The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda 

Answering pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

By Julio Severo 

Everything begins in the mass propaganda, and the big media, which has a virtual monopoly of that propaganda, can provoke immense alterations in the mindset of the population. The Nazi propaganda czar used to say that a lie repeated a thousand times eventually becomes truth. Such repetition in the big media may turn in the popular mind hate into love and vice-versa, and death into life, and vice-versa. 

However, the debate now no longer is about the life of the “unwanted” Jews in the media of Nazi Germany. The debate now deals with the “unwanted” unborn babies in the modern media of Brazil. 

In his article “Abortando o problema” (Aborting the problem), Hélio Schwartsman, columnist and editorialist of Folha de S. Paulo, advocated abortion with the following argument: 

“Let us suppose for a brief instant that laws and institutions worked properly in Brazil and that all of the women that induce or try to induce in themselves an abortion outside of the hypotheses allowed in law (life risk for the mother or pregnancy resulting from rape) were identified, prosecuted and jailed. In this case, we would need to build 5,5 new feminine prisons (facilities of 500 vacancies) a day just to shelter about 1 million former would-be mothers that interrupt their pregnancies illegally every year”. 

I don’t know from which top hat Schwartsman got that rabbit of 1 million to base his calculations, since it is an old habit of the pro-abortion propaganda in Brazil to swell numbers. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a Jewish doctor that became the director of the largest abortion clinic in the Western world and oversaw 60,000 abortion procedures, has admitted concerning the propaganda before the legalization of abortion in the US: 

“How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In NARAL, we generally emphasized the frame of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always ‘5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year.’ I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics?”. — Bernard Nathanson, Aborting America, Doubleday, 1979, p. 193.*   

When the goal is to exterminate the “problem”, for the Nazi the ends justified the means —- and the propaganda and the inflated statistics. Today, when the goal is to abort the “problem”, equally the ends justify the means — and the propaganda and the inflated statistics. 

But even if the number of 1 million employed by Schwartsman were correct, what to do? The “cultural” indoctrination controlled by Nazi in Germany reached such point that a major part of the population agreed in exterminating Jews — and probably a significant number of Germans participated actively in such extermination. What to do? Does the high number of participants in a crime justify its acceptance and legalization? 

The good thing, in the case of Dr. Nathanson, is that he eventually abandoned his multimillionaire dirty business of doing abortions and manipulating statistics. 

The wonders of the legal abortion? 

The argument of Schwartsman continues, “Equally bulky resources would have to be assigned to the construction of orphanages, to shelter the thousands of children that would go unassisted during the prison term of their mothers”. 

So with the legalization of abortion, would there be fewer expenses for the government? Welcome to “Alice in the Wonderland of Abortion”! And what about the bulkiest resources, Mr. Schwartsman, that would have to be assigned to cope with the enormous system that would have to be created in order to assist hundreds of thousands of women that, seduced by the announcements of the state abortion industry, would make two, three or four abortions? Who will pay that huge bill, Mr. Schwartsman? And who will pay the bill of the abortion traumas and sequels in the women and their families? 

Try, Mr. Schwartsman, with your wife to homeschool your small children, and the Brazilian government will condemn you to prison or in the minimum to the loss of your custody over your children, little caring if your small children will lose their father and mother. In Brazil, homeschooling is a crime. While you propose that women that murder are to be spared, families that don’t murder nor rape are not being spared by the Brazilian State that wants control on everything and on everybody. 

The government is also actively working to criminalize corporal discipline of children by loving parents. How much money, Mr. Should Schwartsman, will be spent for the construction of orphanages for children whose parents will be arrested by the “crime” of homeschooling or corporal discipline? 

If even innocent parents are being condemned, why cannot criminals be condemned? 

If a mother kills a six-year-old child, or kills another adult, should the State spare her just because she has other children to raise? 

In the case where a mother willfully murdered her unborn baby, what chances will that woman’s other children have to have a psychologically healthy and non-traumatic upbringing? 

Where does abortion put a woman? 

Intentional abortion also puts a woman in a category different from a loving mother’s role. While, in order to achieve conquests, the pro-abortion feminist movement portrays all of the women as eternal oppressed and victims, the murder of unborn babies puts indeed a woman in the category of oppressor. 

With intentional abortion, woman joins to man in the capacity and inhumanity of attacking, violating rights and murdering an innocent life. 

Schwartsman continues, “It is worth to observe too that my calculation does not take in account a significant number of physicians, midwives or friends that in some way helped these women to get rid of unwanted fetuses and, according to the law, should also get jailed”. 

What to do with the thousands of concentration camp guards, sadistic physicians and all the other Germans that collaborated to exterminate the “unwanted”? That would be a good question to the Folha de S. Paulo editorialist. 

Public health issue? 

Anyway, Schwartsman insists that “the abortion problem is not an issue to be solved in the courts”. What is it issue of, then?  

Was it to exterminate Jews a public health issue? Probably, the Nazi-culture-loving German population would say “yes”, answering that it is much healthier not to have the undesirable Jews near. Today, those in the category of unwanted are the unborn, whose extermination is not treated as serious ethical and criminal problem, but simply as a “public health issue”. 

Does contraception reduce abortions? 

Schwartsman says, “The important, in practical terms, is to create conditions so that women don’t need to abort, and it is basically achieved through the offer of contraceptive methods free of charge or at least very cheap to the population (but the Catholic Church doesn’t agree) and sex education. Demographic studies are unanimous in pointing a very strong correlation between the level of the woman’s education and the decrease of fecundity and, consequently, of clandestine abortions”. 

Does broad access to contraceptives reduce the number abortions? Schwartsman should explain that to the US and Europe, which are champions in contraception and legal abortion! Only the US has today more than 1 million legal abortions a year. Since the legalization of abortion in the USA in 1973, more than 50 million unborn babies were murdered. Contraception reduces the number of abortions, Mr. Schwartsman, only in magic shows with top hats and rabbits. 

But I agree with him that there is a “very strong correlation between the level of the woman’s education and the decrease of fecundity”. In spite of that, there is no correlation between the level of the woman’s education and the decrease of legal abortions. None. It is enough to see American and European women: graduate and careerist moved by abundant contraception and abundant abortions. 

Graduate, careerist and aborting 

What is quite documented is that government and non-government groups in the US, with international institutions like the UN, have been for decades imposing the women’s systematic education, not because of a concern for their well-being, but exclusively to achieve their bigger objective of reducing the world population — including through legal abortion. 

According to them, the woman that spends more time at the school and university will have as central concern of life her own professional ambitions, postponing marriage, if she marries. When she gets married — often near to the age of 30, when 90% ova are gone —, she has one or two children, and she is prone to abort as a way to protect her career. The modern professional woman is mass production model idealized by the population-control elite. She is the image and likeness of the planning by pro-abortion and anti-family social engineers. 

The woman’s most prolonged education reduces her marriage and family chances, but it never reduces her sexual activity, which begins well early and without any commitment. Mr. Schwartsman then could present a more ethical and fair proposal: women that don’t want to have babies should avoid sexual relationships, which usually lead to pregnancy. If he doesn’t understand that so basic, so primordial principle, what may he understand on life, children and family? 

That rational and practical proposal would solve vast social and individual problems, including abortion and children traumatized conceived in relationships of individuals whose only commitment is the hedonism. 

Mr. Schwartsman gives his reason for not considering life as sacred: “It estimated that 2/3 to 3/4 of the fecundated ova never get attached in the uterus, resulting in miscarriages”. It is like saying that, just because thousands of men and women die from accidents everyday, you can equally forget that life is sacred and approve the murderous pretensions from the heartless heads of editorialists and legislators.  

Uncertainties on the right to life: the soap opera gets reprised 

The remaining text of Mr. Schwartsman is busy obfuscating issues regarding the beginning of human life, trying to oppose science with religion, and religion with religion, as if science, law, philosophy and religion could not be put at the service of the predominant ideological “ethics”. Science and religion were not problems for the secular State of Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. In fact, for pure chance abortion was the ethics of the secular State in Nazi Germany and Soviet Union that, even alleging pro-family intentions, murdered babies and families. Both systems murdered inside and out of the uterus. 

If Mr. Schwartsman had lived under such systems, his mother and the State would have had the final word on his unborn life, and outside of the uterus only the State would have been exclusively entitled to life and death decisions on him, leaving him little chance to survive to become a formulator of chic, false and twisted theories in Folha de S. Paulo, assuming the pose of a philosopher that knows how to think on ethical issues. 

There will always be uncertainties about life, but nothing should hinder us from reaching a genuine ethics that sees “all of the human beings as creation of God”. There were for centuries uncertainties about the humanity of Jews. Some believed that they were half human beings. Others, not even that. The motivation behind each uncertainty or certainty was a lot of times hate. And it is not different in the abortion debate. When the talk is on “aborting the problem”, the undeniable motivation is hate, because hate leads to the destruction of innocent lives. 

The ideological vision on the “unwanted” 

Today, the Islamic world — which counts on at least 1 billion adherents — has in lesser or larger degree many uncertainties on the right to the existence of Jews and the most radicals among them have the opinion that Jews are simply disposable pigs and animals, and certainly with an official legalization of the extermination of Jews, many other haters would come out of the closet. 

Is not hate that is motivating the president of Iran to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel? Little he cares if Jews are human beings or not. In the same way, abortion advocates care little if the unborn are human beings or not. Hate, for them, is everything. 

Nazis wanted to solve their “problem”. The president of Iran wants to solve his “problem”. Abortion advocates want to solve their “problem”. The propaganda is different, but the result is the same. 

In Nazi Germany, government and big media walked hand in hand with the idea that the “unwanted” Jews were the problem. In modern Brazil, government and big media walk hand in hand with the idea that the “unwanted” unborn are the problem.   

As a follower of Jesus Christ and his ethics, in Nazi Germany I would defend the “unwanted” Jews in the same way that I defend the “unwanted” unborn babies today. And even before the extreme hate and irrationality of a lot of nations against Israel, I dare to defend the right of the “unwanted” Israel to its existence, because of the promises of God to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 

In spite of the uncertainties that Mr. Schwartsman tried to introduce in the abortion debate, the only certainty left in his text is that the “problem” should be aborted. 

Mr. Schwartsman, the “problem” is not the Jew, nor the unborn. The problem is the lack of true ethics — the same ethics that led Christians to shelter and hide Jews from Nazis, the same ethics that today leads them to defend the right to life of the unborn babies against the propagandas defending the abortion Auschwitz. 

Would the world be better with their legal destruction? 

Schwartsman concludes by saying, “The world is not exactly a beautiful place. But we don’t need to worsen it still more by turning it in a huge prison”. Essentially, he meant, “The world would be less ugly if nobody were punished for killing unborn babies”. 

In the countries where the State controls everything and everybody, nobody is sent to jail for killing unborn babies. Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, pioneering nations in modern pro-abortion legislation, didn’t need to build additional prisons to arrest women that killed their unborn babies. For Schwartsman, just that was already a big saving! 

However, there was no saving to persecute the innocent. Both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany needed to build many more concentration camps, to arrest, torture and kill people disagreeing the system and its “ethics”. When criminals and their crimes receive legal protection, the innocent eventually lose theirs. 

Risking being repetitive against the repetitive arguments by Schwartsman, the legalization of abortion will provoke the dark need to establish thousands of state clinics and abortion services throughout Brazil — at a high cost that, as usual, will be imposed on the Brazilian taxpayer’s shoulders. What a wretched destiny! To work to pay the blood bill of others! 

In the countries where abortion is free, a citizen refusing to pay the abortion tax is arrested. A citizen daring to pray or to protest peacefully in front of a state baby slaughterhouse may be arrested as if he were a criminal — while physicians and women inside of the clinic kill under the protection of the law. And woe to those calling murderers of murderers, because police will come to beat — those antagonizing the “sacred” right of killing. 

Today, as the Brazilian State increasingly controls the citizens’ life and it is walking to decriminalize abortion, the right to free speech of criticizing that murderous march has increasingly been cut, bringing the spectrum of one day where the upcoming pro-abortion State will feel need to build thousands and thousands of prisons to shelter the millions of Brazilian citizens disagreeing the imperious and sacrosanct state and media vision of abortion.

Mr. Schwartsman has his reasons to sanitize legal abortion: His name is connected to the Brazilian pro-abortion group Comissão de Cidadania e Reprodução (Citizenship and Reproduction Committee). Such credentials allow him to use his journalistic skills in an “impartial” and “objective way in the abortion debate.

In fact, the world is not a beautiful place, but it would be less ugly without Nazi and Soviet ideas of abortion. 

For those that did not have their vision affected by the propaganda of untruthfulness, babies are one of the only beautiful things still left in this world. How can it become more beautiful with the legalization of their mass destruction?

Portuguese version of this article: Os “indesejáveis” e a propaganda da inverdade

Source: http://www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Brazilian President Seeks to Secure Abortion as “Right,” Ban Crucifixes in Government Buildings

Massive legislative program being called a nonviolent “coup d’etat” and a socialist party “dictatorship.”

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman, Latin American Correspondent

BRASILIA, Brasil, January 22, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) — Brazilian President Luiz Lula da Silva has introduced a massive legislative reform package in the last year of his term that would secure abortion as a “human right,” impose socialist and homosexualist ideology in the schools and media, and ban crucifixes from government facilities, among other measures.

The legislative program, which is called the Third National Program for Human Rights (PNDH-3), would establish a level of control over the media and private property that is being called a nonviolent “coup d’etat” and a socialist party “dictatorship.” It has elicited widespread protest from institutions ranging from the Catholic Church to military leaders, the agricultural sector, and even members of the president's own cabinet.

The leadership of the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops (CNBB) has issued a declaration “reaffirming its position, manifested many times, in defense of life and the family, and against the decriminalization of abortion, against marriage between people of the same sex and the right of adoption of children by homosexual couples.”

The CNBB leadership “also rejects the creation of ‘mechanisms to impede the display of religious symbols in public establishments of the Union,’ because it regards such an intolerant measure as ignoring our historical roots.”

A Socialist Party Dictatorship?

If the Brazilian Labor Party succeeds in imposing the legislative package contained in the PNDH-3, it will receive broad powers to shut down media outlets that disagree with its ideology, impose its pro-abortion and homosexualist political agenda on the entire country, and undermine the rights of private property.  The extensive powers proposed by the government have led at least one prominent Brazilian commentator to speak of a party “dictatorship.”

For example, the Program treats the killing of unborn children as a “human right,” to be protected by the state. Directive 9 includes “supporting the approval of legislation that decriminalizes abortion, considering the autonomy of women to make decisions concerning their bodies.”

It also orders the creation of “campaigns and educational actions to deconstruct the stereotypes related to sex professionals.”

“Education and Culture in Human Rights,” the fifth “axis” in the Program, directs that children from “infancy” (early childhood) must be taught the government's concept of “human rights,” which includes “the study of themes of gender and sexual orientation” for the purpose of “combating prejudice, which is sometimes rooted in the family itself.”

Directive 10 strikes a decisive blow against the Brazilian tradition of displaying crucifixes in public facilities, mandating the creation of “mechanisms to impede the display of religious symbols in public establishments of the Union (Brazil).”

It also proposes to “carry out campaigns and educational activities to deconstruct the stereotypes related to ... sexual identity and orientation.”

The Program’s Directive 19 requires the creation of curricula “for all of the levels and forms of teaching for basic education,” for “promoting the recognition and/or respect for the diversities of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity…”

The Program’s educational directives will have an even greater impact given the fact that the government recently passed a constitutional amendment requiring that all children be sent to school at the age of four.

Broad Control over the Media and Private Property

Directive 22 of the PNDH-3 would establish state control over broadcast media content, requiring radio and TV stations to show “respect for Human Rights in services of radio broadcasting (radio and television) that have [government] concessions, permission, or authorization, as a condition for the awarding or renewal [of their licenses], foreseeing administrative penalties such as warnings, fines, suspension of programming and cancellation, in accordance with the gravity of the violations committed.”

It also directs the creation of “incentives” for “regular investigations that may identify forms, circumstances, and characteristics of violations of Human Rights in the media.”

Directive 8 also proposes the use of the media as a mouthpiece of the government's “human rights” indoctrination program for young people, directing the “informing of children and adolescents regarding their rights, by means of joint efforts in schools, print media, television, radio, and internet.”

Regarding private property, PNDH-3 proposes that a special “legal framework” be created for the “mediation of urban property conflicts” which will “guarantee the required legal process and the social function of property.”  It uses similar language for rural property conflicts.  According the conservative Spanish publication El Pais, this language is almost identical to that of Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez, who speaks of the concept of “social property.”

The Program has caused consternation and provoked threats of resignation from senior military leaders for proposing the creation of a “Truth Commission” to examine crimes committed by the military regime of the 1960s and 70s.  Military leaders are exempt from prosecution from such crimes according to current Brazilian laws. Lula has calmed fears among military leaders by agreeing to apply the commission to all violations of “human rights,” which presumably includes the terroristic activities of the socialist opposition during the same period.

Controversy Erupts in Brazil

Although President Lula has quieted fears of a socialist witchhunt against its former military enemies, the plan continues to provoke outrage and fierce opposition within Brazil.

Reinaldo Azevedo, blogging for the widely-read news magazine Veja, says that the proposals would constitute a “dictatorship” run by associates of president Luiz Lula, calls it a bloodless “coup d’etat,” and compares the regime it proposes to that of Hugo Chavez, who is gradually eliminating civil liberties in Venezuela.

Azevedo also writes that the proposals would “extinguish private property in the country and the cities” and avers that “the Military Regime instituted in 1964 was more explicit and more modest” in its intentions.

Dimas Lara Resende, Secretary-General of the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops, has commented that “next we will have to demolish the statue of Christ the Redeemer.”

Broadcast media and agricultural associations have also raised their voices against the proposals.

The President of the National Confederation of Agriculture, Senator Katia Abreu, has reportedly said that the creation of mediation programs in cases in which people invade private property will encourage rural violence and prejudice the rights of property owners.  Andre Meloni Nassar, Director General of the Institute for Studies of Commerce and International Businesses writes that the Program is a “funeral for agribusiness.”

Even Lula's Minister of Agrigulture, Reinhold Stephanes, has rejected the idea, expressing fears that such measures will “increase the insecurity in the country” and “strengthen radical organizations.”

Although Lula has himself expressed concern about some of the material in the Program, he appears determined to defend it, although it threatens to undermine his strong popularity in his last year of office.

Source: LifeSiteNews

Divulgation: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Read more:

Inhumane rights, by Julio Severo

Educational slavery for four-year-old children, by Julio Severo

Will an earthquake be necessary? 

Lessons of Haiti for a Lula administration avid to promote Afro-Brazilian religions as “culture” 

By Julio Severo 

Before the immense tragedy of the earthquake in Haiti, where dozens of thousands died, Gerge Samuel Antoine, the consul of Haiti in São Paulo, Brazil, was sincere enough — and also politically incorrect — to attribute the tragedy to the religion of Haitians. The official religion of Haiti, a nation overwhelmingly formed by African slaves’ descendants, is voodoo. 

Voodoo is a religion from Africa that, as Afro-Brazilian candomblé, mixed elements of the Catholic rulers’ religion. As in candomblé, rituals in voodoo are marked by music, dances and food, including sacrificed animals. In the ceremony of both, participants enter a trance and receive spirits in their bodies. There are reports, abundantly documented and published, of human beings’ sacrifice in some of those rituals — including boys’ rape by the leader, which is usually homosexual. 

From the point of view of the Bible, those practices are dangerous: 

“You must never sacrifice your sons or daughters by burning them alive, practice black magic, be a fortuneteller, witch, or sorcerer, cast spells, ask ghosts or spirits for help, or consult the dead. Whoever does these things is disgusting to the LORD…” (Deuteronomy 18:10-12 GWV)

Would it be any wonder then that the same nation that has voodoo as its official religion is, at the same time, the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere? That miserable condition is a spiritual heritage preceding European colonization. 

Before the European colonization, Africa lived a culture of wars among tribes, enslavement of the members of conquered tribes, human beings’ ritual sacrifices — and the common element of that “culture”, which was impeding progress and peace in Africa, was its own religion, which leaned on the invocation of spiritual beings and powers considered by the Bible and the Christian tradition as demons and dark powers.  

Therefore, one can understand the Haitian consul’s declaration, Antoine, who said on the earthquake in Haiti: “I think it has to do with messing so much with voodoo, I don't know what it is… The African himself has a curse. Everywhere there are Africans it’s f…”

It is not difficult to decipher the consul’s words, although expressed in a thoughtless way. Where there are many descendants of Africans, there are a lot of voodoo and candomblé. And where there is a lot of voodoo and candomblé, there are many descendants of Africans. And where there is a lot of voodoo and candomblé, there is a lot of curse. At least, that is the sheer reality in Brazil and Haiti. 

However, it is necessary to make it clear that the curses on them are not the result of their skin color, but because of predominant religious practices. When those wicked practices are given up, there is real change. According to the Bible, the man that is in Christ is a new creature, whether he is white, black, yellow or blue. Where there are blacks saved, delivered and transformed by Jesus’ blood, there are not the usual curses of voodoo and candomblé. That is a different and beautiful reality, which Haiti and its consul in São Paulo ignore. What they know is the reality of destruction of voodoo. 

I understand that reality very well, because in my childhood I was taken to the rituals of an Afro-Brazilian religion, where my mother was one of its local leaders. So today I am able to pray with discernment when a homosexual activist threatens me saying that he has been invoking Afro-Brazilian spirits against my life.

Gay activists and Afro-Brazilian religions have been very united because, different from the God of the Bible who abhors homosexuality, spirits in candomblé, macumba and voodoo love sex between two men. Even “Christian” gay activists in Brazil are very supportive of Afro-Brazilian religions. Late Neemias Marien, a Rio de Janeiro minister expelled from the Presbyterian Church in Brazil for his homosexual militancy, said that he had spiritual experiences common in candomblé and voodoo. And in a meeting of the World Council of Churches in Brazil, gay militants and Afro-Brazilian adherents were pictured together.

Of course the same “cultural” tendency that despises Christianity equally values the religion (not mentioning the homosexuality) of “minorities” and historically “discriminated” groups, so that any Brazilian daring to say openly what the consul said against voodoo (or against candomblé) incurs a moral lynching by the leftist media and by the paranoid leftist government of Brazil. Nevertheless, only people that lived under Afro-Brazilian religions, or voodoo, know the destructive power of the evil spirits. Haiti is living that reality. 

And even so Brazil, under the Lula administration, wants the promotion and protection of those religions, including in schools, as “culture”. It is with a lot of haughtiness that the government insists on that direction — antagonizing the largely Catholic culture of Brazil. 

Actually, what the socialist agenda wants is the weakness of Christianity and its values, which are contrary to the socialist ideals. By insinuating that Afro-Brazilian religions are “victims” of an “oppressive” Christianity, socialists hope to eradicate every trace of Christian influence in the society and substitute it for their own values. 

The notion that they want to teach to the public is simple: if the African slaves’ descendants are victims, then their religion is a victim too. All of their millenarian misfortunes are used then to blame exclusively European colonialism and by extension Christianity — leaving voodoo and candomblé virtually untouched and exempt from responsibility in all of the tragedies, catastrophes, poverty, criminality and other evils. 

Try to suggest slightly that there may be evil in voodoo and candomblé, and the leftist media quickly provides a heavy torrent of criticism and condemnations, as if every denunciation against those religions were a direct racist attack against backs. They put those religions in a privileged pedestal where to criticize them is like a “sacrilege”. But that same media grants totally inverse treatment when Christianity is under criticism.  

The socialist agenda wants the situation to reach a point where a Christian, even one that has left African religions, might be legally threatened and condemned by “prejudice” if he says that there are curses in people and countries that invoke demons of witchcraft. It is evident: there won’t be any condemnation for the “irreverent” individuals that say what they want about Christianity — in these cases, the invocation of a right of free expression seems always to work very well! 

But, wanting or not, what the anti-prejudice ideology is doing is to put demons of voodoo, candomblé and similar religions to occupy in an outstanding way the social stage as “victims” of the “imperialistic” Christianity — in fact, as “poor victims” in need of the protection and assistance from the State —, as if now it were the turn for God to be put in the category of criminal, discriminator, bigot, racist against African religions, etc. Or as if now it were the turn for the gods of the Afro-Brazilian religions to have their “cultural” revenge. 

With his ambitious and obstinate politics of promoting as culture what the Bible classifies as witchcraft, Lula shows his own preferences. Before the 2006 presidential election, he visited Benin, the African nation considered the cradle of voodoo. There, Lula participated in a long ceremony of voodoo priests, to “help him” being reelected. In return, now he wants the Afro-Brazilian religions, which are related to voodoo, in privileged position in the schools, to the detriment of Christianity itself. 

Will one or two earthquakes be enough to wake up the Brazilian society for the evils of the politically correct? I doubt a lot. The book of Revelation makes it clear that in these last days there will be a lot of curses and environmental tragedies, including enormous earthquakes, which will come as judgment and consequences of the sins of the society. Revelation describes the reaction of those surviving these judgments: 

“And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.” (Revelation 9:21 NKJV)

That is, even after major earthquakes and plagues, 

Modern generation won’t repent from their homicides: murder of unborn babies through abortion, euthanasia, human beings’ ritual sacrifice in witchcraft, macabre scientific experiences with embryos, etc. 

Modern generation won’t repent from their sorceries (invocation of demons and their powers under several forms, including macumba, candomblé, voodoo and many others) and from promoting them as “culture” in the schools, TV and other educational ways, flooding the whole society with their infernal malignancy and protecting them of criticism. 

Modern generation won’t repent from their sexual immorality (adultery, sex outside marriage, homosexual acts, pornography, pornographic sexual education in the schools, etc.). 

Modern generation won’t repent from their thefts, in a culture where many want to take advantage of their neighbor in the first opportunity, especially through government offices. 

For their sins and a lack of repentance, they will continue suffering judgments.

Portuguese version of this article: Será necessário um terremoto?

Spanish version of this article: ¿Se hará necesario un terremoto?

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Read more:

In search of the ancient altars: Rejecting the Israel roots and welcoming the Afro roots

Inhumane rights

Inhumane decree misleads Brazilian people with oppressive and dictatorial measures

By Julio Severo

Very in the Soviet style, Lula, president of Brazil, has shown all of his red claws, from his feet and hands.

His presidential decree of “human rights” (Decreto 7037, issued on 21/12/2009, also known as “3º Plano Nacional de Direitos Humanos” [Third Human Rights National Plan]), allegedly crafted with the approval and consensus from the people, violates major rights of the Brazilian citizens, giving to evil the covering of “human rights” and stripping most of the population from their legitimate rights.

For those that do not know, in the Soviet Union, the biggest practical model of socialism in the world, everything was done “in the name of the people”. Courts, which condemned the innocent and protected criminals of the only party, were the “people’s courts”. To resist this “justice” was considered crime against the people. The innocent people were condemned in their own name!

It is obvious that all of that talk of “from the people” and “for the people” was in truth just a camouflage for the state arbitrariness. The State could freely violate rights under the pretext that it was acting “in the best interests of the people”.

Not much different, the socialist government of Brazil alleges always to be acting “in the best interests” of the poor, or of the oppressed, or of the disabled, or of the women, or of the blacks and now of the gays — in the most advanced and updated Marxist malice

Soviet communists committed horrendous genocides — everything in the name of the best interests of the people. Today, the thirst for blood and the moral and ethical annihilation are turned, in Lula’s decree, into the defense of “human rights”: to approve abortion, to legitimate prostitution, to legitimate as “culture” the imposition of Afro-Brazilian religions (similar to voodoo) in schools, to ban Christian symbols in federal facilities, to canonize communist terrorists, etc.

In my article Presente das Trevas (Gift from the Darkness), published in December 22, 2009, I warned Brazil that while everybody were resting and enjoying their family and the holiday, Lula and his comrades were scheming their inhumane bomb of “human rights”. The bomb, delivered as a presidential decree in December 21, 2009, will have a devastatingly lethal effect if the population does not show their strength and courage.

If the red and morally inverted decree of Lula prevails, everybody will have “human rights” in Brazil — except for the innocent. His decree in reality decrees the extinction of morality, ethics, private properties, free speech and, with the imposition of gay “marriage”, religious freedom.

Lula’s decree establishes several measures filled with ideological malice in the most sophisticated Soviet style of distortion of words and reality, presenting as “human rights” the following aberrations,

*Professionalization of prostitution.

*Press and internet control.

*Ban on Christian symbols in public facilities.

*Official promotion of Afro-Brazilian religions (similar to voodoo) as “culture” of the descendants of slaves from Africa.

*Legalization of abortion.

*Legitimating of gay “marriage” and the adoption of children by these couples.

For minimally healthy people, this has nothing to do with human rights. But when morally unhealthy individuals are in power, what should we expect?

Recently, I have read that, in the Open Doors rating, the nation that most persecutes and murders Christians in the world is communist North Korea. In the second place is Iran — the same Iran whose Israel-hating president keeps friendship with Lula.  

Have Lula ever remembered mentioning to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that to murder Christians is to violate human rights? Have Lula remembered issuing a fair presidential decree condemning Ahmadinejad and his administration for crimes and abuses of legitimate human rights against Christians?

This is the essence of the ethics of Lula and his administration, which use and abuse the “human rights” term to defend and give honor even to communist terrorists, including by taking away from Brazilian taxpayers for scandalous and unfair reparations. And his presidential decree orders the transformation of these criminals into heroes. And guess who is going to be lowered and debased into the category of criminal and “human rights violator”? No, it was not Ahmadinejad that was chosen. Lula and his gang are aiming at the Brazilian military, which were able to save Brazil from a sure communist coup in the 1960s, while many other Third World nations were falling into the hands of international communism.

To Ahmadinejad, Lula and his administration show kindness, respect, consideration, etc. To the enemies of the state arbitrariness robed in “human rights”, the weight of the “justice” of the “people’s” or “human rights” courts — it is all the same. The impeding anti-“homophobia” courts will show plenty of evidences of this arbitrariness.

Lula has already decided: the mutilated and raped corpses of the tortured and slaughtered Christians in Iran have no value for his ambitious ideological agenda. So there will be no presidential decree defending these or other real victims of human rights abuses.

The nasty left will keep praising and supporting Lula with Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and other authentic human-rights abusers. And it will keep praising his presidential decree, which guaranteed a red Christmas for Brazilians — a gloomy redness that, if not resisted and fought, will extend its nefarious consequences for a long time. Christmas holiday has gone, but Brazilians are still choked and sickened with the decreed crafted in the most pure and immoral Soviet spirit.

As usual, the people expect, with outstretched hands, gifts and favors from the government, with the illusion that the government is the source of all solutions. But the Brazilian government is no Santa Claus. And notwithstanding it were, it would be fictitious, not real. The only undeniable reality is that the vast ethical and moral problems facing Brazil have largely been caused by the government itself. The decree of Lula is the biggest evidence of what a wicked administration can do against its own people, in the name of the people!

Yet, there is hope: the people that elected that redness has always the democratic right to throw it down

Portuguese version of this article: Direitos desumanos

Spanish version of this article: Derechos inhumanos

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Why I am not a socialist

Some reasons why I am not helping to build the kingdom of the Beast

By Julio Severo

Socialism is a fashion among atheists since Karl Marx. In its essence, socialism enthrones the State in the center of everything, as if the State had some kind of divine vocation or permission to replace God and meet all human needs: education, health, housing, employment, etc. Intending or not, every government promising such total provision is socialistic.

The socialist fashion has imposed on the collective mindset the strange “normalcy” of viewing government as responsible for taking care of all human needs, as if we needed a state super-nanny “caring” for us for a lifetime. Ask a cleaning woman or a powerful businessman what the role of the State is, and they will robotically echo: to deliver education, health, housing, employment, etc. The brainwashing is virtually finished now. Everything is ready for the coming of the kingdom of the Beast.

This brainwashing, which is widespread today, hit and so changed the mindset of many nominal Christians that they defend naturally ideas that are basically leftist. They unashamedly defend a State in the place of God, albeit with other words. 

I for one am unashamed not to belong to that ideology, and I give now my reasons why I do not accept a State in the place of God.

1. I am not a socialist because I am not an idolater. The Bible puts God as the supreme provider. In the past, heathens put in this stand Baal and other gods. Today, socialists put the State as the supreme provider, giving it a character and function completely outside God’s purposes. To accept that role for the State imposed by socialism is to embrace idolatry and fall into serious sin against God.

2. I am not a socialist because I am not stupid. The Bible says that “by their fruits you will know them”. What has been the fruit of Marxism, created by Satanist Karl Marx? Socialism and its variations brought forth to the world more than 100 million murders. Socialism is undeniably the most murderous ideology today.

3. I am not a socialist because I love Jesus Christ with all my heart. There is no place in my life for socialism. Jesus walked healing and preaching the Kingdom of God, while the preachers of the Integral Mission “gospel” and other Liberation Theology labels preach, in Christian vestures, the kingdom of this world — the government in the place of God. The only kind of healing these false messengers preach is the state health care, funded by abusive and criminal taxes that violate God’s commands.

4. I am not a socialist because I am not a blasphemer. I do not mix Bible with the ideology of Karl Marx and his successors. I do not use the Gospel and the precious name of Jesus Christ to promote socialism and a socialist State. I cannot serve two masters, because it would be blasphemy to preach that, in the presence of the blood spilled of Jesus Christ that has been saving so many souls, an ideology that has shed so much innocent blood is the answer for the poor. I came from a past of poverty, and Jesus was my answer. To equate slightly the blood-shedding socialism with Jesus that shed his own blood for me would be blasphemy. 

5. I am not a socialist because I do not want blindly to help a corrupt system. The Bible makes it clear that in the last days an arrogant and strong idolatrous State will raise up, demanding worship to itself. This day has come. We are in the last time foretold by God’s Word. The State today has almost no similarity with what a State should be according to Romans 13. Modern State is a false god, with its homosexual priests (as the old heathen religions) and pro-abortion, thirsty for innocent blood (as the old heathen religions).

6. I am not a socialist because I do not accept that the State became a religion, requiring worship to itself above all the religions, commands, precepts, etc. The State today is increasingly reflecting the image of the Beast, imposing itself above religions, equating Jesus Christ, the sovereign King of the Universe, with all the false gods, including from witchcraft, and imposing the submission of citizens to its pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality commands. The State-Beast today is a religion that will not accept anything except worship and submission. 

7. I am not a socialist because I am not cynic. Intending or not, admitting or not, a Christian working for socialism is promoting a strange glory, though unashamedly he may say that everything is for God’s glory. Jesus does not need socialism to glorify his name. Jesus does not need a welfare and provider-of-everything State to achieve the objectives of the Kingdom of God.

8. I am not a socialist because I am a Kingdom of God citizen. In these last days, when individual States are merging and turning themselves into a super-state — or State-Beast — foreseen in the Revelation, I am glad to be a member of the army of prophetic resistance, which with the Lamb will overcome (see Revelation 17:14). The Government of God shall come and destroy the world government of the Beast built for a long time by the sympathizers of socialism and other aberrations.

9. I am not a socialist because I preach another government system. King Jesus has his own government system. That government system is called Kingdom of God. While atheist, Catholic, evangelical and animist socialists preach the kingdom of Karl Marx and his successors, I and many others preach the Kingdom of God.

10. I am not a socialist because I do not want to help to build the world government of the Beast. While an innumerable crowd is building the world kingdom of the Beast through socialism, I and many others are advancing the Kingdom of God, which shall destroy the kingdom of the Beast.

11. I am not a socialist because I am not an accomplice of thief and liar. The socialist State, which usurps the place of God promising to meet all human needs (health, education, housing, employment, etc.), has to impose abusive and criminal taxes on the population. And even after stealing continuously, it does not fulfill its promises. However it may be, the State has no permission from God to steal, regardless its justifications for the stealing.

12. I am not a socialist because I believe, as Romans 13, that the role of the State is only to punish criminals, including with capital punishment when necessary, and to praise good citizens. Any government overpassing and perverting the limits of Romans 13 is demonic and deserves to be denounced and repulsed. Any Christian preaching a government overpassing these limits is a false messenger and deserves to be prophetically denounced.

13. I am not a socialist because I believe in the revelations of God’s Word. The book of Revelation warns positively on the threats from the Beast, which will be a comprehensive and domineering State. The State-Beast wants for itself and its commands the maximum attention from everybody. The State-Beast promising care for every need of everybody forces all citizens to remain under its total welfare coverage. The State-Beast requiring being in the place of God reflects in truth its soul of Baal, with sacrifices of babies (abortion) and sacred and untouchable priests of homosexuality.

14. I am not a socialist because I have eyes to see and ears to hear what God’s Word shows and says. Whoever has eyes to see and ears to hear, let him pay attention to what God shows and says about the Beast, the gruesome State in these last days, which will mislead everybody. Promising to grant education, health, housing, employment, etc., who would fail to deceive the population? Year after year, the most corrupt politicians make these promises, and year after year the population elects them… The State-Beast already knows what to do to capture the people’s heart.

15. I am not a socialist because there is no ideology fighting so much as socialism so that “the kingdom of the Beast will come”. Certainly, there are other ideologies collaborating, but by far socialism is the master of ceremonies in this macabre and apocalyptic show of the Beast.

16. I am not a socialist because I am a son of God, not a fruit of imbecile ideologies impregnating collectively universities and schools. Modern schools, captured by the socialist ideology, deform citizens, forming a socialist mindset in children that will be congressmen, ministers, priests, physicians — everybody cast in the same casting, in the same mindset that the State should meet all the needs of everybody. I broke the casting. I belong to Jesus!

17. I am not a socialist because I am not manipulated. Most ministers in Nazi Germany used Romans 13 to teach German evangelicals to be submissive to the Nazi government. So do today leftist ministers on behalf of socialist governments. So will do ministers on behalf of the State-Beast. Even though those “revolutionary” ministers faithfully use Romans 13 to preach “submission and respect” to welfare governments, regardless how murderous they are, they do not hesitate to inflame their evangelical flocks with rebellious attitudes towards any and every government failing to fulfill the socialist ideal.

18. I am not a socialist because I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I love him and I hear his voice. Jesus is sufficient for me. Jesus and his government system — the Kingdom of God — are sufficient for me.

Those are only some of the reasons why I reject socialism and every ideology putting the State on a pedestal and in the center of the lives of human beings.

A time for prophetic resistance

Yet, the brainwashing in the conscious and subconscious of the masses has been so a profound, gradual and systematic process that even my arguments, which may appear many, are few. They are like a little stone in the overwhelming presence of the Goliath of leftist indoctrination prevalent throughout the society. They are insufficient to reverse the overpowering ideological hypnotization imposed on the mindset of the majority.

Nevertheless, I will continue preaching the Kingdom of God and its righteousness.

Nevertheless, I will continue serving King Jesus Christ in the context we are in — in the prophetic context of Revelation. It is in this context we should see the State and what it has changed into and what it is changing into.

While the order of God in Romans 13 is respect and submission to a State that respects and is submissive to the limits and calling God imposed on it, the direction for the followers of Jesus in Revelation is neither respect nor submission to the State-Beast. The State has changed, and so has done also God’s direction for the behavior of the Kingdom of God citizens in the modern society. The order in Revelation is resistance — to resist until the Kingdom of God comes.

So very gladly I say, pray and prophesize:

Come, Kingdom of God!

And certainly the Kingdom of God shall come and destroy all the systems and ideologies opposed to God and his indestructible government or put themselves in the place of God.

Amen.

Portuguese version of this article: Por que não sou socialista

Spanish version of this article: Por qué no soy socialista

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading:

The prophet Elijah’s return: what the Elijah anointing represents to families and the political world in these last days