April 30, 2012

Justice Served to Obama

By Matt Barber

Eric Holder is a busy man. When President Obama’s chief law enforcement officer isn’t tied up selling guns to Mexican drug cartels, refusing to prosecute self-serving cases of voter intimidation or ignoring “wanted dead or alive” bounties placed by black militants on the heads of private citizens, he’s busy conspiring with pro-abortion extremists to bring the full weight of the federal government down upon innocent pro-life advocates.

So much tyranny, so little time.

Eric Holder is much more than just incompetent. He’s an extremist pro-abortion activist who shares his boss’s goal of “fundamentally transforming America” to reflect both men’s secular-socialist self-image.

The most recent and obvious example of this administration’s serial abuse of power in furtherance of a radical pro-abortion agenda came when the Department of Health and Human Services mandated, in contravention of the First Amendment, that all religious organizations provide contraception, sterilization and various forms of abortion to employees. This may be the single greatest violation of our constitutionally safeguarded religious liberties in our lifetimes. The mandate remains in place to this day.

But individual citizens haven’t escaped a forced fiduciary tie to abortion homicide. A few weeks later HHS arbitrarily attached a “final rule” to Obamacare requiring that every American, pro-life or otherwise, pay one dollar per month earmarked expressly for an abortion services pool. This validates pro-life forewarnings that the president was simply lying when he issued a toothless executive order supposedly banning federal dollars for abortion. (What do we call someone who chronically lies?)

Still, every once in a while the good guys win one.

For several months now the Obama administration has been abusing our judicial system through a concerted political intimidation campaign via the federal courts. Obama has instructed the Justice Department to sue a number of pro-life counselors and volunteers for allegedly violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance (FACE) Act.

You won’t hear it from the mainstream media, but the Justice Department has just faced an embarrassing smack down on the highest profile of these cases. It has dropped an appeal in Holder v. Pine against pro-life sidewalk counselor Mary “Susan” Pine, who is represented by the civil rights firm Liberty Counsel. The DOJ has agreed to pay $120,000 for this frivolous lawsuit which, as the evidence indicated, was intended to intimidate Ms. Pine and send a shot over the bow of pro-lifers around the country.

Mr. Holder unsuccessfully sought thousands of dollars in fines against Ms. Pine, as well as a permanent injunction banning her from counseling women on the public sidewalk outside the Presidential Women’s Center (PWC) abortion mill (or any other “reproductive services” clinic).

After 18 months of litigation, the DOJ’s case was thrown out of federal court, and the department was chastised in a scathing ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp for filing a case with no evidence.

Judge Ryskamp wrote that Holder’s complete failure to present any evidence of wrongdoing, coupled with the DOJ’s cozy relationship with PWC and their apparent joint decision to destroy video surveillance footage of the alleged “obstruction,” caused the court to suspect a conspiracy at the highest levels of the Obama administration. “The Court is at a loss as to why the Government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place,” wrote Judge Ryskamp. “The Court can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the Government and PWC, which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities rather than to vindicate the rights of those allegedly aggrieved by Ms. Pine’s conduct.”

After the ruling the DOJ appealed on the last day possible and gave indication that President Obama had personally ordered the appeal. A little over a week later, the president apparently decided to cut his losses and reversed course.

Harry Mihet, senior counsel for Liberty Counsel, said of the judge’s ruling: “It’s not every day that a federal judge accuses the Justice Department of a full-blown conspiracy.”

Ironically, this past December, in the midst of the case, Ms. Pine actually counseled a woman outside of PWC and convinced her not to have an abortion, thus saving the life of the child and possibly the mother as well. Her email to Liberty Counsel read simply: “We saved a life today.”

Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, pulled no punches:

It is irresponsible for the U.S. Department of Justice to place politics above principle when deciding to prosecute, and thus attempt to silence, a pro-life sidewalk counselor without any evidence of wrongdoing.

When the nation’s highest law enforcement officer files suit against any citizen, the suit must be based on the law coupled with compelling evidence. Anything less is an abuse of the high office. Susan Pine will not be silenced or detoured from her mission to save the lives of innocent children.

Indeed, “politics above principle,” intimidation of private citizens and jaw-dropping abuses of power are but a few hallmarks of this Obama administration.

History will be no more kind to this president than he has been to the citizens he was sworn to honorably serve.

Matt Barber is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law, who also serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action.

[Editor’s Note: The opinions and views expressed by guest and outside contributors in articles submitted for publication in the Sage Commentary or Sage Views sections are those of the author and are not necessarily the opinions and views of Sage Commentary]

April 30, 2012

To Be or Not to Be – Chance or Creation, You Decide

By Donald G. Mashburn

More scientists are questioning the claims – often fraudulent – of evolutionists. Evolutionists don’t like it. They dogmatically oppose the very thought of “Intelligent Design” in the creation of life. And they get really ugly for anyone to suggest that the God of the Bible, an all-powerful Creator created “all things” and “all things exist by His will.”

They claim that “all scientists” accept their beliefs. Such statements are blatantly untrue, of course, as you know if you’re personally acquainted with many real scientists. For many scientists are coming to realize that evolutionists’ claims of “random” haphazard origin of life don’t hold up under scientific scrutiny.

Evolution advocates seem to be ignorant of – or choose to ignore – the solid, science-based arguments against evolution. In particular, they ignore the demonstrated mathematical improbability that evolution has, or can, occur.

Mathematical and statistical methods show the absurdity of some evolutionists’ claims that “chance” produced life on this planet.

In 1860, Thomas Huxley, known as “Darwin’s bulldog,” debated Anglican Bishop Samuel Wilberforce on evolution. Huxley surprised Wilberforce by claiming, “Six eternal monkeys typing on six eternal typewriters, with an unlimited supply of paper and ink, could if given enough time, produce a psalm, a sonnet, or even a whole book.”

Russell Grigg, in Creation, Ex Nihilo, in 1990-1991, skillfully concluded that using “ape-friendly” typewriters with only 50 keys, and using all capitals and by striking one key per second, the “chance” of randomly typing only the first two words of Psalm 1:1, “The Lord,” would be only 1 in 39,062 billion, and would take 1,238,664 years!

Huxley claimed that “somewhere, sometime,” all things could be produced by chance. However, his monkey-typists argument fails the scientific tests of mathematics and biogenesis, the principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms.

And just for fun, consider the statistical game any high school math class can play. First, place 10 identical discs, numbered from 1 to 10, in a bucket. Then ask: Can we, using “chance methods,” count from 1 to 10 by drawing out one disc from the bucket, noting it, and putting it back in the bucket?

Stated simply, can we count from 1 to 10, in the correct sequence, by taking the discs from the bucket one at a time?

Michael Stubbs, writing in Creation magazine computed the probability of selecting the discs in the right order as one in 10 billion attempts. Or, by using “chance methods,” we need 10 billion attempts to count from 1 to 10.

An even more interesting “chance” problem is the statistical debunking of evolutionism’s claim that we all descended from a simple cell that somehow came from the nothingness of some primordial ooze.

Huxley’s modern day counterparts claim that even DNA molecules can be developed by chance. But not according to Harold J. Morowitz, Professor of Biophysics at Yale University, who investigated the statistical impossibility of forming a DNA molecule.

Morowitz took into account the chemistry and physics required to form one complete bacterium of Escherichia coli – the common diarrhea bacterium. He concluded that the probability of such an event occurring in the entire history of the universe is less than one chance in 10 to the 100 billion power, a probability so infinitesimally small it is mathematically considered to be zero many billions earlier

Considering the intricate structure of human cells – to say nothing of the incredibly precise “electrical system” that keeps your heart beating in rhythm – a thinking scientist proficient in math would conclude that chance has no role in the design of the “wonderfully made” human body.

An increasing number of biology teachers are questioning the lack of proof for evolution, and rightly so. Yet, many biology teachers still parrot the myth – as C.S. Lewis called it – that your ancestors were slime, or some such uncomely pedigree. But evolution, viewed through the clear lens of biophysics and mathematics – both true sciences – is shown to be not science but a system of beliefs.

Therefore, if you believe with evolutionists that you evolved, and yet accept the computations of real scientists like professor Morowitz, the probability is zero that you exist!

And if you believe that you’re a product of evolution, and accept the stubborn precision of mathematics, you can’t possibly exist. Talk about being a “nobody!”