We live in a zeitgeist in which good is scorned as evil and evil is heralded as good. It is a conundrum that while troubling to some is not perplexing to me.

If a person is found to be abusing a dog or a cat he or she is decried and faces harsh reprimands. So sacrosanct is the protection of animals that a certain poultry company advertises that people should buy their products because of the care they give their chickens before they end up on your plate. Animal-rights zealots protest the treatment of hogs and cattle, calling for a caring environment before they are slaughtered and served as meals in our homes and restaurants.

The so-called “women’s rights” groups are out en masse shrieking and caterwauling because the House of Representatives proposed the “inhumane and dare I say unconscionable” step of ending the murder of babies after 20 weeks.

Planned Parenthood and the advocates of baby killing do not want it known that at 20 weeks a baby is fully developed – not that it matters, because said groups believe women should be allowed to murder their child up to the moment of birth.

There are groups that argue the declawing of cats and the clipping of the tails of dogs is animal cruelty and must be stopped. There are groups fighting to end the circumcising of male babies because they hypothesize the practice is painful and traumatizing to a male child.

However, as I wrote over a decade ago:

“Between weeks 20 and 30, an unborn child has more pain receptors per square inch than at any other time, before or after birth, with only a very thin layer of skin for protection. Mechanisms that inhibit or moderate the experience of pain do not begin to develop until weeks 30-32. Any pain the unborn child experiences before these mechanisms form is likely worse than the pain an older child or adult experiences. (Expert report of Dr. Kanwaljeet S. Anand, Northern District of the U.S. District Court in California, Jan. 15, 2004. Dr. Anand is a board-certified pediatrician who specializes in the care of critically ill newborns and children, and has conducted over 20 years of intensive research and study on the development of pain and stress in human newborn infants and fetuses.)” (See: “Turkeys Matter, But Children Are A Choice,” mychal-massie.com, Nov. 29, 2005)

“Planned Parenthood, perhaps the most prolific abortion-genocide machine, would have the public believe that impaling a woman with what amounts to a shop vac that rips apart a tiny unborn child is painless. They want the public to believe that having an unborn baby burned to death from salt solution is painless. Tell that to the woman experiencing cramps as her unborn child kicks and rolls violently as it is slowly burned to death in the solution.” That is the epitome of upside down reasoning.

Some believe that when God created man and woman, He also created he-he and she-she but that the Holy Spirit, in some cruel twist, blinded the writers of Scripture He inspired to write the life-guiding words of the Holy Bible, and hence there is no mention of same. Those such as myself who believe the word of God is settled in heaven (see Psalm 119:89) and that it is immutable are accused of adhering to outdated reasoning.

I don’t believe that there’s a gene that causes one to be homosexual any more than I believe in unicorns. In fact, as I recall, when the alleged scientific evidence for this surfaced in the early 1980s, it was later revealed that the discovering scientists were themselves homosexuals.

The most expedient path to transmogrifying aberrant behavior to acceptable is to affix the scientific label “genetic” to it. The problem is, there’s no historical biblical support for such claims – the Erebusic entreaties masquerading as erudition, in the useless attempt to prove that God created outside of “XX” and “XY” chromosomes, notwithstanding.

The world today is turned upside down because sin is palatable if it has a scientific seal of approval on it. For example: Anthony Weiner and Harvey Weinstein aren’t scum; they’re sex addicts. Said reasoning is the excuse used by individuals to avoid accountability.

Our culture asserts it’s acceptable for the groups referenced herein to deny biblical absolutes, but it’s intolerant for true Christians to embrace biblical truths. We base our position upon the word of God and Christian dogma. Those ridiculing us base their positions upon what those like themselves are saying.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.