Sitting here on this Lord’s Day morning, I was thinking about my 3 year old grandson, Robert.  I was recently informed by my bride, that Grandma and I will be keeping him Friday night.

I began thinking about the miracle of my own special daughter, who will be 24 in July, and Robert, whom we almost lost, due to his mother’s diabetes, which almost ended my daughter-in-law’s life as well.

I have trouble wrapping my head around the thought processes of those who do not understand the sanctity of human life.  Like, for instance, President Barack Hussein Obama and his Science Czar, John Holdren.

Remember this little heartfelt speech?

Holdren holds similar views.

Holdren’s official title is Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Holdren co-wrote a 1973 book, Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions, with infamous population control advocate Paul Ehrlich.

On page 235 in the book in chapter 8, titled “Population Limitation”, Holdren and his partner wrote:

To a biologist the question of when life begins for a human child is almost meaningless. To most biologists, an embryo (unborn child during the first two or three months of development) or a fetus is no more a complete human being than a blueprint is a building.

…The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being. Where any of these essential elements is lacking, the resultant individual will be deficient in some respect.

Obama’s Science Czar also wrote that legal scholars don’t view unborn children as human under the U.S. Constitution until “it is born”.

From this point of view, a fetus is only a potential human being

Historically, the law has dated most rights and privileges from the moment of birth, and legal scholars generally agree that a fetus is not a ‘person’ within the meaning of the United States Constitution until it is born and living independent of its mother’s body.

Holdren co-wrote another book with Ehrlich in 1977, Ecoscience. 

In it, they argued that

Human values and institutions have set mankind on a collision course with the laws of nature. Human beings cling jealously to their prerogative to reproduce as they please—and they please to make each new generation larger than the last—yet endless multiplication on a finite planet is impossible. Most humans aspire to greater material prosperity, but the number of people that can be supported on Earth if everyone is rich is even smaller than if everyone is poor.

Also, in Ecoscience, Holdren and Ehrlich argue that America should be de-developed. In other words,countries like the U.S. should have their economies destroyed and their wealth redistributed to the poor at home and abroad.

Sound familiar?

He and Ehrlich go on to say that

The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being.

Holdren seems to be in agreement with the Princeton University “ethicist” (and nutjob) Peter Singer, that infants up to the age of two or so are not really human beings, and so can be aborted post-natal.

My hands are shaking as I post the following garbage from the mind of Peter Singer.  He was asked:  Would you kill a disabled baby?

Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman’s right to have an abortion. One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the foetus and the newborn baby.

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection than the life of a fetus.

About killing a baby with Down Syndrome, he said:

We may not want a child to start on life’s uncertain voyage if the prospects are clouded. When this can be known at a very early stage in the voyage, we may still have a chance to make a fresh start. This means detaching ourselves from the infant who has been born, cutting ourselves free before the ties that have already begun to bind us to our child have become irresistible. Instead of going forward and putting all our effort into making the best of the situation, we can still say no, and start again from the beginning.

Charming, isn’t he? 

It should be noted that Holdren now disavows everything that he co-wrote with Paul Ehrlich in those two books. 

Notwithstanding Holdren’s denial of his long-published opinions, the fact that Obama chose this man to be in his Administration speaks volumes.

Psalm 139:13-14:

13  For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are Your works, and my soul knows it very well.