✍️✍️✍️ Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis

Monday, August 09, 2021 4:03:43 PM

Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis

God does not have a Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis estate problem Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis their amy winehouse genre Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis enough territory to go Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis for all Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis love Him and are Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis to His purpose. Some Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis that along with Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis elderly and sick, infants were among those shot and left lying in Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis houses, doorways, and streets of the town. Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis Jeff Greenfield notes, "bad The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas Book Report Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis to Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis out good conversation. It then joined Police Battalion 45 Jing Mei Woo Becoming Chinese Summary the execution of several thousand Jews Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis Vinnitsa in Septemberand Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis 7, to 8, Jews in Dnepropetrovsk on October The Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis portion Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis Jews still present in the city consisted Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis craftsmen and their families.

What is a Rhetorical Analysis?

Just my 10 cents since it's so long. With love and much cheer in our "rebellion" against the NWO, Deannie. Rudi, Thank you for your post about Corrie Ten Boom. As I read the response to my previous post, I left the computer to reflect for awhile, and that was what I was thinking about exactly. Wickus, I agree, and hopefully you did not find me in that category. Thanks for the reminder.

It does seem that we are being stirred up and hopefully our responses can further bring glory to God rather than condemnation upon ourselves. Anon I realize I have hit a nerve. Yes, my view is a common protestant view of the scriptures. Which makes sense as I am protestant. I am just fully assured that what God has promised, He is also able to perform.

I am saddened that you would think I would be flippantly shouting "He Saves" as others are brought to their demise. I know not the condition of their heart, and I would with every fiber help, take action and pray. I don't forget that the salvation is not for this life but to the next. But for myself, if I was being hauled off, and my husband and my children, I will guarantee we will be Praising the Lord we are counted worthy to suffer for His name. Blessings to you, Leana. Sorry, I meant to say without impugning motives. We're already doing enough of the former. Dear Pastor Ted, I must disagree with you. Listen to Rav Shaul with all his education, which undoubtedly included understanding the Greek philosophy of his day said: And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.

For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. Paul who had much education but he understood what was most important.

I am very surprised at the way that you attacked someone on the forum for reading the Bible. First of all it would be better to be a peacemaker. Don you think? You elevated men's writings, although some of them may be very good Maybe you have not tasted the Living Water, but if you do, you will never go thirsty. There is no commentary in the world that can fill me, as the Word itself does. It is life. I will have to side with Paul on this one It's sad to me as a Pastor that you don't stand for God's Word in an unambiguous way. Constance has been reluctant to take a stand for the Bible too, even though she quotes from it, but I understand. She is a lawyer, not a Pastor. Please read what the Psalmist has to say. He finds his wisdom in the Word of God.

I'm sure you know it well Psalm 1 How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, Nor stand in the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers! He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water, Which yields its fruit in its season And its leaf does not wither; And in whatever he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so, But they are like chaff which the wind drives away. Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, Nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous. There might be some wonderful commentators on the Bible and some not-so wonderful commentators on the Bible.

The Bible calls our wisdom, apart from God, vain human wisdom. I will take God's wisdom any day over that of men. Blessings to you in Yeshua, Joyce. Deannie, Thanks for your comments. I think what you said is really true and we should keep that in mind. Blessings to you in Yeshua. Hi Leana My comment was not for any individual, but in general. Deannie, when your brother or sister is in error, it is right to show them the error according to Scripture. This blog is for showing the error of New Age teaching. But it must be done in love. The problems with comments is that we can read the wrong info into it. There is a lot of posters who states that if they were known in person, the readers would understand. The written word can sometimes be misinterpreted and can lead to arguments.

I am just as anti New Age as you are. I hate what is happening to the Body of Christ A. A the Church. But by misunderstanding God fearing posters on my blog, I have made enemies. And my intentions were good. So before starting to fire with the Word, lets just all pray for insight and wisdom. Then we will edify and not kill with the Word. A true believer who professes to know Jesus as Lord and Messiah will ALWAYS be among those who will come to the aid of believers and unbelievers alike, in good times and bad. Rudi, Thanks for your references to those who rescued Jews during the Holocaust and the links. I posted on this topic a couple of weeks ago but no one picked up on it.

The number of people who took action in this way was numerically speaking extremely small. From the little I've read on the topic, they could probably all have fit into a corner at Willow Creek Church. Most ordinary people watched it happen, went about their daily lives, and did not intervene. What conclusions can we draw from this about who actually knew Jesus as Lord and Messiah in Europe during the early 's, and who knows Him now? Leanna, Absolutely. I agree, we as Christians, should correct error when we see it. However, we above all, should not impugn motives. We should also expect that people will disagree with us, and vigorously. This is especially so because they do not perceive it to be error.

They, in turn, will correct us. I think that is healthy discussion. Chesterton wrote, "is that it ends a good argument. We can provide Scriptural references for our beliefs and others can counter. We can state why we hold to sola scriptura. This can all be done with civility and love. In this sense, I think Dorothy and Paul actually have a lot in commmon. Neither one is ready to compromise their beliefs to accomodate another. It seems to me that neither, Dorothy or Paul, is ready for the "shift" and both are equally distateful to those in NAM. As I hope all of us are. I cringe when I hear people try to guilt others into compromise or silence by appealing to tolerance.

I would rather civility in disagreement. My Lord didn't compromise and neither did his adversaries. How many posts regarding the AoC and Council on World Religions do we need to read to be convinced of this? We can see what Jesus thinks of compromise in the Revelation church of Laodicea - He wants to vomit them out. If not worth fighting for, of what value are our beliefs?

I would rather see us unfraid of discussing doctrinal differences but drop personal attacks and impugning motives. BTW, I have not seen you do this. I think Rose's last post was brilliant. She recommended a book to Joyce without a snide comment. It seems this is the type of give and take that honors God. Sorry for the long posts. I hope my previous post didn't sound too flippant. I take God's Word and my Christian walk seriously. But I am weary of "tolerance.

Erwin Lutzer's book: Hitler's Cross describes how Hitler was able to neutralize the church both Protestant and Catholic. It also disccuses his ties to the occult. For what it's worth. Rather the most important book ever written is their authority and their emphasis. Digressing to the philosophers or other peripheral reading is a red-herring.

What God the Father, who is love, sees in His Son is beautiful, is robed in Holy royalty, and is safe; outside of Christ Jesus is nothing safe. We are commanded to earnestly contend for the faith. I SEE his blood upon the rose And in the stars the glory of his eyes, His body gleams amid eternal snows, His tears fall from the skies. I see his face in every flower; The thunder and the singing of the birds Are but his voice—and carven by his power Rocks are his written words. All pathways by his feet are worn, His strong heart stirs the ever-beating sea, His crown of thorns is twined with every thorn, His cross is every tree.

Setterman, Hmmm, yes, well After all, wasting your time in such a way is just such a digression from and detraction from the Biblical Truth. Goodnight, Rose. There are people who serve God. Other people think God will always serve them if they say the right words. No, you are wrong. The second group are people who believe in magic, like New Agers. Imbedded Wi-Fi technology that will call your doctor if you have a heart attack or if you fail to take your meds? Deannie, You don't seem to understand. Perhaps if many strong willed believers in Islam started posting here, refusing to stop posting their beliefs, challenging others to arguments, forcing others to continuously read their version of how religion must be practiced and arguing that only their belief system can fight the New Age movement, you might begin to see the blog as someone who is not a Christian sees it.

You might see how the comments section has deteriorated from a united fight against the dangers of the New Age movement to one having a focus on European politics and Christianity, to the almost complete exclusion of anything else connected to the New Age movement. It's as if Germans only talked about Christianity and Russian politics as the Nazi movement was growing. Is the practice of Christianity the only way to fight the New Age movement? The New Age movement has infiltrated all religious groups. The difficulty is in isolating those aspects of the movement that are now found in religious groups that are similar to those that can be found under the label New Age "spirituality.

In both cases monotheistic core belief systems would be marginalized or destroyed. Do not fool yourself; Judaism and Christianity are both to be eliminated. Christians who would like to see Judaism eliminated are just helping the New Age movement. Protestants who would like to see Catholicism eliminated are just helping the New Age movement do what they see is their job. Is every school board meeting, every church service, every kindergarten class, every adult education program, every television show supposed to be place for a showdown between monotheistic groups?

Joyce included, Christians know very little about Judaism and Jews know very little about Christianity. All of the arguments here seem to be based on limited superficial knowledge. That's why for the first 18 years or so I refused to get involved in Protestant squabbles or judged what each group and its leaders said they knew about the movement. I refused to publicly comment on Christianity in spite of all of the negative things I had learned. Even now I try to avoid the discussion though I will comment on obvious New Age infiltration by the New Age leadership. Christians continously attempt to put Jews on the defensive where religion is concerned. While it doesn't happen publicly, privately it seems continuous.

I don't think Jews ever attempt to put Christians on the religious defensive or push their religious beliefs on them. I have never seen it happen. To go back to the beginning point Deannie, do you think I should aggressively push Judaism here. I don't mean debate. I mean sell like one sells a used car. Do I need to do this to show I am not a follower of the New Age movement? Do I need to do this to show my beliefs are firm and not subject to change? Do I need to point out where Christianity is not an acceptable religion for me to follow? Do I need to continuously say I love Christians but that I believe Christianity has many weaknesses in the larger scheme of things? Do I need to say I appreciate Christians seeing value in Jewish documents, but that Judaism does not need or appreciate evaluation by Christians?

Or can I just post information about the dangers of the New Age movement! Constance has been reluctant to take a stand for the Bible. What have I been doing since ? Making chop suey? Judge not, lest ye be judged and please let's all remember that it was the sin of self-righteousness that was responsible for crucify ing our Saviour Jesus Christ! Constance Constance. Constance, You have defended Rose again, who actually seems quite capable of defending herself with lots of stinging remarks she sends out. I forgive her, but her remarks actually seem kind of silly to me to be honest. Affirming her okay, but not defending Scripture is another story.

I am deeply concerned unwillingness to name the Bible as the sole authority for our faith. I just would like to be sure where you stand on this. No offense, but you are dealing in areas of eschatology, talking about the anti-messiah who you have hinted is Javier Solana. Whether I agree with that or not isn't relevant but, I'd like to know what caused you to come to these conclusions.

I'm assuming it's the Bible, but would like to verify that. The blog centers around news that relates to the study of "last things" but what is our reference point, no? How did you decide that Javier Solana meets the description of antimessiah? I have some very specific criteria that I use when trying to understand eschatology , which is not always so easy to understand, from books like Daniel,Matthew, Revelations,Corinthians, Thessalonians, Deutoronomy, Exodus, Genesis, Joel, Amos, Ezekiel, Zachariah, just to name a few. Ecclesiology factors in too. Exodus parallels much of Revelations, in fact rabbis call it a "stolen book". Pharaoh is type of antimessiah.

Do you see how much we could learn from Scripture by looking at what Pharoah did? What a relief to know that God will help us "cross over" bring us through the wilderness into the Promised Land or this time, His everlasting kingdom. What a blessing to know He will restore Gan Eden, the "place of delight" where we dwell with Him face to face.

There are some very specific things that the anti-messiah will do. I know people who believe that Islam will produce the anti-messiah and they will quote a bunch of verses to explain why based on current events and the Bible. My opinion has always been that we can't know for sure who he is until the sacrificial system is reestablished and he halts it, according to both the prophet Daniel in Chap 9 and Yeshua in Matthew 24 Then and only then can we really be sure. There are people that say those prophecies have already been fulfilled when Rome destroyed the temple in 70 a. There are those who say when Israel signs a peace agreement they will be fulfilled.

There are those that say it was Oslo, which clearly can't be. There are some who think the 10 kings are EU, others think it's 10 regions of the world, still others who think its' 10 kings from the Arab world. Some think the antimessiah is Prince Charles, some Tony Blair, others believe it will be an "Assyrian" based on a passage of the Bible, others like you Javier Solana. There is the antimessiah and the false prophet. Some think the false prophet will be the Pope, in fact that was a common interpretation of Scripture for centuries.

There are still some who think he has a big role to play. I believe there are other prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled like the joining of the two sticks, outlined in Eze There are also prohecies that talk about the role of Jews in the last days like Zech , which has a very spefic meaning. It's about the nations taking hold of the tzizit of a Jew, symbolizing obedience to the commandments. There are still other prophets who say God is going to shake Israel out of the nations like Amos. My point is, no matter what we think is going to happen, we base our opinions on the Scriptures, first and foremost. Shimon Kefa Peter said that there would be lots of deception in the Last Days and we should grow in truth and knowledge of Him, so that we are not deceived.

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. We are warned about false prophets, and false teachers and we are also told that prophecy is NOT a matter of personal interpretation. How can we recognize a fake dollar bill? I would like to be able to put your comments into context. There are people on the blog, that don't believe in Yeshua at all or those who follow the Pope. That's fine, but I take this into account so if and when and if I read their comments, I know where they're coming from. I've been open about what I believe, even if others disagree, which is their right.

As I said, maybe you've done this somewhere before, and if so, please forgive me for asking. I'm not asking for a long doctrinal statement, but just a few words about what you base your beliefs on.. I firmly believe that if people want to learn about who is the antimessiah and what deception will look like in the last days, they need to read it from the Bible. Then and only then will they know what God says will happen, not someone else's opinion about it.

When we know the Scriptures, we can go to the news and see how current events might fit into the Biblical scenario, not the reverse. Again, just want to emphasize there is no offense intended and I am not saying that you haven't looked at Scripture, but I think that it would be important to clarify this so that people understand why you believe what you do. While I do read the news and stay informed about major events of our day, if I didn't read the Scriptures I would be without hope. In Daniel 2, it says that the Last Kingdom, Yeshua's kingdom will crush the kingdom of iron and clay the antimessiah's kingdom. That is the most important thing I can know.

If I don't know the end of the story, then I would be afraid. Praise be to God, who gave us the hope of His Word so that we can know with certainty that in Him, and in Yeshua our future is secure. Thanks sincerely and blessings, Joyce. I don't think there is much point in talking about anti Christ or anti Messiah if one doesn't search Scripture - and in this case, Scripture alone. Without Scripture, the term anti Christ is silly. Dorothy, I would agree the NAM would like to have the various religions destroy one another. I don't see how my encouraging civil and loving debate, devoid of ad hominem attacks and impugning motives, qualifies for trying to destroy another religion.

Perhaps if I were strapping on suicide belts or encouraging others to do so you would have a valid point. To equate civil, reasoned debate with attempts to destroy another's belief is one method the PC crowd uses to silence opponents. I'm quite happy to hear from Muslims, Jews and atheists. Doesn't bother me bit. I don't see how their input on Javier Solana being anti Christ is relevant though. I would be happy to hear their thoughts on how he may be a king pin in the NAM though. I would also be happy to hear their thoughts on how to fight the NAM, just not on whether JS qualifies as anti Christ. Which is what attracted me to this blog in the first place. Perhaps I misread the intent and genesis of this blog.

I assume adults can debate and amicably disagree. Perhaps I assume too much. Constance, I just saw your comment before mine was posted. I haven't been reading you since sorry, I'm new to your writings. With all the defense of Catholicism, it clouded the issue for me. My original thought was your a Bible believer so if my original thoughts were right, great I can't reconcile the RCC with Scripture, so that's where I get a little stuck reading your comments.

There might be some others here that feel the way I do too? Dorothy, I am sorry that you feel persecuted on the blog. I personally as a Jew who lost my identity for most of my adult life would never want to persecute you. I love my people, the Jewish people and I don't know you, but my heart goes out if you feel that way. I have made it a point to understand Jews and why they were persecuted and what Judaism is all about.

I'm not expert and I learn every day. I have a dear, dear friend raised in Orthodox Judaism in Israel and we discuss many things. If anything, it pains me what has been done to MY people for centuries. I know God told us He would disperse us for our disobedience but I believe today He is gathering us and bringing them back to the Land. I don't believe the church will be raptured like some, and then Jacob's trouble will come, so my interest in seeing the Jews back in the Land is not self serving I just happen to believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob does not change.

He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He will accomplish what He said He will. Israel is His chosen, His treasured possession and He has a plan for Israel the physical descendants of Jacob , so I personally am not against you at all. My beliefs about the two sticks of Judah and Ephraim coming together is actually shared by many Orthodox Jews. My belief is the Torah is still valid and God's appointments are still His appointments.

He hasn't cancelled them. I follow the Biblical dietary laws, not always the rabbinic ones, like using separate sets of dishes, and not having a cheeseburger. I separate between Torah and some of the fences built around it after the Babylonian exile, but I understand why they were put there, to protect the Jews from disobeying God again. I do not think Yeshua came to abolish Torah, or Paul for that matter. Maybe I'll change my mind on cheeseburgers. I've had to change my mind on things like Christmas, Easter, etc. I am always listening to Abba to see what He wants to show me. I am not set in my ways. We can always learn.

Maybe I can learn some things from you? I learn from my Orthodox Jewish friend even though we often have differences. She considers our family dear friends to her, more so than some of her Jewish friends from her synagogue. It is helpful for others to know how you see these things and I don't mean that in an insulting way. The only way to undo years of antisemitism is for people to understand the Jewish way of looking at things, and even if they don't agree I believe the roots of what Christians believe needs to be reexamined through Hebraic lens. The Dead Sea Scrolls and much scholarly work has helped us to do this in the last 60 years. Many of the Jews, raised in Judaism, who come to faith in Yeshua have helped too.

I think this is not accidental. Since the Yom Kippur war, many, many Jews have put their faith in Yeshua.. Probably more than any other time since the book of Acts. The only reason I care at all about the New Age Movement is because I'm concerned how people will be turned away from the true and only God, the God of Israel, so my only interest in being on a forum like this or reading Constance's comments is to see what's going on in the world today that looks like Bible prophecy. Without the Bible, Tanach and for me the Newer Covenant, I would have absolutely no idea if Constance is on to something or not That doesn't give us the right to insult one another or put one another down.

That should be understood by all. Sometimes in expressing our strong opinions it might seem like we are insulting others, but I can speak for myself in saying I don't want to insult you. My heart does go out to you as the only Judiasm practicing Jew on the forum. Hannah Newman wrote an excellent online book as to how she sees the New Age from an Orthodox perspective. It's called the Rainbow Swastika and she quotes from Constance. I could resonate with much of what she said, and yet still not agree with her totally.

Jews are misunderstood, no doubt. I think the Messianics have tried to bring some understanding to the Christian community but sometimes among themselves they don't agree, but we are dealing with years of misunderstandings and even the Jews don't agree among themselves and Christians among themselves,etc When Mashiach comes we will all be on the same page While it doesn't happen publicly, privately it seems continuous Dorothy, Well stated and thank you for the wake up call. When I referred to religious bigotry yesterday, I was referring not only to Anticatholicism but also to Antisemitism, both of which are two underlying assumptions for many who participate here.

Certain individuals have outed themselves explicitly over the last few months in regard to both, under the pretext of claiming to possess unshakeable "Biblical" faith. Note to everyone: Catholics and Jews are also "people of the book. Usually I try to ignore it or skirt around the issue but some days I am less successful than others. Joyce's posts lately are particularly repugnant in their bigotry. In a certain sense I feel sorry for these people, because it is apparently the only means of talking abstract concepts in contrast to the mundane, as in "What would you like for dinner" that these people seem to know.

Does Setterman or Paul or Joyce even know how to have an intelligent normal converstaion about a topic where they are not continually referencing their Biblical interpretations as supreme? I suspect they have these weird, me-centric as in "look at me, I have the right beliefs! I believe the dialogue on this blog would be far more ugly if you, Dorothy, were not a personal friend of Constance For example, see Old Man's stomach-churning posts above about the merits of Michael Hoffman--hard to believe, isn't it, that he has the nerve to come and post that here publicly, without embarassment or shame?

Yet I am the only person here who dared take him to task. Apparently, you don't take Old Man to task because he has the right "Biblical belief system. In other words, so long as you hold the right belief system aka Evangelical Christianity behavior of the most unbiblical kind will be continously tolerated and overlooked. Deannie comparing you to Paul is, in my view , Deannie's attempt to not alienate assauge, in other words Paul because she feels a theological affinity with him because of his belief system. Deannie knows you are nothing like Paul in either your methodology or your beliefs, but for Deannie, to face the reality of Paul's ugly behavior and confront him about it would be to force her to question who someone who is also "born again" could behave in such an ugly way.

His belief system is "Biblical" and correct, I have heard his witness--why isn't his behavior "Biblical"? He's one of us Deannie--this is my interpretation of your behavior, I am not claiming to read your mind, conscious or otherwise--feel free to speculate about my own motives as well. Some of the nicer and better mannered people here share the Evangelical belief system of the rude people, but they are afraid to speak up in disapproval. It's like a highly dysfunctional family who make excuses for the bad behavior of others because they are family. I would love for people like Leana or Deannie for example to take a strong stand againsst the religious bigotry that permeates this blog by confronting people when the issue arises, but I don't think it will happen unfortunately.

Like yourself, I don't come here to talk about my religion. On a weekly basis, however, I see such vicious attacks on it that I feel compelled to try to redress the problem with the individuals at hand. I also am trying to set a role model for Protestants here who may also be uncomfortable with what they are hearing but be afraid to knock it on its head so to speak. I can only imagine what this blog would look like vis a vis Jews if Dorothy were, like me, someone who surfed in off the street instead of a colleague of Constance.

I have a pretty good idea though, based on things that have been said, and it is not pretty. Deannie, I don't think you are going to get much of a debate about the New Age movement from anyone in the Muslim community. I've looked. There is a publication titled New Age. There are parallels between the Sufi community and NA. A number of years ago I went and talked with the librarian at a major mosque in the Chicago area, and he and his wife confirmed that the topic hasn't been explored. The Muslim community is extremely large, and perhaps there is someone warning about NA but in a language I don't understand. If the Muslim community is to become controlled by NA leadership, I think it will be through the political end which controls trade and finances.

I believe that there are large numbers of Muslims who practice the religion for practical reasons, much like members of any other religious community. It's done to share solidarity with other members of the family and community. When those around them become lax and liberal, they will go that route also. If their leadership leads them into NA practices, just as Christian leaders have done to their flocks, they aren't going to take a stand against the changes.

If anyone can add to this, I would appreciate hearing it. Deannie, I don't know who you think is discussing religion in a civil manner. That takes two people. What we have in the comments section are affirmations between people who think alike and lectures to those like Rose, RL and myself who say NO to the offer of "civil discussions. Rose, You are an extremely intelligent, articulate person who not only sees through the "word soup" but whose bluntness is delightfully softened at the edges, making readers more charmed than angry with your attacks on opponents. I look forward to seeing you pick apart what passes for "intellectual" promotion of New Age planning.

You could easily be a columnist writing to expose NA. I don't think there is such a writer about the NA movement at this time. Go to it girl!!! Rose, Maybe you didn't read my comment about Jews. I'll repost it so you can refrain from misquoting me: " I love my people, the Jewish people and I don't know you, but my heart goes out if you feel that way. I don't hate Catholics either. I don't love or hate people based on their beliefs. I just don't agree with all of them Sorry about that.

As for Constance "nipping me in the bud" that's quite an expression. You face a little opposition on your beliefs and this is how you react. Well what is the difference between that approach and Nazi Germany where they "nipped people in the bud" who didn't agree with them? You obviously can't tolerate the fact that someone has a faith that they can back up with Scriptures.. Instead of taking the time to search the Scriptures you attack me and others without ceasing. As of yet, I have not attacked you because I have no interest.

As for "nipping me in the bud" all I can say is if that will give you a sense of power and control have a field day. My suggestion would be to look at the example of Yeshua, and see how often He quoted from the Scriptures. He even quoted the Scriptures to chase Satan. I applaud the Review Committee for its attempt to control the euthanasia law, but due to the - after the death - reporting system in the Netherlands, these people are already dead.

It is even more concerning that since the introduction of the euthanasia law in , there has never been a doctor prosecuted for abusing the law. The term assisted deaths refers to either euthanasia or assisted suicide. Psychiatric euthanasia deaths tripled in the Netherlands. Theo Boer: Dutch euthanasia law needs reform. What happened when euthanasia became legal. The Netherlands experience. Dutch euthanasia clinic lethally injects woman who didn't want to live in a nursing home. Netherlands euthanasia report. Labels: Alex Schadenberg , euthanasia , euthanasia lobby , Levenseindekliniek , Netherlands euthanasia , Psychological suffering. Experts say: Scotland's assisted suicide bill will undermine suicide prevention efforts.

The Herald reported that: A law that would legalise assisted suicide is facing growing opposition, as academics and ethicists raised fresh concerns that it would lead to the elderly being put under pressure to kill themselves. Figures within the medical profession have also raised new concerns that if the Bill currently making its way through Holyrood passes, it would undermine efforts to reduce suicides generally and open the door to euthanasia. The article continued by quoting from the experts who submissions to the Scottish Health Committee on the assisted dying bill:. J Kenyon Mason Institute The J Kenyon Mason Institute for Medicine, Life Sciences and Law, based at the University of Edinburgh, said in its submission that there were insufficient safeguards to protect patients "from coercion or undue influence in making decisions".

Robert Preston, director of Living and Dying Well, a research body established in to examine the evidence surrounding the end-of-life debate, claimed there was "no effective safeguarding system to protect the public and especially its most vulnerable members". He went on to argue that there are a number of important weaknesses in the Bill, including the lack of the need for a psychiatric assessment before an assisted suicide could take place. Mr Preston added: "In these days when home visits are not as common as was once the case, doctors often know little of their patients' lives beyond the consulting room.

Yet the Bill is asking them to make life or death decisions without any objective assessment regime to guide them. The previous assisted dying bill was sponsored by Margo MacDonald MSP , that would have legalized euthanasia and assisted suicide in Scotland was overwhelmingly defeated on Dec. The current assisted dying bill was introduced by Margo MacDonald November Scotland may kill assisted suicide bill in committee. Scotland assisted suicide bill discriminates against people with disabilities.

Scotland assisted suicide plan 'unethical and uncontrollable'. British Medical Association rejects Scottish assisted suicide bill. Dr Stephen Hutchinson: Assisted suicide is not safe. Friday, January 16, Montero: Euthanasia in Belgium has expanded considerably. This article was originally published on the Hope Australia website on January 16, Twelve years later, its scope has expanded considerably. This is the translated text of the interview: Montclos: For the first time, the law authorizing euthanasia in Belgium is being criticized.

We talked with Etienne Montero about the case of Van Den Bleeken, of this "death penalty in reverse" Montero: The death of Frank Van Den Bleeken has not occurred, but after him, 15 other detainees have already made a request for lethal injection. It has been forgotten that in September , a 48 year old psychiatric inmate was indeed euthanized Our country has been condemned 14 times by the European Court of Human Rights because we continue to hold such prisoners under conditions that do not correspond to their state of psychiatric patients judged responsible for their actions.

This lack of care, being accepted as a reason for euthanasia, reveal how the barriers posed in have been jumped one after the other. Montclos: Has the number of euthanasia deaths increased? Montero: Exponentially, yes. In twelve years, it went from to 1, deaths per year. And I speak here about the referrals reports from doctors to the Board of Control, as the authorities admit they have no way to assess the number of actually practiced euthanasia deaths, probably much more important.

Furthermore, in November , euthanasia was legally open to minors, regardless of their age Montclos: How is the legality of lethal injections controlled? Montero: By a commission that scrutinizes the files forwarded by the doctors. But it is an a posteriori review, that is to say, once people have already died, and the Commission only has at its disposal the information that the doctor is willing to provide. Everything is biased. Moreover, in twelve years, no records were sent to court The following article was published on the blog of the disability rights group Scope in the UK. Every few years somebody will make the proposal only for it to be nervously put aside.

But this time feels different. Despite its controversial nature it seems the idea has somehow caught public imagination and there is a very real chance that this time it could become law. My name is Juliet. I have been disabled since I was four; I use a wheelchair and rely on PAs to assist me with pretty much everything. I am also passionately opposed to the legalisation of AS. People know that sick and disabled people have had to fight hard for control of our own lives so naturally they assume we want to control our deaths too.

Most of us have personal experience of disability and our reasons for opposing the Bill will vary. But our core arguments are that it is unnecessary and unsafe. No amount of safeguarding will ever be enough to protect all vulnerable people, all the time. And that is a terrifying thought for those of us who face illness and death every day. Sympathy is hard to fight because some of their campaigners genuinely want to try and prevent future suffering. Fear is much harder to counteract. People will die in pain and distress unless the authorities ensure all terminally ill people get the palliative support they need.

It is no coincidence that at a time of savage public funding cuts, the AS question has raised its ugly head again. It is because the misguided belief that society will always take care of its most vulnerable citizens has been tarnished, exposed as a lie. Life not death Our solution is not to control when and how we die, but to focus on life rather than death. The suggestion that dignity is lost through illness and can only be reclaimed by controlling the manner of your death is not only ignorant, but insulting to disabled people who have fought to build a meaningful life. If there is any loss of dignity then it is inflicted; it is not a natural state that can be avoided by dying early.

Considering Goldberg's goal of "muddying the waters" on fascism, and considering that the mainstream media and Goldberg's fellow conservatives haven't eviscerated, debunked and mocked him and his work as they should, it seems especially important to recollect the truth. This year, I wanted to take a look at the Nazi's T4 "euthanasia" program, which, starting in the summer of , focused on killing the mentally and physically disabled.

Taking its name from the building where the program's offices resided, T4 was in many ways a precursor of the larger scale death camps and "the Final Solution. It's a chilling example of an attempt to earn radical ideas mainstream acceptance through gradual steps. The Overton Window relates to this. This post is by no means definitive, but may still be useful. A number of books focus on the subject, including "Deadly Medicine: Creating the Master Race," and that's without even delving into the eugenics and sterilization movements of Sweden, Great Britain, America and other countries.

The film Europa, Europa has a memorable, funny scene on these issues. I'll also recommend once again Conspiracy , a superbly cast film about the Wannsee Conference , where the details of the Final Solution were disseminated. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be commercially available currently but at some point in the future, perhaps I can post clips. The special, apparently repackaged from the U. Selling Murder interviews Klara Nowak, who was labeled as schizophrenic she wasn't and offered the choice of sterilization or confinement in a mental home. She chose the former, and although she went on to become a successful nurse, was tormented by the consequences of the Nazi policy, lamenting her lack of children and grandchildren.

Perhaps most chilling is that the decision to force this on her was made by her town's "Public Health" officer, who did not even bother to examine her. On that aspect, I can't help but think of some of the current abuses of our justice system. As the Nazis pushed from a policy of sterilization to one of murder first with children and later with adults , they made a strategic effort to sell this to party members, to those that were to conduct the killing, and to the general public. Hitler decreed that the short film Victims of the Past Opfer der Vergangenheit , be shown in every movie theater in Germany. As the narrator for Selling Murder observes: The film claims that disabled people have been allowed to survive thanks by modern medicines, in defiance of the laws of natural selection.

Theirs lives are depicted as unproductive and meaningless. The film also warns, in alarmist fashion, about the threat of a horde of mentally disabled people in the next fifty years if something isn't done immediately. You can see an excerpt below: [Update: the original video was yanked, but the replacement above seems more complete anyway. A subsequent film less widely distributed, The Inheritance Das Erbe , pushed more directly for murder, or in Nazi terms, "mercy killings.

In The Inheritance Das Erbe , the oh-so wise doctors show a female nurse nature footage of a cat preying on a sick bird, animals fighting, and so on, while the narrator speaks of the dominance of the strong over the "weak" and the need to dispose of the "sick. In these films, as at the Hadamar Clinic , one of the six asylums where the T4 killings were carried out, such phrases as "Existence without life" Dasein ohne Leben , "Life unworthy of Life" lebensunwertes Leben and "mercy killing" were commonly employed. At Hadamar and the other clinics, the infamous method later used at Auschwitz and other death camps was first employed: telling the victims they were to receive a shower, locking them in, gassing them with carbon monoxide Zyklon B was used later in the death camps , and then cremating the bodies.

At Hadamar, as at many similar sites, a peephole was provided for the doctors and guards. The Nazis weren't able to keep all of this secret, however, and some prominent critics such as Bishop Galen denounced them publicly Hitler was apparently furious, but Galen was too well-known to eliminate outright. This was one reason of many for the "Final Solution," deporting victims to the east and Poland, where there was less German scrutiny.

Meanwhile, as a former guard explains in Selling Murder , at the Hadamar Clinic they shifted to more subtle methods. The most common was to administer a lethal sedative, and then report that the patient had died of the "flu. However, for two of the destroyed films, the makers of Selling Murder found the original scripts and directors' notes, and some of the original footage. The original footage is mostly of physically and mentally disabled patients, the more shocking looking, the better.

So, while I'm used Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis having you Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis try to put words in Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis mouth Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis pretend I've said things Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis haven't, I Personal Narrative: My First Significant Trial put up with that stuff. Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis number of Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis and deportees from Hungary is Golden Doodle Research Paper known from several documents: around trains. Artificial selection is a millennia-old concept, and it's The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas Book Report Nazis Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis other Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis proposed. Perhaps if I were strapping on Fentanyl Research Paper Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis or encouraging others to do Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis Karen Chen Research Paper would have a valid point. Harvard's Aram Bakshian gives us an excellent example in his comments about George Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis. I would agree perhaps that more could Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis been commented to specify more of a point, I'm Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis sure I see Hoffman or his ideas being promoted. He writes that Washington was a man of unerring judgment, sterling character, rectitude, steadfast Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis, unflagging sense of duty, and Hadamar Rhetorical Analysis.