Recently, in an interview with CEO Rick “Saddle sore” Warren, B. Hussein Obama responded to a question asking, ‘when life begins,’ by saying,
“whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade.”
First notice that Obama is a typical American in as much as he has compartmentalized truth. The idea that one can answer the question to life from either a Theological lens or a scientific lens indicates that he believes, in a Thomistic fashion, that there are two paths to truth.
Second, consider that Obama has had no problem coming to conclusions on other “above my pay grade” issues. For example, Obama has concluded that the polar ice caps are going to melt from the carbon footprint left by men. As such he has determined that we must save the planet. So, coming to conclusions that are “above his pay grade” on ecology in order to save the planet are perfectly acceptable but coming to conclusions on embryology above his pay grade in order to save babies are not.
Third, consider that this is all smoke. Obama has answered the question on when life begins and he has done so with precise specificity. For B. Hussein Obama life begins with a parent’s choice. When Obama, as a Illinois state senator, voted against what would later be known as the “Born-Alive Infants’ Protection Act” he declared to God and man his answer to when life begins.
Indeed, Obama in his vote that determined that life begins when a parent determines life begins voted to redefine the current legal definition of the beginning of life from “life begins when a child is living outside the womb to life begins outside the womb unless the parent went into delivery wanting the child dead. If the parent went into delivery wanting the child dead then it is impossible, by definition, for life to officially begin.
Obama, with his opposition to legislation that would have provided protection to babies who were targeted for abortion but who were born alive, was trying to expand the rights of abortion from the right to have an attempted abortion to the right to have an successful abortion — even if the aborting has to happen post live delivery.
Fourth, if such a decision really is above his pay grade then prudence would require to give the benefit of doubt to what he doesn’t know to not be life. A man who was truly humble about his lack of knowledge on such a life and death subject would be careful to err on the side of caution. Obama is lying on this issue to protect his Presidential aspirations.
Obama wants to be President and telling the truth is the only thing that is above his pay grade.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08192008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obamas_extremism_125074.htm
http://www.eppc.org/programs/ppaf/publications_ppaf/pubID.3290/pub_detail.asp
And yet (in keeping with his metaphor) he wishes to be promoted to the highest pay grade of all…what will he plead then? The only thing left is the divine right of kings.
I think it may be time for the captain to turn back on the fasten your seatbelt sign.
The only reason I unbuckle my seatbelt anymore is to strangle those who advocate divine rights of Marxist Presidents.
Jerry,
Rick Santorum is a traitorous turncoat who got what he deserved when he was defeated by Casey in his Senatorial loss.
Now Bret, you know I’m not advocating, only anticipating. I’m assuming that should he reach the “pinnacle rank” (pay grade), he won’t feel the need to defer to some abstract “higher pay grade.” He’ll start giving us the full Obamanation as a divine right.
Bret,
I don’t know enough about Santorum.
Where did he turn?
You know anything about Daniel Ritchie’s book here?
http://reformedcovenanter.wordpress.com/my-civil-government-book-available-from/
Sorry bout the Tigers. I thought Cabrera and Willis would put them in the hunt
Santorum turned when he supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the Pennsylvania Republican primary in 200? It was a close primary and Toomey was pro life while Specter is one of the worst Republican Senators on life issues.
All I know about Daniel’s book is that I’d like to have a copy. I have seen it advertised and I even gave it a plug here on Iron Ink.
Willis ended up being a bust. Cabrera will yet be a good trade. Sheffield and their pitching has let them down. They need to get some starting pitching in the next off season.
After losing in the 10th last night they are getting swamped tonight.
Bret
A good commentary on Acts?
Jerry
Greg,
I’m the one who is advocating.
How did we ever get to the point where we produce this kind of leadership alternatives?
I can’t think of any greater bunch of losers than Obama, Biden, Clintons, McCain, Romney, Huckabee, etc.
I quite agree.
Jerry,
Martyn Lloyd Jones
Jones is quite good except for the role of Christian in relation to the public sphere.
F. F. Bruce
Watch out for where Liberal presuppositions leak in … Still Bruce was a good scholar.
The Acts of the Apostles : A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington III
Arminian so beware! But gives some great background information.
John Calvin
John Stott
James Boice — Very Basic but solid. I found it disappointing in as much this communicated to me that this is all the higher that the average person in the pew could rise according to Boice’s reckoning. It is a kind of Commentary for those preaching Acts.
I. H. Marshal — Arminian but still thoughtful in places.
When I preached Acts I used all of these plus Matthew Henry’s commentary on Acts. I think a key thing in preaching Acts is to keep Redemptive Historical categories always before you.
Specter started his public lies (as far as I know) at the Warren Commission. It is SO disappointing that Santorum played politics here instead of voting with according to his worldview. The prophets so warn kings about this. Jehoshaphat honored YHWH (2Chr 17:1-10; Deut 6 & Psalm 78) but he favored a political alliance with Ahab and Ahab’s & Jezebel’s gods This led to baal & ashteroth being set up in the temple and some exclusions in the chronlogies in Matthew. Hopefully YHWH’s judgment will turn him back since he was a man who “sat in the gates” and probably desires it again.
McCain long ago committed the same sin
Being a Phillies fan I feel your pain
Bret,
commentaries on Acts
Thank you so much
Jerry
Do you have an opinion on D A Carson? He wrote a commentary on Acts touted by “TR’s”
McCain is owned by George Soros and the CFR.
Worthless.
I’ve read 3 or 4 books by D. A. Carson. Generally speaking he is pretty good, though I didn’t care for his “Difficult Doctrine Of The Love Of God.” I’ve never read him on Acts so I can’t speak specifically to that commentary.
I must say though that I’m surprised that the TR’s would recommend him since he doesn’t strike me as a TR type.
I’m going to have to back up and apologize here. Carson didn’t do Acts and it has been in my very finite brain for a long time that he did. I’m living proof of the Creator creature distinction everyday.
A study group I attend will be going through Acts & I’m going to help a little is why this has been on my mind.
I did find this though
http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2007/03/26/around-the-web-2/