ALIPAC Asks Trump Supporters To Contribute to Insurgent GOP Candidates

An interesting article from www.ALIPAC.us about GOP candidates. This follows this post about increased refugees.  This follows this post about Pope Francis and immigration. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

 

 

ALIPAC Asks Trump Supporters To Contribute to Insurgent GOP Candidates


Contact: Americans for Legal Immigration PAC | WilliamG@alipac.us | (866) 703-0864

With illegal immigration being the top issue of the GOP primaries for the first time in modern history, and with the leading GOP Candidate for President ascending due to his promise to deport illegals and Muslim refugees while financing his own campaign, ALIPAC is asking Donald Trump supporters to focus their donations on insurgent GOP candidates running against Republican incumbents that are likely to join with Democrats to oppose the Trump immigration plans.

ALIPAC has compiled an unprecedented list of Republican incumbents that have been documented supporting amnesty for illegal aliens despite the fact they are eager to convince GOP voters otherwise. This list is called the Cantor List and it now contains 178 GOP incumbents that stand with John McCain, Marco Rubio, Jeb bush, Eric Cantor, and Barack Obama in support of amnesty for illegal aliens!

"Since Mr. Trump has said he has no need for donations from his highly energized supporters, their financial support would be wisely spent backing GOP insurgent candidates that would back his tough enforcement agenda. The targets on our Cantor List are the men and women currently in congress that have blood on their hands for all of the deaths and destruction caused by illegal aliens that freely enter and roam America with government support due to Obama and his GOP facilitators and protectors," said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. "Regardless of which candidate you favor for President, the 'Trump Effect' is creating a powerful campaign coattail by which any GOP insurgent challenger can rise to the top of the race by exposing the amnesty support record of the 178 incumbents on the Cantor List! But it will not help America to elect an outsider candidate to the Presidency if these GOP lawmakers that support amnesty in Congress are reelected!"

Many GOP insurgent candidates have already emerged against GOP incumbents and made the incumbent's support for amnesty for illegals a top campaign issue.

Eric Cantor's support for amnesty for illegals, like the 178 new targets on the Cantor List, is the main reason he lost his race in 2014 to GOP newcomer Dave Brat. While Cantor outspent Brat 40 to 1, Brad defeated Cantor in a landslide with the help of his campaign manager Zach Werrell.

Adding to ALIPAC's ability to target GOP incumbents that agree with Democrats like Pelosi and Obama on amnesty for illegals, Zach Werrell has launched a new campaign consulting firm to help more GOP primary insurgents repeat the astounding overthrow of Eric Cantor. Many of the tips on how to accomplish such a feat are in Werrell's first of its kind book How to Bag a RINO.

"We need America to hear our call!" said William Gheen. "We need more GOP primary challengers lining up against Cantor List targets and using the resources and know how obtained from the Brat vs. Cantor race. We also need all of those Republican donors that would usually focus their funds on the star power candidates for President to focus their much need donations on the candidates and effort to change Congress by electing more anti-establishment anti-amnesty republicans in the 2016 primaries."

For more information or to schedule interviews, please visit www.ALIPAC.us

###
 

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!

Wknd Box Office: The 5th Wave, The Boy, Mojave

By Debbie Schlussel

Hope to be back on track with earlier, more timely movie reviews next Friday, but you didn’t miss much in this weekend’s new releases. It’s January, the second pet cemetery for bad movies (the first is August), where Hollywood studios send bad movies to die. Two of the movies are okay, and, ironically, the one not screened for critics isn’t all bad. I did not see “Dirty Grandpa,” which was also not screened for critics, and about which I heard awful things, unless juvenile penis jokes courtesy of Robert De Niro are your thing. As for the rest . . .
* “The 5th Wave” – Rated PG-13: This was yet another post-apocalyptic/dystopian/end-of-days movie of which we’ve seen plenty. Sometimes I like those, sometimes I don’t. This fit more into the former category. It wasn’t bad, and I’m surprised it was released in January.
Chloe Grace Moretz stars as a teen girl in a world taken over by alien space ships, a world in which most humans have died. It begins with Moretz’s character asking how she has quickly become the teen girl who kills to survive, from what was, shortly before that, the girl who was a normal fun-loving, obedient American teen. Then, the movie flash backs to what happened.
First, alien spaceships began to appear in the sky in major cities all over the world. But aliens never descended form them or communicated with humans. Instead, there were “waves” of destruction that followed. First, electricity stopped working (along with cellphones, wifi, etc.), and cars stopped functioning. Not sure how aliens can magically do that, since not all cars are electric, but it’s aliens–so you suspend your disbelief, knowing it’s science fiction. Then, there is a plague of bad weather. Floods and typhoons strike Moretz’s Ohio neighborhood, even though the area is largely landlocked. Tsunami-like tidal waves hit coastal cities and instantly take down skyscrapers and other buildings (though other scenes after this destruction, show the buildings entirely intact–an inconsistency). And, then, there is a plague of disease. Many humans die from illness, including Moretz’s mother.
With her father and younger brother surviving, Moretz’s family goes to a nearby refugee camp where other survivors go. Eventually, U.S. military personnel show up at the camp, stating that the aliens have taken human form and are occupying the woods as snipers to kill the few surviving humans left. Also, the survivors are told, the aliens can’t can’t be detected easily, except among children. The commanding officer, a general played by Liev Schreiber, informs the people that he will take the kids, first, to nearby Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, drop them off, and then come for the adults. At first, I thought this movie was anti-U.S.-military, but when things are explained, that’s actually not the case. As with any good thriller, things are not what they seem. Moretz is rescued and helped by a handsome stranger who is also enigmatic.
I thought the movie was a little violent for the youthful audience at which it’s aimed. That said, there are clear “good versus evil” delineations once the movie progresses and things are explained. So I’d probably let my young teens see it, if I were a parent.
I enjoyed this movie, as it was entertaining, full of action, and has a tightly-crafted story. That said, it isn’t original. We’ve seen this story with slight variations before, and I’m sure we’ll see it again. And like many of those movies, this is based on a series of best-selling young adult novels. This movie ends with more than a hint that the story continues and that sequels will soon be served up. That’s Hollywood.
ONE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS

Watch the Trailer . . .

* “The Boy” – Rated R: This was not screened for critics, usually a bad sign. And there were no Thursday night early showings, an even worse sign. But it wasn’t bad. And as creepy movies go, this was extremely creepy and well done. As scary movies go, it was kind of scary, though I’m jaded because I’ve seen so many allegedly scary movies that very little of what used to make me jump and scream, frightens me anymore. I had an inkling of what was really going on here at some point early on in the movie because, again, I see so many of these that it becomes less difficult to figure out. Still, I thought it was decent for the kind of movie that it is. And I’m surprised they didn’t screen this, as I’ve been “treated” to screenings for many movies that are far worse.
The story: an American woman, Greta (the British Lauren Cohan, who does an English accent well–see her work on “The Walking Dead”), goes to the UK to escape an abusive boyfriend back in Montana. She applies for a nanny job for a couple’s son at their giant mansion in the countryside. When she gets there for the interview, she meets the couple, who are old and seem too old to have a young son. Then, she “meets” the son–a creepy ceramic boy doll. The couple tells her she has all kinds of rules of things she must do for the the son: wake him every morning and dress him, read to him, play music very loudly, feed him, help him learn piano, put him to bed, etc.
Greta thinks the whole thing is ridiculous and finally learns from the local grocery owner (who delivers the food) that the couple’s son died in a fire when he was eight. The couple have dealt with their grief by believing that the boy is this doll that appeared soon after their real son died. While Greta believes the situation is comical, she decides to accept the job and stay to stay away from her violent ex-love back in the States and also to get paid for an easy job of reading to a doll.
Soon, the “parents” of the doll announce they are going on vacation and will leave Greta at the creepy mansion to take care of Brahms (the “boy”/doll). They leave her with a set of rules. Great still believes this is silly, but soon strange things begin happening at the mansion. And, then, she starts believing that the spirit of the dead boy is actually embodied in this doll. The film is a great example of how easily a reasonable person–even a jaded, skeptical one–can be convinced to believe the unbelievable.
This movie was engrossing and entertaining. And you actually suspend belief, unless you figure it all out. Either way, for a creepy, scary movie, this does the trick. And wasn’t that the point?
TWO REAGANS

Watch the trailer . . .

* “Mojave” – Rated PG-13: The storyline for this was a good idea in theory, but not in the way it’s practiced in this boring disaster and complete waste of time.
The story: a successful, wealthy, young movie star (Garrett Hedlund) who drinks, does drugs, and cheats on his wife, is frustrated. So he briefly leaves his Hollywood home to hang out in the Mojave desert. But he drives so erratically that his jeep turns over and he can’t turn it back over. What might have been a quick sojourn turns into an overnight camping trip, though it appears he did plan to spend the night camping, anyway, as he seems to have the necessary supplies. Hedlund builds a campfire and thinks he is alone in the desert on a dark night. But, soon, another man (Oscar Isaac), who seems to be a lone drifter or homeless person, comes upon Hedlund’s camp. He tries to befriend Hedlund and sit at his campfire, but Hedlund doesn’t want that, as he is very suspicious of the stranger. Soon, they are in a physical tussle, which the larger Hedlund wins. And Hedlund gets the drifter’s rifle, pointing it at him and demanding he leave.
Later, Hedlund goes inside a cave of sorts and falls asleep. He wakes up in the morning with a national park ranger or Border Patrol agent looking down at him from the cave, and without thinking, Hedlund shoots the guard with the rifle, instantly killing him. Hedlund, in shock over what he has done and desperate to get away with it and not get caught, flees the desert and gets back to Los Angeles. He leaves the rifle in pieces, except for one wooden portion of it, and he’s careful to wipe his prints off of everything.
But the desert drifter finds Hedlund’s overturned Jeep, and learns who he is from the registration left in the vehicle’s glove compartment. The drifter hitchhikes to Los Angeles, robs and kills a wealthy gay man whom he entices, and then the drifter meets up with Hedlund, blackmailing him . . . or, rather, attempting to.
Nothing really ever happens in this very slow, uninteresting film. It just sits there. And at the end of the movie, you wonder, “Is that all there is?” Sadly, yes, that’s all there is. On the other hand, thank G-d it’s over. 1.5 wasted hours of your life you’ll never get back.
TWO MARXES PLUS TWO OBAMAS PLUS ONE ISIS BEHEADING

Watch the trailer . . .

You might also like:

Well, Someone Finally Has Some Balls on Egypt – 3 Cheers ...

MUST WATCH: POWERFUL Video on Occupy Wall St Anti-Semitism

Yeah, Right: Helen Thomas a/k/a tHAMAS Told Relatives ...

Weekend Box Office: “Date Night,” “Runaways,” “Girl w/ ...

Linkwithin

Editorial: Is "Open Borders" a Conservative postion? Republican one? Patriotic? American? Righteous?

Editorial

Where one stands on immigration in this era should be THE litmus test for conservative-ness. A person may be pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-free market, yet if that person has an Open Borders stance, then that same person is allowing people into the country who will vote for the party which has stood AGAINST pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-free market.

Donald Trump And The Emergence Of The Alternative (“Dissident”) Right

An interesting article from http://www.vdare.com about Donald Trump and "conservatism." This follows this post about the increase in Central American refugees. This follows this post about candidates running against RINO's in the primary season. This follows this post about Pope Francis and immigration. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

 

Samuel T. Francis, 1947-2005

<

Donald Trump, Sam Francis And The Emergence Of The Alternative (“Dissident”) Right

>

---

James Kirkpatrick

A+ | a-

  

See also Is the Spectre of Trump (And Sam Francis) Haunting Davos?
Conservatism Inc.’s mouthpieces (“conservative intellectuals”—Rich Lowry?!!!) have made a last-ditch effort in National Review to frame the battle against Trump as a conflict between unprincipled “populism” and principled “conservatism” [Donald Trump or Ted Cruz? Republicans Argue Over Who Is Greater Threat, by Jonathan Martin, New York Times, January 21, 2016]. You won’t hear this from us often, but Salon has a pretty good demolition job. The bottom line: the late Samuel T. Francis has been redeemed.
It was nothing less than historic when talk radio titan Rush Limbaugh respectfully quoted Sam Francis on January 20, saying he was “undeservedly smeared” as a white supremacist. Limbaugh claimed “populism” and “nationalism” have overcome “conservatism” in terms of popularity and that Donald Trump is building a new kind of coalition on the American Right [Nationalism Trumps Conservatism Says Limbaugh, WND, January 20, 2016]
Significantly, rather than falling back on lame slogans about how “true conservatives” need to stamp out this rebellion, Limbaugh actually sought to understand why it is happening, turning to Sam Francis’s discussion of the Pat Buchanan insurgency in a 1996 Chronicles article, From Household To Nation. And Limbaugh used Francis’s analysis to attack a GOP Establishment that he charged does not understand its own voters.
Limbaugh argued ordinary conservative voters aren’t “wonks” who are “dyed-in-the-wool conservative theoreticians absorbed in such things as the free market and all these other bells and whistles.” Instead, they’re attracted to someone willing to actually confront and defeat the Left, after years of what voters see as continuous retreat in Washington DC.
Perhaps most importantly, Limbaugh specifically identified the refusal of the GOP to do anything about Open Borders as the catalyst for voters’ anger. [Understanding Trump’s appeal, Rush Limbaugh, January 20, 2016]
Limbaugh cited Michael Brendan Dougherty’s influential article How an obscure advisor to Pat Buchanan predicted the wild Trump campaign in 1996 [The Week, January 19, 2016]. Dougherty’s virtue-signaling about “race-obsessed ‘alt-right’ nationalists” is worth enduring for his accurate analysis that the late lamented Conservative Movement is now largely “worthless” when it comes to protecting the interests of its constituents and “what so frightens the conservative movement about Trump’s success is that he reveals just how thin the support for their ideas really is.”
Of course, it is dangerous to base large political theories around Trump because he is such a singular personality. A charismatic billionaire who has spent decades crafting a wildly popular brand is going to attract support no matter what.
But despite Trump’s sui generis nature, his success confirms a more general point: Republican voters don’t vote for the GOP because of goofy rhetoric about enterprise zones and Social Security reform, but despite it.
And, notwithstanding increasingly shrill predictions by the pundits, there’s no sign Trump is slowing down. A new poll shows Trump with an eleven point over Ted Cruz lead only days before the critical Iowa caucus [Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders hold solid leads in Iowa, CNN/ORC poll finds, by Tal Kopan, CNN, January 21, 2016]. More worrisome for the Beltway Right, Trump can survive a narrow defeat in Iowa, whereas it is unclear Cruz can.
The “populism” now denounced by National Review isn’t an ideology. It’s a tactic. And it’s a tactic Conservatism Inc. has been quite willing to use—and still is.
Ted Cruz, who is now calling Donald Trump a phony conservative, has spent the entire campaign up to this point praising Trump and copying his positions as he tried to win over his voters. Even the faux Flyover Country shtick of his #NewYorkValues campaign is a clumsy attempt to transform an East Coast corporate lawyer into some kind of corn-fed son of the soil. As Diana West acidly observed, Cruz also reversed his “internationalist” positions on trade, H1-B visas and refugees in order to position himself as a faux nationalist. [Cruz v. Trump I, Diana West, January 20, 2016]
More broadly, the entire Establishment Conservative Movement can be defined as the attempt to exploit cornpone revulsion from “New York Values” while accepting the money and serving the interests of New York City financiers. Who can forget Tea Party “leader” Dick Armey wearing a cowboy hat and claiming to speak for Middle America while he privately lobbied for more immigration and mocked the “Bubba vote?” [Armey `Bubba vote` to hurt Obama, by Richard Wolf and Martha T. Moore, USA Today, September 3, 2008]
There’s an unreality in people like Mark Levin screeching that Trump is some dire threat to “liberty” [Levin: Agrarian National Populism Not Conservative, by Jeff Poor, Breitbart, January 21, 2016]. Besides his implicit criticism of Trump’s supporters as “morons,” Levin has never actually done anything to limit the size of the state. Indeed, judging by the history of the postwar American Right, “liberty” is simply a more flowery term for “upper-class tax cuts.”
Besides, populism, if it means anything, refers to the creation of a mass movement of regular people directed against a hostile elite. Conservatism Inc. relies on such posturing. Conservative railing against the “liberal elite” is such a standard tactic it doesn’t even bear notice.
Trump is different, because he actually seems willing to defend the concrete interests of his supporters—not just offer the same slogans.
But though Limbaugh seems to understand Trump has created something new, even he doesn’t fully realize what’s happening. Besides Francis, he also credited Angelo Codevilla and his 2010 American Spectator article on the Rise of the Ruling Class as anticipating Trump. Codevilla’s thesis does resemble a dumbed-down version of Francis’s work, as he explains the machinations of a “ruling class” with a uniform ideology operating through the state. But Codevilla, who supports mass immigration, also refuses to identify international capitalism as one of the forces breaking down Middle American communities.
Ultimately, there’s a difference of substance as well as tone between Codevilla’s pro-forma opposition to a statist “ruling class” and Francis’s deeper analysis that international capitalism is sometimes the more dangerous enemy of tradition and authentic conservatism [Capitalism, The Enemy, by Sam Francis, Chronicles, August 2000, republished online at Radix Journal, July 3, 2015].
Something tells me this is the bridge Rush Limbaugh will never cross.
The truth is that Trump’s triumph is a victory of substance, not just style. For decades, the Conservative Movement has tried a kind of halfway populism, to convince struggling Middle Americans to support an internationalist agenda of mass immigration, foreign wars, cuts to programs like Medicare and Social Security, and economic globalization. Because the overt hatred of the Left is so strong, many white Americans felt they had no choice but to vote for Republicans—or simply stay home if offered candidates like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.
Ted Cruz’s strategy is premised upon being a “true conservative” as opposed to the “populist” Trump. Having moved to the right on immigration, Cruz and his apologists within the conservative movement are now pushing Cruz’s opposition to “crony capitalism” as a way to create space between him and Trump. [Trump’s support for Ethanol is bad for taxpayers and their cars, by Jillian Kay Melchior, National Review, January 21, 2016].
But just as with the Conservatism Inc. obsession with the Export-Import Bank, it’s impossible to take such concerns seriously.

• First: such issues simply are not important compared to existential questions such as immigration and sovereignty, where there are serious doubts about Cruz’s priorities. As Rush Limbaugh said, most Americans are not “wonks.”
• Second: as Francis explained in Household to Nation, many Americans benefit from government programs. Dogmatically opposing these programs in the name of “limited government” may appeal to nonprofit employees, in DC but normal Americans will not understand why their own livelihoods should be endangered on behalf of ideological abstractions promoted by eccentric billionaires.
• Third: even “true conservatives” like Cruz favor government intervention in the economy when it comes to their preferred programs. Witness Cruz’s enthusiastic support for the Keystone Pipeline, which requires extensive use of that other Movement Conservative bugaboo, Eminent Domain. And this has not gone unnoticed by the Left [Jon Stewart rips Republicans for hypocritical position on eminent domain, by Greg Gilman, The Wrap, November 21, 2015]

If “conservatism” is defined as the protection of the national community, Trump is more of a “conservative” than Cruz. Cruz is more “conservative” only if we define that ideology as a rhetorical obsession with wonkish economic issues and totemistic phrases such as “limited government.”
As such invocations never seem to amount to anything anyway, it may be “conservatism” which is the empty politics of style, not Trump’s sinewy nationalism.
But there is one legitimate point to Conservatism Inc.’s kvetching. With the Sarah Palin/Donald Trump alliance, implicit white identity politics is now a real force in American politics. But the intellectual backing for such a project can only be found in the Alternative (John Derbyshire prefers “Dissident”) Right. And more than any other figure, Sam Francis provided the vocabulary, analysis and strategy for dismantling the current order.
If Trump can achieve a political triumph, it will surely speed Francis’s postmortem intellectual one.
Somewhere in Valhalla, Samuel T. Francis is smiling. Because it’s not illegal immigrants who are going to be coming out of the shadows. It’s us.

James Kirkpatrick [Email him] is a Beltway veteran and a refugee from Conservatism Inc.

Tens of Thousands of Pro-Lifers March for Life and Mourn 58 Million Abortions

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about the March for Life. This follows this post about doritos. This follows this post about botched abortions. For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

Tens of Thousands of Pro-Lifers March for Life and Mourn 58 Million Abortions

National   Steven Ertelt     Washington, DC

Share this story:

Thanks to a massive snowstorm threatening to dump at least two feet of snow on the  nation’s capital, the March for Life did not break any attendance records this year, but the tens of thousands of pro-life people who braved the cold and snow proudly stood for life.

While marchers mourned 43 years of legalized abortion, many sounded a hopeful theme for a pro-life future and think the decision will eventually be reversed.

The Roe v. Wade decision, handed down on January 22, 1973, overturned pro-life laws offering protection for unborn children in most states across the country, and made abortions legal and virtually unlimited. More than 58 million unborn children have been killed in abortions since.
Polling data shows Americans are pro-life and few agree with Obama’s unlimited abortion position or that of Hillary Clinton.
As with other recent marches, the number of young adults and high school and college students impressed organizers and provided another reason to be optimistic.
LifeNews has collected dozens of March for Life pictures from pro-lifers attending today’s March for Life. Below is a selection of those celebrating life and mourning Roe v. Wade.
Click here to sign up for daily pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com





Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.

Share this story:

Abortion and Planned Parenthood A Cause for Righteous Anger

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about abortion and Planned Parenthood. This follows this post about refugees. This follows this post about the papacy. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Abortion and Planned Parenthood

A Cause for Righteous Anger

 by Milan Bizic 1 comment Estimated reading time: 9 minutes

America’s abortion debate is a window on one of the country’s deepest spiritual crises. When we see injustice, brutality and sin on this scale, we rightly get angry at the evil. How can we ensure we’re experiencing godly, righteous anger instead of destructive, carnal anger?

Isabelle Limbach/iStock/Thinkstock

The sin of murder through abortion twists the lives of those affected and the twits the moral fiber of a people.

Why should abortion—and the merchandising of the body parts of murdered babies—fill us with godly, righteous anger?
Every day I read at least some news, so I spend my fair share of time feeling sad or shocked or simply perplexed at the things seemingly regular people do to other seemingly regular people. Thankfully, information saturation hasn’t numbed me to human suffering, and I can still get shocked and upset by what I see. I really wish there was enough good news to offset the bad, and I really wish I could walk away from a news report feeling happy and hopeful for everyone whose stories I read and hear about. It doesn’t happen very often.\

Godly, righteous anger is about justice , not revenge.

Every now and again I read a story that goes beyond the everyday shock and awe at the darker sides of human nature. You probably had the same reaction when you read about it or watched the videos that were shared around. I’m talking about the revelation that representatives of Planned Parenthood, the United States’ largest abortion provider, were caught on video bartering over body parts from aborted children.
Sure, I was shocked. I felt stunned and sad. But I felt another emotion as well—something deeper and rawer than sadness or shock. I was  angry.
Was it right for me to be angry? Should you be angry about abortion? Is it possible to be angry in a godly way? I’ll come back to America’s abortion crisis, but first let’s lay some groundwork on the complex concept of righteous, godly anger.

God’s anger is righteous

We don’t often think of anger as a Christian emotion—and for the most part, that’s probably a good thing. Christians are to be defined by their relationship with God the Father and Jesus Christ. They are measured by the character of Jesus Himself. And He perfectly modeled self-control, patience and mercy. But He was also capable of anger when the situation called for it.
All four Gospels record Jesus’ anger at the moneychangers in the temple for profaning God’s holy house. Maybe when you think about our Savior shouting, flipping over tables and using a makeshift whip to drive animals out of the temple it makes you uncomfortable. Maybe you have a difficult time reconciling this very real image of Jesus with other very real images of Jesus defending the weak, healing the sick and taking up the cause of the poor.
If we honestly and humbly read the Bible, though, we’ll see that this instance of Jesus’ life is 100 percent, entirely consistent with His righteous character as it’s displayed throughout the Bible. The author of Hebrews gives us an essential truth about Jesus: He is “the same yesterday, today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). That means the same godly character that produced anger at the temple moneychangers also produces great mercy every day. The same godly character that commands care for widows and orphans commands justice and judgment on those who reject God’s way.
Psalms 7:12 tells us, “God is angry with the wicked every day.” It should come as no surprise then that God is very angry at the senseless killing of helpless children. We shouldn’t be shocked that God is angry that people are profiting from the killing of His precious children. We also shouldn’t be afraid to feel some of that anger ourselves and to “sigh and cry” over the evil actions we see (Ezekiel 9:4).
When we read about callous violence and injustice, it’s right to be angry. We need to tread carefully however. Anger is a powerful and potentially very destructive emotion that, in the wrong context, wrong frame of mind and wrong spirit, can wreck our spiritual lives and cause us to hurt others.

Is your anger righteous?

Christianity is all about becoming more and more like God as Jesus modeled His righteous character for us to follow. It’s important that we keep close tabs on our thoughts and actions to make sure that we’re following His lead and not the pulls of the flesh and allowing human nature to dictate our responses. That’s why we need to constantly examine ourselves to make sure we’re staying on the “straight and narrow.” How do we know if we’re right or wrong in being angry at something?
Many scriptures show us there’s a vast gulf separating righteous and unrighteous anger. In the very beginning of mankind’s history, Cain’s anger drove him to murder his own brother (Genesis 4:8). Unfettered anger—or misdirected anger—can lead us to great sin. God Himself tells us that it is good to be angry as long as we don’t sin through misdirected, unrestrained anger (Ephesians 4:26).
So what is godly anger? One condition of righteous anger is that it should be directed toward sin. Just as Jesus was furious at the profaning of His Father’s house, we should hate sin and the negative consequences it brings on people—especially the innocent or helpless.
Proverbs 6 lists seven things that God actively hates. The common denominator is sin and its effects on people: “These six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren” (Proverbs 6:16-19).
A second aspect of godly anger is that it isn’t quickly or easily kindled. God’s anger at sin isn’t explosive. He’s not a “walking time bomb” like some people are.
No one likes to be around other people who have a reputation for their quick tempers. Sometimes people with explosive anger can be very dangerous. God Himself testifies to His slow temper: “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth” (Exodus 34:6).
If we want to cultivate only righteous anger, we need to follow His lead, being “slow to wrath” (James 1:19). In fact, this quality of God is one of the fruits of His Holy Spirit that develops in us as we grow close to God and He begins producing His character within us. Paul wrote that “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Galatians 5:22-23, emphasis added). Notice here self-control —another essential trait of those who don’t sin in anger.
A third factor in godly, righteous anger is that it’s about justice, not revenge. Do we get angry at people and hope for the time when they “get theirs”? If I’m being honest, I have to admit that sometimes my anger over horrific events like the mass slaughter of infants gets me going down this path.
But that human desire for punishment isn’t even remotely related to God’s promise of true justice for the innocent and the guilty. Paul tells us that we should “give place to wrath, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Romans 12:19). Wait for God’s time of judgment and justice.
God will ultimately deal with evildoers. And it helps to always keep in mind what God is well aware of—that people are misled in their thinking and actions by a powerful malevolent spirit—Satan the devil (see 1 John 5:19 and “An Evil Spirit World: Where Did It Come From? ”).

Why be angry about abortion?

Back to the Planned Parenthood controversy: Why should abortion—and the merchandising of the body parts of murdered babies—fill us with godly, righteous anger?
Consider that our society—our culture—is murdering, wholesale, the most precious and helpless among us. Psalm 127 tells us that children are a gift from God. They are precious to Him and should be to us. They’re not a burden, not a negative consequence, and certainly not a “parasite” in the womb as some characterize the unborn.
To say that we can choose to, at any point in a nine-month window of time, kill the next generation of the human family—all potential members of the divine family of God—is a great evil and a curse. We should be furious at the very notion.
Let’s be honest: Almost all abortions, by some estimates more than 99 percent, are performed for the reason of convenience.  The baby was conceived at an “inconvenient time” for the parents. No one has yet explained why a child can be given the death penalty because of the circumstances of their conception.
A fairly conservative estimate—based on numbers collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—puts the number of legal abortions performed in the United States since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973 at approximately 51 million. That’s 51 million lives cut short, 51 million untold stories, immeasurable potential thrown away and sacrificed to the false god of convenience and personal choice. Does that make you angry? It should.

Godly anger should lead to repentance

It should make you angry because, as Ezekiel warned Israel, sin twists people’s lives (Ezekiel 7:13, New Living Translation). The sin of murder through abortion twists the lives of those affected. And on a bigger scale, the widespread acceptance and support of abortion and organizations like Planned Parenthood twists the moral fiber of a people. If America’s national conscience can tolerate the dismembering of a child and the merchandising of its body parts, what can’t it tolerate?
There’s one last element to godly, righteous anger, and it’s the most important element. The anger that comes from God should convict us to change and become more like Him. It should motivate us to fix our problems and turn toward the mercy and love God desperately wants to extend to us.
God doesn’t want people to suffer the bad consequences that sin produces, and He doesn’t want any nation to suffer these consequences either. God is patient and “not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:8).
It’s not too late for those whose lives have been twisted by the sin of abortion to repent and live by God’s high standard of respect for the sanctity of life. And, while it would require a great miracle, it’s also not too late for America and other countries where abortion is legal to experience a nationwide repentance and to turn away from this sin.
God is waiting with arms wide open to accept those who turn away from sin to seek Him. Will America respond? Will you?

abortion Anger

You might also be interested in...

Current Events & Trends: Planned Parenthood caught in horrific scandal

Abortion is a powerfully emotional topic. Pro-abortion supporters passionately...

The Great Battle for God

With so much confusion and strife in our world, where is God and what is His...

• 

  Milan Bizic

  Publications Proofreader & Copy Editor, United Church of God

  Milan Nick Bizic was born in Wheeling, West Virginia. He was raised in a small community in Eastern Ohio, about an hour from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He is a graduate of Ambassador Bible Center, where he attended during the class of 2006. He also has a degree in computer science from Belmont College, and a degree in communication from Ohio University’s Scripps College of Communication and Journalism.

Add to my study list

Print this Page

Appeared In...

Good News Magazine: November - December 2015

Join the conversation!

Log in or register to post comments

Don’t let the snow keep you from helping the March for Life

A timely post from http://www.mrc.org/  about the March for Life. This follows this post about Mexico's role in the heroin epidemic. This follows this post about Pope Francis's opinion of Mexicans.
You can follow me here.


Don’t let the snow keep you from helping the March for Life   

http://www.coverthemarch.com/

If you are unable to attend the March for Life this year, you can still make a difference! Every year the media distort, spin, or completely ignore the world’s largest   pro-life rally because it doesn’t align with their agenda. This year, we are demanding that they check their bias and show some journalistic integrity by covering what will be a massive rally by any standards (last year, almost a million people flooded the National Mall for the March!) You can help us hold the media accountable by calling the three broadcast networks and demanding they cover Friday’s March for Life. Talking points for your call can be found at www.CoverTheMarch.com. If you haven’t called yet, please do so as soon as possible. If you’ve already called, call again! As always, thank you for your support. Sincerely, MRC Action Team

Media Research Center | 1900 Campus Commons Drive, Suite 600 | Reston, VA 20191 Donate | Unsubscribe | Update Preferences