Archive for February, 2008

Planned Parenthood’s Racist Anti-Black Eugenics

February 29, 08

Via video at Moonbattery, from original source The Advocate, here’s the truth behind Planned Parenthood’s ‘lending a hand’ to overburdened minority communities:




With new vids as of April 2008 at Michelle Malkin.

“A racial analysis of abortion statistics is quite revealing. According to a Health and Human Services Administration report, as many as forty-three percent of all abortions are performed on Blacks and another ten percent on Hispanics. This, despite the fact that Blacks only make up eleven percent of the total U.S.  population and Hispanics only about eight percent. A National Academy of Sciences investigation released more conservative–but no less telling-figures: thirty-two percent of all abortions are performed on minority mothers.” – Life Research Institute

What, are you surprised? Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger was, after all, a blatant racist and eugenecist:

“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics.” 

“A stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

“The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.”

“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

“Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.”

“We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

“[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification without the burden of unwanted children…”

That last quote says it all about what liberalism enshrines as its highest goal: Kill children so that we all can have endless, carefree sex.

With policies like these (along with pro-homosexual nonreproduction), no wonder the U.S. Democrats (another historically racist group btw) have to resort to giving voting rights to illegal immigrants and prisoners in order to replenish their voter base.

If Abortion is Legal, So Should Infanticide and Child Murder Be

February 29, 08

I have pointed out before the absurd illogicity of legalizing abortion, particularly late-term abortions where the fetus is up to 24 weeks old (and has a skull that needs to be crushed, a brain that needs to be vacuumed out and limbs that need to be cut up to facilitate removal from the womb).

Compare and see:

Killing a baby in a crib = MURDER

Killing a pregnant woman = DOUBLE MURDER (one for the woman, one for the unborn child)

Killing a baby in the womb = LEGAL ABORTION


This is true, insofar as if the baby is not fully killed by the abortion procedure, leaving it to die in the clinic is prosecutable as infanticide.

So all that differentiates infanticide from legal abortion is a flap of flesh separating the baby from the outside world.

Of course, the logical conclusion would be that ABORTION = MURDER.

But no… I really shouldn’t be surprised that in this sinful, fallen world, the same comparison would instead lead to liberals concluding that INFANTICIDE = INALIENABLE RIGHT OF A MOTHER.

Via Moonbattery, a frightening truth is revealed:

A Sauk Village girl who suffocated her newborn daughter, then placed her in the trash, was sentenced Tuesday to 5 years of probation and mandatory counseling by a Cook County Juvenile Court judge.

She was arrested in October 2006 after she told detectives she secretly gave birth in the middle of the night in the bathroom of her house. She was 14 at the time. Authorities said that after she gave birth, her younger sister cut the baby’s umbilical cord, fed the baby formula and put her to bed.

That morning the teen went to school. When she came home, she suffocated the baby with a blanket and put her body in the trash, police said. The body was found later that night by a female relative.

The girl was found guilty of second-degree murder and concealing a homicide in October.

The girl, who is now 16 and is not being named because she is a juvenile, appeared in the Markham courthouse before Judge Michael W. Stuttley. She didn’t speak during the sentencing hearing, and kept her eyes lowered during much of the proceeding. Stuttley also sentenced the girl to complete 100 hours of community service at a day-care center.

Now, I can understand the fear, confusion and immaturity this young girl must have. Nonetheless, the utter lack of moral foundation led her to selfishly decide that “Ending my baby’s life is better than me getting in trouble.”

And see where the pro-choice world is headed by taking a look at the Netherlands, perhaps the most liberal (legal drugs, legal prostitution, legal homosexuality, legal abortion, legal euthaniasia, legal zoophilia) place on earth:


Now They Want to Euthanize Children

In the Netherlands, 31 percent of pediatricians have killed infants. A fifth of these killings were done without the “consent” of parents. Going Dutch has never been so horrible.
by Wesley J. Smith

FIRST, Dutch euthanasia advocates said that patient killing will be limited to the competent, terminally ill who ask for it.

Then, when doctors began euthanizing patients who clearly were not terminally ill, sweat not, they soothed: medicalized killing will be limited to competent people with incurable illnesses or disabilities.

Then, when doctors began killing patients who were depressed but not physically ill, not to worry, they told us: only competent depressed people whose desire to commit suicide is “rational” will have their deaths facilitated.

Then, when doctors began killing incompetent people, such as those with Alzheimer’s, it’s all under control, they crooned: non-voluntary killing will be limited to patients who would have asked for it if they were competent.

And now they want to euthanize children.

In the Netherlands, Groningen University Hospital has decided its doctors will euthanize children under the age of 12, if doctors believe their suffering is intolerable or if they have an incurable illness.

But what does that mean? In many cases, as occurs now with adults, it will become an excuse not to provide proper pain control for children who are dying of potentially agonizing maladies such as cancer, and doing away with them instead.

As for those deemed “incurable”–this term is merely a euphemism for killing babies and children who are seriously disabled.

Indeed, a disturbing 1997 study published in the British medical journal, the Lancet, revealed how deeply pediatric euthanasia has already metastasized into Dutch neo natal medical practice: According to the report, doctors were killing approximately 8 percent of all infants who died each year in the Netherlands

That amounts to approximately 80-90 per year. Of these, one-third would have lived more than a month. At least 10-15 of these killings involved infants who did not require life-sustaining treatment to stay alive. The study found that a shocking 45 percent of neo-natologists and 31 percent of pediatricians who responded to questionnaires had killed infants.

Dutch doctors are able to engage in the kind of euthanasia activities that got some German doctors hanged after Nuremberg.

For those who object to this assertion by claiming that German doctors killed disabled babies during World War II without consent of parents, so too do many Dutch doctors: Approximately 21 percent of the infant euthanasia deaths occurred without request or consent of parents.

Moreover, since when did parents attain the moral right to have their children killed?

Blame the radically altered mindset that results when killing is redefined from a moral wrong into a beneficent and legal act.

If killing is right for, say the adult cancer patient, why shouldn’t it be just as right for the disabled quadriplegic, the suicidal mother whose children have been killed in an accident, or the infant born with profound mental retardation?

At that point, laws and regulations erected to protect the vulnerable against abuse come to be seen as obstructions that must be surmounted. From there, it is only a hop, skip, and a jump to deciding that killing is the preferable option.


And I would add, if killing is right for the unborn baby (as pro-choicers say), why shouldn’t it be just as right for the born infant?

Indeed, now that the ‘progressive’ world has decided that taking away the life of a non-consenting baby is the inalienable right of the mother, how long before this ‘right to take away life’ is extended to everyone else?

The doctors will forbid medical aid to be given to those whom they deem ‘unworthy’. (Did I say will? I mean, already do.)

The white racists will forcibly abort the black babies. (Did I say will? I mean, already are.)

Governments will round up and gas ‘social undesirables’ like vagabonds and the elderly. (Did I say will? I mean, aleady did in 1940s Nazi Germany and already do today in the Netherlands, see the news piece above.)

And a mother will snuff out their 5-year old child’s life because he is ‘inconvenient’ to her dating life. (Did I say will? Read the first half of this post again.)

And do you know what? One day, these ‘social progressives’ will one day be old and sick and OH-SO-INCONVENIENT to keep around… And then they will have the privilege of enjoying the exact same treatement they advocated all their lives.

It’s just too bad that the pro-abortion supporters did not themselves have the experience of being aborted.

11 Rules of Life – Not Really by Bill Gates, But Highly Applicable to Moonbats

February 28, 08

I received a forwarded e-mail from my mum. It’s claimed to be a talk Bill Gates gave at a high school entitled ’11 Things They Did Not and Will Not Learn in School’.

Of course, this being teh Internets and all, it wasn’t actually by Bill Gates, but by Charles J. Sykes who included his original version in the book Dumbing Down Our Kids: Why American Children Feel Good about Themselves, but Can’t Read, Write, or Add.

The actual complete list of 14 can be found at Snopes, which has the full-length versions of the first 10 as well.

But I’ve noticed that Moonbats generally do not follow these rules of life. Take a gander and compare:

Rule 1: Life is not fair — get used to it!

  • Lesson for: Supporters of welfare parasitism and socialized anything. You don’t work hard, expect hard-workers to pay for your lifestyle, and still whine that life isn’t fair? The heck it isn’t, and you’re to blame!

Rule 2: The world won’t care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.

  • Lesson for: Fuzzy maths proponents who aren’t concerned that their future accountants can’t add or future engineers build self-imploding bridges, so long as their tender self-esteem isn’t challenged.

Rule 3: You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won’t be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.

Rule 4: If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.

Rule 5: Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping — they called it opportunity.

  • Lesson for: Related to Rule 3, lesson in a one-liner joke: “Hi, I’m a 30-year old with a PhD in Social Studies and wrote a thesis on how the capitalist system is inferior to socialism! Would you like fries with that?”

Rule 6: If you mess up, it’s not your parents’ fault, so don’t whine about your mistakes, learn from them.

Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren’t as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you are. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent’s generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.

Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools they have abolished failing grades and they’ll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn’t bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.

Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters. You don’t get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.

Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.

Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you’ll end up working for one.

  • Lesson for: Leftist-indoctrinated college grads who will find out that – surprise! – the Soviet Union collapsed to its own socialism two decades ago and free market capitalists run the world now (Obama-Hillary ’08 notwithstanding).

Rule 12: Smoking does not make you look cool. It makes you look moronic.

  • Lesson for: Smoking is passe. So the lesson here is for teenagers who think underage sex,  teenage pregnancy, dropping out of school and raising a child as an unemployed single mother at age 16 are cool.

Rule 13: You are not immortal.

  • Lesson for: Dhimmicrat jihadi-appeasers who somehow convince themselves that surrendering to terrorists will encourage them to stop killing infidels such as Moonbats (heck, especially pro-homosexuality, pro-feminism, atheist Moonbats!).

Rule 14: Enjoy this while you can. Someday you’ll realize how wonderful it was to be a kid.

  • Lesson for: Moonbats who, finally realizing how pampered and sheltered they were as children, go back to behaving like children regardless of age and responsibilities.

Who Is Hijacking Whose Christianity?

February 27, 08

From, his article in blockquotes and with my remarks following. It’s amazing how much Scripture can easily be cited to refute the shallow panderings of this ‘pundit’.


My Problem with Christianism

Are you a Christian who doesn’t feel represented by the religious right? I know the feeling. When the discourse about faith is dominated by political fundamentalists and social conservatives, many others begin to feel as if their religion has been taken away from them.

The number of Christians misrepresented by the Christian right is many. There are evangelical Protestants who believe strongly that Christianity should not get too close to the corrupting allure of government power.

There are lay Catholics who, while personally devout, are socially liberal on issues like contraception, gay rights, women’s equality and a multi-faith society.

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. – Matthew 7:21

If you love me, you will obey what I command. Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.  – John 14 

There are very orthodox believers who nonetheless respect the freedom and conscience of others as part of their core understanding of what being a Christian is. They have no problem living next to an atheist or a gay couple or a single mother or people whose views on the meaning of life are utterly alien to them–and respecting their neighbors’ choices. That doesn’t threaten their faith. Sometimes the contrast helps them understand their own faith better.

And there are those who simply believe that, by definition, God is unknowable to our limited, fallible human minds and souls.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. – 2nd Timothy 3:16

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”  – John 14:6-7

These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me. – John 14:24

If God is ultimately unknowable, then how can we be so certain of what God’s real position is on, say, the fate of Terri Schiavo?

“You shall not murder.” – Exodus 20:13

Or the morality of contraception? Or the role of women?

Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. – Collosians 3:18

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. – Ephesians 5:25,28

Or the love of a gay couple?

For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. – Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5 (Jesus says)

‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. – Leviticus 18:22

‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. – Leviticus 20:13

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. – Romans 1:26-27

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1st Corinthians 6:9-10

The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.” …Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens. – Genesis 19

Also, faith for many of us is interwoven with doubt, a doubt that can strengthen faith and give it perspective and shadow. That doubt means having great humility in the face of God and an enormous reluctance to impose one’s beliefs, through civil law, on anyone else.

I would say a clear majority of Christians in the U.S. fall into one or many of those camps. Yet the term “people of faith” has been co-opted almost entirely in our discourse by those who see Christianity as compatible with only one political party, the Republicans, and believe that their religious doctrines should determine public policy for everyone.

Apart from the Republicans, what other U.S. political party is even remotely in tune with mainstream Christianity? Just look at what the opposites of the Conservative Republicans stand for:


“Sides are being chosen,” Tom DeLay recently told his supporters, “and the future of man hangs in the balance! The enemies of virtue may be on the march, but they have not won, and if we put our trust in Christ, they never will.” So Christ is a conservative Republican?

No, but conservative Republicans are overwhelmingly Christian. Don’t try and subversively rephrase it into a sarcastic straw man.

Rush Limbaugh recently called the Democrats the “party of death” because of many Democrats’ view that some moral decisions, like the choice to have a first-trimester abortion, should be left to the individual, not the cops.

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. – Psalm 139:13

This is what the LORD says – he who made you, who formed you in the womb, and who will help you – Isaiah 44:2

This is what the LORD says – your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb – Isaiah 44:23

And now the LORD says – he who formed me in the womb to be his servant – Isaiah 49:5

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart – Jeremiah 1:5

“You shall not murder.” – Exodus 20:13

Ann Coulter, with her usual subtlety, simply calls her political opponents “godless,” the title of her new book. And the largely nonreligious media have taken the bait. The “Christian” vote has become shorthand in journalism for the Republican base.

What to do about it? The worst response, I think, would be to construct something called the religious left. Many of us who are Christians and not supportive of the religious right are not on the left either. In fact, we are opposed to any politicization of the Gospels by any party, Democratic or Republican, by partisan black churches or partisan white ones. “My kingdom is not of this world,” Jesus insisted. What part of that do we not understand?

What part about living like a Christian does this guy not understand?

Keep my decrees and laws, for the man who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD. – Leviticus 18:5

You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men. You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven. – Matthew 5:13-16

So let me suggest that we take back the word Christian while giving the religious right a new adjective: Christianist. Christianity, in this view, is simply a faith. Christianism is an ideology, politics, an ism.

The distinction between Christian and Christianist echoes the distinction we make between Muslim and Islamist. Muslims are those who follow Islam. Islamists are those who want to wield Islam as a political force and conflate state and mosque. Not all Islamists are violent. Only a tiny few are terrorists. And I should underline that the term Christianist is in no way designed to label people on the religious right as favoring any violence at all.

I mean merely by the term Christianist the view that religious faith is so important that it must also have a precise political agenda. It is the belief that religion dictates politics and that politics should dictate the laws for everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike.

In that case, we should have new labels like atheicism, liberalicism, and immoralism for those who seek to implement their godless ways in national politics. To them, their own humanist wants and base instincts are the supreme law. Quid pro quo?

That’s what I dissent from, and I dissent from it as a Christian. I dissent from the political pollution of sincere, personal faith. I dissent most strongly from the attempt to argue that one party represents God and that the other doesn’t.

I dissent from having my faith co-opted and wielded by people whose politics I do not share and whose intolerance I abhor. The word Christian belongs to no political party. It’s time the quiet majority of believers took it back.

See that Liberal (Democrat) Opinions pic again. Not all Christians are Republicans, but I suspect few Democrats are serious, born again, Bible-believing, live-for-Christ Christians.

That is why such self-seeking men as Bill Clinton (Democrat former President) and Jimmy Carter (Democrat former President, who laments that Jesus didn’t accept Satan’s temptation) must try and form their own alternative to the Southern Baptist Convention – since no mature Christian would ever fall for their foolish deception.


Therefore in conclusion I, Scott, dare contend that it is liberalism that is attempting to hijack Christianity from its true faithful keepers.

And we already have an existing label for such usurpers that doesn’t need any -isms: hedonists, Christians-in-name-only, cafeteria Christians, Antinomianists, false prophets and false shephers who lead the flock astray.

As the Bible long ago foretold and warned:

So which do you think are more likely to be the false doctrines that are attempting to hijack the true faith – mainstream, conservative, fundamentalist beliefs that follow 2000-year old tradition?

Or 1960’s hippie counterculture fad theology?

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Apologia tou Kristou (Christian Apologetics), Faith Under Fire, The World | 9 Comments »

Jewish Nobel Laureates: 11590% More Than Population Statistics Might Expect

February 25, 08

Since its inception in 1895 till the last presentations in 2007, there have been 155 Nobel Prize laureates who are of Jewish lineage.

Out of the total 684 Nobel laureates for the above categories, a full 22.66% of them have been of Jewish lineage.

An amazing list of achievements for a people who comprise just 0.1955% of the world population!

That, as the title of my post states, is a statistical over-representation of Jewish people among Nobel Prize laureates to the value of 11590.793% (i.e there are 115.9 times as many Jewish Nobel laureates as there would be if every race had equal representation among the Nobel Prize winners).

And many of their contributions to science and society are practical and beneficial to our everyday lives (e.g. anesthesia, penicillin, blood groups, relativity which enables GPS).

And they’re making new breakthroughs all the time, not just once-upon-a-time during some wistfully recalled Golden Age in the long gone past.

This in spite of thousands of years of persecution, climaxing at in the Holocaust murder of 6 million, and institutionalized throughout the world  even today.

Therefore even I, of the great Chinese race that is more than a billion strong, must admit the superiority of God’s chosen people. (Yes Dr. M, they do rule at least the intellectual world.)

Something the Death-to-Jews/Israel/Zionists crowd should think about before their next loud protest against the insinuated ‘global parasites’. And just who is busy shouting slogans, rioting and burning cars instead of working hard to better mankind?

Indeed YHWH’s unbreakable promise to Abraham (patriarch of the Jewish people through Isaac through Jacob aka Israel) has been fulfilled, and will continue to be fulfilled:

All the peoples on earth (no matter how ungrateful) have been blessed through Abraham’s descendants, the Jewish race…

Through the contributions to human civilization by individuals, and ultimately through the salvation and redemption that is offered to us through the greatest Jewish-born person of all history – Jesus the Messiah.

PS. The Nobel Peace Prize is not included even though Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin won it, because frankly, it is determined by just five people based on their political bias (not scientific review nor neutral objectivity).

Which is why such obvious embarassments and failures as Jimmy Carter, Yasser Arafat and Al ‘Haven’t Achieved Anything Yet’ Gore could win it.

PPS. Meanwhile, the rest of the Middle East populace is 2350% over-represented in terrorist incidents. Go figure.

Via Free Republic via wits0:

The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world’s population. They have received the following NobelPrizes:

Literature: 1988 – Najib Mahfooz

Peace: 1978 – Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat 1990 – Elias James Corey 1994 – Yaser Arafat: 1999 – Ahmed Zewai

Economics: (zero)

Physics: (zero)

Medicine: 1960 – Peter Brian Medawar 1998 – Ferid Mourad


The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world’s population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature: 1910 – Paul Heyse 1927 – Henri Bergson 1958 – Boris Pasternak 1966 – Shmuel Yosef Agnon 1966 – Nelly Sachs 1976 – Saul Bellow 1978 – Isaac Bashevis Singer 1981 – Elias Canetti 1987 – Joseph Brodsky 1991 – Nadine Gordimer World

Peace: 1911 – Alfred Fried 1911 – Tobias Mi chae l Carel Asser 1968 – Rene Cassin 1973 – Henry Kissinger 1978 – Menachem Begin 1986 – Elie Wiesel 1994 – Shimon Peres 1994 – Yitzhak Rabin

Physics: 1905 – Adolph Von Baeyer 1906 – Henri Moissan 1907 – Albert Abraham Michelson 1908 – Gabriel Lippmann 1910 – Otto Wallach 1915 – Richard Willstaetter 1918 – Fritz Haber 1921 – Albert Einstein 1922 – Niels Bohr 1925 – James Franck 1925 – Gustav Hertz 1943 – Gustav Stern 1943 – George Charles de Hevesy 1944 – Isidor Issac Rabi 1952 – Felix Bloch 1954 – Max Born 1958 – Igor Tamm 1959 – Emilio Segre 1960 – Donald A. Glaser 1961 – Robert Hofstadter 1961 – Melvin Calvin 1962 – Lev Davidovich Landau 1962 – Max Ferdinand Perutz 1965 – Richard Phillips Feynman 1965 – Julian Schwinger 1969 – Murray Gell-Mann 1971 – Dennis Gabor 1972 – William Howard Stein 1973 – Brian David Josephson 1975 – Benjamin Mottleson 1976 – Burton Richter 1977 – Ilya Prigogine 1978 – Arno Allan Penzias 1978 – Peter L Kapitza 1979 – Stephen Weinberg 1979 – Sheldon Glashow 1979 – Herbert Charles Brown 1980 – Paul Berg 1980 – Walter Gilbert 1981 – Roald Hoffmann 1982 – Aaron Klug 1985 – Albert A. Hauptman 1985 – Jerome Karle 1986 – Dudley R. Herschbach 1988 – Robert Huber 1988 – Leon Lederman 1988 – Melvin Schwartz 1988 – Jack Steinberger 1989 – Sidney Altman 1990 – Jerome Friedman 1992 – Rudolph Marcus 1995 – Martin Perl 2000 – Alan J. Heeger

Economics: 1970 – Paul Anthony Samuelson 1971 – Simon Kuznets 1972 – Kenneth Joseph Arrow 1975 – Leonid Kantorovich 1976 – Milton Friedman 1978 – Herbert A. Simon 1980 – Lawrence Robert Klein 1985 – Franco Modigliani 1987 – Robert M. Solow 1990 – Harry Markowitz 1990 – Merton Miller 1992 – Gary Becker 1993 – Robert Fogel

Medicine: 1908 – Elie Metchnikoff 1908 – Paul Erlich 1914 – Robert Barany 1922 – Otto Meyerhof 1930 – Karl Landsteiner 1931 – Otto Warburg 1936 – Otto Loewi 1944 – Joseph Erlanger 1944 – Herbert Spencer Gasser 1945 – Ernst Boris Chain 1946 – Hermann Joseph Muller 1950 – Tadeus Reichstein 1952 – Selman Abraham Waksman 1953 – Hans Krebs 1953 – Fritz Albert Lipmann 1958 – Joshua Lederberg 1959 – Arthur Kornberg 1964 – Konrad Bloch 1965 – Francois Jacob 1965 – Andre Lwoff 1967 – George Wald 1968 – Marshall W. Nirenberg 1969 – Salvador Luria 1970 – Julius Axelrod 1970 – Sir Bernard Katz 1972 – Gerald Maurice Edelman 1975 – Howard Martin Temin 1976 – Baruch S. Blumberg 1977 – Roselyn Sussman Yalow 1978 – Daniel Nathans 1980 – Baruj Benacerraf 1984 – Cesar Milstein 1985 – Mi chae l Stuart Brown 1985 – Joseph L. Goldstein 1986 – Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini] 1988 – Gertrude Elion 1989 – Harold Varmus 1991 – Erwin Neher 1991 – Bert Sakmann 1993 – Richard J. Roberts 1993 – Phillip Sharp 1994 – Alfred Gilman 1995 – Edward B. Lewis 1996- Lu RoseIacovino TOTAL: 129!

END CREDITS: Meryl Yourish where I found the link to how many Jewish Nobel laureates there have been.

PPPS. The Jawa Report does a similar type of calculation, only regarding terrorists incidents on US soil by a certain segment of the population… 45 out of 125 is 36%, but the segment is 0.08% of the total population, so they are over-represented by 45,000% (i.e. 450 times as many terrorists from this segment as there ought to be if everything else were equal).

Gateway Pundit also has a similar conclusion… For international terrorist incidents resulting in trials in America, 186 of 226 is 81.58%. Out of a 1% of the American population, this is an over-representation of 815,789% (8,158 times as many as the average)!


Tipped by hutchrun, on Israel’s 63rd anniversary:

Israel has the highest average living standards in the Middle East. The per capita income in 2000 was over $17,500, exceeding that of the UK.
Israel’s $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined.
Israel has the third highest rate of entrepreneurship – and the highest rate among women and among people over 55 – in the world.

Israel accomplishments under 63 years of attack and duress.

Israel inventions under 63 years of attack and duress.

Contrast with Anti-Jewish nations:

As I’ve observed before in this space, countries where vicious anti-Semitism is rife are almost always backward and poor. This isn’t, as anti-Semites believe, because the Elders of Zion are plotting to keep Uz-beki-beki-beki-stan poor. It is because the inability to see the world clearly and discern cause and effect relations in complex social settings is linked to many other failures in economic and political life. Anti-Semitism isn’t just the socialism of fools; it is the sociology of the befuddled. The anti-Semite fails to grasp how the world works, and that failure condemns him to endless frustration. Naturally, this is the fault of the Jews.

And noted atheist Richard Dawkins also pointed out this huge statistical skew:

I thought about comparing the numbers of Nobel Prizes won by Jews (more than 120) and Muslims (ten if you count Peace Prizes, half that if you don’t). This astonishing discrepancy is rendered the more dramatic when you consider the small size of the world’s Jewish population.

But if you want to bring up the Jews, I’m happy to drop Trinity, Cambridge and give you the truly astonishing Nobel Prize figures for Jews. You’ll find it won’t bolster your apologetics.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in That's A Fact, The World | 18 Comments »

Badawi: Mind Your Words

February 25, 08

From The Star 25 Feb 2008:


PM: Mind your words

KEPALA BATAS: Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has advised election candidates to be extra careful in their choice of words in order to ensure a trouble-free campaign.

“Be careful with what you say. Don’t tarnish the election process,” the Prime Minister said after submitting his nomination paper at Dewan Millennium here yesterday.

Abdullah will be defending his Kepala Batas parliamentary seat for the eighth term.

He will be challenged by PAS freelance preacher and Al-Azhar University graduate Subri Mat Arshad, 45.

The Prime Minister said the nomination process nationwide yesterday was reported to be to be peaceful.

Abdullah said the Barisan Nasional was fielding the best candidates, adding that there were cases of those who did not meet the Barisan’s strict criteria being dropped at the eleventh hour.

Citing examples, he said: “One of them was declared a bankrupt and we replaced him. Another who has a court case pending against him was also dropped.”


He means like these words?

Or perhaps these?

Oh… He must mean T H E S E.

No, I don’t think he appreciates my blogging much.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Malaysiana, UMNOpocrisy | Leave a Comment »

Walad and Ibn: Christianity Agrees With Islam, God Did Not Have a Son (Sexually)

February 25, 08

One objection I’ve heard from Muslims about the Christian doctrine that Jesus Christ is God’s only son is that “Allah is separate from this sinful world and could never do something so worldly and degrading as have sexual intercourse with Mary”.

Their understanding of the subject is often, however, limited to the parroting of a popular (but shallow and flawed) argument:

“John 3:16 says ‘begotten’, which means involving sexual intercourse, therefore Christianity believes that God has sex with Mary – which is totally disgusting and unacceptable!”

Well, I have news for you: Christians completely agree on the sickness of that idea.

What Christians actually believe is that Jesus is God’s son in the relationship sense: Jesus is obedient and submits to God the Father’s will, and the Father bestows all His kingdom and authority unto Jesus.

(And no, liberal readers, intimate does NOT always have to refer to sex. But I wouldn’t expect you to understand the concept of a deep, intimate, emotional relationship that doesn’t involve and focus on sex.)

This is cleared up by the New International Version (NIV) Bible translation which puts precedence on the meaning of the original Greek rather than the literal translation:

This makes clear the actual meaning of the term ‘only begotten’ as ‘special, unique, privileged’ – not ‘sexually conceived’. So I do not want to hear any more trolling about that fallacious argument, hear?

And do you know what? The above correct Christian doctrine on Jesus’ sonship is not at all opposed by the Qur’an!


From Free Republic:

The Qur’an teaches that Jesus did not have a biological father, being conceived in Mary’s womb by the will of God. Yet, in a mental disconnect, Muslims say Jesus was not the son of God. This belief is considered blasphemy and punishable by death.

Confusion may be due to the two different Arabic words for son:

“walad”– son from a sexual union; and

“ibn” – son in the widest sense of the word, similar to the Hebrew word “ben” – builder of the family name. 

In verses which say Allah did not have a son, the Arabic word used for “son” is “walad” – son of a sexual union, not “ibn” – son in the widest sense:

In this sense, Muslims and Christians are in agreement, that God did not have sex with Mary.


And compare these Suras, also from that site:

…with the Gospel narrative:

Again, the Qur’an has no disagreement with Christian Canon there, on the fact that Mary was a virgin and no actual sexual intercourse took place.


From this, one may conclude that the Qur’an clearly precludes Allah having a son from a physical, sexual union (walad)… But it does not preclude Allah having a non-biological, relationship-wise son (ibn).

Which is exactly what Canonical Christianity has always said.

PS. The Free Republic article also describes how most of the knowledge about Christianity came from heretical, non-Canonical sources, which explains so much about the misconceptions about Christianity that are carried over even to modern times.

PPS. Speaking of heresy… The religious group which actually does likely believe in literal God-Mary sex are the Latter Day Saints.

END CREDITS: This post is inspired by a tip from wits0.

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Apologia tou Kristou (Christian Apologetics), That's A Fact | 4 Comments »

70 Year Old Man Gets 30 Lashes and Jail For Walking Dog in Iran

February 22, 08

What is it with Middle Eastern religious fascists and their desire to physically abuse and torture the most defenceless members of society?

First a woman is brutally, mercilessly lashed with a whip 200 times for being raped, now this evil bullying:

Tehran, 19 Feb.(AKI) – A 70-year-old man has been sentenced by an Iranian judge to four months in jail and 30 lashes for going out on the street with his dog.

The incident took place in Shahr Rey, a suburb of Tehran when the owner of the dog was caught by a police who quickly handcuffed the man. He was later charged by an Islamic judge for “disturbing the public order”.

The sentence, seems to want to panic the owners of dogs that despite repeated warnings by the police, continue to defy the authorities by taking their dogs outside their homes.

And it’s not just because according to certain interpretations, dogs are ‘unclean’. In Saudi Arabia, even cats are banned. Never mind that their own prophet, whom they are called to emulate, loved cats as much as any Icanhascheezburger reader does.

Rowan Williams, is this really the kind of culture you wish all of once-Great Britain to accomodate and adopt?

Love – especially the selfless, genuine, unpresuming kind that companion animals will give – is a totally alien concept to such heartless and selfish men, which is why they demonize it so.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in The World | 7 Comments »

KOMAS Voter Education Videos and RM5000 Film Script Competition

February 22, 08

KOMAS (Pusat Komunikasi Masyarakat) has a series of videos on Voter Education. Check them out below.

Kebebasan Media


Hapuskan politik wang

Freedom of assembly

Abolish Phantom Voters

Also: Competition: Stand to win RM5000 for a script about democracy in Malaysia 

And remember to check if you are really registered to vote, and where: Check Your Malaysian Voter Registration

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Malaysiana, Uni Life | Leave a Comment »

Extremist Pro-Life Christian Fascists Have Killed Millions in the Name of Stopping Abortion! (Well, Maybe Not Quite That Many)

February 21, 08

Sourced via Moonbattery

Quiz time: How many people have unhinged, fascistic, extremist fundamentalist Christian bigots murdered in recent years?

Judging by the insinuating vehemence shown by liberals and atheists towards Christians and their beliefs, it must be a whoooooooole lot, right? After all, those nutter pro-lifers regularly attack abortionists and firebomb Planned Parenthood clinics.

Just look at how many incidents of mass murder pro-lifers have carried out in the name of stopping abortion:

Crutcher notes that in the years 1993 and 1994, the worst period of violence in pro-life history in which five abortionists and clinic workers were killed, more farmers and twice as many hairdressers were murdered on the job. (The total number of murders that have occurred since Roe v. Wade passed in 1973 is seven.)

Oh, dear Morgan Freeman! Seven murders over 35 years? That’s one murder every five years, or one fifth of a murder every single year! Christian religious terrorism is so ghastly! 

The Associated Press concurs on that point:

When it comes to fears about a terrorist attack, people in the U.S. usually focus on Osama bin Laden and foreign-based radical groups. Yet researchers say domestic extremists who commit violence in the name of their cause — abortion or the environment, for example — account for most of the damage from such incidents in this country.

Amazing! Since we aaaaaaaall know that the liberal media doesn’t lie, EVAH, that means that Christo-maniacs have wreaked more havoc than 9/11 ever did!!

*Ahem.* To put things into perspective, over 3000 people died in a single morning from 9/11. Seven abortion enablers were killed by pro-lifers.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the liberal media seeks to convince you that 7 > 3000.

The editors must have been working really hard at their fuzzy maths textbooks. Or maybe they believe that Osama is a Southern Baptist stooge, so anything he does counts as anti-abortion-clinic terrorism.

Meanwhile, Atheistic Communism killed perhaps 100 million people over the past century.

And currently, more than ONE MILLION BABIES are murdered in the womb every single month.

The dementia of liberals and atheists leads them to continually accuse Christians of being the world’s worst people. They denounce us as hate-filled fascists who just can’t wait for a chance to sacrifice unbelievers in the name of their cruel and demented God.

But the real world facts show otherwise.
(They always do, Moonbats, they always do.)

(Yes, Samuel Skinner, this post is partly addressed to your remarks, 2nd last sentence.)

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Apologia tou Kristou (Christian Apologetics), Atheist Debates, Faith Under Fire, Liberal Values, That's A Fact, The World | 27 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: