left are paper-tigers, waiting to be blown over.

Assuming that Christians are done with cringing before Scary Words by Certified Professionals — Leftists certified by other Leftists — and are willing to actually WORK to break the intensely Anti-Christian chain of lies, and fog of deceit.

From Evolution News:

Darwinist Turns Math Cop: Track 1 and Track 2

Jason Rosenhouse insists that intelligent design proponents obey his rules, but happily flouts them himself.

As usual, Darwinian elitists insist on one set of rigid rules for his enemies, but another far more flexible set of rules for himself.

It’s hard work, chasing down and cutting off all these lies. But there is a reward at the end of it, the triumph of truth.

Darwinian Racism, Ape-Human Hybrids, and White Nationalists

From Evolution News: Listen: How Darwinian Materialism Poisoned Mainstream Ethics

—<Quote begins>—

A new ID the Future episode again features Darwinian Racism author and historian Richard Weikart and radio host Hank Hanegraaff exploring the pernicious impact Charles Darwin and Darwinism have had on modern ethics. Ideas laid out in Darwin’s The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man fueled scientific racism in the United States and Nazi Germany, Weikart says, and undergird the ideas of contemporary white nationalists, who tend to be virulently anti-Christian and pro-Darwin.

We can take some comfort from the fact that white nationalists are a fringe movement and that most evolutionists today are anti-racist, but Weikart notes that Darwinian materialism has poisoned mainstream ethics in another way, by devaluing humans generally. This is why someone as mainstream as Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins felt free to publicly encourage experimentation in ape-human hybrids, work that Dawkins hopes will undermine the idea that humans are anything special. When the biblical idea that humans are made in the image of God is replaced with the idea that we are just a collocation of atoms spit out by a blind evolutionary process, all manner of evil against humans becomes far easier to justify.

Fortunately the scientific evidence has turned against evolutionary theory. To learn more about that, check out the short videos at Discovery Science, beginning with the series Science Uprising. Download the podcast or listen to it here.

—<Quote ends>—

The dying Darwinian era is dying.

But, as White Nationalists remain unrepentant on their drive to dehumanize men (and women, and children) with “inferior genetics”, however defined, Christians will have to remain vigilant and hostile regarding whatever repulsive evil they’re planning.

Note that the entire point of Darwinism is to attack and destroy any law systems and any appeal beyond the control of the Right Sort of White Men.

Christians in response have remained as passive, complicit, and cravenly cowardly as you please, so long as their own comforts are secure.

This is evil on the part of Christians.

God demands the protection of all human life, and respect for His handiwork, for the Image of God. He demands this in His Law, and it is the duty of obedient Christians to not only obey this Law himself, but to teach the nations to do so as well.

The Kingdom of God must increase, in time and on earth.

Pushing Too Hard: Euthanasia and Abortion

From Evolution News: How Euthanasia Activists Laid the Groundwork for Overturning Roe by Wesley J. Smith

—<Quote begins>—

Back in the ’90s, the assisted-suicide movement tried to convince the Supreme Court to impose a Roe v. Wade–style decision for their cause that would circumvent the democratic process by imposing doctor-hastened death as a constitutional right. (Full disclosure: I wrote and filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court against that effort as a lawyer for the International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force, now the Patients Rights Council.) The effort failed, with the Supreme Court ruling 9–0 in Glucksberg v. Washington (1997) that there is no right to be found in the United States Constitution to assisted suicide.

An Unanticipated Turn

Now, in a turn that could not have been anticipated at the time, Glucksberg provided the primary precedent for striking down Roe as bad constitutional law. From Dobbs v. Jackson (my emphasis):

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely — the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” Washington v. Glucksberg. . .


In deciding whether a right falls into either of these categories, the Court has long asked whether the right is “deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition” and whether it is essential to our Nation’s “scheme of ordered liberty.” . . . Glucksberg . . . And in conducting this inquiry, we have engaged in a careful analysis of the history of the right at issue. . . .

Thus, in Glucksberg, which held that the Due Process Clause does not confer a right to assisted suicide, the Court surveyed more than 700 years of “Anglo-American common law tradition,” 521 U. S., at 711, and made clear that a fundamental right must be “objectively, deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.

Analyzing the history of the unenumerated claim of a right to abortion, the majority found it wholly wanting.

As the Court cautioned in Glucksberg, “[w]e must . . . exercise the utmost care whenever we are asked to break new ground in this field, lest the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause be subtly transformed into the policy preferences of the Members of this Court.” 521 U.S., at 720 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Although a pre-quickening abortion was not itself considered homicide, it does not follow that abortion was permissible at common law—much less that abortion was a legal right. Cf. Glucksberg, 521 U.S., at 713 (removal of “common law’s harsh sanctions did not represent an acceptance of suicide”).

And Kaboom!

The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973. The Court in Roe could have said of abortion exactly what Glucksberg said of assisted suicide: “Attitudes toward [abortion] have changed since Bracton, but our laws have consistently condemned, and continue to prohibit, [that practice].” 521 U.S., at 719.

So, in a hubristic attempt to force assisted suicide on the nation in the same way abortion had been, euthanasia activists instead laid the groundwork for Roe’s obliteration. The irony is quite remarkable.

Cross-posted at The Corner.

—<Quote ends>—

We Christians need to place the foundation of our laws on Moses and Jesus: relying on traditions is not wise.

That’s going to take a lot of work, generations of work, before Jesus is publicly recognized as Lord over the nation — ALL nations — in human law, as well as both actual fact and Biblical doctrine.

We might as well start now, in raising our children with a mind for God’s justice in time and on earth, a drive to make it happen, and acting under the Holy Spirit to reach God’s goals in a God-pleasing manner.

A One-Off, or a New Trend?

(A modified excerpt from the other blog)

It’s rather surprising that the Forever-Losers stopped losing. At least for today: June 24, 2022.

Whenever this is a one-off, or the start of a new trend, remains to be seen.

They would be wise to publicly thank God, consider what they did right for a change, and ponder how to build upon their victory.

They would also be wise not to rely on the powers and decisions of a 5-4 (or even 7-2) ruling of the judges. Pinning all of your hopes on the will of a few powerful Nobles & Mighty Men is an unwise long-term strategy.

More is needed. Much more.

The task remains the same. We do not seek to just make abortion illegal; we seek to make it unthinkable. So we preach the Gospel. We preach justice. We preach mercy. We preach the Cross of Jesus Christ.

Roe Is Overturned: What It Means And Doesn’t Mean.
John Reasnor, Lamb’s Reign

But also…

Private Profits, Communal Losses

While the Federal Reserve Act explicitly requires that Federal Reserve member banks be assessed to cover operating losses, the Federal Reserve Board’s stated plan is to monetize these losses and still report a positive capital and surplus position through the use of “creative accounting” entries not seen since the 1980s savings and loan crisis. Those that recall that historical period know that relying on “regulatory accounting standards” to create phantom capital cushions did not turn out well. In the Fed’s case, failure is not an issue because the Fed can literally print as much money as needed to pay its expenses and member bank dividends. Monetizing operating losses will however enrich the Fed member banks that are supposed to be bearing the loss, while the public at large will face higher interest rates, higher unemployment, reduced growth, and the inflationary consequences of the new money printed to cover Fed losses. The Fed seems to be hoping that nobody notices.

Who Owns Federal Reserve Losses and How Will they Impact Monetary Policy?
By Paul H. Kupiec & Alex J. Pollock

A Deep and Powerful Evil

I am confident that God loathes the FED even more than I do.

But the problem is, the FED is an ancient near-core American evil.

Younger than Darwinism in the US, true. Also, younger than slavery and treaty-busting with American Indians.

But it is a really powerful evil, deeply rooted in American soil now.

Getting rid of it will cause great pain, and face great opposition from exceptionally powerful people and groups. But, I suspect, less opposition than the (statistically inevitable) bust-up of the welfare state.

It would be a very sweet move, if the breakup of the FED – “the welfare system/cartel for the senior banks” – can be forced as a package deal, tied to the end of the rest of the welfare state.

Why should the poor be the ONLY ones to suffer loss?

Righting an Old Wrong

Calvin and Luther sided with the Nobles, when the peasantry started to take “equality before the law” seriously.1

It’s time we corrected their error, and open the door to blessings that have been waiting for five centuries to fall on our heads.

1 See Blaming Moses: Rejection of Mosaic Civil Law During the Early Reformation by Joel McDurmon for details.

Cutting It Off

From Quora:

—<Quote begins>—

Jude Bennett Studied Political Science at Los Angeles Valley College (Graduated 1978)

How many children must be gunned down for you to start considering gun control?

Ban swimming pools-to many drownings, ban cars-to many accidents, ban marriage-to many divorces, ban fast-food & junk food-to many overweight people. It is the people not the gun, take responsibility.

—<Quote ends>—

Progressives – and all the other collectivists – are not known for their love and concern for children.

  • Not for their lives (see: abortion).
  • Not for their intelligence (see: public school education)
  • Not for their sexuality, maturity, or happiness (see: sexual mutilation)
    • Yes, they actually do encourage cutting off a little boys’ penis “if he feels like a girl” And if he commits suicide later at 24, because of a perverse choice the Betters encouraged when he was 6 – after taking him away from his parents, of course?

      “Not my problem”.

And of course, we know how the USSR was the first modern nation to legalize abortion, and how China disposed of its future because of the raw delight the Central Government had in cramming its fist through the teeth of million of poor women, and in tearing apart/drowning millions of infants before the eyes of their mothers.

(Yes, I’m talking about you, Chairman Deng.)

To see how Progressives love children, watch their actions.

(Especially children of the wrong skin shade: see Margaret Sanger, eugenist, for details. Or Kermit Gosnell.)

But Progressives do enjoy making pious “for the sake of the children” noises, if it means stripping Inferiors of both the right and the ability of self-defence, of placing the same value on their lives as God does.

Far better to place the disarmed public under the care of the armed police. Who have no legal requirement to protect the public, and will place Officer Safety above the lives of small children, never mind the Mundanes.

Christians should be suspicious, when Secular governments show a deep concern for their safety… and think that the very best way to protect them is to disarm them.

Unarmed Christians fare poorly under Secularist governments. Or Islamic governments, for that matter. For remarkably similar reasons.

“Thou shall have no god above US!”
declares Our Betters,
“And your life has the value that WE set on it!”

Canada: Triple Jabbed Leads in COVID-19 Deaths

From Trudeau Panics as Fully Vaccinated account for 9 in every 10 COVID-19 Deaths in Canada over the past month; 4 in every 5 of which were Triple Jabbed by The Expose:

—<Quote begins>—

…over the past month, 9 in every 10 Covid-19 deaths in Canada have been among the fully vaccinated, and 4 in every 5 of those deaths were among the triple jabbed.

The Government of Canada produces a daily Covid-19 Epidemiology update, in which they sporadically provide new data on Covid-19 cases, hospitalisations and deaths as and when they feel like it.

The following table is taken from their 21st June update, found here, and shows the number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths by vaccination status up to June 5th 2022 –


Unfortunately, the Government of Canada is attempting to deceive the public by providing a tally of cases, hospitalisations and deaths that stretches all the way back to December 14th 2020. By doing this they’re able to include a huge wave that occurred in January 2021 when just 0.3% of the population of Canada was considered fully vaccinated.

But thanks to the ‘Wayback Machine‘, we’re able to look at previously published reports by the Government of Canada and do the simple math ourselves to work out the current situation surrounding Covid-19 by vaccination status.

The following table is taken from a report published late May 2022, and it shows the number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths by vaccination status between 14th Dec 2020 and 1st May 2022 –


Now, all we have to do is carry out simple subtraction to deduce who is accounting for the most recent wave of Covid-19 cases, hospitalisations, and deaths in Canada, and these are the results…

Covid-19 Cases

The following chart shows the number of Covid-19 cases across the whole of Canada by vaccination status between 1st May and 5th June 2022 –

Canada recorded 127,262 Covid-19 cases between 1st May and 5th June 2022, and 118,826 of those cases were among the vaccinated population. With 4,381 cases among the partly vaccinated, 40,327 cases among the double vaccinated, and 74,118 cases among the triple vaccinated.

This means the unvaccinated population accounted for 7% of Covid-19 cases between 1st May and 5th June 2022, whilst the vaccinated population accounted for 93%, 58% of which were among the triple jabbed.

Covid-19 Hospitalisations

The following chart shows the number of Covid-19 hospitalisations across the whole of Canada by vaccination status between 1st May and 5th June 2022 –

In the space of 5 weeks, Canada’s hospitals suffered an influx of 7,625 Covid-19 patients, and 6,560 of them were vaccinated. With 242 hospitalisations among the partly vaccinated, 1,728 hospitalisations among the double vaccinated, and 4,590 hospitalisations among the triple vaccinated.

This means the unvaccinated population accounted for just 14% of hospitalisations, whilst the vaccinated population accounted for 86%, 70% of which were among the triple jabbed.

Covid-19 Deaths

The following chart shows the number of Covid-19 deaths across the whole of Canada by vaccination status between 1st May and 5th June 2022 –

Over these 5 weeks, there were 1,707 Covid-19 deaths across Canada and the vaccinated population accounted for 1,472 of them. With 41 deaths among the partly vaccinated, 318 deaths among the double vaccinated, and a shocking 1,113 deaths among the triple vaccinated.

The means the unvaccinated population accounted for just 14% of deaths, whilst the vaccinated population accounted for 86%, 76% of which were among the triple jabbed.

If you don’t find these figures that concerning, perhaps you will once you realise this was how the pandemic was shaping out in terms of deaths across the country a couple of months ago prior to a mass “booster” campaign across Canada –


Between 13th Nov and 4th Dec 21, the unvaccinated accounted for 57% of deaths, whilst the vaccinated accounted for 43% of deaths.

Fast forward 1 month, and we found that between 5th Dec and 15th Jan 22 the fully vaccinated accounted for 64% of Covid-19 deaths, whilst the unvaccinated accounted for just 36%. Seven days later things then got even worse, with the fully vaccinated accounting for 72% of deaths whilst the unvaccinated accounted for 28%.

But now despite a mass booster campaign, and the Government of Canada trying to desperately conceal it, a bit of time, effort, and simple maths has revealed that 9 in every 10 Covid-19 cases, hospitalisations and deaths were recorded among the fully vaccinated population between 1st May and 5th June 2022.

Should we be seeing this if the third jab is effective? Absolutely not, these figures strongly suggest the third jab has made the situation worse for the vaccinated, and Justin ‘I’m triple jabbed but have now caught COVID for a second time‘ Trudeau’s advice to go and get the vaccine or a booster should be completely and utterly ignored.

—<Quote ends>—

I advise that – no matter where you are on this world – you avoid these experimental “vaccination” shots.

Certainly today, the risk of the COVID-19 disease is a good deal lower than the risk of the vaccine. Or even the widespread public harm stemming from any of the destructive lockdowns.

The God-Emperor, Whose Word is Truth

“If you see an article about how Xi Jinping eradicated poverty in China, don’t just pay attention to this clip, but pay attention to the fact that you’re not allowed — we talked about this — it’s not that poverty was eliminated, it was that Xi Jinping said poverty was eliminated.

So if you talk about it now then you’re gonna get in trouble because poverty is supposed to, supposed to have been eliminated. It’s not the reality…”

“It’s virtual reality.”

“It is. So this poor guy just goes and looks at this wedding, puts the video out. Then he gets arrested because you’re not allowed to show poverty anymore. It’s not that poverty’s not allowed to exist…”

“He got arrested by the local government for, um, making China look bad. Yes that’s exactly that’s actually what the charge was, yeah.”

Additional evidence to support my charge of idolatry, before the One Who Sees:

NANCHANG, June 10 (Xinhua) — Huang Kunming, a senior Communist Party of China (CPC) official, on Friday underscored the necessity of studying and implementing Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.

Huang, a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and head of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee, made the remarks while addressing a seminar on the subject held in Jinggangshan, east China’s Jiangxi Province.

Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era has put forward a range of new ideas, viewpoints and affirmations based on China’s actual situations, said Huang. It represents a new breakthrough in adapting Marxism to the context of China.

Under its guidance, historic achievements and changes were made in the cause of the Party and the country, said Huang. He called for solid efforts in studying, understanding and publicizing the thought. ■

Senior CPC official underscores studying, implementing Xi Thought

Devotional material, read by millions daily. Written by a man who much prefers pictures of Christ taken down in private homes, to be replaced by pictures of himself.

So the man in North Korea isn’t the only God-Emperor out there, after all!

But God will judge these lawless impostors.

But after the frauds are gone, who will finally teach the nations the right way to live and grow?

Will Christians finally do what Jesus told us to do? To disciple the nations?

Or will we merely cry out for more new kings, more new gods, and more new laws, just backed with different lies?

The Problem with Standing Armies

There’s a new podcast on The Problem with Standing Armies on, that Christian people interested in international politics should consider.

(In addition to reading Healer of the Nations, of course! Hint on the recommended policies: fewer spies, armies, and navies: more missionaries, businessmen, traders, and teachers.)

Note that todays rulers much prefer Kant’s “eternal war for eternal peace” idea, as it lets Our Betters continue to extract wealth and resources from the population, while stripping liberty, justice, and hope “for the good of (democracy/the race/the revolution) and the might of the nation.”

And the enrichment of the Leader and his friends. Can’t forget that!

Note that John Calvin and the Reformers of old were no fan of standing armies, no more than the Biblical government instituted by Moses was.1 Indeed, a standing army was one of the curses that would afflict Israel as they sought to have “a king, like all the nations” — as described in First Samuel 8.

The “Standing army” part is in bold:

So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men and your donkeys, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

I Samuel 8:10-18, ESV

And what did the imperialists, the nationalists, the blood’n’soil people of the day — right-wing and left-wing humanists both — respond?

But the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel. And they said, “No! But there shall be a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.” And when Samuel had heard all the words of the people, he repeated them in the ears of the Lord. And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey their voice and make them a king.” Samuel then said to the men of Israel, “Go every man to his city.”

I Samuel 10:19-22, ESV

Note that big “our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.”

Our king is supposed to do that. Not us.

And not God, either.

“God is not the king WE chose! We want a Mighty Man as king, just like all the other nations who despise God have to rule over them.”

Humanists are humanists, 3000 years ago, and today. Regardless if they were careful to visit the Temple at Jerusalem at the proper times, or are careful to attend only the best universities.

You’d think that Christians would have picked up a few hard truths since that grim day, so long ago, when the Christians of the era rejected the rule of God over them in favour of pleasing strongmen.

But as the lessons have not been learned, the beatings will continue.

All creation awaits, for our repentance and our obedience to King Jesus, over and above all Mighty Men of swords and tanks and operators.

It’s been a long wait.

1 For one thing: while Our Benefactors are occasionally at war with each other, they are always at war with their citizens, forever looking for new ways to restrict and punish and train and control and extract wealth from the commoner trash.