TVA Rolling Blackouts - 12/23-24/2022 - Christmas Eve Commentary (published 12-24-2022; article #381)

 “Unplugged black cord” (1/7/2021), by Kelly Sikkema, on Unsplash. Free to use under the Unsplash License.

Introduction

“Northeast Tennessee can have a little bit of winter. Sometimes, it falls on a weekend.” I have said that, during a cool snap, ever since Mrs. Appalachian Irishman and I returned from Russia (10/1/1994 - 9/30/1999).

Welcome to a northeast Tennessee winter weekend! It started yesterday (Friday, 12/23/2022). December had been mild, with lows in the 20s to 40s Fahrenheit (F) and highs in the 40s and 50sF. Yesterday, in our neck of the woods, the low was 5F (-15 Celsius) and the high was 10F (-12 Celsius). This morning, the low was 3F (-16 Celsius). It looks like the high will be in the low 20sF (-5 or -6 Celsius).

Tomorrow, Christmas day, the weather prognosticators predict the low to be in the mid-teens (about -9 Celsius) and the high to be about 30F (-1 Celsius). They claim that the warming trend will continue, until lows reach the 30s to 50sF and the highs reach the 40s to 60sF. Our winter weekend may stretch into five days – but not a full week.

Our “Brave” Excursions into the “Frigid” Weather

Yesterday, about 1 PM, I walked to the mailbox, to flag up our annual homeowners insurance payment. The temperature was 6F (-14 Celsius). The sun was shining brightly. A cold breeze was blowing. I had on blue jeans, a T-shirt, and a sweatshirt, with socks and shoes. I stayed out in the front yard a while, enjoying the crisp air and sunshine. If I'd been out longer, I would have needed a coat. About 5 PM, I walked to the mailbox, to get Mrs. Appalachian Irishman's Kohl's bill (for a Christmas gift). The temperature was still 6F (-14 Celsius), but the sun had gone behind the ridge to our north, and the wind was stronger. Molly, bravely, ventured out with me. We didn't waste any time, getting back indoors! The lack of sun and the stronger wind were the differences. In the afternoon, Mrs. Appalachian Irishman had driven, bravely, to visit her folks. She also had gone last minute Christmas shopping, bravely, with her youngest sister, who had come in on Thursday.

Today, about noon, I walked to the mailbox, to get the junk mail. The temperature was about 10F (-12 Celsius). The sun shined brightly. There was no wind. I had on the same type of clothes as yesterday. It felt great! Molly, however, chose not to enjoy the balmy temperature with me. Mrs. Appalachian Irishman was backing out the garage to go visit her folks. Please, dear, don't come back to tell me that you also shopped for that final, last second Christmas present that you didn't buy yesterday!

How does this involve TVA rolling blackouts? I'll explain and comment. I will conclude by transitioning to the 12/23/2022 family gathering and to final thoughts on Christmas Eve.

Rolling Blackouts, 12/23-24/2022

Yesterday morning, while cleaning up, I heard the WQUT-FM (Tri-Cities classic rock) disc jockey mention that the rolling blackouts had taken the station off air for 15 minutes. Later, at 12:01 PM, we had a rolling blackout that lasted 15 minutes. No notice was given. We had to take our “collectively equal share” of the “collective suffering.” Thankfully, we had no more blackouts.

Today, we have had two rolling blackouts so far – 8:10-30 AM (five minutes longer than the dictated 15 minutes) and 11:00-15 AM. My youngest brother called, after our second blackout, to say that they had endured three already today. We had no notice, before the blackouts. My computer has had three KUB reboots so far (one yesterday and two today).

Yesterday and today, around the blackouts, I did some internet searching. I'll cite a couple of sources.

“TVA resumes rolling blackouts across East Tennessee,” on WATE-TV, by Hope McAlee, posted 12/23/2022, 11:55 AM EST; updated 12/24/2022, 9:53 AM EST and 12:21 PM EST. Notice that I included the two updates today. What I'd seen, just after our 11:00-15 AM blackout, when I started this draft article, was:

Saturday

9:50 a.m. Update – The Knoxville Utility Board tweeted that it was informed by TVA that their system is stabilizing and they expect the mandatory electric outages to no longer be necessary after 10 a.m. Saturday.

I'd thought, “Liars! We had a blackout at 11 AM, which is after 10 AM!” In the early afternoon, while writing this article, I saw the 12:21 PM update:

Saturday

12:15 p.m. Update – TVA said rolling blackouts have ended and thanked everyone for doing their part to help conserve energy and maintain the power grid for 10 million people in the seven states that TVA services.

Noon Update – The Knoxville Utility Board announced that TVA has ended the mandatory outages for KUB’s service area. The City of Oak Ridge also said that rolling blackouts for their area had been terminated.

11:30 a.m. Update – The Knoxville Utility Board issued a statement that TVA has extended the requirement for them to reduce their power load, meaning that rolling blackouts will continue.

So far, so good, at the time of this typing! I hope that the folks at the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) do not change their minds – again!

“TVA, Local Power Companies Manage Record-Setting Power Demand,” on TVA.com, 12/24/2022 states, in part:

On Saturday morning, December 24, TVA directed local power companies to implement planned, short duration, intermittent power interruptions to maintain system reliably. This action is similar to steps that TVA and local power companies took on Friday, December 23, to help ensure power system reliability. This measure is expected to be temporary until the highest peak power demands have been met.

During the 24-hours of December 23, TVA supplied more energy than at any other time in its history – 740 gigawatt-hours, or 740 million kilowatt-hours. The cold also produced a winter record for peak power demand of 33,425 megawatts at 7 p.m. CT when the regionwide average temperature was 9 degrees.

We have had stretches of either very cold or very hot weather before, when the electricity demand was high. Storms, snow, and ice have damaged power lines, which caused power outages. Yesterday and today, however, are the first times that TVA has mandated rolling blackouts. My commentary on this follows.

Commentary on Rolling Blackouts

I had wondered: “what is the reason for these new, never before done, rolling blackouts, with no notice, by TVA dictate?”

“Our Power System,” on TVA.com states, in part (with my emboldening added for emphasis):

TVA’s power portfolio is dynamic and adaptable in the face of changing demands and regulations. Our emphasis has moved away from traditional coal-based production and toward cleaner forms of power generation, and today the power we deliver is nearly 60 percent carbon-free.

Meanwhile, we’re decommissioning some of our oldest coal-fired units to make way for these new, more efficient forms of power production. It’s a natural evolution—one that fits with our historic mission of providing reliable, low-cost energy that makes life better for the people we serve.

Who is the “our” in the title? TVA is a government entity. We the people manage the government – or we are supposed to do so. The government works for us – or it's supposed to do so. I hope that “our” means “we the people,” not “TVA.”

I tried various searches, but I could not find annual TVA electric output totals by year. If anyone reading this article can find valid sources, please comment!

I speculate, however, that TVA's electric output has declined, since they have mothballed coal-fired steam plants, such as the John Sevier steam plant, in Hawkins County, Tennessee. (The plant was demolished, from April 2015 to May 2017.)

TVA, of course, has been under various federal, socialistic government dictates to produce more “clean energy” and to reduce its “carbon footprint.” These dictates advanced under President Obama. President Biden continues to advance the dictates. I'm sure that many Democrats and several Republicans have been and are in favor of these dictates.

Don't read into my remarks what I'm not saying! I am a conservationist, not an environmentalist. The difference is in the worldviews. I will define my terms and explain. (This section is included as my seventh entry, in “Worldviews in Conflict” topic.)

A conservationist has the biblical worldview, which values environmental stewardship. As good stewards, conservationists take care of what God has entrusted to us in nature. The ethical use of natural resources, to better mankind, cares for and manages the environment, for future generations. Humans use, manage, and improve the ecosystem. We are not intruders. I paint with a broad brush, but my definition aligns with other reputable website sources that I have viewed.

An environmentalist, however, has a pantheistic worldview. The creation is worshiped above the Creator. The needs of humans are lower than the needs of the environment (climate, air, land, water, animals, and plants). Humans are separate from the creation and act “immorally,” by disrupting it. Again, I paint with a broad brush, but ask any “tree hugger” if my concept is not correct.

Christmas Eve Commentary

That's about enough on that mundane topic! I'm done. Let's move on, shall we? After all, this is Christmas Eve!

Can Christmas Eve fall on the 22nd, not the 24th? Yes, it can, and it did for the Fearghail clan! On Thursday, December 22, 2022, my youngest brother and his family came down to visit, have Christmas dinner (or lunch, as the Yankees call it) with us, and open gifts! The decision to visit early this year was motivated by the current bit of winter that started yesterday and by Christmas falling on Sunday this year.

We enjoyed about four hours of great family time! Our nieces regaled us with stories about their current basketball season. My brother and I talked about mischievous things that we had done in our teenage years. We shared some family memories. Molly was also happy to see everyone. Thanks, Mrs. Appalachian Irishman, for preparing a fine meal, on the unexpected date!

Conclusion

My paternal grandparents didn't connect to electricity (for lights only) until Dad was already several years old. They used coal oil lamps and candles for light. In winter, firewood heated the home well enough, if family wore enough layers of clothes and had enough blankets on the beds. A rolling blackout may have occurred – if the fire went out, before more wood could be brought in to stoke the coals.

If mankind must serve the creation, instead of the Creator, then those environmentalists should give up all modern electrical conveniences. That would be consistent. They should all return to living like Dad was raised – until Granny and Papaw connected to electric lights.

If mankind serves the Creator, then those conservationists should use the environment to improve mankind, replenish the environment, and leave it better, for the next generation.

Hey! What do you know? KUB has not done a third rolling blackout – yet.

Merry Christmas, to all my readers – especially to you, dear reader. The eternal Word was born of a virgin, lived as a man, ministered and showed us God in the flesh, was crucified for our sins (yours and mine), was resurrected, and ascended back to heaven. Christmas is the traditional commemoration of Jesus' birth.

I don't care at all for the commercialization of Christmas. I do not need any Christmas presents. I have the gift of God. That is enough.

“Respect for Marriage Act:” God's Law Versus 12-13-2022 RFMA Law (published 12-15-2022; article #379)

Photograph (3/29/2019) by Sandy Millar, on Unsplash. Free to use under the Unsplash License.

Introduction

I was blindsided while watching the news, on the evening of 12/13/2022. Apparently, on that day, President Biden had signed a bill, the Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA), into temporal, human law. The new, secular law applies to the United States.

My mind has been on more profound and everlasting thoughts, as I continue my series on Christian Evidences. Interestingly, I have been working on my sixth article, which I, Lord willing, plan to publish. That article will affirm that the accuracy of the Bible proves that it is inspired by God.

This article, thus, is a sidetrack, but I must write and publish it. I must take a public stand. I trust that many readers will agree with me. I hope that those who do not will engage me with their comments and reasoning. All relevant comments (in agreement or disagreement) are welcome.

This article places the secular Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA) in the context of God's law on marriage. Like the prophet Elijah, I do not “waver between two opinions.” I follow God. (See 1 Kings 18:21, in context.) This is my sixth article in the “Worldviews in Conflict” topic section.

God's Law

So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27, NIV)

The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. (Genesis 2:18,21-24, NIV)

God created the first man, Adam. Then, He created the first woman, whom Adam named Eve (Genesis 3:20). God performed the first marriage ceremony, as He presented Eve to Adam. “Man” is from the Hebrew “Ish” (איש). “Woman” is from the Hebrew “Ishaha” (אישה), meaning “out of man.”

In answer to the Pharisees' testing question on divorce, Jesus answered, referencing the Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 texts:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. (Matthew 19:4-6, NIV)

God, however, allowed polygyny, for a time, in the Old Testament. For example, King Solomon “had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.” (1 Kings 11:3, NIV). Polygyny, though allowed temporarily, is not a part of God's law on marriage.

God's law on marriage is that one man and one woman unite as husband and wife. No other option defines marriage, according to the Supreme Lawgiver.

12/13/2022 RFMA Law

What are the details of the 12/13/2022 "Respect for Marriage Act” (RFMA) secular law for the United States? I heard the televised news. I decided to dig into the details.

Congressional Record

I checked Congress.gov for the answers, which found: H.R.8404 - Respect for Marriage Act and Text: H.R.8404 — 117th Congress (2021-2022). In summary, the law defines “marriage” as between two people. It requires State officials, under penalty for non-compliance, to recognize, in any manner, “marriage” between two people of the same gender. The law assures private citizens and religious organizations that their view on marriage (as between one man and one woman) is protected. Finally, the law continues to deny the right to polygamous marriages.

On 7/19/2022, the bill passed the U.S. House by a vote of 267 (220 Democrats and 47 Republicans) in favor and 157 (all Republicans) opposed. Seven House Members (all Republicans, including Tim Burchett of Tennessee) did not vote. Source: Roll Call 373 | Bill Number: H. R. 8404.

On 11/29/2022, the bill passed the U.S. Senate by a vote of 61 (47 Democrats, 12 Republicans, and 2 Independents) in favor and 36 (all Republicans, including the two Tennessee senators) opposed. Three Senators (two Republican and one Democrat) did not vote. Source: Record Vote Number: 362.

On 12/8/2022, the House agreed to the Senate amendment by a vote of 258 (219 Democrats and 29 Republicans) in favor and 169 (all Republicans) opposed. One Republican House Member voted present and four Republican House Members did not vote. Source: Roll no. 513.

On 12/9/2022, the bill was presented to President Biden. He signed it on 12/13/2022, when the bill became “public law.”

The Media

We have heard and read the various media sources. My synopsis and reaction, below, are derived from two articles. The first is: “White House glows rainbow colors after Biden signs Respect For Marriage Act: The Respect for Marriage Act codified same sex marriage and interracial marriage,” by Lawrence Richard, on Fox News, 2/14/2022, 2:03 AM EST. The other is: “Passage of the Respect for Marriage Act Signals That Same-Sex Marriage Will Remain the Law of the Land,” on JD Supra, by Baker Donelson, 12/13/2022.

The Fox News article includes President Biden's statement, during the signing ceremony. President Biden stated, "This law and the love it defends strike a blow against hate in all its forms." He also stated, “Racism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, they’re all connected. But the antidote to hate is love." The article also indicates, which I saw on TV, that the President had invited a “nonbinary drag queen” to attend the Respect for Marriage Act signing ceremony. The “drag queen,” by Twitter comments, has degraded and harshly attacked the police many times.

My reaction is disgust and amazement! The photographs and video that I saw of the “drag queen” disgusted me. I pray for his or her soul. The presence of that lifestyle at an official ceremony implies the acceptance of that lifestyle. Children do not need to be exposed to or taught about that lifestyle in school! I will not write any further on this. Enough is enough. I hope that the overwhelming majority of folks who saw what I did on TV were as disgusted as I was.

I was amazed by President Biden's remarks. Are his thoughts that shallow, biased, and perverted? They seem to be. His thoughts certainly do not reflect the biblical worldview. The President labels falsely as haters those who oppose the practice of homosexuality. Mr. President, one can hate the sin and love the sinner, by loving efforts to persuade the sinner to repent of his or her sin. (We are all sinners, either having been saved by grace or needing salvation.) Also, Mr. President, do not categorize “homophobia” and “transphobia” with “racism” and “antisemitism,” as they are not in the same category. I suggest, Mr. President, that you become theophobic, by changing your worldview to reflect, in reverential fear, the biblical worldview. Finally, Mr. President, you claim to be a Christian (which I doubt). If you are, I suggest strongly that you study your Bible, by the proper hermeneutical method, repent of your secular, humanistic, and socialist worldview, and follow the biblical worldview. Do this, for your own salvation and for the salvation of this once great nation.

The JD Supra article indicates that the Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA) was introduced, in reaction to the Supreme Court's 6/24/2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. (See my 6/26/2022 article.) The article notes that the Supreme Court had already decided, on 6/26/2015, that “same-sex marriage” was “legal” in the United States. (See Obergefell v. Hodges, on SCOTUSblog for the official record.) The article states further, in part:

The RFMA codifies the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples for the first time under a federal statute and repeals the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined a spouse only as a person of the opposite sex and provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages. The Act requires states and the federal government to recognize and "give full faith and credit" to same-sex and interracial marriages conducted in other states.

and

Under the RFMA, nonprofit religious organizations are not required to "provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage."

The article states that a May 2022 Gallup poll found that 71% of Americans support “same-sex marriage.” The article did not cite the source, but I found it at: “Same-Sex Marriage Support Inches Up to New High of 71%,” on Gallup, by Justin McCarthy, 6/1/2022.

My reaction is no surprise. Of the several questions on Gallup's Religion topic section, I will reference three.

First, “would you describe yourself as a "born-again" or evangelical Christian?” In 2021, the responses were 36% agreed and 62% disagreed, with 2% having no opinion.

Second, “which of the following statements comes closest to describing your views about the Bible -- the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word, the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it should be taken literally, or the Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man?” On 5/2/2022, the answers were 20% actual word, 49% inspired word, 29% fables/legends, and 1% no opinion.

Finally, “do you believe in God?” On 5/2-22/2022, the replies were 81% yes, 17& no, with 1% of no opinion.

Most Americans believe in God and think that the Bible (in some manner) is His inspired word. Only 36% of Americans, however, state that they are “born again” Christians (as if there could be any other kind).

The majority in this once great nation do not follow the biblical worldview. My first “Worldviews in Conflict” topic article, of 6/7/2022, quoted from the Barna study that indicated that only 6% of American adults have the biblical worldview.

Conclusion

Sixteen years ago, on 6/3/2006, I published my article titled “Marriage Melee,” which was, ironically, my sixteenth article. I would not change one word today. In that article, I had written, in part:

Today, two men or two women may marry. Tomorrow, a man may marry several women, or vice versa. Next week, a group of men may marry a group of women. Next month, a group of men may marry each other. A year from now, a man may marry his dog – or his truck! Who is to say what is wrong?

To argue “there are no absolutes” is an absolute contradiction. Absolutes must exist, in logical reasoning and in the law.

Marriage is by definition the union of one man and one woman! Anything else is a perversion.

The “slippery slope” line of reasoning is a logical fallacy. My 6/3/2006 article was not presenting a “slippery slope.” Instead, that article stated then, as I continue to state now: if there is no absolute definition of marriage, then any form of “marriage” is possible.

Secular law has redefined marriage from being between one man and one woman to being between to people (without consideration of gender). In theory, secular law could redefine marriage as one man and a multiple number of women (polygyny). What about one woman and a multiple number of men (polyandry)? (The marriage of one gender and two or more other genders is called, in general, polygamy.) What about a brother and sister marrying? What about a daughter marrying her father? What about an adult marrying a child? This is not “slippery slope” fallacy. It is potential reality.

I speculate that, in time, polygamy (as polygyny and polyandry) could become secular law, in this nation. It is legal or allowed in 80 nations, according to World Population Review, Countries Where Polygamy Is Legal 2022.

As I stated in the introduction, like the prophet Elijah, I do not “waver between two opinions.” God's law on marriage is that one man and one woman unite as husband and wife. No other option defines marriage, according to the Supreme Lawgiver. God is the majority. Standing with God is the majority – despite what 71% of Americans think.

“BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION:” Biden's 9-1-2022 Speech, in Historical World War II Context (published 9-3-2022; article #353)

Introduction

My last article concluded by stating: “My next article will be profound. I promise.” This is that next article.

By the way, on family heritage, Papaw Aby Wood was born, on 9/4/1901, and Mom and Dad were married, on 9/3/1959. My 9/6/2021 article includes my most recent comments on that heritage, aside from this note.

The “battle for the soul of the nation” is real. That battle, however, is not what the first President of the USSA (Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.) propagates. I will explain – in the historical context of World War II.

Biden's Speech on 9/1/2022 & My Comments

On the evening of 9/1/2022, Mrs. Appalachian Irishman, our ol' puppy (Molly), and I were half way watching the Tennessee Volunteers beat up on a “high school” team, for the first game of the college football season. I knew President Biden would speak to the nation that evening. I didn't want to be angered by his verbal propaganda.

Instead, the next day, I read the transcript of his speech. The transcript is on the official The White House website. See “REMARKS BY PRESIDENT BIDEN ON THE CONTINUED BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION,” Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, (September 1, 2022). I will cite his words that are relevant to this article and add my comments.

Speaking from Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, President Biden began, by stating (with my yellow highlighting added):

This is where America made its Declaration of Independence to the world more than two centuries ago with an idea, unique among nations, that in America, we’re all created equal. This is where the United States Constitution was written and debated. These two documents and the ideas they embody — equality and democracy — are the rock upon which this nation is built.

That is common high ground. This article is my fifth on “Worldviews in Conflict.” (See my “Topic Sections.”) As I have written, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution were written by flawed men. Those documents, however, are based on God's absolute moral law – as understood naturally and as expressed in the inspired biblical record (understood correctly). Flawed men can write moral documents. I do, every time I write an article.

President Biden, however, dropped quickly to the low ground of propaganda – with no supporting evidence cited. Excerpts (with my red highlighting added) of his propagandizing are:

Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.

MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people.

I will not cite further from President Biden's propaganda. Anyone may read the full transcript (which I have provided, in the above link). By the way, the next day, during a press conference, President Biden claimed that he reversed his diatribe, of the evening before. Remember, a double-minded man is unstable in his ways. (Read James 1:8, in context.)

I am NOT a Donald Trump supporter or advocate. President Trump did well enough. He was better than the other option, when he was elected. He often affirmed several biblical and constitutional principals. I agreed with him on those principals, as he affirmed them.

MAGA stands for “make America great again.” Donald Trump used the phrase as a campaign slogan, according to Dictionary.com.

What are MAGA Republicans? I wondered. I searched.

Historically, there was a Great America PAC (Political Action Committee), with news from 2016 to 2018. Open Secrets details PAC Profile: Make America Great Again PAC, as a Leadership PAC, affiliated with ex-President Donald Trump. Ballotpedia details Make America Great Again PAC, as the MAGA PAC for Donald Trump, when he ran for office.

For currently active information, I found Save America: Donald J. Trump. The “about” section lists their values, among which include:

– We are committed to defending innocent life and to upholding the Judeo-Christian values of our founding.

– We believe in the promise of the Declaration of Independence, that we are all made EQUAL by our Creator, and that must all be TREATED equal under the law.

– We know that our rights do not come from government,[sic] they come from God, and no earthly force can ever take those rights away. That includes the right to religious liberty and the right to Keep and Bear Arms.

– We embrace free thought,[sic] we welcome robust debate, and we are not afraid to stand up to the oppressive dictates of political correctness.

– We know that the rule of law is the ultimate safeguard of our freedoms, and we affirm that the Constitution means exactly what it says AS WRITTEN.

If Save America: Donald J. Trump are “MAGA Republicans,” then where, in their values, are their extremist threats to the foundations of our republic? Where is their disrespect to the Constitution? Where is their disbelief in the rule of law? Where and how do they not recognize the will of the people?

As I close this section, I affirm the obvious. President Biden was making political hay. He was arguing against a straw man. He engaged himself in the lowest form of political propaganda. I respect the office of President. I do not respect President Biden; however, I do love him, as a man created in God's image, and I will do all within my power, to lead him to Christ – as I doubt his salvation – judging justly, by his words and deeds. (Read Jesus' words, in John 7:24, in context.)

Historical World War II Context

I will place President Biden's 9/1/2022 speech, in the historical context of World War II. I wish that the President had thought to frame his words, as I do for him now.

On 9/1/2022, did you remember that World War II started, on 9/1/1939, when Germany invaded Poland? I did not, until I found the source, on 9/2/2022.

You are encouraged to read: “How Did World War II End? These are the five key events that led to the conclusion of World War II,” by Christopher Klein, History.com, 8/11/2020. Germany invaded Poland, on 9/1/1939, which started World War II. On 9/2/1945, Japan surrendered formally, on the US battleship Missouri, which ended World War II. Note that, on 8/14/1945, the Japanese Emperor had surrendered, by radio broadcast.

This nation has never been perfect – no nation has ever been. Nations, however, can have historical moments of great moral rightness and fortitude. The moral greatness and sacrifice that this nation (and others) demonstrated – during World War II – are historical facts.

When this nation follows the ideals and principals in the founding documents, then this nation acts according to the divine value system that those documents reflect and express. America is great, when she follows her founding principals – which are based on God's moral law.

Conclusion

During his 9/1/2022 speech, President Biden stated (with my yellow highlighting added):

I ran for President [sic] because I believed we were in a battle for the soul of this nation. I still believe that to be true. I believe the soul is the breath, the life, and the essence of who we are. The soul is what makes us “us.”

I agree that “a battle for the soul of this nation” exists – and has been ongoing, for decades. President Biden's understanding of that battle is incorrect, however. His ungodly and socialist propagandists and he are on the side of Satan – since they “affirm” constitutional values, while they work to further erode those values. I can unpack that last sentence and prove it – if any reader wishes to challenge me. My “Worldviews in Conflict” section contains my written record.

The Good Lord stated, in Luke 11:17 (NIV):

Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall.

Please read that verse in its context. America is a divided nation. Everyone should know this.

Even Sharon Osbourne knows it. On 8/28/2022, she stated:

America has changed so drastically. It isn’t the United States of America at all. Nothing’s united about it. It’s a very weird place to live right now. (Source: “Tea with Ozzy Osbourne: ‘I’ve sung that song for 55 years. I’m not going to forget the words,’” by Craig McLean, The Guardian, 8/28/2022.)

Of course, spiritual warfare has existed, since Satan was cast from heaven. I will not unpack that last sentence here. Instead, you may read: “Why Was Lucifer, Satan, Cast Out of Heaven and Banished to Hell?” By Dolores Smyth, Crosswalk.com Contributing Writer, 10/2/2020. It is a good article on the subject.

The “battle for the soul of this nation” is in the context of spiritual warfare. God wins, on Judgment Day. Satan and his majority followers do not. The minority, who are saved by God's grace, through their active faith, win. Please read the inspired record of Jesus' words, in context:

Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. (Matt. 7:13-14 NIV)

Truth, morality, and values are not determined by the majority. They are established by God. His inspired word, the Bible, is His written record. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution reflect the divine worldview.

Mr. President, may you be guided, as you lead this nation, by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution – which are rooted in the divine worldview. Please stop your propaganda. We, who are wise, are not listening. We'd rather watch football.

TENNESSEE 'TRIGGER' LAW: UNBORN CHILDREN HAVE RIGHT TO LIFE (published 8-25-2022; article #349)

Introduction

The “Worldviews in Conflict” section contains my public statements, of 6/7/2022, 6/26/2022, and 6/30/2022. You are welcome to read or re-read them now. I suggest that you do so.

This article is a brief note, regarding the significance of today, 8/25/2022, Thursday. The brevity does not indicate a lack of importance. “A word to the wise is sufficient,” as someone once said.

Tennessee “Trigger” Law Effective 8/25/2022

On 6/24/2022, the USSA “Supreme” Court agreed, correctly mostly, with God's Supreme Court. The articles in June of this year wrote about that landmark decision -- in the context of worldviews in conflict. States should not decide, if an unborn child has the right to life. God's Supreme Court has already decided that they do.

Consequently, Tennessee -- effective today, 8/25/2022 -- stands to protect the unborn children, who are in their mothers' wombs. The details are and have been on various news outlets. Of several, I chose one propaganda news network: “Tennessee 'trigger' law banning nearly all abortions goes into effect: The law makes providing an abortion a felony in the state.“ On ABCNews.com, by Nadine El-Bawab, video by Jessie DiMartino, 8/25/2022. I didn't concern myself with their “murder the unborn babies” images. That is between God and them. God will judge them.

Conclusion

Amidst the ongoing moral decline, in this once great nation, the knowledge that unborn children, in the State of Tennessee, have the right to life -- which God had given them at the moment of conception -- is comforting.

Don't worry. I'll write more on “worldviews in conflict” -- to affirm the biblical worldview. Mrs. Appalachian Irishman, however, is mashing potatoes. I'm hungry. I'm off here for now! Let's eat!

WORLDVIEWS in CONFLICT: PRO-LIFE ARGUMENT WON EASILY (published 6-30-2022; article #337)

Introduction

My 6/26/2022 article mentioned the 6/24/2022 USSA “Supreme Court” decision that overturned Roe vs. Wade. This article expands on the “pro-choice” versus pro-life debate that this once great nation continues to endure – based on worldviews in conflict.

I do not apologize for using the phrase “the murder of the unborn child,” instead of the euphemistic term “abortion.” That is my choice. Your choice is whether or not to read what I write on this topic. I hope that you choose to read.

I will affirm the pro-life position. My reasoning will be based on logic and fact – not emotion and subjective opinion. Sadly, the rational art of proper reasoning, by logic and fact, is often overcome, by irrational “arguments” from emotion and subjective opinion.

Conviction

I will not “flip-flop” or be “wishy-washy” – as the first President of the USSA is – on this topic. I quote from “Psaki dodges question on when Biden believes human life begins: Biden previously said that life begins at conception but changed his mind,” by Andrew Mark Miller, Fox News, published February 1, 2022, 4:52 PM EST. I added yellow highlights for emphasis.

In September, Biden appeared to change his stance that life begins at conception while discussing a controversial abortion law in Texas.

"I respect those who believe life begins in the moment of conception – I respect that," he told reporters. "Don't agree, but I respect that."

Before making that statement, Biden had said multiple times dating back to at least 2008 that he believes life begins at conception.

"I’m prepared to accept that at the moment of conception there’s human life and being, but I’m not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view," Biden, who identifies as Catholic, said in 2015.

The divinely inspired James (who wrote to Jewish Christians, in the first century) stated:

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8 KJV)

Unlike the first President of the USSA, I am not a double minded man. My ways are stable. I wish that President Biden could say the same.

Definitions

Before my affirmative, I must define my terms. I define my terms in this section and in other sections that follow. My definitions are from Merriam-Webster, or “old man Webster's dictionary,” as I've heard folks in these parts say for years. I have added my highlighting in yellow and underlined certain words and phrases. My note is in brackets.

Definition of pro: 1: an argument or evidence in affirmation. 

Definition of life. [Note: twenty definitions are listed. I list three here, as relevant to my affirmative.]

1a: the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body

  b: a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings

  c: an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism (see metabolism sense 1), growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

8: a vital or living being specifically: person

18: an opportunity for continued viability

Definition of person: 1: human, individual

Definition of human: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens): a person

Definition of Homo sapiens: humankind

Definition of humankind: the human race: humanity

Definition of humanity: 2a: the quality or state of being human

Definition of baby: 1a(1): an extremely young child especially: infant

Definition of child: 1a: a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Thus, by Mr. Webster, I define “human life” as a “person” or a “human.” This, of course, should be common knowledge. A young child or baby is a person, according to Mr. Webster.

Merriam-Webster defines “abortion” as (with my highlighting and underline added):

1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as

a: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage

b: induced expulsion of a human fetus

Merriam-Webster defines “fetus” as (with my highlighting added):

specifically: a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth

Some abortions are miscarriages that happen naturally. Other abortions are induced by medical procedure. I will affirm the “pro-life” truth, against induced abortions.

Note that Mr. Webster defined abortion as the “induced expulsion of a human fetus,” which results in “the death of the embryo or fetus.” Mr. Webster, therefore, affirms, by definitions, my position that the unborn child is human and that an induced abortion results in the death of the human fetus.

Affirmative from Science and the Declaration of Independence

Science

Despite President Biden's unstable double-mindedness, science verifies that human life begins at the moment of conception. The fact is not in doubt. I am not aware of any current “pro-choice” argument that claims that life does not begin at conception.

I could site many sources, to prove that human life begins at conception. I quote from the WebMD article “Slideshow: Fetal Development Month by Month,” reviewed by Amita Shroff, MD on February 24, 2021. I added my yellow highlights to the quote.

Fertilization happens when a sperm meets and penetrates an egg. It's also called conception. At this moment, the genetic makeup is complete, including the sex of the baby.

MedicineNet, Inc. is “owned and operated by WebMD.” Their “Pregnancy Week by Week (First, Second, and Third Trimester),” medically reviewed on 5/12/2021, contains the following quotes. I added my yellow highlights to the quotes.

First Trimester (week 1 - week 12)

At 4 to 5 weeks:

   Your baby's brain and spinal cord have begun to form.

   The heart begins to form.

At 8 weeks:

   All major organs and external body structures have begun to form.

   Your baby's heart beats with a regular rhythm.

The lengthy article continues to describe the further development and growth of the unborn “baby.” The truth that human life (as a developing baby) begins at conception is proved by science.

Declaration of Independence

In the July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence, it is written:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

“Self-evident” is that which is obvious. For example, It is self-evident that one plus one equals two. The Declaration of Independence states that the Creator (God) created all men equal, with inherent (unalienable or intrinsic) rights that include the right to life.

Let's ask Mr. Webster (Merriam-Webster) for the definition of “man,” as the plural of “men.” I highlighted the words in yellow.

Definition of man: 1a(1): an individual human

Mr. Webster has defined a child or baby as a “young person.” He has defined a “person” as a “human.”

The Declaration of Independence states the self-evident truth that the baby -- who became human at the moment of conception -- has the right to life – as endowed by the Creator (God).

Affirmative Won

If the unborn child in the womb is human, and if the unborn child has the right to life, then the unborn child must be allowed to live – and not to have his or her right to life violated, by induced abortion.

Mr. Webster (Merriam-Webster) states (with my highlighting added):

Definition of murder: 1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

Definition of unlawful: 1: not lawful: illegal 2: not morally right or conventional

The unborn child in the womb is human, as I have verified. The unborn child has the right to life, as I have verified. The unborn child must be allowed to continue to live.

That right to life should not be violated, by induced abortion. An induced abortion is murder. This is why I call “induced abortion” the murder of an unborn child. Induced abortion is not morally right.

The exception would be to save the mother's physical life -- if both the unborn child and the mother would die, if the child were to be born. If the child would live, after birth, but the mother would die, while in the process of giving birth, then the choice would be based on the decision of the mother – only in that situation. That situation is rare. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “Maternal Mortality” (last reviewed 4/26/2022) states (with my underlining added): “The death of a woman during pregnancy, at delivery, or soon after delivery is a tragedy for her family and for society as a whole. Sadly, about 700 women die each year in the United States as a result of pregnancy or delivery complications.” The CDC does not state the number of women who die at delivery.

Potential Rebuttals Answered

My verified affirmative victory for the unborn children will generate various rebuttals. I will respond to nine theoretical rebuttals.

Rebuttal 1: “it is my body and my choice. You do not have the right to determine my choice.” Pregnancy involves two bodies – the mother and the separate human life in her womb. The unborn child cannot yet state his or her choice – to live or die. The unborn child in the womb has the right to life, which overrules the mother's desire to kill her child. My prior reasoning proves this fact.

Rebuttal 2: “you have a right to your opinion. Don't force your opinion on me.” The topic is not subject to opinion. It is based on fact. The unborn child has the right to life. My prior reasoning proves this fact. You must acknowledge the fact.

Rebuttal 3: “the unborn child is like an acorn. The acorn is not an oak tree yet.” The acorn will become an oak tree, if it is allowed to continue to grow. It is an oak tree “in the womb” of development. The unborn child will become a born child, who will develop further into an adult. If the “fetus” is not human, give it time to grow and to be born. You will see what it becomes. Your argument from analogy is invalid and not sound.

Rebuttal 4: “I made a mistake, by getting pregnant. I want to correct that mistake.” Everyone makes mistakes. No one, except the Good Lord, is or was perfect. Do you wish to make another mistake, by murdering the unborn child in your womb?

Rebuttal 5: “I don't care for or want this baby!” Your lack of love or care for the unborn child in your womb does not override that child's right to life. As a secondary thought, the father of your unborn child may be unknown or known to you. He and you may communicate or not. He and you may have a good or bad relationship. I don't know. Your moment of passion created your unborn child. If that moment of passion was a mistake, then please don't commit another mistake by murdering your unborn child! After your child is born, I think that you will love him or her! (See “Rebuttal 6” on organizations that can help you!)

Rebuttal 6: “Having this baby will cause me emotional, relational, societal, economic, and/or spiritual harm.” Is the right to life contingent to the absence of harm? Many organizations (i.e., churches, pro-life centers, etc.) are available to help you, if you reach out to them. What if you develop a health condition that requires others to care for you? Would you want that care, or would you rather be put to death, to prevent the “harm” that your caregivers would face? Please do not cause yourself further harm, by living with the memory that you killed your unborn child – just to avoid various types of potential “harm” to yourself. Please seek help! Many others and I are ready to help you!

Rebuttal 7: “Various polls indicate that America is divided on the abortion issue. We should defer to the opinions of others and not be dogmatic.” Really? When is absolute morality (i.e, the right to life) determined by opinion polls? What if opinion polls indicated that some people consider theft, the abuse of others, or even murder to be good? Would you defer to their invalid views? Morality is not determined by the majority (or even by opinion polls). Many in this nation have immoral views that accept the murder of unborn children. What if many accept the murder of a different ethnic group (euphemistically called ethnic cleansing)? Would you defer your opinion to them? I didn't think so.

Rebuttal 8: “How can you be for the death penalty and against 'pro-choice'?” This is a false analogy. The death penalty punishes a murderer for his crime(s). I can prove my argument for the death penalty. What crime did the innocent child in the womb commit? Affirm your position that it is morally correct to murder the unborn child – if you can.

Rebuttal 9: “What about pregnancy due to rape or incest? Isn't abortion a valid choice then?” We agree to the fact that rape and incest are immoral. Pregnancy by rape or incest is rare, perhaps one percent or less, but it happens, sadly. (I have researched the statistics.) If possible, the rape victim, with caring support, could receive immediate medical treatment (the removal of the male semen) before conception. If conception occurs, the child conceived in violence is innocent. If the unborn child could speak, he or she might say, “It doesn't matter how I began. What matters is who I will become." The question on pregnancy by rape or incest does not refute the fact that the murder of the unborn child is immoral. In urgent situations, I have violated speed limit laws (with emergency flashers on), to assist family members, who were experiencing a significant health crisis. My violation of the speed limit (the lesser evil) was necessary, to help my loved one (the greater good). God will judge, not me, the woman who allows her unborn child, conceived by rape or incest, to be murdered, to help her overcome whatever real trials that she would face, if she had given birth to her child. God is a just Judge. I defer to His judgment.

Of course, other rebuttals can be offered. I can overcome any other theoretical rebuttals. My reasoning, which I have stated, is both sound and valid.

Affirmative from Scripture

You will notice that I won the pro-life argument without the use of inspired scripture. The use of the Bible to affirm the pro-life argument is valid. First, however, the affirmative must prove that the Bible is the inspired and infallible word of God. I can prove, and I have proved, that affirmative. By God's grace, I have led atheists to either theism or even to salvation. I had to start by proving the existence of the God of the Bible and then prove that the Bible is the inspired word of God.

My affirmative from scripture assumes that those who read this section believe and know that God exists and that the Bible is His inspired word. I write this section to help believers, who accept, in error, the “right to choose” arguments. If you claim to be a Christian, you cannot accept that the murder of unborn child is scriptural. I will cite scripture references and include my comments.

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” (Genesis 1:27,28, NIV)

Mankind, which includes the unborn, is created in God's image. The “divine spark,” soul, or new human is created at conception. Male and female are fruitful when they increase the number of humans by the procreation of their child together. The Creator grants his human creation the right to life, because we are made in His image. This truth is self-evident.

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. (Psalms 139:13-14, NIV)

The psalmist David addressed God. By inspiration, David stated that he (not an inhuman mass of tissue) was in his mother's womb. He used “me,” which is his reference to himself, in his mother's womb.

The word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:4-5, NIV)

The inspired prophet Jeremiah stated the Lord's word to him. God appointed Jeremiah to be a prophet, before God formed Jeremiah in his mother's womb. The physical act of procreation is when God forms the child in the womb. God, who is all knowing, knows each person – before conception. It is a sobering thought to realize that God has always known me – even before I was conceived! He knew my past life. He knows my current life. He knows my future life (and death). He knows my everlasting Home!

Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John. He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:11-17, NIV)

The inspired Luke records the angel Gabriel's statement to Zechariah, the father of John the Immersionist. I highlighted “he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born.” Reasoning from the specific to the general concludes that each innocent, unborn child is filled with the Holy Spirit, while in the mother's womb. Sadly, once the child reaches the age of accountability, and freely chooses to sin, the Holy Spirit cannot be present, until salvation restores the presence of the Holy Spirit. The purpose of this article prohibits me from unpacking further the depth of this theological thought.

I hope that my argument from scripture helps change the mind of believers, who still accept, in error, the murder of unborn children. One cannot be a true believer without affirming the right to life.

For Further Pro-Life Reading

This nine-page article cannot encompass every aspect of the worldview conflict on the murder on unborn children in their mothers' wombs. In my research, I found and read sections of several websites – both for the murder of unborn children and for the right to life of those children. I will reference two of those websites.

"Abortion Facts" contains twenty scholarly articles on abortion and provides support for pregnant women, who seek alternatives to abortion. The website is pro-life. The accreditation is:

Selected content reprinted with permission from John C. Willke M.D., Barbara H. Willke R.N., John Jefferson Davis Ph.D., David C. Reardon Ph.D., Abort73.com, Eternal Perspective Ministries, Abolish Human Abortion, Life Issues Institute, BlackGenocide.org, Heritage House '76, Inc. & The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.

“Abortion Procedures” is “a project of Live Action.” The website is pro-life and has videos with comments by OB/GYN medical doctors, who used to perform abortions. The videos and comments regard first trimester abortion pills, first trimester suction D&C abortion, second trimester D&E abortion, and third trimester induction. Anyone who affirms the right to murder unborn babies should watch the videos.

Conclusion

Conflicting worldviews is nothing new. Unbiblical worldviews love the world (i.e. the secular, the temporal, the natural, and the evil). The biblical worldview loves the Lord. The world hates the biblical worldview.

Jesus, the Christ, spoke the following words, to his disciples, on the eve before his crucifixion:

If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. (John 15:18-19, NIV)

I suggest that you read the Gospel of John 13:1 - 17:26. You will understand John 15:18-19 in context.

The inspired apostle John wrote:

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world – the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life – comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever. (1 John 2:15-17, NIV)

The “pro-choice” versus pro-life debate is one example, of many, of worldviews in conflict. True Christians and true churches need to love the pregnant mother and her baby. They should not look down on or shame the mother, if she is unwed. They need to love the mother, by their loving and supporting ministry to her. Many churches and pro-life organizations are ready to help.

Those of the world, who affirm “the right” to murder unborn children, are wrong – even if the majority of the world agrees with them. Morality is not subjective and determined by opinion polls. Morality is absolute, since it comes from the Divine Lawgiver - God, who never changes. The world vandalizes pro-life clinics, threatens pro-life individuals, and spews irrational diatribe. The world enjoys hearing its thunder. The world tries to force its ungodly worldview, by intimidation, not by logic.

We, who are not of this world, follow the biblical worldview. The Gospel of Matthew, in chapter ten, records Jesus' commissioning of his twelve disciples. In verse 28, Jesus states:

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28, NIV)

The biblical worldview does not fear the world. We have reverential fear of God, who has saved us from everlasting destruction, by our faith (based on evidence) response to His Son – who was conceived and born of a virgin – according to God's eternal scheme of redemption. I can prove these facts of faith. I have done so many times.

In the Gospel of John 13:1 - 17:26, which I have referenced, Jesus stated to his disciples:

Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know. (John 14:1-4, NKJV)

Heaven is a prepared place for a prepared people. I STAND with many, who are prepared. Our faith guides us by the biblical worldview. We STAND with God, who is the majority, against the ungodly world and its evil worldviews. If you have not joined us, will you join us? The invitation is open. You have the free will to choose. Choose wisely.