This is Ferguson: Emotions over Facts

"Truth is the first casualty of the feelings-driven society." -Ben Shapiro

The streets are filled with angry citizens. Screaming, shouting, chanting words of anger, frustration, and disappointment. "No justice, no peace!" Shouts one citizen. Down the road a car sits on the side of the road engulfed in flames. Police and national guardsmen patrol the streets in full body armor and riot gear carrying military grade rifles and driving heavily armored vehicles. Citizens within inches of policemens' face mask screaming in fits of rage and fury.  An armored national guardsmen throws a canister into the rioting crowd. Tear gas starts building from the midst of the crowd from the canister. Citizens cough and cover their faces, yet their shouting grows louder and their tempers grow hotter. A cool winter's breeze blows through the air clearing the gas. Citizens turn their attention to the police and national guardsmen with hate filled eyes. The law enforcers brace themselves. This is going to be a long night...

No, this isn't a scene from the newest Hollywood blockbuster, this is reality. This is Ferguson.

This all stems back to an incident in August in Ferguson Missouri. A white police officer named Darren Wilson  shot and killed an 18 year old black man named Michael Brown. When this happened, accusations of racism were thrown saying that this was a racial crime of hatred. Whites killing blacks. While it is true that awhile man killed a black man, there were no indications of it being racially motivated. 

When the incident happened, riots broke out in the city and across the country. Black citizens rioting and looting claiming that it was injustice and that it was all about the racist whites wanting to kill blacks. Infamous instigators like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson took the stage and pushed the racial killing perspective. Their speeches and words encouraged the rioters to continue the riots. 

On Monday, November 24th, the grand jury announced that Wilson would not be charged with anything. They heard his testimony along with over a dozen eye witness accounts and concluded that Wilson was acting well within the bounds of the law for a police officer to defend himself against an attacker. For the days leading up to the grand jury decision, the media anticipated a riot to occur, and that is just what happened. Looting, property damage, fires burning buildings down. Citizens attacking each other and cops. Citizens blowing up cop cars, ect... 

Th night of the verdict The New York Times reported the following:

"At a news conference on Monday night, President Obama urged protesters to be peaceful, saying that is what Michael Brown’s family wanted.

“Michael Brown’s parents have lost more than anyone,” he said. “We should be honoring their wishes.”

President Obama appealed to law enforcement to show restraint in responding to the protests. "

For a timeline of events that took place that night you can visit: http://tinyurl.com/news-blogs-nytimes

All of this brings me to my point. As I scrolled through my newsfeed on Facebook and Twitter that Monday night almost every post was talking about the verdict. The views were split. About 50 percent were angry statuses disappointed with the verdict, believing that it was an act of racial violence. About 40 percent were those who approved of the verdict and were mad at the allegations of racism. About 10 percent were people, like myself who stepped back from the high emotional tensions of the issue and looked at the solid facts and evidence and acknowledged the tragedy of a young man dying but also believe that the officer did nothing wrong and that there were no racial motivations. People in the latter category urged for prayers and peace and non violence and pleaded with others to see the truth of the facts. 

The group that was upset with the verdict was majority blacks and white liberals. The people who agreed with the verdict were majority whites and black conservatives. The people in the third group were white and black conservatives and liberals who had actually examined the facts and weren't emotionally charged.

Many of the blacks who were upset with the verdict took to posting statuses and links about how white people were hateful bigots and how white cops were racist and how black people are always the victims. Me, being white, am hurt by these claims. I love blacks as much as I love any race. One of my biggest heroes has always been MLK. I have always advocated against racism and for Civil Rights. I believe in everything MLK stood for. I believe that we are all humans and all deserve equal rights and none should ever be discriminated against. I openly criticize those whites i hear making racist remarks. If I were alive during the civil rights era, I would've been standing with the blacks fighting for equal rights. I try not to have a lot of hate in my life, but I hate racism. It infuriates me. So to hear black people say all these things about whites really upsets me, because I, and many others, are not like that at all. Truth be told, Not all cops are bad. Not all black people are criminals. And not all white people are racist.

I understand that this is mob mentality. People are disappointed with the verdict and then instigators like Sharpton and Jackson start talking and people become angry and start rioting and attacking others. Most of these people haven't examined the facts, they have been misled and are full of emotion and anger. Those blind them from the facts. I've experienced mob mentality before when I worked in Washington DC. I was at the Supreme Court awaiting the verdict of the Hobby Lobby case. (The case involved the owners of Hobby Lobby refusing to pay for their employees to get abortions and abortion inducing drugs through insurance. They simply believed that the preborn children were human and that it was wrong to kill an innocent human being. Obamacare called for all businesses provide coverage for 20 different types of "contraceptives". Hobby Lobby owners provided 16 of the 20, but didn't provide 4 because they were against abortion. So the Obama administration was forcing them to provide it or shut down). The Hobby Lobby owners won the case. I was there on the front steps of the Supreme Court setting up a press conference with Students For Life of America. While there abortion supporters showed up to protest. They were furious and were yelling and chanting. Slogans and signs saying things like "Recreational sex is my hobby and I am here to lobby!". The majority of protestors were late teenaged males. Their signs had condoms on them saying that they can't take that away from them and that you can't take contraceptives away from women. I agree with that, we shouldn't take condoms and contraceptives away from them. But these people, just like the angry people in Ferguson refuse to look at the facts. In the Hobby Lobby case, they weren't against providing coverage for contraceptives and condoms to their employees, they were against abortion and abortion inducing drugs (which were only 4). These protestors had been misled into thinking that Hobby Lobby was banning their employees from using any type of contraceptives. When I tried to tell these protestors that, they yelled louder in order to drown out the facts I was sharing. They just wanted to riot and protest regardless of the facts. That is exactly what is going on in Ferguson. Protestors don't even examine the facts, and many of those who side with them refuse to read the facts as well. It's almost like they want the issue to be racism so badly that even though it was proven not to be, they accused those facts as being racist and those telling the facts to be racists because they looked at the facts. Simple mob mentality and disregard for all authority, truth, and opinions that differed from what they wanted the results to be.

I spent over 2 hours reading the grand jury transcript. I read the medical examiner's report, the testimony of officer Wilson, and about half of the eye witnesses. All confirm the accounts told by Officer Wilson. The transcripts can be found here: 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?_r=4

My main point I am trying to get across is that we are all prone to emotional reactions on issues, but we shouldn't allow that to cloud out the truth and solid facts. The facts are unbiased and completely neutral. They are the truth. And you don't have to like the truth, but you should not ignore it or lie about it. John Adams once said:

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

I don't understand why the rioters feel like the verdict justifies robbing stores, attacking people, and burning buildings and vehicles. Even if this were a case about race and the white man got off clean, that still wouldn't justify all of that chaos. I also don't understand why people can't just look at the solid black and white facts. Society would be much better if people were honest and stuck to the facts rather than lie and let their vision be clouded by emotion. I get so frustrated by the ignorance and evil in this world. But I have to keep reminding myself that I was not made for this world and it is not my home. I'm not supposed to be at ease with everyone's attitudes and actions. We are fallen sinful people living in a fallen sinful world. I eagerly await the day where all of the world is perfect and in harmony with God in his kingdom. No more lies, death, tears, sadness, or anger. Oh, how I long for that day. 

Another interesting bit of information about the accusations of white on black crimes can be found here: http://youtu.be/iGTUcS-yQtQ

In Milwaukee, Wisconsin a similar situation happened and a police officer gave this speech, it is equally applicable to the Ferguson situation: http://youtu.be/T7MAO7McNKE

http://youtu.be/T7MAO7McNKE

Here is a good explanation as to why Officer Wilson wasn't charged according to the law:

http://www.policeone.com/Crowd-Control/articles/7782643-Why-Officer-Darren-Wilson-wasnt-indicted/

An analytical response to a Pro-Choice Progressive

I recently posted a status on Facebook criticizing some of the Pro-Choice claims. It lead to a rather lengthy discussion between 4 of my friends. Two were very strong Pro-Life Advocates and two were very strong Pro-Choice advocates. This response is to the most vocal of the two Pro-Choice advocates. I broke down his claims and arguments and wrote a response to each of them. Amazingly, by the grace of God, I was able to stay calm and gently respond to his claims and arguments without getting upset or mad. This youngster is, from what I've gathered, a logical and intelligent student, and I pray that some of what I have said has some effect on him.

Note: *I use some arguments & examples in an edited form from Scott Klusendorf and Dr. Mike S. Adams, both have encouraged and taught me many things on this area. I wouldn't have been able to make this defense without them. *
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My friend, you make some great points and raise some important questions. Allow me to break each down and address and/or answer them for you. Before I answer and address what you said, I want to first lay on the table what science says on the issue, and the reasoning behind most of, if not all of my points. 

Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading doctors in thee field and Embryology Text books confirm this. The science of embryology is clear. From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct , living, and whole human beings. Therefore, every "successful" abortion ends the life of a living human being. Nothing is added to the unborn to make them “more human”. They are fully human, just as much as human as you and I are.  They just aren't as fully developed as you and I are. They are just as much human as you and I are, just at a different stage of development. In comparison: a 4 year old girl is not as fully developed as a 14 year old girl is, yet both are fully human. That is not simply my opinion, that is documented scientific truth.

Now on to your questions and points.

*”You make it seem like people who are pro-choice are pro-abortion and that's entirely false.”

Being pro-choice means that you want women to have an option, a choice, on whether they want to get an abortion (unjustly end an innocent human life) or not. Being Pro-life means that we value all human life and wish for the equal right to life for all human beings. Because if you take away that one right, all other rights are automatically taken away. So, when it all boils down, Pro-life advocates are against abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life). Pro-Choice advocates are for the right of a mother to get an abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life), therefore, by advocating for it, you are on the “pro” side of it. On a side note: the majority of Pro-choice advocates that I’ve met or talked with are very much Pro-abortion. They view it as no different than using a condom or taking the pill. 

*”The honest reason why people have the same process as me are simply one to keep it safe.” 

I assume you mean “safe” for the mother. But abortion, itself, is never a safe procedure. In every procedure, sans failed abortions, an innocent human life is unjustly ended. I do’t know about you, but to me, killing an innocent human being would never fall under the category of “safe”. 

  

*”Before abortions were legal people still had things like back alley abortions where a shifty guy would use a hanger or some instrument like that. This lead to the woman most often dying or being incredibly hurt....really gruesome stuff. This is why most people who are pro-choice believe that way, we need to keep something like this safe, and avoid a disaster like that from happening ever again.”

Sadly, yes, that did happen before abortion was made legal in the US in 1973. But in saying this, the assumption is made that the unborn are not human. A more understandable analogy of your argument would be: (I’m going to drive down the road to kill someone, but there is ice all over the road, I’m afraid that I might have a wreck on the way there and get hurt. Could you call the city workers to have them come put salt on the road so that I wont get hurt on my way to of from the person’s house? Im still going to kill the person, but at least I will be safe in the process.) In your argument/statement, you are saying that we should keep it legal to unjustly end the life of an innocent human being in a safe and sterile environment to avoid harming the person killing them, as would happen in a dirty filthy place such as a back alley. Where’s the logic in that?

*”Let the expected mother know what she is going through”

I completely agree with you. A mother should know what is going to happen in the procedure before she agrees to do it. Sadly, in the majority of abortion clinics, especially Planed Parenthood, they do not explain to the mother what the procedure is. Ive talked with several women that have either had abortions or had been to get an abortion and then decided not to. They said that they were not shown an ultrasound, or told what the procedure would do. In one person I talked to, she said that although the abortion doctor did an ultrasound, he purposely stood in front of the screen so that she could not see it, and he told her that there was nothing but a glob of tissue. He also talked loud during the ultrasound so that she wouldn't hear the heartbeat. She went to the hospital the same day and saw her child through an ultrasound and listened to the heartbeat. She decided to not go through with the procedure after seeing and hearing these things. This is not an isolated incident, I've heard dozens upon dozens of accounts almost identical to this one from all across the country. Why, you might ask, do the abortion doctors lie and deceive the women like this? Money. The approximate cost for an abortion is between $400-500. The doctors make a profit from this. If they actually told what the procedure would do and actually showed the women the ultrasound, most women, after seeing the child and hearing the heartbeat, would change their minds about the abortion. And thus the abortion doctors would not make any money, save for the small visit fee.   


“Other reasons are obvious, like in the horrific event of rape or incest. How can we as human beings tell a woman who was raped that they now have to carry that burden, and that reminder of the most likely single most horrific event that has ever happened to her in her life. We can't! That would be appalling to even suggest that the woman has to keep it.”

Good point. Rape is terrible. I consider it to be the worst crime, after murder, that is. I advocate for the male to be castrated in punishment for the crime, as well as a long jail sentence.  It is an absolutely horrible crime and nobody should ever have to experience it. You're saying that if a woman becomes pregnant as the result of rape, she should get an abortion. So, you're suggesting that because an evil man commits an extremely terrible act of violence on an innocent woman, then the woman should in turn  commit an extremely terrible act of violence on another innocent human being that results in that human being’s life being ended. If anyone should have their life ended over rape, it should be the rapist, not the innocent child.
As for the child reminding her of the horrific incident, let me ask you something: should we be allowed to kill other human beings simply because they remind of us of a horrible event that happened to us? Lets say that a woman is raped and doesn't get pregnant, and it just so happens that her boss looks similar to the rapist, and everyday at work she is reminded of that horrible incident because her boss resembles the rapist. Should she be allowed to kill her boss, n innocent human being, simply because he reminds her of that horrible attack? 
Luckily, less than 1% of abortions are done on women who became pregnant as the result of rape, so that is a very small issue.
I propose to you an offer:  If I agree to write in the exception for rape , will you lobby with me for the law banning all other abortions (99% of the ones performed) ?

*”Another pretty valid point are the legislators that claim themselves as pro-life consistently vote down child welfare services. So, how can they say we need to protect that child as much as we can while in womb, but when it comes out, if the parents can't afford it, that's on them, maybe the shouldn't have had the kid in the first place. The pro-life concepts don't make a lot of sense in that regard.”

An EXCELLENT point my friend! And that, I agree with you 100%. It makes no sense whatsoever! We should make every effort to protect the children at all stages of development, not just in the womb. Thats why I cannot stand politicians, they dont make sense and they! HA! As the late Whitney Houston so eloquently put it, I believe the children are our future. We should protect them at all costs at all stages of their life . 

*”The MOST obvious [reason], mother endangerment”

This too is something I agree with you on. But I believe you are mistaken about. Yes, I believe that if the mother’s life is at risk and if continuing to carry the child or giving birth would kill her, then I believe that her life should be saved. I haven't met any Pro-life advocates that would disagree. The child will die either way, so you are saving the only life you can. I use the analogy that if 2 kids are going down stream towards a waterfall, and you go in to save them, but because of the current, you only have time to save one, you save the one that easiest to save and that is closest to you. You aren't going in with the intention of taking a life, you are going in with the intention of saving a life. The other life that is lost is an unintentional and unavoidable consequence.
Also, even if abortion were made illegal, this would in no way affect this life saving procedure. These procedures are done in hospitals or women’s clinics by medical doctors who are trying to save the woman’s life. Ive never heard of an abortion doctor doing one of these life saving procedures. I have a friend who is an OBGYN here in Starkville and the Medical Director of the Starkville Pregnancy Care Center, and I've talked to him about this issue and how he handles it. He agrees and says that it is a last resort procedure they do to save the mother’s life and that those cases are rare. So the legalization or ilegalization of abortion would have no affect whatsoever on this procedure. 

*”...people who have the ability to have the keep and could afford it or giving it up for adoption, and they have an abortion, that's pretty twisted.”

Yes, that is pretty twisted. But sadly, that is the case with the majority of people who get abortions in the US. They use abortion as a form of birth control. I believe that adoption is the best choice in the situations where the parents cannot provide for the children. 
In their annual report released in 2010, Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, did 392 abortions per every 1 adoption referral. 

*”You and I probably shouldn't have too much input on a subject like this because after all, we can never get pregnant. This is women's rights issue, and men trying to legislate it just doesn't make sense!”

I see your point, and I would agree with you IF this really were a women’s rights issue. The claim that abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life) is a women’s rights issue couldn't be farther from the truth. It is, in fact, a human rights issue. Since abortion was made legal in the US in 1973, over 55 Million innocent human beings have been killed. Half of those innocent human beings (approximately 27.5 Million) have been male. This doesn't just concern women, it concerns men as well. Regardless of the gender, nobody should have the right to unjustly take the life of an innocent human being.   

*”We can not for a single second compare abortions to the holocaust.”

Why can’t we? Approximately 6 million innocent human beings were killed in the Holocaust. Around 55 Million innocent human beings were/are being killed through abortion. The death toll of abortion is approximately 9 times higher than that of the Holocaust.
Now, I will grant that the torture and brutality of the Jews before they were killed is horrific, and in comparison, abortion seems like a more merciful way to kill someone. Although it has been proven that in surgical abortions past 8 weeks, the child can actually feel pain and can feel the pain of its arms and legs being ripped from their bodies. That sounds horrific too.
So, when comparing just the death tolls, abortion would be considered 9 times worse than the holocaust.
Not to mention that the US’s largest abortion provider started out as a machine for eugenics, ridding the nation of the undesirable people, most notably, blacks. Their early founders had numerous links to the KKK and the Nazi Party, and even Hitler and Himmler. They still do, in some forms, still function today with a racist agenda. But that is a whole other can of worms that can be saved for a later discussion. (If you are interested, I suggest you watch “Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America”. 

Thanks for your input in this discussion, and I apologize for the delayed response. I hope you have a blessed summer! =)  
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As you can see, every response comes back to the question, are the unborn human? If they are not human, than abortion isnt wrong at all and should be legal, but if the unborn are human, then abortion is Very wrong and should be made illegal and the unborn should be protected at all cost! 



*Update: I received a response to this from the guy it was written to. He was telling g someone about it and tagged me in it.:
 "Nick Bell and I were In a debate about abortion recently in a status he published. Nick and I threw some good points at each other in a non-offensive way, some things we actually agreed on. There were people in the thread obviously offended but, in his argument he opened my mind to think about my stance on the issue, I am still pro-choice, but he brought up valid points. Opening people to think works in many ways."

I praise God that his mind was opened to think about and consider some of his ideas!