Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Revelation 16-22

2014-10-20T02:07:30Z

Debletar: /* Chapter 22 */

==Chapter 16==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.
|I heard a great voice out of the Temple, saying to the seven Messengers, "Be on your way and pour out the vials of the rage of God onto the earth!"
|
|-
|2
|And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.
|The first went out and poured out his vial onto the earth. A rash of foul-smelling, painful sores broke out on the men who had the cattle-stamp of the ravener, and on them who were worshipping his statue.
|
|-
|3
|And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.
|The second poured out his vial onto the sea. It turned into post-mortem blood clot matter, and every living thing in the sea died.
|
|-
|4
|And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood.
|The third poured out his vial onto the rivers and freshwater springs, and they turned into blood.
|
|-
|5
|And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
|I heard the Messenger in charge of the freshwater supplies say, "You are just, O Lord, Who are, and were, and will be, because you have ruled in this way!
|
|-
|6
|For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
|They have spilled the blood of saints and prophets, and You have given them blood to drink, because they deserve it!"
|
|-
|7
|And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.
|I heard one from the altar saying, "Yes indeed, Lord God Almighty, your verdicts are true and just!"
|
|-
|8
|And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
|The fourth poured out his vial onto the [[sun]]. The sun was then made capable of scorching men with fire.
|
|-
|9
|And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.
|Men were scorched with great heat, and they blasphemed the Name of the God That has authority over these plagues. They didn't get their minds right, nor did they give Him glory.
|
|-
|10
|And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
|The fifth poured out his vial on the capital city of the ravener, and his regime became darkened, and people gnawed their tongues from the pain,
|
|-
|11
|And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.
|and blasphemed the God of heaven, blaming Him for their pains and their sores, and did not change their hearts about their deeds.
|
|-
|12
|And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
|The sixth poured out his vial on the great [[Euphrates River]], and its water was dried up, in order to clear a path for the heads-of-state of the Far East.
|
|-
|13
|And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
|I saw three frog-like demons coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the ravener, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
|
|-
|14
|For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
|These are the spirits of demons, that make miraculous signs and go out to all the heads-of-state of the earth and the entire world, to gather them to the War of the Great Day of God Almighty.
|
|-
|15
|Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
|"Behold! I am coming like a Thief! Blessed is the one who stays alert, and keeps his clothes on, if he doesn't want to walk naked, and let people see him in a shameful condition!"
|
|-
|16
|And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
|And he massed them in a place that is called in [[Hebrew]], Armageddon.
|Literally, '''הרמגדון''' (Har-mageddon), or the Valley of Megiddo. [[Napoleon Bonaparte]], on surveying this valley during his travels in the [[Middle East]], is rumored to have exclaimed that this would be a wonderful place to have a battle. It is a wide-open space with room to assemble an army larger than has ever before been assembled for a single battle. In fact, many other battles, often decisive battles in [[Egypt]]ian and [[Israel]]ite history, have been fought on this site.

The British, in the days of Mandatory [[Palestine]], built Ramat-David Air Force Base in this valley. Today that base is the largest and most important base of the Israeli Air Forces.
|-
|17
|And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.
|And the seventh poured out his vial into the air. A great voice out of the temple, from the throne, said, "It is done!"
|
|-
|18
|And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.
|Lightings, voices, and thunderclaps occurred, and a gret earthquake, such has not been felt since men walked this earth, so terrible was this earthquake.
|
|-
|19
|And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.
|The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the Gentiles were destroyed. Babylon the Great came into the memory of God, Who lashed out at her in the full out-of-control fury of His magisterial indignation.
|
|-
|20
|And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.
|Every island was sunk, and the mountains could not be found.
|
|-
|21
|And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.
|And a great hail fell out of the sky onto men. Every hailstone weighed roughly as much as a backpack-load. Men blasphemed God and blamed Him for the plague of the hail, because this plague was very, very great.
|The literal Greek word is '''ταλεντον''' (''talenton''), the weight that a man could carry on his back. Any rock or hailstone weighing that much would deliver as much energy as would a nuclear device.
|}

==Chapter 17==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
|One of the seven Messengers who held the seven vials came and talked with me. He told me, "Come here; I will show you the verdict in the case of the great harlot who sits on many waters,
|This is the "Whore of Babylon."
|-
|2
|With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
|who has had the heads-of-state of the earth as her clients, and those who live on the earth have gotten intoxicated with all her immoral activities and programs."
|
|-
|3
|So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
|So he carried me away in the Spirit into the desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet-colored ravening animal, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
|
|-
|4
|And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
|The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and decorated herself with gold and precious gemtones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, full of detestable substances and the unclean products of her immoral acts.
|
|-
|5
|And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
|On her forehead this name was written: "Secret, Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots and of Detestable Things from the Earth."
|
|-
|6
|And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
|I saw that this woman was intoxicated from the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her, I got the shock of my life.
|The literal Greek reads "wondered with a great wonder." Greek, like Hebrew, often repeats the same concept for emphasis, which is what it does here.
|-
|7
|And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
|And the Messenger told me, "Why are you so shocked? I will tell you the secret of the woman, and of that seven-headed and ten-horned wild animal that's carrying her.
|
|-
|8
|The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
|That wild animal you saw was alive, is now dead, and is about to rise out of the Abyss, and be on his way to utter ruin. They who are living on the earth, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, will be shocked and awed when they see this ravening animal who was alive, is now dead, and yet is still alive.
|
|-
|9
|And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
|Here is where you need insight: The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman is sitting. They are also seven emperors.
|In the original manuscripts, the phrase "seven kings" is part of this verse, not the one following.
|-
|10
|And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
|Five of them have died, one is in power right now, and the other hasn't come to power yet, and when he does come to power, he'll remain in power only for a short while.
|
|-
|11
|And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
|The ravening animal that was alive, and is now dead, is in fact the eighth emperor. He is one of the seven, and is on his way to total ruin.
|
|-
|12
|And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
|The ten horns you saw are ten heads-of-state, who have not yet received a state to run. They will receive authority aas heads-of-state for one hour along with the ravener.
|
|-
|13
|These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
|They are unanimous, and will give their power and their authority to the ravener.
|
|-
|14
|These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
|They will fight a war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will beat them. He is, after all, the Lord of lords, and King of kings, and His companions are called, and chosen, and faithful."
|
|-
|15
|And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
|And he told me, "The waters you saw, where the harlot is sitting, are peoples, and crowds, and ethnic groups, and languages.
|
|-
|16
|And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
|The ten horns you saw on the ravener, will hate the harlot and render her desolate and naked. They will eat her flesh and burn her up.
|
|-
|17
|For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.
|Because God has put it into their hearts to accomplish His purpose, to forge an alliance, and to give their sovereignty to the ravener, until everything that God said would happen, does happen.
|
|-
|18
|And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
|And the woman you saw is the great city that rules imperially over all the heads-of-state of the earth."
|
|}

==Chapter 18==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
|After this, I saw another Messenger coming down from heaven, having great authority. The [[earth]] was made to shine with His glory.
|This is probably yet another manifestation of [[Jesus Christ]].
|-
|2
|And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
|And He cried with a loud voice: "Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great! She has become the dwelling place of demons, the dungeon of every unclean spirit, and a cage for every unclean and despicable bird!
|The use of the aorist tense, repeated, suggests that the city will fall twice.

Some manuscripts add "and a cage for every unclean ''beast''."
|-
|3
|For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
|All the ethnic groups have taken part in her wild orgies, and the heads-of-state of the earth have had sexual favors from her, and the merchants of the earth have grown rich through the addictive power of her sensual luxuries!"
|
|-
|4
|And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
|I heard another voice out of the sky. It said, "Come out of her, My people, so that you will not be mixed up in her sins, and that you not receive any of her plagues!
|
|-
|5
|For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
|Her sins have reached to the sky, and God has remembered her unjust dealings!
|
|-
|6
|Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.
|Reward her the same way that she rewarded you, and pay her back doubled and redoubled according to her works. Fill her cup double-full!
|
|-
|7
|How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.
|To the extent that she glorified herself, and lived luxuriously, give her just as much torment and sorrow! She says in her heart, 'I sit as a queen, I am not a widow, and I will never be sorry'!
|
|-
|8
|Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.
|For this reason, her plagues will come in one day, death, mourning, and famine. She will be burned up in fire, because the Lord God Who convicts her is mighty!
|
|-
|9
|And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
|The kings of the earth, her former clients who lived in luxury with her, will weep and mourn for her, when they see the smoke of her burning.
|
|-
|10
|Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.
|They will stand at a distance for fear of her torment, and say, 'Woe! Woe! That great city, Babylon the mighty city! In one hour your verdict has been delivered!
|
|-
|11
|And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:
|"The merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her, because nobody is buying their wares anymore!
|
|-
|12
|The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,
|The wares of [[gold]], [[silver]], precious gemstones, and [[pearl]]s, and fine linen, and purple and [[silk]] and scarlet, and all your [[wood]], and all types of [[ivory]] vessels, and rare wooden vessels, and of [[bronze]], [[iron]], and [[marble]],
|Some manuscripts replace "wood" with "stone."
|-
|13
|And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men.
|and [[cinnamon]], and aromatic spices, and ointments, and myrrh, and frankincense, and [[wine]], and [[oil]], and fine-ground flour, and [[wheat]], and [[cattle]], and [[sheep]], and [[horse]]s, and four-wheeled vehicles, and the bodies and souls of men.
|
|-
|14
|And the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and all things which were dainty and goodly are departed from thee, and thou shalt find them no more at all.
|The fruits that your soul lusted after have left you, and all things that were luxurious and splendid have left you, and you will never find them again!"
|
|-
|15
|The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing,
|The merchants of these things, who made themselves rich by her, will stand at a distance for the fear of her torment, weeping and mourning.
|
|-
|16
|And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!
|They will say, "Woe, woe, that great city, that was dressed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decorated with gold, precious stones, and pearls!
|
|-
|17
|For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
|In one hour such great riches have been laid waste!" And every ship's captain, and all the ships' passengers and crewmen, and all who made their living trading by sea, stood at a distance.
|
|-
|18
|And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city!
|They cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, "Was there ever any city like this city?"
|
|-
|19
|And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.
|They threw dust on their heads, and, while weeping and wailing, they cried, "Woe! Woe! That great city, in which everyone who had ships in the sea grew rich from her expensive tastes! In one hour she is turned into a ghost city!
|
|-
|20
|Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.
|Be glad about her, heaven, and you holy apostles and prophets, because God has awarded you a judgment against her!"
|
|-
|21
|And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.
|And a strong Messenger picked up a stone like a large millstone, and threw it into the sea. He said, "In this way, Babylon the great city will be violently destroyed, and will never be found again!
|
|-
|22
|And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee;
|The sound of harp-players, and musicians, and flutists, and trumpeters, will never be heard in you again! No craftsman, of whatever craft, will be found in you again, and the sound of a millstone will never be heard in you again.
|
|-
|23
|And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
|The light of a candle will never shine in you again, and the voice of bridegroom and bride will never be heard in you again. Your merchants were the great men of the earth, because all ethnic groups were deceived by means of your drugs of abuse!
|Again the Greek word '''φαρμακεια''' (''pharmakeia''), translated "sorcery" but actually meaning "drug abuse" (specifically, hallucinogen abuse), appears. But another equivalent expression might be, "Everyone drank your [[cyanide]]-laced children's drink!"
|-
|24
|And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.
|In her was found the blood of [[prophet]]s, and of saints, and of everyone that was ever killed on earth!"
|
|}

==Chapter 19==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God:
|After these things, I heard a great voice from many people in heaven, saying, "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power be to the Lord our [[God]]!"
|The [[Hebrew]] word '''הללויה''' (Hallelujah) literally means, "Let us praise God!"
|-
|2
|For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
|His verdicts are true and just. He has convicted the great harlot, and has exacted the penalty for the blood of His slaves at her hand!"
|
|-
|3
|And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever.
|And they said a second time, "Hallelujah! And her smoke rose up for ever and ever!"
|
|-
|4
|And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia.
|The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshipped God Who was sitting on the throne, saying, "Amen! Hallelujah!"
|Which, when translated, means, "So be it! Let us praise God!"
|-
|5
|And a voice came out of the throne, saying, Praise our God, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great.
|A voice came from the throne, saying, "Praise our God, all His slaves, and you who fear Him, both small and great!"
|
|-
|6
|And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.
|And I heard a voice like the voice of a great crowd, and the voice of a lot of rushing water, and the voice of loud thunderclaps, saying, "Hallelujah! For the Lord God Almighty is reigning.
|
|-
|7
|Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
|Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to Him. The wedding of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.
|
|-
|8
|And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
|To her was granted that she be dressed in fine linen, clean and bright, because the fine linen is the justification of the saints."
|
|-
|9
|And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
|And he told me, "Write: 'Blessed are they who are invited to the Lamb's wedding reception.'" And he told me, "These are the true sayings of God."
|
|-
|10
|And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
|I fell at his feet to kiss his feet. And he told me, "Don't do that! I am your fellow slave, and the slave of those who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God. The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
|
|-
|11
|And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
|I saw heaven opened, and saw a white horse, and Him Who sat on it, called Faithful and True. In justice he makes both judgment and war.
|
|-
|12
|His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
|His eyes were like a fiery flame. On his head were many diadems, and he had a name written, that no man knew except Him.
|Only Jesus has the right to wear diadems.
|-
|13
|And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
|He was dressed in a robe covered with blood. His Name is called the Word of God.
|
|-
|14
|And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
|The armies in heaven followed him on white horses. They wore fine linen, white and clean.
|
|-
|15
|And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
|Out of his mouth goes a sharp broadsword, so that he will strike all ethnic groups with it. He will rule them with an [[iron]] sceptre, and he is treading the winepress of the rage of the magisterial anger of Almighty God.
|
|-
|16
|And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
|On his robe and on his thigh was a name written: "King of kings, and Lord of lords."
|
|-
|17
|And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
|And I saw a Messenger standing in the [[sun]]. He cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the middle of the sky, "Come and gather yourselves to the supper of the great God,
|
|-
|18
|That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
|so that you may eat the flesh of heads-of-state, and the flesh of ranking army officers, and the flesh of warlords, and the flesh of horses and cavalrymen, and the flesh of all men, lawful residents and inmates, small and great!"
|
|-
|19
|And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
|And I saw the ravener, and the heads-of-state of the earth, and their armies, mustered together to make war against Him Who sat on the horse, and against His army.
|
|-
|20
|And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
|The ravener was captured, and with him the false prophet that worked signs in front of him, with which he deceived those who had taken the ravener's cattle-brand stamp, and those who worshipped his statue. Both of them were thrown alive into a lake of fire and burning [[sulfur]].
|
|-
|21
|And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.
|The rest were killed with the broadsword belonging to Him Who sat on the horse, the sword issuing from His mouth. All the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.
|
|}

==Chapter 20==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
|I saw a Messenger coming down from heaven, who held the key of the Abyss and a great chain in his hand.
|
|-
|2
|And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
|He seized the dragon, the old serpent, that is the Devil, and [[Satan]], and bound him for a thousand years,
|
|-
|3
|And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
|and threw him into the Abyss, and shut him up, and sealed him in, so that he would never deceive the nations again, until the thousand years had passed. After this, he must be released for a little while.
|
|-
|4
|And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
|And I saw thrones, and those sitting on them, who were given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony about Jesus, and the Truth of God, and who had not worshipped the ravener or his statue, and had not gotten his cattle-brand-like stamp on their foreheads or in their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
|
|-
|5
|But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
|But the rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the First Resurrection.
|
|-
|6
|Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
|Anyone having a part in the First Resurrection is considered blessed and holy. The second death has no authority over these people. On the contrary, they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him for a thousand years.
|
|-
|7
|And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
|Now when the thousand years are ended, [[Satan]] will be released from his prison.
|
|-
|8
|And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
|He will go out to deceive the ethnic groups in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, in order to gather them together to fight a war. The number of them will be like the sand of the sea.
|
|-
|9
|And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
|They went up over the breadth of the earth, and surrounded the camp of the saints, and the beloved city. Then fire came down from heaven and consumed them.
|Some manuscripts say "fire came down ''from God'' out of heaven."
|-
|10
|And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
|The devil that had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and burning sulfur, where the ravener and the false prophet had been thrown, and will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
|
|-
|11
|And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
|Then I saw a great white throne, and Him Who sat on it. From His face the earth and heaven fled, and they had no place.
|
|-
|12
|And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
|I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. Another book was opened: the Book of Life. The dead were judged from the things written in those books, according to their deeds.
|
|-
|13
|And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
|The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hell turned over the dead that were in them. Every man was judged according to his works.
|
|-
|14
|And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
|Then Death and Hell were thrown into the lake of fire. This, the lake of fire, is the second death.
|
|-
|15
|And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
|And any man whose name was not recorded in the Book of Life was thrown into the lake of fire.
|
|}

==Chapter 21==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
|And I saw a new sky and a new earth. The first sky and the first earth had gone away, and the sea no longer existed.
|
|-
|2
|And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of the sky, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
|I, John, saw the holy city, the New [[Jerusalem]], coming down from [[God]] out of heaven, prepared the way a bride is adorned for her husband.
|
|-
|3
|And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
|I heard a great voice out of the sky, saying, "Now God pitches His tent with men, and He will live with them, and they will be His people, and God Himself will be with them, and will be their God.
|
|-
|4
|And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
|And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and neither death nor sorrow nor crying nor pain shall exist any longer, because the first things have gone away.
|
|-
|5
|And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
|He Who sat on the thone said, "Look: I am making everything new!" And He told me, "Write! These words are true and faithful."
|
|-
|6
|And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
|And He told me, "It is complete. I am A and Z, the beginning and the end. I will allow anyone who is thirsty to drink freely from the fountain of the water of life.
|
|-
|7
|He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
|The winner will inherit everything, and I will be his God, and he will be My son.
|
|-
|8
|But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
|But the cowards, the unbelievers, the detestable ones, the murderers, the clients of prostitute, the drug pushers, the idol worshippers, and all liars, will have their part in the lake of fire and burning sulfur, which is the second death."
|
|-
|9
|And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
|One of the Messengers who held the seven vials filled with the seven last plagues came to me, and talked with me. He said, "Come here, and I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb."
|
|-
|10
|And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
|He carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, holy Jerusalem, coming down out of the sky from God,
|
|-
|11
|Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
|having the glory of God. Its light was like a very precious stone, like a jasper stone, as clear as crystal.
|
|-
|12
|And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
|It had a great and high wall, and twelve gates. At the gates twelve Messengers stood guard. The gates had names written on them: the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel.
|
|-
|13
|On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
|Three gates were in the east wall, three in the north, three in the south, and three in the west.
|
|-
|14
|And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
|The city wall had twelve foundations. In those were the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb.
|
|-
|15
|And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.
|The one talking with me had a golden measuring rod for measuring the city, and its gates, and its wall.
|
|-
|16
|And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.
|The city lies in a square, and is as long as it is wide. He measured the city with the rod: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length and breadth and height are all the same.
|Again, for "furlong" read '''σταδιον''' or ''stadion'', the Greek transliteration of ''stadium'', a Roman distance measure equal to one-eighth of a Roman [[mile]].
|-
|17
|And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.
|He measured its wall: 144 cubits, according to the measure of a man, which is also the measure of a Messenger of God.
|A [[cubit]] is the length of a man's arm from elbow to third fingertip.
|-
|18
|And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.
|The wall was built of jasper, and the city was built of pure gold, like clear glass.
|
|-
|19
|And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;
|The foundations of the city wall were embellished with all types of precious stones:
1. Jasper

2. Sapphire

3. Agate

4. Emerald

|Explanation of the stones:
1. Probably the green jasper.

2. Self-explanatory

3. Agate: the modern "marble"

4. Self-explanatory
|-
|20
|The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolite; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.
|5. Sardonyx

6. Carnelian

7. Chrysolite

8. Beryl

9. Topaz

10. Chrysoprasus

11. Jacinth

12. Amethyst
|5. A variegated agate

6. A red stone, perhaps the modern [[garnet]]

7. Golden-yellow topaz

8. A green stone.

9. Ordinary yellow topaz

10. Green [[quartz]]

11. A blue stone

12. Self-explanatory
|-
|21
|And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.
|The twelve gates were twelve pearls. Each gate was formed from a single pearl. The city street was pure gold, as transparent as glass.
|
|-
|22
|And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
|I saw no Temple in it. The Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.
|
|-
|23
|And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
|The city did not need the sun, or the moon, to shine in it. The glory of God gave it its light, and the Lamb is its light.
|
|-
|24
|And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
|The ethnic groups of the saved ones will walk in its light, and the heads-of-state of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
|
|-
|25
|And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
|Its gates are never closed by day, and in fact night does not fall there.
|
|-
|26
|And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.
|They will bring the glory and the honor of all ethnic groups into it.
|
|-
|27
|And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.
|And under no circumstances will any corrupting influence enter it, nor anything at all that works detestable things, or makes a lie. Only those written in the Lamb's Book of Life may enter.
|
|}

==Chapter 22==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of [[God]] and of the Lamb.
|And He showed me a pure river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing out of the throne of [[God]] and the Lamb.
|
|-
|2
|In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
|In the middle of its street, and to either side of the river, grew the Tree of Life. It bore all kinds of fruits, and produced fruit every month, and the leaves of the tree served for the healing of the ethnic groups.
|"It" is the New [[Jerusalem]], whose description continues.
|-
|3
|And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
|Every curse will no longer exist. The Throne of God and the Lamb will be in it, and His slaves will serve Him.
|
|-
|4
|And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
|They will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads.
|
|-
|5
|And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
|Night will not exist there, and they will need no candles, or sunlight. The Lord God gives them light, and they will reign for ever and ever.
|
|-
|6
|And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.
|And he told me, "These words are faithful and true. The Lord God of the holy [[prophet]]s sent His Messenger to show his slaves the things that must soon happen.
|
|-
|7
|Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.
|Look: I will come quickly. Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.
|
|-
|8
|And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
|I, John, saw these things, and heard them. When I had heard and seen everything, I fell down to worship before the feet of the Messenger that showed me these things.
|
|-
|9
|Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.
|He told me, "Don't do that! I am your fellow slave, and the slave of your brothers the prophets, and of all those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
|
|-
|10
|And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
|And he told me, "Do not keep the words of the prophecy of this book under wraps. The time has arrived.
|
|-
|11
|He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
|Let the unjust man remain unjust, and the filthy man remain filthy. Let the just man stay just, and the holy man stay holy."
|
|-
|12
|And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
|"Look: I will come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give to every man according to his deeds.
|
|-
|13
|I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
|I am A and Z, the beginning and the end, first and last."
|Use "A and Z", or the more traditional "Alpha and Omega" here?
|-
|14
|Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
|Blessed are they who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the Tree of Life, and may walk in through the gates into the city.
|Some manuscripts read, "who keep His commandments." The robe referred to is the Roman toga, the robe of citizenship.
|-
|15
|For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
|Outside are dogs, and drug dealers, and prostitute users, and murderers, and idolaters, and whoever loves and tells lies.
|
|-
|16
|I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
|"I, Jesus, have sent My Messenger to testify these things to you in the churches. I am the Root and Offspring of David, and the Bright and Morning Star."
|
|-
|17
|And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
|The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" Let anyone who is listening say, "Come!" Let him who is thirsty come. And whoever is willing, let him drink freely of the water of life.
|
|-
|18
|For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
|I warn every man who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man adds to these things to introduce a liberal bias, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book.
|
|-
|19
|And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
|And if any man subtracts from the words of the book of this prophecy to introduce a liberal bias, God will subtract his portion out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things written in this book.
|
|-
|20
|He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
|He who bears witness to these things says, "Indeed, I am coming quickly!" Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!
|
|-
|21
|The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
|The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.
|This verse has many variations, and in some manuscripts is left out entirely.

The Book of Revelation, and with it the Bible, ends here.
|}

[[Category:Conservative Bible]]

Matthew 20-28 (Translated)

2014-10-20T02:06:14Z

Debletar: /* Chapter 25 */

==Chapter 20==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
|"For the Kingdom of heaven is like a landowner, who went out at dawn to hire workmen for his vineyard.
|οἰκοδεσπότης means ''head of the house'', householder sounds dated, landowner seems to be more appropriate.... πρωΐ: at dawn, early in the morning, implying that he uses the whole day
|-
|2
|And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
|"And when he had formed an agreement with the workmen to pay them a silver coin a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
|Silver coin is easily understood, shilling is almost as dated as denarius. (By "shilling" is meant the Roman denarius, worth ten assaria, four sesterces, or forty quadrants.)
|-
|3
|And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
|"And he went out three hours later, and saw others standing without work in the public square,
|This is the '''αγορα''' or ''agora'', which served as marketplace and place of legal transactions.
ἀργός was omitted.
|-
|4
|And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.
|"And said to them, 'Go also into the vineyard, and I will pay you whatever wage is just.'
|<s>The phrase ''and they went their way'' is an interpolation.</s> The phrase ''and they went their way'' comes from the first words of the next verse οἱ δὲ ἀπῆλθον. ''and they went''.
|-
|5
|Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
|"and they went that way. And he went out again at midday and three hours later, and did the same thing.
|The hours of the day began at sunrise, as the hours of night began at sunset.
|-
|6
|And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
|"And an hour before dusk he went out and found others standing around, and said to them, 'Why have you been standing here all day without work?'
|It's the proverbial eleventh hour, the five-minutes-until-midnight.
|-
|7
|They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
|"They said to him, 'Because no man has hired us.' He said to them, 'Go also into the vineyard, and whatever is just, that you will receive.'
|
|-
|8
|So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
|"So when the evening came, the lord of the vineyard said to his steward, 'Call the workmen, and pay them their wages, beginning from the last to the first.'
|
|-
|9
|And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
|"And when they who had been hired at about the eleventh hour came, they each received a shilling.
|
|-
|10
|But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
|"But when the first-hired men came, they thought that they would receive a higher wage, and they also received a shilling.
|
|-
|11
|And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
|"And when they received it, they started complaining against the master of the house,
|
|-
|12
|Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
|"saying, 'These last have been working only for one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who have carried the load and the heat of the full day.'
|
|-
|13
|But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
|"But he answered one of them, and said, 'Friend, I'm not doing you any wrong. Didn't you agree to work for me for a shilling?
|
|-
|14
|Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
|"'Take what is yours, and go on. I wish to give to this last man, even as I have given to you.
|
|-
|15
|Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
|"'Isn't it lawful for me to do as I wish with what is mine? Is your eye evil, because I am good?'
|At issue is not the principle of "equal pay for comparable worth," but that an employer has the absolute right to pay whatever wage he wishes to pay, so long as he honors his agreements without discrimination. In the same way, [[God]] has the absolute right to reward those of us who serve Him exactly as He wishes, and He will always reliably honor the agreements He makes.
|-
|16
|So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
|"So the last will be first, and the first last."
|The Byzantine manuscripts add, "For many are called, but few chosen." But this may be an interpolation.
|-
|17
|And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them,
|And Jesus, while going up to [[Jerusalem]], took the Twelve aside on the road for a private consultation. He said to them,
|Jerusalem is an at elevation of 800 meters, the highest of any city; hence the phrase "going up." The most reliable manuscripts speak only of "the Twelve," because that they are the Twelve Apostles is well understood.
|-
|18
|Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
|"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man will be betrayed to the leading priests and to the scribes, and they will condemn Him to death,
|
|-
|19
|And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.
|"And will deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify Him. And on the third day He will rise again."
|
|-
|20
|Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him.
|Then the mother of Zebedee's children came to Him with her sons, falling down at His feet and wanting something from Him.
|
|-
|21
|And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.
|And He said to her, "What do you wish?" She said to Him, "Grant that these two sons of mine may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on the left, in Your kingdom."
|
|-
|22
|But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able.
|But Jesus in answer said, "You don't know what you're asking. Can you drink from the cup that I will drink from, and be baptized with the baptism that I will be baptized with?" And they said to him, "We can."
|
|-
|23
|And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
|And He said to them, "You will certainly drink from My cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with. But to sit on My right hand, or on My left, is not for Me to grant, but it will be granted to them for whom it is prepared by My Father."
|
|-
|24
|And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.
|And when the other ten heard it, they were indignant toward the two brothers.
|
|-
|25
|But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
|But Jesus called them to Him, and said, "You know that the leaders of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and that the great ones exercise authority over them.
|
|-
|26
|But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
|"But it will not be that way among you. If any man wants to be great among you, let him first be your table waiter,
|The Greek word used here is '''διακονος''', which survives as the English word [[deacon]]. Thus Jesus prefigures the original appointment of the first deacons; see {{Bible ref|book=Acts|chap=6}}.
|-
|27
|And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
|"And if anyone wants to be first, let him be your slave,
|
|-
|28
|Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
|"Even as the Son of man came not to be waited on, but to wait on others, and to give his life as a ransom for many people."
|
|-
|29
|And as they departed from Jericho, a great multitude followed him.
|And as they left [[Jericho]], a great crowd followed them.
|
|-
|30
|And, behold, two blind men sitting by the way side, when they heard that Jesus passed by, cried out, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou Son of David.
|Two blind men sitting by the roadside, when they heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, "Have mercy on us, O Lord, son of David."
|
|-
|31
|And the multitude rebuked them, because they should hold their peace: but they cried the more, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou Son of David.
|And the crowd scolded them, saying that they should keep quiet. But they cried all the more, saying, "Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David."
|
|-
|32
|And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, What will ye that I shall do unto you?
|And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, "What do you want me to do for you?"
|
|-
|33
|They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened.
|They said to him, "Lord, we want our eyes opened."
|
|-
|34
|So Jesus had compassion on them, and touched their eyes: and immediately their eyes received sight, and they followed him.
|So Jesus took pity on them, and touched their eyes. Immediately they regained their sight, and followed Him.
|
|}

==Chapter 21==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples,
|When they approached [[Jerusalem]] and had come to Bethphage, to [[Mount Olive]], Jesus sent two of His students,
|
|-
|2
|Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.
|and told them, "Go into the next village you come to. As soon as you enter it, you will find a tethered donkey and a colt next to her. Untie them and bring them to Me.
|
|-
|3
|And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.
|"And if any man says anything to you, tell them, 'The Lord needs them,' and he'll send them right away."
|
|-
|4
|All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,
|All this was done in order to fulfil that which was spoken by [[Isaiah]], who said,
|
|-
|5
|Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.
|"Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold, your King comes unto you, meek, and sitting on a donkey, and a colt that is a donkey's foal."
|
|-
|6
|And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them,
|And the students went and did as Jesus told them,
|
|-
|7
|And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.
|and brought the donkey, and the colt, ad put their clothes on them, and they set Him on it.
|
|-
|8
|And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.
|And a very large crowd spread their cloaks in the road; others cut down branches from the trees and strewed them on the road.
|These were [[palm]] branches. The crowd probably did this, thinking to make the road softer and more tolerable for the donkey and the colt to walk on it.
|-
|9
|And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.
|And the crowds that walked ahead and behind shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord! Hosanna in the Highest!"
|''Hosanna'' is an [[Aramaic]] word meaning "Save, I pray." The formula "Blessed is he who comes" is the Hebrew idiom that means "Welcome."
|-
|10
|And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this?
|And when he had entered Jerusalem, everyone in the city was moved, and said, "Who is This?"
|
|-
|11
|And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.
|And the crowd said, "This is Jesus the Prophet of Nazareth of Galilee."
|Capitalized on account of Whom we're talking about, the Son of God, not on account of what the speaker might have thought He was.
|-
|12
|And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
|And Jesus went into the [[Temple of Jerusalem|Temple]] and threw out everyone who was selling and buying goods in the Temple, and turned over the tables of the moneychangers and the chairs of the dove-sellers,
|Most manuscripts say simply "Temple"; others add "of God."
|-
|13
|And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
|And He told them, "It is written, 'My House shall be called the House of prayer.' But you have made it into a robbers' den."
|Jesus does not mean to say that all commerce is inherently evil. He ''does'' make the point that commercial activity ''in the Temple'' can never be proper. It was also the worst example of hypocrisy that He had yet encountered: the Pharisees, with all their regulations, had allowed this crass commercialism to go on in the Temple itself, and had done nothing about it.
|-
|14
|And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple; and he healed them.
|And blind and lame people came to Him in the Temple, and He healed them.
|
|-
|15
|And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sore displeased,
|And when the leading priests and the scribes saw the absolutely amazing things that He did, and the children crying in the Temple, and saying, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they were very much displeased.
|The Greek word '''θαυμασιος''' means something so amazing that a person watching it can only say, "Wow!"
|-
|16
|And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?
|They told Him, "Do you hear what they're saying?" And Jesus told them, "Of course I have. Haven't you ever read, 'Out of the mouths of babies and sucklings you have made praise complete'?"
|
|-
|17
|And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany; and he lodged there.
|And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany, and took up residence there.
|
|-
|18
|Now in the morning as he returned into the city, he hungered.
|The next morning, as He came back into the city, He was hungry.
|
|-
|19
|And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.
|And when He saw a fig tree in the road, He came to it, and found nothing on it but leaves. He told it, "Let no fruit grow on you from this moment forward, forever." And immediately the fig tree withered away.
|
|-
|20
|And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away!
|And when the students saw it, they were bug-eye shocked, saying, "Look at how fast that fig tree withered away!"
|
|-
|21
|Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.
|In answer, Jesus told them, "I tell you truly: If you have faith, and don't doubt it, you will not only do what was just done to this fig tree, but also if you say to this mountain, 'Remove yourself and throw yourself into the sea,' it will happen.
|
|-
|22
|And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.
|"And all thins, whatever you ask in prayer and while believing, you will receive."
|
|-
|23
|And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
|And when He had entered the Temple, the leading priests and elders of the people came to Him as He was teaching, and said, "By what authority do You do these things, and who gave You this authority?"
|
|-
|24
|And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
|And in answer Jesus told them, "I will ask you one thing only. If you tell me, then I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
|
|-
|25
|The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
|"Where did the baptism of [[John the Baptist]] come from? From heaven, or from men?" And they spoke among themselves, and said, "If we say, 'From heaven,' then He will ask us, 'So why didn't you believe him?'
|
|-
|26
|But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.
|"But if we say, 'From men,' then there's no telling what all these people will do, because everyone thinks that John was a prophet."
|
|-
|27
|And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.
|So in answer to Jesus, they said, "We don't know." And He told them, "In that case, I won't tell you by what authority I do these things.
|
|-
|28
|But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard.
|"But what do you think? A certain man had two sons. He came to the first, and said, 'Son, go and work today in my vineyard.'
|
|-
|29
|He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went.
|"In answer, he said, 'I don't want to.' But later he changed his mind, and went.
|
|-
|30
|And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.
|"And he came to the other one, and said the same thing. And in answer, He said, "I am going, sir," but he did not go.
|
|-
|31
|Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
|"Which of those two did what his father wished?" They said to him, "The first." Jesus told them, "I tell you truly: the tax-collectors and the prostitutes will go into the Kingdom of God ahead of you.
|
|-
|32
|For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.
|"For John came to you by the road of justice, and you didn't believe him. But the tax gatherers and prostitutes believe him. And you, when you saw that happen, did not change your minds afterward, so that you might believe him.
|
|-
|33
|Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
|"I'll tell you another parable: A certain householder planted a vineyard, and planted a hedge around it, and dug a winepress in it, and built a tower, and rented it out to tenant farmers and went away on a long trip.
|
|-
|34
|And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
|"When vintage time approached, he sent his slaves to the tenants to collect the fruits of the vintage.
|
|-
|35
|And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
|"And the tenants took his slaves, and beat one, killed another, and stoned another.
|
|-
|36
|Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
|"Again he sent other slaves, in fact more the second time, and they did the same thing to them.
|
|-
|37
|But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
|"But he finally sent his son to them, saying, "They will have proper respect for my son."
|
|-
|38
|But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
|"But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, "This is the heir. Let's kill him and seize the inheritance for ourselves."
|
|-
|39
|And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
|"And they caught him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him.
|
|-
|40
|When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
|"Now when the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?"
|
|-
|41
|They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
|They told Him, "He will ignominiously destroy those wicked men, and rent out his vineyard to other tenants, who will pay him his rightful share of the vintage."
|
|-
|42
|Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
|Jesus told them, "Didn't you ever read in the Scriptures, 'The stone that the builders rejected has become the primary cornerstone: this is the Lord's doing, and it is amazing in our eyes'?
|
|-
|43
|Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
|"So I tell you: The Kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and given to a nation that will produce Its fruits.
|
|-
|44
|And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
|"And whoever falls on this stone will be broken. But whomever it falls on will be crushed."
|The provenance of this verse is not universally accepted and seems out-of-place.
|-
|45
|And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
|And when the leading priests and the Pharisees had heard his parables, they recognized that He was talking about them.
|
|-
|46
|But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.
|But when they looked for a way to lay hands on him, they were afraid of the crowd, because they took Him for a prophet.
|
|}

==Chapter 22==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
|In answer, Jesus spoke to them again by means of parables, and said,
|
|-
|2
|The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
|"The Kingdom of heaven is like a certain king, who arranged a marriage for his son,
|
|-
|3
|And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
|"and sent out his slaves to call the invitees to the wedding, and they didn't want to come.
|
|-
|4
|Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
|"He sent his slaves out again, saying, "Tell the invitees, 'I have gotten my dinner ready; my oxen and my fatted calves have been slaughtered; everything is ready. Come to the wedding.'"
|
|-
|5
|But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
|"But they blew it off, and went their ways. One went to his farm, and another to his merchandise.
|
|-
|6
|And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
|"And the rest of them took his slaves, treated them disgracefully, and killed them.
|
|-
|7
|But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
|"The king was furious, as a magistrate might be, and he sent out his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned down their city.
|
|-
|8
|Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
|"Then he told his slaves, 'The wedding is ready, but the original invitees didn't deserve to come.
|
|-
|9
|Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
|"'So go into the roads, and invite as many people as you can find to the wedding.'
|
|-
|10
|So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
|"So those slaves went out into the roads, and gathered together everyone they could find, good or bad, and the wedding had plenty of guests.
|
|-
|11
|And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
|"But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man who was not properly dressed for a wedding.
|
|-
|12
|And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
|"And he said to him, 'Friend, how did you get in here without the proper clothes for a wedding?' And he couldn't say a word.
|
|-
|13
|Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
|"Then the king told his slaves, 'Tie him hand and foot, take him away, and throw him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and grinding of teeth.'
|
|-
|14
|For many are called, but few are chosen.
|"For many are called, but few chosen."
|This is the proper place for a verse that had been interpolated earlier.
|-
|15
|Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
|"Then the Pharisees went away and held a meeting about how they might trap Him into saying something embarrassing.
|
|-
|16
|And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
|And they send out to Him their own students with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth, and that You don't care about any man, because You are no Respecter of persons.
|The Herodians were partisans of [[Herod Antipas]] and the royal family of the Herods.
|-
|17
|Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
|"So tell us what you think? Is it proper to pay the census tax to Caesar, or not?"
|The particular tax is called '''κηνσος''' or ''kensos''. This is a direct transliteration, into Greek, of the Latin ''census'' tax.
|-
|18
|But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
|But Jesus knew exactly the sort of wicked people He was dealing with. So He said, "Why are you always testing Me, you hypocrites?
|
|-
|19
|Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
|"Show me the coin that you use to pay the census tax." And they brought him a Roman shilling.
|Specifically, the denarius, or dinar, a typical day's wages.
|-
|20
|And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
|And He said to them, "Whose face and epigram is this?"
|
|-
|21
|They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
|They told Him, "Caesar's." So He told them, "So give Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God."
|
|-
|22
|When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.
|When they heard these words, they were stupefied, and left Him, and went on their way.
|
|-
|23
|The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
|On the same day the Sadducees came to Him. (The Sadducees say that there is no such thing as a resurrection of the dead.) They asked Him,
|
|-
|24
|Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
|"Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies and leaves no children, his brother must marry his wife.'
|The Sadducees quote the Levirate Law from Deuteronomy.
|-
|25
|Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
|"Now there were seven brothers with us. The first brother married, then died and left no issue, so his wife married his brother.
|
|-
|26
|Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
|"And the second brother did the same, and the third, and so on to the seventh.
|
|-
|27
|And last of all the woman died also.
|"Finally the woman died as well.
|
|-
|28
|Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
|"Now: in the resurrection, whom is she married to? All seven had married her!"
|
|-
|29
|Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
|In answer, Jesus said, "You are mistaken. You don't know either the Scriptures or the power of God.
|In other words, the Sadducees haven't done their homework.
|-
|30
|For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
|"People in the resurrection neither marry nor are given away in marriage. To the contrary, they are like God's Messengers in heaven.
|This does not mean that Resurrected people will actually ''be'' angels. But it does say that angels do not marry. Angels are a company, not a race.
|-
|31
|But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
|"But while we're on the subject of the resurrection of the dead: haven't you read what God Himself said? He said,
|
|-
|32
|I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
|"'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' He is not the God of dead people, but of live people."
|
|-
|33
|And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
|When the crowd heard this, they were amazed at His teaching.
|
|-
|34
|But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
|When the Pharisees heard that He had shut the Sadducees up, they held a meeting.
|
|-
|35
|Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
|Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question to test Him, and said,
|This "lawyer" was a teacher of Jewish law. Rome had no dedicated lawyers.
|-
|36
|Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
|"'Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?'"
|
|-
|37
|Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
|Jesus said to Him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your soul, and all your mind.'
|
|-
|38
|This is the first and great commandment.
|"This is the first and most important commandment.
|
|-
|39
|And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
|"The second is just as important: 'You shall love your neighbor as you love yourself.'
|
|-
|40
|On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
|"On these two commandments, the entire law depends, and the prophets."
|
|-
|41
|While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
|While the Pharisees were still meeting, Jesus asked them,
|
|-
|42
|Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.
|"What do you think about the Anointed One? Whose son is He?" They said to him, "The son of David."
|
|-
|43
|He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
|He said to them, "So how does David in spirit call Him Lord, when he said,
|
|-
|44
|The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
|"'The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool?"'
|The expression "LORD" is actually the [[Tetragrammaton]], which in Hebrew is '''יהוה''' or ''YHWH''.
|-
|45
|If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
|"So if David calls Him Lord, how can He be his son?"
|
|-
|46
|And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
|And no one could say a word to Him in answer, and neither did any man dare ask Him any more questions from that day forward.
|
|}

==Chapter 23==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
|Now Jesus spoke to the crowd, and to His students,
|
|-
|2
|Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
|saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses.
|
|-
|3
|All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
|"So whatever they tell you to do, you do and keep. But don't follow their example. They say, but they don't do.
|
|-
|4
|For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
|"They prepare burdens that are heavy and hard to carry, and lay them on other people's shoulders, but they themselves will not lift a finger to help anyone carry them.
|
|-
|5
|But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
|"They do everything that they do in order to be seen by men. They make their Scripture carrying cases broad, and make their tassels large,
|In {{Bible ref|book=Deuteronomy|chap=6|verses=8}}, [[Moses]] told the Jews to keep the words of God on their hands and on their foreheads. Furthermore he told them to write the word on their doorposts and gates. But whether Moses meant this literally or figuratively is an open question. The Pharisees took this command to a ridiculous extreme—and more to the point, that, together with the oversized tassels and other things that Jesus describes of their behavior, is all a sham.
|-
|6
|And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
|"And love the couches of honor at public banquets, and seats of honor in the synagogues,
|
|-
|7
|And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
|"And greedings in the public squares, and to be called 'Rabbi! Rabbi!' by men.
|
|-
|8
|But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
|"Don't ask to be called 'Rabbi.' You have only One Teacher, namely Christ; and all of you are brothers.
|
|-
|9
|And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
|"And don't call any man your father on earth. You have only One Father, Who is in heaven.
|
|-
|10
|Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
|"Don't ask to be called masters. You have only One Master, namely Christ.
|
|-
|11
|But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
|"But the greatest among you will be your table-waiter.
|
|-
|12
|And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
|"And anyone who brings himself up will be brought low, and anyone who brings himself low will be brought up.
|
|-
|13
|But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
|"But it will be terrible for you, you scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are shutting people out of the Kingdom of heaven. You don't go in yourselves, and don't let anyone else go in.
|
|-
|14
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You eat widows out of their houses, and make a long prayer, but you're only pretending. So you will be condemned all the worse for that.
|The provenance of this verse is doubtful, but it is in character with every other accusation that Jesus made against the Pharisees.
|-
|15
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You scour sea and land to make one convert, but when you've converted him, you make him twice the child of hell you are.
|
|-
|16
|Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
|"How terrible for you, you blind guides! You say, 'If you swear by the [[Temple of Jerusalem|Temple]], that's nothing, but if you swear by the [[gold]] of the Temple, you're in debt.'
|
|-
|17
|Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
|"You blind morons! Which is more important, the gold, or the Temple that makes that gold holy?
|
|-
|18
|And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
|"And: 'If you swear by the altar, that's nothing, but if you swear by the gift on the altar, you're in debt.'
|
|-
|19
|Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
|"You blind morons! Which is greater, the gift, or the altar that makes that gift holy?
|
|-
|20
|Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
|"So in fact, if someone swears by the altar, he's swearing by the alter and everything on it.
|
|-
|21
|And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
|"And if he swears by the Temple, he's swearing by the Temple and everything in it.
|
|-
|22
|And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
|"And if he swears by heaven, he's swearing by the throne of God, and by Him Who sits on it.
|It's worth repeating here that Jesus said, in the Sermon on the Mount, that people shouldn't take oaths, for this very reason.
|-
|23
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You pay ten percent of [[mint]] and [[anise]] and [[cummin]], and have neglected the more important matters of law, and judgment, and mercy, and faith.
|
|-
|24
|Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
|"You blind guides! You're straining at a [[gnat]] while swallowing a [[camel]].
|
|-
|25
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and the platter, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.
|
|-
|26
|Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
|"You blind Pharisee, first clean the things in the cup and platter, and then the outside will be clean, too.
|
|-
|27
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs. They certainly look beautiful on the outside, but on the inside they are full of dead men's bones and all sorts of unclean things.
|A tomb typically contains things that are unclean by any standard, not just the ceremonial.
|-
|28
|Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
|"And just like them, you also look just to men on the outside, but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
|
|-
|29
|Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
|"How terrible for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are building the tombs of the prophets, and decorating the burial caves of the just.
|
|-
|30
|And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
|"And you say, 'If we had been alive in the days of our father, we wouldn't have taken part with them in killing the prophets.'
|
|-
|31
|Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
|"Thus you are testifying against yourselves, that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets.
|
|-
|32
|Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
|"So fill up the measure of your fathers.
|
|-
|33
|Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
|"You snakes, you jerks, how can you escape being sentenced to the eternal fire?
|
|-
|34
|Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
|"For this reason, behold: I am sending you prophets, and wise men, and scribes. You will kill and crucify some of them, and have some of them scourges in your synagogues, and persecute them from one city to another,
|
|-
|35
|That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
|"in order that all the just blood that has been shed on the earth will come on your heads, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you killed between the Temple and the altar.
|This is actually the eponymous prophet, not the [[High Priest]] of that name who also died in a similar manner and location.
|-
|36
|Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
|"I tell you truly: this generation will be held to answer for all of these things.
|
|-
|37
|O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
|"O [[Jerusalem]], Jerusalem, who kills the prophets, and stones those that are sent to you, how often have I wanted to gather My children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you didn't want that!
|
|-
|38
|Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
|"Your house is left to you empty and abandoned.
|
|-
|39
|For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
|"Because I say to you: You will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord.'"
|
|}

==Chapter 24==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
|And Jesus went out, away from the [[Temple of Jerusalem|Temple]]. His students came to Him to show Him the Temple buildings.
|
|-
|2
|And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
|And Jesus told them, "Do you see all these things? I tell you truly: there won't be one stone left on top of another, that won't be torn down."
|
|-
|3
|And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
|And as he sat on [[Mount Olive]], the students came to Him privately, and said, "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and the end of the world?"
|
|-
|4
|And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
|And Jesus in answer told them, "Make sure not to let anyone lie to you.
|
|-
|5
|For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
|"Many men will come in My Name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many others.
|
|-
|6
|And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
|"You are about to hear about wars and rumors of wars. Make sure not to worry about that; all these things have to happen, but this isn't the end.
|
|-
|7
|For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
|"Ethnic groups and nation-states will fight against one another, and famines and earthquakes will strike in various places.
|Many manuscripts add "and pandemics" between the famines and the earthquakes.
|-
|8
|All these are the beginning of sorrows.
|"All these things are the beginning of birth-pains.
|
|-
|9
|Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
|"Then they will bind you over to be punished, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all ethnic groups on account of My Name.
|
|-
|10
|And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
|"And then many people will start to have doubts, and will double-cross one another, and will come to hate one another.
|
|-
|11
|And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
|"Many false prophets will arise and deceive many people.
|
|-
|12
|And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
|"And because lawlessness will be overwhelmingly present, the love of many people will die out.
|
|-
|13
|But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
|"But anyone who can endure until the end, will be saved.
|
|-
|14
|And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
|"And this Good News of the Kingdom will be preached in all the world as a testimony to all ethnic groups. That's when the end will come.
|
|-
|15
|When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
|"So when you see the Abomination that Makes Desolate, that [[Daniel]] the prophet spoke about, standing in the Holy Place (and those who read about this will know what I'm talking about),
|
|-
|16
|Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
|"then anyone in Judea needs to run to the high hills.
|
|-
|17
|Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
|"If anyone is on the housetop, he should not come down to take anything out of his house.
|
|-
|18
|Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
|"If anyone is in the field, he should not come back even to take his clothes.
|
|-
|19
|And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
|"And it will be terrible for pregnant and nursing women in those days!
|
|-
|20
|But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
|"And pray that you won't have to flee in the wintertime, or on the Sabbath day.
|
|-
|21
|For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
|"Because then a great oppression will supervene, such as has not been seen since the beginning of the world until this time, nor ever will be seen again.
|
|-
|22
|And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
|"In fact, if those days weren't cut short, no one would be saved. But for the sake of the chosen ones, those days will be cut short.
|
|-
|23
|Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
|"Then if anyone says to you, "Look! Christ is here!" (or "there!"), don't believe it.
|
|-
|24
|For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
|"False Christs, and false prophets, will arise, and will show great signs and wonders, so much so that they could deceive even the chosen ones if they could.
|
|-
|25
|Behold, I have told you before.
|"Remember, I went over this before.
|
|-
|26
|Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
|"So if they tell you, 'Look! He's in the desert!' don't go. Or if they say, 'Look! He's in the private rooms!" don't believe it.
|
|-
|27
|For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
|"Because as lightning comes out of the east, and shines even to the western sky, that's how the coming of the Son of man will be.
|
|-
|28
|For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
|"For wherever the dead body is, the vultures will be flocking together.
|The [[vulture]] described here is the Middle Eastern black vulture ''Gyps fulvus'' that has the wingspan of an [[eagle]] and tends to nest in very high elevations.
|-
|29
|Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
|"Immediately after the oppression of those days, the [[sun]] will be darkened, and the [[moon]] will not give its light, and the [[stars]] will fall from the sky, and the powers of the skies will be shaken.
|The Greek word '''φεγγος''' or ''phengos'' refers to reflected light, not the primary light from a body like the sun.

The "falling stars" will likely be [[meteor]]s. In those days, the word ''star'' stood for any pinpoint-like object in the sky, and not exclusively the bodies of [[hydrogen]] and [[helium]] known to [[astronomy]] by that name.
|-
|30
|And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
|"And then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven. Then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see 'the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory.
|
|-
|31
|And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
|"And He will send His Messengers with a loud trumpet blast, and they will gather His chosen ones from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.
|
|-
|32
|Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
|"Learn now a parable of the fig tree. When its branch is still tender, and puts out leaves, you know that summer is near.
|
|-
|33
|So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
|"In the same way you, when you see all these things, know that it is practically at your doorstep.
|
|-
|34
|Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
|"I tell you truly: This generation will not pass away until all these things are fulfilled.
|
|-
|35
|Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
|"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Truth will not pass away.
|
|-
|36
|But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
|"But no man knows that day and hour, not even the Messengers of heaven, but only My Father.
|
|-
|37
|But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
|"And as it was in the days of [[Noah]], the coming of the Son of man will be.
|
|-
|38
|For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
|"In the days before the [[Great Flood]] people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving away in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the [[Noah's Ark|Ark]].
|The Greek word used is '''κιβωτος''', which usually means "box." This is further evidence that Noah's Ark was rectilinear and ''not'' tub-shaped as many popular paintings depict it.
|-
|39
|And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
|"And they didn't know anything until the Flood came, and swept them all the way. That's how the coming of the Son of man will be.
|
|-
|40
|Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
|"Two men will be in a field, and one will be taken and the other left.
|
|-
|41
|Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
|"Two women will be grinding grain at the mill; one will be taken and the other left.
|
|-
|42
|Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
|"So stay alert, because you don't know at what hour your Lord will come.
|
|-
|43
|But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
|"But know this: If the master of the house had known in advance what time the thief would come, he would have been watching, and would not have allowed his house to be broken into.
|
|-
|44
|Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
|"So you be ready as well, because the Son of man will come when you least expect Him.
|
|-
|45
|Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
|"Who, then, is a faithful and wise slave, whom his lord has made master of his household, to pay them their wages on time?
|
|-
|46
|Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
|"Blessed is that servant, whom his lord, when he comes, will find doing as he asked.
|
|-
|47
|Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
|"I tell you truly, that he will make that man the steward of all his goods.
|
|-
|48
|But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
|"But if that evil servant will tell himself, 'My lord will be late in coming',
|
|-
|49
|And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
|"and will start striking his fellow slaves, and to eat and drink with intoxicated people,
|
|-
|50
|The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
|"that slave's lord will come on a day when he least expects him, and in an hour that he doesn't know,
|
|-
|51
|And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
|"and will punish him severely, and will treat him the same as any hypocrite: there will be weeping and grinding of teeth."
|
|}

==Chapter 25==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
|"The Kingdom of heaven will be like ten bridesmaids, who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.
|
|-
|2
|And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
|"Five of them were foolish, and five sensible.
|
|-
|3
|They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:
|"The foolish ones took their lamps, but took no oil with them.
|
|-
|4
|But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
|"But the sensible ones took oil in vessels with their lamps.
|
|-
|5
|While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
|"While the bridegroom took time to come, they all grew drowsy and slept.
|
|-
|6
|And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
|"At midnight a cry went out, 'Behold! The bridegroom is coming! Go out to meet him!'
|
|-
|7
|Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
|"Then all those bridesmaids woke up, and trimmed their lamps.
|This "trimming" operation involves cutting off the burnt part of the wick so that the lamp would continue to burn brightly.
|-
|8
|And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
|"And the foolish ones said to the sensible ones, 'Give us some of your oil; our lamps have gone out.'
|
|-
|9
|But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
|"But the sensible ones said in answer, 'We can't do that; we wouldn't have enough oil for all of us. Instead, go to the sellers and buy oil for yourselves.'
|
|-
|10
|And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
|"And while they were going to buy oil, the bridegroom came. Those who were ready went in with him to the wedding, and the door was shut.
|
|-
|11
|Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
|"Afterward the other bridesmaids came also, saying, 'Lord, Lord, open to us!'
|
|-
|12
|But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
|But in answer he said, 'I tell you truly: I don't know you.'
|
|-
|13
|Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
|"So stay alert, because you don't know either the day or the hour."
|The Byzantine manuscripts add "when the Son of man comes" to that last.
|-
|14
|For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
|"A certain man was going away from home on a long trip. He called his own slaves and entrusted his goods to them.
|
|-
|15
|And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
|"To one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one, to each according to his particular ability, and left on his trip right away.
|The [[talent]] was the weight of any precious metal that a man could carry on his back.
|-
|16
|Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
|"Then the one who received the five talents went and traded with them, and made another five talents.
|
|-
|17
|And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
|"And likewise the one who received the two, also made another two.
|
|-
|18
|But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
|"But the one who received the one talent went and dug in the earth and hid his lord's money.
|The Greek word used here for money is '''αργυριον''', or [[silver]]. Therefore these were probably silver talents that the slaves had to work with.
|-
|19
|After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
|"After a long time the lord of these slaves came back and settled accounts with them.
|
|-
|20
|And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
|"And so the one who had received the five talents came and brought five more talents, and said, 'Lord, you entrusted five talents to me; I have made five talents more.'
|
|-
|21
|His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
|"His lord said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful slave. You have been faithful over a few things, so I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.'
|
|-
|22
|He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
|"Also, the one who had received two talents came and said, 'Lord, you entrusted two talents to me. Behold, I have made two more talents besides these.'
|
|-
|23
|His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
|"His lord said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful slave. You have been faithful over a few things, so I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.'
|
|-
|24
|Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
|"Then the one who had received the one talent came and said, 'Lord, I knew that you are a hard man, and that you reap where you haven't sown, and gather where you haven't threshed.
|
|-
|25
|And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
|"'And I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground. Here is your money back.'
|
|-
|26
|His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
|"In answer, his lord told him, 'You wicked and lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I haven't sown, and gather where I haven't threshed.
|
|-
|27
|Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
|"'So you should have given my money to the moneychangers, and then when I came back I would have had my money back with interest.
|
|-
|28
|Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
|"'So take the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.
|
|-
|29
|For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
|"'Because to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundant amount. But from him who has nothing, even what little he has will be taken away.
|
|-
|30
|And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
|"'And throw the worthless slave into outer darkness; there will be weeping and grinding of teeth.'
|
|-
|31
|When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
|"When the Son of man comes in His glory, and all the holy Messengers with Him, He will then sit on the throne of His glory.
|
|-
|32
|And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
|"Before him will be gathered all races of man, and he will separate them from one another, the way a politician separates his liberals from the conservatives.
|This is because of the statistical probability of atheists and other non-Christians being liberal.
|-
|33
|And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
|"He will set the sheep to his right, and the goats to his left.
|Perhaps this should be translated as "He will set the sheep to his conservative side, and the goats to his liberal side." The Greek word "δεξιός" (translated here as "right") can be translated metaphorically as "cautious authority"; "εὐώνυμος" (translated here as "left") can be translated metaphorically as "unlucky", "sinister" or ... "liberal"?
|-
|34
|Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
|"Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you who are blessed by My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you since the foundation of the world.
|
|-
|35
|For I was an hungrey, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
|"'When I was hungry, you gave Me food. When I was thirsty, you gave Me drink. When I was a stranger, you took Me in.
|
|-
|36
|Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
|"'When I was naked, you clothed Me. I was sick, and you visited Me. I was in prison, and you came to Me.'
|
|-
|37
|Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
|"Then the just will say in answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You? Or thirsty, and give You drink?
|
|-
|38
|When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
|"'When did we see You a stranger, and take You in? Or naked, and clothe You?
|
|-
|39
|Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
|"'Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
|
|-
|40
|And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
|"And the King will tell them in answer, 'I tell you truly: to the extent that you have done it for the least of these My brothers, you have done it for Me.'
|
|-
|41
|Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
|"Then he'll also say to those on His left hand, 'Go away from Me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the Slanderer and his messengers.
|
|-
|42
|For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
|"'I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink.
|
|-
|43
|I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
|"'I was a stranger, and you didn't take Me in. I was naked, and you didn't clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.'
|
|-
|44
|Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
|"Then they also will tell Him in answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and not wait on You?'
|
|-
|45
|Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
|"Then He will say in answer to them, 'I tell you truly: to the extent that you failed to do this for one of the least of these, you failed to do it for Me.'
|
|-
|46
|And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
|"And these people will go away into eternal punishment, but the just into eternal life."
|
|}

==Chapter 26 -- the [[Last Supper]] begins at 26:20==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples,
|And it happened, when Jesus had finished saying all these things, He said to His students,
|
|-
|2
|Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.
|"You know that the feast of Passover takes place in two days, and the Son of man will be betrayed to be crucified."
|
|-
|3
|Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,
|Then the leading priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people assembled together, in the palace of the [[High Priest]], [[Caiaphas]] by name,
|
|-
|4
|And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.
|and held a meeting on how they might arrest Jesus by treachery and have Him killed.
|
|-
|5
|But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.
|But they said, "We cannot do it on the feast day; if we do, the people will riot."
|
|-
|6
|Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,
|Now when Jesus was staying in Bethany, in the home of Simon the leper,
|
|-
|7
|There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
|a woman came to him who had an alabaster box of very expensive ointment. She poured it out onto his head as he reclined to dine.
|
|-
|8
|But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
|And when His students saw it, they were indignant. "What a waste!" they said.
|
|-
|9
|For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
|"This ointment might have been sold for a lot of money, money we could have given to the poor!"
|
|-
|10
|When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
|When Jesus realized what was happening, He said, "Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a good work for Me.
|
|-
|11
|For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
|"You will always have the poor with you, but you won't always have Me.
|
|-
|12
|For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
|"When she poured out this ointment on My body, she did it for My funeral.
|
|-
|13
|Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.
|I tell you truly: wherever this Good News is preached in the whole world, this thing that this woman has done will also be talked of as a memorial of her."
|
|-
|14
|Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,
|Then one of the Twelve, named [[Judas Iscariot]], went to the members of the [[Sanhedrin]],
|
|-
|15
|And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver.
|and asked them, "What will you pay me if I deliver Him to you?" They hired him for thirty pieces of [[silver]].
|Oddly, Delilah's price for betraying [[Samson]] was fifty-five hundred pieces of silver, eleven hundred from each of the Lords of the Five Cities. One could, therefore, argue that Judas sold Jesus out fairly cheaply by comparison.
|-
|16
|And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him.
|And from that time forward he looked for a chance to betray Him.
|
|-
|17
|Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?
|Now on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the students came to Jesus, saying to Him, "Where do you want us to prepare a place for You to eat the Passover meal?"
|
|-
|18
|And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
|And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and tell him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is near; I will keep the Passover at your house with My students."'"
|
|-
|19
|And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.
|And the students did as Jesus had instructed them, and prepared the Passover.
|
|-
|20
|Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.
|That evening, He sat down with the Twelve.
|
|-
|21
|And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
|As they were eating, He said, "I tell you truly: one of you will betray Me."
|
|-
|22
|And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?
|And they were very much distressed, and every one of them started asking Him, "Lord, it isn't I, is it?"
|
|-
|23
|And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.
|In answer He said, "The one dipping His hand with Me in the dish, is the one who will betray Me.
|
|-
|24
|The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.
|"The Son of man is going as it was written that He would go. But it will be terrible for that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed. It would have been better for that man if he had not been born."
|
|-
|25
|Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.
|Then Judas (who eventually did betray Him) said in answer, "Teacher, it isn't I, is it?" He said to him, "You've said it."
|
|-
|26
|And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
|As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to the students, and said, "Take. Eat. This is My Body."
|
|-
|27
|And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
|And, taking a cup, He gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from this, all of you.
|Some manuscripts have "''the'' cup."
|-
|28
|For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
|"For this is My Blood of the Testament, Which is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins.
|Some manuscripts have "New Testament."
|-
|29
|But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
|"But I tell you, from now on I will not drink of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's Kingdom.
|
|-
|30
|And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.
|And when they had sung a hymn, they went out into [[Mount Olivet]].
|
|-
|31
|Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
|Then Jesus told them, "All of you will have doubts about Me this night. Scripture says, 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered abroad.'
|
|-
|32
|But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.
|"But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee."
|
|-
|33
|Peter answered and said unto him, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.
|Peter, in answer, said to Him, "Even if all men doubt You, I will never doubt You."
|
|-
|34
|Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
|Jesus told him, "I tell you truly: on this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times."
|
|-
|35
|Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.
|Peter told him, "Even if I die with You, I will never deny You." The other students said the same.
|
|-
|36
|Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder.
|Then Jesus came with them to a place called Gethsemane, and said to the students, "Stay here, while I go and pray over there."
|
|-
|37
|And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
|He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee with Him, and began to be pained and distressed.
|
|-
|38
|Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
|Then He told them, "My soul is very distressed, even to death. Stay here and keep watch with Me."
|
|-
|39
|And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
|And He went a little further on, and fell on His face, and prayed, "O Father, if You can, let this cup pass from Me. But don't do what I want, but rather what You want."
|
|-
|40
|And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?
|And he came to the students, and found them asleep, and said to Peter, "Couldn't you stay up with Me for one hour?
|
|-
|41
|Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.
|"Stay up and pray that you not enter into a test. The spirit is indeed willing, but the flesh is weak."
|
|-
|42
|He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.
|He went away again the second time, and prayed, "My Father, if this cup cannot pass from Me unless I drink from it, then let it be done as You wish."
|
|-
|43
|And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy.
|And He came and found them asleep again, because their eyes were heavy.
|
|-
|44
|And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words.
|And He left them, and went away again, and prayed for a third time, saying the same words.
|
|-
|45
|Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.
|Then He came to His disciples, and told them, "Sleep on now, and take your rest. The hour has arrived, and the Son of man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners.
|
|-
|46
|Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.
|"Get up, and let's go. Behold, the one who is to betray me has arrived."
|
|-
|47
|And while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people.
|And while He was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, came. With him came a great crowd armed with swords and sticks, from among the leading priests and elders of the people.
|
|-
|48
|Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he: hold him fast.
|Now the traitor gave them a sign. He said, "The Man that I kiss, He is the One. Hold Him fast."
|
|-
|49
|And forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, master; and kissed him.
|And at once he came to Jesus, and said, "Hello, Teacher," and kissed Him.
|
|-
|50
|And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him.
|And Jesus said to him, "Friend, why have you come?" Then the crowd came, and laid hands on Jesus, and arrested Him.
|
|-
|51
|And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.
|And then one of the men with Jesus reached with his hand, drew his sword, and struck a slave of the High Priest and cut off his ear.
|
|-
|52
|Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
|Then Jesus told him, "Put your sword back into its place. Everyone who takes the sword will die by the sword.
|
|-
|53
|Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?
|"Do you really think that I can't pray to My Father, and He wouldn't immediately give Me more than twelve brigades of His messengers?
|The military unit that Jesus named was the Roman [[legion]]. A legion typically included six thousand troops and auxiliaries, which is actually more than a modern infantry brigade.
|-
|54
|But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?
|"But in that case, how would the Scriptures be fulfilled, the ones that say that this is how it has to be?"
|
|-
|55
|In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.
|In that same hour Jesus said to the crowds, "Have you come out as you would against an insurrectionist, to arrest Me with swords and sticks? I was sitting every day with you, teaching in the Temple, and you didn't arrest Me then."
|
|-
|56
|But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.
|But all this happened, so that the Scriptures of the prophets would be fulfilled. Then all the students left Him behind, and ran away.
|
|-
|57
|And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.
|And those who had arrested Jesus led Him away to [[Caiaphas]] the [[High Priest]], where the scribes and the elders were already assembled.
|This was a middle-of-the-night session of the [[Sanhedrin]], a process of highly dubious legality in and of itself.
|-
|58
|But Peter followed him afar off unto the high priest's palace, and went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end.
|But Peter followed Him at a distance to the palace of the [[High Priest]], and went in, and sat with the attendants, to see the end.
|
|-
|59
|Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;
|Now the leading priests, and the elders, and the entire Sanhedrin, sought trumped-up testimony against Jesus, to have Him condemned to death.
|
|-
|60
|But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses,
|But they found none. Even though many lying witnesses came, they still found none. At last came two lying witnesses,
|
|-
|61
|And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.
|who said, "This fellow said, 'I can destroy the Temple of God and rebuild it in three days.'"
|
|-
|62
|And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
|And the [[High Priest]] got up, and said to Him, "Have you no answer to what these witnesses are saying against You?"
|
|-
|63
|But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
|But Jesus kept quiet. Then the High Priest in answer said, "I am putting you under oath by the living God: Tell us whether you are the Messiah, the Son of God."
|
|-
|64
|Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
|Jesus said to him, "You just said it. Nevertheless I tell you: Hereafter you will see 'the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.'"
|
|-
|65
|Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.
|Then the High Priest tore his clothes, and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need witnesses anymore? You have heard His blasphemy!
|The ritual tearing of clothes (specifically, ripping one's robe down the middle) was a sign of deep mourning or extreme indignation. But Caiaphas broke the regulations on his conduct by doing this.
|-
|66
|What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.
|"How say you?" In answer, they voted "Guilty and sentenced to death."
|This was a taking of a verdict.
|-
|67
|Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands,
|Then they spat in His face, and struck Him, and others slapped Him with the flats of their hands,
|
|-
|68
|Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?
|and said, "Who hit You, Messiah? Guess!"
|
|-
|69
|Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.
|Now Peter was sitting outside in the palace. A young woman came to him, saying, "You were also with Jesus of Galilee."
|
|-
|70
|But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.
|But he denied it in front of everyone, saying, "I don't know what you're talking about!"
|
|-
|71
|And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.
|And when he had gone out onto the portico, another young woman saw him, and said to everyone present, "This man was also with Jesus of Nazareth!"
|
|-
|72
|And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man.
|And again he denied; this time he swore and said, "I don't know the Man!"
|
|-
|73
|And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech betrayeth thee.
|And after awhile the bystanders came up to him and said to Peter, "You have to be one of them; your own words give you away."
|
|-
|74
|Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.
|Then he started to curse and swear, saying, "I don't know the Man!" And immediately the rooster crowed.
|
|-
|75
|And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.
|And Peter remembered the words that Jesus had said to him: "Before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." And he went out and wept bitterly.
|
|}

==Chapter 27==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:
|The next morning, all the leading priests and elders of the people held a conference against Jesus, seeking a means to have Him executed.
|The [[Sanhedrin]], being merely an advisory body and subject to [[Rome|Roman]] law, had no authority to order anyone executed.
|-
|2
|And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
|And they bound Him, led Him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor.
|In short, the Sanhedrin sought a Roman warrant for Christ's execution, and they could get it only from the governor of Judea Province.
|-
|3
|Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
|Then Judas, who had betrayed Him, when he saw that He had been convicted, had a change of mind, and brought the thirty pieces of [[silver]] back to the leading priests and elders,
|
|-
|4
|Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.
|and told them, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." And they said, "So what? That's your problem, not ours."
|Some manuscripts use a different Greek word that means "just" or "righteous." The favorite word is the one meaning "innocent" in the sense "not guilty."
|-
|5
|And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
|And he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple, and left, and went out and killed himself.
|The Greek word '''απαγχομαι''' or ''apagchomai'' is sometimes translated "I kill myself by hanging." However, it is actually the middle-voice form of '''απαγω''' which actually means "I put someone to death"—by any means. Matthew does not actually give any greater detail than this about how Judas died, but Luke does, in {{Bible ref|book=Acts|chap=1}}.
|-
|6
|And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.
|And the leading priests took the silver pieces, and said, "We can't put this into the treasury; this is blood money."
|
|-
|7
|And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in.
|And they held a conference, and used the money to buy a potter's field for burying foreigners.
|The Greek words used literally ''do'' mean "a potter's field" and carries the same connotation as that English phrase carries today.
|-
|8
|Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.
|And that is why that field is called the Field of Blood, even today.
|
|-
|9
|Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value;
|Thus these words were fulfilled that were spoken by the prophet [[Jeremiah]]: "And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of the Precious One, held precious by the children of Israel,
|
|-
|10
|And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.
|"and gave them to buy a potter's field, as the Lord instructed Me."
|Some manuscripts say "threw" rather than "gave".
|-
|11
|And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.
|And Jesus stood before the governor. The governor asked Him, "Are you the King of the Jews?"
|
|-
|12
|And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
|And when He was accused by the leading priests and elders, He gave no answer.
|
|-
|13
|Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?
|Then Pilate said to him, "Don't you hear how many things to which they testify against You?"
|
|-
|14
|And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.
|And Jesus never said one word in answer, so that the governor was shocked as he had never been shocked before.
|Presumably Pilate had never seen anything like this in his career in public life, nor heard any fellow Senator tell a similar tale from his days as a magistrate in the provinces.
|-
|15
|Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would.
|Now at the festival the governor was accustomed to release to the people a prisoner, whomever they wanted released.
|
|-
|16
|And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas.
|And at the time they held a notable prisoner, named Barabbas.
|Some manuscripts actually preface the name "Barabbas" with "Jesus", which doesn't make much sense.
|-
|17
|Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?
|So when they were assembled, Pilate told them, "Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ?"
|
|-
|18
|For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.
|Because he knew that they had handed Him over out of envy.
|
|-
|19
|When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.
|When he had sat down on the judgment seat, his wife sent him a message: "Don't have anything to do with That Just Man. I have had many nightmares today on His account!"
|The Greek word '''βημα''' was the word used for "judgment seat." To be more specific, this was the classic semicircular and backless [[curule chair]] on which Roman magistrates sat when they held court.
|-
|20
|But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.
|But the leading priests and elders had persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.
|
|-
|21
|The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas.
|The governor said in answer, "Which of these two do you want me to release to you?" They said, "Barabbas."
|
|-
|22
|Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
|Pilate said to them, "Then what should I do with Jesus called Christ?" They asll said to him, "Let Him be crucified!"
|
|-
|23
|And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
|And the governor said, "Why? What crime has He committed?" But they cried out even more loudly: "Let Him be crucified!"
|
|-
|24
|When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.
|When Pilate realized that he could not win, and indeed risked having a riot on his hands, he took water, and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this man's blood; this is your responsibility!"
|Some manuscripts specify "this just man's blood."
|-
|25
|Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.
|Then all the people shouted in answer, "Let His blood be on us, and on our children!"
|
|-
|26
|Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.
|So he released Barabbas to them, and when he had had Jesus scourged, he handed him over to be crucified.
|
|-
|27
|Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers.
|Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the garrison courtyard, and gathered the entire garrison together to watch Him.
|The Greek word '''πραιτωριον''' or ''praetorion'' is a Greek transliteration of the Roman word ''praetorium'', the headquarters of any garrison or, more specifically, the Praetorian or Palace Guard of the Emperor.
|-
|28
|And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe.
|And they tore His clothes off, and put a red infantryman's cloak on Him.
|
|-
|29
|And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!
|Then they wove together a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and put a reed in His right hand. Then they dropped to one knee before Him, and mocked Him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!"
|The flimsy reed was their idea of a scepter.
|-
|30
|And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.
|And they spat on Him, and took the reed away from Him, and batted Him on the head with it.
|
|-
|31
|And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.
|And after they were finished mocking Him, they took the war cloak off Him, and put his own clothes back on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him.
|
|-
|32
|And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross.
|As they were coming out, they found a man from Cyrene, named Simon. They forced him to carry His cross.
|
|-
|33
|And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
|And when they had come to a place called Golgotha, i.e. "Skull Hill",
|
|-
|34
|They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
|they gave Him a vinegar-and-bile mixture to drink. When He had tasted that, He wouldn't drink it.
|
|-
|35
|And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.
|And they crucified Him, and divided His clothes by a throw of dice, so that these [[prophet]]ic words might be fulfilled: "They divided my clothes among them, and threw dice for my apparel."
|
|-
|36
|And sitting down they watched him there;
|And they sat down and watched Him there,
|
|-
|37
|And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
|and set up over his head his written accusation: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."
|
|-
|38
|Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.
|Two robbers were crucified with Him, one to His right, and the other to His left.
|
|-
|39
|And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads,
|And the passersby taunted him, wagging their heads,
|
|-
|40
|And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
|and saying, "Hey, You! You said that You could destroy the Temple and build it in three days! Why don't You save Yourself? If You're really the Son of God, come down from the cross!"
|
|-
|41
|Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said,
|In the same way the leading priests mocked him, together with the scribes and elders. They said,
|
|-
|42
|He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
|"He saved others, but can't save Himself. If he's really the King of Israel, then He can dome down from the cross, and we'll believe Him.
|
|-
|43
|He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
|"He trusted in God, so let Him deliver Him now, if He wants. After all, He said, 'I am the Son of God.'"
|
|-
|44
|The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.
|The robbers also, who were being crucified with Him, threw those same words in His teeth.
|Remarkably, that idiom survives today in English, even in a literal, word-for-word translation.
|-
|45
|Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
|Now from the sixth hour of the day, darkness fell over the entire country until the ninth hour.
|Hours of the ancient day were measured from sunrise. The equivalent phrase today would be "from noon until three p.m."
|-
|46
|And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
|And at about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, "''Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?''" That means, "My God, My God, why have You abandoned Me?"
|
|-
|47
|Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias.
|Some of the bystanders, when they heard that, said, "He's calling for [[Elijah]]."
|
|-
|48
|And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.
|Immediately one of them ran from Him, and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it to Him to drink.
|
|-
|49
|The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.
|The rest of them said, "Leave Him alone; let's see whether Elijah will come to save Him."
|
|-
|50
|Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
|Jesus then cried out again in a loud voice and breathed his last.
|The literal idiomatic Greek phrase reads "gave up the breath."
|-
|51
|And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
|And at that moment the veil of the Temple was torn into two pieces from top to bottom, and the earth shook, and the rocks split,
|The Greek "Καὶ ἰδού" in this context emphasizes the identical timing<ref>See, for example, the various translations of Καὶ ἰδού (depending on the context) to include "suddenly" and "at that time" at [http://www.biblestudytools.com/matthew/27-51-compare.html]</ref> - ignoring ἰδού (or any word) in translation is disfavored, see [[Bible Translation Issues]].
|-
|52
|And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
|And the graves were opened, and many bodies of dead saints rose up,
|
|-
|53
|And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
|and came out of those graves after His Resurrection, and went into the Holy City, and appeared to many people.
|
|-
|54
|Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
|The centurion, and those standing with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake and the other happenings. They were very much afraid, and said, "This must have been the Son of God."
|
|-
|55
|And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him:
|And many women were there watching from a distance. They had been following Jesus ever since He began in Galilee, and used to wait on Him.
|
|-
|56
|Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's children.
|They included Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of Zebedee's sons.
|
|-
|57
|When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:
|That evening, a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, came. He also had been a student of Jesus.
|
|-
|58
|He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered.
|He went to Pilate, and claimed the body of Jesus. The Pilate ordered the body turned over to him.
|
|-
|59
|And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
|When Joseph had taken possession of the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
|
|-
|60
|And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
|and buried it in his own new tomb, one that he had chiseled out in the rock. He had a large stone rolled across the entrance to the tomb, and went away.
|
|-
|61
|And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.
|And Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting next to the tomb.
|
|-
|62
|Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
|The next day, the day following the day of preparation, the leading priests and the Pharisees came together to Pilate.
|
|-
|63
|Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
|They said, "Sir, we remember what that Liar said, while He was still alive, 'After three days I will rise again.'
|Capitalized on account of Who He actually is, not on account of what the speakers thought He was.
|-
|64
|Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
|So give orders that the tomb be secured until the third day. We don't want His students to come in the middle of the night and steal His body, and tell the people, 'He has risen from the dead.' If that happens, we'll have an even worse problem."
|The literal Greek idiom translates, "The last error will be worse than the first."
|-
|65
|Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
|Pilate told them, "You'll have a guard. Go and make it as secure as you can."
|
|-
|66
|So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
|So they went, and secured the tomb by sealing the stone, and posted a guard.
|One assumes that this was a guard of Roman soldiers, not a Jewish Temple guard. The Sanhedrin could post its own guard over a tomb without asking for Roman authority, if it wanted.
|}

==Chapter 28==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Verse
!King James Version
!Proposed Conservative Translation
!Analysis
|-
|1
|In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
|After the Sabbaths, as the dawn began on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.
|
|-
|2
|And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
|And a great earthquake struck, because a Messenger from the Lord came down from heaven, came to the tomb, rolled back the stone from its entrance, and sat on it.
|The particular Messenger, or [[angel]], is not identified here.
|-
|3
|His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
|His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were as white as snow.
|
|-
|4
|And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
|And the guards shook out of fear of him, and passed out, like so many corpses.
|
|-
|5
|And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
|And the Messenger said in answer to the women, "Don't be afraid. I know you're looking for Jesus, Who was crucified.
|
|-
|6
|He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
|"He isn't here. He has been raised up, as He said He would be. Come and see the place where He was lying.
|Some manuscripts, including the Byzantine, have "where the Lord was lying."
|-
|7
|And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
|"And go quickly, and tell His students that He has been raised up from the dead. Look, He's going ahead of you into Galilee; you'll see Him there. I have told you."
|
|-
|8
|And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
|And they went away quickly from the tomb, in fear and in great joy, and ran to bring word to His students.
|Some manuscripts have "And they went ''out'' quickly."
|-
|9
|And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
|And as they were going to tell His students, behold, Jesus met them, saying, "Hello, everyone." And they came and held Him by His feet, and kissed His feet.
|
|-
|10
|Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.
|Then Jesus told them, "Don't be afraid. Go and tell My brothers that they must go into Galilee. There they will see Me."
|
|-
|11
|Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
|Now when they were going, some of the guards came into the city, and told the leading priests everything that had happened.
|
|-
|12
|And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
|When the leading priests met with the elders and conferred with them, they gave a lot of silver pieces to the soldiers,
|How many silver pieces is never reported, but it must have been a very large bribe. (See below)
|-
|13
|Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
|and said, "Say, 'His students came in the night and stole Him away while we were asleep.'
|
|-
|14
|And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
|"And if the governor hears about this, we will persuade him and keep you out of trouble."
|That probably took a great deal of persuasion, indeed. The penalty in the Roman army for sleeping on watch was [[capital punishment|death]].
|-
|15
|So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
|So they took the bribe, and did as they had been instructed. This tale is commonly told among the Jews to this day.
|By "this day" is meant not only the time of the writing of the Gospel of Matthew, but the time of this work, in 2009 AD.
|-
|16
|Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
|Then the eleven students went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had told them to go.
|
|-
|17
|And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
|And when they saw Him, they fell at His feet, but some had doubts.
|
|-
|18
|And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
|And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All the power in heaven and earth is given to Me.
|
|-
|19
|Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
|"So go and make students from all ethnic groups, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Divine Guide,
|
|-
|20
|Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
|"teaching them to keep absolutely everything that I commanded you. And remember that I am with you always, even to the end of the world."
|The Byzantine manuscripts add "Amen," i.e., "So be it."
|}

[[Matthew 1-9 (Translated)]] 
[[Matthew 10-19 (Translated)]]

[[Category:Conservative Bible]]

== References ==
<references />

Barack Hussein Obama

2014-05-05T23:40:44Z

Debletar:

{{Officeholder
|name=Barack Hussein Obama
|image=President Barack Obama.jpg
|party=[[Democratic Party]]
|spouse=[[Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama]]; may have had a prior marriage.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/was-barack-obama-married-in-college/</ref>
|religion=see [[Obama's religion]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/president
|country=the United States
|number=44th
|terms=January 20, 2009-Present
|vp=[[Joe Biden]]
|preceded=[[George W. Bush]]
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Illinois
|terms=January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008
|preceded=Peter Fitzgerald
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Roland Burris]]
}}
}}

'''Barack Hussein Obama II''' (reportedly born in [[Honolulu, Hawaii]] on August 4, 1961) is the 44th President of the [[United States]]. Through heavy use of [[early voting]] by the Democrat political machine, Obama was elected president in 2008 with 365 [[electoral vote]]s and 53% of the popular vote. In 2012 he was elected to a second term with 332 electoral votes and 51% of the popular vote. Promoted heavily by [[liberals]], as demonstrated by his unjustified receipt of the 2009 [[Nobel Prize|Nobel Peace Prize]], Obama won the presidency despite a short and unremarkable political career by outspending his opponent, [[John McCain]], by hundreds of millions of dollars in 2008<ref>[http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contriball.php?cycle=2008 Candidate Comparison: Top Contributors 2008 Cycle]. OpenSecrets.org.</ref>, and spending more than a billion dollars from special interests to attain reelection in 2012.<ref>[http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/index.php 2012 Presidential Race]. OpenSecrets.org [http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/indus.php?cycle=2012&id=N00009638 Opensecrets.org Barack Obama], 33% Individual contributions, 67% large and corporate.</ref>

The [[liberal claptrap]] that helped elect Obama as president seems silly today. It was claimed, for example, that Obama has millions of followers on [[Twitter]], when allegedly some 70% of them are fake.<ref>http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/08/obama-has-millions-of-fake-twitter-followers/1#.UDfQVqA2et_</ref> And although the [[lamestream media]] promoted Obama as a great orator, in fact he relies almost entirely on teleprompters for his speeches and press conferences, and at one point even had teleprompters set up for him in a middle school classroom in order to speak to the media.

Obama is [[pro-abortion]]. During his campaigns Obama said that he intended to "[[Redistribution of wealth|spread the wealth around]]" and has been portrayed as saying that entrepreneurs and employers deserve no credit for building their businesses.<ref>Zuckerman, M.B. (2010, July 16). [http://www.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/07/16/obamas-anti-business-policies-are-our-economic-katrina Obama's Anti-business Policies are our Economic Katrina]. ''U.S. News''. Barnes, F. (2009, July 22). [http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/619dvjlm.asp An Anti-Business President]. ''The Weekly Standard''. Vol. 14, No. 38 Shedlock, M. (2010, August 20). [http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/small-businesses-are-not-hiring-why.html Small Businesses are not hiring. Why should they?] Globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com. Wright, C.E. (2012, February 12). [http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/dear_mr_president_why_we_are_n.html Dear Mr. President: Why we are not hiring]. ''American Thinker''.</ref> On March 1, 2013 Obama issued [[Executive Order|executive orders]] to implement his [[Budget sequester|sequester]] of budget cuts which<ref>http://weaselzippers.us/2013/02/27/dnc-boosts-obama-sequester-job-loss-threat-of-750000-to-2-million</ref> has been widely criticized for destroying jobs in what was an anemic and fragile recovery.<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-02-26/news/chi-20130226-foys_briefs_1_sequester-president-obama-press-secretary-jay-carney President Obama's sequester,] ''Chicago Tribune'', February 26, 2013.</ref>

Warren L. Dean Jr., an adjunct professor of law at [[Georgetown University Law Center]], wrote:
*{{obama income inequality}}

Former [[Democrat]] Presidential candidate [[Joe Lieberman]] endorsed Obama's opponent in 2008 and has declined to endorse Obama for the [[Presidential Election 2012|2012 presidential election]].<ref>Lillis, M. (2012, April 22). [http://thehill.com/video/campaign/222929-lieberman-declines-to-endorse-in-presidential-race Sen. Lieberman declines to endorse in presidential race]. ''The Hill''.</ref>

Following the 2011 debt ceiling standoff between Obama and House Republicans,<ref name=Swann-Aug>{{cite web|url=http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8 |title=United States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered to 'AA+' on Political Risks and Rising Debt Burden; Outlook Negative |publisher= [[Standard & Poor's]] |date=August 5, 2011 |accessdate=April 3, 2013}}</ref> the United States Government's credit rating was, for the first time in its history, downgraded from AAA to AA+, and [[poverty]]<ref>[http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf Figure 4: Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959-2009]. ''U.S. Census Bureau''. Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2010 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.</ref> increased markedly. By and large his programs, said to combat the recession, unemployment, slow growth, and deficits, have failed<ref>"The vast majority (73%) of respondents reported the fiscal stimulus enacted in February 2009 has had no impact on employment to date. While 68% also believe a jobs bill, such as the one recently enacted into law, will have no impact on payrolls, 30% do believe it will boost payrolls moderately". [http://www.nabe.com/press/ind1004.pdf Industry Survey], ''National Association for Business Economics'', April 2010, p. 2.</ref> leaving the the country saddled with a $16 trillion [[national debt]] and climbing.<ref>Under Obama the U.S. National Debt has tripled. Source: [https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?graph_id=86836 U.S. Treasury]; Federal Reserve Board.</ref> One of his most well known tactics is blaming someone else, such as George W. Bush, for all his failures instead of taking responsibility. Also on the domestic front, Obama passed an expensive [[health care]] bill in 2010 with no national concensus or [[bipartisan]] support and 34 Democrats dissenting. Recently, the [[Congressional Budget Office]] wrote an open letter to [[John Boehner]], the Speaker of the House, outlining the effects of repealing [[Obamacare]] and explaining why net loss of over 100 billion dollars would occur from the repeal. [http://cbo.gov/publication/43471]

Americans deaths in [[Afghanistan]] have more than doubled under Obama's leadership compared with the preceding eight years of George Bush, according to the Congressional Research Service <ref>Chesser, S.G. (2012, July 12). [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41084.pdf Afghanistan Casualties: Military Forces and Civilians - CRS Report for Congress]. Pg. 3. ''Congressional Research Service'''.</ref> Against his own Defense Secretary's advice, Obama [[Libyan uprising 2011|attacked Libya]] - a possible violation of the [[War Powers Act]]. After he he took credit for the killing of [[September 11th]] mastermind terrorist [[Osama bin Laden]], the [[U.S. State Department]] warned of increased risk to the lives and safety of Americans.<ref>''KABC-TV/DT'' (2011, July 27). [http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8273909 Risk of anti-US violence up after Osama bin Laden's death]. On ''ABC7 News''.</ref> Bin Laden's successor, [[Ayman al-Zawahiri]] confirmed the [[Benghazi Attack]] which killed four State Department employees, was motivated by revenge.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/africa/libya-attack-jihadists/index.html Pro-al Qaeda group seen behind deadly Benghazi attack], By Nic Robertson, Paul Cruickshank and Tim Lister, CNN, September 13, 2012.</ref> Bin Laden's killing, however had negligible impact on Obama's approval ratings.<ref>''Gallup''. [http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/gallup-daily-obama-job-approval.aspx Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval].</ref>

Obama's bizarre gaffes are frequent and embarrassing, but typically unreported by the [[liberal media]]. Many hardworking American businessmen took offense to a 2012 campaign speech about the economy where he says "You didn't build that." Obama offended [[Poland]] by referring to the [[Nazi]] death camps there as "Polish death camps." Later Obama apologized.<ref>Sink, J. (2012, June 1). [http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/europe/230419-obama-letter-says-he-regrets-polish-death-camp-gaffe Obama apologizes in writing for 'Polish death camp' verbal gaffe].''The Hill''.</ref> Even the ''New York Times'' was critical of Obama's incessant boasting about the killing of bin Laden.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/us/politics/critics-pounce-on-obamas-trumpeting-of-bin-laden-death.html?_r=0 Obama Trumpets Killing of Bin Laden, and Critics Pounce], By PETER BAKER and MICHAEL D. SHEAR, April 27, 2012.</ref>

==Biography==
===Birth===
{{TOC right}}
:''Main article : [[Early life and career of Barack Hussein Obama]]''
:''See also : [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage]]''
Obama claims to have been born in Hawaii to Stanley Ann Dunham and [[Barack Obama Sr.]] - who had married just six months prior - on August 4, 1961 in [[Honolulu, Hawaii]].<ref name=msnbc>''MSNBC'' (2008, February 20). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23257295/ns/msnbc_tv-documentaries/t/obama-becomes-rising-star-among-democrats/ Obama Becomes Rising Star Among Democrats]."</ref> Some contend that this story is a complete fabrication. After many leading conservatives -- including the leadership of this site and [[Donald Trump]] -- called for Obama to release his birth certificate he produced a document that he claimed was his birth certificate on April 27, 2011. Sheriff [[Joe Arpaio]] of Maricopa County in Arizona conducted an investigation of Obama's eligibility and questioned whether the alleged "birth certificate" was a fake; however, no charges have been filed. [[Obama]] was reportedly assigned a social security number whose area code was assigned to applications coming from zip codes in Connecticut.<ref>Beginning in 1972, all Social Security numbers were issued from a central office in Baltimore, Maryland.[http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/geocard.html]</ref>

The original claims that Obama was born in Kenya come from the Obamas themselves. In 1991, Obama's literary agent, Acton & Dystel, published a promotional booklet that stated that Obama was born in Kenya. <ref>http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii</ref><ref>http://www.examiner.com/article/publisher-s-1991-booklet-says-barack-obama-was-born-kenya</ref> The claim that Obama was born in Kenya remained on the agent's web site until 2007. <ref>http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/Obama-pamphlet-in-use-2007</ref> Internet archives confirm this information. <ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20070403190001/http://www.dystel.com/clientlist.html</ref> In addition to the information from literary agents, Michelle Obama stated in an interview that Kenya is Obama's "homeland".<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLzJz2A2N1c</ref>

Barack Obama Sr. was not a [[Natural born citizen|citizen of the United States]]. At the time of Obama's birth, Kenya was a British colony, meaning that not only was Obama Sr. a British subject, but he passed that status on to his son. When Kenya gained independence, Obama and his father both ceased to be British subjects and became Kenyan citizens. Barack Obama was a dual citizen of the United States and Kenya until his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired in 1984, as he had failed to renounce US nationality and swear loyalty to Kenya. Even if he had been born with US citizenship through his mother, it has been argued that as he was born with dual nationality, he is not a natural-born citizen of the United States, and thus constitutionally ineligible to become President. Despite this, no court that has considered such arguments has accepted the proposition that Obama is not a natural-born citizen.<ref>See [http://www.scribd.com/doc/88910250/Purpura-Moran-Initial-Decision-of-ALJ-Masin Initial Decision by Jeff S. Masin] in ''Purpura and Moran v. Obama'' at 7 ("Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a “natural born Citizen” regardless of the status of his father."), Tisdale v. Obama (E.D.Va 2012) Order at 2 ("It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens." (citing ''United States v. Wong Kim Ark'', 169 U.S. 649)), ''aff'd per curiam'' by 4th Cir., ''Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana'', 916 N.E.2d 678, 685 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) ("With regard to President Barack Obama, the Plaintiffs posit that because his father was a citizen of the United Kingdom, President Obama is constitutionally ineligible to assume the Office of the President....we hold that the Plaintiffs' arguments fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted")</ref>

===Early Life===
Obama's birth parents divorced in 1963 when his mother discovered Barack Obama Sr. was already married to a woman living in Kenya.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-2024819/Barack-Obamas-father-Bigamist-drunk-wife-beater.html Barack Obama's father: Bigamist, drunk and wife-beater], By Ian Birrell, 12 August 2011. dailymail.co.uk This is one of the first misleading statements about Barack Obama when he was introduced to America as Keynote Speaker at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Advance publicity billed him as the "son of Kenyan economist" when infact Obama Sr. was forced out of the graduate program at Harvard because of his bigamy. He returned to Kenya. Obama at the age 9 once briefly met his father who served in the corrupt Kenyan socialist regime's Department of [[Economic Planning]]. Obama Sr. killed himself in a drunken car accident.</ref> When Obama was 2 years old his mother married Lolo Soetoro, an [[Indonesian]] geologist. At age 6 his mother and adoptive father took him to Jakarta, Indonesia for 4 years while his mother pursued a Ph.D. in Anthropology requiring fieldwork there.<ref name="db mother">{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-03/a-singular-woman-by-janny-scott-review-by-stacy-schiff/#|work=The Daily Beast|format=HTML|language=English|title=Dreams of His Mother|author=Stacy Schiff}}</ref> His mother then abandoned him in Hawaii with his grandparents (Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, who had moved to Hawaii in 1959) <ref name=revealed>Malveaux, Suzanne (2008, August 20). "[http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0808/20/se.02.html Barack Obama Revealed]." ''CNN''.</ref> so she could return to Indonesia after her divorce. Obama's grandfather arranged for his friend, the noted communist writer [[Frank Marshall Davis]], to serve as a mentor and role model for an impressionable African-American youth.

Other siblings of Obama's include his half-sister Maya Soetoro-Ng and 7 other children born to his father by 4 different women.<ref name=raisingobama>Purdum, Todd (2008, March). "[http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803 Raising Obama]." ''Vanity Fair''.</ref> For much of his early life, prior to his transfer to Columbia University, he went by his nickname, "Barry." In the summer of 1988, before attending Harvard Law School (he'd just been accepted), he visited Kogelo, Kenya, to learn more about his father's family. When his mother died in 1995, he and his sister Maya scattered her ashes over Hawaii's south shore.<ref name=revealed />

===Personal Life===
[[Image:Michelle Obama.jpg|frame|right|Michelle (Robinson) Obama, wife of Barack Obama.]]
Barack Obama met his future wife, an attorney named Michelle Robinson, herself a recent Harvard Law School graduate, while he was an intern and she was on staff at Sidley Austin LLP, a prestigious corporate law firm.<ref name=msnbc /> Despite company policy prohibiting relations between staff and interns, the two started dating. The two continued dating long-distance while he finished law school, and on October 18, 1992,<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/03/obama-anniversary-20-years-married_n_1935840.html Huffington Post says it was October 3, 1992.]</ref> were married by Reverend [[Jeremiah Wright]] at Trinity United Church.<ref name=revealed /> In 1999, their first child was born, Malia, and in 2001, another daughter, Natasha (often called Sasha).<ref name=msnbc />

Obama attended Reverend Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church from 1984-1988 during his time as a [[community organizer]] (''See [[Barack_Obama#1984-1988.2C_Community_Organizer|1985-1988, Community Organizer]] section''). Obama credits Wright with his alleged conversion to Christianity, and had both his daughters, Sasha and Malia, baptized there.<ref name=revealed />

===Education===
At age 6, Obama attended schools in Indonesia, the first a Catholic School while he was in Kindergarten, and later a public school. The school had mostly Muslim students (since most Indonesians are Muslim). In ''Dreams from My Father'', Obama writes, "In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to my mother that I had made faces during [[Koran]]ic studies."<ref>''Dreams from My Father'', by Barack Obama, p.142 Aug 1, 1996. [http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/Dreams_From_My_Father_Principles_+_Values.htm]</ref> ''Insight Magazine'' first reported [[Hillary Clinton]]'s organization had "questions about Obama’s Muslim background: ''Are the American people ready for an elected president who was educated in a [[Madrassa]] as a young boy and has not been forthcoming about his Muslim heritage?"''<ref>[http://www.debbieschlussel.com/2899/hillary-clinton-agrees-with-schlussel-obama-suspicious-deceptive-on-muslim-background/ Hillary Clinton Agrees With Schlussel: Obama Suspicious, Deceptive on Muslim Background], By Debbie Schlussel, January 19, 2007.</ref>

In 1971, at age 10, Barack Obama moved to Hawaii, and his grandparents helped him gain entrance to the prestigious Punahou Academy in Honolulu where he began substance abuse and illegal drugs.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/obama-pot-smoking-details_n_1545904.html Obama Pot-Smoking Details Revealed In David Maraniss Book], ''The Huffington Post'', By Luke Johnson, 05/25/2012 . </ref> He was accepted through a scholarship for disadvantaged minorities while he was in 5th grade.<ref name=revealed /> At this elite high school with 1,200 students he was just 1 of 3 black students, and couldn't make the starting lineup of the state champion basketball team his senior year. He wrote a poem for the school's literary magazine, ''Ka Wai Ola''.<ref name=raisingobama />

In 1979, he began a 2-year stint at Occidental College college in Los Angeles,<ref name=msnbc /> and then transferred to Columbia University in New York, which he graduated from in 1983.<ref name=pragmatic>Scott, Janny (2007, July 30). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd]." ''New York Times''.</ref> During this time he published an anti-military tirade embracing Soviet General Secretary [[Leonid Brezhnev]]'s <ref>Obama supported CPSU General Secretary Brezhnev's foreign policy over both Presidents [[Jimmy Carter]] and Ronald Reagan's decision to deploy the MX Missile in Europe. [http://www.csmonitor.com/1981/1124/112439.html Brezhnev offers Schmidt moratorium on nuclear missiles], Elizabeth Pond, ''CS Monitor'', November 24, 1981. See also [http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/images/nytint/docs/obama-s-1983-college-magazine-article/original.pdf Breaking the War Mentality], Barack Obama, Columbia ''Sundial'', March 10, 1983.</ref> proposal for a nuclear freeze in the campus newspaper and allegedly spoke at an Anti-Apartheid rally,<ref name=revealed /> although several prominent student leaders said they did not remember him there. Professor Michael L. Baron was impressed by Obama and wrote him a recommendation for Harvard Law School.<ref name=differs>Scott, J. (2007, October 30). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all Obama's Account of New York Years Often Differs From What Others Say]." ''New York Times''.</ref> In the winter of 1988 Barack Obama decided to attend Harvard Law School, and left Chicago for Cambridge, Massachusetts. In his 2nd year a power struggle broke out among the dominant white liberals over control of the ''Harvard Law Review''. Obama was elected its first black president as a compromise candidate largely with help of conservatives following a "marathon voting session" in which he finally won on the 19th ballot.<ref name=raisingobama /> This led to national attention and numerous job offers, which Obama passed up, at age 30, to pursue his political career in Chicago.<ref name=msnbc /><ref name=revealed />

===Religion===
''Main article: [[Obama's Religion]]''

Despite [[liberal]] denial of the facts, there is evidence that Obama is not a [[Christianity|Christian]] as he claims, but rather a Muslim. <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Obama%27s_religion</ref> Evidence includes how he referred to [[Jesus Christ]] as "A son of God", rather than "The son of God".

[[File:Hitler7.JPG|thumb|It is possible that Obama lied about his religion to gain support, a similiar tactic to that used by [[Adolf Hitler]].]]
It is possible that Obama lied about his religion as an attempt to gain support, which was similar to a tactic used by [[Adolf Hitler]], who called himself a Christian, even though he was an [[Atheist]]. <ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Adolf_Hitler</ref>

===Early Employment===
====1983-1984, Financial Analyst and Writer====
In 1984 Obama worked as a writer and financial analyst for Business International Corporation to help pay off some of his student loans. Business International Corporation was a small newsletter-publishing and research firm which aided multinational companies understand overseas markets. Obama served as a writer/researcher for a company reference service, Financing Foreign Operations, and wrote for their newsletter, ''Business International Money Report''. His supervisor was Cathy Lazere. <ref name=differs /><ref>Henig, J. (2008, June 21). "[http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/obama-polishes-his-resume-2/ Obama Polishes His Resume]." ''FactCheck.org''. [http://www.analyzethis.net/2005/07/09/barack-obama-embellishes-his-resume/ Barack Obama Embellishes His Resume] ''analyzethis.net''. </ref>
====1984-1988, Community Organizer====
In 1984, Obama was hired by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a non-profit organization promoting environmental, consumer, and government reforms. He also was paid just under $10,000 annually as a full-time organizer for Harlem's City College to mobilize student volunteers.<ref name=differs />

From 1985-88, Obama worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago <ref>The Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC)</ref> funded with a $25,000 grant by [[Bill Ayers]]' Woods Fund. The ''New York Times'' reported he was paid $1,000 a year, with $2,000 extra for a car<ref name=revealed /><ref name=streetwise>Scott, Janny (2007, September 9). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/us/politics/09obama.html?pagewanted=all In 2000, a Streetwise Veteran Schooled a Bold Young Obama]." ''New York Times''.</ref> however stories vary wildly. Jerry Kellman, who hired him, says it was "$10,000 a year and a $2,000 car allowance". Obama himself gave different numbers; his memoir says $10,000 (as well as the car), in his Wesleyan speech he gave it as "$12,000 a year plus $2,000 for an old, beat-up car", and when he announced his candidacy for president, it was "a group of churches had offered me a job as a community organizer for $13,000 a year".

Ryan Lizza at ''The New Republic'' reported that "Jean Rudd of the Woods Fund...had provided Kellman with his original $25,000 to hire Obama". Ari Berman reported in ''The Nation'' that the "[Woods Fund] gave a $25,000 grant to the Developing Communities Project, which hired Obama". CBS Channel 2 in Chicago ran a story with a document showing that Obama's proposed salary in 1987 was $25,000, a number that the Obama campaign confirmed while insisting at the same time his original salary was $13,000.<ref>[http://theobamafile.com/obamaworks.htm Community Organizing], The Obama File. http://theobamafile.com.</ref>

During this time Obama joined Reverend Wright's Trinity United Church because in the words of Suzanne Malveaux of ''CNN'', "It was the church to join if you wanted to be one of Chicago's black movers and shakers." At the time, community organizing involved close affiliation with churches, which was how Obama met Wright. Obama abandoned the fight against asbestos contamination in the Altgeld Gardens housing project to pursue personal interests and a career by enrollment at Harvard Law School in the winter of 1988.<ref name=revealed />
====1988-1996, Law Practice====
In 1988 Obama gained work as a Summer Associate at one of the most prestigious corporate law firms in the world, Sidley Austin LLP<ref name=austin>Lattman, P. (2007, May 11). "[http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/05/11/sidley-austin-when-barack-met-michelle/ When Barack Met Michelle]." ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref><ref name=revealed />, owned by Newton Minow, thanks to the recommendation of Minow's daughter Martha, a professor at Harvard Law School. It was at Minow's law firm that Obama would meet Michelle Robinson, his future wife.<ref name=raisingobama /> From 1993-96 he practiced civil rights law including suing Citibank to force them into making [[Subprime loan|subprime mortgage]]s to unqualified minority borrowers.<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/03/community-reinvestment-act-mortgages-housing-opinions-contributors-peter-schweizer.html A Poisonous Cocktail: Expanding the Community Reinvestment Act], Peter Schweizer, ''Forbes'', 10.05.09. In ''Selma S. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank'', lead attorney Obama alleged that although his clients had been denied mortgages "because of delinquent credit obligations and adverse credit," they were really victims of institutional racism. The suit was brought about by the Community Reinvestment Act, so called affirmative action mortgage lending. The plaintiffs won $60,000, Obama and two other attorneys were paid $950,000.</ref> After graduating from Harvard he was hired by Miner, Barnhill, & Galland, a small politically-connected law firm.<ref name=austin /> It was at Miner, Barnhill, & Galland that he would meet influential real estate developer Tony Rezko.<ref name=revealed />
====1991-1992, Project Vote====
In 1991 Obama was recruited by Sandy Newman to head the Chicago chapter of Project Vote!<ref name=revealed />, and in 1992 was the Executive Director, overseeing a voter registration drive which registered 125,000 black voters and was credited with defeating an incumbent Democrat in the primary and electing U.S. Senator Carol Mosely Braun.<ref name=raisingobama /><ref name=pragmatic />

====1992-2004, Lecturer at University of Chicago====
Obama taught part-time at the University of Chicago Law School<ref name=raisingobama /> from 1992-2004. Though Obama erroneously describes himself as a "constitutional law professor"<ref>http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-complains-of-being-constrained-by-a-system-founding-father-put-place</ref>, he was actually only a senior lecturer and the class he taught the most times was called "Current Issues in Racism and the Law".<ref>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/09/20/obamas-favorite-course-to-teach-at-the-university-of-chicago-revealed/</ref> He was a Lecturer from 1992-96, teaching 3 courses per year<cite>, and a senior lecturer from 1996-2004. After Obama was criticized for lying about his job title, the University of Chicago released a statement stating that senior lecturers are considered Law School faculty and regarded as professors but not full-time or tenured. Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time, tenured track position several times during this period but declined each time.<ref>"[http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media Media Inquiries: Statement Regarding Barack Obama]." ''University of Chicago Law School''.</ref>

====1995, Author====
In 1995 Obama published ''Dreams From My Father'' about his life and family background.<ref name=msnbc />

===Personal Awards===
====2009 Nobel Peace Prize====
On October 9, 2009 Barack H. Obama became the third sitting U.S. President<ref name=wilsons>Wilson, Scott (2009, October 10). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/09/AR2009100900914.html President Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize]. ''Washington Post''.</ref> to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "''for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples''".<ref>NobelPrize.org (2009, October 9). "[http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html The Nobel Prize for 2009: Press Release]." Oslo, Norway. Accessed May 13, 2012.</ref> Obama stated that he was "surprised and deeply humbled" to receive the unexpected award,<ref>(2009, October 9). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2009-10-09/world/nobel.peace.prize_1_norwegian-nobel-committee-international-diplomacy-and-cooperation-nuclear-weapons?_s=PM:WORLD Obama: Nobel Peace Prize is 'Call to Action']." ''CNN''.</ref> and also said, "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who have inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace".<ref name=wilsons /> The award was widely criticized given Obama's then lack of accomplishments.<ref>Chazan, G. & MacDonald, A. (2009, October 11). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125509603349176083.html Nobel Committee's Decision Courts Controversy]." ''Wall Street Journal''. (2009, October 9). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/09/obamas-peace-prize-draws-criticism-liberals/ Obama's Peace Prize Draws Criticism, Even From Some Liberals]." ''Associated Press''.</ref>

==1996-2003, Illinois State Senate==
===1996 Election===
{{main article|Radical roots of Barack Hussein Obama}}
In 1995 a cadre of like minded individuals gathered for a fundraising event in the early career of Barack Obama hosted by [[Weather Underground]] (WUO) [[terrorist]] [[William Ayers|William "Bill" Ayers]]. Besides Obama, those in attendance were Ayers wife [[Bernardine Dohrn]],<ref>Georgie Anne Geyer and Keyes Beach "Cuba: School for U.S. Radicals", ''Chicago Daily News/Chicago Sun-Times'' five part series October 1970, excerpted in [http://foia.fbi.gov/filelink.html?file=/weather/weath1c.pdf FBI file Weather Underground Organization (Weatherman),] Part 1c pp. 5-7 pdf (113-115 in original). [http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/clandestine-agents-of-the-cuban-government-ayers-dohrn-myers/]</ref> and Carl Davidson, veterans of [[guerrilla warfare]] training in [[Cuba]] just prior 1968 Democratic National Convention riots. Ayers and Dohrn have taken credit for, and never denied, bombing the [[U.S. Capitol]], the [[Pentagon]] and the [[State Department]].

Ayers and Dohrn used their celebrity status among [[leftist]]s to launch Obama's career. Ayers, Dohrn and [[Jeff Jones]]<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106653 ''Obama's 'green jobs czar' worked with terror founder] Van Jones served on board of activist group where ex-Weatherman serves as top director'', By Aaron Klein, [[WorldNetDaily]], August 13, 2009.</ref> are authors of ''[[Bill_Ayers#Prairie_Fire_Organizing_Committee_and_Maoist_thought|Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-imperialism]],'' the title taken from ''The Sayings of Mao Zedong.''<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/]</ref> The book declares "we are [[communist]] men and women."<ref>Harvey Klehr, ''Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today'' (Transaction Books, New Brunswick, 1988), 109.</ref> Ayers later jokingly, publicly admitted to ghostwriting Obama's book, ''Dreams From My Father''<ref>Cashill, J. (2011, March 28). [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/ayers_affirms_he_wrote_dreams.html Ayers Affirms He Wrote Dreams From My Father]. ''American Thinker''.</ref> and Obama was to appoint several openly avowed Maoists to prominent White House and Executive Branch positions.<ref>Fund, J. (2009, October 21). [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704597704574487431322664964.html From Mao to Obama]. ''The Wall Street Journal''.</ref>

====Knocking Candidates Off the Ballot====
Barack Obama ran for the Illinois state senate in 1996. He was initially supported by incumbent [[Alice Palmer]], who declared she would run for the U.S. Congress. However, when her bid for Congress failed on November 28, 1995, she tried to run for her old seat in the March 1996 election. Her supporters asked Obama to step aside, although whether this was with her permission remains uncertain.<ref name=pragmatic /> Not only did Obama not step down, he gathered a team of high-priced lawyers, including fellow Harvard Law School graduate Thomas Johnson, to challenge his opponent's petition signatures on technicalities after the filing deadline had passed. Such tactics are legal and frequently used in Chicago; in 2006 they eliminated 67 of the 245 aldermanic candidates;<ref name=bareknuckle>Jackson, David & Long, Ray (2007, April 4). "[http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-0704030881apr04-archive,0,1523598,full.story Barack Obama: Showing His Bare Knuckles]." ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref> yet nevertheless led to the term "hardball" by the ''New York Times''<ref name=pragmatic /> and "cutthroat" by David Mendel as reported by both ''CNN''<ref name=revealed /> and ''MSNBC''.<ref name=msnbc /> The ''Chicago Tribune'' declared Obama had mastered "the bare-knuckle arts of Chicago electoral politics", noting "The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it."<ref name=bareknuckle /> As one of Obama's four opponents, eliminated through his ballot challenges, would put it: {{cquote|"Why say you're for a new tomorrow, then do old-style Chicago politics to remove legitimate candidates? He talks about honor and democracy, but what honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?"
-Gha-is Askia, 1996 Illinois Senate candidate<ref>Jackson, David & Long, Ray (2007, April 3). "[http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-070403obama-ballot-archive,0,5297304,full.story Obama Knows His Way Around a Ballot]." ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref>}} Mark Ewell, another candidate, filed 1,286 signatures, and Obama's challenges left him 86 short of the minimum requirement (757<ref name=spivak>Spivak, Todd (2008, February 28). "[http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/ Barack Obama and Me]." ''Houston Press''.</ref>). Ewell filed a federal lawsuit contesting the election board's decision but Tom Johnson intervened, and Ewell's case was dismissed just a few days later. Ewell and other Obama opponents were using early 1995 polling sheets to verify signatures of registered voters, but city authorities had just purged 15,871 unqualified people from the 13th district list, and Obama's challenges used the more recent, updated list. Askia was left 69 signatures short of the requirement. If names were printed instead of signed in cursive, they were declared invalid. If they were good but the person registering the signatures wasn't a registered voter (e.g. underage) they were invalid.<ref name=hardball>Griffin, Drew & Johnston, Kathleen (2008, May 29). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2008-05-29/politics/obamas.first.campaign_1_obama-campaign-barack-obama-chicago-politics?_s=PM:POLITICS Obama Played Hardball in First Chicago Campaign]." ''CNN''.</ref> Palmer had according to Obama campaign consult Ronald Davis, used two children to help gather her petition signatures. To this day Palmer denies the challenges were valid, and maintains she could have overcome the objections with more time and resources.<ref name=bareknuckle /> Thanks to his lawyers, Obama would win the election without a single other candidate on the ballot.

===2000 Election===
: ''Main Article: [[Illinois 1st congressional district election, 2000]]''
In 2000, Obama lost his only political election when he chose to run against experienced incumbent and former [[Black Panther]] and Bobby L. Rush for the U.S. Congress in a 65% black district. Rush's name recognition began at 90%, Obama's at 11%. Michelle Obama opposed taking on an such an iconic figure dear to the community and threatened divorce.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2145035/Michelle-Obama-prepared-divorce-papers-separate-Barack-leaving-suicidal.html New book claims Michelle Obama prepared divorce papers to separate from Barack], By Daniel Bates, 16 May 2012. dailymail.co.uk</ref> Establishment Democrats considered Obama "a white man in blackface".<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/choice-2012/transcript-29/ PBS Frontline Transcript, The Choice 2012.</ref> Rush said of Obama, “He went to Harvard and became an educated fool,” adding, “We’re not impressed with these folks with these eastern elite degrees.”<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/28/bobby-rush-in-2000-obamas-a-harvard-educated-fool-who-thinks-he-knows-all-about-the-civil-rights-protests/ Bobby Rush in 2000: Obama a Harvard ‘educated fool’ who ‘thinks he knows all about’ the ‘civil rights protests’], Daily Caller, 03/28/2012.</ref>Todd Spivak would give voice to this impression of Obama, noting that{{cquote|"My view of Obama then wasn't all that different from the image he projects now....One thing I can say is, I never heard him launch into the preacher-man voice he now employs during speeches. He sounded vanilla, and activists in his mostly black district often chided him for it."<ref name=spivak />}}Rush would go on to win the Primary with 61.02% of the vote; Obama received 30.36%.<ref name=streetwise /> The loss led to Obama considering dropping out of politics altogether, particularly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, since his name sounds similar to "Osama bin Laden".<ref name=msnbc />

===State Senate Voting Record===
[[File:O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson.jpg|right|thumb|250px| Obama speaking at the October 2002 [[War on Terror|anti-War rally]] in Chicago organized by [[Carl Davidson]].<ref>Davidson is a longtime [[Mao]]ist and champion of the ''Thought of Mao Tse Tung.'' Davidson's anti-Trotskyite polemic, [http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=10925 ''Left in Form, Right in Essence''] defends Maoist doctrine. </ref> Unlike Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, Obama took the rather unpopular position against "dumb wars".]]
Obama entered the Illinois Senate promising change to a corrupt system. He mixed often radical votes with more pragmatic agreements. Possibly one of his most radical votes was against requiring medical care for aborted children who survive [[abortion|the procedure]] - in fact the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council ascribed him a 100% rating for his consistently pro-choice votes.<ref name="cbs illinois">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml|title=Obama Record May Be Gold Mine For Critics|work=CBS|format=HTML|language=English|last=Clark|first=Amy S.|date=Jan. 17, 2007}}</ref> He was criticized for using the statehouse as a stepping stone for a more illustrious career: Steven J. Rauschenberger, a [[Republican]], said prior to Obama's election as president: “He is a very bright but very ambitious person who has always had his eyes on the prize, and it wasn’t Springfield. If he deserves to be president, it is not because he was a great legislator.”<ref name="nyt illinois">{{cite web|work=The New York Times|title=In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd|last=Scott|first=Janny|format=HTML|language=English|date=July 30, 2007|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.html}}</ref>

The statehouse was majority Republican, so the Senator was sometimes forced to compromise. He formed allegiances across party lines to pass [[campaign finance]] reform that banned most gifts by lobbyists, prohibited spending campaign money for legislators’ personal use and required electronic filing of campaign disclosure reports.<ref name="nyt illinois"/> Obama also helped pass a so-called “driving-while-black bill”, which required the police to collect data on the race of drivers they stopped as a way to monitor [[racial profiling]].<ref name="nyt illinois"/>

Obama established himself as a chief spokesperson in opposition to the [[War on Terror]] during an October 2002 rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago<ref>The rally was organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq (CAWI) later renamed Chicagoans Against War and Injustice. [http://www.noiraqwar-chicago.org/?page_id=2 About CAWI] by Carl Davidson, Nov 02 2006. Retrieved from Chicagoans Against War and Injustice, March 15, 2010.</ref> [[community organizing|organized]] by veteran [[Mao]]ist and webmaster of [[Progressives for Obama]],<ref>[http://www.linkedin.com/in/carldavidson Carl Davidson,] LinkedIn.com, retrieved March 13, 2010.</ref> [[Carl Davidson]].

===2003 Emil Jones Deal===
: ''Main Article: [[2003 Barack Obama deal with Emil Jones]]''
When Illinois' U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald announced he would be retiring in April 2003, Obama jumped at the opportunity, declaring that he would be a candidate for the U.S. Senate in 2004.<ref name=msnbc /> To boost his chances Obama approached the newly crowned president of the Illinois Senate, Emil Jones Jr., with a proposal. According to Jones, whom Obama has since called his "godfather"<ref name=godfather>''Associated Press'' (2009, June 18). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-3983147.html Obama's Political 'Godfather' In Illinois]."</ref> the conversation went as follows:
{{cquote|"After I was elected president, in 2003, he came to see me, a couple months later. And he said to me, he said, ‘You’re the senate president now, and with that, you have a lot of pow-er.’ And I told Barack, ‘You think I got a lot of pow-er now?,’ and he said, ‘Yeah, you got a lot of pow-er.’ And I said, ‘What kind of pow-er do I have?’ He said, ‘You have the pow-er to make a United States sen-a-tor!’ I said to Barack, I said, ‘That sounds good!’ I said, ‘I haven’t even thought of that.’ I said, ‘Do you have someone in mind you think I could make?,’ and he said, ‘Yeah. Me.’ "<ref name=raisingobama /><ref name=pragmatic />}}
Because of the deal, Obama's entire Illinois Senate legislative record was, as longtime Obama reporter Todd Spivak put it, built in a single year. During his 7th and final year in the Illinois Senate, Obama sponsored an incredible 26 bills into law, including many he now points to when criticized as inexperienced<ref name=spivak /> - as ''CNN's'' Suzanne Malveaux observed, "With help from on high, Obama got his name on hundreds of bills that he pushed through."<ref name=revealed /> Jones not only had Obama craft legislation addressing daily tragedies to raise his political profile<ref name=godfather />, he also appointed Obama head of almost all high-profile legislation in the Illinois Senate, angering other state legislators with more seniority who'd spent years supporting the bills.<ref name=spivak /> Illinois State Senator Rickey Hendon, the original sponsor of the famous racial profiling bill requiring videotaped confessions in police interrogations, complained bitterly about Jones' decision.<ref name=revealed /><ref name=intheblack>Spivak, Todd (2004, March 25). "[http://www.illinoistimes.com/Springfield/article-922-in-the-black.html In the Black]." ''Illinois Times''.</ref> Jones' influence had a major impact on Obama's chances in the 2004 elections, preventing major political players from backing Obama's opponents. To quote Emil Jones,{{cquote|"He knew if he had me in the run for the Senate, it would put a block on the current mayor. The current mayor and the father of the controller, which was Dan Hynes, they were roommates in Springfield when the mayor was a state senator, so they had a relationship. Another big financial backer for the governor was Blair Hull. Barack knew if he had me it would checkmate the governor, ’cause the governor couldn’t come out and go with Blair Hull, ’cause the governor needs me. Same with the mayor. So he had analyzed and figured all of that out. He knew I could help him with labor support. And I could put a checkmate on some of the local politicians that didn’t know him, but they couldn’t really go against me."
-Emil Jones<ref name=raisingobama />}}

==2004-2008, U.S. Senate==
:''See also: [[Early_life_and_career_of_Barack_Hussein_Obama#U.S._Senate_.282004-2008.29|Barack Obama:U.S. Senate (2004-2008)]], [[United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004]]''
[[Image:obama.jpg|thumb|left|Senator Barack Obama]]
===2004 Primary Election===
Despite initially trailing in the polls to frontrunner [[Blair Hull]]<ref name=intheblack />, Obama greatly benefited from what the ''Chicago Tribune'' called "the most inglorious campaign implosion in Illinois political history"<ref name=mendell>Mendell, David (2004, March 17). "[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-03-17/news/0403170332_1_blair-hull-gery-chico-blacks-and-liberal-whites Obama Routs Democratic Foes]." ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref> when pressure from journalists and opposing candidates, just weeks before the election, forced the unsealing of Hull's messy divorce files.<ref name=blairhull>Voegeli, William (2004, March 19). "[http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.339/pub_detail.asp The Rise and Fall of Blair Hull]." ''The Claremont Institute''.</ref> The files revealed Hull's ex-wife's accusations of verbal and physical abuse.<ref name=spivak /> Hull would afterwards criticize the media, stating, "As for the press, I will never read the newspaper the same way again."<ref name=mendell /> Obama would go on to win the Primary with 53% of the vote.<ref name=blairhull /> Obama's unexpected victory led to him being termed a "rising star" by the media.<ref>Howlett, Debbie (2004, March 18). "[http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-03-18-obama-usat_x.htm Dems See a Rising Star in Illinois Senate Candidate]." ''USA Today''.</ref>
===2004 General Election, Jack Ryan===
Once again Obama found himself trailing to popular frontrunner [[Jack Ryan]], and once again a candidate's campaign imploded thanks to media intervention. In an unprecedented move, the ''Chicago Tribune'' and local TV station WLS sued to force the unsealing of Ryan's divorce files, despite opposition from both Ryan and his wife, Jeri Ryan, who in the files accused Jack Ryan of trying to coerce her to perform sex acts in public. Though Ryan advisors told him he could still win if using a negative attack on Obama, Ryan refused to engage in what he considered dirty politics.<ref name=abandon>''Associated Press'' (2004, June 26). "[http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/state/2004-06-25-ryan_x.htm Jack Ryan Abandons Senate Bid]."</ref> Ryan then dropped out of the race (per request by the Illinois GOP<ref name=idealist>Sangwan, Rahul (2004, October 1). "[http://www.dartmouthindependent.com/archives/2004/10/jack_ryan_81_th.html Jack Ryan '81: The Conservative Idealist]." ''Dartmouth Independent''.</ref>), following which the Illinois GOP scrambled to find a replacement, leaving Obama uncontested for weeks to campaign and build up public support. On top of all this, Obama was selected to give the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention (July 27<ref>''Washington Post'' (2004, June 26). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html Illinois Senate Candidate Barack Obama]."</ref>), catapulting him into the national spotlight, and leading to further media publicity terming him a "rising star".<ref>Page, Susan & Despoignes, Peronet (2004, July 28). "[http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-07-28-obama-speech_x.htm Rising Star Brings Democrats to Their Feet]." ''USA Today''.</ref>
===2004 General Election, Alan Keyes===
: ''Main Article: [[Obama born alive controversy]]''
After a number of candidates including former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka declined to run<ref>''CNN'' (2004, August 9). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2004-08-09/politics/il.keyes_1_senate-candidate-senate-race-illinois-senate?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS Keyes Challenges Obama for Illinois Senate Seat]."</ref>, the Illinois GOP finally settled on fiery [[Alan Keyes]], a former Ambassador to the Economic and Social Counsel of the United Nations<ref name=spivak />, with less than 3 months left before the November 2004 election.<ref name=msnbc /> His sudden entrance into the state for the election was initially attacked in the press as "carpetbagging".<ref>''Chicago Tribune''. "[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-08-06/news/0408060313_1_mr-keyes-judy-baar-topinka-alan-keyes The GOP's Rent-A-Senator]." ''Washington Post'' (2004, August 9). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50885-2004Aug8.html Mr. Keyes the Carpetbagger].</ref><ref name=pearson>Pearson, Rick (2004, September 5). "[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-09-05/news/0409050304_1_selfish-hedonist-alan-keyes-illinois-republican-party Keyes, State GOP Gearing Up Blame Campaign]." ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref> Keyes repeatedly claimed his primary motivation for entering a race he had seemingly no chance of winning was his disgust at Obama's votes on the popular [[Born Alive]] bills.<ref>Keyes, Alan (2004, August 18). "[http://www.mail-archive.com/newsandviews@chuckmuth.com/msg00699.html How You Can Help Alan Keyes for Senate!]." ''Keyes2004 Inc.''</ref> Keyes, from his first day of arriving in Illinois (August 9, 2004)<ref name=assails>''Associated Press'' (2004, August 9). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5654128/ Keyes Assails Obama's Abortion Views]."</ref>, accused Obama of having voted against bills mandating medical care for newborn children, and supporting "infanticide" (the term twice used in the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act<ref>''United States Congress'' (2003, March 13). "[http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/abortion/2003s3.html S.3: Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003]."</ref>) where hospitals left newborn infants to die like garbage.<ref>Smiley, Tavis (2004, August 31). "[http://www.keyesarchives.com/transcript.php?id=341 Alan Keyes on the Tavis Smiley Show]." ''NPR''. ''CBS2 Chicago'' (2004, August 30). "[http://www.keyesarchives.com/transcript.php?id=337 Alan Keyes on CBS2 Chicago This Morning]." This Morning.</ref> Obama in a debate on October 13, 2004, defended himself against Keyes' accusations of infanticide by claiming that Illinois law was already sufficient.<ref>''Chicago Tribune'' (2004, October 13). "[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-10-13/news/0410140004_1_alan-keyes-senate-race-first-of-three-debates Debate or Discussion?]"</ref>

However, Keyes' rhetoric, calling Obama's votes "the slaveholder's position"<ref name=assails /> and saying "Jesus Christ would not vote for Obama"<ref>Thomas, Scott (2004, September 7). "[http://www.keyesarchives.com/transcript.php?id=348 Alan Keyes on the Scott Thomas Show (AM1160 - WYLL)]." ''Scott Thomas Show''. Chicago, Illinois.</ref> was widely ridiculed by the press. Keyes' unabashed criticism of homosexuality as "selfish hedonism" was also targeted.<ref name=pearson /><ref>''Associated Press''. "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5897569/ Keyes: Cheney's Gay Daughter Practicing Selfish Hedonism]." Pallasch, Abdom M. (2004, September 2). "[http://web.archive.org/web/20071017122135/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20040902/ai_n12560727 Topinka Says He Should Apologize for 'Idiotic' Comment]." ''Chicago Sun-Times''.</ref> Obama would ultimately win the election, 70% to 27%.<ref>''CNN.com''. "[http://cnn.hu/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/IL/S/01/index.html Election Results: U.S. Senate/Illinois]." Election 2004.</ref>

===U.S. Senate Voting Record===
Obama's incomplete term in the U.S. Senate was largely unoteworthy. In voting against raising the [[debt limit]] in 2006 Obama famously said, "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit."<ref>''Washington Post'' FACT CHECKER, [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/annotating-obamas-2006-speech-against-boosting-the-debt-limit/2013/01/14/aa8cf8c4-5e9b-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_blog.html Annotating Obama’s 2006 speech against boosting the debt limit], Glenn Kessler, 01/15/2013.</ref><ref>Kaplan, R. (2011, April 11). [http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/obama-once-opposed-debt-ceiling-hike/237129/ Obama Once Opposed Debt Ceiling Hike]. ''The Atlantic''.</ref> In 2008 as candidate for president Obama called George W. Bush's request to raise the debt limit "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic".<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q Obama says adding $4 trillion to debt is unpatriotic.] Youtbue.</ref>

The ''National Journal'' ranked him the most liberal senator in 2007.<ref name="ranked">{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502163_162-3775451-502163.html|title=National Journal: Obama Most Liberal Senator In 2007|author=Brian Montopoli|date=January 31, 2008|work=CBS}}</ref>

Obama frequently used the [[filibuster]] to obstruct the operations of government,<ref>O'Keefe, E. (2010, February 4). [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303801_pf.html Obama criticizes Senate Republicans for delaying confirmation votes]. ''The Washington Post''.</ref> and voted against the [[minimum wage]] bill<ref>[http://uspolitics.about.com/od/legislatio1/a/HR2206.htm HR 2206 - Emergency Appropriations], Kathy Gill, Your Guide to U.S. Politics: Current Events. May 26 2007. [http://more.gov.mtopgroup.com/2007/05/votes-hr-2206-iraq-supplemental.html Votes - H.R. 2206: Iraq Supplemental], May 28, 2007. Retrieved from Deeper Inside the Mountain, June 4, 2007.</ref> he introduced because it included a provision to pay active duty U.S. troops. He voted for the $700 billion TARP program to bailout the big banks after receiving more than $120,000 in contributions from [[Fannie Mae]], a government sponsored entity<ref>more than any other political candidate for office since 1989. [http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers], By Lindsay Renick Mayer, September 11, 2008. opensecrets.org</ref> taken into conservatorship for mismanaging its affairs and responsible for all the big bank's problems.

According to Opensecrets.org, of the 671,269 contributions to Obama during his time in the Senate, [[Goldman Sachs]], JP Morgan, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley were among the top 20 biggest money donors to his campaigns. [http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00009638&cycle=2008][http://www.votesmart.org/finance.php?can_id=9490] All four subsequently received approximately $70 billion in taxpayer assisted [[bailout]] money from the [[TARP]] program he voted for.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/10/14/business/14bailout.graphic2.html ''Beneficiary Banks'', New York Times. 2008-10-14.]</ref> UBS AG, a foreign bank and the 12th largest donor to Obama,<ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638</ref> was fined $780 billion in February 2009 in a U.S. Federal Court on charges it helped thousands of Americans evade taxes.<ref>[http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20090219/FREE/902199983 ''UBS fined $780 million in tax evasion scandal,''] Investment News, February 19, 2009.</ref>

==2008 Presidential Election==
{{main article|Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign}}
Unlike Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, Obama's hands were not stained with a vote for the Iraqi war resolution, as he was not in the Senate at the time; a minority of Democrats who wanted to punish candidates for exhibiting [[bi-partisan]]ship began calling for his candidacy after liberals lauded his 2004 [[Democratic National Convention]] speech.
====Primary Election====
In 2007-08, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton competed for the Democratic nomination. Hillary Clinton cleverly resurrected the "Born Alive" controversy surrounding Obama that had lain largely dormant since 2004 (notwithstanding the continuing mentions by Jill Stanek), by accusing Obama of not being pro-choice for voting "Present" on a number of abortion-related bills<ref>Bettelheim, Adriel (2008, February 13). "[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/feb/13/obamas-present-tension/ Obama's 'Present' Tension]." ''PolitiFact''.</ref> - including the Born Alive ones,<ref name=clinton>Berman, Russell (2008, January 17). "[http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-obama-should-vote-no-on-abortion-issue/69700/ Clinton: Obama Should Vote 'No' On Abortion Issue She Backed]." ''New York Sun''. Hernandez, Raymond & Drew, Christopher (2007, December 20). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?pagewanted=all It's Not Just 'Ayes' and 'Nays': Obama's Votes in Illinois Echo]." ''New York Times''.</ref> and cowardly ducking the votes.<ref>''Politi-Fact''. "[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/feb/13/hillary-clinton/yes-but-its-complicated/ Response to Hillary Clinton Comment for January 21st, 2008]." Truth-o-Meter. Dorning, Mike (2007, December 20). "[http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/12/criticism_of_obama_present_vot.html Clinton Camp Criticizes Obama 'Present' Votes]." The Swamp. ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref> This led to criticism of Obama by two pro-choice organizations, Emily's List, and the National Organization for Women.<ref>Dorning, Mike (2008, January 14). "[http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/obama_campaign_mounts_defense.html The Swamp: Obama Campaign Defends His Abortion-Rights Record]." ''Chicago Tribune''. Dorn, Michael (2008, February 6). "[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_voting_record_on_aborti_1.html Obama's Voting Record on Abortion]." ''Washington Post''. Newton-Small, Jay (2008, January 14). "[http://swampland.time.com/2008/01/14/obama_campaign_defends_present/ Obama Campaign Defends 'Present' Abortion Votes]." ''Time Magazine''.</ref> However, Pam Sutherland, the long-time head of Illinois Planned Parenthood, came to Obama's aid, criticizing Clinton for making the attack, and stating repeatedly that Obama's present votes were part of a broader strategy used by Planned Parenthood to keep Illinois voters from knowing their state senators were voting against the controversial and popular bills.<ref>Hernandez, Raymond & Drew, Christopher (2007, December 20). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20cnd-obama.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin Obama's Vote in Illinois Was Often Just 'Present']." ''New York Times''. Follmer, Max (2008, March 28). "[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/14/obama-emphasizes-prochoic_n_81460.html Obama Emphasizes Pro-Choice Voting Record as Clinton Questions 'Present' Votes]." ''Huffington Post''.</ref>
{{cquote|"He came to me and said: ‘My members are being attacked. We need to figure out a way to protect members and to protect women. A ‘present’ vote was hard to pigeonhole which is exactly what Obama wanted. What it did was give cover to moderate Democrats who wanted to vote with us but were afraid to do so" because of how their votes would be used against them electorally. A ‘present’ vote would protect them. Your senator voted ‘present.’ Most of the electorate is not going to know what that means."
-Pam Sutherland, President/CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, 1980-2012<ref>Davis, Teddy (2007, July 17). "[http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2007/07/obama-abortion/ Obama Abortion Dodges Blessed by Planned Parenthood], ''ABC News''.</ref>}}As the contest in Iowa drew near and the former First Lady's inevitability was being usurped by a challenger, Hillary Clinton organizers began circulating rumors that Obama was secretly a Muslim.<ref>[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/barackemail/ Obama Under the Clinton Microscope], By JEFF ZELENY, ''New York Times'', December 10, 2007; [http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/06/clinton-volunteers-anti-obama-e-mail-causes-stir/ Clinton volunteer's sending of anti-Obama e-mail causes stir]. December 6, 2007. CNN; [http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=92143 Hillary Clinton Press Release - Sen. Obama Rewrites History], December 2, 2007, references Obama in the Muslim school in Indonesia in 3rd grade, quoting the ''The Los Angeles Times'', 3/15/07; [http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/americas/article1995587.ece Obama ‘was educated in madrassa’], Tim Reid and Tom Baldwin, ''The Times'' (London), January 20, 2007.</ref> Clinton also made the claim repeatedly that while Obama was leading in Delegates she was winning the Popular Vote<ref>Koffler, Daniel (2008, May 28). "[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-koffler/hillary-clinton-and-the-p_b_103913.html Hillary Clinton and the Popular Vote: Not Wrong, but Meaningless]." ''Huffington Post''. Barone, Michael (2008, March 28). "[http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/barone/2008/03/28/projection-clinton-wins-popular-vote-obama-wins-delegate-count Projection: Clinton Wins Popular Vote, Obama Wins Delegate Vote]." ''U.S. News''.</ref>, though this was in part because Obama hadn't been registered in Michigan.<ref>Romano, Andrew (2008, August 2). "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/blogs/stumper/2008/06/02/clinton-s-popular-vote-claim-close-but-not-quite.html Clinton's Popular Vote Claim? Close--But Not Quite*]." ''Newsweek''. ''RealClearPolitics''. "[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html 2008 Democratic Popular Vote]."</ref> Obama's advantage with super-delegates over Clinton was about 2-to-1.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Superdelegate endorsements for Friday 6/6|work=Democratic Convention Watch|url=http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/06/superdelegate-endorsements-for-friday.html}}</ref> Obama was able to attract the support of [[liberals]] by pointing out that he had come out against the [[Iraq War]] "from the beginning" whereas Clinton had voted in favor of the war in 2002.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-31-democrats-debate_N.htm|title=Obama, Clinton stress differences on Iraq, issues|author=David Jackson|work=USA Today|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> On June 7, 2008, Hillary Clinton withdrew from the Primaries, conceding the race and endorsing her opponent<ref>''Associated Press''. "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24993082/ns/politics-decision_08/t/clinton-ends-historic-bid-endorses-obama/ Clinton Ends Historic Bid, Endorses Obama]."</ref>, when Obama passed the 2,118 Delegates required; winning 2,201 delegates to Clinton's 1,896.<ref>''CNN''. "[http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D Election Center 2008].</ref>

====Born Alive Record Resurfaces====
On June 30, 2008, Obama's voting record on the "Born Alive" bills came once more to the forefront when CNN gave voice to the growing controversy and revealed the defense Obama had been using since 2004-2008, that the Illinois bills he'd voted against were different from the federal bill, was false, since he'd brought up for a vote a bill word for word identical to the federal bill in the Health and Human Services Committee he chaired, and voted against it, defeating it.<ref>''CNN''. "[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY How He Really Voted on Abortion: Obama's Record Under Attack]." ''The Situation Room''. Uploaded to ''YouTube'' by Jill Stanek. ''CNN''. "[http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0806/30/sitroom.02.html Transcripts: June 30, 2008]." The Situation Room.</ref> This led in August to a confrontation between Obama and the [[NRLC]].<ref>''National Right to Life Committee''. "[http://www.nrlc.org/news/2008/NRL08/ObamaCoverup.html Obama Cover-up Revealed on Born-Alive Abortion Survivor's Bill]." NRL News, Vol. 35, Issue 7-8, pg. 5.</ref> After Obama accused critics of 'lying'<ref>Brody, David (2008, August 16). "[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skq5M1Ksp_c McCain/Obama Forum]." ''CNN''. Uploaded to ''YouTube'' by Jill Stanek. David Brody (August 16, 2008). "[http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2008/08/16/obama-gets-heated-on-born-alive-infant-protection-act.aspx Obama Gets Heated on Born Alive Infant Protection Act]." ''CBN News''. The Brody File.</ref> the NRLC challenged the assertion, and the Obama campaign conceded he "misspoke" and had voted against an identical bill to the "federal bill that everybody supported" but focused on Obama's new claim, that Illinois law was already sufficient to protect newborn children.<ref>Berman, Russell (2008, August 18). "[http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-facing-attacks-from-all-sides-over-abortion/84059/ Obama Facing Attacks From All Sides Over Abortion Record]." ''New York Sun''.</ref> The NRLC promptly declared "Senator Barack Obama's four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions continues to unravel."<ref>Johnson, Douglas (2008, August 18). "[http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/Obamacoveruponbornalive.htm Obama Cover-up on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Continues to Unravel After Sen. Obama Says NRLC is 'Lying']." ''National Right to Life Committee''.</ref>
====Jeremiah Wright====
:''See also: [[Barack Obama and Liberation Theology]]''
One major dilemma that arose for Obama during his campaign was his connection to his preacher [[Jeremiah Wright]]. Obama and his wife (raised a Baptist) were members of the Trinity [[United Church of Christ]]<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776246/posts</ref> in Chicago, a church that embraced [[black liberation theology]] and its emphasis on empowering so-called "oppressed groups" against "establishment forces". This denomination was the first in America to ordain gays as ministers.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31079.html, Obama's church pushes controversial doctrines, March 20, 2008</ref> Church pastor Jeremiah Wright had been making inflammatory comments and posting his sermons online for sale. These include the statement "G-d damn America," and in describing the September 11th attacks, "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4443788 Obama's Pastor: G-d Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11]</ref> In addition, Rev. Wright blamed America saying "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being [[anti-Semitic]]."

In April 2008, after 20 years in the church, candidate Obama made public statements poised to set him at odds with the man who conducted his wedding and baptized his children. With the negative publicity persisting, a month later Obama ended the friendship, left Wright's church, and blamed the media.<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/31/obama-resigns-church-membership-in-chicago/], Obama Drops Church Membership in Chicago, May 31, 2008</ref> Obama claimed “It’s not fair to the other members of the church who seek to worship in peace...", and distanced himself from Wright's sermons as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth."<ref>USA TODAY, ''Obama breaks with former pastor, Candidate cites rants on U.S. role in terror, AIDS'', by Kathy Kiely and David Jackson [http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080430/1a_offlede30_dom.art.htm]</ref><ref>''Obama Says He Is Outraged By Wright's "Rants"''[http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080430.htm]</ref>

====Result====
Obama made an effort to portray John McCain as similar to George W. Bush, drawing attention to McCain's refusal to criticize the unpopular president. McCain was particularly criticized for saying of how many years we should be willing to stay in Iraq, "Make it a hundred."<ref>Dobbs, Michael (2008, April 2). "[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/mccains_100year_war.html FactChecker: McCain's '100-Year War']." ''Washington Post''.</ref>{{cquote|"John McCain went on television and said that there has been great progress economically over the last seven-and-a-half years. John McCain thinks our economy has made great progress under George W. Bush? How could somebody who has been traveling across this country, somebody who came to Erie, Pennsylvania, say we’ve made great progress?"
-Barack Obama<ref>Zeleny, Jeff (2008, April 18). "[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/obama-criticizes-mccain-on-economic-stance/ Obama Criticizes McCain on Economic Stance]." ''New York Times''.</ref>}} On August 22nd, Obama selected [[Joe Biden]] as his running mate for the vice presidency<ref>''CNN'' (2008, August 23). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2008-08-23/politics/biden.democrat.vp.candidate_1_biden-john-mccain-barack-obama?_s=PM:POLITICS Obama Introduces Biden as Running Mate]."</ref>, which would be contrasted one week later with John McCain's selection of [[Sarah Palin]].<ref>Cooper, Michael & Bumiller, Elisabeth (2008, August 29). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/us/politics/29palin.html?pagewanted=all Alaskan is McCain's Choice; First Woman on G.O.P. Ticket]. ''New York Times''.</ref>

On November 2, 2008, Barack Obama won the presidential election with 365 electoral votes to John McCain's 173.<ref>(2008, November 14). "[http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/explorer.html Electoral Explorer]." Election Results 2008. ''New York Times''.</ref> Obama received 53% of the popular vote to John McCain's 46%.<ref>(2008, November 17). "[http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/ President]." Election Center 2008. ''CNN''.</ref>

==2009-2013, U.S. Presidency==
{{main article|Obama administration}}
[[File:Obama and George H. W. Bush.jpg|thumb|right|300px|President Barack Obama meets with former President George H. W. Bush in the Oval Office, Feb. 15, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza).]]
Five years into Obama's presidency the number of people holding jobs still was 3 million below the all time high of 138 million<ref>The effectiveness of [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009|Stimulus]] and deficits: [http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?graph_id=112811 Job growth under President Obama's first term;] Source: United States Department of Labor.</ref> workers - despite an increase of 10 million people in population over the same period of time.<ref>[https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?graph_id=112809 U.S. Population growth during Obama's first four years in office.] Source: U.S. Census Bureau.</ref> Under Obama and Senate Democrats<ref>The Democratic controlled Senate did not propose, vote on, or pass a budget for nearly five years. [http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/23/politics/senate-budget-bill/index.html Senate passes its first budget proposal in four years,] Ted Barrett and Alison Harding, CNN, March 23, 2013.</ref> budget management, the United States suffered its largest [[Federal budget deficit|deficit]]s<ref>Edwards, B. et. al. (2009, November 6). [http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10708/11-06-mbr.htm Monthly Budget Review: Fiscal Year 2009]. ''Congressional Budget Office''. Delisle, E.C. et. al. (2010, November 5). [http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/118xx/doc11873/NovemberMBR.pdf Monthly Budget Review: Fiscal Year 2010]. ''Congressional Budget Office''.</ref> in history and its credit-worthiness downgraded from Standard & Poors. Obama assured Americans that unemployment would not rise above 8% if his [[economic stimulus]] program was adopted, however it rose and stagnated in the 8-10% range<ref>Di Leo, L & Lynch, S.N. (2010, August 20). [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704476104575439172480870774.html Jobless Claims Jump in New Sign Recovery is Sputtering]. ''The Wall Street Journal''.</ref><ref>Bureau of Labor Statistics. [http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS11300000&years_option=specific_years&include_graphs=true&to_month=1&from_month=2 Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject: Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey]. ''United States Department of Labor''. Data extracted on: July 19, 2010 (4:31:11 PM).</ref> for the entirety of his first term.

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen, writing in the [[Wall Street Journal]], noted, "Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship." The commentators also note Obama's approach to governance has encouraged radical leftists to pursue a similar strategy on his behalf. Mary Frances Berry, former head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, acknowledged that the [[Obama administration]] has taken to polarizing America around the issue of race as a means of diverting attention from other issues, saying, "Having one's opponent [[race card|rebut charges of racism]] is far better than discussing [[Unemployment|joblessness]]."<ref>Berry, M.F. (2010, July 20). [http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Mary_Frances_Berry_91E3D9D5-C40D-440C-9D48-1C50CBC60C87.html Energy Arena, Driving the Conversation: Contracting Out U.S. Security? And will Branding Tea Party Racist Work?] ''Politico''.</ref> Caddell and Schoen, who worked for President Carter and Clinton, respectively, further stated, "Mr. Obama has also cynically [[class warfare|divided the country on class lines]]. He has taken to playing the populist card time and time again. He bashes Wall Street and insurance companies whenever convenient to advance his programs, yet he has been eager to accept campaign contributions and negotiate with these very same banks and [[corporation]]s behind closed doors in order to advance his political agenda... President Obama's divisive approach to governance has weakened us as a people and paralyzed our political culture."<ref>Caddell, P.H. & Schoen, D.E. (2010, July 28). [http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748703700904575391553798363586.html Our Divisive President]. ''The Wall Street Journal''.</ref>
===Domestic policy===
====Economic policy====
[[File:Keynes.jpg|thumbnail|right|190px|[[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of discredited [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]]<ref>
*[http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/fabian-john-maynard-keynes-the-stealthy-enemy-of-human-freedom/ John Maynard Keynes the stealthy enemy of human freedom]
*[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-02-22/deathbed-of-keynesian-economics-will-be-in-u-k-matthew-lynn.html Deathbed of Keynesian Economics will be in the UK]
*[http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/show/23102.html Will the G8 Repudiate the Philosophy of Living Beyond Our Means?]
*[http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html KEYNES AT HARVARD Economic Deception as a Political Credo BY ZYGMUND DOBBS]
</ref> ]]
{{see also|Obamunism|American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009}}
Critics of the Obama administration have coined the word "[[Obamunism]]" to describe Barack Obama's [[socialism|socialistic]] and "[[fascism]] light" [[economic planning]] policies.<ref>[[Benito Mussolini]] defined fascism as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] labels [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|Obama's corporate bailouts]] as being "fascism light" in nature.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/daily-intel/2009/07/20/obamunism-inc|work=The Big Money|publisher=WashingtonPost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obamunism, Inc.|author=David Sessions|date=July 20, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/gerald-celente-6944|author=Jim Blasingame|title=Is the government creating a bailout bubble?}}</ref> Obamunism can also refer to Obama's [[Obama administration fiscal policy|ruinous fiscal policies]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|reckless monetary policies]].<ref name="gerard">{{cite web|url=http://seekingalpha.com/article/120883-monetary-policynot-obama-s-stimulusis-what-needs-watching|title=Monetary Policy-Not Obama's Stimulus-Is What Needs Watching|author=Gerard Jackson|date=February 16, 2009|work=Seeking Alpha}}</ref><ref name="bam">{{cite web|work=New York Post|date=May 17, 2009|url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/editorials/bams_wise_words_169731.htm|title=BAM'S WISE WORDS}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/|title=Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures|work=The Foundry|publisher=The Heritage Foundation|author=Conn Carroll|date=March 24th, 2009}}</ref> As seen in his own actions, Barack Obama instructed his advisors to find loopholes that would enable the president to act as a [[dictator]] by pushing through legislation and increases in spending without congressional authority.<ref>Naked Emperor News (2011, October 12). [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/executive-dictatorship-obama-instructs-advisers-to-push-through-stimulus-projects-without-pesky-congressional-authorization/ Exclusive Dictatorship: Obama Instructs Advisors to Push Through Stimulus Projects Without Pesky 'Congressional Authorization']. ''The Blaze''.</ref>

Nevertheless, budgets passed under President Obama have included the smallest average annualized growth of federal spending (1.4%) since before President Reagan. Federal spending grew an average of 8.7% per year during Reagan's first term and an average of 8.1% per year during George W. Bush's second term.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/|title=Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?|publisher=Forbes|author=Rick Ungar|date=May 24th, 2012}}</ref>

[[Wall Street]] firms and banks that were bailed out were among Obama's biggest campaign supporters.<ref>''OpenSecrets.org''. [http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638 Barack Obama: Top Contributors]. The Center for Responsive Politics.</ref> Therefore, the Obama administration bailouts of corrupt, unproductive, and reckless Wall Street firms was hardly surprising, and many argue that it was not helpful in making the United States economy more productive and prosperous by encouraging more risk taking through letting banks off with a slap on the wrist. Others argue that bailing out the banks kept credit flowing and prevented a much deeper recession and a total collapse of the financial system. The government will recoup some though not all of its capital infusions over time. A 2005 study found that government corporate bailouts are often done for mere political considerations and the economic resources allocated exhibit significantly worse economic performance than resources allocated using purely business considerations.<ref>Faccio, M. et. al. (2005, March 1). [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=676905 Political Connections and Corporate Bailouts]. ''Social Science Research Network''.</ref> Proponents of [[free market]] capitalism said Bernanke should not have bailed out failing firms and instead should have allowed free market capitalism to quickly recover as it did in the depression of 1920 without government intervention (free market capitalists assert that government intervention drags out economic recessions and depressions).<ref>Woods, T.E. (2009, April 10). [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czcUmnsprQI Why You've Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920]. ''Ludwig Von Mises Institute''. Hosted on ''YouTube''.</ref>

Top trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] predicts that the corrupt economic policies of the Obama administration will lead to a second [[Great Depression|great depression]] (Celente predicted the 1987 US stock market crash, the dot.com crash, the US 2008/2009 recession, and the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s) and may lead to a "second [[American Revolution]]" (Celente predicted the [[Tea Party Movement|tax protests]] that are now occurring in America).<ref name="celente1">Celente, G. (2009, August 1). [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MMX3SKzrfU&feature=channel_page pt 2/2 Gerald Celente on Financial Sense Newshour Aug 1st 2009]. ''Financial Sense Newshour''. Hosted on ''YouTube''.</ref><ref name="celente2">Celente, G. (2009, August 2). [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9bfw1ebgw&feature=response_watch ]. ''Financial Sense Newshour''. Hosted on ''YouTube''.</ref> Celente also asserts that the costly and inefficient temporary short term methods that the Obama administration is using to alleviate economic problems in the short term (which is causing massive increases in [[Obama administration deficit spending]]) is only making matters worse and will not prevent the worse economic depression in United States history from occurring.<ref>Celente, G. (2009, August 11). [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C8K7rWkGGw pt 1/2 Gerald Celente on Howestreet.com 11 Aug 2009]. ''HoweStreet.com''. Hosted on ''YouTube''.</ref><ref>Celente, G. (2009, August 11). [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LBffdIW0XA&feature=response_watch pt 2/2 Gerald Celente on Howestreet.com 11 Aug 2009]. ''HoweStreet.com''. Hosted on ''YouTube''.</ref>

The Obama administration has been sharply criticized for [[Obama administration deficit spending|its massive deficit spending]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|its reckless monetary policy]] via vast increases in the [[money supply]], although inflation under Bernanke has been below the historic mean.<ref name="gerard"/><ref name="bam"/><ref>Carroll, C. (2009, March 24). [http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/ Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures]. ''The Foundry''. The Heritage Network.</ref> Celente predicts that if a "second American Revolution" occurs in a peaceful and productive manner, it may include a [[Third Party System|third party movement]] of governance that will advocate a more [[free market]] [[capitalism]] approach to the American economy and a more strict interpretation of the [[United States Constitution|United States constitution]] as far as the authors' [[original intent]].<ref name="celente1"/><ref name="celente2"/>

During what the [[White House]] billed as [[Recovery Summer]], one half million workers per week continued losing their jobs. His signature legislative achievement, [[ObamaCare]],has been found to be [[unconstitutional]]<ref>Schoenberg, T. & Fisk, M.T. (2010, December 13). [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-13/u-s-health-care-law-requirement-thrown-out-by-judge.html Obama's Health-Care Law Ruled Unconstitutional Over Insurance Requirement]. ''Bloomberg''.</ref> by several judges and constitutional by others, and is credited as a major cause of uncertainty, high [[unemployment]],<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33220</ref> lagging job creation,<ref>Foster, J.D. (2010, August 5). [http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/05/it%E2%80%99s-official-medicare%E2%80%99s-finances-shadowed-by-uncertainty/ It’s Official: Medicare’s Finances Shadowed by Uncertainty]. ''The Foundry''. The Heritage Network.</ref> and risk of a credit default crisis.<ref>Samuelson, R.J. (2010, March 29). [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/28/AR2010032802353.html With health bill, Obama has sown the seeds of a budget crisis]. ''The Washington Post''.</ref><ref>Cramer, J. (2010, March 16). [http://www.thestreet.com/story/10703361/cramer-obamacare-will-topple-the-market.html Cramer: Obamacare Will Topple the Market]. ''The Street''.</ref>

His 2012 Budget plan has been roundly criticized in the mainstream and liberal press as not a serious effort to deal with the nation's economic crisis.<ref>[http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=blogs.view&blog_id=1551d6f5-2ac9-4b8d-97ab-74def354024e Newspapers Call Out White House: ‘What Would That Path Be, Mr. President?’]</ref>

[[Jeffrey Tucker]] wrote, "President Obama's economic policy has been catastrophic for liberty, enterprise, and the American dream—the very archetype of what not to do to end recession." [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1118186176/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=anncoulter-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1118186176]
=====Stimulus=====
:''See also: [[Recovery Summer]]''
In early 2009, Obama lobbied Congress and the public to pass a sweeping Stimulus package<ref>(2009, January 3). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28479998/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-urges-congress-pass-stimulus-plan/ Obama Urges Congress to Pass Stimulus Plan]." ''Associated Press''. Parsons, C. & Nicholas, P. (2009, February 10). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28479998/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-urges-congress-pass-stimulus-plan/ Barack Obama Sternly Urges Congress to Pass Economic Stimulus]." ''Chicago Tribune''.</ref> known as ''The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009'' (H.R. 1).<ref>"[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1: Bill Text Versions: H.R. 1]." 111th Congress (2009-2010). ''Library of Congress''. "[http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=204335,00.html The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: Information Center]." ''IRS''.</ref> The report of the Congressional Budget Office mandated by law stated that the legislation would ultimately harm the economy.<ref>Dinan, S. (2009, February 4). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/ CBO: Obama Stimulus Harmful Over Long Haul]." ''U.S. News''.</ref> Contrary to his promise of bipartisanship,<ref>Dinan, S. (2009, March 28). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/28/mccain-obama-breaks-campaign-promises-shuns-bipart/?page=all McCain: Obama Breaks Promise of Bipartisanship]." ''Washington Times''.</ref> the bill passed the House 244-188 on January 28, 2009 with 11 Democrats voting with the entire Republican caucus against,<ref>Calmes, J. (2009, January 28). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/us/politics/29obama.html House Passes Stimulus Plan With No G.O.P. Votes]." ''New York Times''.</ref> and received just 3 Republican votes when passing the Senate 61-37.<ref>Herszenhorn, D.M. (2009, February 10). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/washington/11web-stim.html Senate Approves Stimulus Plan]." ''New York Times''.</ref> One third of the massive $838 billion bill consisted of [[Backdoor_spending_authority#Backdoor_tax_expenditures|backdoor tax expenditures]]<ref>(2009, February 11). "Senate Passes $838 Billion Stimulus Bill]." ''Associated Press''.</ref> and the rest direct [[new spending]] on "just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years."<ref>(2009, January 28). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html A 40-Year Wish List]." ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref> In responding to criticism of the broken bipartisanship promise at the time, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously quipped, "We won the election. We wrote the bill."<ref>Kane, P. (2009, January 23). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/22/AR2009012203961.html Stimulus Plan Meets More GOP Resistance]." ''Washington Post''.</ref> On February 18, 2009, the Stimulus was signed into law by Obama.<ref>(2009, February 17). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29231790/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-stimulus-lets-americans-claim-destiny/ Obama: Stimulus Lets Americans Claim Destiny]." ''Associated Press''.</ref> In August 2009, Republicans and Democratic Senator David Obey drew attention to mistakes on the Recovery.gov site claiming millions of Stimulus jobs created that didn't exist. Obama responded by saying the errors just indicate his accounting is an "inexact science".<ref>(2009, November 18). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/18/obama-calls-stimulus-data-errors-issue-says-focus-job-growth/ Obama Calls Stimulus Data Errors 'Side Issue,' Says Focus Is on Job Growth]." ''FOX News''.</ref>
=====[[Sequestration]]=====
According to [[Pulitzer Prize]] winning journalist [[Bob Woodward]] of the ''[[Washington Post]]'', Obama misled the American people in a Presidential debate only two weeks before the 2012 election when he said, "The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,”<ref>[http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-22/opinions/37238840_1_jack-lew-treasury-secretary-rob-nabors Obama’s sequester deal-changer,] By Bob Woodward, ''Washington Post'', February 22, 2013.</ref> when in fact his chief budget negotiator and current Chief of Staff, [[Jack Lew]], made a call to Democrat [[Harry Reid]] at 2:30 pm on July 27, 2011 with the proposal after clearing it with Obama,<ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/22/fact-check-woodward-wrote-that-obama-administration-proposed-sequester/ Fact-check: Woodward wrote that Obama administration proposed sequester]. dailycaller.com </ref> as fully documented in Woodward's book, ''The Price of Politics''. Federal Reserve Chairman [[Ben Bernanke]] warned of immediate jobloss of about 750,000 jobs - about the same level as under George W. Bush<ref>[http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?graph_id=109262 Monthly Jobloss under George W. Bush, Jan 2007 - Jan 2009]. See also [http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?graph_id=109266 Initial Unemployment Claims] over the same period, annualized. Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.</ref> - if Obama's budget and economic plans were allowed to take effect.<ref>[http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/26/news/economy/bernanke-burden-recovery/ Bernanke: Spending cuts add 'significant' burden to recovery,] By Annalyn Kurtz, CNN February 26, 2013.</ref>

Woodward, who's reporting on [[Watergate]] is credited with toppling the administration of [[Richard Nixon]], told Wolf Blitzer of CNN he was told by a senior White House official he'd regret talking about the President Obama's positions on the sequester.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/bob-woodward-obama-sequester-white-house-reporting-price-politics-2013-2 Bob Woodward: White House Threatened Me On Sequester,] businessinsider.com </ref>

====Healthcare mandates====
{{main article|Obamacare}}
On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the unpopular Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The act originated in the [[Democratic]]ally controlled House and was amended and passed the Senate just prior to Sen. [[Ted Kennedy]]'s death largely along party lines with a significant number of Democrats voting to oppose. In what was construed as a de facto rejection of the bill, [[Massachusetts]] voters elected a [[Republican]] candidate, [[Scott Brown]], who promised to vote against the bill if given the chance.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/scott-brown-wins-massachusetts-senate-race.html|work=The Washington Post|author=Chris Cillizza|date=January 19, 2010|title=Scott Brown wins Massachusetts Senate special election race|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> After Obama made a promise to issue an [[executive order]] that would ultimately prohibit the use of taxpayer subsidies to pay for [[abortion]] services,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/22/nation/la-na-healthcare-passage22-2010mar22/3|work=The Los Angeles Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes historic healthcare overhaul|date=March 22, 2010|author=Noam N. Levey and Janet Hook}}</ref> the Democratic [[House of Representatives]] would pass the bill as it left the Senate 219-212, with 34 Democrats and all other parties dissenting.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-21/politics/health.care.main_1_health-care-entire-house-democratic-caucus-pre-existing-conditions?_s=PM:POLITICS|date=March 21, 2010|author=Alan Silverleib|work=CNN|format=HTML|language=English|title=House passes health care bill on 219-212 vote}}</ref>

Amongst other things, the act mandated that everyone purchase health care coverage or face punitive tax measures, and was upheld by the [[Supreme Court]].

====Regulatory reform====
Obama criticized the "revolving door" of government and business.<ref>"We need to close the revolving door that lets lobbyists come into government freely, and lets them use their time in public service as a way to promote their own interests over the interests of the American people when they leave." [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-welcoming-senior-staff-and-cabinet-secretaries-white-house REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT IN WELCOMING SENIOR STAFF AND CABINET SECRETARIES TO THE WHITE HOUSE,] January 21, 2009. whitehouse.gov </ref> After appointing [[Peter Orszag]] his first Budget Director to dole out the stimulus cash, Orszag resigned to become Citigroup's Vice Chairman of Global Banking. Citigroup was the recipient of $476 billion in [[bailout]] money - more than any other bank - after the disastrous [[Financial crisis of 2008]].<ref>[http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2011/03/citibank_received_more_bailout.html Citigroup Received More Bailout Money Than Any Other Bank,] By Nitasha Tiku, 3/16/11. </ref> Before the bailout, Orszag's expert opinion of the chances of a mortgage meltdown were 1 in 500,000.<ref>[http://www.pierrelemieux.org/stiglitzrisk.pdf Implications of the New Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Risk-based Capital Standard,] by Joseph E. Stiglitz, Jonathan M. Orszag and Peter R. Orszag. Fannie Mae Papers, Volume 1, Issue 2, March 2002, Conclusion p.6. </ref>

====Environment and energy====
{{main article|Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster}}
President Obama authorized offshore oil drilling in the [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0430/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-imperils-Obama-s-offshore-drilling-plan Gulf of Mexico oil spill imperils Obama's offshore drilling plan,] By Mark Clayton, ''Christian Science Monitor'', April 30, 2010.</ref> stating, "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills"<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref> and was widely criticized for his mishandling of the "[[Gulf oil spill disaster|worst environmental disaster]] in US history."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman Conscience of a Liberal: The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times'', April 30, 2010.</ref>
====Reverses Clinton era gay discrimination====
{{main article|Don't Ask Don't Tell}}
Candidate Obama promised to repeal a policy that originated with President Clinton and passed by a Democratically controlled Congress that prohibited inquiries into military personnel's [[sexual orientation]] while barring openly gay [[homosexuals]] from serving in the military. [[Liberals]] expressed anger when time passed and no effort to repeal the law was seen;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/21/obama-to-delay-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/|work=The Washington Times|format=HTML|title=Obama to delay ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ repeal|language=English|author=Rowan Scarborough|date=November 21, 2008}}</ref> in fact, Obama's [[justice department]], as part of their duty to defend all laws passed by any administration, filed a brief arguing against the [[Supreme Court]] granting a [[writ of certiorari]] to a gay soldier challenging the law (the writ was not granted). In response, the soldier, James Pietrangelo II, a former Army infantryman and lawyer, said, “[Obama's] a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar. This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people."<ref>{{cite web|work=Time Magazine|publisher=Time Inc.|format=HTML|url=http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1903545,00.html?imw=Y|title=Dismay Over Obama's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Turnabout|author=Mark Thompson|date=Jun. 09, 2009}}</ref>

On December 15th, 2010, a bill was introduced in the [[House of Representatives]] to repeal the law - it passed a day later by a vote of 250-175;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll638.xml|title=FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 638|format=HTML|work=Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives}}</ref> it passed the Senate three days later 65-31.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00281|work=The U.S. Senate|title=U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> Obama signed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 on December 22nd.<ref name="g dadt">{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/22/obama-repeals-dont-ask-dont-tell|work=The Guardian|format=HTML|language=English|title='Don't ask, don't tell' repealed as Obama signs landmark law|date=22 December 2010}}</ref> The [[Pentagon]] itself could not immediately implement the repeal and questioned whether it would hurt combat readiness.<ref name="g dadt"/>

====Labor law and compensation to 9/11 first responders====
Obama's first act of office was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act - effectively nullifying the [[Supreme Court]] case ''Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'', which ruled that Ledbetter had to have filed a pay [[discrimination]] suit within 180 days of the first time Ledbetter was paid less than her male peers;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/us/politics/30ledbetter-web.html|work=The New York Times|format=HTML|language=English|title=Obama Signs Equal-Pay Legislation|author=Sheryl Gay Stolberg|date=January 29, 2009}}</ref> the law made corporations subject to suit within 180 days of each time the employee was unfairly paid.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://writ.news.findlaw.com/grossman/20090213.html?=features|work=FindLaw|author=Joanna L. Grossman|date=Feb. 13, 2009|format=HTML|language=English|title=The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009}}</ref>

On January 2, 2011, Obama signed the James Zadroga [[9/11]] Healthcare and Compensation Act.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2011/jan/02/obama-signs-zadroga-act-law/|publisher=New York Public Radio|title=Obama Signs Zadroga Act into Law|author=Fred Mogul|date=January 02, 2011|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> The act, which afforded 9/11 first responders who were sickened by the dust from the collapse of the [[World Trade Center]] health care and compensation, passed [[Congress]] after its sponsors agreed to scale down the pricing from 7.4 to 4.2 billion dollars.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2010/dec/22/zadroga-911-bill-passes-senate/|publisher=New York Public Radio|work=wNYC|format=HTML|language=English|title=Congress Approves 9/11 Health Bill|date=December 22, 2010}}</ref>

===Foreign policy===
[[File:Western Wall Obama.jpg|thumb|left|320px|At [[Western Wall]], Jerusalem, 2008.]]
As Senator, Obama was highly critical of President Bush and promised change. As President, Obama has tripled down in Afghanistan, widened the war into Pakistan, multiplied drone attacks, bombed Yemen and Somalia, and started an undeclared NATO war in Libya. On presidential war powers, surveillance questions, Guantanamo, detention policy and habeas corpus, Obama has similarly stayed the course, or expanded Bush's precedents. In a speech on May 19, 2011 Obama fully embraced the [[Bush Doctrine]] of preventative war.<ref>Krauthammer, C. (April 19). [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-news-in-obamas-speech/2011/05/19/AF4dFN7G_story.html The News in Obama's Speech]. ''The Washington Post''.</ref>

From the Boston Globe:
<blockquote>
'The New America Foundation, which tracks the strikes, has listed 23 raids since the beginning of April, 2011, all but one in Pakistan’s tribal regions of North and South Waziristan. A June 20 attack was reported in Kurram, an area north of North Waziristan along the Afghanistan border.'
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
'The drone program has become increasingly controversial as the Obama administration has expanded its use beyond the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Lethal missiles have been launched from unmanned aircraft in at least five countries in addition to Pakistan: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and, most recently, Somalia. The military’s Joint Special Operations Command used a drone last June to attack what officials said were two senior members of the Al Shabab militant group on the Somali coast.' <ref>DeYoung, K. (2011, July 4). [http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2011/07/04/cia_halts_drone_launches_from_pakistan_base/ CIA Halts Drone Launches From Pakistan Base]. ''The Boston Globe''. </ref>
</blockquote>

A commentator says:
<blockquote>
'Obama is commendable when he says he wants to avoid war. His policies, however, favor war by destabilizing the Middle East making it extremely hostile and favoring radical Islam over America’s ally, Israel, and American interests in the region... The president has chosen a very dangerous path for every American and one that promises great difficulty for Israel.' <ref> [http://www.thejerusalemconnection.us/blog/2012/03/14/obamas-words-disguise-his-israel-foreign-policy-actions.html Obama's words disguise his Israel foreign policy actions.] </ref>
</blockquote>
====Commander-in-chief====
By Obama's third year as Commander-in-Chief, over 1200 American troops died in Iraq and Afghanistan - significantly more than the number who died during President [[George W. Bush]]'s term of office. And growing numbers of civilian contractors also have fallen. In the first half of 2010, 250 contractors reportedly died in Iraq and Afghanistan - more than the 235 military personnel who fell during the same period.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/05/24/114662/what-price-war.html#ixzz1Nz07pg5O</ref>
====National Defense====
President Obama signed into U.S. law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), only after his administration successfully lobbied to remove language from the bill that would have protected American citizens from being detained indefinitely without trial.<ref>Aaron Dykes. [http://www.infowars.com/president-obamas-ndaa-signing-statement-i-have-the-power-to-detain-americans-but-i-wont/ Obama’s Signing Statement on NDAA: I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t], Infowars.com, January 1, 2012. </ref> After the legislation cleared Congress, the ACLU commented that if President Obama signed the bill it "will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law," while executive director of the ''Human Rights Watch'' blasted the President for being ‘on the wrong side of history,’ noting that "Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in US law."<ref>President Decides to Sign Ill-Conceived National Defense Authorization Act. [http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/14/us-refusal-veto-detainee-bill-historic-tragedy-rights US: Refusal to Veto Detainee Bill A Historic Tragedy for Rights], ''Human Rights Watch'', December 14, 2011. [http://www.aclu.org/national-security/white-house-backs-away-defense-bill-veto-threat White House Backs Away from Defense Bill Veto Threat], ''[[ACLU]]'', December 14, 2011.</ref>

Section 1031 of the NDAA bill, which itself defines the entirety of the United States as a “battlefield,” allows American citizens to be snatched from the streets, carted off to a foreign detention camp and held indefinitely without trial. As reported by Infowars.com, the bill states that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” faces indefinite detention, but no trial or evidence has to be presented, the White House merely needs to make the accusation.<ref>Paul Joseph Watson. [http://www.infowars.com/obama-administration-demanded-power-to-indefinitely-detain-u-s-citizens/ Obama Administration Demanded Power To Indefinitely Detain U.S. Citizens], Infowars.com, December 12, 2011. S.1867 [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:2:./temp/~c1122VN0Iv:e548990: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Engrossed in Senate [Passed Senate] - ES)], ''The Library of Congress'' THOMAS, 112th Congress (2011-2011), Accessed January 25, 2012. Text of S.1867 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s1867/text?version=es&nid=t0:es:281 Sec. 1031. Affirmation of authority of the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force.], [[U.S. Congress]], ''OpenCongress.org'', (Accessed January 25, 2012).</ref>
====Al Qaeda and Libya====
{{main article|Libyan uprising 2011}}
In February 2011, the political unrest that spread through the Arab world showed up as protests in Libya. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, leader of Libya for 41 years, responded to the violence<ref>http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28376.htm</ref> with legitimate steps.<ref name="nyt libya">{{cite web|url=http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html|work=The New York Times|publisher=The New York Times Inc.|format=HTML|language=English|title=Libya — Protests and Revolt (2011)}}</ref> The [[United Nations Security Council]] voted to impose [[sanctions]], and later passed a resolution to protect civilians. Obama, without approval from Congress and over the objections of his own National Security staff,<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20038391-503544.html</ref> directed American forces to take out Libya's air defense system.<ref name="nyt libya"/> Secretary of Defence [[Robert Gates]], National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough, and [[White House]] counterterrorism chief [[John O. Brennan]] all opposed the action. Obama later said, "if we waited one more day Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world."<ref>{{cite web|author=Barack Obama|url=http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134935452/obamas-speech-on-libya-a-responsibility-to-act|title=Obama's Speech On Libya: 'A Responsibility To Act'|date=March 28, 2011|publisher=National Public Radio ([[NPR]])|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> [[Alan J. Kuperman]], in an editorial for the ''[[Boston Globe]]'' - suggested this statement was false, writing, "intervention did not prevent genocide, because no such bloodbath was in the offing. To the contrary, by emboldening rebellion, US interference has prolonged Libya’s civil war and the resultant suffering of innocents."<ref name="kuperman">{{cite web|author=Alan J. Kuperman|work=The Boston Globe|url=http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-14/bostonglobe/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions|title=False pretense for war in Libya?|date=April 14, 2011}}</ref> Kuperman, a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas who authored a book called ''The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention'', further stated that the rebels had tricked the world into thinking a bloodbath was at hand and that Obama had lied to the American people in order to act on this theory.<ref name="kuperman"/>
<blockquote>
Gaddafi [never] threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy’’ warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by ''The New York Times'', which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.’’ Gaddafi even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.’’ <ref> [http://politicalcartel.org/2011/04/17/libya-and-the-obama-doctrine/ Libya and the “Obama Doctrine”.] </ref>
</blockquote>
Gaddafi wrote to Obama and told him he bore no ill will. "We have been hurt more morally than physically because of what had happened against us in both deeds and words by you," he wrote. "Despite all this you will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the USA. We endeavour and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaign."<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/06/gaddafi-obama-nato-libya?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487]</ref>
=====Aid to violent Islamists=====
A March 29, 2011 article in the ''[[Washington Post]]'' included these paragraphs:
{{Cquote|"It’s almost a certitude that at least part” of the Libyan opposition includes members of al-Qaeda, said Bruce Riedel, a former senior CIA analyst and adviser to President Obama. Riedel said that anti-Gaddafi elements in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi have had “very close associations with al-Qaeda” dating back years....I would hope that we now have a good sense of the opposition in Libya and can say that this is 2 percent, not 20 percent,” Riedel said. “If we don’t, then we are running the risk of helping to bring to power a regime that could be very dangerous.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/libyan-opposition-includes-a-small-number-of-al-qaeda-fighters-us-officials-say/2011/03/29/AFRlXWyB_story.html</ref>}}

This set off a fierce debate in the [[Obama administration]] over the wisdom of arming terrorists.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/world/africa/30diplo.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss</ref> It is now known sometime prior to March 31, 2011,<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/africa/31intel.html?_r=2&hp</ref> at the urging of Hillary Clinton<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/world/africa/19policy.html?_r=3&hp& </ref> and over the objections of his National Security Council, Obama signed a Presidential Finding authorizing support for the rebel jihadis.<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330</ref>

By October 2011, [[Libyan rebel fighting group]]s with support from [[NATO]] overtook the capital and toppled the government. Gaddafi was captured and brutally and sadistically murdered.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPzeLLL9V-c Leading from behind - a critique of Obama foreign policy]</ref> The jihadis were immediately recognized by the U.S. and the U.N. as the new legitimate government. Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, chairman of the National Transitional Council, announced [[Sharia]] will be the source for all legislation and all laws conflicting with Sharia are null and void.<ref name="Sharia">[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8861608/Libya-Al-Qaeda-flag-flown-above-Benghazi-courthouse.html Libya: Al Qaeda flag flown above Benghazi courthouse - Daily Telegraph]</ref> Abdel Rahim al-Kib, the country's interim prime minister, echoed Jalil's words days later.<ref>[http://www.presstv.ir/detail/207953.html New Libyan PM backs Islamic sharia law]</ref> The al Qaeda flag was flown above the Benghazi courthouse, and reports surfaced that the Libyan jihadis had imposed Sharia law in some parts of the country even earlier.<ref name="Sharia" /> By February 17, 2013, four foreign nationals were arrested for distributing Christian literature, a charge that could carry the death penalty<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/17/libya-arrests-suspected-foreign-missionaries Libya arrests foreign 'missionaries' Four foreign nationals accused of distributing Christian literature,] a charge that could carry the death penalty, Chris Stephen guardian.co.uk, Sunday 17 February 2013.</ref>

=====U.S. Ambassador murdered=====
:{{main|Benghazi Attack}}
With several U.S.embassies besieged on the anniversary of the [[September 11 attacks]], White House Press Secretary [[Jay Carney]] declared there was no reason to believe the attack on the sovereign territory of the United States consulate in Benghazi, less than two months before the [[2012 Presidential election]] which killed Americans, was a terrorist attack.
{{Cquote|The unrest that we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive.}}
This became the official White House line. Between jokes with [[Jon Stewart]] on the ''Comedy Channel'' Obama said the death of Americans was "not optimal".<ref>[http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/18/Obama-Benghazi-murders-not-optimal Interview with Jon Stewart of the ''Daily Show''].</ref> When pressed by reporters, who pointed out evidence that the violence in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, Press Secretary Carney argued “the unrest around the region has been in response to this video.”

Leading suspected jihadis in the murders and terrorist attack were the local Benghazi branch of Ansar al-Shariah, known to have ties to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.<ref>http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/10/19/when-an-obama-adviser-called-benghazi-an-al-qaeda-hotbed/?cxntfid=blogs_political_insider_jim_galloway</ref> A commander of the terrorist group boasted jovially about the attack over drinks with reporters for the ''[[New York Times]]'' in Benghazi<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/world/africa/election-year-stakes-overshadow-nuances-of-benghazi-investigation.html?pagewanted=2&ref=world</ref>.<ref>http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/frappe-libya-attack/</ref>
=====[[Al Qaeda in the Maghreb]]=====
Two more Americans were killed, along with 35 others, after being taken hostage by rebel jihadists in Mali shortly after the Libyan upheaval.<ref>[http://world.time.com/2013/01/21/algeria-37-foreigner-hostages-killed-in-attack/ Algeria: 37 Foreigner Hostages Killed in Attack], Associated Press, Jan. 21, 2013. ''TIME'' magazine.</ref>

Hillary Clinton testified before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the wake of the Benghazi murders under her stewardship, that weapons and fighters equipped by the Obama administration made their way to [[Mali]] and [[Algeria]]:
{{cquote|There is no doubt that the Algerian terrorists had weapons from Libya. There is no doubt that the Malian remnants of AQIM [Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb] have weapons from Libya.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-says-militants-used-weapons-libya-algeria-attack-154222664.html Clinton says militants used weapons from Libya in Algeria attack,] Reuters, Jan 23, 2013.]</ref>}}

====Afghanistan====
{{main article|Afghanistan War}}
Obama escalated troop strength<ref name="pbs">{{cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamaswar/themes/strategy.html#ixzz1LhWNImZp|title=Obama's New Strategy (March '09)|author=George Packer, Seth Jones, David Kilcullen, Rory Stewart, Andrew Exum, Col. Andrew Bacevich (Ret.)|work=PBS|language=English|format=HTML}}</ref> and defense costs in Afghanistan from $43.5 billion in George Bush's last year to $113.7 billion for 2011.<ref>Congressional Research Service, quoted in Gregory Anthony, ''What price war?''</ref> Adviser to General [[Stanley McChrystal]] David Kilcullen wrote, "One of the big strategic shifts is the use of language now which talks about Pakistan and Afghanistan as the same theater. Now we talked about Af-Pak long before the Obama administration came about, but the public use of that term, and the description of it as the Afghanistan-Pakistan campaign, sends a new message to people about how the administration is going to think about Afghanistan and Pakistan."<ref name="pbs"/> T

====Mexico====
[[File:Eric Holder.jpg|right|thumb|200px|[[Eric Holder]] remains as Attorney General despite being held in Contempt of Congress. Others such as Rahm Emanual have departed in wake of the Fast & Furious revelations.<ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/fast_and_furious_in_a_rotten_nutshell.html#ixzz27iRBCN28 Fast and Furious in a Rotten Nutshell], Ronald Kolb, ''American Thinker'', October 7, 2011,</ref>]]
:''Main article:'' '''[[Operation Fast and Furious]]'''
In May of 2010, President Obama promised Mexican President [[Felipe Calderon]] that his administration would assist Mexico in curbing drug cartel violence, which has led to 30,000 deaths in Mexico. "President Calderon and I . . . stand together against the drug cartels that have unleashed horrific violence in so many communities," Obama said on May 19. "Mexico can count on the United States as a full partner in this effort."

The ''[[Washington Post]]'' has reported however that White House officials stopped a requirement for gun dealers to report bulk sales of high-powered semiautomatic rifles commonly used by illegal drug cartels. [[Justice Department]] officials had asked for White House approval to require thousands of gun dealers along the border to report the purchases to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and Explosives. ATF investigators expected to get leads on suspected arms traffickers. Senior law enforcement sources said the proposal from the ATF was held up by then White House chief of staff [[Rahm Emanuel]].<ref>Horwitz, S. & Grimaldi, J.V. (2010, December 17). [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121706598.html White House Delayed Rule Meant to Stop Gun Flow to Mexico]. ''The Washington Post''.</ref> Gun dealers have been required for decades to report the sales of multiple handguns to the ATF.

====Guantanamo Bay====
{{main article|Guantanamo Bay}}
One of Obama's campaign promises was that he would close the American detention center at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - detainees would be flown to other countries while the ones awaiting trial would enter the American court system. Two days after taking office he signed an order directing the military to do so.<ref name="salon">{{cite web|url=http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric|work=Salon|title=The Obama/Gitmo timeline|author=Natasha Lennard|format=HTML|language=English}}</ref> But, in November 2009 Obama admitted that his self imposed deadline of January 2010 would be missed, and in March 2011 the president went back on his campaign promise, signing an executive order to create a formal system of indefinite detention for the prisoners.<ref name="salon"/>
====Russia====
Obama criticized [[Conservative]] president of [[Russia]], [[Vladimir Putin]] for carrying out a referendum for the seizure of [[Crimea]] to Russia.<ref>http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-calls-rethinking-crimea-vote</ref>

==2012 Presidential Campaign==
: ''Main article: [[Presidential Election 2012]]''
===2011: Birth Certificate Released===
: ''Main article: [[Barack_Obama_Controversies#Birth_Certificate]]''
On April 27, 2011<ref>CNN Political Unit (2011, April 27). "[http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/27/white-house-releases-obama-birth-certificate/ White House Releases Obama Birth Certificate]." ''CNN''</ref>, a long-running controversy surrounding Obama's birth was largely put to rest<ref>Winter, J. (2011, April 29). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/29/expert-says-obamas-birth-certificate-legit/ Expert: No Doubt Obama's Birth Certificate is Legit]." ''FOX News''. Tuchman, G. (2011, April 25). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-25/politics/birthers.obama.hawaii_1_birther-controversy-obama-opinion-research-corporation?_s=PM:POLITICS Obama Birther Claims Have No Merit]." ''CNN''. (2011, April 27). "[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42779923/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-releases-detailed-us-birth-certificate/ Obama Releases Detailed U.S. Birth Certificate]." ''MSNBC''.</ref> when Obama had his long-form birth certificate posted at WhiteHouse.gov.<ref>"[http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf Certificate of Live Birth]." State of Hawaii. Retrieved from ''WhiteHouse.gov''.</ref> Donald Trump, who had attacked Obama on the Birth Certificate issue and was then leading Republicans in polls for the upcoming GOP primary<ref>James, F. (2011, April 15). "[http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/04/15/135446314/poll-donald-trump-birther-darling-leads-gop-field-at-26 Donald Trump, Birther In Chief? Poll Has Him Leading GOP Field with 26 Percent]." ''NPR''.</ref>, was effectively knocked out of the race because of this.<ref>Kapur, S. (2011, May 10). "[http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/10/trumps-popularity-tanks-after-obama-releases-long-form-birth-certificate/ Trump's Popularity Tanks After Obama Releases Long-Form Birth Certificate]." ''RawStory.com''.</ref>

The following is a timeline of previous events leading up to the release:

* In June 2008 the Obama campaign allowed FactCheck.org to look at his “Certificate of Live Birth” and take photos.<ref>Henig, J. (2008, August 21). Born in the U.S.A. FactCheck.org. Retrieved from http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html</ref>
* In July 2008 a blogger discovered a birth announcement from the Honolulu Advertiser from August 13, 1961 for Barack Obama. It has since been discovered another newspaper, the Star Bulletin, also documented the birth.<ref>Snopes.com. Barack Obama Birth Certificate. Retrieved from http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp</ref>
* PolitiFact went to extreme lengths to verify Obama’s citizenship, attaining scanned copies of his 1992 marriage certificate from Cook County, IL, his driver’s license record, and his registration and disciplinary record. PolitiFact also addressed a number of concerns about the documentation.<ref>Hollyfield, A. (2008, June 27). Obama’s birth certificate: Final chapter. PolitiFact. Retrieved from http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/</ref>
* In October 2008 Hawaii’s Department of Health released a statement by Dr. Chiyome Fu.kino verifying that Obama’s birth certificate was on record.<ref>Hawaii Department of Health. News Release: Statement by Dr. Chiyome Fu.kino. Retrieved from http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf</ref>
* In August 2009 it was revealed that an alleged Kenyan birth certificate for Obama was a hoax.<ref>Snopes.com. Kenyan Mistake. Retrieved from http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp</ref> Another website allows you to create your own imitation Kenyan birth certificates online.<ref>KenyanBirthCertificateGenerator.com. Blue Collar Industries. Retrieved from http://kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com/</ref>

===2011: Death of Osama bin Laden===
On May 1, 2011, Obama announced in a press conference<ref>Obama, B. (2011, May 2). "[http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead Osama Bin Laden Dead]." ''WhiteHouse.gov''.</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf1SLhNoUNY Nobel Prize Winner with a kill list].</ref> that Osama bin Laden was dead after a U.S. assault force infiltrated a compound in [[Abbottabad raid|Abottobad]], Pakistan.<ref>Baker, P., Cooper, H., & Mazzetti, M. (2011, May 1). "[Bin Laden is Dead, Obama Says]." ''New York Times''. "[http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Osama_Bin_Laden/ Target Bin Laden: The Death of Public Enemy #1]." ''ABC News''. ''NPR''. "[http://www.npr.org/series/135908383/osama-bin-laden-dead Special Series: Osama Bin Laden Killed]." </ref> Attacks on Americans and American consulate bureaus have since escalated as reprisals for bin Laden's death. [[Al Qaeda]], once presumed broken and on the run, now functions openly throughout North Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and parts of Eurasia. Relations with longtime ally Pakistan have become strained. Obama experienced only a temporary blip in approval polls.<ref>Dao, J. & Sussman, D. (2011, May 4). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/us/politics/05poll.html For Obama, Big Rise in Poll Numbers After Bin Laden Raid]." ''New York Times''. ''Pew Research Center'' (2011, May 2). "[http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/03/public-relieved-by-bin-ladens-death-obamas-job-approval-rises/ Public 'Relieved' by Bin Laden's Death, Obama's Job Approval Rises]." Jones, J.M. (2011, May 5). "[http://www.gallup.com/poll/147437/obama-approval-rallies-six-points-bin-laden-death.aspx Obama Job Approval Rallies Six Points to 52% After Bin Laden Death]." ''Gallup''.</ref><ref>''CBS/Associated Press'' (2012, May 1). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57424622/1-year-after-osama-bin-laden-killed-still-no-answers-from-pakistan/ 1 Year After Osama bin Laden Killed, Still No Answers from Pakistan]."</ref> Pakistan has denied White House claims that there was a deal with it allowing the raid.<ref>''Associated Press'' (2011, May 10). "[http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/05/10/pakistani-president-claims-bin-laden-deal/ Former Pakistani President Claims There Was Never Bin Laden Deal With U.S.]." Retrieved from ''FOX News''.</ref>

=== 2012: Possible Ties to ACORN ===
According to Stanley Kurtz - author of ''Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism'' (2010) Obama in 1995 sought and obtained the endorsement of a left-wing third party, the [[New Party]] in his quest to be elected to the Illinois State Senate.<ref>Kurtz, S. (2012, June 7). [http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302031/obamas-third-party-history-stanley-kurtz Obama's Third-Party History]. ''National Review Online''.</ref> Obama's "Fight the Smears" campaign has denied this, as has Politico's Ben Smith.<ref name=pollack>Pollack, J.B. (2012, June 7). [http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/07/Obama-Caught-Lying-Again-He-WAS-Member-of-New-Party-Says-Kurtz Obama Caught Lying Again: He WAS Member of 'New Party', Says Kurtz]. ''Breitbart''. Smith, B. (2008, October 25). [http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/The_dread_New_Party.html The Dread New Party]. ''Politico''.</ref> Others who claim he was affiliated with the New Party/ACORN include The Blaze's Billy Hallowell<ref>Hallowell, B. (2012, June 7). [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report-new-documents-show-obama-was-a-member-of-the-far-left-new-party/ News Docs Reportedly Show Obama Was a Member of the Far-Left 'New Party']. ''The Blaze''.</ref>, Breitbart's Joel Pollack, Human Events' Erick Erickson<ref>Erickson, E. (2008, June 10). [http://www.humanevents.com/2008/06/10/obama-and-the-new-party/ Obama and the New Party]. ''Human Events''.</ref>, Newsbusters' P.J. Gladnick<ref>Gladnick, P.J. (2008, October 12). [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/10/08/will-msm-report-obama-membership-socialist-new-party#ixzz21JfE3z1z Will MSM Report on Obama Membership in Socialist New Party?] ''Newsbusters''.</ref>, Rick Moran at AmericanThinker.com<ref>Rick Moran. [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_alliance_with_marxists.html Obama's Alliance with Marxists], ''American Thinker'', June 03, 2008.</ref>, and various writers at Discover the Networks (which include Kurtz and Erickson).<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434 NEW PARTY (NP)], ''DiscoverTheNetworks.org''.</ref>

Kurtz in 2012 has claimed to find minutes of the New Party Chicago chapter that say, "''Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party 'Candidate Contract' and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.''"<ref name=pollack /> Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod responded to Kurtz with silence and when asked if that meant "yes or no", Axelrod stated, "You can take that as I have no idea what you are talking about."<ref>Pollack, J.B. (2012, June 7). [http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/07/Exclusive-Axelrod-Plays-Dumb-on-Obama-and-Socialist-New-Party Exclusive: Axelrod Plays Dumb on Obama and Socialist New Party]. ''Breitbart''.</ref>

===2012: "You didn't build that" Controversy===
{{main|You didn't build that}}

On July 13, 2012, at a campaign event in [[Virginia]], Obama gave a speech that immediately stirred up controversy. Speaking about the government's role in the success of private business, he said:<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia</ref>
{{cquote|If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business - you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.}} The [[Romney]] campaign has used "If you’ve got a business - you didn’t build that" in ads to show America that Obama believes it is government that creates business rather than hard-working individuals. The Obama campaign has alternatively stated that the sentenced was poorly worded since he was not giving a scripted speech and that when Obama said "that" he was referring to roads and bridges. Obama points to a later portion of his speech in which he said, "The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together," to support his claim.

===Results===

On November 6, 2012 Barack Obama won reelection with 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney's 206.<ref>http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012</ref> Obama received 51% of the popular vote (65,899,660 votes) to Romney's 47% (60,932,152 votes).<ref>http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2012/2012presgeresults.pdf</ref>

==See also==
*[[Political positions of Barack Obama]]
*[[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]]
*[[Barack Obama and abortion]]
*[[Essay:Born Outside the U.S.A.!]]
*[[Essay: The Special Interests Candidate]]
*[[Lobbyists ties to the Obama administration]]
*[[Obama doublespeak]]
*[[Obama inauguration]]
*[[Religion of Barack Hussein Obama]]
*[[The Honorable James David Manning]]
*[[Al Qaeda in the Maghreb]]

==External links==

*[http://barackobamadoubletalk.com/ Barack Obama Doubletalk]
*[http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/national-journal-obama-facing-crisis-over-incompetence/ National Journal: Obama facing crisis over incompetence]
*[http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/ Audacity Of Hypocrisy]
*[http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6130/ The New Cult of Personality]
*[http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/23/che-obama-and-the-revolutionary-agenda/ Che, Obama, and the Revolutionary Agenda]
*[http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/ Obama Laundry List of Lies]
*[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/09/americas-first-muslim-president/ GAFFNEY: America's first Muslim president?] Washington Times
*[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-l-esposito/barack-obama-and-islam_b_212519.html Barack Obama and Islam.] by [[John L. Esposito]].
*[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78931 Democrat: Obama's grandma confirms Kenyan birth.]
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm Barack Obama on the issues.]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{USPresidents}}
{{2008 presidential candidates}}
{{2012 presidential candidates}}
[[Category: Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Current Heads of government]]
[[Category:Current Heads of State]]
[[category:Nobel laureates in Peace]]
[[Category:2012 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Socialism]]
[[Category:Muslims]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Chicago]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Obama, Barack Hussein}}

Evolution

2014-05-05T23:23:54Z

Debletar: /* Lack of Any Clear Transitional Forms */ Added full quote, changed source.

''See also [[Counterexamples to Evolution]]''.
[[Image:Evolution.jpg|alt=evolution darwin theory|right|thumb|225px|Late in [[Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin's]] life, Darwin told the Duke of Argyll that he frequently had overwhelming thoughts that the natural world was the [[Intelligent design|result of design]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref> See also: [http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] and [[Causes of evolutionary belief]] ]]
The theory of '''evolution''' is a [[Naturalism|naturalistic]] [[theory]] of the [[history]] of life on earth (this refers to the theory of evolution which employs [[methodological naturalism]] and is taught in schools and universities). Merriam-Webster's dictionary gives the following [[definition of evolution]]: "a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations..."<ref>[http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/evolution Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, Definition for "evolution"]</ref> Currently, there are several [[theories of evolution]].

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref> In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of [[Charles Darwin|Darwinian]] evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

In 2011, the results of a study was published indicating that most [[United States]] high school biology teachers are reluctant to endorse the theory of evolution in class. <ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/science/study-most-high-school-biology.html</ref> In addition, in 2011, eight anti-evolution bills were introduced into state legislatures within the United States encouraging students to employ [[critical thinking]] skills when examining the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. In 2009, there were seven states which required critical analysis skills be employed when examining evolutionary material within schools.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9851</ref>

A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of [[United States|American]] medical doctors reject [[Darwinism]], stating that they do not believe man evolved through natural processes alone.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> Thirty-eight percent of the American medical doctors polled agreed with the statement that "Humans evolved naturally with no supernatural involvement." <ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> The study also reported that 1/3 of all medical doctors favor the theory of [[Intelligent design|intelligent design]] over evolution.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> In 2010, the Gallup organization reported that 40% of Americans believe in [[young earth creationism]].<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/Four-Americans-Believe-Strict-Creationism.aspx</ref> In January 2006, the [[BBC]] reported concerning [[Britain]]:
{{cquote|Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life, according to an opinion poll.

Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that [[creationism]] or intelligent design (ID) should be taught in school science lessons.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm</ref>}}

The theory of evolution posits a process of transformation from simple life forms to more complex life forms, which has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory.<ref>Russell Grigg and Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/4280 Intelligent Design—‘A War on Science’ says the BBC]]</ref><ref>Paul McHugh, [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2477 The Weekly Standard, Teaching Darwin: Why we're still fighting about biology textbook. March 28, 2005]</ref> Although not a [[creation science|creation scientist]], Swedish [[genetics|geneticist]] Dr. [[Nils Heribert-Nilsson]], Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in [[Sweden]] and a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, stated: "My attempts to demonstrate Evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least, I should hardly be accused of having started from a preconceived antievolutionary standpoint."<ref>[http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/gould-and-heribert-nilsson Quotes to note]</ref>
[[File:Fish fossil Nat Park Svs.jpg|thumb|Fish fossil, National Park Svs.]]
[[Image:Intelligent design.jpg‎|thumbnail|300px|left|When [[Richard Dawkins]] was a young man, he recognized the [[Intelligent design|that the complexity of life indicates a designer]]. ]]
The fossil record is often used as evidence in the [[creation]] versus evolution controversy. The [[fossil]] record does not support the theory of evolution and is one of the flaws in the theory of evolution.<ref>
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Creation/Evolution Quotes: Fossil Record]
* [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3001 Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [http://www.anointed-one.net/quotes.html Quotes of Famous Evolutionist Regarding the Fossil Record]
* [http://creation.com/content/view/5654 Ediacaran ‘explosion’]
</ref> In 1981, there were at least a hundred million fossils that were catalogued and identified in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.fossils.me/tag/darwinism Porter Kier, quoted in New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129]</ref> Despite the large number of fossils available to scientists in 1981, evolutionist Mark Ridley, who currently serves as a professor of zoology at [[Oxford University]], was forced to confess: "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or [[Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuationist]], uses the fossil record as evidence in favour of the theory of evolution as opposed to [[Creationism|special creation]]."<ref>Mark Ridley, 'Who doubts evolution?', New Scientist, vol. 90, 25 June 1981, p. 831</ref>

In addition to the evolutionary position lacking evidential support and being counterevidential, the great intellectuals in history such as [[Archimedes]], [[Aristotle]], [[St. Augustine]], [[Francis Bacon]], [[Isaac Newton]], and [[Lord Kelvin]] did not propose an evolutionary process for a species to transform into a more complex version. Even after the theory of evolution was proposed and promoted heavily in England and Germany, most leading scientists were against the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon, [http://www.johnankerberg.com/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC1W0104D.pdf Darwin, Evolution, and His Critics - Part 3, How Was Darwin's Theory of Evolution First Received]
* [http://www.icr.org/article/280/ More on Anti-Darwinian Scientists Exerpted from the New Book by Wendell R. Bird, J.D., Attorney]
</ref>
The theory of evolution was published by naturalist [[Darwin, Charles|Charles Darwin]] in his book ''[[The Origin of Species|On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life]]'', in 1859. In a letter to [[Asa Gray]], Darwin confided: "...I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true [[science]]."<ref>http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-2109</ref>Prior to publishing the book, Darwin wrote in his private notebooks that he was a [[materialism|materialist]], which is a type of [[atheism|atheist]].(see: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Charles_Darwin#Religious_Views_of_Charles_Darwin religious views of Charles Darwin) ]<ref>
* [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1877 Darwin's real message: have you missed it?]
* [http://www.equip.org/articles/is-darwinism-atheistic- Is Darwinism Atheistic? An Examination of the Beliefs and Practices of Charles Darwin]
* Barrett, Paul H. ''Darwin on Man'' 1974:276
* ''American Scientist'' May 1977:323
</ref> Charles Darwin’s casual mentioning of a ‘creator’ in earlier editions of The Origin of Species appears to have been a merely a ploy to downplay the implications of his [[materialism|materialistic]] theory.<ref>[http://creation.com/charles-darwins-real-message-have-you-missed-it Charles Darwin's real message. Have you missed it?]</ref> The amount of credit Darwin actually deserves for the theory is disputed. <ref>
*[http://creation.com/charles-darwins-illegitimate-brainchild Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild: If You Thought Darwin’s Origin Was Original, Think Again! by Russell Grigg]
*[http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j16_3/j16_3_58-63.pdf Did Darwin plagiarize his evolution theory?]
*[http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/was-blyth-the-true-scientist-and-darwin-merely-a-plagiarist-and-charlatan/ Was Blyth the true scientist and Darwin merely a plagiarist and charlatan?]
*[http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar0.html Charles Darwin - The Truth]</ref> Darwin's theory attempted to explain the origin of the various kinds of plants and animals via the process of ''[[natural selection]]'' or "survival of the fittest".

The basic principle behind natural selection is that in the struggle for life some organisms in a given population will be better suited to their particular environment and thus have a reproductive advantage which increases the representation of their particular traits over time. Many years before Charles Darwin, there were several other individuals who published articles on the topic of natural selection.<ref>Russell Grigg, [http://creation.com/charles-darwins-illegitimate-brainchild Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild: If You Thought Darwin’s Origin Was Original, Think Again!]</ref> [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]] was a naturalist who supported the theory of evolution. [[Lamarckism|Lamarck's theory of evolution]] asserted that evolution occurs because organisms are able to inherit traits acquired by their ancestors which is an idea rejected by the current scientific community.<ref>[http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=13567 MedicineNet.com, Definition of Lamarkism]</ref>

Darwin did not first propose in his book ''Origin of Species'' that man had descended from non-human ancestors. Darwin's theory of evolution incorporated that later in Darwin's book entitled ''[[Descent of Man]]''.

As far as the history of the theory of evolution, although Darwin is well known when it comes to the early advocacy of the evolutionary position in the [[Western world]], evolutionary ideas were taught by the [[Ancient Greece|ancient Greeks]] as early as the 7th century B.C.<ref>Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/naturalism.asp Evolutionary Naturalism: An Ancient Idea] First published: TJ 15(2):77–80 August 2001</ref> The concept of naturalistic evolution differs from the concept of [[Theistic Evolution|theistic evolution]] in that it states [[God]] does not guide the posited process of [[macroevolution]].<ref>Dr. Werner Gitt, [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1749/ 10 Dangers of Theistic Evolution] First published: Creation 17(4):49–51, September 1995</ref>

== Intuition, Darwinism and questioning evolution ==

In January of 2012, the ''Journal of Research in Science Teaching'' published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings.<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref><ref>[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20449/abstract Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution]</ref> A January 20, 2012 article entitled ''Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling'' published by the website Live Science wrote of the research: "They found that intuition had a significant impact on what the students accepted, no matter how much they knew and regardless of their religious beliefs."<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref>

In May of 2011, [[Creation Ministries International]] launched the [[Question evolution! campaign|Question evolution! campaign]] which is a [[grassroots]] campaign encouraging students and others to "question the evolutionary [[pseudoscience]] peddled to them". The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot answer. (see: [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer]).<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref>

== Theory of Evolution - Mutations and the Life Sciences in General ==

''See also:'' [[Theories of evolution]]

Evolutionist [[Theodosius Dobzhansky]] wrote concerning the theory of evolution: "The process of [[mutation]] is the only known source of the new materials of genetic variability, and hence of evolution."<ref>NorthWest Creation Network, [http://www.nwcreation.net/geneticquotes.html Quotes on Genetics]</ref> Concerning various [[theories of evolution]], most evolutionists believe that the processes of mutation, [[genetic drift]] and natural selection created every species of life that we see on earth today after [[Origin of Life|life first came about on earth]] although [[Theory of evolution and little consensus|there is little consensus on how this process is allegedly to have occurred]].<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1855 Climbing Mount Improbable:A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins]</ref>

[[Pierre-Paul Grassé]], who served as Chair of evolutionary [[biology]] at Sorbonne University for thirty years and was ex-president of the French Academy of Sciences, stated the following: "Some contemporary biologists, as soon as they observe a mutation, talk about evolution. They are implicitly supporting the following syllogism: mutations are the only evolutionary variations, all living beings undergo mutations, therefore all living beings evolve....No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution." Grassé pointed out that bacteria which are the subject of study of many geneticists and molecular biologists are organisms which produce the most mutants.<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grasse then points that bacteria are considered to have "stabilized a billion years ago!".<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grassé regards the "unceasing mutations" to be "merely hereditary fluctuations around a median position; a swing to the right, a swing to the left, but no final evolutionary effect."<ref>[ http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref>

In addition, [[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>
[[File:Safarti3.jpg|alt=evolutionary theory opponent|thumb|200px|right|[[Jonathan Sarfati]]]]
[[Creation Science|Creation scientists]] believe that mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift would not cause macroevolution.<ref>
* Answers in Genesis, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/mutations.asp Mutations: Questions and Answers]
* Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp Darwinism and the Deterioration of the Genome]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1855 Climbing Mount Improbable:A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3831 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 2, Variation and Natural Selection Versus Evolution]
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/selection.asp Natural Selection Questions and Answers]
</ref> Furthermore, creation scientists assert that the life sciences as a whole support the creation model and do not support the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creation, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences2.html Life Sciences]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M.,[http://creation.com/Whos-really-pushing-bad-science-rebuttal-to-Lawrence-S-Lerner Who's Really Pushing 'Bad Science'?]
</ref> [[Homology]] involves the theory that macroevolutionary relationships can be demonstrated by the similarity in the anatomy and physiology of different organisms.<ref>Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i1/homology.asp Does Homology Provide Evidence of Evolutionary Naturalism?]</ref> An example of a homology argument is that [[DNA]] similarities between human and other living organisms is evidence for the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. Georgia Purdom, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-and-chimp-dna If Human and Chimp DNA Are So Similar, Why Are There So Many Physical and Mental Differences Between Them?]
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/human-chimp-dna-similarity DNA Similarity: Evidence for Evolutionary Relationship?]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3835 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 6, Humans: Images of God or Advanced Apes?]
</ref> Creation scientists provide sound reasons why [[homology|the homology argument is not a valid argument]]. Both evolutionary scientists and [[Young earth creationism|young earth creation]] scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs, however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionist believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref>

Critics of the theory of evolution state that many of today's proponents of the evolutionary position have diluted the meaning of the term "evolution" to the point where it defined as or the definition includes change over time in the [[Genetics|gene]] pool of a population over time through such processes as [[mutation]], natural selection, and [[genetic drift]].<ref>
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/anderson/an_appb.htm Glossary Definitions of "Evolution"]
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe02phl4.html#lgclprblmsflcsqvctn Fallacies used to support evolution:Equivocation]
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_meaningsofevolution.pdf The Meanings of Evolution]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]
</ref> Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] of [[Creation Ministries International]] declares concerning the diluted definition of the word "evolution":
{{cquote|...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and [[creation]] disproved. The PBS ''Evolution'' series and the ''[[Scientific American]]'' article are full of examples of this fallacy.<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]</ref><ref>The PBS [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ evolution website] bills itself as "The most comprehensive evolutionary science resource on the Internet" but it is very poorly done.</ref>}}

=== Biological diversity - evolution contrasted with biblical creation science ===

Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote:
{{cquote|In contrast, [[creationism|creationists]], starting from the [[Bible]], believe that [[God]] created different kinds of organisms, which reproduced ‘after their kinds’ (Gen. 1:11–12, 21, 24–25). Each of these kinds was created with a vast amount of [[information]]. There was enough variety in the information in the original creatures so their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of environments.

All ([[sexual reproduction|sexually reproducing]]) organisms contain their genetic information in paired form. Each offspring inherits half its genetic information from its mother, and half from its father. So there are two [[gene|genes]] at a given position (locus, plural loci) coding for a particular characteristic. An organism can be [[heterozygous]] at a given locus, meaning it carries different forms ([[allele|alleles]]) of this gene... So there is no problem for creationists explaining that the original created kinds could each give rise to many different varieties. In fact, the original created kinds would have had much more heterozygosity than their modern, more specialized descendants. No wonder [[Francisco J. Ayala|Ayala]] pointed out that most of the variation in populations arises from reshuffling of previously existing genes, not from mutations. Many varieties can arise simply by two previously hidden [[recessive allele|recessive alleles]] coming together. However, Ayala believes the genetic information came ultimately from mutations, not creation. His belief is contrary to [http://creation.com/information-theory-questions-and-answers information theory], as shown in [http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-9-is-the-design-explanation-legitimate chapter 9 on ‘Design’].<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-9-is-the-design-explanation-legitimate</ref>}}

=== Prominent evolutionists have indicated that the origin of life is part of the evolutionary model ===

Dr. Don Batten of [[Creation Ministries International]] has pointed out that prominent evolutionists, such as [[PZ Myers]] and Nick Matzke, have indicated that a naturalistic postulation of the [[origin of life]] (often called [[abiogenesis]]), is part of the evolutionary model.<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref> This poses a very serious problem for the evolutionary position as the evidence clearly points life being a [[Intelligent design|product of design]] and not through naturalistic processes.<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref>

== Evolution - Implications of Genetic Code and Processing of Biological Information ==
[[Image:Stephen Meyer.jpg|thumb|150px|left|Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]] published an article favoring [[intelligent design]] in a peer reviewed science journal which had traditionally only published material advocating the evolutionary position.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1489</ref>]]
:''See main articles: [[Creation science]], [[Intelligent design]], and [[creationism]]''
Creation scientists and [[intelligent design]] advocates point out that the [[genetic code]] ([[Deoxyribonucleic acid|DNA]] code), genetic programs, and biological information argue for an intelligent cause in regards the origins question and assert it is one of the many problems of the theory of evolution.<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation">Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center For Scientific Creation, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences18.html Codes, Programs, and Information]</ref><ref>
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/infotheory.asp Information Theory Questions and Answers]
* [[William Dembski]], [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=118 Intelligent Design as a Theory of Information]</ref>

Dr. [[Walt Brown]] states the genetic material that controls the biological processes of life is coded information and that human experience tells us that [[code|codes]] are created only by the result of intelligence and not merely by processes of nature.<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation" /> Dr. Brown also asserts that the "information stored in the genetic material of all life is a complex program. Therefore, it appears that an unfathomable intelligence created these genetic programs."<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation" />

To support his view regarding the divine origin of genetic programs Dr. Walt Brown cites the work of David Abel and Professor Jack Trevors who wrote the following:
{{cquote|No matter how many "bits" of possible combinations it has, there is no reason to call it "information" if it doesn't at least have the potential of producing something useful. What kind of information produces function? In [[computer science]], we call it a "program." Another name for [[computer software]] is an "[[algorithm]]." No man-made program comes close to the technical brilliance of even Mycoplasmal genetic algorithms. Mycoplasmas are the simplest known organism with the smallest known genome, to date. How was its genome and other living organisms' genomes programmed? - David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors, “Three Subsets of Sequence Complexity and Their Relevance to Biopolymeric Information,” Theoretical Biology & Medical Modelling, Vol. 2, 11 August 2005, page 8<ref>
* Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center For Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes17.html#wp1467742 Notes and References: Codes, Programs, and Information]
* PubMed Central (PMC), [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1208958 Three subsets of sequence complexity and their relevance to biopolymeric information by David L Abel1 and Jack T Trevors]
</ref>}}

In the peer reviewed biology journal ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]] argues that no current materialistic theory of evolution can account for the origin of the information necessary to build novel animal forms and proposed an intelligent cause as the best explanation for the origin of biological information and the higher taxa.<ref>Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]], [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2177 ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'', 117(2):213-239. 2004, The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories]</ref> The editor of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Dr. [[Richard Sternberg]], [[Smithsonian-Sternberg affair|came under intense scrutiny and persecution for the aforementioned article]] published by Dr. Meyer.

== Theory of evolution and little scientific consensus ==

''See also:'' [[Theory of evolution and little consensus]] and [[Theories of evolution]]

There is little scientific consensus on how macroevolution is said to have happened and the claimed mechanisms of evolutionary change, as can be seen in the following quotes:
{{cquote|When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: "It happened." Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd. -(Simon Conway Morris, [palaeontologist, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge University, UK], "Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11)<ref>
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/mechns01.html Stephen E. Jones, Creation/Evolution Quotes: Mechanisms #1]
* Simon Conway Morris, [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WSN-4195FC1-1&_user=681891&_coverDate=01%2F07%2F2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000037419&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=681891&md5=1806889a6d57f9282db2e4c04d32e8f7 Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"“The history of organic life is indemonstrable; we cannot prove a whole lot in evolutionary biology, and our findings will always be hypothesis. There is one true evolutionary history of life, and whether we will actually ever know it is not likely. Most importantly, we have to think about questioning underlying assumptions, whether we are dealing with [[molecule]]s or anything else.” - Jeffrey H. Schwartz, Professor of Biological Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, February 9, 2007<ref>
* [http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/there-is-no-theory-of-evolution/ Uncommon Descent - The Intelligent Design Weblog of William Dembski, Denyse O'Leary and friends, There Is No Theory of Evolution, February 20, 2007]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"If it is true that an influx of doubt and uncertainty actually marks periods of healthy growth in a science, then evolutionary biology is flourishing today as it seldom has flourished in the past. For biologists collectively are less agreed upon the details of evolutionary mechanics than they were a scant decade ago. Superficially, it seems as if we know less about evolution than we did in 1959, the centennial year of Darwin's on the Origin of Species." - [[Niles Eldredge]], "Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the [[Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium|Theory of Punctuated Equilibria]]," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, 1985, p.14<ref>[http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/mechns01.html Stephen E. Jones, Creation/Evolution Quotes: Mechanisms #1]</ref>}}

[[Pierre-Paul Grassé]], who served as Chair of Evolution at Sorbonne University for thirty years and was ex-president of the French Academy of Sciences, stated the following:
{{cquote|Through use and abuse of hidden [[postulate]]s, of bold, often ill-founded [[extrapolation]]s, a [[pseudoscience]] has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of [[biology]] and is leading astray many [[biochemistry|biochemists]] and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case....

Today, our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood, and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses of the interpretations and extrapolations that [[theory|theoreticians]] put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their [[sectarianism]], purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and the falsity of their beliefs. - Pierre-Paul Grassé - Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), pages 6 and 8<ref>http://bevets.com/equotesg3.htm</ref>}}
===Recent clamour to revise the modern evolutionary synthesis===

''See:'' [[Modern evolutionary synthesis]] and [[Theories of evolution]]

== Evolutionary Theory and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎ ==
[[Image:Haeckel.jpg|right|thumb|[[Ernst Haeckel]]]]
:''See also: [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Theories of evolution]] and [[Evolution and just so stories]]
A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist and [[Stephen Gould]], who held a [[agnostic|agnostic]] worldview<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/03/20/a-review-of-the-dawkins-delusion-by-alister-mcgrath/</ref> and promoted the notion of [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|non-overlapping magesteria]], wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':
{{cquote|"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"<ref name="haeckel">[http://www.creationism.org/wakefield/haeckel.htm "Another Evolution Fraud Exposed"] - Creationism.org, INVESTIGATING GENESIS SERIES.</ref>}}

An irony of history is that the March 9, 1907 edition of the [[NY Times]] refers to Ernst Haeckel as the "celebrated Darwinian and founder of the Association for the Propagation of Ethical [[Atheism]]."<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C03EFDD123EE033A2575AC0A9659C946697D6CF</ref>

Stephen Gould continues by quoting Michael Richardson of the St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London, who stated: "I know of at least fifty recent biology texts which use the drawings uncritically".<ref name="haeckel" />

== Lack of Any Clear Transitional Forms ==

''See also:'' [[Evolution and the fossil record]]

As alluded to earlier, today there are over one hundred million identified and cataloged [[fossils]] in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.halos.com/printer.htm?page=/book/ctm-07-e.htm Creation's Tiny Mystery: Chapter 7: Creation Science—a Public Issue]</ref> If the evolutionary position was valid, then there should be "transitional forms" in the fossil record reflecting the intermediate life forms. Another term for these "transitional forms" is "missing links".
[[File:Darwin.jpg|alt=charles darwin's theory of evolution|right|thumb|225px|[[Charles Darwin]] wrote: "When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref> ]]
Charles Darwin admitted that his theory required the existence of "transitional forms." Darwin wrote: "So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth."<ref>[http://www.thedarwinpapers.com/oldsite/number5/darwin5.htm THE DARWIN PAPERS, VOLUME 1, NUMBER V, FOSSILS: HISTORY WRITTEN IN STONE]</ref> However, Darwin wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every strata full of such intermediate links? [[Geology]] assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory."<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/Discontinuties.html NATURAL DISCONTINUITIES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD]</ref> Darwin thought the lack of transitional links in his time was because "only a small portion of the surface of the earth has been geologically explored and no part with sufficient care...".<ref>[[Charles Darwin]], ''Origin of the Species'', [http://www.darwin-literature.com/The_Origin_of_Species/10.html Chapter X: ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD]</ref> As Charles Darwin grew older he became increasingly concerned about the lack of evidence for the theory of evolution in terms of the existence of transitional forms. Darwin wrote, "“When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref>

Scientist Dr. Michael Denton wrote regarding the fossil record:
{{cquote|"It is still, as it was in Darwin's day, overwhelmingly true that the first representatives of all the major classes of organisms known to biology are already highly characteristic of their class when they make their initial appearance in the fossil record. This phenomenon is particularly obvious in the case of the [[Invertebrate|invertebrate]] fossil record. At its first appearance in the ancient Paleozoic seas, invertebrate life was already divided into practically all the major groups with which we are familiar today.<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/Discontinuties.html NATURAL DISCONTINUITIES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD]</ref>}}

Creationists assert that evolutionists have had over 140 years to find a transitional fossil and nothing approaching a conclusive transitional form has ever been found and that only a handful of highly doubtful examples of transitional fossils exist.<ref>
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3001 Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [http://www.anointed-one.net/quotes.html Quotes of Famous Evolutionist Regarding the Fossil Record]
</ref> Distinguished anthropologist Sir Edmund R. Leach declared, "Missing links in the sequence of fossil evidence were a worry to Darwin. He felt sure they would eventually turn up, but they are still missing and seem likely to remain so."<ref>Sir Edmund Leech, [http://www.evolutionisdead.com/quotes.php?QID=241 Addresing the 1981 annual meeting of the British Association for the advancement of Science, 'Men, bishop and apes'. Nature vol 293, 3 Sep. 1981, p. 19 and 20]</ref>

As a response, [[Deceit|deceitful]] evolutionists frequently point to some alleged transitional fossils. <ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates</ref> However, these were likely hoaxes or misidentified non-transitional fossils, just like the [[Piltdown Man]], a hoax "missing link" allegedly done by Charles Dawson. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man</ref>

David B. Kitts of the School of Geology and [[Geophysics]] at the University of Oklahoma wrote that "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and [[paleontology]] does not provide them…".<ref>Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Brad Harrub, Ph.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2088 15 Answers to John Rennie and Scientific American’s Nonsense—Argument #13]</ref>

David Raup, who was the curator of geology at the museum holding the world's largest fossil collection, the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, observed:
{{cquote|"[Darwin] was embarrassed by the fossil record because it didn't look the way he predicted it would .... Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. ... [W]e have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time." - David M. Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology," ''Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin'' 50 (January 1979): 22-23, 24-25.}}

One of the most famous proponents of the theory of evolution was the late [[Harvard]] paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. Embarrassed with the lack of the fossil record, Gould explained away the lack of transitional fossils with punctuated equilibrium:
{{cquote|The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. Yet Darwin was so wedded to gradualism that he wagered his entire theory on a denial of this literal record:

The geological record is extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large extent explain why we do not find interminable varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps. He who rejects these views on the nature of the geological record, will rightly reject my whole theory.

Darwin's argument still persists as the favored escape of most paleontologists from the embarrassment of a record that seems to show so little of evolution. In exposing its cultural and methodological roots, I wish in no way to impugn the potential validity of gradualism (for all general views have similar roots). I only wish to point out that it is never "seen" in the rocks.

Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.

For several years, Niles Eldredge of the American Museum of Natural History and I have been advocating a resolution to this uncomfortable paradox. We believe that Huxley was right in his warning . The modern theory of evolution does not require gradual change. In fact, the operation of Darwinian processes should yield exactly what we see in the fossil record. <ref>Gould, S. J. 1977. "Evolution's Erratic Pace" in Natural History 86(5):12-16.</ref>}}

For more information please see:

*[[Evolution and the fossil record]]

* [[Paleoanthropology]] or [[Human evolution]]

*[[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎]]

=== The Fossil Record quotes ===
[[Creationism|Creationists]] can cite quotations which assert that no solid fossil evidence for the theory of evolution position exists:
{{cquote|"...I still think that to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favour of special creation. - E.J.H. Corner (Professor of Botany, Cambridge University, England), “Evolution” in Anna M. MacLeod and L. S. Cobley (eds.), Contemporary Botanical Thought (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961), p. 97<ref>Christian Answers Network, [http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/orb-fossil-ref.html The Fossil Record - References]</ref><ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes23.html Notes and References: Fossil Gaps]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time." - Lord Solly Zuckerman (professor of anatomy at Birmingham University in England and chief scientific adviser to the British government from the time period of 1964 to 1971), Beyond The Ivory Tower, Toplinger Publications, New York, 1970, p. 19.<ref>Sean Pitman, M.D., [http://www.detectingdesign.com/earlyman.html Early Man]</ref><ref>[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jzuckerman.htm Solly Zuckerman: Biography]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether". Henry Gee, “Return to the Planet of the Apes,” Nature, Vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p. 131.<ref>[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412131a0.html Henry Gee, “Return to the Planet of the Apes,” Nature, Vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p. 131.]</ref>}}

For more fossil record quotes please see: [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Fossil record quotes] and [http://creationwiki.org/Fossil_record_quotes Additional fossil record quotes]

== Paleoanthropology ==
''For more information please see'': [[Paleoanthropology]] and [[Human evolution]]
[[Image:Nebraska Man.jpg|thumb|alt=human evolution|150px|right|[[Nebraska man]] was made famous by Henry Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History. Nebraska man turned out to be nothing more than a single pig-like tooth.]]
[[Paleoanthropology]] is an interdisciplinary branch of [[anthropology]] that concerns itself with the origins of early humans and it examines and evaluates items such as fossils and [[artifact]]s.<ref>[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9058075/paleoanthropology Encyclopedia Britannica (online): Paleoanthropology]</ref> Dr. David Pilbeam is a paleoanthropologist who received his Ph.D. at [[Yale]] University and Dr. Pilbeam is presently Professor of Social Sciences at [[Harvard]] University and Curator of Paleontology at the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. In addition, Dr. Pilbeam served as an advisor for the Kenya government regarding the creation of an international institute for the study of human origins.<ref>[[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/fossils.asp Those Fossils Are A Problem]</ref>

Dr. Pilbeam wrote a review of Richard Leakey's book ''Origins'' in the journal ''American Scientist'':
{{cquote|...perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleoanthropology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about. But that is heresy.<ref name="thoughtsonEvo">Sean Pitman, M.D., [http://www.creationapologetics.org/refuting/quotes.html Thoughts on Evolution From Scientists and Other Intellectuals]</ref>}}

Dr. Pilbeam wrote the following regarding the theory of evolution and paleoanthropology:
{{cquote|I am also aware of the fact that, at least in my own subject of paleoanthropology, "theory" - heavily influenced by implicit ideas almost always dominates "data". ....Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influence the way fossils are interpreted.<ref name="thoughtsonEvo" />}}

Evolutionist and Harvard professor [[Richard Lewontin]] wrote in 1995 that "Despite the excited and optimistic claims that have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species can be established as our direct ancestor...."<ref>Brad Harrub, Ph.D., Bert Thompson, Ph.D., and Eric Lyons, M.Min., [https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=153 ''Human Evolution and the “Record of the Rocks”'']</ref> In the September 2005 issue of [[National Geographic]], Joel Achenbach asserted that human evolution is a "fact" but he also candidly admitted that the field of paleoanthropology "has again become a rather glorious mess."<ref>Brad Harrub, Ph.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=126&article=1555 ''The “Glorious Mess” of Human Origins'']</ref><ref name="bonesrightplaces">[[National Geographic]] (online edition), Joel Achenbach, [http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/resources_who.html PALEOANTHROPOLOGY, Out of Africa, Are we looking for bones in all the right places?]</ref> In the same National Geographic article Harvard paleoanthropologist Dan Lieberman states, "We're not doing a very good job of being honest about what we don't know...".<ref name="bonesrightplaces" />

Concerning pictures of the supposed ancestors of man featured in science journals and the news media Boyce Rensberger wrote in the journal ''Science'' the following regarding their highly speculative nature:
{{cquote|Unfortunately, the vast majority of artist's conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. But a handful of expert natural-history artists begin with the fossil bones of a hominid and work from there…. Much of the reconstruction, however, is guesswork. Bones say nothing about the fleshy parts of the nose, lips, or ears. Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.... Hairiness is a matter of pure conjecture.<ref>Frank Sherwin, M.A., [http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=823 "Human Evolution" An Update]</ref><ref>Bert Thompson, P.H.D. and Brad Harrub, P.H.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/dc-02-safull.pdf 15 Answers to John Rennie and ''Scientific American's'' Nonsense]</ref>}}

Creation scientists concur with Dr. Pilbeam regarding the speculative nature of the field of paleoanthropology and assert there is no compelling evidence in the field of paleoanthropology for the various theories of human evolution.<ref>
*[http://creation.com/anthropology-and-apemen-questions-and-answers Anthropology and Apeman Questions and Answers - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/Anthropology.asp Anthropology and Apeman Questions and Answers - Answers in Genesis]
*[http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/127 ''Human Evolution and the “Record of the Rocks”'']</ref>

== Microevolution vs. macroevolution ==

In 2011, Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]] declared:
{{cquote|It is a commonly held belief of evolutionists that small changes in genetic materials (mutations) will ultimately produce the presumed large changes necessary for one biological organism to change into a different kind of biological organism which is commonly called [[macroevolution]]. This belief is not valid. Scientifically, a mutation is a copying error of previously existing information contained in the DNA: a mutation is a structural change in the hereditary material which makes the offspring different from its parents.
[[File:Grady S. McMurtry.jpg|right|thumb|175px|Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]] ]]
It is acknowledged that the Laws of Genetics are conservative, they are not “creative.” Genetics only copies or rearranges the previously existing information and passes it on to the next generation. When copying information, you have only two choices; you can only copy it perfectly or imperfectly, you cannot copy something “more perfectly.” Mutations do not build one upon another beneficially. Mutations do not create new organs; they only modify existing organs and structures. Mutations overwhelmingly lose information; they do not gain it; therefore, mutations cause changes which are contrary of evolutionary philosophy.

As a follow on, the addition of excess undirected energy will destroy the previously existing system. Indeed, you will never get an increase in the specifications on the DNA to create new organs without the input from a greater intelligence.

Mutations affect and are affected by many genes and other intergenic information acting in combination with one another. The addition of the accidental duplication of previously existing information is detrimental to any organism.

Mutations do produce “[[microevolution]],” however, this term is far better understood as merely “lateral adaptation,” which is only variation within a kind, a mathematical shifting of gene frequency within a gene pool. The shifting of gene frequencies and a loss of information cannot produce macroevolution.

As Dr. [[Roger Lewin]] commented after the 1980 University of Chicago conference entitled “Macroevolution”:

“The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. … At the risk of doing violence to the positions of some of the people at the meeting, the answer can be given as a clear, No.” [Emphasis added]

Dr. Roger Lewin, “Evolution Theory under Fire,” Science. Vol. 210, 21 November 1980. p. 883-887.<ref>http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=116</ref>}}

In 1988, the prominent [[Harvard University]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote in his essay ''Does Microevolution Explain Macroevolution''?:
{{cquote|Among all the claims made during the [[Modern evolutionary synthesis|evolutionary synthesis]], perhaps the one that found least acceptance was the assertion that all phenomena of macroevolution can be ‘reduced to,' that is, explained by, microevolutionary genetic processes. Not surprisingly, this claim was usually supported by geneticists but was widely rejected by the very biologists who dealt with macroevolution, the morphologists and paleontologists. Many of them insisted that there is more or less complete discontinuity between the processes at the two levels—that what happens at the species level is entirely different from what happens at the level of the higher categories. Now, 50 years later the controversy remains undecided.

...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.<ref>http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html</ref>}}

== Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics ==

[[Image:Jonathansafarti.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|right|[[Jonathan Sarfati]] ]]
''See also:'' [[Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics|Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics and evolution]]

[[Creation Ministries International]] has a great wealth of information on why the second law of thermodynamics is incompatible with the evolutionary [[paradigm]].

Some of their key resources on this matter are:

*[http://creation.com/the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-answers-to-critics The Second Law of Thermodynamics: Answers to Critics] by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]]

*[http://creation.com/thermodynamics-and-order-questions-and-answers Thermodynamics Questions and Answers]

*[http://creation.com/thermodynamics-and-evolution Thermodynamics and evolution]

*[http://creation.com/some-thermodynamics-criticisms-and-answers Some thermodynamics criticisms — and answers]

== Punctuated Equilibrium ==

''See also:'' [[Theories of evolution]]

[[Image:StephenGould.jpg|left|thumbnail|170px|[[Stephen Jay Gould]] ]]
Because the fossil record is characterized by the abrupt appearance of species and stasis in the fossil record the theory of [[punctuated equilibrium]] was developed and its chief proponents were [[Stephen Gould]], Niles Eldridge, and Steven Stanley. According to the American Museum of Natural History the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium "asserts that evolution occurs in dramatic spurts interspersed with long periods of stasis".<ref>http://www.amnh.org/science/divisions/paleo/bio.php?scientist=eldredge</ref> Because Stephen Gould was the leading proponent of the theory of punctuated equilibrium much of the criticism of the theory has been directed towards Gould.<ref>http://dannyreviews.com/h/The_Dynamics_of_Evolution.html</ref><ref>[http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/spring02/editor.shtml.htm Yale Review of Book, Spring 2002 issue, Monograph: Punctuated Equilibrium]</ref> The development of a new evolutionary school of thought occurring due to the fossil record not supporting the evolutionary position was not unprecedented. In 1930, Austin H. Clark, an American evolutionary zoologist who wrote 630 articles and books in six languages, came up with an evolutionary hypothesis called [[zoogenesis]] which postulated that each of the major types of life forms evolved separately and independently from all the others.<ref>http://creation.com/zoogenesis-a-theory-of-desperation</ref> Prior to publishing his work entitled ''The New Evolution: Zoogenesis'', Clark wrote in a journal article published in the ''Quarterly Review of Biology'' that "so far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any one of the major groups arose from any other."<ref>http://creation.com/zoogenesis-a-theory-of-desperation#endRef4</ref>

In 1995, there was an essay in the ''New York Review of Books'' by the late John Maynard Smith, a noted evolutionary biologist who was considered the dean of British [[Neo-Darwinism|neo-Darwinists]], and Smith wrote the following regarding Gould's work in respect to the theory of evolution:
{{cquote|The evolutionary biologists with whom I have discussed his [Gould’s] work tend to see him as a man whose ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth bothering with, but as one who should not be publicly criticized because he is at least on our side against the creationists. All this would not matter, were it not that he is giving non biologists a largely false picture of the state of evolutionary theory."<ref>http://www.arn.org/ftissues/ft9801/johnson.html</ref><ref>http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/shermer_sjgould.pdf</ref>}}

Noted journalist and author Robert Wright , wrote in 1996 that, “among top-flight evolutionary biologists, Gould is considered a pest—not just a lightweight, but an actively muddled man who has warped the public's understanding of Darwinism.”<ref>http://dannyreviews.com/h/The_Dynamics_of_Evolution.html</ref><ref>[http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/spring02/editor.shtml.htm Yale Review of Book, Spring 2002 issue, Monograph: Punctuated Equilibrium]</ref>

Creation scientist Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote regarding the implausibility of the theory of punctuated equilibrium and the implausibility of the idea of gradual evolution the following:
{{cquote|...supporters of ‘jerky’ evolution [[saltationism]] and its relative, [[Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuated equilibria]]) point out that the fossil record does not show gradualism, and that the hypothetical transitional forms would be disadvantageous. But supporters of [[Phyletic gradualism|gradual evolution]] point out that large, information-increasing changes are so improbable that one would need to invoke a secular miracle. Creationists agree with ''both'': punctuational evolution can’t happen, and gradual evolution can’t happen—in fact, particles-to-people evolution can’t happen at all!<ref>[http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-2-chapter-3-argument-evolution-is-true-science-not-just-a-theory Refuting evolution]</ref>}}

== Atheism and the evolutionary paradigm are religious in nature and legal implications ==

Many of the leaders of the atheist movement, such as the evolutionist and atheist [[Richard Dawkins]], argue for [[atheism]] and evolution with a religious fervor.

Daniel Smartt has identified seven dimensions which make up religion: narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material. It is not necessary in Smartt's model for every one of these to be present in order for something to be a religion.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion "Atheism: A religion"], Daniel Smartt, Creation.com</ref>. However, it can be argued that all seven are present in the case of atheism.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref> Please see: [http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]and [http://creation.com/atheism Atheism] and [[Atheism is a religion]].

=== Atheism is a religion and its legal implications as far as the teaching of evolution ===
[[File:Paul gosselin.JPG|thumbnail|right|275px|The Canadian [[anthropology|anthropologist]] [[Paul Gosselin]] points out that evolution is a [[secular]] origins [[myth]].<ref>[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/origines/myth.htm Myths of Origin and the Theory of Evolution]</ref> ]]
[[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalistic]] notions concerning origins are religious in nature and both have legal implications as far as evolution being taught in public schools.<ref>http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_error_summary.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_Error.pdf</ref>

John Calvert, a lawyer and [[intelligent design]] proponent wrote:
{{cquote|The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the [[United States]] held that atheism is a [[religion]]. Therefore, it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently, public schools are often unwittingly promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins.<ref>[http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2011/08/intelligent-design-leader-john-calvert.html The effects of the Question Evolution! Campaign will be devastating to evolutionary belief and atheism]</ref>}}

See also:

*[[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]
*[[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]

=== Evolution as a secular origins myth ===

Evolution is a secular origins myth of [[atheism|atheists]], [[agnosticism|agnostics]] and members of other [[liberal Christianity|theologically liberal]] religious sects (theologically [[liberal]] religious sects often dismiss out of hand various [[supernatural]] events in history due to their hostility towards [[God]] and the supernatural). See: [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

== Implausible Explanations and the Evolutionary Position==
[[Image:Feather image.jpg|thumb|300px|left|[[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random [[mutation]]s."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>]]
Individuals who are against the evolutionary position assert that evolutionary scientists employ extremely implausible "just so stories" to support their position and have done this since at least the time of Charles Darwin.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/two-just-so-stories/</ref>
<ref>http://darwinstories.blogspot.com/</ref>

A well known example of a "just so story" is when Darwin, in his Origin of the Species, wrote a chapter entitled "Difficulties on Theory" in which he stated:
{{cquote|"In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale."<ref>http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/chapter-06.html</ref>}}

Even the prominent evolutionist and geneticist Professor Richard Lewontin admitted the following:
{{cquote|"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to [[materialism]]. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." - Richard Lewontin, ‘Billions and billions of demons’, The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-1-evolution-creation-science-religion-facts-bias</ref>}}

Dr. Sarfati wrote regarding the theory of evolution the following:
{{cquote|The same logic applies to the [[dinosaur]]-[[Bird|bird]] debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite Feduccia’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the dino-to-bird advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-crocodiles. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!<ref>http://creation.com/new-four-winged-feathered-dinosaur</ref>}}
[[Image:BacterialFlagellum.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[flagellum|Bacterial Flagellum]] with rotary motor, courtesy of Access Research Network (Art Battson)]]

Opponents to the theory of evolution commonly point to the following in nature as being implausibly created through evolutionary processes:
*various [[Symbiosis|symbiotic relationships]] found in nature.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/5044</ref><ref>http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/booklets/evolution/cooperat.html</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/146/</ref>
*[[flagellum|bacterial flagellum]]<ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2331</ref>
*[[homing]]<ref>[http://creation.com/wings-on-the-wind Wings on the wind
How do migrating birds know exactly when, and where, to go?]</ref>
*the origin of flight in the animal kingdom<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i1/planes.asp</ref>
* human [[brain]]<ref>http://creation.com/the-brain-brainier-than-believed-before</ref><ref>http://creation.com/the-human-bodygods-masterpiece</ref><ref>http://creation.com/mind-by-design-peter-line-interview</ref>
*[[migration]]<ref>http://creation.com/the-magnificent-migrating-monarch</ref>
*the [[whale]]<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-5-whale-evolution</ref><ref>http://creation.com/whale-explodes-fossil-theory</ref>
*the [[Venus flytrap]]<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/4340</ref>
*the [[Bombardier beetle]]<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/beetle.asp</ref>
*the [[Woodpecker|woodpecker]]<ref>http://www.creationism.org/heinze/Woodpecker.htm</ref>

Lastly, biochemist [[Michael Behe]] wrote the following:
{{cquote|"Molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority. There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or book—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. There are assertions that such evolution occurred, but absolutely none are supported by pertinent experiments or calculations. Since no one knows molecular evolution by direct experience, and since there is no authority on which to base claims of knowledge, it can truly be said that—like the contention that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl this year—the assertion of Darwinian molecular evolution is merely bluster." - Michael J. Behe, [[Darwin’s Black Box]] (New York: The Free Press, 1996), p. 186<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes10.html#wp1033719</ref>}}

== Statements of Design ==
:''See main article: [[Intelligent design]]''

[[Phillip E. Johnson]] cites [[Francis Crick]] in order to illustrate the fact that the biological world has the strong appearance of being designed:
{{cquote|"One of the world's most famous scientists, probably the most famous living biologist, is Sir [[Francis Crick]], the British co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, a Nobel Prize winner... Crick is also a fervent atheistic [[materialism|materialist]], who propounds the particle story. In his autobiography, Crick says very candidly biologists must remind themselves daily that what they study was not created, it evolved; it was not designed, it evolved. Why do they have to remind themselves of that? Because otherwise, the facts which are staring them in the face and trying to get their attention might break through. What we discovered when I developed a working group of scientists, philosophers, et al., in the United States was that living organisms look as if they were designed and they look that way because that is exactly what they are." - Evolution And Christian Faith by [[Phillip E. Johnson]]<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/ntcreation.html</ref>}}

Stephen C. Meyer offers the following statement regarding the design of the biological world:
{{cquote|"During the last forty years, [[molecular biology]] has revealed a complexity and intricacy of design that exceeds anything that was imaginable during the late-nineteenth century. We now know that organisms display any number of distinctive features of intelligently engineered high-tech systems: information storage and transfer capability; functioning codes; sorting and delivery systems; regulatory and feed-back loops; signal transduction circuitry; and everywhere, complex, mutually-interdependent networks of parts. Indeed, the complexity of the biomacromolecules discussed in this essay does not begin to exhaust the full complexity of living systems. As even the staunch materialist [[Richard Dawkins]] has allowed, "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." Yet the materialistic science we have inherited from the late-nineteenth century, with its exclusive conceptual reliance on matter and energy, could neither envision nor can it now account for the biology of the information age." - The Origin of Life and the Death of Materialism by [[Stephen C. Meyer]], Ph.D.<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_origins.htm</ref>}}
[[File:Darwin monkey cartoon.jpg|left|thumbnail|150px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]] ]]
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states the following regarding a candid admission of Charles Darwin:
{{cquote|In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death:

In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of [[Orchid]]s, and upon The [[Earthworm]]s, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away.”(Argyll 1885, 244]<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref>}}

== Detractors of Evolution and the Scientific Journals ==
Advocates of the theory of evolution have often claimed that those who oppose the theory of evolution don't publish their opposition to the theory of evolution in the appropriate scientific literature (creationist scientists have peer reviewed journals which favor the creationist position).<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640</ref><ref>http://creationresearch.org/crsq.html</ref><ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3873/</ref> Recently, there has been articles which were favorable to the [[intelligent design]] position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the theory of evolution.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640</ref>

== Unqualified to be a scientific theory==

[[Image:Image014.jpg|thumb|150px|right|[[Karl Popper]]]]
[[Karl Popper]], a leading philosopher of science and originator of the falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation of science from nonscience,<ref>
* http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
* http://www.discovery.org/a/3524</ref> stated that Darwinism is "not a testable scientific theory, but a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] research programme."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref> Leading Darwinist and philosopher of science, Michael Ruse declared the concerning Popper's statement and [[Falsifiability of evolution|the actions he took after making that statement]]: "Since making this claim, Popper himself has modified his position somewhat; but, disclaimers aside, I suspect that even now he does not really believe that Darwinism in its modern form is genuinely falsifiable."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref>

The issue of the [[Falsifiability of evolution|falsifiability of the evolutionary position]] is very important issue and although offering a poor cure to the problem that Karl Popper described, committed evolutionists Louis Charles Birch & Paul R. Ehrlich stated in the journal ''[[Nature]]'':
{{cquote|Our theory of evolution has become, as Popper described, one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it. It is thus outside of empirical science but not necessarily false. No one can think of ways in which to test it. Ideas, either without basis or based on a few laboratory experiments carried out in extremely simplified systems, have become part of an evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training. The cure seems to us not to be a discarding of the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory, but more skepticism about many of its tenets.<ref>L.C. Birch and P.R. Ehrlich, Nature, vol. 214 (1967), p. 349</ref>}}

The [[Sweden|Swedish]] cytogeneticist, Antonio Lima-De-Faria, who has been knighted
by the king of Sweden for his scientific achievements, noted that "there has never been a theory of evolution".<ref>[http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0807/S00053.htm Altenberg 16: An Exposé Of The Evolution Industry, July 6, 2008, by Suzan Mazur]</ref><ref>http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-tales-from-altenberg-suzan-mazurs.html</ref>

== Evolution is a Religion and Not Science ==

''See also:'' [[Evolution is a religion]]

[[Michael Ruse]], the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist science philosopher admitted, “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref> In the leading American science science journal ''Science'', Michael Ruse published an article in 2003 entitled ''Is Evolution a Secular Religion?''<ref>[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/299/5612/1523.full Is Evolution a Secular Religion?] by Dr. [[Michael Ruse]], ''Science'', March 7, 2003</ref>

Creationist opponents of evolution commonly point out that evolution is a religion and not science.<ref> *[http://creation.com/the-religious-nature-of-evolution The religious nature of evolution] by Dr. [[Carl Wieland]]
*[http://creation.com/evolution-religious Religious Nature of Evolution and its Attack on Christianity]
*[http://www.icr.org/article/455/ Evolution is a religion - not science] by Dr. [[Henry Morris]]
*[http://creation.com/evolution-as-religion Evolution as religion]</ref>

For more information, please see: [[Evolution is a religion]]

== Effect on Scientific Endeavors Outside the Specific Field of Biology ==
[[Image:Lysenko.jpg|right|thumbnail|150px|[[Trofim Denisovich Lysenko]]]]
[[Stephen Wolfram]] in his book ''A New Kind of Science'' has stated that the Darwinian theory of evolution has, in recent years, "increasingly been applied outside of biology."<ref>http://www.wolframscience.com/nksonline/page-14-text?firstview=1</ref>

===Lysenkoism===
Evolutionary theory played a prominent role in regards to atheistic communism.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3054/</ref> Communists, in particular [[Stalinism]], favored a version of [[Lamarckism]] called [[Lysenkoism]] developed by the [[Atheism|atheist]] [[Trofim Denisovich Lysenko]].<ref>http://www.bookrags.com/research/lysenkoism-wog/</ref> Lsyenko was made member of the Supreme [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] and head of the Institute of Genetics of the [[Soviet Academy of Sciences]].<ref>http://www.bartelby.com/65/ly/Lysenko.html</ref> Later Lysenko became President of the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences.<ref>http://www.bartelby.com/65/ly/Lysenko.html</ref> Many [[genetics|geneticists]] were imprisoned and executed for their ''bourgeois science'', and agricultural policies based on Lysenkoism that were adopted under the Communist leaders [[Joseph Stalin]] and [[Mao Zedong]] caused famines and the death of millions.<ref>http://www.bookrags.com/research/lysenkoism-wog/</ref>

===Medical Science===
The theory of evolution has had a negative effect on the field of [[medicine|medical science]]. According to Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]] the list of [[vestigial organs]] in humans has gone from 180 in 1890 to 0 in 1999.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/vestigial.asp</ref> Furthermore, Dr. Bergman states the following:
{{cquote|Few examples of vestigial organs in humans are now offered, and the ones that are have been shown by more recent research to be completely functional (and in many cases critically so, see Bergman and Howe)...

One popular book on the human body which discussed vestigial organs stated that next to [[circumcision]]

‘… tonsillectomy is the most frequently performed piece of surgery. Doctors once thought [[tonsils]] were simply useless evolutionary leftovers and took them out thinking that it could do no harm. Today there is considerable evidence that there are more troubles in the upper respiratory tract ''after'' tonsil removal than before, and doctors generally agree that simple enlargement of tonsils is hardly an indication for [[surgery]]...’<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/vestigial.asp</ref>}}

===Astronomy===
Young earth creation scientist Dr. Jonathan Sarfati states that evolutionary thought has been applied to the field of astronomy.<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-7-astronomy</ref> Sarfati's claim is supported by the fact that astronomers do refer to the "evolution of the universe".<ref>
* http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7042/edsumm/e050602-01.html
* http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975MoIzN....Q....Z
* http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995deun.book.....S
</ref> Sarfati asserts the evolutionary view has had a negative effect on astronomy and that arguments to support the proposed evolutionary time scales of billions of years via the field of astronomy are invalid.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3836</ref> Creationists can cite examples of scientists stating that evolutionary ideas in astronomy have failed to have any explanatory power:
{{cquote|““...most every prediction by theorists about [[planet|planetary]] formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes43.html Strange Planets] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}
{{cquote|"Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the [[Solar System]] began about 350 years ago but have not yet been quantitatively successful, making this one of the oldest unsolved problems in modern science.” - Stephen G. Brush, A History of Modern Planetary Physics, Vol. 3 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 91.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43" />}}
{{cquote|“We don’t understand how a single [[star]] forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.” Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750.<ref name="creationsciencenotes60">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes60.html Star Births? Stellar Evolution?] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}

{{cquote|“We cannot even show convincingly how [[Galaxy|galaxies]], stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.” Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186.<ref name="creationsciencenotes61">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes61.html Galaxies] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}

In 2001, Cristina Chiappini wrote concering the [[Milky Way]] galaxy:

:". . . it is an elegant structure that shows both order and complexity. . . . The end product is especially remarkable in the light of what is believed to be the starting point: nebulous blobs of gas. How the universe made the Milky Way from such simple beginnings is not altogether clear. - Cristina Chiappini, "The Formation and Evolution of the Milky Way," American Scientist (vol. 89, Nov./Dec. 2001), p. 506.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>

Dr. [[Walt Brown]] provides numerous citations to the secular science literature that cite the failings of current old universe [[paradigm]] explanations in regards to the planets, stars, and galaxies.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43" /><ref name="creationsciencenotes60" /><ref name="creationsciencenotes61" />

===Origin of Life===
Evolutionary thought has had an influence on [[origin of life]] research as well. For example, a 2004 article in the ''International Journal of [[Astrobiology]]'' is titled ''On the applicability of Darwinian principles to [[chemical evolution]] that led to life''.<ref>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=240771</ref> It is also clear that early origin of life researcher Aleksandr Oparin who proposed materialist ideas regarding the origin of life was influenced by evolutionary thought.<ref>
* [http://creation.com/the-origin-of-life-a-problem-for-evolution Origin of life - a problem for evolution]
* http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9057170/Oparin,%20Aleksandr
</ref> However, the current [[origin of life|naturalistic explanations for the origin of life are inadequate]].

== Richard Dawkins and evolutionary quackery ==

See:'' [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience|Richard Dawkins and evolutionary quackery]]

== Age of the Earth and the Theory of Evolution ==
:''See main articles: [[Young Earth Creationism]], [[Geologic system]]''
As far as the evolutionary timeline posited by the evolutionary community, the various theories of evolution claim that the earth and universe are billions of years old and that macroevolutionary processes occurred over this time period.<ref name="sarfati3837">Sarfati, 1999, [http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth Chapter 8, How old is the earth?]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-7-astronomy</ref> [[William R. Corliss]] was a respected cataloger of scientific [[anomaly|anomalies]] and the science magazine ''[[New Scientist]]'' had an article which focused on Mr. Corliss's career as a cataloger of scientific anomalies.<ref>Adrian Hope, ''Finding a Home for Stray Fact'', New Scientist, July 14, 1977, p. 83</ref> Mr. Corliss cataloged scores of [[Anomaly|anomalies]] which challenge the old earth geology [[paradigm]].<ref>http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.net/articles/184</ref> [[Young earth creationism|Young earth creationist]] hold the [[earth]] and universe is approximately 6,000 years old.<ref name="sarfati3837" /> Young earth creationist scientists state the following is true: there are multiple lines of evidence pointing to a young earth and universe; the old earth and universe [[paradigm]] has numerous [[anomaly|anomalies]] and uses invalid dating methods, and there are multiple citations in the secular science literature that corroborate the implausibility of the old earth and universe paradigm (for details see: [[Young Earth Creationism]]).

See also:

*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]

*[http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?]

*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa Age of the earth and the universe]

== Scientific Community Consensus and the Macroevolution Position ==

''See also:'' [[Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief|Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief]]

[[Image:Lion6.jpg|thumb|210px|right|Until the 1970s the scientific consensus was wrong on how [[lion]]s killed their prey.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref> The [[Bible]] was correct regarding how lions killed their prey.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref>]]
A 1997 [[Gallup Organization|Gallup]] poll indicated that 55% of [[United States]] scientists believed that humans developed over a period of millions of years from less developed forms of life and that [[God]] had no part in the process, 40% believed in [[Theistic evolution|theistic evolution]], and 5% of scientists believed that God created man fairly much in his current form at one time within the last 10,000 years.<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/19991013122341/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/evolutionviews990816.html Views in U.S. Much Different Than Elsewhere], Kenneth Chang, ''ABCNews.com'', 1999.</ref> As noted earlier, in 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

Poll results regarding the amount of scientists who are skeptical or opposed to the evolutionary view could be underreporting the actual amount of scientists who are skeptical of the evolutionary view or hold the creation science view. Poll results may not be as precise as they could be as creation science organizations report widespread discrimination against scientists who hold the creation science view.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i2/suppression.asp</ref>
On April 18, 2008 a film documentary by [[Ben Stein]] entitled ''[[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]]!'' was released to the public which documents the [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution|suppression of scientific freedom of scientists who are critical of the evolutionary position]].<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57840</ref><ref>http://www.expelledthemovie.com/</ref>
Such suppression is not surprising given that a poll among United States scientists showed that approximately 45% of scientists believed there was no God.<ref>[http://www.pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/Scientists-and-Belief.aspx Scientists and belief]</ref> In addition, a survey found that 93% of the scientists who were members of the [[United States National Academy of Sciences]] do not believe there is a God.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6691/full/394313a0.html</ref> Given this state of affairs, a future [[paradigm shift]] from the theory of evolution to a creation science position could be slow given the worldviews of many scientists.
[[Image:Harvester-ants.jpg|thumb|205px|left|19th century [[Europe|European]] naturalists were wrong about [[ant]] behavior. The [[Bible]] was correct about ant behavior.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BWilliamsvsAnon71to73.htm</ref>]]
Also, the current scientific community consensus is no guarantee of truth. The [[History of science|history of science]] shows many examples where the scientific community consensus was in error, was scientifically unsound, or had little or no empirical basis. For example, [[bloodletting]] was practiced from antiquity and still had many practitioners up until the late 1800s.<ref>[http://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting History of bloodletting]</ref> In his essay, ''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D. wrote the following: "...history is rife with examples in which our best medical judgment was flawed. The prestigious British Medical Journal begun in 1828 chose the name Lancet to signal its scholarly intent and cutting edge therapy."<ref>''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D.</ref>
Also, in regards to modern medical science, in a 1991 [[BMJ]] (formerly called the British Medical Journal) article, Richard Smith (editor of BMJ at the time) wrote the following: "There are 30,000 biomedical journals in the world...Yet only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence, [[David Eddy]] professor of health policy and management at [[Duke University]], told a conference in Manchester last week. This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all."<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=1932964&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum]</ref> Next, [[Alchemy|alchemy]] was at one time considered to be a legitimate scientific pursuit and was studied by such notable individuals as [[Isaac Newton]], [[Robert Boyle]], [[Roger Bacon]], and [[Gottfried Leibniz]].<ref>http://www.levity.com/alchemy/caezza4.html</ref><ref>http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9011664/Roger-Bacon</ref> Given the aforementioned weaknesses in the evolutionary position and given that the history of science shows there have been some notable paradigm shifts,<ref>[http://deskarati.com/2011/08/17/scientific-revolutions-or-paradigm-shifts/ Scientific revolutions or paradigm shifts]</ref><ref>http://www.geoff-hart.com/resources/2006/intheory.htm</ref>the scientific consensus argument for the macroevolutionary theory certainly cannot be called an invincible argument.

In addition, biblical creationists can point out examples where the scientific community was in error and the Bible was clearly correct. For example, until the 1970s the scientific consensus on how lions killed their prey was in error and the Bible turned out to be right in this matter.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref> Also, for centuries the scientific community believed that snakes could not hear and the 1988 edition of The New [[Encyclopedia Britannica]] stated the snakes could not hear but that was mistaken and the Bible was correct in this matter.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BCobra94.htm</ref><ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BBritannicaCobra38.htm</ref> In addition, 19th century European naturalists were wrong concerning a matter regarding ant behavior and the Bible was correct.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BWilliamsvsAnon71to73.htm</ref> Many creationists such as the creationists at [[Creation Ministries International]] assert that the Bible contains knowledge that shows an understanding of scientific knowledge [http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible scientific foreknowledge beyond that believed to exist at the time the Bible was composed].<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge at Creationwiki]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/content/view/1718/</ref> In addition, [[Christianity]] had a profound influence in regards to the [[Christianity and Science|development of modern science]].

For more information see: [[Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief]]

== Social Effects of the Theory of Evolution ==

''For more information please see: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] and [[Evolutionary racism]] and [[Atheism and Evolution]]''
‎

There have been significant and negative social ramifications of the adoption of the theory of evolution. The theory has been foundational to [[Social Darwinism]], [[Nazism]] and [[Communism]] and has also been a source of racism.<ref>
* http://www.icr.org/article/454/
* http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v09n1p04.htm
* http://www.creation.com/content/view/3031/
* http://www.creation.com/content/view/3054/
* http://creation.com/content/view/1804/
* http://creation.com/charles-darwins-impactthe-bloodstained-legacy-of-evolution
* http://www.icr.org/article/55/
</ref>

=== Belief in evolution and sexual immorality ===

''See also:'' [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] and [[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]] and [[Bestiality and Germany]] and [[Bestiality and Sweden]]
[[Image:Carl weiland.jpg|thumbnail|150px|right|Dr. [[Carl Wieland]] is the Managing Director of Creation Ministries International ]]

In July of 2000, [[Creation Ministries International]] reported:
{{cquote|For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]]’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.

The research survey of 1535 people, conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness. Darwin himself apparently feared that belief in evolution by the common man would lead to social decay. The survey showed that people who believed in evolution were more likely to be in favour of premarital sex than those who rejected Darwin’s theory. Another issue which highlighted the contrast between the effect of evolutionary ideas and that of biblical principles was that Darwinians were reported to be ‘especially tolerant’ of [[abortion]].

In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’<ref>[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]</ref>}}

Also, according to [[atheism|atheist]] [[philosophy|philosopher]] David Stove the theory of evolution was influential in regards to the [[sexual revolution]].<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18094</ref>

See also:

*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]

=== Evolution and Nazism ===
[[Image:Hitlerspeech.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Adolf Hitler]]]]
The staunch evolutionist [[Stephen Gould]] admitted the following:
{{cquote|[[Ernst Haeckel|Haeckel]] was the chief apostle of evolution in [[Germany]].... His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science - all contributed to the rise of Nazism. - Stephen J. Gould, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny," Belknap Press: Cambridge MA, 1977, pp.77-78).<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/social.html</ref>}}

[[Adolf Hitler]] wrote the following [[Evolutionary racism|evolutionary racist]] material in his work ''[[Mein Kampf]]'':
{{cquote|If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such cases all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/09/15/a-church-apology-to-darwin/</ref>}}

[[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] also wrote in ''Mein Kampf'':
{{cquote|The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref>}}

Dr. Robert E.D. Clark also wrote:
{{cquote|“Adolf Hitler’s mind was captivated by evolutionary teaching — probably since the time he was a boy. Evolutionary ideas — quite undisguised — lie at the basis of all that is worst in Mein Kampf — and in his public speeches.”<ref>http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_holocaust_why_did_it_happen</ref>}}

Dr. [[Josef Mengele]]'s evolutionary thinking was in accordance with [[Social Darwinism|social Darwinist]] theories that [[Adolph Hitler]] and a number of [[German]] academics found appealing.<ref>[http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/herero-genocide Herero Genecide]</ref> Dr. Joseph Mengele studied under the leading proponents the "unworthy life" branch of evolutionary thought.<ref>[http://creation.com/refutation-of-new-scientists-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions-nazi-darwin-link The Darwin–Hitler connection]</ref> Dr. Mengele was one of the most notorious individuals associated with [[Nazi]] death camps and the [[Holocaust]].<ref>http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/joseph_mengele.htm</ref> Mengele obtained a infamous reputation due to his experiments on twins while at [[Auschwitz]]-Birkenau.<ref>http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/joseph_mengele.htm</ref>

B. Wilder-Smith wrote the following regarding [[Nazism]] and the theory of evolution:
{{cquote|One of the central planks in Nazi theory and doctrine was …evolutionary theory [and] … that all biology had evolved … upward, and that … less evolved types … should be actively eradicated [and] … that natural selection could and should be actively aided, and therefore [the Nazis] instituted political measures to eradicate … [[Jew]]s, and … blacks, whom they considered as “underdeveloped”.’<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i2/nazi.asp</ref>}}

[[Pulitzer Prize]] winning author Marilynne Robinson wrote the following regarding Hitler's racism in the November 2006 issue of Harper’s Magazine:
{{cquote|While it is true that persecution of the Jews has a very long history in Europe, it is also true that science in the twentieth century revived and absolutized persecution by giving it a fresh rationale — Jewishness was not religious or cultural, but genetic. Therefore no appeal could be made against the brute fact of a Jewish grandparent...

There is indeed [[history|historical]] precedent in the [[Spanish Inquisition]] for the notion of hereditary Judaism. But the fact that the worst religious thought of the sixteenth century can be likened to the worst scientific thought of the twentieth century hardly redounds to the credit of science."<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>}}
[[File:Stalin-140508 27880t.jpg|right|200px|thumb|The brutal [[atheism|atheist]] [[Joseph Stalin]] was greatly influenced by the work of [[Charles Darwin]].<ref>http://creation.com/the-darwinian-foundation-of-communism</ref>]]
As noted earlier, evolutionary ideas significantly influenced the thinking of the nineteenth and twentieth-century [[Communism|Communists]].<ref>http://creation.com/content/view/1804/</ref><ref>http://creation.com/charles-darwins-impactthe-bloodstained-legacy-of-evolution</ref> Karl Marx wrote in a letter the following, ""Darwin's book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the [[class struggle]] in history." Darwin's ideas also influenced the thinking of [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]], [[Vladimir Lenin]], and [[Joseph Stalin]].<ref>http://creation.com/the-darwinian-foundation-of-communism</ref>

=== Darwinism and communism ===

Governments under the banner of [[atheism|atheistic]] [[communism]] have caused the death of somewhere between 40 million to 260 million human lives.<ref>
*[http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/finalconflict/fcrevb102.html The Black Book of Communism]
*[http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hpcws/lelivrenoir.htm The Black Book of Communism]
*[http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM How Many Did Communist Regimes Murder?]
*[http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2526 The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression]</ref> Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term [[democide]] (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.<ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref>

=== Darwinism and racism ===

''See also:'' [[Evolutionary racism]]

Previously it was mentioned that evolutionary ideas contributed to the scourge of [[racism]]. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/racism.asp</ref> Charles Darwin and [[Thomas Huxley]] contributed greatly to the theory of evolution broadly being accepted in the 1900s. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref> Darwin, Huxley, and the 19th century evolutionists were racist in sentiment and believed the white race was superior. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref> For example, Charles Darwin wrote in his work ''[[The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex]]'' the following:
{{cquote|At some future period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.<ref>Charles Darwin, ''The Descent of Man'', Ch. VI, On The Birthplace and Antiquity Of Man</ref>}}
[[File:Ota Benga at Bronx Zoo.jpg|thumb|[[Ota Benga]] in the Bronx Zoo]]
John C. Burnham wrote, in the journal ''Science'', the following in regards to the theory of evolution and racism:
{{cquote|After 1859, the evolutionary schema raised additional questions, particularly whether or not Afro-Americans could survive competition with their white near-relations. The momentous answer was a resounding no.... The [[Africa]]n was inferior — he represented the missing link between [[ape]] and Teuton."<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref>}}

Harvard University's [[Stephen Jay Gould]] stated, "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory."<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref> Recent [[racism]] directed at [[Michelle Obama]] was the result of [[evolutionary racism]].<ref>http://creation.com/obama-racism-row</ref>

==== Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa's comments about black women and African history ====

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics. Dr. Kanazawa publishes a blog on the ''Psychology Today'' website called ''The Scientific Fundamentalist''.

In 2011, Dr. Kanazawa published the following inappropriate comment which was later pulled by the Psychology Today website:
{{cquote|It is very interesting to note that, even though black women are objectively less physically attractive than other women, black women (and men) subjectively consider themselves to be far more physically attractive than others.<ref>http://www.scribd.com/doc/55558908/Why-Are-Black-Women-Rated-Less-Physically-Attractive-Than-Other-Women-But-Black-Men-Are-Rated-Better-Looking-Than-Other-Men</ref>}}

Kanazawa has a "Savanna principle" hypothesis which speculates that societal problems are due to the human brain supposedly evolving in Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago in a very different environment from modern society.<ref>http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/38933</ref>

=== Darwinism and bestiality ===
[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|250px|The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the [[liberal]] and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] ]]

''See also:'' [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Irreligion and superstition]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The pro-evolution magazine the ''[[Scientific American]]'' speciously made this unwarranted speculation via their blog on the aberrant practice of bestiality:
{{cquote|After all, we are animals....

In any event, philosophical questions aside, I simply find it astounding — and incredibly fascinating from an evolutionary perspective — that so many people (as much as a full percent of the general population) are certifiable zoophiles. And scientific researchers appear to be slowly conceding that zoophilia may be a genuine human sexual orientation.<ref>Animal Lovers: Zoophiles Make Scientists Rethink Human Sexuality By Jesse Bering, March 24, 2010</ref>}}

Liberals [[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality|are more likely to believe]] in evolutionary pseudoscience. Concerning the aberrant practice of [[homosexuality]], the licentious [[liberal]] community [[Views on Homosexuality|has more favorable views]] on [[homosexuality]] than [[conservative]]s plus has a history of inflating the number of people who are homosexuals.<ref>[http://www.cwfa.org/content.asp?id=2099 How Bad Science Helped Launch the 'Gay' Revolution] By Robert H. Knight</ref> As far as the [[Causes of Homosexuality|causes of homosexuality]], the [[liberal]] community commonly ignores the existence of [[ex-homosexuals]] and errantly asserts that homosexuality is an immutable sexual orientation despite the fact that researchers [[Religious Upbringing and Culture Affects Rates of Homosexuality|have found cultures where homosexuality does not exist]].<ref>[http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead - Chapter 6]</ref> Thus, it is not surprising the ''Scientific American'' engaged in the above cited speculation concerning [[bestiality]].

In areas of the [[Western World]] where there is a significant amount of [[atheism|atheists]] and evolutionary belief, there have been notable problems related to [[bestiality]] (see: [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]]).

See also:

*[[Bestiality and Germany]]

*[[Bestiality and Sweden]]

*[[Denmark and bestiality]]

*[[Netherlands and bestiality]]

*[[Bestiality and Britain]]

*[[Washington state and bestiality]]

===Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science ===

See: [[Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science]]

=== Common behavior of online evolutionists ===
In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported that [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html</ref> Given that ''Wired Magazine'' and [[Vox Day]] declared for [[Atheism appears to be significantly less appealing to women| various reasons that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men]], it is not surprising the online dispute was bitter. In addition, Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]].

In 2010, the [[Christian apologetics]] website [[True Free Thinker]] wrote:
{{cquote|Scienceblogger [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/pz-myers-and-pavlovs-monkeys Chad Orzel described] the commentators on [[PZ Myers]] ' Scienceblogs.com site [[Pharyngula (blog)|Pharyngula]], and other Scienceblogs.com commentators, as "screechy monkeys."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/pz-myers-and-pavlovs-monkeys</ref>}}

In addition, there is a widespread problem with [[Atheist bullying|atheist cyberbullying]] on [[YouTube]] toward [[Christian]] and [[creationism|creationist]] YouTube channels. [[CreationWiki]] has developed a web page entitled [http://creationwiki.org/Creationist_YouTube_video Creationist YouTube video] designed to show creationists how to thwart atheist/evolutionist cyberbullies.

==Creation Scientists Tend to Win the Creation-Evolution Debates==
[[Image:Duanegishpic.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Dr. [[Duane Gish]]]]
:''For additional information please see the article: [[Atheism and Debate]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]]

Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970's particularly in the [[United States]]. Robert Sloan, Director of Paleontology at the University of Minnesota, reluctantly admitted to a ''Wall Street Journal'' reporter that the "creationists tend to win" the public debates which focused on the creation vs. evolution controversy.<ref>Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John, [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC0104W1E.htm Truth in Advertising: Damaging the Cause of Science]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>
In August of 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”
Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>

Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]].<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> Also, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]]. Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref>

==Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality ==
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|right|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by [[Baylor University]] yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
:''See also: [[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]] and
[[Theory of evolution and liberalism]]'' and [[Atheism and Evolution]] and [[Atheism and deception]]

As alluded to earlier, in the [[United States]], CBS News reported in October of 2005 that the [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|Americans most likely to believe only in the theory of evolution are liberals]].<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref> {{cquote|The CBS News reported the following:
Americans most likely to believe in only evolution are [[liberal]]s (36 percent), those who rarely or never attend religious services (25 percent), and those with a college degree or higher (24 percent).

White evangelicals (77 percent), weekly churchgoers (74 percent) and conservatives (64 percent), are mostly likely to say God created humans in their present form.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref>}}

Given that [[Professor values|liberalism is so prevalent in academia]], it is not entirely surprising that college graduates are indoctrinated into the evolutionary paradigm via evolutionary propaganda.

Despite the aforementioned lack of evidence for the evolutionary position and the aforementioned counter evidential nature of the evolutionary paradigm, atheists and liberals persist in advocating the evolutionary paradigm. The continued support of the atheist and liberal community for the evolutionary paradigm is not surprising given the that the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|...a comprehensive new study released by [[Baylor University]] yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

=== Evolutionary belief, irreligion, extraterrestial life, UFOlogy and other pseudoscience ===

See: [[Irreligion and superstition]]

=== Liberalism, Charles Darwin, and Denial of Creation ===

''See also:'' [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

[[File:113320508 2b86fdb94a.jpg|thumb|201px|right|The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref> ]]‎Many liberals when faced with the compelling data for creation science and against the evolutionary paradigm irrationally attempt to suppress the evidence and engage in denial like the atheist [[Charles Darwin]] (see: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Charles_Darwin#Religious_Views_of_Charles_Darwin religious views of Charles Darwin] ) who late in life is reported to often have overwhelming thoughts that the world was designed.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref><ref>The Berkeley [http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ "Understanding Evolution" website] and the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution Wikipedia evolution article] are prime examples of liberal denialism when it comes to liberals denying the clear evidence for [[creation]].</ref> [[Creation Ministries International]] describes such irrational thinking in the following manner:
{{cquote|Underpinning this abandonment of faith in God is the widespread acceptance of evolutionary thinking — that everything made itself by natural processes; that God is not necessary. There is ‘design’, such people will admit, but no Designer is necessary. The designed thing designed itself! This thinking, where the plain-as-day evidence for God’s existence (Rom. 1:19–20) is explained away, leads naturally to atheism (belief in no God) and [[secular humanism]] (man can chart his own course without God). Such thinking [[Professor values|abounds in universities]] and governments today).<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter1.pdf</ref>}}

The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

Although he is not a [[creationism|creationist]], the atheist [[philosophy|philosopher]] John Gray admitted in 2008 in ''The Guardian'':
{{cquote|A great deal of modern thought consists of secular myths - hollowed-out religious narratives translated into [[pseudoscience|pseudo-science]]. [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]]'s notion that new communications technologies will fundamentally alter the way human beings think is just such a myth.<ref>[http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/15/society The atheist delusion, John Gray, The Guardian, Friday 14 March 2008]</ref>}}

For more information please see: [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

=== Ben Stein Interview with the Evolutionist Richard Dawkins ===

In the movie [[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]], [[Ben Stein]] demonstrated the folly of [[evolutionism]] in his interview with the prominent evolutionist and atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M_ZF8r5e7w A clip of the interview has been uploaded to YouTube] ).

The [[Discovery Institute]] provides an transcript of part of the interview along with some commentary:
{{cquote|BEN STEIN: "What do you think is the possibility that [[Intelligent design|Intelligent Design]] might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?"

DAWKINS: "Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer."

Ho,ho! That is precisely what the [[Raëlism|Raelians]] say:

Years ago, everybody knew that the earth was flat. Everybody knew that the sun revolved around the earth. Today, everybody knows that life on earth is either the result of random evolution or the work of a supernatural God. Or is it? In "Message from the Designers", Rael presents us with a third option: that all life on earth was created by advanced scientists from another world.

Richard Dawkins and Rael; "clear thinking" kindred spirits!
<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/4589</ref>}}

In the Ben Stein/Richard Dawkins interview, Richard Dawkins was also asked what the probability is of God's existence is and a rationale for that estimation. [http://www.conservapedia.com/Richard_Dawkins#Ben_Stein_Interview_with_the_Evolutionist_Richard_Dawkins_Demonstrated_the_Folly_of_Evolutionism Dawkins gave a very inept reply to Ben Stein concerning this issue.]

=== Creationist Video Interview of Richard Dawkins Being Stumped by a Creationist===
A video clip featuring Richard Dawkins became widely available to the public,<ref name="stumped">[http://creation.com/content/view/5712/ Was Dawkins Stumped?] (Creation Ministries International) (The clip is viewable on this page).</ref>
[http://creation.com/content/view/5712/ showing Dawkins being stumped by a question from the creationist interviewer].
A shortened version has been translated into 10 languages.
The clip was part of an interview included in the video and DVD ''From a Frog to Prince'', produced by [[Creation Ministries International]] about the genetic information required by evolution, and the interviewer is asking Dawkins for an example of genetic information arising from a mutation.

In later interviews, Dawkins claims that he was not stumped, but instead shocked when he realized that the interviewer was a [[creationism|creationist]], and the video was edited in a way to make him look like he was unable to answer the question.<ref>[http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/dawkins.htm]</ref> However, the question came after he had that realization, and after the creationists negotiated with Dawkins and he agreed to continue.<ref> [http://creation.com/images/feedback/2008/5712timeline_lge.jpg Interview Timeline]</ref>
Richard Dawkins still hasn't provide any examples of genetic information being created by evolution.

===Methodological Naturalism Ideology In Evolutionary Thought ===

As mentioned earlier, evolutionary thought (which employs [[methodological naturalism]]) has had an influence on [[origin of life]] research as well (for example, a 2004 article in the ''International Journal of [[Astrobiology]]'' is titled ''On the applicability of Darwinian principles to [[chemical evolution]] that led to life'').<ref>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=240771</ref> The [[Nobel Prize]] winning biologist [[Francis Crick]] described himself as an [[agnostic]] with "a strong inclination towards [[atheism]]."<ref>Francis Crick, What Mad Pursuit: a Personal View of Scientific Discovery, Basic Books reprint edition, 1990, ISBN 0-465-09138-5, p. 145.</ref>In 1992, the science magazine ''[[Scientific American]]'' published an interview which explored Sir [[Francis Crick]]'s belief in the hypothesis [[Directed panspermia|Directed Panspermia]] as a proposed hypthesis for the [[origin of life]] on [[earth]].<ref>[http://www.genesispark.com/essays/spontaneous/ Reprint of an Creation Research Quarterly September 2001 article ''The Spontaneous Generation Hypothesis'' by David P. Woetzel]</ref> Directed panspermia posits concerning the question of [[origin of life]] on [[earth]] that "organisms were deliberately transmitted to the earth by [[Extraterrestrial life|intelligent beings on another planet]]."<ref name="SD">http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-04zzz.html</ref> [[Michael Behe]] wrote regarding the Scientific American interview the following: {{cquote|The primary reason Crick subscribes to this unorthodox view is that he judges the undirected origin of life to be a virtually insurmountable obstacle, but he wants a [[Naturalism|naturalistic explanation]]. <ref>[http://www.genesispark.com/essays/spontaneous/ Reprint of an Creation Research Quarterly September 2001 article ''The Spontaneous Generation Hypothesis'' by David P. Woetzel]</ref>}}

When commenting on the hypothesis of [[Directed Panspermia]] Creation Ministries International wrote that Francis "Crick’s atheistic faith leads to absurd [[pseudoscience]]".<ref>http://creation.com/designed-by-aliens-crick-watson-atheism-panspermia</ref>

=== Supppession of scientific inquiry concerning alternative theories of origins ===

see also: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]

There exists widespread suppression of [[creation science]] and [[intelligent design]], ideas which offer alternative explanations of origins than do the various [[theories of evolution]] (for more information please see: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]).

=== Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity ===

Please see: [[Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity]] [[Atheism and deception]]

== Causes of evolutionary belief ==

''See also:'' [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]

A number of articles have been written concerning the reasons why evolutionists commonly hold their evolutionary views:

*[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-is-evolution-is-pushed-in-america.html Why is evolution pushed by dogmatic evolutionists?]

*[http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/567-why-people-believe-in-evolution Why do people believe in evolution?]

*[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/evolutionary-gut-feelings-belief-in.html Evolutionary gut feelings, "Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling"] (Cites study in ''Live Science'' article)

See also:

*[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to belief in evolution] (cites Australian National University study)

== Evolutionary biology careers ==

See: [[Evolutionary biology careers]]

== Creation vs. Evolution Videos ==
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]

== Creation vs. evolution news ==

*[[Creation vs. evolution news]]

== Poor health practices of some notable evolutionists ==

See: [[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]

== Further Reading (including free on-line versions) ==

*[http://www.amazon.com/Top-Evidences-God-Creation-ebook/dp/B00E4DS2J0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380144491&sr=8-1&keywords=jason+browning Top 15 Evidences for God and Creation] by Jason Browning
* J.D. Mitchell, ''The Creation Dialogues - A Response to the Position of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on Evolution, Christianity and the Bible'', Pleasant Word (Winepress Pub), 2010 ISBN 1414118007<ref>http://www.creationengineeringconcepts.org/index.php?p=1_35_THE-CREATION-DIALOGUES</ref><ref>http://www.christianbook.com/dialogues-american-association-advancement-evolution-christianity/j-d-mitchell/9781414118000/pd/118002</ref>
*Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]], ''Creation: Our Worldview'', TEC Publications, Columbus, GA 2010 ISBN 0-9674006-1-9
*[[Duane Gish]], ''Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!'', El Cajon: [[Institute for Creation Research]], 1996<ref>http://www.icr.org/store/index.php?main_page=pubs_product_book_info&products_id=2176</ref> ISBN 9780890511121
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution'', Master Books, 1999 [http://www.creation.com/content/view/4014/ (Free on-line version)] ISBN 0890512582
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Master Books, 2002,[http://www.creation.com/content/view/4013/ (Free on-line version)] ISBN 0890513872
*Richard Weikart, ''Hitler's Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress'' ISBN 978-0-230-61807-7
*Richard Weikart, ''From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany'' ISBN 9781403972019
*[[R.L. Wysong]], ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy'', Inquiry Press (Midland, MI), 1976. ISBN 978-0-918-112-02-6<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/05105.htm</ref>
*[[Phillip E. Johnson|Phillip Johnson]], ''Darwin on Trial''. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois. 1991<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwin.html</ref> ISBN 0-8308-1324-1
*[[R. C. Sproul]], ''Not a Chance: The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology'', Baker Book House: 1994<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/chance.html</ref> ISBN 080105852X

=== Social effects of the theory of evolution ===

*[http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Absolute-Cynical-Observations-Postmodern/dp/2980777447/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1384179653&sr=8-3&keywords=flight+from+absolutes Flight from the Absolute: Cynical Observations on the Postmodern West. Volume II] by [[Paul Gosselin]]
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77k9QDQBi54 Flight from the Absolute: Cynical Observations on the Postmodern West. Volume II] - Paul Gosselin discusses his book (video)

=== Other biblical creation related publications ===

''See also:'' [[Biblical creation journals]]

Some prominent biblical [[creation]] publications are given below:

*[[Creation magazine]]

*[[Journal of Creation]] - Peer reviewed

*[[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal]] - peer reviewed

== See also ==

*[[Evolution articles]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[Essay: Atheism and evolution essays|Atheism and evolution essays]]
*[[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]
*[[Origin of life]]
*[[Atheism]]
*[[Creation]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Young Earth Creationism]]
*[[Human evolution]]
*[[Arguments for a recent creation]]
*[[Atheism and Evolution]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Counterexamples to Evolution]]
*[[Creation Science]]
*[[Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution]]
*[[Evolutionism]]

==External Links and other links ==

*[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]
*[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]
*[http://creation.com Creation Ministries International] - Over 7,000 articles on the creation vs. evolution issue
*[http://creationrevolution.com/ Creation vs. evolution news]

'''Other resources:'''

*[http://creation.com/creation-answers Evidence and arguments against evolution]
*[http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=53 The Nine Great 'Proofs' for Evolution: and Why They Are All False!]
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Evolution]
*[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/human-evolution.htm Human evolutionary theory]
*[http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/theory-of-evolution.htm Theory of evolution]
*[http://www.windmillministries.org/theory-of-evolution Theory of evolution] by [[Windmill Ministries]]
*[http://www.theory-of-evolution.net/ Intelligent Design vs. Evolution]

'''Social effects of Darwinism:'''

*[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/philo/eth_ev_pg.htm Problems with Ethics in an Evolutionary / Materialistic World-View]

'''Anti-Darwinism/creationist, French/English website:'''

*[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/ Samizdat]

{{Template:Creation vs. evolution}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{DEFAULTSORT: Evolution, theory of}}
[[Category: Pseudoscience]]
[[Category:Life Sciences]]
[[Category: Biology]]

Evolution

2014-05-05T23:18:58Z

Debletar: /* Lack of Any Clear Transitional Forms */ Added 2 sources showing evolutionist ignorance

''See also [[Counterexamples to Evolution]]''.
[[Image:Evolution.jpg|alt=evolution darwin theory|right|thumb|225px|Late in [[Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin's]] life, Darwin told the Duke of Argyll that he frequently had overwhelming thoughts that the natural world was the [[Intelligent design|result of design]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref> See also: [http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] and [[Causes of evolutionary belief]] ]]
The theory of '''evolution''' is a [[Naturalism|naturalistic]] [[theory]] of the [[history]] of life on earth (this refers to the theory of evolution which employs [[methodological naturalism]] and is taught in schools and universities). Merriam-Webster's dictionary gives the following [[definition of evolution]]: "a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations..."<ref>[http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/evolution Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, Definition for "evolution"]</ref> Currently, there are several [[theories of evolution]].

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]])<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref> In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of [[Charles Darwin|Darwinian]] evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

In 2011, the results of a study was published indicating that most [[United States]] high school biology teachers are reluctant to endorse the theory of evolution in class. <ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/science/study-most-high-school-biology.html</ref> In addition, in 2011, eight anti-evolution bills were introduced into state legislatures within the United States encouraging students to employ [[critical thinking]] skills when examining the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. In 2009, there were seven states which required critical analysis skills be employed when examining evolutionary material within schools.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9851</ref>

A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of [[United States|American]] medical doctors reject [[Darwinism]], stating that they do not believe man evolved through natural processes alone.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> Thirty-eight percent of the American medical doctors polled agreed with the statement that "Humans evolved naturally with no supernatural involvement." <ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> The study also reported that 1/3 of all medical doctors favor the theory of [[Intelligent design|intelligent design]] over evolution.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> In 2010, the Gallup organization reported that 40% of Americans believe in [[young earth creationism]].<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/Four-Americans-Believe-Strict-Creationism.aspx</ref> In January 2006, the [[BBC]] reported concerning [[Britain]]:
{{cquote|Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life, according to an opinion poll.

Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that [[creationism]] or intelligent design (ID) should be taught in school science lessons.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm</ref>}}

The theory of evolution posits a process of transformation from simple life forms to more complex life forms, which has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory.<ref>Russell Grigg and Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/4280 Intelligent Design—‘A War on Science’ says the BBC]]</ref><ref>Paul McHugh, [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2477 The Weekly Standard, Teaching Darwin: Why we're still fighting about biology textbook. March 28, 2005]</ref> Although not a [[creation science|creation scientist]], Swedish [[genetics|geneticist]] Dr. [[Nils Heribert-Nilsson]], Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in [[Sweden]] and a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, stated: "My attempts to demonstrate Evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least, I should hardly be accused of having started from a preconceived antievolutionary standpoint."<ref>[http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/gould-and-heribert-nilsson Quotes to note]</ref>
[[File:Fish fossil Nat Park Svs.jpg|thumb|Fish fossil, National Park Svs.]]
[[Image:Intelligent design.jpg‎|thumbnail|300px|left|When [[Richard Dawkins]] was a young man, he recognized the [[Intelligent design|that the complexity of life indicates a designer]]. ]]
The fossil record is often used as evidence in the [[creation]] versus evolution controversy. The [[fossil]] record does not support the theory of evolution and is one of the flaws in the theory of evolution.<ref>
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Creation/Evolution Quotes: Fossil Record]
* [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3001 Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [http://www.anointed-one.net/quotes.html Quotes of Famous Evolutionist Regarding the Fossil Record]
* [http://creation.com/content/view/5654 Ediacaran ‘explosion’]
</ref> In 1981, there were at least a hundred million fossils that were catalogued and identified in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.fossils.me/tag/darwinism Porter Kier, quoted in New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129]</ref> Despite the large number of fossils available to scientists in 1981, evolutionist Mark Ridley, who currently serves as a professor of zoology at [[Oxford University]], was forced to confess: "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or [[Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuationist]], uses the fossil record as evidence in favour of the theory of evolution as opposed to [[Creationism|special creation]]."<ref>Mark Ridley, 'Who doubts evolution?', New Scientist, vol. 90, 25 June 1981, p. 831</ref>

In addition to the evolutionary position lacking evidential support and being counterevidential, the great intellectuals in history such as [[Archimedes]], [[Aristotle]], [[St. Augustine]], [[Francis Bacon]], [[Isaac Newton]], and [[Lord Kelvin]] did not propose an evolutionary process for a species to transform into a more complex version. Even after the theory of evolution was proposed and promoted heavily in England and Germany, most leading scientists were against the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon, [http://www.johnankerberg.com/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC1W0104D.pdf Darwin, Evolution, and His Critics - Part 3, How Was Darwin's Theory of Evolution First Received]
* [http://www.icr.org/article/280/ More on Anti-Darwinian Scientists Exerpted from the New Book by Wendell R. Bird, J.D., Attorney]
</ref>
The theory of evolution was published by naturalist [[Darwin, Charles|Charles Darwin]] in his book ''[[The Origin of Species|On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life]]'', in 1859. In a letter to [[Asa Gray]], Darwin confided: "...I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true [[science]]."<ref>http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-2109</ref>Prior to publishing the book, Darwin wrote in his private notebooks that he was a [[materialism|materialist]], which is a type of [[atheism|atheist]].(see: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Charles_Darwin#Religious_Views_of_Charles_Darwin religious views of Charles Darwin) ]<ref>
* [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1877 Darwin's real message: have you missed it?]
* [http://www.equip.org/articles/is-darwinism-atheistic- Is Darwinism Atheistic? An Examination of the Beliefs and Practices of Charles Darwin]
* Barrett, Paul H. ''Darwin on Man'' 1974:276
* ''American Scientist'' May 1977:323
</ref> Charles Darwin’s casual mentioning of a ‘creator’ in earlier editions of The Origin of Species appears to have been a merely a ploy to downplay the implications of his [[materialism|materialistic]] theory.<ref>[http://creation.com/charles-darwins-real-message-have-you-missed-it Charles Darwin's real message. Have you missed it?]</ref> The amount of credit Darwin actually deserves for the theory is disputed. <ref>
*[http://creation.com/charles-darwins-illegitimate-brainchild Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild: If You Thought Darwin’s Origin Was Original, Think Again! by Russell Grigg]
*[http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j16_3/j16_3_58-63.pdf Did Darwin plagiarize his evolution theory?]
*[http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/was-blyth-the-true-scientist-and-darwin-merely-a-plagiarist-and-charlatan/ Was Blyth the true scientist and Darwin merely a plagiarist and charlatan?]
*[http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar0.html Charles Darwin - The Truth]</ref> Darwin's theory attempted to explain the origin of the various kinds of plants and animals via the process of ''[[natural selection]]'' or "survival of the fittest".

The basic principle behind natural selection is that in the struggle for life some organisms in a given population will be better suited to their particular environment and thus have a reproductive advantage which increases the representation of their particular traits over time. Many years before Charles Darwin, there were several other individuals who published articles on the topic of natural selection.<ref>Russell Grigg, [http://creation.com/charles-darwins-illegitimate-brainchild Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild: If You Thought Darwin’s Origin Was Original, Think Again!]</ref> [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]] was a naturalist who supported the theory of evolution. [[Lamarckism|Lamarck's theory of evolution]] asserted that evolution occurs because organisms are able to inherit traits acquired by their ancestors which is an idea rejected by the current scientific community.<ref>[http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=13567 MedicineNet.com, Definition of Lamarkism]</ref>

Darwin did not first propose in his book ''Origin of Species'' that man had descended from non-human ancestors. Darwin's theory of evolution incorporated that later in Darwin's book entitled ''[[Descent of Man]]''.

As far as the history of the theory of evolution, although Darwin is well known when it comes to the early advocacy of the evolutionary position in the [[Western world]], evolutionary ideas were taught by the [[Ancient Greece|ancient Greeks]] as early as the 7th century B.C.<ref>Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/naturalism.asp Evolutionary Naturalism: An Ancient Idea] First published: TJ 15(2):77–80 August 2001</ref> The concept of naturalistic evolution differs from the concept of [[Theistic Evolution|theistic evolution]] in that it states [[God]] does not guide the posited process of [[macroevolution]].<ref>Dr. Werner Gitt, [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1749/ 10 Dangers of Theistic Evolution] First published: Creation 17(4):49–51, September 1995</ref>

== Intuition, Darwinism and questioning evolution ==

In January of 2012, the ''Journal of Research in Science Teaching'' published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings.<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref><ref>[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20449/abstract Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution]</ref> A January 20, 2012 article entitled ''Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling'' published by the website Live Science wrote of the research: "They found that intuition had a significant impact on what the students accepted, no matter how much they knew and regardless of their religious beliefs."<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref>

In May of 2011, [[Creation Ministries International]] launched the [[Question evolution! campaign|Question evolution! campaign]] which is a [[grassroots]] campaign encouraging students and others to "question the evolutionary [[pseudoscience]] peddled to them". The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot answer. (see: [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer]).<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref>

== Theory of Evolution - Mutations and the Life Sciences in General ==

''See also:'' [[Theories of evolution]]

Evolutionist [[Theodosius Dobzhansky]] wrote concerning the theory of evolution: "The process of [[mutation]] is the only known source of the new materials of genetic variability, and hence of evolution."<ref>NorthWest Creation Network, [http://www.nwcreation.net/geneticquotes.html Quotes on Genetics]</ref> Concerning various [[theories of evolution]], most evolutionists believe that the processes of mutation, [[genetic drift]] and natural selection created every species of life that we see on earth today after [[Origin of Life|life first came about on earth]] although [[Theory of evolution and little consensus|there is little consensus on how this process is allegedly to have occurred]].<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1855 Climbing Mount Improbable:A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins]</ref>

[[Pierre-Paul Grassé]], who served as Chair of evolutionary [[biology]] at Sorbonne University for thirty years and was ex-president of the French Academy of Sciences, stated the following: "Some contemporary biologists, as soon as they observe a mutation, talk about evolution. They are implicitly supporting the following syllogism: mutations are the only evolutionary variations, all living beings undergo mutations, therefore all living beings evolve....No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution." Grassé pointed out that bacteria which are the subject of study of many geneticists and molecular biologists are organisms which produce the most mutants.<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grasse then points that bacteria are considered to have "stabilized a billion years ago!".<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grassé regards the "unceasing mutations" to be "merely hereditary fluctuations around a median position; a swing to the right, a swing to the left, but no final evolutionary effect."<ref>[ http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref>

In addition, [[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>
[[File:Safarti3.jpg|alt=evolutionary theory opponent|thumb|200px|right|[[Jonathan Sarfati]]]]
[[Creation Science|Creation scientists]] believe that mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift would not cause macroevolution.<ref>
* Answers in Genesis, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/mutations.asp Mutations: Questions and Answers]
* Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp Darwinism and the Deterioration of the Genome]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1855 Climbing Mount Improbable:A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3831 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 2, Variation and Natural Selection Versus Evolution]
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/selection.asp Natural Selection Questions and Answers]
</ref> Furthermore, creation scientists assert that the life sciences as a whole support the creation model and do not support the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creation, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences2.html Life Sciences]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M.,[http://creation.com/Whos-really-pushing-bad-science-rebuttal-to-Lawrence-S-Lerner Who's Really Pushing 'Bad Science'?]
</ref> [[Homology]] involves the theory that macroevolutionary relationships can be demonstrated by the similarity in the anatomy and physiology of different organisms.<ref>Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i1/homology.asp Does Homology Provide Evidence of Evolutionary Naturalism?]</ref> An example of a homology argument is that [[DNA]] similarities between human and other living organisms is evidence for the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. Georgia Purdom, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-and-chimp-dna If Human and Chimp DNA Are So Similar, Why Are There So Many Physical and Mental Differences Between Them?]
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/human-chimp-dna-similarity DNA Similarity: Evidence for Evolutionary Relationship?]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3835 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 6, Humans: Images of God or Advanced Apes?]
</ref> Creation scientists provide sound reasons why [[homology|the homology argument is not a valid argument]]. Both evolutionary scientists and [[Young earth creationism|young earth creation]] scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs, however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionist believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref>

Critics of the theory of evolution state that many of today's proponents of the evolutionary position have diluted the meaning of the term "evolution" to the point where it defined as or the definition includes change over time in the [[Genetics|gene]] pool of a population over time through such processes as [[mutation]], natural selection, and [[genetic drift]].<ref>
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/anderson/an_appb.htm Glossary Definitions of "Evolution"]
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe02phl4.html#lgclprblmsflcsqvctn Fallacies used to support evolution:Equivocation]
* [http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_meaningsofevolution.pdf The Meanings of Evolution]
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]
</ref> Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] of [[Creation Ministries International]] declares concerning the diluted definition of the word "evolution":
{{cquote|...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and [[creation]] disproved. The PBS ''Evolution'' series and the ''[[Scientific American]]'' article are full of examples of this fallacy.<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]],Ph.D., F.M. [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3262/ ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science]</ref><ref>The PBS [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ evolution website] bills itself as "The most comprehensive evolutionary science resource on the Internet" but it is very poorly done.</ref>}}

=== Biological diversity - evolution contrasted with biblical creation science ===

Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote:
{{cquote|In contrast, [[creationism|creationists]], starting from the [[Bible]], believe that [[God]] created different kinds of organisms, which reproduced ‘after their kinds’ (Gen. 1:11–12, 21, 24–25). Each of these kinds was created with a vast amount of [[information]]. There was enough variety in the information in the original creatures so their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of environments.

All ([[sexual reproduction|sexually reproducing]]) organisms contain their genetic information in paired form. Each offspring inherits half its genetic information from its mother, and half from its father. So there are two [[gene|genes]] at a given position (locus, plural loci) coding for a particular characteristic. An organism can be [[heterozygous]] at a given locus, meaning it carries different forms ([[allele|alleles]]) of this gene... So there is no problem for creationists explaining that the original created kinds could each give rise to many different varieties. In fact, the original created kinds would have had much more heterozygosity than their modern, more specialized descendants. No wonder [[Francisco J. Ayala|Ayala]] pointed out that most of the variation in populations arises from reshuffling of previously existing genes, not from mutations. Many varieties can arise simply by two previously hidden [[recessive allele|recessive alleles]] coming together. However, Ayala believes the genetic information came ultimately from mutations, not creation. His belief is contrary to [http://creation.com/information-theory-questions-and-answers information theory], as shown in [http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-9-is-the-design-explanation-legitimate chapter 9 on ‘Design’].<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-9-is-the-design-explanation-legitimate</ref>}}

=== Prominent evolutionists have indicated that the origin of life is part of the evolutionary model ===

Dr. Don Batten of [[Creation Ministries International]] has pointed out that prominent evolutionists, such as [[PZ Myers]] and Nick Matzke, have indicated that a naturalistic postulation of the [[origin of life]] (often called [[abiogenesis]]), is part of the evolutionary model.<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref> This poses a very serious problem for the evolutionary position as the evidence clearly points life being a [[Intelligent design|product of design]] and not through naturalistic processes.<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref>

== Evolution - Implications of Genetic Code and Processing of Biological Information ==
[[Image:Stephen Meyer.jpg|thumb|150px|left|Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]] published an article favoring [[intelligent design]] in a peer reviewed science journal which had traditionally only published material advocating the evolutionary position.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1489</ref>]]
:''See main articles: [[Creation science]], [[Intelligent design]], and [[creationism]]''
Creation scientists and [[intelligent design]] advocates point out that the [[genetic code]] ([[Deoxyribonucleic acid|DNA]] code), genetic programs, and biological information argue for an intelligent cause in regards the origins question and assert it is one of the many problems of the theory of evolution.<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation">Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center For Scientific Creation, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences18.html Codes, Programs, and Information]</ref><ref>
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/infotheory.asp Information Theory Questions and Answers]
* [[William Dembski]], [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=118 Intelligent Design as a Theory of Information]</ref>

Dr. [[Walt Brown]] states the genetic material that controls the biological processes of life is coded information and that human experience tells us that [[code|codes]] are created only by the result of intelligence and not merely by processes of nature.<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation" /> Dr. Brown also asserts that the "information stored in the genetic material of all life is a complex program. Therefore, it appears that an unfathomable intelligence created these genetic programs."<ref name="waltbrown-scientificcreation" />

To support his view regarding the divine origin of genetic programs Dr. Walt Brown cites the work of David Abel and Professor Jack Trevors who wrote the following:
{{cquote|No matter how many "bits" of possible combinations it has, there is no reason to call it "information" if it doesn't at least have the potential of producing something useful. What kind of information produces function? In [[computer science]], we call it a "program." Another name for [[computer software]] is an "[[algorithm]]." No man-made program comes close to the technical brilliance of even Mycoplasmal genetic algorithms. Mycoplasmas are the simplest known organism with the smallest known genome, to date. How was its genome and other living organisms' genomes programmed? - David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors, “Three Subsets of Sequence Complexity and Their Relevance to Biopolymeric Information,” Theoretical Biology & Medical Modelling, Vol. 2, 11 August 2005, page 8<ref>
* Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center For Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes17.html#wp1467742 Notes and References: Codes, Programs, and Information]
* PubMed Central (PMC), [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1208958 Three subsets of sequence complexity and their relevance to biopolymeric information by David L Abel1 and Jack T Trevors]
</ref>}}

In the peer reviewed biology journal ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]] argues that no current materialistic theory of evolution can account for the origin of the information necessary to build novel animal forms and proposed an intelligent cause as the best explanation for the origin of biological information and the higher taxa.<ref>Dr. [[Stephen Meyer]], [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2177 ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'', 117(2):213-239. 2004, The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories]</ref> The editor of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Dr. [[Richard Sternberg]], [[Smithsonian-Sternberg affair|came under intense scrutiny and persecution for the aforementioned article]] published by Dr. Meyer.

== Theory of evolution and little scientific consensus ==

''See also:'' [[Theory of evolution and little consensus]] and [[Theories of evolution]]

There is little scientific consensus on how macroevolution is said to have happened and the claimed mechanisms of evolutionary change, as can be seen in the following quotes:
{{cquote|When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: "It happened." Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd. -(Simon Conway Morris, [palaeontologist, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge University, UK], "Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11)<ref>
* [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/mechns01.html Stephen E. Jones, Creation/Evolution Quotes: Mechanisms #1]
* Simon Conway Morris, [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WSN-4195FC1-1&_user=681891&_coverDate=01%2F07%2F2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000037419&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=681891&md5=1806889a6d57f9282db2e4c04d32e8f7 Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"“The history of organic life is indemonstrable; we cannot prove a whole lot in evolutionary biology, and our findings will always be hypothesis. There is one true evolutionary history of life, and whether we will actually ever know it is not likely. Most importantly, we have to think about questioning underlying assumptions, whether we are dealing with [[molecule]]s or anything else.” - Jeffrey H. Schwartz, Professor of Biological Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, February 9, 2007<ref>
* [http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/there-is-no-theory-of-evolution/ Uncommon Descent - The Intelligent Design Weblog of William Dembski, Denyse O'Leary and friends, There Is No Theory of Evolution, February 20, 2007]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"If it is true that an influx of doubt and uncertainty actually marks periods of healthy growth in a science, then evolutionary biology is flourishing today as it seldom has flourished in the past. For biologists collectively are less agreed upon the details of evolutionary mechanics than they were a scant decade ago. Superficially, it seems as if we know less about evolution than we did in 1959, the centennial year of Darwin's on the Origin of Species." - [[Niles Eldredge]], "Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the [[Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium|Theory of Punctuated Equilibria]]," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, 1985, p.14<ref>[http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/mechns01.html Stephen E. Jones, Creation/Evolution Quotes: Mechanisms #1]</ref>}}

[[Pierre-Paul Grassé]], who served as Chair of Evolution at Sorbonne University for thirty years and was ex-president of the French Academy of Sciences, stated the following:
{{cquote|Through use and abuse of hidden [[postulate]]s, of bold, often ill-founded [[extrapolation]]s, a [[pseudoscience]] has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of [[biology]] and is leading astray many [[biochemistry|biochemists]] and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case....

Today, our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood, and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses of the interpretations and extrapolations that [[theory|theoreticians]] put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their [[sectarianism]], purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and the falsity of their beliefs. - Pierre-Paul Grassé - Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), pages 6 and 8<ref>http://bevets.com/equotesg3.htm</ref>}}
===Recent clamour to revise the modern evolutionary synthesis===

''See:'' [[Modern evolutionary synthesis]] and [[Theories of evolution]]

== Evolutionary Theory and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎ ==
[[Image:Haeckel.jpg|right|thumb|[[Ernst Haeckel]]]]
:''See also: [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Theories of evolution]] and [[Evolution and just so stories]]
A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist and [[Stephen Gould]], who held a [[agnostic|agnostic]] worldview<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/03/20/a-review-of-the-dawkins-delusion-by-alister-mcgrath/</ref> and promoted the notion of [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|non-overlapping magesteria]], wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':
{{cquote|"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"<ref name="haeckel">[http://www.creationism.org/wakefield/haeckel.htm "Another Evolution Fraud Exposed"] - Creationism.org, INVESTIGATING GENESIS SERIES.</ref>}}

An irony of history is that the March 9, 1907 edition of the [[NY Times]] refers to Ernst Haeckel as the "celebrated Darwinian and founder of the Association for the Propagation of Ethical [[Atheism]]."<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C03EFDD123EE033A2575AC0A9659C946697D6CF</ref>

Stephen Gould continues by quoting Michael Richardson of the St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London, who stated: "I know of at least fifty recent biology texts which use the drawings uncritically".<ref name="haeckel" />

== Lack of Any Clear Transitional Forms ==

''See also:'' [[Evolution and the fossil record]]

As alluded to earlier, today there are over one hundred million identified and cataloged [[fossils]] in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.halos.com/printer.htm?page=/book/ctm-07-e.htm Creation's Tiny Mystery: Chapter 7: Creation Science—a Public Issue]</ref> If the evolutionary position was valid, then there should be "transitional forms" in the fossil record reflecting the intermediate life forms. Another term for these "transitional forms" is "missing links".
[[File:Darwin.jpg|alt=charles darwin's theory of evolution|right|thumb|225px|[[Charles Darwin]] wrote: "When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref> ]]
Charles Darwin admitted that his theory required the existence of "transitional forms." Darwin wrote: "So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth."<ref>[http://www.thedarwinpapers.com/oldsite/number5/darwin5.htm THE DARWIN PAPERS, VOLUME 1, NUMBER V, FOSSILS: HISTORY WRITTEN IN STONE]</ref> However, Darwin wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every strata full of such intermediate links? [[Geology]] assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory."<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/Discontinuties.html NATURAL DISCONTINUITIES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD]</ref> Darwin thought the lack of transitional links in his time was because "only a small portion of the surface of the earth has been geologically explored and no part with sufficient care...".<ref>[[Charles Darwin]], ''Origin of the Species'', [http://www.darwin-literature.com/The_Origin_of_Species/10.html Chapter X: ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD]</ref> As Charles Darwin grew older he became increasingly concerned about the lack of evidence for the theory of evolution in terms of the existence of transitional forms. Darwin wrote, "“When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref>

Scientist Dr. Michael Denton wrote regarding the fossil record:
{{cquote|"It is still, as it was in Darwin's day, overwhelmingly true that the first representatives of all the major classes of organisms known to biology are already highly characteristic of their class when they make their initial appearance in the fossil record. This phenomenon is particularly obvious in the case of the [[Invertebrate|invertebrate]] fossil record. At its first appearance in the ancient Paleozoic seas, invertebrate life was already divided into practically all the major groups with which we are familiar today.<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/Discontinuties.html NATURAL DISCONTINUITIES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD]</ref>}}

Creationists assert that evolutionists have had over 140 years to find a transitional fossil and nothing approaching a conclusive transitional form has ever been found and that only a handful of highly doubtful examples of transitional fossils exist.<ref>
* [[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3001 Fossils Questions and Answers]
* [http://www.anointed-one.net/quotes.html Quotes of Famous Evolutionist Regarding the Fossil Record]
</ref> Distinguished anthropologist Sir Edmund R. Leach declared, "Missing links in the sequence of fossil evidence were a worry to Darwin. He felt sure they would eventually turn up, but they are still missing and seem likely to remain so."<ref>Sir Edmund Leech, [http://www.evolutionisdead.com/quotes.php?QID=241 Addresing the 1981 annual meeting of the British Association for the advancement of Science, 'Men, bishop and apes'. Nature vol 293, 3 Sep. 1981, p. 19 and 20]</ref>

As a response, [[Deceit|deceitful]] evolutionists frequently point to some alleged transitional fossils. <ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates</ref> However, these were likely hoaxes or misidentified non-transitional fossils, just like the [[Piltdown Man]], a hoax "missing link" allegedly done by Charles Dawson. <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man</ref>

David B. Kitts of the School of Geology and [[Geophysics]] at the University of Oklahoma wrote that "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and [[paleontology]] does not provide them…".<ref>Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Brad Harrub, Ph.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2088 15 Answers to John Rennie and Scientific American’s Nonsense—Argument #13]</ref>

David Raup, who was the curator of geology at the museum holding the world's largest fossil collection, the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, observed:
{{cquote|"[Darwin] was embarrassed by the fossil record because it didn't look the way he predicted it would .... Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. ... [W]e have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time." - David M. Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology," ''Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin'' 50 (January 1979): 22-23, 24-25.}}

One of the most famous proponents of the theory of evolution was the late [[Harvard]] paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. But Gould admitted:
{{cquote|The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils...We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life’s history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center For Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes23.html References and Notes: Fossil Gaps]</ref>}}

For more information please see:

*[[Evolution and the fossil record]]

* [[Paleoanthropology]] or [[Human evolution]]

*[[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎]]

=== The Fossil Record quotes ===
[[Creationism|Creationists]] can cite quotations which assert that no solid fossil evidence for the theory of evolution position exists:
{{cquote|"...I still think that to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favour of special creation. - E.J.H. Corner (Professor of Botany, Cambridge University, England), “Evolution” in Anna M. MacLeod and L. S. Cobley (eds.), Contemporary Botanical Thought (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961), p. 97<ref>Christian Answers Network, [http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/orb-fossil-ref.html The Fossil Record - References]</ref><ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes23.html Notes and References: Fossil Gaps]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time." - Lord Solly Zuckerman (professor of anatomy at Birmingham University in England and chief scientific adviser to the British government from the time period of 1964 to 1971), Beyond The Ivory Tower, Toplinger Publications, New York, 1970, p. 19.<ref>Sean Pitman, M.D., [http://www.detectingdesign.com/earlyman.html Early Man]</ref><ref>[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jzuckerman.htm Solly Zuckerman: Biography]</ref>}}
{{cquote|"Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether". Henry Gee, “Return to the Planet of the Apes,” Nature, Vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p. 131.<ref>[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412131a0.html Henry Gee, “Return to the Planet of the Apes,” Nature, Vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p. 131.]</ref>}}

For more fossil record quotes please see: [http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Fossil record quotes] and [http://creationwiki.org/Fossil_record_quotes Additional fossil record quotes]

== Paleoanthropology ==
''For more information please see'': [[Paleoanthropology]] and [[Human evolution]]
[[Image:Nebraska Man.jpg|thumb|alt=human evolution|150px|right|[[Nebraska man]] was made famous by Henry Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History. Nebraska man turned out to be nothing more than a single pig-like tooth.]]
[[Paleoanthropology]] is an interdisciplinary branch of [[anthropology]] that concerns itself with the origins of early humans and it examines and evaluates items such as fossils and [[artifact]]s.<ref>[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9058075/paleoanthropology Encyclopedia Britannica (online): Paleoanthropology]</ref> Dr. David Pilbeam is a paleoanthropologist who received his Ph.D. at [[Yale]] University and Dr. Pilbeam is presently Professor of Social Sciences at [[Harvard]] University and Curator of Paleontology at the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. In addition, Dr. Pilbeam served as an advisor for the Kenya government regarding the creation of an international institute for the study of human origins.<ref>[[Answers in Genesis]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/fossils.asp Those Fossils Are A Problem]</ref>

Dr. Pilbeam wrote a review of Richard Leakey's book ''Origins'' in the journal ''American Scientist'':
{{cquote|...perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleoanthropology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about. But that is heresy.<ref name="thoughtsonEvo">Sean Pitman, M.D., [http://www.creationapologetics.org/refuting/quotes.html Thoughts on Evolution From Scientists and Other Intellectuals]</ref>}}

Dr. Pilbeam wrote the following regarding the theory of evolution and paleoanthropology:
{{cquote|I am also aware of the fact that, at least in my own subject of paleoanthropology, "theory" - heavily influenced by implicit ideas almost always dominates "data". ....Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influence the way fossils are interpreted.<ref name="thoughtsonEvo" />}}

Evolutionist and Harvard professor [[Richard Lewontin]] wrote in 1995 that "Despite the excited and optimistic claims that have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species can be established as our direct ancestor...."<ref>Brad Harrub, Ph.D., Bert Thompson, Ph.D., and Eric Lyons, M.Min., [https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=153 ''Human Evolution and the “Record of the Rocks”'']</ref> In the September 2005 issue of [[National Geographic]], Joel Achenbach asserted that human evolution is a "fact" but he also candidly admitted that the field of paleoanthropology "has again become a rather glorious mess."<ref>Brad Harrub, Ph.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=126&article=1555 ''The “Glorious Mess” of Human Origins'']</ref><ref name="bonesrightplaces">[[National Geographic]] (online edition), Joel Achenbach, [http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/resources_who.html PALEOANTHROPOLOGY, Out of Africa, Are we looking for bones in all the right places?]</ref> In the same National Geographic article Harvard paleoanthropologist Dan Lieberman states, "We're not doing a very good job of being honest about what we don't know...".<ref name="bonesrightplaces" />

Concerning pictures of the supposed ancestors of man featured in science journals and the news media Boyce Rensberger wrote in the journal ''Science'' the following regarding their highly speculative nature:
{{cquote|Unfortunately, the vast majority of artist's conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. But a handful of expert natural-history artists begin with the fossil bones of a hominid and work from there…. Much of the reconstruction, however, is guesswork. Bones say nothing about the fleshy parts of the nose, lips, or ears. Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.... Hairiness is a matter of pure conjecture.<ref>Frank Sherwin, M.A., [http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=823 "Human Evolution" An Update]</ref><ref>Bert Thompson, P.H.D. and Brad Harrub, P.H.D., [http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/dc-02-safull.pdf 15 Answers to John Rennie and ''Scientific American's'' Nonsense]</ref>}}

Creation scientists concur with Dr. Pilbeam regarding the speculative nature of the field of paleoanthropology and assert there is no compelling evidence in the field of paleoanthropology for the various theories of human evolution.<ref>
*[http://creation.com/anthropology-and-apemen-questions-and-answers Anthropology and Apeman Questions and Answers - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/Anthropology.asp Anthropology and Apeman Questions and Answers - Answers in Genesis]
*[http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/127 ''Human Evolution and the “Record of the Rocks”'']</ref>

== Microevolution vs. macroevolution ==

In 2011, Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]] declared:
{{cquote|It is a commonly held belief of evolutionists that small changes in genetic materials (mutations) will ultimately produce the presumed large changes necessary for one biological organism to change into a different kind of biological organism which is commonly called [[macroevolution]]. This belief is not valid. Scientifically, a mutation is a copying error of previously existing information contained in the DNA: a mutation is a structural change in the hereditary material which makes the offspring different from its parents.
[[File:Grady S. McMurtry.jpg|right|thumb|175px|Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]] ]]
It is acknowledged that the Laws of Genetics are conservative, they are not “creative.” Genetics only copies or rearranges the previously existing information and passes it on to the next generation. When copying information, you have only two choices; you can only copy it perfectly or imperfectly, you cannot copy something “more perfectly.” Mutations do not build one upon another beneficially. Mutations do not create new organs; they only modify existing organs and structures. Mutations overwhelmingly lose information; they do not gain it; therefore, mutations cause changes which are contrary of evolutionary philosophy.

As a follow on, the addition of excess undirected energy will destroy the previously existing system. Indeed, you will never get an increase in the specifications on the DNA to create new organs without the input from a greater intelligence.

Mutations affect and are affected by many genes and other intergenic information acting in combination with one another. The addition of the accidental duplication of previously existing information is detrimental to any organism.

Mutations do produce “[[microevolution]],” however, this term is far better understood as merely “lateral adaptation,” which is only variation within a kind, a mathematical shifting of gene frequency within a gene pool. The shifting of gene frequencies and a loss of information cannot produce macroevolution.

As Dr. [[Roger Lewin]] commented after the 1980 University of Chicago conference entitled “Macroevolution”:

“The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. … At the risk of doing violence to the positions of some of the people at the meeting, the answer can be given as a clear, No.” [Emphasis added]

Dr. Roger Lewin, “Evolution Theory under Fire,” Science. Vol. 210, 21 November 1980. p. 883-887.<ref>http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=116</ref>}}

In 1988, the prominent [[Harvard University]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote in his essay ''Does Microevolution Explain Macroevolution''?:
{{cquote|Among all the claims made during the [[Modern evolutionary synthesis|evolutionary synthesis]], perhaps the one that found least acceptance was the assertion that all phenomena of macroevolution can be ‘reduced to,' that is, explained by, microevolutionary genetic processes. Not surprisingly, this claim was usually supported by geneticists but was widely rejected by the very biologists who dealt with macroevolution, the morphologists and paleontologists. Many of them insisted that there is more or less complete discontinuity between the processes at the two levels—that what happens at the species level is entirely different from what happens at the level of the higher categories. Now, 50 years later the controversy remains undecided.

...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.<ref>http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html</ref>}}

== Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics ==

[[Image:Jonathansafarti.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px|right|[[Jonathan Sarfati]] ]]
''See also:'' [[Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics|Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics and evolution]]

[[Creation Ministries International]] has a great wealth of information on why the second law of thermodynamics is incompatible with the evolutionary [[paradigm]].

Some of their key resources on this matter are:

*[http://creation.com/the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-answers-to-critics The Second Law of Thermodynamics: Answers to Critics] by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]]

*[http://creation.com/thermodynamics-and-order-questions-and-answers Thermodynamics Questions and Answers]

*[http://creation.com/thermodynamics-and-evolution Thermodynamics and evolution]

*[http://creation.com/some-thermodynamics-criticisms-and-answers Some thermodynamics criticisms — and answers]

== Punctuated Equilibrium ==

''See also:'' [[Theories of evolution]]

[[Image:StephenGould.jpg|left|thumbnail|170px|[[Stephen Jay Gould]] ]]
Because the fossil record is characterized by the abrupt appearance of species and stasis in the fossil record the theory of [[punctuated equilibrium]] was developed and its chief proponents were [[Stephen Gould]], Niles Eldridge, and Steven Stanley. According to the American Museum of Natural History the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium "asserts that evolution occurs in dramatic spurts interspersed with long periods of stasis".<ref>http://www.amnh.org/science/divisions/paleo/bio.php?scientist=eldredge</ref> Because Stephen Gould was the leading proponent of the theory of punctuated equilibrium much of the criticism of the theory has been directed towards Gould.<ref>http://dannyreviews.com/h/The_Dynamics_of_Evolution.html</ref><ref>[http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/spring02/editor.shtml.htm Yale Review of Book, Spring 2002 issue, Monograph: Punctuated Equilibrium]</ref> The development of a new evolutionary school of thought occurring due to the fossil record not supporting the evolutionary position was not unprecedented. In 1930, Austin H. Clark, an American evolutionary zoologist who wrote 630 articles and books in six languages, came up with an evolutionary hypothesis called [[zoogenesis]] which postulated that each of the major types of life forms evolved separately and independently from all the others.<ref>http://creation.com/zoogenesis-a-theory-of-desperation</ref> Prior to publishing his work entitled ''The New Evolution: Zoogenesis'', Clark wrote in a journal article published in the ''Quarterly Review of Biology'' that "so far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any one of the major groups arose from any other."<ref>http://creation.com/zoogenesis-a-theory-of-desperation#endRef4</ref>

In 1995, there was an essay in the ''New York Review of Books'' by the late John Maynard Smith, a noted evolutionary biologist who was considered the dean of British [[Neo-Darwinism|neo-Darwinists]], and Smith wrote the following regarding Gould's work in respect to the theory of evolution:
{{cquote|The evolutionary biologists with whom I have discussed his [Gould’s] work tend to see him as a man whose ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth bothering with, but as one who should not be publicly criticized because he is at least on our side against the creationists. All this would not matter, were it not that he is giving non biologists a largely false picture of the state of evolutionary theory."<ref>http://www.arn.org/ftissues/ft9801/johnson.html</ref><ref>http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/shermer_sjgould.pdf</ref>}}

Noted journalist and author Robert Wright , wrote in 1996 that, “among top-flight evolutionary biologists, Gould is considered a pest—not just a lightweight, but an actively muddled man who has warped the public's understanding of Darwinism.”<ref>http://dannyreviews.com/h/The_Dynamics_of_Evolution.html</ref><ref>[http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/spring02/editor.shtml.htm Yale Review of Book, Spring 2002 issue, Monograph: Punctuated Equilibrium]</ref>

Creation scientist Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote regarding the implausibility of the theory of punctuated equilibrium and the implausibility of the idea of gradual evolution the following:
{{cquote|...supporters of ‘jerky’ evolution [[saltationism]] and its relative, [[Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuated equilibria]]) point out that the fossil record does not show gradualism, and that the hypothetical transitional forms would be disadvantageous. But supporters of [[Phyletic gradualism|gradual evolution]] point out that large, information-increasing changes are so improbable that one would need to invoke a secular miracle. Creationists agree with ''both'': punctuational evolution can’t happen, and gradual evolution can’t happen—in fact, particles-to-people evolution can’t happen at all!<ref>[http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-2-chapter-3-argument-evolution-is-true-science-not-just-a-theory Refuting evolution]</ref>}}

== Atheism and the evolutionary paradigm are religious in nature and legal implications ==

Many of the leaders of the atheist movement, such as the evolutionist and atheist [[Richard Dawkins]], argue for [[atheism]] and evolution with a religious fervor.

Daniel Smartt has identified seven dimensions which make up religion: narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material. It is not necessary in Smartt's model for every one of these to be present in order for something to be a religion.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion "Atheism: A religion"], Daniel Smartt, Creation.com</ref>. However, it can be argued that all seven are present in the case of atheism.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref> Please see: [http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]and [http://creation.com/atheism Atheism] and [[Atheism is a religion]].

=== Atheism is a religion and its legal implications as far as the teaching of evolution ===
[[File:Paul gosselin.JPG|thumbnail|right|275px|The Canadian [[anthropology|anthropologist]] [[Paul Gosselin]] points out that evolution is a [[secular]] origins [[myth]].<ref>[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/origines/myth.htm Myths of Origin and the Theory of Evolution]</ref> ]]
[[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalistic]] notions concerning origins are religious in nature and both have legal implications as far as evolution being taught in public schools.<ref>http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_error_summary.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_Error.pdf</ref>

John Calvert, a lawyer and [[intelligent design]] proponent wrote:
{{cquote|The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the [[United States]] held that atheism is a [[religion]]. Therefore, it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently, public schools are often unwittingly promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins.<ref>[http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2011/08/intelligent-design-leader-john-calvert.html The effects of the Question Evolution! Campaign will be devastating to evolutionary belief and atheism]</ref>}}

See also:

*[[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]
*[[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]

=== Evolution as a secular origins myth ===

Evolution is a secular origins myth of [[atheism|atheists]], [[agnosticism|agnostics]] and members of other [[liberal Christianity|theologically liberal]] religious sects (theologically [[liberal]] religious sects often dismiss out of hand various [[supernatural]] events in history due to their hostility towards [[God]] and the supernatural). See: [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

== Implausible Explanations and the Evolutionary Position==
[[Image:Feather image.jpg|thumb|300px|left|[[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random [[mutation]]s."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>]]
Individuals who are against the evolutionary position assert that evolutionary scientists employ extremely implausible "just so stories" to support their position and have done this since at least the time of Charles Darwin.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/two-just-so-stories/</ref>
<ref>http://darwinstories.blogspot.com/</ref>

A well known example of a "just so story" is when Darwin, in his Origin of the Species, wrote a chapter entitled "Difficulties on Theory" in which he stated:
{{cquote|"In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale."<ref>http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/chapter-06.html</ref>}}

Even the prominent evolutionist and geneticist Professor Richard Lewontin admitted the following:
{{cquote|"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to [[materialism]]. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." - Richard Lewontin, ‘Billions and billions of demons’, The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-1-evolution-creation-science-religion-facts-bias</ref>}}

Dr. Sarfati wrote regarding the theory of evolution the following:
{{cquote|The same logic applies to the [[dinosaur]]-[[Bird|bird]] debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite Feduccia’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the dino-to-bird advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-crocodiles. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!<ref>http://creation.com/new-four-winged-feathered-dinosaur</ref>}}
[[Image:BacterialFlagellum.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[flagellum|Bacterial Flagellum]] with rotary motor, courtesy of Access Research Network (Art Battson)]]

Opponents to the theory of evolution commonly point to the following in nature as being implausibly created through evolutionary processes:
*various [[Symbiosis|symbiotic relationships]] found in nature.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/5044</ref><ref>http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/booklets/evolution/cooperat.html</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/146/</ref>
*[[flagellum|bacterial flagellum]]<ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2331</ref>
*[[homing]]<ref>[http://creation.com/wings-on-the-wind Wings on the wind
How do migrating birds know exactly when, and where, to go?]</ref>
*the origin of flight in the animal kingdom<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i1/planes.asp</ref>
* human [[brain]]<ref>http://creation.com/the-brain-brainier-than-believed-before</ref><ref>http://creation.com/the-human-bodygods-masterpiece</ref><ref>http://creation.com/mind-by-design-peter-line-interview</ref>
*[[migration]]<ref>http://creation.com/the-magnificent-migrating-monarch</ref>
*the [[whale]]<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-5-whale-evolution</ref><ref>http://creation.com/whale-explodes-fossil-theory</ref>
*the [[Venus flytrap]]<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/4340</ref>
*the [[Bombardier beetle]]<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/beetle.asp</ref>
*the [[Woodpecker|woodpecker]]<ref>http://www.creationism.org/heinze/Woodpecker.htm</ref>

Lastly, biochemist [[Michael Behe]] wrote the following:
{{cquote|"Molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority. There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or book—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. There are assertions that such evolution occurred, but absolutely none are supported by pertinent experiments or calculations. Since no one knows molecular evolution by direct experience, and since there is no authority on which to base claims of knowledge, it can truly be said that—like the contention that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl this year—the assertion of Darwinian molecular evolution is merely bluster." - Michael J. Behe, [[Darwin’s Black Box]] (New York: The Free Press, 1996), p. 186<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes10.html#wp1033719</ref>}}

== Statements of Design ==
:''See main article: [[Intelligent design]]''

[[Phillip E. Johnson]] cites [[Francis Crick]] in order to illustrate the fact that the biological world has the strong appearance of being designed:
{{cquote|"One of the world's most famous scientists, probably the most famous living biologist, is Sir [[Francis Crick]], the British co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, a Nobel Prize winner... Crick is also a fervent atheistic [[materialism|materialist]], who propounds the particle story. In his autobiography, Crick says very candidly biologists must remind themselves daily that what they study was not created, it evolved; it was not designed, it evolved. Why do they have to remind themselves of that? Because otherwise, the facts which are staring them in the face and trying to get their attention might break through. What we discovered when I developed a working group of scientists, philosophers, et al., in the United States was that living organisms look as if they were designed and they look that way because that is exactly what they are." - Evolution And Christian Faith by [[Phillip E. Johnson]]<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/ntcreation.html</ref>}}

Stephen C. Meyer offers the following statement regarding the design of the biological world:
{{cquote|"During the last forty years, [[molecular biology]] has revealed a complexity and intricacy of design that exceeds anything that was imaginable during the late-nineteenth century. We now know that organisms display any number of distinctive features of intelligently engineered high-tech systems: information storage and transfer capability; functioning codes; sorting and delivery systems; regulatory and feed-back loops; signal transduction circuitry; and everywhere, complex, mutually-interdependent networks of parts. Indeed, the complexity of the biomacromolecules discussed in this essay does not begin to exhaust the full complexity of living systems. As even the staunch materialist [[Richard Dawkins]] has allowed, "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." Yet the materialistic science we have inherited from the late-nineteenth century, with its exclusive conceptual reliance on matter and energy, could neither envision nor can it now account for the biology of the information age." - The Origin of Life and the Death of Materialism by [[Stephen C. Meyer]], Ph.D.<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_origins.htm</ref>}}
[[File:Darwin monkey cartoon.jpg|left|thumbnail|150px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]] ]]
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states the following regarding a candid admission of Charles Darwin:
{{cquote|In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death:

In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of [[Orchid]]s, and upon The [[Earthworm]]s, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away.”(Argyll 1885, 244]<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref>}}

== Detractors of Evolution and the Scientific Journals ==
Advocates of the theory of evolution have often claimed that those who oppose the theory of evolution don't publish their opposition to the theory of evolution in the appropriate scientific literature (creationist scientists have peer reviewed journals which favor the creationist position).<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640</ref><ref>http://creationresearch.org/crsq.html</ref><ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3873/</ref> Recently, there has been articles which were favorable to the [[intelligent design]] position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the theory of evolution.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640</ref>

== Unqualified to be a scientific theory==

[[Image:Image014.jpg|thumb|150px|right|[[Karl Popper]]]]
[[Karl Popper]], a leading philosopher of science and originator of the falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation of science from nonscience,<ref>
* http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
* http://www.discovery.org/a/3524</ref> stated that Darwinism is "not a testable scientific theory, but a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] research programme."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref> Leading Darwinist and philosopher of science, Michael Ruse declared the concerning Popper's statement and [[Falsifiability of evolution|the actions he took after making that statement]]: "Since making this claim, Popper himself has modified his position somewhat; but, disclaimers aside, I suspect that even now he does not really believe that Darwinism in its modern form is genuinely falsifiable."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref>

The issue of the [[Falsifiability of evolution|falsifiability of the evolutionary position]] is very important issue and although offering a poor cure to the problem that Karl Popper described, committed evolutionists Louis Charles Birch & Paul R. Ehrlich stated in the journal ''[[Nature]]'':
{{cquote|Our theory of evolution has become, as Popper described, one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it. It is thus outside of empirical science but not necessarily false. No one can think of ways in which to test it. Ideas, either without basis or based on a few laboratory experiments carried out in extremely simplified systems, have become part of an evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training. The cure seems to us not to be a discarding of the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory, but more skepticism about many of its tenets.<ref>L.C. Birch and P.R. Ehrlich, Nature, vol. 214 (1967), p. 349</ref>}}

The [[Sweden|Swedish]] cytogeneticist, Antonio Lima-De-Faria, who has been knighted
by the king of Sweden for his scientific achievements, noted that "there has never been a theory of evolution".<ref>[http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0807/S00053.htm Altenberg 16: An Exposé Of The Evolution Industry, July 6, 2008, by Suzan Mazur]</ref><ref>http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-tales-from-altenberg-suzan-mazurs.html</ref>

== Evolution is a Religion and Not Science ==

''See also:'' [[Evolution is a religion]]

[[Michael Ruse]], the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist science philosopher admitted, “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref> In the leading American science science journal ''Science'', Michael Ruse published an article in 2003 entitled ''Is Evolution a Secular Religion?''<ref>[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/299/5612/1523.full Is Evolution a Secular Religion?] by Dr. [[Michael Ruse]], ''Science'', March 7, 2003</ref>

Creationist opponents of evolution commonly point out that evolution is a religion and not science.<ref> *[http://creation.com/the-religious-nature-of-evolution The religious nature of evolution] by Dr. [[Carl Wieland]]
*[http://creation.com/evolution-religious Religious Nature of Evolution and its Attack on Christianity]
*[http://www.icr.org/article/455/ Evolution is a religion - not science] by Dr. [[Henry Morris]]
*[http://creation.com/evolution-as-religion Evolution as religion]</ref>

For more information, please see: [[Evolution is a religion]]

== Effect on Scientific Endeavors Outside the Specific Field of Biology ==
[[Image:Lysenko.jpg|right|thumbnail|150px|[[Trofim Denisovich Lysenko]]]]
[[Stephen Wolfram]] in his book ''A New Kind of Science'' has stated that the Darwinian theory of evolution has, in recent years, "increasingly been applied outside of biology."<ref>http://www.wolframscience.com/nksonline/page-14-text?firstview=1</ref>

===Lysenkoism===
Evolutionary theory played a prominent role in regards to atheistic communism.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3054/</ref> Communists, in particular [[Stalinism]], favored a version of [[Lamarckism]] called [[Lysenkoism]] developed by the [[Atheism|atheist]] [[Trofim Denisovich Lysenko]].<ref>http://www.bookrags.com/research/lysenkoism-wog/</ref> Lsyenko was made member of the Supreme [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] and head of the Institute of Genetics of the [[Soviet Academy of Sciences]].<ref>http://www.bartelby.com/65/ly/Lysenko.html</ref> Later Lysenko became President of the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences.<ref>http://www.bartelby.com/65/ly/Lysenko.html</ref> Many [[genetics|geneticists]] were imprisoned and executed for their ''bourgeois science'', and agricultural policies based on Lysenkoism that were adopted under the Communist leaders [[Joseph Stalin]] and [[Mao Zedong]] caused famines and the death of millions.<ref>http://www.bookrags.com/research/lysenkoism-wog/</ref>

===Medical Science===
The theory of evolution has had a negative effect on the field of [[medicine|medical science]]. According to Dr. [[Jerry Bergman]] the list of [[vestigial organs]] in humans has gone from 180 in 1890 to 0 in 1999.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/vestigial.asp</ref> Furthermore, Dr. Bergman states the following:
{{cquote|Few examples of vestigial organs in humans are now offered, and the ones that are have been shown by more recent research to be completely functional (and in many cases critically so, see Bergman and Howe)...

One popular book on the human body which discussed vestigial organs stated that next to [[circumcision]]

‘… tonsillectomy is the most frequently performed piece of surgery. Doctors once thought [[tonsils]] were simply useless evolutionary leftovers and took them out thinking that it could do no harm. Today there is considerable evidence that there are more troubles in the upper respiratory tract ''after'' tonsil removal than before, and doctors generally agree that simple enlargement of tonsils is hardly an indication for [[surgery]]...’<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/vestigial.asp</ref>}}

===Astronomy===
Young earth creation scientist Dr. Jonathan Sarfati states that evolutionary thought has been applied to the field of astronomy.<ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-7-astronomy</ref> Sarfati's claim is supported by the fact that astronomers do refer to the "evolution of the universe".<ref>
* http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7042/edsumm/e050602-01.html
* http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975MoIzN....Q....Z
* http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995deun.book.....S
</ref> Sarfati asserts the evolutionary view has had a negative effect on astronomy and that arguments to support the proposed evolutionary time scales of billions of years via the field of astronomy are invalid.<ref>http://www.creation.com/content/view/3836</ref> Creationists can cite examples of scientists stating that evolutionary ideas in astronomy have failed to have any explanatory power:
{{cquote|““...most every prediction by theorists about [[planet|planetary]] formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes43.html Strange Planets] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}
{{cquote|"Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the [[Solar System]] began about 350 years ago but have not yet been quantitatively successful, making this one of the oldest unsolved problems in modern science.” - Stephen G. Brush, A History of Modern Planetary Physics, Vol. 3 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 91.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43" />}}
{{cquote|“We don’t understand how a single [[star]] forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.” Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750.<ref name="creationsciencenotes60">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes60.html Star Births? Stellar Evolution?] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}

{{cquote|“We cannot even show convincingly how [[Galaxy|galaxies]], stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.” Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186.<ref name="creationsciencenotes61">[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes61.html Galaxies] - Creationscience.com</ref>}}

In 2001, Cristina Chiappini wrote concering the [[Milky Way]] galaxy:

:". . . it is an elegant structure that shows both order and complexity. . . . The end product is especially remarkable in the light of what is believed to be the starting point: nebulous blobs of gas. How the universe made the Milky Way from such simple beginnings is not altogether clear. - Cristina Chiappini, "The Formation and Evolution of the Milky Way," American Scientist (vol. 89, Nov./Dec. 2001), p. 506.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>

Dr. [[Walt Brown]] provides numerous citations to the secular science literature that cite the failings of current old universe [[paradigm]] explanations in regards to the planets, stars, and galaxies.<ref name="creationsciencenotes43" /><ref name="creationsciencenotes60" /><ref name="creationsciencenotes61" />

===Origin of Life===
Evolutionary thought has had an influence on [[origin of life]] research as well. For example, a 2004 article in the ''International Journal of [[Astrobiology]]'' is titled ''On the applicability of Darwinian principles to [[chemical evolution]] that led to life''.<ref>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=240771</ref> It is also clear that early origin of life researcher Aleksandr Oparin who proposed materialist ideas regarding the origin of life was influenced by evolutionary thought.<ref>
* [http://creation.com/the-origin-of-life-a-problem-for-evolution Origin of life - a problem for evolution]
* http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9057170/Oparin,%20Aleksandr
</ref> However, the current [[origin of life|naturalistic explanations for the origin of life are inadequate]].

== Richard Dawkins and evolutionary quackery ==

See:'' [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience|Richard Dawkins and evolutionary quackery]]

== Age of the Earth and the Theory of Evolution ==
:''See main articles: [[Young Earth Creationism]], [[Geologic system]]''
As far as the evolutionary timeline posited by the evolutionary community, the various theories of evolution claim that the earth and universe are billions of years old and that macroevolutionary processes occurred over this time period.<ref name="sarfati3837">Sarfati, 1999, [http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth Chapter 8, How old is the earth?]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-7-astronomy</ref> [[William R. Corliss]] was a respected cataloger of scientific [[anomaly|anomalies]] and the science magazine ''[[New Scientist]]'' had an article which focused on Mr. Corliss's career as a cataloger of scientific anomalies.<ref>Adrian Hope, ''Finding a Home for Stray Fact'', New Scientist, July 14, 1977, p. 83</ref> Mr. Corliss cataloged scores of [[Anomaly|anomalies]] which challenge the old earth geology [[paradigm]].<ref>http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.net/articles/184</ref> [[Young earth creationism|Young earth creationist]] hold the [[earth]] and universe is approximately 6,000 years old.<ref name="sarfati3837" /> Young earth creationist scientists state the following is true: there are multiple lines of evidence pointing to a young earth and universe; the old earth and universe [[paradigm]] has numerous [[anomaly|anomalies]] and uses invalid dating methods, and there are multiple citations in the secular science literature that corroborate the implausibility of the old earth and universe paradigm (for details see: [[Young Earth Creationism]]).

See also:

*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]

*[http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?]

*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa Age of the earth and the universe]

== Scientific Community Consensus and the Macroevolution Position ==

''See also:'' [[Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief|Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief]]

[[Image:Lion6.jpg|thumb|210px|right|Until the 1970s the scientific consensus was wrong on how [[lion]]s killed their prey.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref> The [[Bible]] was correct regarding how lions killed their prey.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref>]]
A 1997 [[Gallup Organization|Gallup]] poll indicated that 55% of [[United States]] scientists believed that humans developed over a period of millions of years from less developed forms of life and that [[God]] had no part in the process, 40% believed in [[Theistic evolution|theistic evolution]], and 5% of scientists believed that God created man fairly much in his current form at one time within the last 10,000 years.<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/19991013122341/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/evolutionviews990816.html Views in U.S. Much Different Than Elsewhere], Kenneth Chang, ''ABCNews.com'', 1999.</ref> As noted earlier, in 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture...announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref>

Poll results regarding the amount of scientists who are skeptical or opposed to the evolutionary view could be underreporting the actual amount of scientists who are skeptical of the evolutionary view or hold the creation science view. Poll results may not be as precise as they could be as creation science organizations report widespread discrimination against scientists who hold the creation science view.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i2/suppression.asp</ref>
On April 18, 2008 a film documentary by [[Ben Stein]] entitled ''[[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]]!'' was released to the public which documents the [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution|suppression of scientific freedom of scientists who are critical of the evolutionary position]].<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57840</ref><ref>http://www.expelledthemovie.com/</ref>
Such suppression is not surprising given that a poll among United States scientists showed that approximately 45% of scientists believed there was no God.<ref>[http://www.pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/Scientists-and-Belief.aspx Scientists and belief]</ref> In addition, a survey found that 93% of the scientists who were members of the [[United States National Academy of Sciences]] do not believe there is a God.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6691/full/394313a0.html</ref> Given this state of affairs, a future [[paradigm shift]] from the theory of evolution to a creation science position could be slow given the worldviews of many scientists.
[[Image:Harvester-ants.jpg|thumb|205px|left|19th century [[Europe|European]] naturalists were wrong about [[ant]] behavior. The [[Bible]] was correct about ant behavior.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BWilliamsvsAnon71to73.htm</ref>]]
Also, the current scientific community consensus is no guarantee of truth. The [[History of science|history of science]] shows many examples where the scientific community consensus was in error, was scientifically unsound, or had little or no empirical basis. For example, [[bloodletting]] was practiced from antiquity and still had many practitioners up until the late 1800s.<ref>[http://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting History of bloodletting]</ref> In his essay, ''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D. wrote the following: "...history is rife with examples in which our best medical judgment was flawed. The prestigious British Medical Journal begun in 1828 chose the name Lancet to signal its scholarly intent and cutting edge therapy."<ref>''A Paradigm Shift: Are We Ready?'' , Niranjan Kissoon, M.D.</ref>
Also, in regards to modern medical science, in a 1991 [[BMJ]] (formerly called the British Medical Journal) article, Richard Smith (editor of BMJ at the time) wrote the following: "There are 30,000 biomedical journals in the world...Yet only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence, [[David Eddy]] professor of health policy and management at [[Duke University]], told a conference in Manchester last week. This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all."<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=1932964&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum]</ref> Next, [[Alchemy|alchemy]] was at one time considered to be a legitimate scientific pursuit and was studied by such notable individuals as [[Isaac Newton]], [[Robert Boyle]], [[Roger Bacon]], and [[Gottfried Leibniz]].<ref>http://www.levity.com/alchemy/caezza4.html</ref><ref>http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9011664/Roger-Bacon</ref> Given the aforementioned weaknesses in the evolutionary position and given that the history of science shows there have been some notable paradigm shifts,<ref>[http://deskarati.com/2011/08/17/scientific-revolutions-or-paradigm-shifts/ Scientific revolutions or paradigm shifts]</ref><ref>http://www.geoff-hart.com/resources/2006/intheory.htm</ref>the scientific consensus argument for the macroevolutionary theory certainly cannot be called an invincible argument.

In addition, biblical creationists can point out examples where the scientific community was in error and the Bible was clearly correct. For example, until the 1970s the scientific consensus on how lions killed their prey was in error and the Bible turned out to be right in this matter.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref> Also, for centuries the scientific community believed that snakes could not hear and the 1988 edition of The New [[Encyclopedia Britannica]] stated the snakes could not hear but that was mistaken and the Bible was correct in this matter.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BCobra94.htm</ref><ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BBritannicaCobra38.htm</ref> In addition, 19th century European naturalists were wrong concerning a matter regarding ant behavior and the Bible was correct.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BWilliamsvsAnon71to73.htm</ref> Many creationists such as the creationists at [[Creation Ministries International]] assert that the Bible contains knowledge that shows an understanding of scientific knowledge [http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible scientific foreknowledge beyond that believed to exist at the time the Bible was composed].<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge at Creationwiki]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/content/view/1718/</ref> In addition, [[Christianity]] had a profound influence in regards to the [[Christianity and Science|development of modern science]].

For more information see: [[Scientific consensus and evolutionary belief]]

== Social Effects of the Theory of Evolution ==

''For more information please see: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] and [[Evolutionary racism]] and [[Atheism and Evolution]]''
‎

There have been significant and negative social ramifications of the adoption of the theory of evolution. The theory has been foundational to [[Social Darwinism]], [[Nazism]] and [[Communism]] and has also been a source of racism.<ref>
* http://www.icr.org/article/454/
* http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v09n1p04.htm
* http://www.creation.com/content/view/3031/
* http://www.creation.com/content/view/3054/
* http://creation.com/content/view/1804/
* http://creation.com/charles-darwins-impactthe-bloodstained-legacy-of-evolution
* http://www.icr.org/article/55/
</ref>

=== Belief in evolution and sexual immorality ===

''See also:'' [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] and [[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]] and [[Bestiality and Germany]] and [[Bestiality and Sweden]]
[[Image:Carl weiland.jpg|thumbnail|150px|right|Dr. [[Carl Wieland]] is the Managing Director of Creation Ministries International ]]

In July of 2000, [[Creation Ministries International]] reported:
{{cquote|For years, many people have scoffed at any suggestion that the evils in society could be linked with the teaching of the theory of evolution. But new research has confirmed what Bible-believers have known all along—that the rising acceptance of [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]]’s theory is related to declining morality in the community.

The research survey of 1535 people, conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness. Darwin himself apparently feared that belief in evolution by the common man would lead to social decay. The survey showed that people who believed in evolution were more likely to be in favour of premarital sex than those who rejected Darwin’s theory. Another issue which highlighted the contrast between the effect of evolutionary ideas and that of biblical principles was that Darwinians were reported to be ‘especially tolerant’ of [[abortion]].

In identifying the primary factors determining these differences in community attitudes, the author of the research report, Dr Jonathan Kelley, said: ‘The single most important influence after church attendance is the theory of evolution.’<ref>[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]</ref>}}

Also, according to [[atheism|atheist]] [[philosophy|philosopher]] David Stove the theory of evolution was influential in regards to the [[sexual revolution]].<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18094</ref>

See also:

*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]

=== Evolution and Nazism ===
[[Image:Hitlerspeech.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Adolf Hitler]]]]
The staunch evolutionist [[Stephen Gould]] admitted the following:
{{cquote|[[Ernst Haeckel|Haeckel]] was the chief apostle of evolution in [[Germany]].... His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science - all contributed to the rise of Nazism. - Stephen J. Gould, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny," Belknap Press: Cambridge MA, 1977, pp.77-78).<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/social.html</ref>}}

[[Adolf Hitler]] wrote the following [[Evolutionary racism|evolutionary racist]] material in his work ''[[Mein Kampf]]'':
{{cquote|If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such cases all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/09/15/a-church-apology-to-darwin/</ref>}}

[[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] also wrote in ''Mein Kampf'':
{{cquote|The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref>}}

Dr. Robert E.D. Clark also wrote:
{{cquote|“Adolf Hitler’s mind was captivated by evolutionary teaching — probably since the time he was a boy. Evolutionary ideas — quite undisguised — lie at the basis of all that is worst in Mein Kampf — and in his public speeches.”<ref>http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_holocaust_why_did_it_happen</ref>}}

Dr. [[Josef Mengele]]'s evolutionary thinking was in accordance with [[Social Darwinism|social Darwinist]] theories that [[Adolph Hitler]] and a number of [[German]] academics found appealing.<ref>[http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/herero-genocide Herero Genecide]</ref> Dr. Joseph Mengele studied under the leading proponents the "unworthy life" branch of evolutionary thought.<ref>[http://creation.com/refutation-of-new-scientists-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions-nazi-darwin-link The Darwin–Hitler connection]</ref> Dr. Mengele was one of the most notorious individuals associated with [[Nazi]] death camps and the [[Holocaust]].<ref>http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/joseph_mengele.htm</ref> Mengele obtained a infamous reputation due to his experiments on twins while at [[Auschwitz]]-Birkenau.<ref>http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/joseph_mengele.htm</ref>

B. Wilder-Smith wrote the following regarding [[Nazism]] and the theory of evolution:
{{cquote|One of the central planks in Nazi theory and doctrine was …evolutionary theory [and] … that all biology had evolved … upward, and that … less evolved types … should be actively eradicated [and] … that natural selection could and should be actively aided, and therefore [the Nazis] instituted political measures to eradicate … [[Jew]]s, and … blacks, whom they considered as “underdeveloped”.’<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i2/nazi.asp</ref>}}

[[Pulitzer Prize]] winning author Marilynne Robinson wrote the following regarding Hitler's racism in the November 2006 issue of Harper’s Magazine:
{{cquote|While it is true that persecution of the Jews has a very long history in Europe, it is also true that science in the twentieth century revived and absolutized persecution by giving it a fresh rationale — Jewishness was not religious or cultural, but genetic. Therefore no appeal could be made against the brute fact of a Jewish grandparent...

There is indeed [[history|historical]] precedent in the [[Spanish Inquisition]] for the notion of hereditary Judaism. But the fact that the worst religious thought of the sixteenth century can be likened to the worst scientific thought of the twentieth century hardly redounds to the credit of science."<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>}}
[[File:Stalin-140508 27880t.jpg|right|200px|thumb|The brutal [[atheism|atheist]] [[Joseph Stalin]] was greatly influenced by the work of [[Charles Darwin]].<ref>http://creation.com/the-darwinian-foundation-of-communism</ref>]]
As noted earlier, evolutionary ideas significantly influenced the thinking of the nineteenth and twentieth-century [[Communism|Communists]].<ref>http://creation.com/content/view/1804/</ref><ref>http://creation.com/charles-darwins-impactthe-bloodstained-legacy-of-evolution</ref> Karl Marx wrote in a letter the following, ""Darwin's book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the [[class struggle]] in history." Darwin's ideas also influenced the thinking of [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]], [[Vladimir Lenin]], and [[Joseph Stalin]].<ref>http://creation.com/the-darwinian-foundation-of-communism</ref>

=== Darwinism and communism ===

Governments under the banner of [[atheism|atheistic]] [[communism]] have caused the death of somewhere between 40 million to 260 million human lives.<ref>
*[http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/finalconflict/fcrevb102.html The Black Book of Communism]
*[http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hpcws/lelivrenoir.htm The Black Book of Communism]
*[http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM How Many Did Communist Regimes Murder?]
*[http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2526 The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression]</ref> Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term [[democide]] (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.<ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref>

=== Darwinism and racism ===

''See also:'' [[Evolutionary racism]]

Previously it was mentioned that evolutionary ideas contributed to the scourge of [[racism]]. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/racism.asp</ref> Charles Darwin and [[Thomas Huxley]] contributed greatly to the theory of evolution broadly being accepted in the 1900s. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref> Darwin, Huxley, and the 19th century evolutionists were racist in sentiment and believed the white race was superior. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref> For example, Charles Darwin wrote in his work ''[[The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex]]'' the following:
{{cquote|At some future period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.<ref>Charles Darwin, ''The Descent of Man'', Ch. VI, On The Birthplace and Antiquity Of Man</ref>}}
[[File:Ota Benga at Bronx Zoo.jpg|thumb|[[Ota Benga]] in the Bronx Zoo]]
John C. Burnham wrote, in the journal ''Science'', the following in regards to the theory of evolution and racism:
{{cquote|After 1859, the evolutionary schema raised additional questions, particularly whether or not Afro-Americans could survive competition with their white near-relations. The momentous answer was a resounding no.... The [[Africa]]n was inferior — he represented the missing link between [[ape]] and Teuton."<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/55/</ref>}}

Harvard University's [[Stephen Jay Gould]] stated, "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory."<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref> Recent [[racism]] directed at [[Michelle Obama]] was the result of [[evolutionary racism]].<ref>http://creation.com/obama-racism-row</ref>

==== Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa's comments about black women and African history ====

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics. Dr. Kanazawa publishes a blog on the ''Psychology Today'' website called ''The Scientific Fundamentalist''.

In 2011, Dr. Kanazawa published the following inappropriate comment which was later pulled by the Psychology Today website:
{{cquote|It is very interesting to note that, even though black women are objectively less physically attractive than other women, black women (and men) subjectively consider themselves to be far more physically attractive than others.<ref>http://www.scribd.com/doc/55558908/Why-Are-Black-Women-Rated-Less-Physically-Attractive-Than-Other-Women-But-Black-Men-Are-Rated-Better-Looking-Than-Other-Men</ref>}}

Kanazawa has a "Savanna principle" hypothesis which speculates that societal problems are due to the human brain supposedly evolving in Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago in a very different environment from modern society.<ref>http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/38933</ref>

=== Darwinism and bestiality ===
[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|250px|The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the [[liberal]] and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] ]]

''See also:'' [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Irreligion and superstition]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The pro-evolution magazine the ''[[Scientific American]]'' speciously made this unwarranted speculation via their blog on the aberrant practice of bestiality:
{{cquote|After all, we are animals....

In any event, philosophical questions aside, I simply find it astounding — and incredibly fascinating from an evolutionary perspective — that so many people (as much as a full percent of the general population) are certifiable zoophiles. And scientific researchers appear to be slowly conceding that zoophilia may be a genuine human sexual orientation.<ref>Animal Lovers: Zoophiles Make Scientists Rethink Human Sexuality By Jesse Bering, March 24, 2010</ref>}}

Liberals [[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality|are more likely to believe]] in evolutionary pseudoscience. Concerning the aberrant practice of [[homosexuality]], the licentious [[liberal]] community [[Views on Homosexuality|has more favorable views]] on [[homosexuality]] than [[conservative]]s plus has a history of inflating the number of people who are homosexuals.<ref>[http://www.cwfa.org/content.asp?id=2099 How Bad Science Helped Launch the 'Gay' Revolution] By Robert H. Knight</ref> As far as the [[Causes of Homosexuality|causes of homosexuality]], the [[liberal]] community commonly ignores the existence of [[ex-homosexuals]] and errantly asserts that homosexuality is an immutable sexual orientation despite the fact that researchers [[Religious Upbringing and Culture Affects Rates of Homosexuality|have found cultures where homosexuality does not exist]].<ref>[http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm My Genes Made Me Do it - a scientific look at sexual orientation by Dr Neil Whitehead and Briar Whitehead - Chapter 6]</ref> Thus, it is not surprising the ''Scientific American'' engaged in the above cited speculation concerning [[bestiality]].

In areas of the [[Western World]] where there is a significant amount of [[atheism|atheists]] and evolutionary belief, there have been notable problems related to [[bestiality]] (see: [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]]).

See also:

*[[Bestiality and Germany]]

*[[Bestiality and Sweden]]

*[[Denmark and bestiality]]

*[[Netherlands and bestiality]]

*[[Bestiality and Britain]]

*[[Washington state and bestiality]]

===Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science ===

See: [[Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science]]

=== Common behavior of online evolutionists ===
In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported that [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html</ref> Given that ''Wired Magazine'' and [[Vox Day]] declared for [[Atheism appears to be significantly less appealing to women| various reasons that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men]], it is not surprising the online dispute was bitter. In addition, Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]].

In 2010, the [[Christian apologetics]] website [[True Free Thinker]] wrote:
{{cquote|Scienceblogger [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/pz-myers-and-pavlovs-monkeys Chad Orzel described] the commentators on [[PZ Myers]] ' Scienceblogs.com site [[Pharyngula (blog)|Pharyngula]], and other Scienceblogs.com commentators, as "screechy monkeys."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/pz-myers-and-pavlovs-monkeys</ref>}}

In addition, there is a widespread problem with [[Atheist bullying|atheist cyberbullying]] on [[YouTube]] toward [[Christian]] and [[creationism|creationist]] YouTube channels. [[CreationWiki]] has developed a web page entitled [http://creationwiki.org/Creationist_YouTube_video Creationist YouTube video] designed to show creationists how to thwart atheist/evolutionist cyberbullies.

==Creation Scientists Tend to Win the Creation-Evolution Debates==
[[Image:Duanegishpic.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Dr. [[Duane Gish]]]]
:''For additional information please see the article: [[Atheism and Debate]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]]

Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970's particularly in the [[United States]]. Robert Sloan, Director of Paleontology at the University of Minnesota, reluctantly admitted to a ''Wall Street Journal'' reporter that the "creationists tend to win" the public debates which focused on the creation vs. evolution controversy.<ref>Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John, [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC0104W1E.htm Truth in Advertising: Damaging the Cause of Science]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>
In August of 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”
Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>

Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]].<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> Also, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]]. Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref>

==Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality ==
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|right|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by [[Baylor University]] yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
:''See also: [[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]] and
[[Theory of evolution and liberalism]]'' and [[Atheism and Evolution]] and [[Atheism and deception]]

As alluded to earlier, in the [[United States]], CBS News reported in October of 2005 that the [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|Americans most likely to believe only in the theory of evolution are liberals]].<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref> {{cquote|The CBS News reported the following:
Americans most likely to believe in only evolution are [[liberal]]s (36 percent), those who rarely or never attend religious services (25 percent), and those with a college degree or higher (24 percent).

White evangelicals (77 percent), weekly churchgoers (74 percent) and conservatives (64 percent), are mostly likely to say God created humans in their present form.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref>}}

Given that [[Professor values|liberalism is so prevalent in academia]], it is not entirely surprising that college graduates are indoctrinated into the evolutionary paradigm via evolutionary propaganda.

Despite the aforementioned lack of evidence for the evolutionary position and the aforementioned counter evidential nature of the evolutionary paradigm, atheists and liberals persist in advocating the evolutionary paradigm. The continued support of the atheist and liberal community for the evolutionary paradigm is not surprising given the that the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|...a comprehensive new study released by [[Baylor University]] yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

=== Evolutionary belief, irreligion, extraterrestial life, UFOlogy and other pseudoscience ===

See: [[Irreligion and superstition]]

=== Liberalism, Charles Darwin, and Denial of Creation ===

''See also:'' [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

[[File:113320508 2b86fdb94a.jpg|thumb|201px|right|The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref> ]]‎Many liberals when faced with the compelling data for creation science and against the evolutionary paradigm irrationally attempt to suppress the evidence and engage in denial like the atheist [[Charles Darwin]] (see: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Charles_Darwin#Religious_Views_of_Charles_Darwin religious views of Charles Darwin] ) who late in life is reported to often have overwhelming thoughts that the world was designed.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref><ref>The Berkeley [http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ "Understanding Evolution" website] and the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution Wikipedia evolution article] are prime examples of liberal denialism when it comes to liberals denying the clear evidence for [[creation]].</ref> [[Creation Ministries International]] describes such irrational thinking in the following manner:
{{cquote|Underpinning this abandonment of faith in God is the widespread acceptance of evolutionary thinking — that everything made itself by natural processes; that God is not necessary. There is ‘design’, such people will admit, but no Designer is necessary. The designed thing designed itself! This thinking, where the plain-as-day evidence for God’s existence (Rom. 1:19–20) is explained away, leads naturally to atheism (belief in no God) and [[secular humanism]] (man can chart his own course without God). Such thinking [[Professor values|abounds in universities]] and governments today).<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter1.pdf</ref>}}

The evolutionist and immunologist Dr. Scott Todd, an immunologist at [[Kansas State University]], perfectly epitomized the irrational evolutionary denial of the evidence for creation in his correspondence to the science journal ''Nature''. Dr. Scott wrote: "Even if all the data point to an [[Intelligent design|intelligent designer]], such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not [[naturalism|naturalistic]]".<ref>http://creation.com/a-designer-is-unscientificeven-if-all-the-evidence-supports-one</ref>

Although he is not a [[creationism|creationist]], the atheist [[philosophy|philosopher]] John Gray admitted in 2008 in ''The Guardian'':
{{cquote|A great deal of modern thought consists of secular myths - hollowed-out religious narratives translated into [[pseudoscience|pseudo-science]]. [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]]'s notion that new communications technologies will fundamentally alter the way human beings think is just such a myth.<ref>[http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/15/society The atheist delusion, John Gray, The Guardian, Friday 14 March 2008]</ref>}}

For more information please see: [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]

=== Ben Stein Interview with the Evolutionist Richard Dawkins ===

In the movie [[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]], [[Ben Stein]] demonstrated the folly of [[evolutionism]] in his interview with the prominent evolutionist and atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M_ZF8r5e7w A clip of the interview has been uploaded to YouTube] ).

The [[Discovery Institute]] provides an transcript of part of the interview along with some commentary:
{{cquote|BEN STEIN: "What do you think is the possibility that [[Intelligent design|Intelligent Design]] might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?"

DAWKINS: "Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer."

Ho,ho! That is precisely what the [[Raëlism|Raelians]] say:

Years ago, everybody knew that the earth was flat. Everybody knew that the sun revolved around the earth. Today, everybody knows that life on earth is either the result of random evolution or the work of a supernatural God. Or is it? In "Message from the Designers", Rael presents us with a third option: that all life on earth was created by advanced scientists from another world.

Richard Dawkins and Rael; "clear thinking" kindred spirits!
<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/4589</ref>}}

In the Ben Stein/Richard Dawkins interview, Richard Dawkins was also asked what the probability is of God's existence is and a rationale for that estimation. [http://www.conservapedia.com/Richard_Dawkins#Ben_Stein_Interview_with_the_Evolutionist_Richard_Dawkins_Demonstrated_the_Folly_of_Evolutionism Dawkins gave a very inept reply to Ben Stein concerning this issue.]

=== Creationist Video Interview of Richard Dawkins Being Stumped by a Creationist===
A video clip featuring Richard Dawkins became widely available to the public,<ref name="stumped">[http://creation.com/content/view/5712/ Was Dawkins Stumped?] (Creation Ministries International) (The clip is viewable on this page).</ref>
[http://creation.com/content/view/5712/ showing Dawkins being stumped by a question from the creationist interviewer].
A shortened version has been translated into 10 languages.
The clip was part of an interview included in the video and DVD ''From a Frog to Prince'', produced by [[Creation Ministries International]] about the genetic information required by evolution, and the interviewer is asking Dawkins for an example of genetic information arising from a mutation.

In later interviews, Dawkins claims that he was not stumped, but instead shocked when he realized that the interviewer was a [[creationism|creationist]], and the video was edited in a way to make him look like he was unable to answer the question.<ref>[http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/dawkins.htm]</ref> However, the question came after he had that realization, and after the creationists negotiated with Dawkins and he agreed to continue.<ref> [http://creation.com/images/feedback/2008/5712timeline_lge.jpg Interview Timeline]</ref>
Richard Dawkins still hasn't provide any examples of genetic information being created by evolution.

===Methodological Naturalism Ideology In Evolutionary Thought ===

As mentioned earlier, evolutionary thought (which employs [[methodological naturalism]]) has had an influence on [[origin of life]] research as well (for example, a 2004 article in the ''International Journal of [[Astrobiology]]'' is titled ''On the applicability of Darwinian principles to [[chemical evolution]] that led to life'').<ref>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=240771</ref> The [[Nobel Prize]] winning biologist [[Francis Crick]] described himself as an [[agnostic]] with "a strong inclination towards [[atheism]]."<ref>Francis Crick, What Mad Pursuit: a Personal View of Scientific Discovery, Basic Books reprint edition, 1990, ISBN 0-465-09138-5, p. 145.</ref>In 1992, the science magazine ''[[Scientific American]]'' published an interview which explored Sir [[Francis Crick]]'s belief in the hypothesis [[Directed panspermia|Directed Panspermia]] as a proposed hypthesis for the [[origin of life]] on [[earth]].<ref>[http://www.genesispark.com/essays/spontaneous/ Reprint of an Creation Research Quarterly September 2001 article ''The Spontaneous Generation Hypothesis'' by David P. Woetzel]</ref> Directed panspermia posits concerning the question of [[origin of life]] on [[earth]] that "organisms were deliberately transmitted to the earth by [[Extraterrestrial life|intelligent beings on another planet]]."<ref name="SD">http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-04zzz.html</ref> [[Michael Behe]] wrote regarding the Scientific American interview the following: {{cquote|The primary reason Crick subscribes to this unorthodox view is that he judges the undirected origin of life to be a virtually insurmountable obstacle, but he wants a [[Naturalism|naturalistic explanation]]. <ref>[http://www.genesispark.com/essays/spontaneous/ Reprint of an Creation Research Quarterly September 2001 article ''The Spontaneous Generation Hypothesis'' by David P. Woetzel]</ref>}}

When commenting on the hypothesis of [[Directed Panspermia]] Creation Ministries International wrote that Francis "Crick’s atheistic faith leads to absurd [[pseudoscience]]".<ref>http://creation.com/designed-by-aliens-crick-watson-atheism-panspermia</ref>

=== Supppession of scientific inquiry concerning alternative theories of origins ===

see also: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]

There exists widespread suppression of [[creation science]] and [[intelligent design]], ideas which offer alternative explanations of origins than do the various [[theories of evolution]] (for more information please see: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]).

=== Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity ===

Please see: [[Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity]] [[Atheism and deception]]

== Causes of evolutionary belief ==

''See also:'' [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]

A number of articles have been written concerning the reasons why evolutionists commonly hold their evolutionary views:

*[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-is-evolution-is-pushed-in-america.html Why is evolution pushed by dogmatic evolutionists?]

*[http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/567-why-people-believe-in-evolution Why do people believe in evolution?]

*[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/evolutionary-gut-feelings-belief-in.html Evolutionary gut feelings, "Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling"] (Cites study in ''Live Science'' article)

See also:

*[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to belief in evolution] (cites Australian National University study)

== Evolutionary biology careers ==

See: [[Evolutionary biology careers]]

== Creation vs. Evolution Videos ==
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]

== Creation vs. evolution news ==

*[[Creation vs. evolution news]]

== Poor health practices of some notable evolutionists ==

See: [[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]

== Further Reading (including free on-line versions) ==

*[http://www.amazon.com/Top-Evidences-God-Creation-ebook/dp/B00E4DS2J0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380144491&sr=8-1&keywords=jason+browning Top 15 Evidences for God and Creation] by Jason Browning
* J.D. Mitchell, ''The Creation Dialogues - A Response to the Position of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on Evolution, Christianity and the Bible'', Pleasant Word (Winepress Pub), 2010 ISBN 1414118007<ref>http://www.creationengineeringconcepts.org/index.php?p=1_35_THE-CREATION-DIALOGUES</ref><ref>http://www.christianbook.com/dialogues-american-association-advancement-evolution-christianity/j-d-mitchell/9781414118000/pd/118002</ref>
*Dr. [[Grady S. McMurtry]], ''Creation: Our Worldview'', TEC Publications, Columbus, GA 2010 ISBN 0-9674006-1-9
*[[Duane Gish]], ''Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!'', El Cajon: [[Institute for Creation Research]], 1996<ref>http://www.icr.org/store/index.php?main_page=pubs_product_book_info&products_id=2176</ref> ISBN 9780890511121
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution'', Master Books, 1999 [http://www.creation.com/content/view/4014/ (Free on-line version)] ISBN 0890512582
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Master Books, 2002,[http://www.creation.com/content/view/4013/ (Free on-line version)] ISBN 0890513872
*Richard Weikart, ''Hitler's Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress'' ISBN 978-0-230-61807-7
*Richard Weikart, ''From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany'' ISBN 9781403972019
*[[R.L. Wysong]], ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy'', Inquiry Press (Midland, MI), 1976. ISBN 978-0-918-112-02-6<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/05105.htm</ref>
*[[Phillip E. Johnson|Phillip Johnson]], ''Darwin on Trial''. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois. 1991<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwin.html</ref> ISBN 0-8308-1324-1
*[[R. C. Sproul]], ''Not a Chance: The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology'', Baker Book House: 1994<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/chance.html</ref> ISBN 080105852X

=== Social effects of the theory of evolution ===

*[http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Absolute-Cynical-Observations-Postmodern/dp/2980777447/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1384179653&sr=8-3&keywords=flight+from+absolutes Flight from the Absolute: Cynical Observations on the Postmodern West. Volume II] by [[Paul Gosselin]]
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77k9QDQBi54 Flight from the Absolute: Cynical Observations on the Postmodern West. Volume II] - Paul Gosselin discusses his book (video)

=== Other biblical creation related publications ===

''See also:'' [[Biblical creation journals]]

Some prominent biblical [[creation]] publications are given below:

*[[Creation magazine]]

*[[Journal of Creation]] - Peer reviewed

*[[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal]] - peer reviewed

== See also ==

*[[Evolution articles]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[Essay: Atheism and evolution essays|Atheism and evolution essays]]
*[[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]
*[[Origin of life]]
*[[Atheism]]
*[[Creation]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Young Earth Creationism]]
*[[Human evolution]]
*[[Arguments for a recent creation]]
*[[Atheism and Evolution]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Counterexamples to Evolution]]
*[[Creation Science]]
*[[Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution]]
*[[Evolutionism]]

==External Links and other links ==

*[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]
*[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]
*[http://creation.com Creation Ministries International] - Over 7,000 articles on the creation vs. evolution issue
*[http://creationrevolution.com/ Creation vs. evolution news]

'''Other resources:'''

*[http://creation.com/creation-answers Evidence and arguments against evolution]
*[http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=53 The Nine Great 'Proofs' for Evolution: and Why They Are All False!]
*[http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Evolution]
*[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/human-evolution.htm Human evolutionary theory]
*[http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/theory-of-evolution.htm Theory of evolution]
*[http://www.windmillministries.org/theory-of-evolution Theory of evolution] by [[Windmill Ministries]]
*[http://www.theory-of-evolution.net/ Intelligent Design vs. Evolution]

'''Social effects of Darwinism:'''

*[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/philo/eth_ev_pg.htm Problems with Ethics in an Evolutionary / Materialistic World-View]

'''Anti-Darwinism/creationist, French/English website:'''

*[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/ Samizdat]

{{Template:Creation vs. evolution}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{DEFAULTSORT: Evolution, theory of}}
[[Category: Pseudoscience]]
[[Category:Life Sciences]]
[[Category: Biology]]

ObamaCare

2014-04-17T04:08:17Z

Debletar: /* Basic Requirements */ Added new source on other effects, such as healthcare rationing

[[File:ObamaCareSymbol.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Image courtesy [[Newsbusters]].]]
'''ObamaCare''', formally known as "'''The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act'''," (ACA) will impose massive penalties on young workers, small businesses and others who choose not to buy expensive health insurance, beginning in 2014. ObamaCare is the biggest handout by [[liberals]] to a single interest group — the health insurance industry — in [[America]]n history. Even [[Democrat]]ic Senator [[Jim Webb]] admitted in 2012: Obamacare "cost [[Obama]] a lot of credibility as a leader."<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/222259-sen-webb-says-president-obamas-health-law-cost-him-a-lot-of-credibility-as-a-leader</ref> On June 28, 2012, the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare — by only one vote, 5-4 — as being within the taxing power of the federal government. Since then, leading Democrats have described ObamaCare as a "train wreck," and [[union]]s increasingly agree with [[conservatives]] that Obamacare should be repealed.<ref>http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/300881-labor-unions-break-ranks-on-health-law</ref>

The [[Association of American Physicians and Surgeons]] (AAPS) pointed out that there are no redeeming provisions of Obama's health care plan.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00377</ref> AAPS observes that Obama's health care plan will significantly increase the overall cost of health care for a majority of United States citizens, plus reduce the quality of care that a [[free market]] system would otherwise provide.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00377</ref>

Obamacare will soon cause havoc and harm to tens of millions of Americans: 28 million Americans will be caught in a "massive game of health coverage pingpong" due to Obamacare.<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-medi-cal-churn-20130520,0,5572821.story</ref>

As of April 2014, the House of Representatives has voted 55 times to scale back or repeal the law, but none of those proposals has received consideration in the Senate.<ref name=fulltime/>

__TOC__
[[File:Jane orient.jpg|right|200px|thumbnail|Dr. Jane Orient, Director of the [[Association of American Physicians and Surgeons]] (AAPS). The [[conservative]] doctors' association the AAPS has always been against Obamacare while the liberal [[American Medical Association]] endorsed it.<ref>[http://www.aapsonline.org/index.php/article/the_right_not_to_work_for_obamacare/ The right not to work for Obamacare]</ref><ref>[http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/why-the-ama-endorses-obamacare-but-your-doctor-does-not/ Why the AMA endorses Obamacare]</ref> ]]
Obamacare is opposed by many state governors, including [[Florida]] Governor [[Rick Scott]]. He declared after the Supreme Court ruling, "I will not implement this law. Florida will not implement Obamacare." Scott encouraged other states to reject Obamacare in three ways:

*opt out of the expensive Medicaid provision in ObamaCare, which would incur massive costs in extending free care to those over the poverty line
*refuse to set up a [[health-insurance exchange]] - "If there were any value added by these exchanges, the private sector would be doing it already," Governor Scott observed
*repeal Obamacare in Congress, which requires electing a [[Republican]] majority in the [[U.S. Senate]]

Obamacare was passed by [[Congress]] on March 21, 2010, and signed into federal law by President [[Barack Obama]] on March 23. This law furthers the process of [[Socialism|socializing]] the [[United States]] [[health care]] system begun with [[Medicare]].<ref>Epic [[Direct_spending#New_spending|new spending]] and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703399204574505423751140690.html Nancy Pelosi's New Health-Care Bill], ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'', November 01, 2009.</ref><ref>[[President Obama]], Senate Majority Leader [[Harry Reid]] and House Speaker [[Nancy Pelosi]] rammed Obamacare down the throats of an unwilling American public. Half a year removed from the unprecedented legislative chicanery and backroom dealing that characterized the bill's passage, much more is known about the bill than when it was passed into law. [http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Obamacare-is-even-worse-than-critics-thought-960772-103571664.html Examiner Editorial: Obamacare is even worse than critics thought], ''Washington Examiner'', September 22, 2010.</ref> The centerpiece of Obamacare is the individual mandate, a provision that makes it mandatory for every citizen to purchase private health insurance, which is unprecedented in American history. Through legislative mandates, Obamacare requires private citizens to purchase health insurance, involuntarily fund [[abortion]]s, and pay for sex offenders to use Viagra under the threat of legal sanctions if they do not. The new law imposes penalties that will increase to 2.5% of one's income if he fails to purchase government-approved health insurance.

On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court voted 5–4 that, while ObamaCare exceeded Congress’s authority under the commerce clause, the law was a permissible tax under the Constitution. <ref>[http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf]</ref>. The constitutionality of Obamacare was originally challenged under the theory that it exceeded the limitations of the commerce clause; more than 20 federal lawsuits have been filed against Obamacare since President Barack Obama signed it into law.<ref>By Janet Adamy and Evan Perez. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704058704576015631138296112.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsForth Federal Judge to Rule on Health Law's Constitutionality], WSJ.com, December 13, 2010.</ref><ref>By Rep. [[Lamar Smith]]. [http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/01/19/rep-lamar-smith-voting-repeal-new-health-care-law/ REP. LAMAR SMITH: Why I Am Voting to Repeal the New Health Care Law], ''[[Fox News]]'' (FoxNews.com), Published January 19, 2011.</ref> In total, 27 states have started or joined in a lawsuit against Obamacare.<ref>Brandon Stewart. [http://blog.heritage.org/2011/01/17/list-of-states-suing-over-obamacare/ List of 27 States Suing Over Obamacare], heritage.org, January 17, 2011.</ref> A federal judge ruled on 13 December 2010 that a central component of ObamaCare, the requirement that most Americans carry insurance or pay a penalty, violates the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is quoted as saying the law "exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power."<ref name=unconstitutional>Judge Rules Mandatory Insurance Unconstitutional; First Round of Long Battle. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703727804576017552229615230.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEADNewsCollection Court Strikes at Health Law], By Janet Adamy (WSJ.com), December 14, 2010.</ref> Then on 31 January 2011 federal judge Roger Vinson ruled that as a result of the unconstitutionality of the "individual mandate" that requires people to buy insurance, the entire law must be declared void.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/31/judges-ruling-health-care-lawsuit-shift-momentum-coverage-debate/ Judge Rules Health Care Law Is Unconstitutional], [[Fox News|FoxNews.com]], Published January 31, 2011.</ref><ref>[[Rush Limbaugh]]. [http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/content/home/daily/site_020111/content/01125106.guest.html Obamacare Ruled Unconstitutional, But Fight for Repeal Must Continue], RushLimbaugh.com, February 1, 2011.</ref> The U.S. district judge declared Obamacare unconstitutional because it violates the [[Commerce Clause]]. In a footnote attached to the ruling, federal judge Roger Vinson cited Barack Obama's position in 2008 from an interview with [[CNN]], when Obama stated that, "If a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house."<ref>Stephen Dinan. [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jan/31/judge-uses-obamas-words-against-him/ Judge uses Obama’s words against him], ''[[The Washington Times]]'', January 31, 2011.</ref>

The [[Congressional Budget Office]] (CBO) estimates the invasive revenue generating device could produce as much as $36 billion over ten years.<ref>[http://allnurses-central.com/world-news-current/proposed-senate-plan-405168.html Proposed Senate Plan Would Involve IRS in Collecting Fines from Non-participants], ALLNURSES CENTRAL, Jul 03, 2009.</ref> The fines are euphemistically dubbed "shared responsibility payments."<ref>http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/cbo-reports-entitlements-and-shared-responsibility</ref> Employers would be required to deduct the penalties from employees' paychecks.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00421</ref> The State of [[Massachusetts]] has had a similar program in place for several years, and many have elected to pay the penalties rather than purchase insurance, and many remain uninsured.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00421</ref>

ObamaCare will do more than detrimentally impact healthcare accessibility. According to the [[Heritage Foundation]], Obama is intentionally sacrificing millions of jobs, at a time when unemployment is around 10%, with the Medicare surtax without any objective exception of increases in revenues.<ref>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/03/Obamas-Capital-Gains-Tax-Hike-Unlikely-to-Increase-Revenues</ref> ObamaCare will cost 650,000 U.S. jobs if it is not repealed. The Congressional Budget Office says the figure would be more than 800,000 people would lose their jobs. <ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbo-director-says-obamacare-would-reduce-employment-800000-workers_547288.html CBO Director Says Obamacare Would Reduce Employment by 800,000 Workers, Weekly Standard, February 10, 2011]</ref>

==Bill History==
===Background===
In the 1940's in the wake of World War II, European countries and Canada rebuilt their health care systems on a single-payer model. However, the United States continued its system of private health care insurance, which was largely paid by employers to cover the health care of employees. Rep. John Dingell, Sr. introduced a bill to establish a national system of health care. When Dingell died in 1955, his son was elected to represent the same Michigan district in Congress. [[John Dingell]], Jr. introduced the National Health Insurance Act, to provide universal health care in each session of congress.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dingell.house.gov/issue/health-care|title=Health Care|accessdate=April 10, 2014}}</ref> In the Senate, [[Edward M. Kennedy]] advocated universal health care.

In 1965, Congress passed the law establishing [[Medicare]] - a single-payer insurance program for citizens over 65, which was funded through a federal payroll tax.

The United States Congress passed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) in 1986. EMTALA requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. EMTALA applies to virtually all U.S. hospitals. As a result, many people who could not afford to see a doctor came to hospital emergency rooms for non-emergency care. Because EMTALA does not have a way of paying for this care, hospitals raised the rates charged to other patients to cover these costs.

On April 12, 2006, Massachusetts Governor [[Mitt Romney]] signed state health legislation which provided for universal health coverage in that state.<ref>{{cite news|title=Landmark Health Bill Signed|agency=Los Angeles Times and Associated Press|date=April 13, 2006|publisher=The Seattle Times|url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002927493_insure13.html}}</ref>

Obama during the 2008 elections had campaigned on healthcare reform, promising that the negotiations would not be behind closed doors, but televised publicly on C-Span.<ref>Spiering, C. (2010, January 6). "[http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/beltway-confidential/2010/01/video-obama-promises-health-care-negotiations-will-be-cspan Video: Obama Promises That Healthcare Negotiations Will Be On C-Span]." ''Washington Examiner''. Holan, A.D. (2009, July 10). "[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/517/health-care-reform-public-sessions-C-SPAN/ Obama Said He'd Televise Health Reform Negotiations on C-Span]." ''PolitiFact''.</ref> He had also promised Planned Parenthood on July 17, 2007, that "reproductive care" would be central to the coming healthcare bill, and that he believed it important for Planned Parenthood to be part of the system<ref>McGurn, William (2009, November 9). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525962492620186.html The Man Who Made Pelosi Cry 'Uncle']." ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref>: {{cquote|"Well, look, in my mind, reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care. So it is at the center and at the heart of the plan that I propose... Essentially what we are doing is to say that we're going to set up a public plan that all persons, and all women, can access if they don't have health insurance. It'll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services, as well as mental health services, and disease-management services, because part of our interest is to make sure that we're putting more money into preventive care. And so many of women's diseases are preventable if they're getting access to regular care. So we subsidize women who don't have health insurance, or can't afford low group rates. We also will subsidize those who prefer to stay in the private insurance market, except the insurers are going to have to abide by the same rules in terms of providing comprehensive care, including reproductive care, and mental care services, and they won't be able to keep people out as a consequence of pre-existing conditions. So, that's going to be absolutely vital... I still believe that it is important for organizations like Planned Parenthood to be part of that system, because many young women for example may be much more comfortable when they're in college, or universities, or in other places, going to Planned Parenthood clinics and services, to get contraception, for example."
-Barack Obama before Planned Parenthood, July 17, 2007<ref>nrlccomm (2009, August 18). "[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cqww8jmizug Obama Promises Abortion in Public Plan]." ''YouTube''.</ref>}}

===Democratic Supermajority===
On April 28, 2009, the 2008 [[Wall Street Journal's]] prediction of a '[[Liberal]] [[Supermajority]]'<ref>(2008, October 17). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html A Liberal Supermajority]." ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref> proved correct; as the defection of Senator [[Arlen Specter]] from the [[Republican Party]] to the [[Democratic Party]] put the Democrats on the verge of one of the rarest blessings in politics, a Supermajority - complete control of the [[House]], two-thirds of the [[Senate]], and [[Presidency]] so that they wouldn't need a single Republican vote to pass bills.<ref>Davis, S. (2009, April 28). "[http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/28/sen-specter-to-switch-parties-democrats-near-60-vote-majority/ Sen. Specter To Switch Parties, Democrats Near 60 Vote Majority]." Washington Wire. ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref> Senator Bernie Sanders then urged the Democratic party to pursue single-payer healthcare reform.<ref>keithmsnbcer (2009, April 29). "[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGYBbFMeFNc Bernie Sanders on Ed Show]." ''MSNBC''. YouTube.</ref> On May 16, 2009, [[Barack Obama]] urged [[Congress]] to pass health care reform within the year, stating, "Our businesses will not be able to compete; our families will not be able to save or spend; our budgets will remain unsustainable unless we get health care costs under control".<ref>(2009, May 16). "[http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5js3WXGJZSiC4UpHS8rzfumBXGd-w Obama Urges Health Care Reform by Year's End]." ''AFP''.</ref> On July 1, 2009, [[Al Franken]] was finally declared the winner of his election (narrowly winning by 312 votes<ref>Gilbert, K. (2009, July 1). "[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/al-franken-win-hands-supermajority-to-senate-democrats Al Franken Win Hands Supermajority to Senate Democrats]." ''LifeSiteNews''.</ref>), giving the Democrats their desired Supermajority, and a clear path towards [[healthcare]] reform which Republicans would be powerless to stop.<ref>Hulse, C. (2009, July 1). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/politics/02cong.html Congressional Memo - What's So Super About a Supermajority?]" ''New York Times''.</ref> Nevertheless, sickness of [[Ted Kennedy]] and [[Robert Byrd]] along with several other factors led to question marks about the supermajority's strength.<ref>Pergram, C. (2009, July 1). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/01/democrats-senate-supermajority-strong-advertised/ Democrats' Senate Supermajority Not As Strong As Advertised]." ''FOX News''. Stewart, J. (2009, July 1). "[http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-1-2009/indecision-2008---franken-s-time Indecision 2008 - Franken's Time]." The Daily Show With Jon Stewart. ''Comedy Central''.</ref> Democrats maintained this Supermajority until February 5, 2010, when Republican [[Scott Brown]] was sworn in to replace deceased Senator [[Edward Kennedy]].<ref>(2010, February 5). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/05/democrats-lose-supermajority-brown-sworn/ Democrats Lose Supermajority as Brown Sworn In]." ''Associated Press''.</ref>
====Locking Out Republicans, Literally====
Democrats were so confident that the 2008 elections displayed [[American]] backing for the Democratic Party that in October 2009 they even changed the door locks for the House [[Oversight and Government Reform Committee]] to keep Republicans from meeting when Democrats weren't present.<ref>Crabtree, S. (2009, October 20). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/63941-democrats-lock-republicans-out-of-committee-room Democrats Lock Republicans Out of Committee Room]." ''The Hill''. Pershing, B. (2009, October 23). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/22/AR2009102204442.html Democrats on House Committee Lock Out Republicans]." ''Washington Post''.</ref> The debacle occurred because Republicans were trying to launch an investigation into corruption by Democrat Senators [[Kent Conrad]] and [[Chris Dodd]] for receiving special VIP loans from [[Countrywide Financial]].<ref>Sherman, J. (2009, October 20). "[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28531.html Towns Locks Republicans Out, Literally]." ''Politico''. Klein, R. & Jaffe, M. (2009, October 21). "[http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/10/dems-lock-out-republicans-literally/ Dems Lock Out Republicans - Literally]." ''ABC News''.</ref> Democrats canceled the meeting by secretly leaving before the meeting was to begin, and a GOP staffer caught this on videotape, set it to the tune of "Hit the Road, Jack", and posted it on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s minority webpage for the press. Committee Chairman Sen. [[Edolphus Towns]] and the Democrats then had the locks changed in retaliation.<ref>Freeman, J. (2009, October 20). "House Democrats Lock GOP Out of Committee Room]." ''Wall Street Journal''. (2009, October 21). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/21/oversight-panels-democrats-lock-republicans-dispute/ Oversight Panel's Democrats Lock Out Republicans After Dispute]." ''FOX News''.</ref>
====Public Option Removed====
On July 8, 2009, Barack Obama met with hospital [[lobbyists]] and struck a deal with the hospital industry to remove the [[public option]] in exchange for the industry's support of the bill, while also reducing costs for hospitals under the plan.<ref>Mogulesku, M. (2010, March 16). "[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/ny-times-reporter-confirm_b_500999.html NY Times Reporter Confirms Obama Made Deal to Kill Public Option]." ''Huffington Post''. Manjunath, Y. (2010, October 6). "[http://www.alan.com/2010/10/06/obamas-not-so-secret-deal-with-the-hospital-industry-to-kill-the-public-option/ Obama's Not-So-Secret Deal With the Hospital Industry to Kill the Public Option]." ''AlanColmes.com''. Manjunath, Y. (2010, October 7). "[http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/10/07/908619/-Obama-rsquo-s-Not-So-Secret-Deal-With-The-Hospital-Industry-To-Kill-The-Public-Option Obama's Not-So-Secret Deal With the Hospital Industry to Kill the Public Option]." ''Daily Kos''.</ref> {{cquote|"Not to worry, [[Jim Messina]], the deputy [[White House]] [[chief of staff]], told the hospital lobbyists, according to White House officials and lobbyists briefed on the call. The White House was standing behind the deal, Mr. Messina told them, capping the industry’s costs at a maximum of $155 billion over 10 years in exchange for its political support... Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan paying [[Medicare]] rates — generally 80 percent of [[private sector]] rates — or controlled by the [[secretary of health and human services]]. 'We have an agreement with the White House that I’m very confident will be seen all the way through conference,' one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, director of the Federation of American Hospitals, told a Capitol Hill newsletter."
-David Kirkpatrick, ''[[New York Times]]'', [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/health/policy/13health.html Obama is Taking an Active Role in Talks on Health Care Plan]<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. (2009, August 13). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/health/policy/13health.html?pagewanted=all Obama is Taking an Active Role in Talks on Health Care Plan]." ''New York Times''.</ref>}} In November 2009, an amendment proposed by [[Dennis Kucinich]] to let states have single-payer healthcare systems without insurance industry lawsuits was stripped from the healthcare bill because [[Nancy Pelosi]] said it would break Obama's promise to let people keep their current insurance plans if they liked them.<ref>Grim, R. (2010, March 18). "[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/pelosi-single-payer-amend_n_347017.html Pelosi-Single Payer Amendment Breaks Obama's Health Care Promise]." ''Huffington Post''.</ref> Kucinich expressed frustration with the move, stating, "They took single-payer off the table right at the beginning, because the table was set by [[insurance]] companies."<ref>Grim, R. (2010, March 18). "[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/29/pelosi-not-planning-to-al_n_339188.html Pelosi Not Planning to Allow Amendments to Health Care Bill]." ''Huffington Post''.</ref> On March 25, 2010, Obama claimed the public option wasn't included "Because we couldn"t get it through Congress, that's why." He also on December 22, 2009 erroneously<ref>(2011, July 27). "[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/dec/23/barack-obama/public-option-obama-platform/ Public Option Was in Obama's Platform]." Truth-O-Meter. ''Politifact''. Jilani, Z. (2009, December 22). "[http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/12/22/74682/obama-repeatedly-touted-public/?mobile=nc FLASHBACK: Obama Repeatedly Touted Public Option Before Refusing To Push For It In The Final Hours]." ''ThinkProgress.org''. Hamsher, J. (2009, September 10). "[http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/09/10/yes-obama-campaigned-on-a-public-option/ Yes, Obama Campaigned on a Public Option]." ''FireDogLake''.</ref> claimed that he hadn't campaigned on a public option.<ref>Jacobson, L. & Drobnic Holan, A. (2010, March 26). "[http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/518/create-public-option-health-plan-new-national-heal/ Create a Public Option Health Plan for a New National Health Insurance Exchange]." The Obameter. ''PolitiFact''. Murray, M. & Montanaro, D. (2009, December 23). "[http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/12/23/4424556-did-obama-campaign-on-public-option?lite Did Obama Campaign on Public Option?]" First Read. ''MSNBC''.</ref> Following Obama's claim, a liberal group, [[The Progressive Change Campaign Committee]], began airing television ads accusing Obama of breaking his promise of a single-payer healthcare plan.<ref>Seelye, K. (2009, December 23). "[http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/23/liberal-group-accuses-obama-of-reneging-on-promises/ Liberal Group Accuses Obama of Reneging on Promises]." ''New York Times''.</ref>
====Tax on Medical Device Makers====
The only healthcare industry to not readily acquiesce to the administration's demands for cooperation, medical device manufacturers, were hit with a 2.3% [[excise]] tax.<ref>LeBlanc, S. (2010, June 7). "[http://www.boston.com/business/taxes/articles/2010/06/07/medical_device_makers_new_tax_will_cost_jobs/ Medical Device Makers: New Tax Will Cost Jobs]." ''Associated Press''. Morris, D. & McGann, E. (2009, October 23). "[http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/64493-obama-taxes-pacemakers-heart-valves Obama Taxes Pacemakers, Heart Valves]." Pundits. ''The Hill''. Musgrove, M. (2009, October 14). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/13/AR2009101303015.html Planned Tax on Medical-Device Makers Too High, Firms Say]." ''Washington Post''.</ref> [[The Wall Street Journal]] suggested this was due to retaliation since the tax would add just $40 billion in funds for a bill costing $900 billion.<ref>(2009, September 18). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204518504574418941379207328.html The Innovation Tax]." ''Wall Street Journal''.</ref> Medical device makers continue to accuse the tax of costing jobs in 2012.<ref>Kelly, S. (2012, April 18). "[http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/18/medicaldevices-tax-idUSL2E8FI25620120418 Medical Device Tax May Spur Price Hike, Cost Cuts]." ''Reuters''. Pecquet, J. (2012, March 26). "[http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/medical-devices-and-prescription-drug-policy-/218151-medical-device-makers-decry-cost-of-new-tax- Medical Device Makers Decry Cost of New Tax]." HealthWatch. ''The Hill''. Flavelle, C. (2012, March 22). "[http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-03-22/how-much-will-the-medical-device-tax-hurt How Much Will the Medical Device Tax Hurt?]" ''Bloomberg Businessweek''.</ref>

===Role of Pro-Life Democrats===
====House Bill: H.R. 3962====
=====Stupak's Resistance=====
In June and July 2009 some 200 [[Planned Parenthood]] [[activists]] arrived in [[Washington D.C.]]<ref>Connolly, C. (2009, July 13). "[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/health-care-reform/2009/07/state_of_play_democrats_dig_in.html State of Play: Democrats Dig In Despite Senate Focus on Hearings]." Daily Dose. ''Washington Post''.</ref> and a number of [[Pro-Choice]] bills began receiving support, as the Pro-Choice movement sought to ensure [[abortion]] would be mandated in health care reform.<ref>Novak, V. (2009, July 31). "[http://www.factcheck.org/2009/07/surgery-for-seniors-vs-abortions/ Surgery for Seniors vs. Abortions?]" ''FactCheck.org''.</ref> The Republicans would find an unlikely ally in the [[Pro-Life Democrats]] (Democrats for Life of America). On June 25, 2009, 19 of them, led by Congressman [[Bart Stupak]], sent a letter to House leader Nancy Pelosi expressing refusal to support any healthcare bill with an [[abortion]] agenda<ref>Kenworthy, Z. (2009, June 30). "[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529632,00.html President Obama's Approval Index Rating Takes a Dive]." ''FOX News''. Russert, L. (2009, July 16). "[http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/07/16/4429288-health-bill-to-floor-in-two-weeks Health Bill to Floor in Two Weeks]." First Read. ''MSNBC''.</ref>, which firmly stated, "''Therefore, we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan... By ensuring that abortions are not funded through any health care reform package, we will take this controversial issue off the table so that Congress can focus on crafting a broadly-supported health care reform bill.''"<ref>Gilbert, Kathleen (2009, June 26). "[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/jun/09062608 Pro-Life Democrats Unite to Protect Unborn Children in Healthcare Restructuring]." ''LifeSiteNews''.</ref>

In July, Stupak introduced the [[Stupak-Pitts amendment]] to ensure [[abortions]] would not be [[subsidized]] in the healthcare bill<ref>(2009, July 22). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5180854-503544.html Dem Says Abortion Language a Must in Healthcare Bill]. ''CBS News''.</ref>, but it was defeated 30-29 in the [[Energy and House Committee]], the committee responsible for drafting it for proposal to the entire [[House of Representatives]], when [[Bart Gordon]] sneakily switched his vote from Yes to No last minute.<ref>McCormack, J. (2009, July 31). "[http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/07/house_democrat_introduces_comp.asp Waxman Strong-Arms Vote to Allow Abortion Coverage in Public Plan]." ''The Weekly Standard''.</ref> Chairman [[Henry Waxman]] replaced it with the [[Capps amendment]], which mandated one healthcare plan in each state must cover abortions.<ref name=menges>Menges, D. (2009, October 30). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/31/stupak-on-the-attack/ Stupak On the Attack]." ''The Washington Times''.</ref> On July 17, 2009, Obama once more urged rapid passage of the healthcare bill.<ref>(2009, July 17). "[http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hXW-UnAKQIiTxd2SoCN6TDQ0Fm3Q Obama Urges Congress to Pass Health Care Reform]." ''AFP''. Ferraro, T. & Smith, D. (2009, September 10). "[http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/10/us-usa-healthcare-obama-idUSTRE5881V520090910 Democrats Seek to Build Momentum On Healthcare]." ''Reuters''.</ref> Pro-Life Democrats then, in mid-July, nearly stopped the healthcare process in its tracks by initially defeating a rule required to start healthcare reform legislation, 215-214, but Democrats managed to persuade a few members to change their votes, barely passing it.<ref>Pergram, C. (2009, July 17). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/17/abortion-debate-complicate-efforts-overhaul-health-care Abortion Debate May Complicate Efforts to Overhaul Health Care]." ''FOX News''.</ref>

Obama on July 16 pressured Republicans to support the healthcare bill, even as the [[Congressional Budget Office]] criticized the proposed healthcare reform for not paying for itself.<ref>Dixon, K. (2009, July 16). "[http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/16/usa-healthcare-idUSN1641208920090716?pageNumber=2 WRAPUP 2-Obama Looks for Republican Healthcare Backing]." ''The New York Times''.</ref> Republicans criticized the lack of [[tort reform]] and insistence on covering 5.6 million [[illegal immigrants]].<ref>(2009, July 22). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/22/president-obama-uses-magnetism-political-capital-push-health-care/ President Obama Uses Magnetism, Political Capital to Push Health Care Bill]." ''FOX News''.</ref> Obama predicted he would be held responsible if the bill failed, stating: {{cquote|"You know, I intend to be president for a while and once the bill passes, I own it. And if people look and say, 'You know what? This hasn't reduced my costs. My [[premiums]] are still going up 25 percent, insurance companies are still jerking me around,' I'm the one who's going to be held responsible."<ref>Kroft, S. (2009, September 13). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-5301098.html?pageNum=2&tag=contentMain;contentBody Obama on Health Care: 'I Own It']." 60 Minutes. ''CBS News''.</ref>}} Obama initially claimed that allegations of abortion in the healthcare bill were "fabrications" by "people who are bearing false witness."<ref>Bordlee, D. (2009, September 30). "[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113335539 Pelosi & Co. Talk Abortion]." ''The National Review''. Winfield, P. (2009, October 23). "[http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/octoberweb-only/142-52.0.html Health Care Reform Splits Democrats on Abortion]." ''Christianity Today''.</ref> On August 21, he said, in a radio talk show, that claims of abortion in the bill were "not true".<ref name=menges /> However, a detailed [[FactCheck.org]] analysis concluded Obama went too far in decrying claims of abortion in healthcare as fabrications, since his own previous promise of "[[reproductive]] services" in the bill coupled with the bill's wording showed that abortion likely would be subsidized by government under the bill.<ref>Jackson, B. (2009, August 21). "[http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/abortion-which-side-is-fabricating/ Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating?]" ''FactCheck.org''.</ref> On September 9, Obama continued to assert the bill would not fund abortions, promising immediately after [[Joe Wilson]] famously stood up and yelled "You lie!", that "Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions."<ref name=menges />

In late September after 31 different Pro-Life Democrats had signed various letters opposing abortion in the healthcare bill, Nancy Pelosi and Obama began meeting with their leader, Bart Stupak, for the first time.<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. (2009, September 28). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/health/policy/29abortion.html Abortion Fight Complicates Healthcare Debate]." ''New York Times''. Gilgoff, D. (2009, November 9). "[http://www.usnews.com/news/religion/articles/2009/10/09/the-countrys-emerging-shift-on-abortion?page=2 The Country's Emerging Shift on Abortion]." ''U.S. News & World Report''.</ref> Stupak denied claims that he was trying to "kill" healthcare reform, stating publicly at the time, "I believe we need comprehensive healthcare reform and I am excited that we are closer than we have ever been to passing a healthcare reform bill in Congress. But any reform must address legitimate concerns, including using public funding for abortions, even if party leaders disagree."<ref>Stupak, B. (2009, October 29). "[http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/65297-i-am-not-trying-to-kill-health-reform-abortion-issue-is-key Stupak: I am Not Trying to Kill Health Care Reform; Abortion Still a Concern]." ''The Hill''.</ref> On October 21, a coalition of Pro-Life groups led by key Republicans, including [[Mike Pence]], delivered a petition signed by 137,000 Americans to Congress expressing disapproval with the healthcare reform legislation.<ref>Brandt, J. (2009, October 21). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/21/house-members-raise-concerns-abortion-funding-health-reform/ House Members Raise Concerns Over Abortion Funding in Health Reform Bill]." ''FOX News''.</ref>
=====Bill Introduced=====
On October 26, the House healthcare bill was unveiled, a 1,930 page piece of legislation, the [[Affordable Healthcare for America Act]] (H.R. 3962).<ref>Allen, J. & Soaghan, M. (2009, November 29). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/65409-pelosi-unveils-healthcare-bill-house-moves-toward-floor-vote Pelosi Unveils Healthcare Bill; House Moves Toward Floor Vote]." ''The Hill''. Jackson, J. (2009, November 7). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5570605-503544.html Key Provisions of the House Healthcare Bill]." ''CBS News''.</ref> Representative Mike Pence (R-IN) accused the bill of being a "government takeover of health care in America".<ref>Barrett, T., Bash, D., et. al. (2009, October 29). "[http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/29/health.care/ House Democrats Unveil $894 Billion Health Care Bill]." ''CNN''.</ref> By early November, the House was trying to pass the healthcare bill<ref>(2009, November 4). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/democrats-running-time-address-abortion-dispute-health-care-reform/ Democrats Running Out of Time to Address Abortion Dispute]." ''FOX News''. Oliphant, J. (2009, November 4). "[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-11-04/news/0911030597_1_abortion-rights-activists-supporters-of-abortion-rights-hyde-amendment Delay on Health Care Bills Loom in Congress]." ''The Chicago Tribune''. (2009, November 2). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/02/abortion-health-care-reform-question/ Abortion Part of Health Care Reform Still in Question]." ''FOX News''. (2009, November 2). "[http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20091102/editorial02_st.art.htm Abortion Foes Seek to Use Health Plan to Curb Access]." ''USA Today''.</ref> but Bart Stupak claimed 40 Pro-Life Democrats could vote with him if his Stupak-Pitts Amendment was not voted on to prevent abortion funding in the bill.<ref>Bacon Jr., P. (2009, November 3). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/02/AR2009110203232.html Some Democrats Concerned Over Abortion Provisions in Health Bill]." ''The Washington Post''. McCormack, J. (2009, September 21). "[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/941kghiv.asp Democratic Dissenters]." ''The Weekly Standard''.</ref> With 218 votes required for passage, this would derail the historic vote set to occur on November 7.<ref>Whitesides, J. (2009, November 4). "[http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/05/us-usa-healthcare-congress-idUSTRE5A233B20091105 Democrats Wrestle With Abortion on Health Bill]." ''Reuters''. Soraghan, M. (2009, October 22). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/64439-whip-count-shows-dems-lack-votes-on-public-plan Whip Count Shows Democrats Lack Votes on 'Robust' Public Option for Healthcare]." ''The Hill''.</ref> While Senate Leader [[Harry Reid]] (D-UT) sought to create a separate bill in the Senate, he continued to lack the 60 votes needed for a public option, i.e. a government insurance program.<ref>Jen.sen, K. & Litvan, L. (2009, November 2). "[http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aTYrPXF97cFw Senate, House Move Closer on Health Bills as Battle Goes Public]." ''Bloomberg''.</ref>
=====Passage=====
Bart Stupak and his 40 Pro-Life Democrats refused to budge,<ref>(2009, November 6). "[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120161271 No Public Money for Abortion]." ''The National Review''.</ref> and Pelosi until the last day tried to play 'chicken', denying the Stupak Amendment its vote.<ref>McCormack, J. (2009, November 5). "[http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/11/post_149.asp Pelosi Likely to Allow Vote on Phony Abortion Compromise Ellsworth Amendment (Update)]." ''The Weekly Standard''.</ref> On November 7 Obama made personal last-minute contact with moderate Democrats in an attempt to persuade them to vote for the healthcare bill without Stupak's amendment.<ref>Haberkorn, J. (2009, November 7). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/07/furious-scramble-for-health-reform-support/ Furious Scramble for Health Reform Support]." ''The Washington Times''. Allen, J. & Hooper, M. (2009, November 7). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/66787-health-bill-reaches-moment-of-truth Health Bill Reaches Moment of Truth]." ''The Hill''.</ref> A desperate Nancy Pelosi met with Bart Stupak last-minute and at his request, the [[Conference of Catholic Bishops]]<ref>''Associated Press'' (2009, November 11). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/11/catholic-bishops-inserting-influence-health-care-fight/ Catholic Bishops Sway Health Care Fight]." Retrieved from ''FOX News''.</ref>, ultimately allowing the Stupak-Pitts amendment its vote, which passed by a vote of 240-194.<ref>Silva, C. (2009, November 23). "[http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2009/11/23/gvsa1123.htm Abortion Amendment Threatens to Derail Health Reform]." ''The American Medical Association''. Duin, J. (2009, November 19). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/19/duin-catholics-celebrate-their-stand-on-health-bil/ Catholics Celebrate Their Stand on Health Bill]." ''The Washington Times''.</ref> While some Republicans had considered voting 'Present' on the Stupak amendment to defeat it and thus perhaps healthcare reform, Pro-Life groups opposed the strategy and were scoring the vote so less than a 'Yes' would change a member's perfect Pro-Life rating.<ref>Hooper, M. (2009, November 9). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/67091-house-gop-mulled-present-strategy-on-abortion-amendment House GOP Mulled 'Present' Strategy on Abortion Amendment]." ''The Hill''.</ref> Republican House leader [[John Boehner]] confronted Democrat [[Charles Rangel]] on the House floor, asking whether the Stupak language would be preserved in the final bill or removed in the end, stating, "I have my doubts this language if it passes has any chance of being in the final version of this bill".<ref>(2009, November 9). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/07/republicans-question-abortion-agreement-effort-stop-health-care-momentum/ Republicans Question Abortion Agreement in Effort to Stop Health Care Momentum]." ''FOX News''.</ref> Boehner refused to vote for the bill without a guarantee the language would be kept.<ref>Phillips, K. (2009, November 7). "[http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/rangel-boehner-tangle-over-ethics-abortion/ Rangel and Boehner Tangle Over Ethics and Abortion]." ''The New York Times''.</ref> {{cquote|"Republican congressional leaders have to be chuckling right now. In the end, all the [[tea-party]] town halls, [[Glenn Beck]] rallies and '[[death panel]]' rumors may have less of a hand in bringing down health care reform than an intraparty Democratic culture war. Congressman Bart Stupak of Michigan, whose amendment restricting abortion coverage on all policies sold through the new insurance exchange paved the way for passage of health reform in the House of Representatives, vows that 'there will be [[hell]] to pay' if his language gets stripped out of, or weakened in, the final legislation."
-Amy Sullivan, ''[[Time Magazine]]'', [http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1939600,00.html#ixzz1vJ6ILjRr Can Dems Resolve Their Abortion Split?]<ref>Sullivan, Amy (2009, November 16). "[http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1939600,00.html#ixzz1vJ6ILjRr Can Dems Resolve Their Abortion Split?]" ''Time Magazine''.</ref>}} On November 8, 2009, the House healthcare bill, newly amended with the Pro-Life Stupak-Pitts amendment, narrowly passed the House by a vote of 220-215.<ref>''Associated Press'' (2009, November 9). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/07/politics/main5570400.shtml House Passes Landmark Healthcare Bill]." ''CBS News''. Condon, S. (2009, November 16). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/09/politics/main5588038.shtml Health Care Progress Report: November 9]." ''CBS News''.</ref> [[Joseph Cao]] was the only Republican to vote in favor of the bill.<ref>Haberkorn, J. (2009, November 12). "[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/12/cao-explains-his-breaking-rank-in-health-care-vote/ Lone GOPer: Health Vote Could End Career]." ''The Washington Times''.</ref> 39 Democrats still voted against the bill, including many fiscally conservative [[Blue Dog Democrats]] and socially conservative Pro-Life Democrats affiliated with DFLA.<ref>Blake, A. (2009, November 10). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/67097-at-risk-dems-defend-their-tough-votes At-Risk Democrats Defend Their Tough Votes on Healthcare Reform Bill]." ''The Hill''.</ref>
=====Reaction=====
Afterwards, Obama stressed that it was time for the Senate to "take the baton."<ref>(2009, November 8). "[http://articles.cnn.com/2009-11-08/politics/health.care_1_public-option-republican-filibuster-health-insurance?_s=PM:POLITICS Obama: Time For Senate to 'Take the Baton' on Health Care Reform]." Healthcare Insurance. ''CNN''.</ref> Several Democrats including [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]] (D-FL) revealed they voted for the bill only with the understanding that it would be removed from the final bill version.<ref>O'Brien, M. (2009, November 9). "[http://thehill.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66969&pop=1&page=8&Itemid=70 Senior Democrat is 'Confident' that Stupak Amendment Will be Stripped]." ''The Hill''.</ref> The passage of Stupak's Pro-Life amendment in the House healthcare bill led to a letter signed by 40 Pro-Choice Senate Democrats, led by [[Dianna DeGette]]<ref name=thrush>Thrush, G. (2009, November 17). "[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29651.html Abortion Causes Family Feud for Democrats]." ''Politico''. Halloran, L. (2009, November 10). "[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120254656 Democrats Face Backlash Over House Abortion Limits]." ''NPR''. Cooper, C. (2009, November 10). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504365_162-5605926-504365.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody The Left's Stupak Stupification]." Coop's Corner. ''CBS News''.</ref>, saying that they would not pass healthcare reform unless Stupak's amendment was removed,<ref>Litvan, L & Rowley, Rowley, J. (2009, November 9). "[http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aaqkPE6p_8ig Abortion Curbs Draw 40 Democrats' Threat of 'No' Vote (Update 1)]." ''Bloomberg''. Young, J. (2009, November 9). "[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/67099-liberals-threaten-to-sink-health-bill-over-abortion Liberals Threaten to Oppose Healthcare Bill Over Stupak Abortion Amendment]." ''The Hill''. (2009, November 27). "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/11/27/abortion-s-new-battleground.html Abortion's New Battleground]." ''Newsweek Magazine''.</ref> even as Senate Pro-Life Democrats vowed to reject any bills with abortion agendas. Senator [[Ben Nelson]] (D-NE) promised, "If it isn’t clear that government money is not to be used to fund abortions, I won’t vote for it," and Obama assured that "This is a health-care bill, not an abortion bill."<ref>Jen.sen, K. & Litvan, L. (2009, November 10). "[http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aI.clKoFb__M Abortion Issue Threatens Healthcare Overhaul Plan (Update 1)]." ''Bloomberg''. (2009, November 10). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/10/abortion-haggling-looms-health-care-debate-senate/ Abortion Haggling Looms Over Health Care Debate in Senate]." ''FOX News''. Franke-Ruta, G. (2009, November 13). "[http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/11/a-new-frontier-opens-up-in-the.html A New Frontier in the Abortion Wars: Health Insurance]." 44 - Politics and Policy. ''The Washington Post''.</ref>

On the Pro-Life side, a website, StopTheAbortionMandate.com, was created, and [[Susan's B. Anthony's List]], an [[Abortion#Activist|anti-abortion group]], fund-raised in attacks on the bill, receiving contributions over 50% above the previous year's levels, which it used in advertising attacks on Sen. Harry Reid. On the Pro-Choice side, Stupak's stand drew the anger of liberal groups.<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. (2009, November 23). "[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/health/policy/24abortion.html?_r=1 Health Bill Revives Abortion Groups]." ''The New York Times''. (2009, November 27). "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/11/27/abortion-s-new-battleground.html Abortion's New Battleground]." ''Newsweek Magazine''.</ref> The Progressive Change Campaign Committee performed three "Stop Stupak" fundraisers and began issuing attack ads against him in his home state of [[Michigan]].<ref>Price, D. (2009, November 12). "[http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=DTNB&s_site=detnews&f_site=detnews&f_sitename=Detroit+News%2C+The+%28MI%29&p_multi=DTNB&p_theme=gannett&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=12BEFFE1532DF538&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM Group Raises Cash, Will Take Stupak to Task]." ''The Detroit News''. Clift, E. (2009, November 12). "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/11/12/both-parties-abandon-women-s-rights.html Both Parties Abandon Women's Rights]." ''Newsweek''.</ref> [[CNN's]] [[Rachel Maddow]] predicted a revolt among [[women]].<ref>Depke, D. (2009, November 13). "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/11/13/stupak-is-as-stupak-does.html Stupak Is as Stupak Does]." ''Newsweek Magazine''.</ref>

Democratic Senator [[Barbara Boxer]] vowed to keep the Stupak-Pitts amendment from passing in the [[Senate]].<ref name=thrush /> White House Senior Advisor [[David Axelrod]] claimed Obama would intervene to change the Stupak language, and Stupak responded with "They're not going to take it out. If they do, health care will not move forward,. We won fair and square. ... That's why Mr. Axelrod's not a legislator. He doesn't really know what he's talking about."<ref>(November 17, 2009). "[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/stupak-health-care-stall-white-house-strips-abortion-restrictions/ Stupak: Health Care Bill Will Stall if White House Strips Abortion Restrictions]." ''FOX News''.</ref> Polls taken in mid-November showed public support for the Pro-Life Democrat position. 61% of Americans, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey, oppose using federal money for abortions, while a [[CBS News]] poll found 56% oppose federal subsidies for abortions.<ref>Black, N. (2009, November 18). "[http://www.christianpost.com/news/most-americans-against-abortion-coverage-in-health-care-bill-41906/ Most Americans Against Abortion Coverage in Health Care Bill]." ''The Christian Post''.</ref>
====Senate Bill: H.R. 3962====
On November 18 the U.S. Senate under Senate Leader Harry Reid introduced its own health care bill (H.R. 3962 The Affordable Health Care for America Act), separate from the House bill. Obama called this bill a 'milestone' and urged Congress to pass it quickly.<ref>Bazinett, K. & McAuliff, M. (2009, November 19). "[http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-11-19/news/17939142_1_reform-bill-illegal-immigrants-public-health-insurance-plan Senate Rolls Out $849 Billion Health Care Reform Bill; President Obama Urges Congress To Act Quickly]. ''New York Daily News''.</ref>

Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska attempted to introduce the [[Nelson Amendment]], a [[Pro-Life]] amendment identical to the Stupak-Pitts amendment, but it was defeated 54-45 on December 8.<ref>Feldmann, L. (2009, December 9). "[http://www.minnpost.com/christian-science-monitor/2009/12/nelson-amendment-fails-health-care-abortion-battle-isn’t-over Nelson Amendment Fails, But Healthcare Abortion Battle Isn't Over]." ''The Christian Post''.</ref> Four Senators stood in the way of the bill's passage, [[Ben Nelson]], [[Mary Landrieu]], [[Blanche Lincoln]], and [[Joe Lieberman]].<ref>Tantaros, A. (2009, December 16). [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/06/obama-heads-captiol-hill-health-care-push/ The Senate's Health Care Bill Isn't On My Christmas List]. ''[[FOX News]]''. Cordes, N. (2009, December 15). [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/15/eveningnews/main5983872.shtml What Will it Take to Win Over Lieberman?]. ''[[CBS News]]''.</ref> By December 16th, both Landrieu and Lieberman had agreed to support the bill since its public option and Medicare expansions were removed.<ref>Haberkorn, J. (2009, December 17). [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/democrats-recraft-health-bill-to-win-passage/?feat=home_headlines Dems Recraft Health Bill to Win Passage]. ''The Washington Times''.</ref> Lieberman agreed only on condition that Medicare not be expanded to include Seniors as young as 55.<ref>(2009, December 16). [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/16/senate-dems-contemplate-half-loaf-health-care/ Democrats' Health Care Wish List Cut Short]. ''Associated Press''.</ref> Landrieu in the process agreed to take $100 million in Medicaid money for her state, and was accused by Republican [[John Cornyn]] as having been "bribed".<ref>Sherman, J. (2009, December 18). [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30783.html Mary Landrieu hot over NRSC comments]. ''Politico''.</ref>
{{cquote|"We are approaching the eve of Christmas and maybe in that spirit, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid morphed into Santa Claus, giving out presents to the little boys and girls who were naughty and (not so) nice this year. Of course, he was not using his own money. America's overused credit card, issued by the Bank of China, may have to be used one more time to pay for Reid's deals. The majority leader traded to help ensure the votes of Sens. Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Chris Dodd, Bernie Sanders and others representing 11 states by giving them special perks for staying on the health care bus that's about to drive us all over the financial cliff."
-[[Ed Rollins]], [http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/23/rollins.health.care.deals.reid/ Harry Reid Playing Santa With Your Money], [[CNN]].<ref>Rollins, E. (2009, December 23). [http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/23/rollins.health.care.deals.reid/ Harry Reid Playing Santa With Your Money]. ''[[CNN]]''.</ref>}}
On December 19 following 13 hours of negotiations, Senator Nelson finally agree to back the Senate bill in exchange for tighter restrictions on abortion and increased Medicaid funding for his state.<ref name=hersz>Herszenhorn, D.M. & Hulse, C. (2009, December 19). [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/20/health/policy/20health.html?pagewanted=all Democrats Clinch Deal for Deciding Vote on Health Bill]. ''[[The New York Times]]''.</ref> The [[National Right to Life Committee]] opposed Nelson's compromise and said it was "light years removed" from the House bill's language per the Stupak Amendment.<ref>Jensen, K. & Litvan, L. (2009, December 20). [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aim3g2AJwUHI House, Senate Health-Care Legislation: Side-by-Side Comparison]. ''Bloomberg''.</ref> A day later, both the RNC and Rick Santorum then initiated a robocall to 100,000 Nebraskans asking them to call Ben Nelson and ask him to reconsider.<ref>Budoff Brown, C. (2009, December 19). [http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1209/RNC_Santorum_hit_Nelson_in_robocall.html?showall RNC, Santorum hit Nelson in Robocall]. ''Politico''.</ref> On December 22nd, the GOP led by [[John McCain]] began accusing Nelson of a "Cornhusker Kickback" because his state had received $45 million of Medicare funding in the deal. Nelson denied this, claiming "I didn't ask for a special favor here".<ref>Scott, B. (2009, December 22). [http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/gop_blasts_kickback_health_fix_dAelgwc0jXXhMD6fwB05IK GOP blasts 'kickback' health fix]. ''[[New York Post]]''.</ref> Landrieu's deal was likewise criticized as the "Louisiana Purchase".<ref>Rowley, J. & Gaouette, N. (2009, December 23). [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aIkM0vXz_yxk Republicans Assail ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ Health Deals (Update1)]. ''[[Bloomberg]]''.</ref>

Both the [[AARP]] and [[American Medical Association]] ran ads urging Senators to vote for the bill. On December 24, 2009, the Senate passed its bill on a party-line vote, 60-39, without a single Republican vote.<ref>Pear, R. (2009, December 24). [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/25/health/policy/25health.html Senate Passes Health Care Overhaul on Party-Line Vote]. ''The New York Times''.</ref>

===Reconciliation===
The possibility of splitting healthcare into two bills and reconciling them was rumored as early as August 20, 2009.<ref>Weisman, J. & Bendavid, N. (2009, August 20). "[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125072573848144647.html New Rx for Health Plan: Split Bill]." ''The Wall Street Journal''. Hetchtkopf, K. (2009, August 20). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5255030-503544.html Dems Might Split Healthcare Reform Into Two Bills]." ''CBS News''.</ref>

<ref>Bash, D., Glass, E., & Walsh, D. (2010, March 19). "[http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/19/health.care.abortion/ Abortion Again an Issue in Health Care Debate]." ''CNN''.</ref>

==Effort to Repeal==
On January 19, 2011, the [[U.S. House of Representatives]] voted 245-189 to repeal Obamacare (56 percent to 44 percent). In an historic repudiation of an entitlement program that was only 10 months old, the House voted to overturn President Obama's health care takeover.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/19/house-poised-vote-health-law-repeal/ House Republicans Vote to Overturn Obamacare in Symbolic Move], [[Fox News|FoxNews.com]], Published January 19, 2011.</ref><ref>An historic repudiation of an entitlement that is only 10 months old. ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', Review & Outlook: [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704590704576091973130244618.html The Repeal Vote], January 20, 2011.</ref> Repealing the bill would eliminate $770 billion in the newly mandated tax increases, according to the CBO.<ref>Philip Klein. [http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/07/breaking-cbo-says-repealing-ob CBO Says Repealing Obamacare Would Reduce Net Spending by $540 Billion], ''The American Spectator'', January 07, 2011.</ref> The CBO released accounting data which shows that repealing the national health care law would reduce net government spending by $540 billion in the ten year period from 2012 through 2021; that number represents the cost of the new provisions, minus [[Medicare]] cuts. The [[Tea Party Movement]] firmly supports the proposed repeal of Obamacare.

On February 2, 2011, the [[U.S. Senate]] proceeded with a hearing to discuss the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and whether or not the individual mandate requiring Americans to purchase health insurance under penalty of a fine is constitutional.<ref>Amanda Carey. [http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/03/senate-hearing-on-health-care-bills-constitutionality-had-more-show-than-substance/ Senate hearing on health care bill’s constitutionality had more show than substance], ''The Daily Caller'', February 03, 2011.</ref> The amendment to repeal Obamacare failed in the Senate by a 51-47 vote.<ref>[[Michelle Malkin]]. [http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/02/undoing-obamacare-senate-repeal-fails-47-51-on-party-line-vote-1099-provision-killed-83-17/ Undoing Obamacare: Senate repeal fails 47-51 on party-line vote; 1099 provision killed 83-17], MichelleMalkin.com, February 2, 2011.</ref>

The Individual Mandate requiring U.S. citizens to buy healthcare was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court as constitutional in 2012. It is possible the entire bill could end up getting repealed.<ref>(2012, April 7). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7404552n Obama vs. Supreme Court: How Serious?]" ''CBS News''.</ref> A ''CBS News''/''New York Times'' poll taken March 21-25, 2012, found that just 26% of Americans want the Supreme Court to keep the entire healthcare law intact.<ref>Condon, S. (2012, March 26). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57404793-503544/poll-1-in-4-want-supreme-court-to-uphold-health-care-law/?tag=featuredPostArea Poll: 1 in 4 Want Supreme Court to Uphold Health Care Law]." ''CBS News''.</ref>

Obama criticized the Supreme Court for considering the case, saying to overturn the bill would be "unprecedented" and was criticized by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who said he should "back off. Let the Court do its work. Let our system work the way it was intended."<ref>Condon, S. (2012, April 5). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57410114-503544/mcconnell-tells-obama-to-back-off-on-supreme-court/ McConnell Tells Obama to 'Back Off' on Supreme Court]." ''CBS News''.</ref> Following this, Obama conceded the Supreme Court does have the power to overturn the bill.<ref>(2012, April 5). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7404408n WH Concedes Court's Power to Kill Health Care Law]." ''CBS Evening News''.</ref>

The Congressional Budget Office in 2011 projected that repealing the bill would add $211 billion to the deficit, but this was contradicted in April 2012 by economist Charles Blahouse who said the bill adds $340 billion to the deficit.<ref>''Associated Press'' (2012, April 10). "[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57411669/study-obamas-health-care-law-will-add-at-least-$340-billion-to-deficit/?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesArea Study: Obama's health care law will add at least $340 billion to deficit]." Retrieved from ''CBS News''.</ref>

As of April 2014, the House of Representatives has voted 55 times to scale back or repeal the law, but none of those proposals has received consideration in the Senate.<ref name=fulltime/>

In October 2013, the Congress needed to adopt a continuing resolution to allow the federal government to remain open after the existing appropriation laws expired. The House adopted a series of continuing resolutions which were conditioned upon the repeal or modification of the ACA. However, the Senate adopted a series of continuing resolutions which did not contain such ACA conditions. As a result of the impasse, many federal programs were shut down, and remained shut until the House agreed to funding without ACA conditions.

== Basic Requirements ==

Beginning in 2014, Americans are required to buy government-approved, private health insurance or else pay a penalty.

Health insurance companies will be required to spend on medical care at least 80% of the premium payments they receive from individual and small-group plans (and at least 85% from large group plans). The federal government will define what constitutes medical care.

=== Immediate Impact in 2010 ===

Creating temporary high-risk pool with subsidized premiums for certain people with pre-existing conditions.

Imposing new taxes on some facilities, such as tanning parlors.

Health insurers raised premiums for Americans as a direct result of President Obama's health care overhaul.<ref>Janet Adamy. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720004575478200948908976.html?KEYWORDS=health+care+insurance+premiums Insurers Pin Rate Hikes on Health Law], ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', September 07, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703340904575285002595068326.html?KEYWORDS=health+care+insurance+premiums Health Law Augurs Transfer of Funds From Old to Young], WSJ.com, July 25, 2010.</ref>

=== Requirements for Insurance Companies ===

Prohibit bans on pre-existing health conditions in children, lifetime and annual limits on expenses, and limits coverage exclusions of pre-existing health conditions in adults.

Requires family policies to include coverage of children up to age 26.

Allows states to form compacts in order to allow the interstate sale of insurance.

Requires direct access to obstetrical and gynecological care, which might include [[abortion]].

Creates (starting in October 2013) health insurance exchanges or marketplaces that will be state-based and state-administered, but states can opt out of this if certain conditions are met; insurance can be sold within the exchange only if government-approved. If a state fails to set up its own exchange, residents of the state can purchase insurance on a federally-administered exchange. Insurance can be sold outside of the exchange, but only policies purchased on the exchange will be eligible for a premium tax credit.<ref name=pcredit/>

Prohibits health plans from discriminating against providers, but plans are not required to contract with any provider.

Requires health plans to develop politically correct language services, community outreach and cultural competency trainings.

Requires "silver" insurance plans sold on the exchange to implement a premium tax credit program for individuals making less than $45,960 ($94,200 for a family of four).<ref name=pcredit>{{cite web|url=https://www.healthcare.gov/will-i-qualify-to-save-on-monthly-premiums/|title=Will I qualify for lower costs on monthly premiums?|work=healthcare.gov|accessdate=April 10, 2014}}</ref> The insurance company receives the credit from the federal government and is responsible for billing the difference to each insured person.

=== Employer Requirements ===

Requires that employers with more than 50 full-time employees provide health insurance or pay a penalty.

Employers with 25 or fewer full-time employees, receiving average salaries of $50,000 or less, can apply for tax credits in order to provide their employees with health insurance.

=== Medicaid ===

Obamacare expands [[Medicaid]] (medical care for the poor) to everyone (under the Medicare age of 65) who has income less than 133% the federal poverty level. States must pay this enormous new burden, but federal government promises to reimburse costs of newly eligible patients under this program from 2014 to 2016. Although the law was drafted to make this a required part of the existing Medicare program, the Supreme Court considered an appeal from certain states and interpreted the law as giving each state the option to either retain the prior scope of Medicaid or expand Medicaid. If a state refuses to expand Medicaid, the taxes collected from that state will be redirected to states that have expanded Medicaid, and hospitals will still be required to provide medical care to the uncovered individuals without reimbursement.

On April 10, 2014, Secretary of Health and Human Services Sebelius acknowledged there are extensive backlogs of people in some states who have applied for Medicaid but remain unable to access care because of out-of-date state computer systems. In April 2014, the government said three million people had enrolled in Medicaid from October 1 through February 28.<ref name=Sebelius>{{cite news|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/10/us-usa-healthcare-obama-idUSBREA3918920140410|title=Obamacare enrollment to surpass 7.5 million: U.S. official|first=David|last=Morgan|date=April 10, 2014|accessdate=April 11, 2014|work=Reuters}}</ref>

=== New Bureaucracy ===

Establishes a new Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) program with the goal of creating non-profit, member-run health insurance companies in every state

=== Impact on the deficit and expanded welfare spending ===
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that Obamacare’s refundable health insurance tax credits (or [[tax expenditure]]s<ref>[http://www.concordcoalition.org/publications/facing-facts/1996/0913/back-door-entitlement The Back-Door Entitlement], The Concord Coalition.</ref> in D.C. parlance) will add to the [[national debt]] $1.36 trillion in the first seven years of implamentation. 85% of filers who claim the tax credit will end the year with zero or negative income tax liability. Since the tax credit is refundable, nearly all 11.3 million of these filers will have negative income tax liability and will no longer pay the cost of government by contributing federal income taxes. Tax credits, or tax expenditures, are a form of federal un-appropriated [[backdoor spending]].

For example, a family of four at 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (about $48,677 in 2016) cannot pay more than 6.3% of their income for health insurance. The CBO estimates that the average cost of the reference insurance plan (the plan used to calculate the tax credit) will be $14,100 for family coverage in 2016. Therefore, a family of four that qualifies for a credit in 2016 and that makes $48,677 would be required to pay about $3,067 for health insurance (6.3% of household income). The difference, $11,033, is the value of this family’s refundable tax credit. According to the CBO, 20 million Americans will receive health insurance tax credits in 2020 at a cost of $130 billion.<ref>[http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/10-27-11_Obamacares_Subsidies_and_Tax_Distribution_Final.pdf Impact of the Obamacare Tax Credits], House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Staff Report, October 27, 2011.</ref>

=== "Death Panels" ===

'''Death panels''' refer to theorized groups of bureaucrats who decide who would receive healthcare, which are a part of Obamacare. [[Sarah Palin]] argues that government health care will not reduce the costs of healthcare, but rather it will "refuse to pay the cost". <ref>https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=113851103434&ref=mf</ref> Obamacare can eventually result in crowded hospitals, and therefore rationing of healthcare. Sarah Palin states that the rationing will likely exclude the "sick, the elderly, and the disabled", which she describes as "downright evil". <ref>https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=113851103434&ref=mf</ref>

== Basis for Legal Challenges ==
===Commerce Clause===
There have been several grounds for challenging the Cosntitutionality of the bill. Obamacare includes an "individual responsibility requirement" compelling persons to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. The one legal justification for this requirement by Congress is the [[Commerce Clause]]:
{{cquote|The individual responsibility requirement provided for in this section ... is commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce, as a result of the effects described in paragraph (2). ... [Paragraph (2) states,] The requirement regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature: economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.}}

Apparently uncertain that this would withstand legal scrutiny as a valid exercise of Commerce Clause authority, on March 21 (the same day as passage) the Joint Committee on Taxation released a 157-page "technical explanation" of the bill. This "explanation" grounded the justification for the bill in the tax authority of Congress, and nowhere mentioned commerce. As Professor Randy Barnett explained in an article on April 29, 2010 in the Wall Street Journal:
{{cquote|The word "commerce" appeared nowhere. Instead, the personal mandate is dubbed an "Excise Tax on Individuals Without Essential Health Benefits Coverage." But while the enacted bill does impose excise taxes on "high cost," employer-sponsored insurance plans and "indoor tanning services," the statute never describes the regulatory "penalty" it imposes for violating the mandate as an "excise tax." It is expressly called a "penalty."}}

Professor Barnett then explained that in ''Bailey v. Drexel Furniture'' (1922), "the Supreme Court struck down such a penalty saying, 'there comes a time in the extension of the penalizing features of the so-called tax when it loses its character as such and becomes a mere penalty with the characteristics of regulation and punishment.'" A subsequent Supreme Court decision, ''U.S. v. Kahriger'' (1953), upheld a punitive tax on gambling based on an express statement in the law that Congress was exercising its power to tax. No such statement exists in Obamacare. ''See also Sonzinsky v. U.S.'' (1937) ("Inquiry into the hidden motives which may move Congress to exercise a power constitutionally conferred upon it is beyond the competency of courts."). Professor Barnett noted that the penalty is not enforced as a tax in a customary manner, providing further evidence that Obamacare is based on the Commerce Clause and not on any taxing authority.

Requiring Americans to buy insurance "would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers," wrote Judge Hudson, a George W. Bush appointee in the Eastern District of Virginia. The federal judge also wrote:
{{Cquote|At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance—or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage—it's about an individual's right to choose to participate.<ref name=unconstitutional/>}}

It has also been pointed out that because the penalty applies to inactivity, it is beyond the powers authorized by the [[Sixteenth Amendment]].

Since the [[federal]] judge decided the entire healthcare reform bill law was unconstitutional, states such as Alaska have decided not to implement the mandated reforms. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/17/alaska-governor-refuses-enact-obamacare/?test=latestnews Alaska Governor Refuses to Enact 'Obamacare', Fox News, February 17, 2011]</ref> This prompted Obama's Justice Department to appeal to Judge Vinson by claiming that states cannot ignore the new health care law while his ruling is being appealed.

===Origination Clause===
On September 12, 2012, the [[Pacific Legal Foundation]] filed suit in a Washington, D.C., federal court, arguing that the mandate is unconstitutional under the [[Origination clause]].<ref>[http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/amended_suit_claims_obamacare_was_enacted_in_violation_of_origination_claus/ Amended Suit Claims Obamacare Was Enacted in Violation of Origination Clause] ABA Journal. Welss, Debra.</ref> The Origination Clause (Article I, Section 7, clause 1 of the Constitution) provides that "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

On September 17, 2009, Congressman Charlie Rangel introduced a bill in the House, H.R. 3590, the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009," whose purpose was "to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees." The bill passed the House on October 8 by a 416-0 vote.

On November 19, Harry Reid introduced his own version of H.R. 3590 in the Senate. He took the bill that had been unanimously passed by the House, renamed it the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," deleted all its contents after the first sentence, and replaced it with totally different content. What followed was the first pass of the Senate version of Obamacare.<ref>[http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29/Justice-Roberts Justice Roberts Turns Obamacare into Origination Clause Shell Game] Breitbart. Leahy, Michael P.</ref>

Thus, the only portion of Obamacare to originate in the House was its number, hardly in line with the Origination Clause. However, Congress frequently uses this same practice for many years, and if the Supreme Court were to overturn the law based on the Origination Clause, a large number of other laws would be open to court challenge as well.

==History of Mandatory Coverage==

One of the early proposals (a predecessor to the one enacted) would create a system to require adults (over age 19, U.S. citizens, not incarcerated) to enroll themselves and dependent children in a plan through the state-wide Health Help Agency (HHA) unless they provide evidence of enrollment or coverage through Medicare, a health insurance plan offered by the Department of Defense, an employee benefit plan through a former employer (i.e. retiree health plans), a qualified collective bargaining agreement, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or the Indian Health Service. The law contains a religious exemption for people, such as [[Christian Scientists]] who do not receive health care. {{USC|26|5000A(d)(2)}}. Each adult would have the responsibility to enroll each child in a plan. Dependent children include individuals up to age 24 claimed by their parents for deductions in the tax code.
[[File:Penalty.jpg|right|thumbnail|200px|If an individual fails to purchase coverage and does not meet the exceptions or the religious exemption, then under Obamacare a financial penalty may be assessed for non-indigent individuals. (Image courtesy See-Ming Lee)]]

===History of Penalty for Failure to Purchase Coverage===

Monthly payments for Obamacare are massive, roughly 12-15% of an individual's annual salary. If an individual fails to purchase coverage and does not meet the exceptions or the religious exemption, then a financial penalty will be assessed for non-indigent individuals. An exemption is available if more than 8% of the individual's household income would be required to pay for the cheapest available coverage.<ref>https://www.healthcare.gov/exemptions/</ref>

Fines were to be paid to the HHA of the State in which the person resides. That agency also may establish a procedure to waive the penalty if the penalty poses a hardship. Each State would determine appropriate mechanisms to enforce the requirement that individuals be enrolled.<ref> http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Healthy%20Americans%20Act/HAA_Section_by_Section.pdf (Link doesn't work.)</ref>

The law that was enacted replaced the state-based approach with a direct penalty to be paid to the United States.

===Privacy Rights===

Section 163 of the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 would have "require[d] the Secretary of HHS to adopt standards for typical transactions between insurers and providers such as claims, eligibility, enrollment, and prior authorization building on the standards in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996".<ref>http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/sbys3200.pdf</ref>

==Rationed Care==

Doctors have said they anticipate more people waiting in the waiting-rooms, more phone calls, people upset because they want to be seen now. Doctors will be overbooked. As the health care system brings in more and more patients, the system will be overwhelmed. Obamacare will be a tremendous burden for doctors in the United States.

Obamacare will shorten the amount of time Doctors have with each patient, and lengthen the amount of time patients will have to wait. Dr. Sreedhar Potarazu said that the current bill passed into law will create a scenario where the supply cannot meet the demand. Because the necessary health care reform needs are not included in Obamacare, there are still no protections for physicians in the medical industry, and doctors are going into the profession to work harder to earn less.

There will be an oversight board where the government looks at what should and shouldn't be given to patients, regardless of medical need. There is going to be rationing of care, according to Dr. Sreedhar Potarazu. Doctors have agreed there will be "rationed care" under Obamacare.<ref>[http://beta.video.foxbusiness.com/v/4115101/doctors-respond-to-health-care-reform/?playlist_id=87185 Doctors Respond to Health-Care Reform], FoxBusiness.com, March 18, 2010.</ref>

==Disinformation==

If private citizens have disagreements, discussions, and dissections of Obamacare, the proposed expansion of federal debt and deficits through its planned regulation of the healthcare industry, whether its communicated through e-mail, websites, blogs, or even casual conversation the Obama administration has asked that these people be reported to the executive branch of the federal government.<ref>McCullough, K. (2009, August 6). [http://townhall.com/columnists/KevinMcCullough/2009/08/06/welcome_to_gestapo-care Welcome to Gestapo-Care]. ''TownHall.com''.</ref> To counter any discussions related to the repeal of Obamacare, or that are against the implementation of Obamacare which will in turn destroy jobs and create more taxpayer debt, a Web page at whitehouse.gov entitled "Reality Check" has claimed that the president's program "would be fully paid for over 10 years, and it would not add one penny to the deficit."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/faq Frequently Asked Questions About Health Insurance Reform]. Health Insurance Reform Reality Check. ''WhiteHouse.gov''.</ref>

The [[CBO]] is mandated to prepare cost estimates and to show how individual legislative proposals would change spending or revenue levels under current law.<ref>[ http://www.cbo.gov/aboutcbo/budgetprocess.shtml Overview]. ''Congressional Budget Office''.</ref> A July 15 2009 letter from the CBO made this assessment,
{{Cquote|Enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in the federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010-2019 period."<ref>Elmendorf, D.W. (2009, June 15). [http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/103xx/doc10310/06-15-HealthChoicesAct.pdf Preliminary Analysis of Major Provisions Related to Health Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Health Choices Act]. ''Congressional Budget Office''. U.S. Congress.</ref>}} However, deceptively, CBO analysis of the House and Senate versions of the health care reform bills show that they would reduce the federal budget deficit by $109 billion <ref>http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=421</ref> and $81 billion <ref>http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=387</ref> respectively.

In a 2010 report, HHS claimed a provision in the health-care law would extend the Medicare trust fund by 12 years. The Congressional Budget Office released a memo that said HHS’s math was more than a little off.

Health and Human Services Secretary [[Kathleen Sebelius]] appearing on Capitol Hill for questioning admitted to double-counting in the Obamacare budget. Rep. Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania said “The same dollar can’t be used twice. This is the largest of the many budget gimmicks Democrats used to claim Obamacare would reduce the deficit.” <ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/04/hhs-secretary-sebelius-admits-to-double-counting-in-obamacare-budget/ HHS Secretary Sebelius admits to double-counting in Obamacare, The Daily Caller, March 4, 2011]</ref>

==Implementation==
{| class=wikitable align=right
|+States implementing Medicare Expansion<ref>{{cite news|url=http://kff.org/health-reform/state-indicator/state-activity-around-expanding-medicaid-under-the-affordable-care-act/|title=Status of State Action on the Medicaid Expansion Decision, 2014|work=Kaiser Family Foundation|accessdate=April 4, 2014}}</ref>
!State!!Status as of April 2014
|-
|Alabama||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Alaska||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Arizona||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Arkansas||Implementing Expansion in 2014<ref group=note name="ar">AR and IA have approved Section 1115 waivers for Medicaid expansion.</ref>
|-
|California||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Colorado||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Connecticut||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Delaware||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|District of Columbia||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Florida||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Georgia||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Hawaii||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Idaho||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Illinois||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Indiana||Open Debate<ref group=note name="in">IN and PA have pending waivers for alternative Medicaid expansion plans.</ref>
|-
|Iowa||Implementing Expansion in 2014<ref group=note name="ar"/>
|-
|Kansas||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Kentucky||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Louisiana||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Maine||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Maryland||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Massachusetts||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Michigan||Implementing Expansion in 2014<ref group=note>MI has an approved waiver for expansion and plans to implement in April 2014.</ref>
|-
|Minnesota||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Mississippi||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Missouri||Open Debate
|-
|Montana||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Nebraska||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Nevada||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|New Hampshire||Implementing Expansion in 2014<ref group=note>NH has passed legislation approving the Medicaid expansion that is expected to be signed by the Governor in March 2014. While the state plans to seek a waiver at a later date, the legislation calls for the expansion to begin July 1, 2014.</ref>
|-
|New Jersey||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|New Mexico||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|New York||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|North Carolina||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|North Dakota||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Ohio||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Oklahoma||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Oregon||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Pennsylvania||Open Debate<ref group=note name="in"/>
|-
|Rhode Island||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|South Carolina||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|South Dakota||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Tennessee||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Texas||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|-
|Utah||Open Debate
|-
|Vermont||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Virginia||Open Debate
|-
|Washington||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|West Virginia||Implementing Expansion in 2014
|-
|Wisconsin||Not Moving Forward at this Time<ref group=note>WI amended its Medicaid state plan and existing Section 1115 waiver to cover adults up to 100% FPL in Medicaid, but did not adopt the expansion.</ref>
|-
|Wyoming||Not Moving Forward at this Time
|}
The ACA as passed assumed that the eligibility for [[Medicaid]] would be automatically expanded in all 50 states. However, some states appealed this provision, and the US Supreme Court ruled that each state would have the right to decide whether to continue Medicaid on its present terms or to expand Medicaid to cover more low-income individuals. Although the ACA provided for the federal government to pay for all costs of medicaid expansion during the first four years, there was no statutory guarantee for full federal funding after that time. So, some states, particularly those with Republican Governors or Republican-controlled legislatures, refused to expand the eligibility requirements for the Medicaid program in their states. However, hospitals faced financial pressures to limit or end free charity care for indigent patients under the new structure, leaving low-income people in a difficult, un-insured dilemma.

Individuals and families who earned enough money to not qualify for [[Medicaid]], and were not covered by employer-provided insurance, were then required to purchase insurance through health care exchanges in order to receive federal subsidies of insurance premiums and deductibles. However, there were massive problems with the online health care exchanges operated by the federal government for states that did not set up their own exchanges. This was true at the start of the open season in October 2013 as well as toward the end of the open season in March 2014. Despite these problems, 7.5 million people signed up for insurance on the exchanges.<ref name=Sebelius/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/04/01/more-7-million-americans-have-enrolled-private-health-coverage-under-affordable-care|title=7.1 Million Americans Have Enrolled in Private Health Coverage Under the Affordable Care Act|work=whitehouse.gov|date=April 1, 2014}}</ref> This number does not indicate a growth in the number of people covered by private health insurance. First, the 7.5 million includes people who became covered by Medicaid expansion. Second, some of the people were already covered by a grandfathered health plan, but were forced to purchase on the exchange so as to receive premium and deductible subsidies. Third, some states, like California, required insurance companies to cancel their existing insurance plans as a precondition of offering plans on the health care exchanges. Fourth, purchasing a plan and signing-up are two very different criteria in determining the viability of government healthcare. The Obama administration has declined to provide "paid for" statistics.

Some people thought that they had purchased insurance through the exchange, but because of malfunctions in the back office of the exchange, the insurance providers did not receive any record of the insurance purchase. The Obama Administration launched a crash program to fix the federal exchange software and in January 2014 replaced the contractor responsible for building and operating the healthcare.gov website.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/01/10/obama-administration-to-replace-top-healthcare-gov-contractor/|title=Obama administration to replace top HealthCare.gov contractor|date=January 10, 2014|accessdate=April 3, 2014|work=Washington Post|author= Juliet Eilperin and Amy Goldstein}}</ref>

Although a number of Americans gave up their grandfathered health care plans for new policies. If the number of people purchasing policies under the ACA is not sufficient, insurance companies will raise their rates in future years, perhaps trapping these Americans who gave up their rights to switch back to the grandfathered plans.

The ACA imposed a mandate for employers who hire more than 50 full time employees. A full time employee is defined as someone who works 30 or more hours per week. In response, some employers have cutback the number of full time employees to avoid the duty to comply with the ACA's insurance requirements. The Obama Administration has postponed the implementation of the employer mandate until 2015. Some employers have cut the hours that their staff could work to under 30 hours per week. For example, adjunct faculty members have found that the number of classes per semester have been reduced so that they will not be covered by employer insurance. House Republicans have passed legislation through the House to increase the definition of full time worker to 40 hours per week.<ref name=fulltime>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-votes-to-change-health-care-laws-definition-of-full-time-work/2014/04/03/dc0b7066-bb69-11e3-9a05-c739f29ccb08_story.html|title=House votes to change health-care law’s definition of full-time work|first=Ed |last=O’Keefe|date=April 3, 2014|work=Washington Post|accessdate=April 10, 2014}}</ref>

The ACA requires health plans to offer women family planning and contraceptive services. Some employers object that such coverage violates religious principles. This issue has been taken to the United States Supreme Court with a decision expected by the summer of 2014.

Following the troubled roll-out of the ACA, on April 11, 2014, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced her resignation.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/11/us-usa-healthcare-idUSBREA3926R20140411|title=Health secretary resigns after Obamacare launch woes|first=Roberta|last=Rampton|date=April 11, 2014|accessdate=April 11, 2014|wprl=Reuters}}</ref>

== Obama Administration health care plan and liberal elitism ==
[[File:Arrogant obama.jpg|right|125px|thumbnail|[[Barack Obama]] ]]
''See also:'' [[Barack Obama and liberal elitism]] and [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]]

In 2007, when Obama was running for the office of President of the United States, he promised Americans "health care that is as good as the health care that I have as a member of Congress."<ref>http://www.emaxhealth.com/10/18430.html</ref> The ACA has a provision which requires members of Congress and their staff to purchase insurance on a health care exchange instead of from the health care plans offered through the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The Obama Administration wrote implementing regulations which would have Congress and their staff receive a subsidy on the exchange-purchased insurance equal to the amount that OPM subsidizes the insurance of all other federal employees. However, during the October 2013 government shutdown crisis, one of the provisions the House added to one of the continuing resolution to fund the federal government was a prohibition of such a subsidy. The Senate rejected it.<ref>http://theweekincongress.com/2013/10/08/how-the-senate-and-house-handled-h-j-res-59-the-continuing-resolution-for-fy-2014/</ref>

The Obama administration's [[Liberal Elite|liberal elitism]] is not unusual when it comes to health care. For example, [[Belinda Stronach]], a former Member of the Canadian Parliament, chose to have a surgical treatment in the United States rather than be treated in Canada for her condition ([[Canada]] has a [[socialized medicine]] system of health care).<ref>http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/09/14/canadian-official-refuses-canadian-health-care/</ref>
[[File:MedSybolBlog.jpg|left|125px]]

Congressman [[John Fleming]] has offered a legislative amendment that would require United States congressmen and senators to take the same health care plan they try to force on others (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt). Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go to his website and sign his petition.<ref>http://fleming.house.gov/index.html</ref>

===Two-Tier Health Care System===
Socialist regimes reveal their true nature by the special treatment they give to their permanent ruling class; they deny such treatment for ordinary citizens of their country. The worst corruption in socialist regimes flows from that simple two-caste system. Some critics claim there is a two-tier health care system under the ACA.<ref>[http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obamacare-means-a-two-tier-health-care-system/ Obamacare Means a Two-Tier Health Care System], by James Lewis at ''Pajamas Media'', March 9, 2010.</ref>

The first example of Obamacare's creation of a two-tier health care system was seen as millions of hardworking Americans struggle to make ends meet and watch as their health care costs increase due to provisions in Obamacare. Senate staffers planned to participate in a two-day orgy of back massages, organic food tastings and milk mustache photos as part of a "health fair" for the staffers, who enjoy some of the best health care in the country.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/08/senate-office-host-health-fair-covered-staffers/ Senate Office to Host Health Fair for Well-Covered Staffers], FoxNews.com, October 08, 2010.</ref> The Senate staffers will be treated to seated massages, herbal [[tea|teas]], polarity therapy, low-fat [[cheese]] samples and organic foods. A [[pharmacist]] and health coach will be available to speak to fair-goers about their medications, nutrition and healthy lifestyle questions. All of which is at the American taxpayers expense. Of course, the ACA provisions regarding employee health care had not gone into effect at the time of that proposed health fair.

Less than one year after Obamacare was signed into law, 111 [[unions]], companies, and organizations had received approval for Waiver of the Annual Limits Requirements of the PHS Act Section 2711.<ref>Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/lots-of-unions-are-on-the-hidden-list-to-receive-obamacare-waivers/ Lots of Unions Are on the ‘Hidden’ List to Receive Obamacare Waivers], ''[[The Blaze]]'', November 15, 2010.</ref><ref name=waivers>Applications for waivers from annual limit requirements: [http://www.hhs.gov/ociio/regulations/approved_applications_for_waiver.html Approved Applications for Waiver of the Annual Limits Requirements of the PHS Act Section 2711], (as of December 3, 2010).</ref><ref>When the American people learned that the congressmen who wrote the new healthcare law were exempt from it, questions regarding the alleged benefits of the new legislation were raised. Further proof that Obamacare may not be all that it was touted to be can be found in the fact that 111 companies, including a number of unions, have been given waivers to be exempted from certain provisions of the law. [http://www.examiner.com/will-county-libertarian-in-chicago/government-health-care-is-not-law-for-everyone?cid=parsely#parsely Government Health Care is not law for everyone], by Steve Balich, Examiner.com, November 15, 2010.</ref><ref>Warner Todd Huston. [http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2010/11/15/obamacare-waivers-prove-policy-is-a-jobs-killer-unions-benefit-most/ Obamacare Waivers Prove Policy is a Jobs Killer, Unions Benefit Most], biggovernment.com, November 15, 2010.</ref> By December 7, 2010, the list of unions, companies, and insurers who have used the HHS waiver as an escape to avoid the costly, destructive consequences of Obamacare for their members and employees grew from 111 to 222.<ref>[[Michelle Malkin]]. [http://michellemalkin.com/2010/12/07/obamacare-waiver-mania-continues-list-tops-222/ Obamacare Waiver-mania! continues: List tops 222], MichelleMalkin.com, December 7, 2010.</ref><ref name=waivers/> More than 50 unions have already received waivers.<ref>[[Rush Limbaugh]]. [http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_011711/content/01125114.guest.html Why We Must Repeal Obamacare], RushLimbaugh.com, January 17, 2011.</ref> Moreover, three [[Service Employees International Union]] (SEIU) local chapters, including the [[Chicago]] chapter, whose political action committee spent $27 million supporting Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, have received waivers from a provision in the Obamacare law.<ref>Fred Lucas. [http://cnsnews.com/news/article/seiu-locals-including-chicago-chapter-wa Three SEIU Locals--Including Chicago Chapter--Waived From Obamacare Requirement], CNSnews.com, January 24, 2011.</ref>

===Treatment of older patients===
Some critics, including 2008 Vice-Presidential candidate [[Sarah Palin]], have accused Obama of planning on setting up "Death Panels" to judge the worthiness and "cost effectiveness" of keeping certain people alive, such as senior citizens. In spite of public outcry over death panels, the Obama administration is pressing forward to enact the same measures by bureaucratic regulations, called "end-of-life planning."<ref>Meredith Jessup. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/return-of-death-panels-obama-to-enact-end-of-life-planning-for-medicare/ Return of ‘Death Panels’? Obama to Enact End-of-Life Planning for Medicare], ''[[The Blaze]]'', December 26, 2010.</ref> Quoting research from the [[British Medical Journal]], the [[Obama administration]] insists death panels are humane: "Advance care planning improves end-of-life care and patient and family satisfaction and reduces stress, anxiety and depression in surviving relatives."
Prior to ObamaCare, uninsured indigent patients would be subject to rationing of care dictated by the limited amount of charity funding available at local hospitals. Insurance companies also rationed care by declining to authorize and reimburse procedures and treatments that they considered wasteful or experimental.

This "end-of-life" care is apparently to be doled out like pork from a salt barrel from the 200 or so "Elderly Care Centers" nationwide that will distribute strictly rationed medication to those in need until such time as the "committee" considers the patient to be too old. 200 centers in the country amounts to about 4 per state on average, though California, Massachusetts and Iowa were able to grab more funding from the Obama administration through a combination of political dealings and judicial activism <ref>http://blogs.smartmoney.com/tax/2011/02/10/lights-camera-tax-scandal-iowa-trial-begins/</ref> The majority of Elderly Care Centers are located in urban areas of states; for example, the state of Kansas has only two Elderly Care Centers for their entire retired population and both are located in Topeka, far from the rural elderly who "need" government help the most. This may be a strategy to reduce the strain on the system by allowing a large portion of the elderly to die off "naturally," while still making a show of treating them in cities, where liberal voters tend to congregate.

There have already been deaths attributed to doctors exercising newly-granted authority from these extra-judicial decision making bodies. A young girl, in liberal California of all places, was told that her liver transplant was not "worth it," because she wouldn't live long enough to justify the value of the organ. Though public outcry forced the doctors to change their minds after ten days, but those ten days were enough to kill an innocent child. Another woman, a nurse in Texas, was denied treatment for her breast cancer, purportedly because she was in middle age and was not worth the "investment." <ref>http://dying.about.com/od/ethicsandchoices/a/death_panels.htm</ref>

Under Obamacare, in every state taxpayer dollars originally slated for caring for the elderly in our communities have been transferred to a "Community Health" slush fund run by federal government-appointed bureaucrats. The purpose of this fund is to allow unscrupulous doctors and insurance companies, who are the acknowledged source of our high health costs, to charge ridiculous amounts of money for basic services, without leaving a paper trail or even committing a (legal) crime.

==Polls==
Taken from an [[Associated Press|AP]] poll, on January 17, 2011, Kellyanne Conway, president of the polling company, inc./WomanTrend, pointed out that when asked if voters would favor a law "that would require every American to have health insurance, or pay money to the government as a penalty if they do not, unless the person is very poor," 59 percent are opposed.<ref>Katrina Trinko. [http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/257331/two-new-obamacare-polls-have-high-numbers-democrats-misleading-questions-katrina-trink# Two New Obamacare Polls Have High Numbers of Democrats, Misleading Questions], ''National Review'', January 17, 2011.</ref> {{Cquote|When they actually hear what the health care reform is, they’re opposed to it," Conway said.}}
One week after a federal district judge ruled in favor of 26 states and declared Obamacare to be unconstitutional, Rasmussen's poll of likely voters showed that Americans support its repeal by a margin of 21 percentage points (58 to 37 percent). Among [[independents]], the margin in support of repeal was even higher: 27 points (63 to 36 percent).<ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/new-rasmussen-poll-obamacare_541512.html New Rasmussen Poll on Obamacare], ''[[The Weekly Standard]]'', February 7, 2011.</ref> The pollsters also point out that many voters don't just want Obamacare repealed — they also want it replaced with a better system.

* On August 29, 2011, the ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'' national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters showed that 57% at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law, including 46% who Strongly Favor repeal. Thirty-seven percent (37%) at least somewhat oppose repeal, with 25% who are Strongly Opposed.<ref>Voters Express Stronger Enthusiasm for Health Care Repeal. [http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law Health Care Law], ''[[Rasmussen Reports]]'', August 29, 2011.</ref>

* According to the ''Kaiser Health Tracking'' [[poll]], as reported on August 30, 2011, 44% of Americans have an unfavorable view of Obamacare. Only 39% of those surveyed have a favorable view of the law.<ref>Conn Carroll. [http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/poll-obamacare-support-all-time-low Poll: Obamacare support at all time low], ''The Washington Examiner'', August 30, 2011.</ref>

* According to a monthly poll from the ''Kaiser Family Foundation'', as reported by ''[[The Hill]]'' on October 28, 2011, 51 percent of respondents had an unfavorable view while only 34 percent had a favorable impression of Obamacare.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/190399-healthcare-laws-popularity-hits-a-new-low-poll-says Healthcare law's popularity hits new low], ''[[The Hill]]'', October 28, 2011.</ref>

== See also ==
[[File:Dr Obama.jpg|right|150px]]
* [[Socialized Medicine]]
* [[Association of American Physicians and Surgeons]] (doctor organization which opposes Obamacare)
* [[Accountable Care Organization]]
* [[Obamunism]]
* [[Barack Hussein Obama#Obama's Medical Administrator|Obama's Medicare/Medicaid Administrator]]
* [[Essay:47 million Americans without health insurance lie]]

== External links ==
*[http://www.healthcare.gov Official website]
*[http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf Full text of Obamacare, aka Affordable Healthcare Act]
*[http://www.healthcare.gov/news/brochures/info-for-small-businesses.pdf Official site info for small businesses; statement there will be penalties against employers]
*[http://www.castlibrary.com/free_books Three Days of Argument: Obamacare On Trial Audiobook] - Complete coverage of the arguments to the Supreme Court regarding Obamacare
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcBaSP31Be8 Know the TRUTH about the Government Health Care Bill H.R.3200- Key Points video]
*[http://www.aapsonline.org/obamacare-bill/ Obamacare] by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvzLDb2igKM The Obama health care press conference: The Public Option]
*[http://www.cato.org/dailypodcast/podcast-archive.php?podcast_id=653 Collectivism and Obama, McCain], featuring David Boaz, [[CATO Institute]] Daily Podcast, June 10, 2008.
*[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_071510/content/01125107.guest.html White House Snaps Fingers and Triggers End of Private Insurance], [[Rush Limbaugh]] on how the Obama Administration just issued new rules requiring health insurance companies to provide free coverage.
*[[Fox News|FoxNews.com]]: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/19/taxpayer-calculator-health-care-repeal Taxpayer Calculator: ''Find Out How Much Health Care Law Is Costing YOU'']. To find out how much your taxes will increase because of Obamacare, [http://www.foxnews.com/topics/health-care-bill-gross-cost-of-coverage-provisions CLICK HERE]. In addition to calculating your individual tax burden caused by the overall health care takeover, FoxNews.com has also broken down the bill into three main pieces: the [http://www.foxnews.com/topics/health-care-bill-gross-cost-of-exchange-subsidies-related-spending.htm gross cost of exchange subsidies and related spending], the [http://www.foxnews.com/topics/health-care-bill-gross-cost-of-medicaid-chip-outlays.htm cost of Medicaid and expense of the Children's Health Insurance Program], and the [http://www.foxnews.com/topics/healthcare-bill-gross-cost-of-small-employer-tax-credits.htm cost of small employer tax credits].
* http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/21/premiums-set-to-rise-this-year-in-run-up-to-obamacare-tax-on-insurance-industry/
* http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/01/memphis-based-medical-company-lays-off-100-blames-obama-care/
* http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/339456/obamacare-s-pressure-points-thomas-p-miller

{{Liberalism}}

==Notes==
<references group="note"/>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Totalitarianism]]

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Socialism]]
[[Category:Health]]
[[category:Health Care]]
[[Category:Government Programs]]
[[Category:Welfare State]]

E=mc²

2014-04-17T03:48:42Z

Debletar: Added a source on application on moving objects.

'''E=mc²''' is [[Einstein]]'s famous formula which asserts that the energy ('''E''') which makes up the [[matter]] in an unmoving object is equal to the square of the [[speed of light]] ('''c²''') times the [[mass]] ('''m''') of that body.<ref>The implausible equation claims that "energy and mass are linked in the most famous relationship in physics: E = mc². (The energy content of a body is equal to the mass of the body times the speed of light squared.)" [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/einstein-genius-among-geniuses.html Einstein: Genius Among Geniuses] - PBS's NOVA</ref> The complete form, when applied to moving objects, is '''E²=(mc²)²+(pc)²''', where '''p''' represents momentum,<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMIhxWRGNw</ref> which is still incorrect. It is a statement that purports to relate all [[matter]] to [[energy]]. In fact, no [[theory]] has successfully unified the [[law]]s governing [[mass]] (''i.e.'', [[gravity]]) with the laws governing light (''i.e.'', [[electromagnetism]]), and numerous attempts to derive '''E=mc²''', in both of its forms, in general from first principles have failed. [[Politics|Political]] pressure,<ref>For example, [[Robert Dicke]], perhaps the greatest physicist of the 20th century, was denied a [[Nobel Prize]] because he doubted the [[Theory of Relativity]].</ref> however, has since made it impossible for anyone pursuing an academic career in [[science]] to even question the validity of this nonsensical [[equation]]. '''''Simply put, E=mc² is [[liberal claptrap]]'''''.

In the USA, the popular ''[[Twilight Zone]]'' series featured '''E=mc²''' prominently, giving the equation greater currency with the public. The song ''Einstein A Go-Go'' by the band Landscape had a similar effect in the UK in the 1980s. But light has never been unified with matter despite more than a billion-dollars-worth of attempts, and it is likely impossible to ever do so. [[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]] predicts that there is no unified theory of light and matter because they were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the [[Book of Genesis]].

[[Mass]] is a measure of an object's inertia, in other words its resistance to acceleration. In contrast, the intrinsic [[energy]] of an object (such as an [[atom]]) is a function of electrostatic charge and other non-inertial forces, having nothing to do with gravity. Declaring the object's energy to be a function of inertia rather than electrostatics is an absurd and impossible attempt to unify the forces of nature, contrary to the accepted view (as predicted by [[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]]) that the forces of nature have not been unified. Liberal scientists assert the formula E=mc² is not limited to nuclear reactions; it applies to chemical reactions and even to the energy stored in a compressed spring. <ref>http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99140.htm</ref>

The claim that '''E=mc²''' has never yielded anything of value and it has often been used as a redefinition of "[[energy]]" for pseudo-scientific purposes by non-scientific journals. Claims can be found not only on liberal, second-tier college websites but at those of [[Baylor]] and the [[MIT]] that the equation is used in [[nuclear power]] generation and [[nuclear weapon]]s ([[nuclear fusion]] and [[nuclear fission]]) and speculations about [[antimatter]].<ref>[http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/E=mcsquared/index.html John D. Norton ''Einstein for everyone - E=mc²''], Department of History and Philosophy of Science University of Pittsburgh</ref><ref>[http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/releng.html Rod Nave ''HpyerPhysics - Relativistic Energy''], Georgia State University</ref><ref>[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/legacy-of-e-equals-mc2.html Peter Tyson ''The Legacy of E=mc²''] October 11, 2005. PBS ''NOVA''. </ref>

The [[Theory of Relativity]] has never been able to mathematically derive '''E=mc²''' from first principles, and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that "Leaving aside that it continues to be affirmed experimentally, a rigorous proof of the mass-energy equivalence is probably beyond the purview of the special theory."<ref>[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AmJPh..79..591H Eugene Hecht: ''How Einstein confirmed E0=mc²'', American Journal of Physics, Volume 79, Issue 6, pp. 591-600 (2011)]</ref>

It has been known for a long time that radiation has a mass equivalence, which was correctly derived by [[Henri Poincare]] in 1904,<ref>[http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josa/abstract.cfm?uri=josa-42-8-540 Herbert E. Ives ''Derivation of the Mass-Energy Relation'', JOSA, Vol. 42, Issue 8, pp. 540-543 (1952)]</ref> but the equation '''E=mc²''' makes a claim far beyond that limited circumstance:

{{cquote|The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904).|||[[Herbert Ives]], 1952}}
In 1907, [[Max Planck]] proved in his fundamental paper that the formula ''E=mc²'' is not a general law and any system submitted to an external pressure will obey a different law: its mass will be proportional to its enthalpy ''H=E+PV'', that is, ''m=H/c²''<ref name="Capria">{{cite book |author=Marco M. Capria, Aubert Daigneaut et al. |title=Physics Before and After Einstein |publisher=IOS Press |year=2005 |chapter=2.Mechanics and Electromagnetism... |pages=43|isbn=1-58603-462-6 |url=http://www.dmi.unipg.it/~mamone/pubb/PBAE.pdf |quote=}}</ref>.

== Description for the layman ==
Ten top physicists were asked to describe in laymen's terms '''E=mc²''':<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/experts.html Lexi Krock, David Levin (editors) ''E=mc² explained'', June, 2005. PBS ''NOVA'']</ref>{{cquote|'''''It's something that doesn't happen in your kitchen or in everyday life.'''''|||Neil deGrasse Tyson, Astrophysicist, American Museum of Natural History}}{{cquote|''Things that seem incredibly different can really be manifestations of the same underlying phenomena.''|||Nima Arkani-Hamed, Theoretical Physicist, Harvard University}}{{cquote|''You can get access to parts of nature you have never been able to get access to before.''|||Lene Hau, Experimental Physicist, Harvard University}}{{
cquote|''It certainly is not an equation that reveals all its subtlety in the few symbols that it takes to write down.''|||Brian Greene Theoretical Physicist Columbia University}}

== History of '''E=mc²''' ==

The [[Public Broadcasting Service]] explained the history of '''E=mc²''' for its NOVA series as follows:<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/ancestors-einstein.html David Bodanis ''Ancestors of E=mc²''], Nov 10, 2005, NOVA</ref>

{{cquote|Over time, [[physicist]]s became used to multiplying an object's mass by the square of its [[velocity]] (mv²) to come up with a useful indicator of its energy. If the velocity of a ball or rock was 100 mph, then they knew that the energy it carried would be proportional to its mass times 100 squared. If the velocity is raised as high as it could go, to 670 million mph, it's almost as if the ultimate energy an object will contain should be revealed when you look at its mass times c squared, or its mc².}}

==Experimental verification==
The first experimental verification for the equation was performed 1932 by a team of an English and an Irish physicist, John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton, as a byproduct of ''"their pioneer work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles"''<ref>[http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1951/# Nobel Prize Organization]</ref> for which they were honored with the [[Nobel Prize]] in physics in 1951. The idea of the mass defect - and its calculation using ''E=mc²'' can be found on page 169-170 of his Nobel lecture.<ref>[http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1951/cockcroft-lecture.pdf John D. Cockroft ''Experiments on the interaction of high-speed nucleons with atomic nuclei''], Nobel Lecture, Dec 11, 1951</ref>

They bombarded [[Lithium]] atoms with [[protons]] having a [[kinetic energy]] less than 1 [[Electron-Volts|MeV]]. The result were two (slightly less heavy) [[α-particle]]s, for which the [[kinetic energy]] was measured as 17.3 MeV

:::::<math>{}_3^7\mathrm{Li}\, +\, {}_1^1\mathrm{H}\,\rightarrow\,2\, {}_2^4\mathrm{He}</math>

The mass of the particles on the left hand side is 8.0263 [[atomic mass units|amu]], the mass on the right hand side ''only'' 8.0077 amu.<ref>Gerard Piel ''The age of science: what scientists learned in the 20th century'', Basic Books, 2001, p. 144-145</ref> The difference between this masses is .00186 amu, which results in the following back-of-an-envelope calculation:

::::<math>0.00186\,\mathrm{amu} \cdot c^2 = 0.0186 \cdot 1.66 \cdot 10^{-27}\,\mathrm{kg}\cdot\left(3\cdot10^8\,\mathrm{\frac{m}{s}}\right)^2</math>
::::<math>\approx\,2.79\cdot 10^{-12} \,\mathrm{kg}\mathrm{\frac{m^2}{s^2}}</math>
::::<math>\approx \,17.3\,\mathrm{MeV}</math>

Accurate measurements and detailed calculations allowed for verifying the theoretical values with an accuracy of ±0.5%. This was the first time a nucleus was artificially split, and thereby the first transmutation of elements using accelerated particles:

Some claim that the best empirical verification of '''E=mc2''' was done in 2005 by Simon Rainville et al., as published in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' (which is not a leading physics journal).<ref>[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7071/full/4381096a.html Nature 438, 1096-1097 (22 December 2005)] doi:10.1038/4381096a; Published online 21 December 2005</ref> The authors state in their article in ''Nature'' magazine that "Einstein's relationship is separately confirmed in two tests, which yield a combined result of 1−Δmc²/E=(−1.4±4.4)×10−7, indicating that it holds to a level of at least 0.00004%. To our knowledge, this is the most precise direct test of the famous equation yet described."

==A Famous Example -- Nuclear Fission of Uranium==

For most types of physical interactions, the masses of the initial reactants and of the final products match so closely that it is essentially impossible to measure any difference. But for nuclear reactions, the difference is measurable. That difference is related to the energy absorbed or released, described by the equation E=mc². (The equation applies to '''all''' interactions; the fact that nuclear interactions are the only ones for which the mass difference is measurable has led people to believe, wrongly, that E=mc² applies only to nuclear interactions.)

The [[Theory of Relativity]] played no role in this work, but proponents later tried to retrofit the theory to the data in order to explain the explain the observed mass changes. Here is the most famous example of the mass change.

Nuclear fission, which is the basis for nuclear energy, was discovered in experiments by [[Otto Hahn]] and [[Fritz Strassman]], and analyzed by [[Lise Meitner]], in 1938.

The decay path of [[Uranium]] that figured in the ''Hahn-Strassmann experiment'' may have been this:

:235U → 140Xe + 91Sr + 4n

(The [[Xenon]] decayed within about a minute to 140Ba. There are a large number of fission paths and fission products, but they were searching for the chemical signature of [[Barium]].)

The masses of the particles are:

{| class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0"
! Substance
! 235U
! 140Xe
! 91Sr
! 4 neutrons
|-
| Number of protons
| 92
| 54
| 38
| 0
|-
| Number of neutrons
| 235
| 140
| 91
| 4
|-
| Number of electrons
| 92
| 54
| 38
| 0
|-
| Mass
| 235.04393
| 139.92164
| 90.910203
| 4.03466
|}

The mass of the Uranium atom is 235.04393, and the sum of the masses of the products is 234.866503. The difference is .177427 amu, or, using the E=mc² equation, 165 million electron volts. (The generally accepted value for the total energy released by Uranium fission, including secondary decays, is about 200 million electron volts.)

The insight that the conversion from Uranium to Barium was caused by complete fission of the atom was made by Lise Meitner in December, 1938. She had the approximate "mass defect" quantities memorized, and so she worked out in her head, using the E=mc² equation, that there would be this enormous release of energy. This release was observed shortly thereafter, and the result is nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

==A Topical Example: Speed of Extremely Energetic Neutrinos==
Here is another example of the use of this formula in physics calculations. Recently there has been quite a controversy over whether neutrinos were observed traveling at a speed faster than light. Relativity doesn't allow that, and, since neutrinos have nonzero (but incredibly tiny) mass, they aren't even supposed to travel ''at'' the speed of light. This very issue came up on the [[Talk:Main_Page#Neutrinos]]. The speeds under discussion were calculated by the use of E=mc2.

The mass of a neutrino is about 0.44x10-36kilograms. (Normally all of these things are measured in more convenient units such as Giga-electron-Volts, but that makes implicit use of E=mc2. If we don't accept that, we have to do the calculations under classical physics, using SI (meter/kilogram/second) units.) The neutrinos were accelerated to an energy of about 17GeV, or .27x10-8Joules. Using the classical formula <math>\mathrm{E} = \frac{1}{2}mv^2</math>, we get v=110x1012meters per second. This is about 370,000 times the speed of light.
However, the classical formula breaks down at speeds close to <math>c</math>, and indeed, as the speed of a massive object approaches <math>c</math>, the object's kinetic energy approaches <math>+\infty</math>.

Several scientists have gone on record stating that the neutrinos, which have mass, travel at precisely the speed of light. If true, this disproves the [[Theory of Relativity]] and the claim that '''E=mc2'''. However, it is more likely that those scientists are using language inaccurately. It is impossible to measure the speed of neutrinos precisely. What is meant is the difference between the speed of light and the speed of the neutrinos is too small to measure.

==Deducing the Equation From Empirical Observation==

While the equation was historically developed on theoretical grounds as an inevitable consequence of special relativity, it is possible to deduce it purely from empirical observation.

So, for the purposes of this section, imagine that one is in the era of "classical physics"; prior to 1900 or so. Relativity has not been invented, but, inexplicably, nuclear physics has. Imagine that the phenomena of radioactivity and nuclear fission have been observed, without any knowledge of relativity.

A well-accepted physical law of classical physics was the law of conservation of mass. This was not easy to deduce. It required careful analysis of such phenomena as combustion, in the 1700's, to eliminate the various confounding sub-phenomena that made the law difficult to see. But, by 1900, the law was well established:

:::*'''In all interactions, mass is precisely conserved.'''

For example, the mass of a TNT molecule is 227.1311 Daltons, or 227.1311 g/mol, which is, for all practical purposes, the same as the mass of its constituent Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, and Oxygen atoms. It is essentially impossible to measure the difference. The principle of conservation of mass is upheld.

But when nuclear phenomena are discovered, we notice something different. The masses of the result particles after an event (e.g. alpha decay, nuclear fission, or artificial transmutation) is measurably less than the masses of the original particle(s). With the invention of the mass spectrometer around 1920, it became possible to measure atomic weights of various isotopes with great precision.

Radium-226 decays into Radon-222 by emission of an alpha particle with an energy of 4.78 MeV.

1 kg of Radium-226 = <math>\frac{6.022 \times 10^{23}}{226.0254}</math> atoms. (The numerator is [[Avogadro's number]], and the denominator is the atomic weight of Radium-226.) This is 2.6643647 * 1024 atoms.

That number of Radon-222 atoms has mass .98226836 kg. That number of alpha particles has mass .01770863 kg.
The mass lost is .00002301 kg.

Each emitted alpha particle has energy of 4.78 MeV, or 4.78 * .1602 * 10-18 Joules. The total alpha energy from the decay of 1 kg of radium is 2.04 * 1012 Joules.

Also, Radon-222 decays into Polonium-218 by emission of an alpha particle with an energy of 5.49 MeV.

1 kg of Radon-222 = <math>\frac{6.022 \times 10^{23}}{222.0176}</math> atoms. This is 2.7124611 * 1024 atoms.

That number of Polonium-218 atoms has mass .98194467 kg. That number of alpha particles has mass .01802830 kg.

The mass lost is .00002703 kg.

Each emitted alpha particle has energy of 5.49 MeV. The total alpha energy from the decay of 1 kg of polonium is 2.39 * 1012 Joules.

It looks as thought we have to rewrite the law of conservation of mass:

:::*'''In all "ordinary" interactions, mass is precisely conserved.'''
:::*'''In nuclear interactions, there is a small but measurable loss of mass.'''

:By the way, we can clearly see that atomic weights of pure isotopes are not integers, and that it has something to do with the energy released by nuclear disintegration. In retrospect, the formula E=mc² explains the non-integer character of atomic weights.

Making special cases like this is unsatisfactory, of course.

We do this for a few other interactions, including the explosion of TNT. This would include the Lithium-plus-Hydrogen and Uranium fission phenomena described above. We won't bother with the details. As observational scientists, we look for patterns in the behavior of nature. We make a table:

{| class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0"
! interaction
! energy released per kg, Joules
! mass lost per kg of original substance, kg
|-
| explosion of TNT
| 4.184 * 106
| seems to be zero
|-
| alpha decay of Ra-226
| 2.04 * 1012
| .00002301 kg
|-
| alpha decay of Rn-222
| 2.39 * 1012
| .00002703 kg
|}

We plot these, and a few others, not shown, on graph paper, and find to our amazement that the relationship is linear.

For Ra, m/E = .112794118 E-16
For Po, m/E = .113096234 E-16

If this is linear, the mass defect for TNT would have been .47 * 10-10. We couldn't possibly have measured this.

So we can rewrite the rule for conservation of mass in a more satisfactory way:

:::*'''In all interactions, there is a loss of mass, equal to about .113 * 10-16 kg per Joule of energy released.'''

What we thought was exact conservation is just very nearly exact, and we hadn't been able to measure it before.

But maybe there's more. This constant has dimensions of kilograms per Joule. From high-school physics, we know that that is seconds squared divided by meters squared. That is, it is the reciprocal of the square of a velocity. We calculate that velocity. It is about 2.97 * 108 meters per second. Very close to the speed of light! Very interesting! (The calculations above were not extremely precise. The formula has been verified with great precision, but not here.)

We don't understand why (that will have to wait for the invention of relativity), but we can formulate a hypothesis:

:::*'''In all interactions, there is a loss of mass, equal to <math>\frac{1}{c^2}</math> times the amount of energy released.'''

We don't have to give the units any more, since everything is now dimensionally correct.

::There is a very interesting analogy with the discovery of [[Maxwell's Equations]]. Maxwell found an interesting relationship involving the fundamental constants <math>\epsilon\,</math> and <math>\mu\,</math> appearing in his equations. Specifically, <math>\epsilon\mu\,</math> has the dimensions of seconds squared divided by meters squared, and that:

:::::<math>\frac{1}{\epsilon\mu} = c^2</math>

::where "c" was the known velocity of light. He also showed that his equations predict electromagnetic waves, propagating at that speed.

==See also==
*[[Counterexamples to Relativity]]
*[[Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity]]

== References ==
<references />
[[Category:relativity]]
[[Category:physics]]
[[Category:science]]
[[Category:Bible]]

Homeopathy

2014-04-17T03:41:02Z

Debletar: added new source

'''Homeopathy''' is a theory of [[alternative medicine]] which tries to treat illnesses with infinitesimal doses of the drugs that cause the same symptom as the illness. Homeopathy is based on the ideas of [[Samuel Hahnemann]], a 19th century physician who observed that some contemporary medicines evoked symptoms similar to those of the illnesses for which they were prescribed.

Homeopathy is popular in Europe and has been used by the British Royal Family.

Critics claim there is no clear evidence to support the efficacy of homeopathic remedies.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/homeopathy.shtml</ref> They further argue that the reported effects are equivalent to placebo.<ref>http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html</ref> A group of studies examined by the National Center for Biotechnology Information and U.S. National Library of Medicine found that homeopathic treatments had weak evidence of efficacy and that they were likely a result of the placebo effect. <ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16125589</ref>

Critics say that homeopathic beliefs have no standard theory; practitioners vary widely in their prescriptions.
==History==
The term "homeopathy" was coined in the 19th century by German physician Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann.<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20080407183345/http://www.shpltd.co.uk/dean-homeopathy.pdf Archived with the Wayback machine]</ref> The concept was first thought up of when he tested upon himself cinchona bark (a purported cure for malaria at the time) and noticed that the symptoms it induced in him were similar to the symptoms of [[malaria]]. He then developed the Law of similars based on this "discovery".<ref>http://www.skylarkbooks.co.uk/Hahnemann_Biography.htm</ref> He then cataloged the effects of various substances on humans in what he called "provings." These provings, he believed, were best applied to the [[subjectivity|self]].<ref>http://altmed.creighton.edu/Homeopathy/philosophy/provings.htm</ref>

Given the inertness of homeopathic remedies, Hahnemann's ideas spread widely when put up against contemporary medicinal quackery which killed patients instead of curing them.<ref>"British Medical Journal", BMJ 1 (533): 283–4, 1871 [http://www.bmj.com/content/1/533/283 Registration required for access]</ref>
= Homeopath beliefs =
==Core Principles==
#Law of similars-this posits that introducing an agent or disease producing similar symptoms as those of the patient will cure the patient<ref>http://altmed.creighton.edu/Homeopathy/history.htm</ref>
#Potentisation- potentisation refers to the belief that the more a substance is diluted, the more powerful it becomes.<ref>Kayne SB (2006), Homeopathic pharmacy: theory and practice (2 ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences, pp. 53, ISBN 9780443101601.</ref>

Homeopathic remedies involve treating an illness with an infinitesimally small dose of a substance that, at bigger doses, can cause symptoms that are like those of the illness (treating 'like with like'). Homeopaths believe that the 'potency' of a remedy can be increased by serial dilutions (repetitively adding water or alcohol) combined with vigorous shaking, to the point where little or none of the original solution remains as part of the final prepared remedy.

The word 'homeopathy' was first used by the German physician Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843). Hahnemann was an eminent physician and a prominent public health reformer. He believed that his new system was more humane and effective than the conventional medicine of his time<ref>Hahnemann S (1796) translated into English as "[http://www.minutus.org/library/article_read.asp?id=6 Essay on a New Principle]". Hahnemann's [http://www.homeopathyhome.com/reference/organon/organon.html Organon der Heilkunst] in English translation</ref>, but it was greeted by the establishment with derision and contempt.<ref>Dean ME (2001) [http://shpltd.co.uk/dean-homeopathy.pdf Homeopathy and the progress of science] Hist Scixxxix</ref> Today, homeopathy is not an accepted part of conventional medicine, and its theories are not generally regarded as scientifically credible, but nevertheless it has more than 100,000 practitioners worldwide, and 500 million users.

Homeopathy (from the Greek hómoios (similar) and páthos (suffering)) regards diseases as 'morbid derangements of the organism', that involve some disturbance in a 'vital force.' Today, most homeopaths still believe that the fundamental causes of disease are internal and constitutional and that it is contrary to good health to suppress symptoms. They also accept the concept of 'latent Psora', the early signs of an organism’s imbalance which indicate that treatment is needed.
==Memory of Water==
One of the most crucial theories regarding the viability of homeopathy, water memory was first claimed to have been observed in 1988 by a French scientist only to be debunked two months later.<ref>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,968080,00.html</ref> The idea behind it is that water retains an imprint of whatever chemicals have been swimming in it. This would vindicate Hahnemann's Potentisation, as even when homeopathic remedies are diluted down to the final product without even a single molecule remaining in the solution, the remedy could still have an effect.
== See also ==

*[[Naturopathy]]
*[[Mind/body]]

== References ==
<references />
[[category:Alternative Medicine]]
[[category:pseudoscience]]

Liberal

2014-04-08T23:58:05Z

Debletar: fixed redlink

[[File:President Barack Obama.jpg|thumbnail|right|180px|President [[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of unsuccessful [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]]. He is considered by many to be the worst president ever.]]

A '''liberal''' is someone who supports '''liberalism''', which is a [[politics|political philosophy]] on the left of the political spectrum. Liberals favor an increase in [[government]] spending, power, and control, as in [[ObamaCare]]. Some liberals also support the [[censorship]] and [[denial]] of [[Christianity]]. Liberals who are a part of the [[secular left]] prefer [[atheism]] over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. Increasingly, liberals side with the [[homosexual agenda]], including supporting [[same-sex marriage|homosexual "marriage"]]. Many liberals favor a [[welfare state]] where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-[[Christian]], or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of [[conservative]] principles, while lacking an actual ideology or values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a increasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.<ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance</ref>

'''A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices''':

* Spending money on government programs (the significant economic problems in the [[Eurozone]] due to government debt will no doubt increasingly discredit this aspect of liberal ideology and make things more difficult for advocates of liberal economic ideologies)
* Government's ability to solve economic problems<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* The belief that terrorism is not a huge threat, and that the main reason for Muslim extremists' hostility towards America is because of bad foreign policy <ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Brainwashing voters with propaganda
* Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized [[abortion]]
* Cessation of teacher-led [[prayer]] in classrooms and school/state-sponsored religious events.
* [[Gun control]]
* [[Anti-Americanism]]
* Affirmative action<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a [[First Amendment]] right<ref>The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.</ref>
* Government-funded medical care, such as [[Obamacare]]
* [[evolution and liberalism|Belief in evolution]]
* Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on.
* Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled [[public education]]
* Placement of men and women in the same jobs in the [[military]]
* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption
* [[Tax and spend]] economics
* Economic sector regulations<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Spreading of [[political correctness]]
* Destroying [[liberty]]
* Ending Western morality
* Non-syndicalist [[labor union|labor unions]]
* Encouraging promiscuity through sexual education (the teaching of safe sex) rather than teaching [[abstinence]] from premarital sex<ref> [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007</ref>
* A "[[living Constitution]]" that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it is thought to have been intended.
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]
* Abolition of the [[death penalty]]
* [[Environmentalism]]<ref> and environmental organizations, for example [[Greenpeace]]</ref>
* [[Globalism]]
* Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.
* Opposition to full private property rights.<ref> For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.</ref>
* Reinstatement of the [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]
* Regulation of business rather than a laissez-faire capitalist economy
* Opposition to the Constitution. Liberals seek to expand federal power at the expense of local government and silence the conservatives who hold them back, violating the 10th and 1st Amendments respectively.
* [[Liberal Denial|Denial]] of traditional [[gender roles]]
* Support of financially irresponsible policies
* Advocating policies which are proven to be incorrect
* Encouragement of [[Global Warming|global warming alarmism]]
* Persecution of [[Christianity]] [[Islam and tolerance|with deference to other religions, such as Islam.]]
Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as [[Obamacare]]. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, [[Democrats]] and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"<ref>http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00</ref> or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal</ref> In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

==Liberals and Uncharitableness==
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[United States|American]] Liberals have been observed to give less to charity than American conservatives.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> In addition, [[per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2] ]]
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]] and [[Atheism and charity]]

In March of 2008, [[George Will]] wrote at [[RealClearPolitics]] concerning the [[United States]]:
{{cquote|Sixteen months ago, [[Arthur C. Brooks]], a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than [[conservative]]s....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref>}}
[[Atheism|Atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] often reject [[Bible|Biblical]] [[morality]] (and therefore [[conservative Christianity]] ) and hold to [[moral relativism]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref> Therefore, it is not surprising that [[per capita]] atheists and agnostics in [[United States|America]] [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2]

=== Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ===
The political magazine the [[American Spectator]] featured an article which focused on [[liberal politicians and uncharitableness]] exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.<ref>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1</ref>

In addition, [[Barack Obama]] has been criticized concerning [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|his lack of charitable giving]].

== Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity ==

''See also:'' [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]] and [[Liberal Christianity]]

According to a 2007 study reported in the ''Journal of Family Issues'', adherents of [[liberal Christianity]] are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]].<ref>[http://www.sagepub.com/hillhsstudy/articles/Chapter10_Article%2001.pdf Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?]</ref>

As noted above, liberals are [[Evolution and liberalism|more likely]] to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.<ref>[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]</ref>

== Liberalism and bestiality ==

See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]

[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|260px|The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Atheism and bestiality]] ]]
[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of bestiality (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]])<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]] (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]).<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. <ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref> In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.<ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref>

Joe Carter's ''[[First Things]]'' article entitled ''The Dangerous Mind'' declares concerning Peter Singer declared:
{{cquote|Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the [[Animal rights|animal liberation movement]] and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).<ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>}}

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: [[Homosexuality and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100108943/the-gay-rights-movement-has-emboldened-americas-bestiality-advocates/ The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph]</ref>

In 2010, the liberal state of [[Washington]] has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: [[Washington state and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database/statistics/state_ranking.php?year=2010&search=go Pet Abuse -2010]</ref><ref>[http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php 2010 United States Census data]</ref><ref>[http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/25/new-poll-identifies-most-liberal-and-conservative-states/ 2011 Political map - CNN]</ref>

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of [[Massachusetts]] tried to soften its bestiality laws.<ref>[Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]</ref>
[[File:NBC Tower.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[LifeSiteNews]] reported:"In 46 hours of programming, [[NBC]] contained only one reference to marital sex, but 11 references to non-marital sex and one reference to [[adultery]] were made. References to incest, pedophilia, partner swapping, prostitution, threesomes, transsexuals/transvestites, [[bestiality]], and necrophilia combined outnumbered references to sex in marriage on NBC by a ratio of 27 to 1.<ref>[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/aug/08080602 Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive]</ref> See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]] ]]
The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the [[Old Testament]] [[Pentateuch|Jewish Law]], punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1778686 A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.]</ref> The atheist population [[Atheism and suicide|has a higher suicide rate]] and [[Atheism and marriageability|lower marriage rates]] than the general population (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and marriageability]] and [[Atheism and health]]).

For more information please see:

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]

*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

*[[Liberalism and bestiality]]

*[[Homosexuality and bestiality]]

*[[Liberal American entertainment industry and bestiality]]

*[[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]]

*[[Wikipedia on bestiality]]

*[[Skeptic Skatje Myers' comments on bestiality]]

*[[Joseph Stalin's ape-men experiments]]
=== Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant ===

''See also:'' [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>

Below is an excerpt of the chant:
{{cquote|Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>}}

==Liberals and Superstition==
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|right|150px]]

The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html]</ref>

Also, in September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in [[pseudoscience]], cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

== Liberalism in the United States Today ==
[[File:Smear merchants.jpg|right|200px]]
[[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly liberal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}</ref> Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: SIN. Liberals (1) '''s'''hift the subject, they (2) '''i'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''n'''ame call.<ref>Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.</ref><ref>[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A& Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America"], February 11, 2011.</ref>

* Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]]. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}</ref>

* Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html]
{{cquote|There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. <ref> [http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=liberal+teachers&fr=yfp-t-501&fp_ip=MX&u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&d=BNZFhPReRjC1&icp=1&.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)</ref>}}

===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings<ref>http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm</ref> of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

=== American liberalism, demographics and expected tipping point in the decline of American liberalism ===
''
See also:'' [[American atheism]] and [[Decline of atheism]] and [[Global atheism]]

Due to the explosive growth of [[global Christianity]] in traditional cultures and their influence on Western [[Christianity]] and the higher birth rate of [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]] and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book ''Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth?'' concerning America:
{{cquote|High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the [[Culture War|culture wars]] towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?]</ref>}}

==Liberalism in Europe today==

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe<ref>http://www.alde.eu</ref> is a party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,<ref>http://www.liberal-international.org/</ref> such as the Liberal Party of Australia.<ref>[http://www.liberal.org.au/]</ref>

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.<ref>[http://www.pes.org]</ref>

==Historical Liberalism ==
In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.<ref>"Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf] </ref>

==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].

== Notable liberal "intellects" ==

''See also:'' [[Infamous liberals]]

* [[Margaret Sanger]]

* [[Adolf Hitler]]

* [[Joseph Stalin]]

* [[Kim Jong-un]]

* [[Mao Zedong]]

*[[John Wayne Gacy]] - In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, [[serial killer]] John Wayne Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and "very liberal".<ref>http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4</ref> Gacy was also a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with [[Rosalynn Carter]].<ref>http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527</ref>

==Liberal Organizations of thought==
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]]
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]
*[[ACORN|ACORN - Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now]]
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.|ANSWER - Act Now to Stop War and End Racism]]
*[[CAIR|CAIR - Council on American-Islamic Relations]]
*[[Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism]]
*[[Democratic National Committee]]
*[[Greenpeace]]
*[[MoveOn.org]]
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]
*[[National Education Association]]
*[[National Organization of Women|NOW - National Organization of Women]]
*[[PETA|PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals]]
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]
*[[Progressives for Obama]]
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]
*[[SEIU|SEIU - Service Employees International Union]]
*[[U.S. Peace Council]]
Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]

==Quotes on Liberals==
"I never use the words [[Democrats]] and [[Republicans]]. It's [[liberals]] and [[Americans]]." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under [[Ronald Reagan]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==See Also==

* [[Conservative resources]]
* [[Conservapedia:Articles about liberals|Articles about liberals]]
* [[Classical liberal]]
* [[Drinking Liberally]]
* [[Godless liberal]]
* [[Last wordism]]
* [[Essay:Liberal celebrity obsession|Liberal celebrity obsession]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia|Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia]]
* [[Liberal Christianity]]
* [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]
* [[Liberal Democrats]]
* [[Liberal Elite]]
* [[Essay: Liberal Falsehoods|Liberal Falsehoods]]
* [[Liberal Fascism]]
* [[Liberal friendship]]
* [[Liberal Gloss]]
* [[Liberal grading]]
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]
* [[Essay:Liberal hysteria|Liberal hysteria]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Intellectualism|Liberal Intellectualism]]
* [[Liberal labels]]
* [[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right|Liberal Lies About the American Right]]
* [[Liberal logic]]
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness|Liberal Mind]]
* [[Liberal Party]]
* [[Liberal supremacist]]
* [[Massachusetts liberal]]
* [[Progressives]]
* [[Scientific Illiteracy and Liberals]]

==Further Information==
* [[Best_New_Conservative_Words#New_Liberal_Terms|New Liberal Terms]]
* [[Conservative Links]]
* http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Political Ideologies]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]

Liberal

2014-04-08T23:55:33Z

Debletar: Fixed syntax error

[[File:President Barack Obama.jpg|thumbnail|right|180px|President [[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of unsuccessful [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]]. He is considered by many to be the worst president ever.]]

A '''liberal''' is someone who supports '''liberalism''', which is a [[politics|political philosophy]] on the left of the political spectrum. Liberals favor an increase in [[government]] spending, power, and control, as in [[ObamaCare]]. Some liberals also support the [[censorship]] and [[deny|denial]] of [[Christianity]]. Liberals who are a part of the [[secular left]] prefer [[atheism]] over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. Increasingly, liberals side with the [[homosexual agenda]], including supporting [[same-sex marriage|homosexual "marriage"]]. Many liberals favor a [[welfare state]] where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-[[Christian]], or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of [[conservative]] principles, while lacking an actual ideology or values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a increasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.<ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance</ref>

'''A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices''':

* Spending money on government programs (the significant economic problems in the [[Eurozone]] due to government debt will no doubt increasingly discredit this aspect of liberal ideology and make things more difficult for advocates of liberal economic ideologies)
* Government's ability to solve economic problems<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* The belief that terrorism is not a huge threat, and that the main reason for Muslim extremists' hostility towards America is because of bad foreign policy <ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Brainwashing voters with propaganda
* Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized [[abortion]]
* Cessation of teacher-led [[prayer]] in classrooms and school/state-sponsored religious events.
* [[Gun control]]
* [[Anti-Americanism]]
* Affirmative action<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a [[First Amendment]] right<ref>The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.</ref>
* Government-funded medical care, such as [[Obamacare]]
* [[evolution and liberalism|Belief in evolution]]
* Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on.
* Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled [[public education]]
* Placement of men and women in the same jobs in the [[military]]
* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption
* [[Tax and spend]] economics
* Economic sector regulations<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Spreading of [[political correctness]]
* Destroying [[liberty]]
* Ending Western morality
* Non-syndicalist [[labor union|labor unions]]
* Encouraging promiscuity through sexual education (the teaching of safe sex) rather than teaching [[abstinence]] from premarital sex<ref> [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007</ref>
* A "[[living Constitution]]" that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it is thought to have been intended.
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]
* Abolition of the [[death penalty]]
* [[Environmentalism]]<ref> and environmental organizations, for example [[Greenpeace]]</ref>
* [[Globalism]]
* Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.
* Opposition to full private property rights.<ref> For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.</ref>
* Reinstatement of the [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]
* Regulation of business rather than a laissez-faire capitalist economy
* Opposition to the Constitution. Liberals seek to expand federal power at the expense of local government and silence the conservatives who hold them back, violating the 10th and 1st Amendments respectively.
* [[Liberal Denial|Denial]] of traditional [[gender roles]]
* Support of financially irresponsible policies
* Advocating policies which are proven to be incorrect
* Encouragement of [[Global Warming|global warming alarmism]]
* Persecution of [[Christianity]] [[Islam and tolerance|with deference to other religions, such as Islam.]]
Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as [[Obamacare]]. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, [[Democrats]] and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"<ref>http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00</ref> or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal</ref> In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

==Liberals and Uncharitableness==
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[United States|American]] Liberals have been observed to give less to charity than American conservatives.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> In addition, [[per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2] ]]
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]] and [[Atheism and charity]]

In March of 2008, [[George Will]] wrote at [[RealClearPolitics]] concerning the [[United States]]:
{{cquote|Sixteen months ago, [[Arthur C. Brooks]], a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than [[conservative]]s....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref>}}
[[Atheism|Atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] often reject [[Bible|Biblical]] [[morality]] (and therefore [[conservative Christianity]] ) and hold to [[moral relativism]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref> Therefore, it is not surprising that [[per capita]] atheists and agnostics in [[United States|America]] [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2]

=== Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ===
The political magazine the [[American Spectator]] featured an article which focused on [[liberal politicians and uncharitableness]] exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.<ref>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1</ref>

In addition, [[Barack Obama]] has been criticized concerning [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|his lack of charitable giving]].

== Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity ==

''See also:'' [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]] and [[Liberal Christianity]]

According to a 2007 study reported in the ''Journal of Family Issues'', adherents of [[liberal Christianity]] are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]].<ref>[http://www.sagepub.com/hillhsstudy/articles/Chapter10_Article%2001.pdf Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?]</ref>

As noted above, liberals are [[Evolution and liberalism|more likely]] to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.<ref>[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]</ref>

== Liberalism and bestiality ==

See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]

[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|260px|The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Atheism and bestiality]] ]]
[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of bestiality (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]])<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]] (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]).<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. <ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref> In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.<ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref>

Joe Carter's ''[[First Things]]'' article entitled ''The Dangerous Mind'' declares concerning Peter Singer declared:
{{cquote|Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the [[Animal rights|animal liberation movement]] and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).<ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>}}

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: [[Homosexuality and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100108943/the-gay-rights-movement-has-emboldened-americas-bestiality-advocates/ The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph]</ref>

In 2010, the liberal state of [[Washington]] has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: [[Washington state and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database/statistics/state_ranking.php?year=2010&search=go Pet Abuse -2010]</ref><ref>[http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php 2010 United States Census data]</ref><ref>[http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/25/new-poll-identifies-most-liberal-and-conservative-states/ 2011 Political map - CNN]</ref>

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of [[Massachusetts]] tried to soften its bestiality laws.<ref>[Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]</ref>
[[File:NBC Tower.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[LifeSiteNews]] reported:"In 46 hours of programming, [[NBC]] contained only one reference to marital sex, but 11 references to non-marital sex and one reference to [[adultery]] were made. References to incest, pedophilia, partner swapping, prostitution, threesomes, transsexuals/transvestites, [[bestiality]], and necrophilia combined outnumbered references to sex in marriage on NBC by a ratio of 27 to 1.<ref>[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/aug/08080602 Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive]</ref> See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]] ]]
The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the [[Old Testament]] [[Pentateuch|Jewish Law]], punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1778686 A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.]</ref> The atheist population [[Atheism and suicide|has a higher suicide rate]] and [[Atheism and marriageability|lower marriage rates]] than the general population (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and marriageability]] and [[Atheism and health]]).

For more information please see:

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]

*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

*[[Liberalism and bestiality]]

*[[Homosexuality and bestiality]]

*[[Liberal American entertainment industry and bestiality]]

*[[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]]

*[[Wikipedia on bestiality]]

*[[Skeptic Skatje Myers' comments on bestiality]]

*[[Joseph Stalin's ape-men experiments]]
=== Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant ===

''See also:'' [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>

Below is an excerpt of the chant:
{{cquote|Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>}}

==Liberals and Superstition==
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|right|150px]]

The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html]</ref>

Also, in September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in [[pseudoscience]], cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

== Liberalism in the United States Today ==
[[File:Smear merchants.jpg|right|200px]]
[[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly liberal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}</ref> Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: SIN. Liberals (1) '''s'''hift the subject, they (2) '''i'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''n'''ame call.<ref>Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.</ref><ref>[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A& Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America"], February 11, 2011.</ref>

* Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]]. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}</ref>

* Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html]
{{cquote|There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. <ref> [http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=liberal+teachers&fr=yfp-t-501&fp_ip=MX&u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&d=BNZFhPReRjC1&icp=1&.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)</ref>}}

===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings<ref>http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm</ref> of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

=== American liberalism, demographics and expected tipping point in the decline of American liberalism ===
''
See also:'' [[American atheism]] and [[Decline of atheism]] and [[Global atheism]]

Due to the explosive growth of [[global Christianity]] in traditional cultures and their influence on Western [[Christianity]] and the higher birth rate of [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]] and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book ''Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth?'' concerning America:
{{cquote|High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the [[Culture War|culture wars]] towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?]</ref>}}

==Liberalism in Europe today==

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe<ref>http://www.alde.eu</ref> is a party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,<ref>http://www.liberal-international.org/</ref> such as the Liberal Party of Australia.<ref>[http://www.liberal.org.au/]</ref>

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.<ref>[http://www.pes.org]</ref>

==Historical Liberalism ==
In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.<ref>"Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf] </ref>

==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].

== Notable liberal "intellects" ==

''See also:'' [[Infamous liberals]]

* [[Margaret Sanger]]

* [[Adolf Hitler]]

* [[Joseph Stalin]]

* [[Kim Jong-un]]

* [[Mao Zedong]]

*[[John Wayne Gacy]] - In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, [[serial killer]] John Wayne Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and "very liberal".<ref>http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4</ref> Gacy was also a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with [[Rosalynn Carter]].<ref>http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527</ref>

==Liberal Organizations of thought==
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]]
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]
*[[ACORN|ACORN - Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now]]
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.|ANSWER - Act Now to Stop War and End Racism]]
*[[CAIR|CAIR - Council on American-Islamic Relations]]
*[[Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism]]
*[[Democratic National Committee]]
*[[Greenpeace]]
*[[MoveOn.org]]
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]
*[[National Education Association]]
*[[National Organization of Women|NOW - National Organization of Women]]
*[[PETA|PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals]]
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]
*[[Progressives for Obama]]
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]
*[[SEIU|SEIU - Service Employees International Union]]
*[[U.S. Peace Council]]
Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]

==Quotes on Liberals==
"I never use the words [[Democrats]] and [[Republicans]]. It's [[liberals]] and [[Americans]]." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under [[Ronald Reagan]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==See Also==

* [[Conservative resources]]
* [[Conservapedia:Articles about liberals|Articles about liberals]]
* [[Classical liberal]]
* [[Drinking Liberally]]
* [[Godless liberal]]
* [[Last wordism]]
* [[Essay:Liberal celebrity obsession|Liberal celebrity obsession]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia|Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia]]
* [[Liberal Christianity]]
* [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]
* [[Liberal Democrats]]
* [[Liberal Elite]]
* [[Essay: Liberal Falsehoods|Liberal Falsehoods]]
* [[Liberal Fascism]]
* [[Liberal friendship]]
* [[Liberal Gloss]]
* [[Liberal grading]]
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]
* [[Essay:Liberal hysteria|Liberal hysteria]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Intellectualism|Liberal Intellectualism]]
* [[Liberal labels]]
* [[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right|Liberal Lies About the American Right]]
* [[Liberal logic]]
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness|Liberal Mind]]
* [[Liberal Party]]
* [[Liberal supremacist]]
* [[Massachusetts liberal]]
* [[Progressives]]
* [[Scientific Illiteracy and Liberals]]

==Further Information==
* [[Best_New_Conservative_Words#New_Liberal_Terms|New Liberal Terms]]
* [[Conservative Links]]
* http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Political Ideologies]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]

Liberal

2014-04-08T23:54:18Z

Debletar: rewritten lead paragraph for more organization.

[[File:President Barack Obama.jpg|thumbnail|right|180px|President [[Barack Obama]] advocates the use of unsuccessful [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian economic concepts]]. He is considered by many to be the worst president ever.]]

A '''liberal'' is someone who supports '''liberalism''', which is a [[politics|political philosophy]] on the left of the political spectrum. Liberals favor an increase in [[government]] spending, power, and control, as in [[ObamaCare]]. Some liberals also support the [[censorship]] and [[deny|denial]] of [[Christianity]]. Liberals who are a part of the [[secular left]] prefer [[atheism]] over the Christian faith, as atheism has no objective morality to hinder their big government plans. Increasingly, liberals side with the [[homosexual agenda]], including supporting [[same-sex marriage|homosexual "marriage"]]. Many liberals favor a [[welfare state]] where people receive endless entitlements without working. Liberals are often anti-[[Christian]], or otherwise disagree with moral or social principles held by many American Christians. The liberal ideology has worsened over the years and degenerated into economically unsound views and intolerant ideology. Some liberals simply support, in knee-jerk fashion, the opposite of [[conservative]] principles, while lacking an actual ideology or values of their own.

Polling data has consistently shown that a increasingly large percentage of Americans identify as conservative, rather than as liberal, currently by 38% to 21%.<ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1042/winds-of-political-change-havent--shifted-publics-ideology-balance</ref>

'''A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices''':

* Spending money on government programs (the significant economic problems in the [[Eurozone]] due to government debt will no doubt increasingly discredit this aspect of liberal ideology and make things more difficult for advocates of liberal economic ideologies)
* Government's ability to solve economic problems<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* The belief that terrorism is not a huge threat, and that the main reason for Muslim extremists' hostility towards America is because of bad foreign policy <ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Brainwashing voters with propaganda
* Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized [[abortion]]
* Cessation of teacher-led [[prayer]] in classrooms and school/state-sponsored religious events.
* [[Gun control]]
* [[Anti-Americanism]]
* Affirmative action<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Opposition to government regulation or restriction of obscenity, pornography and violence in video games as a [[First Amendment]] right<ref>The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.</ref>
* Government-funded medical care, such as [[Obamacare]]
* [[evolution and liberalism|Belief in evolution]]
* Destroying the Christian foundations on which America was built on.
* Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled [[public education]]
* Placement of men and women in the same jobs in the [[military]]
* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]] and homosexual adoption
* [[Tax and spend]] economics
* Economic sector regulations<ref>http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs</ref>
* Spreading of [[political correctness]]
* Destroying [[liberty]]
* Ending Western morality
* Non-syndicalist [[labor union|labor unions]]
* Encouraging promiscuity through sexual education (the teaching of safe sex) rather than teaching [[abstinence]] from premarital sex<ref> [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007</ref>
* A "[[living Constitution]]" that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it is thought to have been intended.
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]
* Abolition of the [[death penalty]]
* [[Environmentalism]]<ref> and environmental organizations, for example [[Greenpeace]]</ref>
* [[Globalism]]
* Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.
* Opposition to full private property rights.<ref> For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.</ref>
* Reinstatement of the [[Fairness Doctrine]]
* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]
* Regulation of business rather than a laissez-faire capitalist economy
* Opposition to the Constitution. Liberals seek to expand federal power at the expense of local government and silence the conservatives who hold them back, violating the 10th and 1st Amendments respectively.
* [[Liberal Denial|Denial]] of traditional [[gender roles]]
* Support of financially irresponsible policies
* Advocating policies which are proven to be incorrect
* Encouragement of [[Global Warming|global warming alarmism]]
* Persecution of [[Christianity]] [[Islam and tolerance|with deference to other religions, such as Islam.]]
Liberals currently use two Clauses of the Constitution to try to expand their power: the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause. The General Welfare Clause mentions "promoting the general welfare". This to a liberal means taxing the rich at increased rates and redistributing that money. The Commerce Clause, on the other hand, says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations, between the states and with the Indian tribes. Since the days of FDR this Clause has been interpreted very loosely and has resulted in the federal government expanding its power. The latest example is The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better know as [[Obamacare]]. In the ACA, the liberals justify the individual mandate by saying it regulates commerce between the states.

The decline in liberal principles can be illustrated by how [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] opposed and condemned public sector unions, stating that the idea of collective bargaining can't be transferred from the private to the public sector, as that would result in the government being unable to carry out its duties. Yet today, decades later, [[Democrats]] and liberals are in lock-step with public sector unions, as they "donate" money to the reelection campaign in exchange for more taxpayer money in their wallets and fluffed up pensions.

Current dictionaries describe the liberal ideology by pretending that a liberal is "a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties" or "a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets,"<ref>http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&sub=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=00</ref> or "open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." or "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties."<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal</ref> In practical usage, the term "liberal" is more closely synonymous with "radical," "immoral," "anti-freedom," or "bad."

==Liberals and Uncharitableness==
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[United States|American]] Liberals have been observed to give less to charity than American conservatives.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> In addition, [[per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2] ]]
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]] and [[Atheism and charity]]

In March of 2008, [[George Will]] wrote at [[RealClearPolitics]] concerning the [[United States]]:
{{cquote|Sixteen months ago, [[Arthur C. Brooks]], a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than [[conservative]]s....

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref>}}
[[Atheism|Atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] often reject [[Bible|Biblical]] [[morality]] (and therefore [[conservative Christianity]] ) and hold to [[moral relativism]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref> Therefore, it is not surprising that [[per capita]] atheists and agnostics in [[United States|America]] [[Atheism and charity|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2]

=== Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ===
The political magazine the [[American Spectator]] featured an article which focused on [[liberal politicians and uncharitableness]] exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.<ref>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1</ref>

In addition, [[Barack Obama]] has been criticized concerning [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|his lack of charitable giving]].

== Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity ==

''See also:'' [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]] and [[Liberal Christianity]]

According to a 2007 study reported in the ''Journal of Family Issues'', adherents of [[liberal Christianity]] are more likely to engage in marital infidelity than theologically [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]].<ref>[http://www.sagepub.com/hillhsstudy/articles/Chapter10_Article%2001.pdf Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?]</ref>

As noted above, liberals are [[Evolution and liberalism|more likely]] to adhere to evolutionary belief than conservatives. A study conducted by the Australian National University, revealed that belief in evolution is associated with moral permissiveness.<ref>[http://creation.com/morals-decline-linked-to-belief-in-evolution Morals decline linked to evolution]</ref>

== Liberalism and bestiality ==

See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]

[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|260px|The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Atheism and bestiality]] ]]
[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. The [[atheist]] philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of bestiality (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]])<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>. Despite holding these immoral views the liberal and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]] (Princeton University is a very liberal school - see: [[Liberalism and bestiality]]).<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> Peter Singer was installed as the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University in 1999 and in 2006 it was reported that he still worked part-time in that capacity. <ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref> In 2006, it was also reported that Singer worked part-time as Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne in the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics since 2005.<ref>[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview]</ref>

Joe Carter's ''[[First Things]]'' article entitled ''The Dangerous Mind'' declares concerning Peter Singer declared:
{{cquote|Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the [[Animal rights|animal liberation movement]] and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).<ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref>}}

On October 5, 2011, the British newspaper The Telegraph wrote an article which discussed how homosexuality "rights" have emboldened individuals to ask for so called bestiality "rights" (see: [[Homosexuality and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100108943/the-gay-rights-movement-has-emboldened-americas-bestiality-advocates/ The dark side of sexual freedom: American 'zoophiles' take on the language of equality - October 5, 2011 - The Telegraph]</ref>

In 2010, the liberal state of [[Washington]] has the highest number of reported cases of bestiality in the United States even though it was merely the 13th most populous state according to the 2010 United States census. (for more information please see: [[Washington state and bestiality]]).<ref>[http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_database/statistics/state_ranking.php?year=2010&search=go Pet Abuse -2010]</ref><ref>[http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php 2010 United States Census data]</ref><ref>[http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/25/new-poll-identifies-most-liberal-and-conservative-states/ 2011 Political map - CNN]</ref>

In 2005, four legislators in the liberal state of [[Massachusetts]] tried to soften its bestiality laws.<ref>[Massachusetts bill to repeal fornication, adultery, and blasphemy, and to soften bestiality laws]</ref>
[[File:NBC Tower.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[LifeSiteNews]] reported:"In 46 hours of programming, [[NBC]] contained only one reference to marital sex, but 11 references to non-marital sex and one reference to [[adultery]] were made. References to incest, pedophilia, partner swapping, prostitution, threesomes, transsexuals/transvestites, [[bestiality]], and necrophilia combined outnumbered references to sex in marriage on NBC by a ratio of 27 to 1.<ref>[http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/aug/08080602 Study Finds TV Treats Marital Sex as Burdensome, Adultery as Positive]</ref> See also: [[Liberalism and bestiality]] ]]
The Bible says that bestiality is a perversion and, under the [[Old Testament]] [[Pentateuch|Jewish Law]], punishable by death (Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, Leviticus 20:15 and Deuteronomy 27:21). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]). The atheistic worldview does not lend itself to the establishment of morality within society and individuals (see: [[Atheism and morality]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).

A study found that "Psychiatric patients were found to have a statistically significant higher prevalence rate (55%) of bestiality than the control groups (10% and 15% respectively)."<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1778686 A prevalence study of bestiality (zoophilia) in psychiatric in-patients, medical in-patients, and psychiatric staff - Int J Psychosom. 1991;38(1-4):45-7.]</ref> The atheist population [[Atheism and suicide|has a higher suicide rate]] and [[Atheism and marriageability|lower marriage rates]] than the general population (see: [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and marriageability]] and [[Atheism and health]]).

For more information please see:

*[[Atheism and bestiality]]

*[[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]

*[[Liberalism and bestiality]]

*[[Homosexuality and bestiality]]

*[[Liberal American entertainment industry and bestiality]]

*[[Geographic areas where bestiality is posing a notable problem]]

*[[Wikipedia on bestiality]]

*[[Skeptic Skatje Myers' comments on bestiality]]

*[[Joseph Stalin's ape-men experiments]]
=== Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant ===

''See also:'' [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]]

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. A crowd at Occupy Wall Street was led to repeat various chants which included a chant involving bestiality and the incident was videotaped.<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>

Below is an excerpt of the chant:
{{cquote|Everything seems to be possible. [Crowd Parrot Chant] You can travel to the moon. [CPC] You can become immortal [CPC] by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals, or whatever. [CPC].<ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/the-10-greatest-moments-from-the-occupy-wall-street-protests-so-far/ The 10 Greatest Moments From The Occupy Wall Street Protests So Far]</ref>}}

==Liberals and Superstition==
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|right|150px]]

The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html]</ref>

Also, in September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith — it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience, such as evolution than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in [[pseudoscience]], cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

== Liberalism in the United States Today ==
[[File:Smear merchants.jpg|right|200px]]
[[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly liberal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}</ref> Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: SIN. Liberals (1) '''s'''hift the subject, they (2) '''i'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''n'''ame call.<ref>Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.</ref><ref>[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A& Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America"], February 11, 2011.</ref>

* Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]]. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}</ref>

* Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html]
{{cquote|There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. <ref> [http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=liberal+teachers&fr=yfp-t-501&fp_ip=MX&u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&d=BNZFhPReRjC1&icp=1&.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)</ref>}}

===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===

The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings<ref>http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm</ref> of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.

=== American liberalism, demographics and expected tipping point in the decline of American liberalism ===
''
See also:'' [[American atheism]] and [[Decline of atheism]] and [[Global atheism]]

Due to the explosive growth of [[global Christianity]] in traditional cultures and their influence on Western [[Christianity]] and the higher birth rate of [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]] and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise.

The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book ''Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth?'' concerning America:
{{cquote|High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the [[Culture War|culture wars]] towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?]</ref>}}

==Liberalism in Europe today==

In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe<ref>http://www.alde.eu</ref> is a party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,<ref>http://www.liberal-international.org/</ref> such as the Liberal Party of Australia.<ref>[http://www.liberal.org.au/]</ref>

Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them "liberals" or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just as in the US, "liberal" may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called "liberal" in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.<ref>[http://www.pes.org]</ref>

==Historical Liberalism ==
In history, the word "liberal" has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the "Third Way". In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq. Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.<ref>"Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs." Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf] </ref>

==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and traditions derived from Northern European Protestantism.

See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].

== Notable liberal "intellects" ==

''See also:'' [[Infamous liberals]]

* [[Margaret Sanger]]

* [[Adolf Hitler]]

* [[Joseph Stalin]]

* [[Kim Jong-un]]

* [[Mao Zedong]]

*[[John Wayne Gacy]] - In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, [[serial killer]] John Wayne Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and "very liberal".<ref>http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4</ref> Gacy was also a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with [[Rosalynn Carter]].<ref>http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527</ref>

==Liberal Organizations of thought==
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]]
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]
*[[ACORN|ACORN - Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now]]
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.|ANSWER - Act Now to Stop War and End Racism]]
*[[CAIR|CAIR - Council on American-Islamic Relations]]
*[[Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism]]
*[[Democratic National Committee]]
*[[Greenpeace]]
*[[MoveOn.org]]
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]
*[[National Education Association]]
*[[National Organization of Women|NOW - National Organization of Women]]
*[[PETA|PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals]]
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]
*[[Progressives for Obama]]
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]
*[[SEIU|SEIU - Service Employees International Union]]
*[[U.S. Peace Council]]
Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]

==Quotes on Liberals==
"I never use the words [[Democrats]] and [[Republicans]]. It's [[liberals]] and [[Americans]]." -James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under [[Ronald Reagan]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==See Also==

* [[Conservative resources]]
* [[Conservapedia:Articles about liberals|Articles about liberals]]
* [[Classical liberal]]
* [[Drinking Liberally]]
* [[Godless liberal]]
* [[Last wordism]]
* [[Essay:Liberal celebrity obsession|Liberal celebrity obsession]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia|Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia]]
* [[Liberal Christianity]]
* [[Liberal Christianity and marital infidelity]]
* [[Liberal Democrats]]
* [[Liberal Elite]]
* [[Essay: Liberal Falsehoods|Liberal Falsehoods]]
* [[Liberal Fascism]]
* [[Liberal friendship]]
* [[Liberal Gloss]]
* [[Liberal grading]]
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]
* [[Essay:Liberal hysteria|Liberal hysteria]]
* [[Essay:Liberal Intellectualism|Liberal Intellectualism]]
* [[Liberal labels]]
* [[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right|Liberal Lies About the American Right]]
* [[Liberal logic]]
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness|Liberal Mind]]
* [[Liberal Party]]
* [[Liberal supremacist]]
* [[Massachusetts liberal]]
* [[Progressives]]
* [[Scientific Illiteracy and Liberals]]

==Further Information==
* [[Best_New_Conservative_Words#New_Liberal_Terms|New Liberal Terms]]
* [[Conservative Links]]
* http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Political Ideologies]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]

Deceit

2014-04-08T23:45:26Z

Debletar: Reworded first sentence

'''Deceit''' means to deliberately misrepresent or deny truths, or lie, with the intent to fool or trick others. <ref>In law, deceit is the fraudulent representation of a material fact, made intentionally or recklessly or without reasonable basis and with the intent to induce reliance on the falsehood. In tort law, if someone does justifiably rely on the deceit to his detriment, then he has a cause of action for recovery of his injury.</ref> See also [[Self-deception]].

[[Christianity]] and [[Judaism]] teach that deceit is morally wrong.<ref>For example, the [[Old Testament]] says, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."[http://biblescripture.net/Commandments.html]</ref>

Deceit helps promote various [[belief system]]s with the public, as illustrated by the examples below. Nearly all of these examples consist of [[deceit]] that was [[embraced deceit|embraced]] by many people in order to advance an [[ideological]] goal. Most prominent modern examples are of [[liberal]]s hoping to mislead the public through [[propaganda]].

'''Embraced deceit''' is [[deceit]] that is knowingly allowed, defended or even promoted for ideological purposes. Not only did the perpetrators of the [[deceit]] promote it, but their allies were complicit also.
'''Embraced deceit''' is common.

==Examples==

#For over 50 years many [[liberals]] denied that [[Julius Rosenberg]] had spied for the [[communist]] [[Soviet Union]]. Then, in September 2008, a co-conspirator finally admitted the truth in "Figure in Rosenberg Case Admits to Soviet Spying."<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/nyregion/12spy.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin</ref>
#In 1997 the National Coalition of Abortion Providers' executive director Ron Fitzsimmons admitted, "I lied through my teeth" about the facts in order to defeat a ban on [[partial birth abortion]].<ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2086/</ref>
#Gun control advocate [[Michael Bellesiles]] wrote a book entitled ''Arming America, The Origins of a National Gun Culture'' (2000). Gary Wills gave it a glowing review in ''[[The New York Times]]'', but admitted later that "I was took. The book is a fraud."<ref>Jonah Goldberg, [http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/guests/s_501644.html ''Reports of the [[Second Amendment]]'s death have been greatly exaggerated ...''] Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Apr. 8, 2007.</ref> Bellesiles resigned from his position as Professor of History at [[Emory University]] in Atlanta when an independent committee of scholars examined his work and concluded that "his scholarly integrity is seriously in question."<ref>http://hnn.us/articles/1069.html</ref>
#The [[Piltdown Man]] was a fraudulent [[missing link]] taught to an entire generation of students worldwide from 1912 to 1953 as "proof" that man had evolved from an ape-like species. [[Evolution]]ists declared the Piltdown Man to be authentic and gave it a formal name, ''Eoanthropus dawsoni,'' in honor of the person who claimed to have found it, Charles Dawson. The British scientific establishment largely supported the validity of Piltdown Man.<ref>http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/tenness5.html</ref> But the Piltdown Man was actually a [[medieval]] skull combined with a lower jaw from an [[orangutan]] and teeth from a [[chimpanzee]], which were then placed in a gravel pit in the village of Piltdown, England. There are reports that as early as 1914 someone at the British Museum privately admitted that "a negro skull and a broken ape jaw" had been "artificially fossilized."<ref>http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/KEITH/Keith_prosecution/piltdown_unmasked.html</ref> Yet promoters of evolution perpetrated this fraud for decades, in textbooks (e.g., the text at issue in the [[Scopes trial]] in 1925) as well as in popular books and magazines (e.g., a 1922 book for the general market illustrated the daily life of the Piltdown Man). <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC02561355&id=L0sDgL6sPh4C&pg=RA1-PR51 ''Everyday Life in the Old Stone Age''], Charles Henry Bourne Quennell, 1922, p. 51.</ref>
#[[Alger Hiss]] was a [[communist]] spy who worked at high levels in the U.S. government. He was convicted of two counts of perjury relating to his denials of his [[treason]]. His verdict was upheld at the [[Court of Appeals]] and the [[Supreme Court]]. Hiss was sentenced to five years on Jan. 25 and served 44 months in Lewisburg Federal Prison before being released in November 1954. Yet he continued to claim he was innocent afterwards. Documents released from [[Soviet]] files after the communist Soviet Union collapsed proved that Hiss had been a spy, and the 1997 [[Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy]] concluded that he was a spy in its report. <ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/moynihan/appa6.html Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy, Appendix A 6. The Experience of The Bomb]</ref>
#American Vice President [[Joe Biden]] is listed on famousplagiarists.com for his widely publicized copying from British liberal [[Neil Kinnock]] and then pawning it off as his own, and then initially denying he had done anything wrong. The resultant exposure of his unacknowledged appropriation of Kinnock's work forced Biden out of the 1988 presidential race,<ref>http://www.famousplagiarists.com/politics.htm</ref> but [[liberals]] have continued to support him as a U.S. Senator and do not seem to mind his prior deceit one bit.
#[[Liberals]] popularized the [[Scopes trial]] with the 1955 play [[Inherit the Wind]], which is often taught in schools, and the 1960 Hollywood motion picture by the same name. Both completely lied about the facts in order to harm [[Christianity]], misleading students who read or enact the play and everyone who saw the movie. As recently as April 17, 2007, the ''[[Village Voice]]'' described the play as though it were factually true,<ref>http://www.villagevoice.com/theater/0716,feingold,76394,11.html</ref> thereby misleading all of its readers.
#''[[Doe v. Bolton]]''<ref>410 U.S. 179, 192 (1973).</ref> was the decision in 1973 by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] which created [[abortion]] on demand based on the theory that Ms. "Doe" wanted an abortion for her health. Sandra Cano was the "Doe" of ''Doe v. Bolton'', and she later proved in sworn testimony that at "NO TIME did I ever have an abortion. I did not seek an abortion nor do I believe in abortion."<ref>http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1553&wit_id=4393</ref> She filed a brief with the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] in 2006 asserting that "fraud was perpetrated on the Court" in the original ''Doe v. Bolton'' case brought in her name. In April 2007, the Supreme Court cited approvingly her brief for the general principle that abortion might harm the women who have them.<ref>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=05-380</ref>
#[[Democrat]] Durham District Attorney [[Mike Nifong]] admitted that there was "no credible evidence" that three Duke lacrosse players committed any of the crimes he charged them with in 2006.<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-26-nifong-court_N.htm?csp=34</ref> A three-member panel of a state commission "ruled that Nifong willfully lied during his prosecution of the three lacrosse players."<ref>http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/661674.html</ref> "The committee ruled in June [2007] that Nifong knowingly withheld DNA evidence that was beneficial to the three charged in the case. ... The state attorney general later exonerated the players and declared the three men innocent of all charges."<ref>''Id.''</ref> But 88 Duke professors -- more than 10 percent of the [[liberal]] Duke professorial faculty - endorsed and published an ad hurtful to the innocent students, which "helped create the lynch-mob atmosphere."<ref>http://www.nypost.com/seven/03232007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/duke__who_wont_pay_opedcolumnists_john_podhoretz.htm</ref> Ultimately "Nifong was sentenced ... to a single day in jail, having been held in criminal contempt of court for lying to a judge during his pursuit of rape charges against the three falsely accused lacrosse players."<ref>http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8RCITJ00&show_article=1</ref>
#In relation to the [[theory of evolution]] evolutionist [[Stephen Jay Gould]] wrote in May of 2000 the following: "[[Ernst Haeckel|Haeckel]]'s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin ... in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution .... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again."<ref>http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm</ref> The [[New York Times]] reported that "drawings were reproduced in textbook after textbook for more than a century" which "biologists discovered ... were fraudulent" but "some textbooks still contain them."<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/08/science/08EVOL.html?ex=1187064000&en=c9bdc4e4fa58256b&ei=5070</ref> Known as the [[Haeckel drawings]], these fake drawings remained in textbooks for more than 100 years until exposed as fake by the [[New York Times]] in 2001. As of Aug. 12, 2007, [[Wikipedia]] continued to present these drawings as generally true while omitting any reference to the [[New York Times]] exposing of the fraud.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo_drawing</ref>
# Several Climatic Research Unit scientists at the University of East Anglia have been scrutinized for deceitful behavior revealed from [[Climategate]]. If it is true that the CRU scientists deliberately falsified climate science data, and then then used the results of the falsification to obtain additional research funding, then it is deceit.
#[[Adolf Hitler]] described the "Big Lie" technique in Mein Kampf and used it many times to justify invading Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and other countries. He blamed Jews for the big lie, and for starting World War II, but was unconvincing.
#Extremist, hyper-liberal regimes such as the [[Soviet Union]] under [[Joseph Stalin]], [[Communist]] [[China]], and [[North Korea]] elevate deceit into an instrument of political statecraft. Systematic [[liberal lies]] are the basic currency of daily governance, and [[propaganda]] delivered through state organs is as essential to these regimes as a [[free press]] to the [[United States]].
#[[Jayson Blair]], disgraced former ''[[New York Times]]'' reporter, was forced to resign after it was discovered he had plagiarized and fabricated large amounts of material for several stories
#[[Democratic]] Presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]] repeatedly pledged to close the [[Guantanamo]] Detention facility housing [[terrorist]]s in order to "regain America's moral stature in the world." <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXZoM__vU0 60 Minutes: Obama Reiterates Promise To Close Guantanamo Bay]</ref> As president, the ''Washington Post'' reported in June 2009 Obama was considering an [[Executive Order]] to hold Guantanamo detainees indefinitely. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062603361.html ''White House Weighs Order on Detention Officials: Move Would Reassert Power To Hold Terror Suspects Indefinitely''], [[Washington Post]], June 27, 2009.</ref>
#In July 2009, Al Gore was interviewed by a reporter from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. During the interview, he was asked about a 2007 British court ruling regarding his "[[An Inconvenient Truth]]" film being shown in public schools. The question was specifically about nine significant scientific errors in the film that were noted by the judge. Gore did not address the issue of the errors, simply stating, "[T]he ruling was in my favour."<ref>http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2624723.htm</ref> However, the judge had unequivocally stated in 2007 after the ruling, "I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act."<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7037671.stm</ref>
#In the earliest example of deceit, the serpent in the [[Garden of Eden]] persuaded [[Eve]] to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, claiming it would make her like [[God]]. In truth, it caused the [[fall of man]], exiling [[Adam and Eve]] from [[Eden]]. See John 8:44.
#Two prominent men in a community arranged to have their church raise $850 in donations to purchase books for a local school. In sworn testimony during depositions, both men denied knowledge of the source of the donations.
#[[James O'Keefe]] and his conspirators pleaded guilty to entering a federal building under false pretenses when they posed as telephone workers to enter Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]'s office to confront her about phone calls from constituents that the senator allegedly ignored.<ref>http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/05/james_okeefe_and_friends_plead.html</ref>

==Quotes==

[[George Orwell]] wrote:
*{{orwell-politics-lies}}
*"Do remember that dishonesty and cowardice always have to be paid for. Don’t imagine that for years on end you can make yourself the boot-licking propagandist of the Soviet regime, or any other regime, and then suddenly return to mental decency. Once a whore, always a whore." [http://pages.interlog.com/~girbe/fonda.html]

==Biblical References==
[[Book of Psalms|Psalm]] 119:118
<blockquote>
Thou hast trodden down all them that err from thy statutes: for their deceit is falsehood.
</blockquote>
Psalm 5:6
<blockquote>
Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.
</blockquote>
Proverbs 26:24
<blockquote>He that hateth dissembleth with his lips, and layeth up deceit within him</blockquote>
Job 27:4
<blockquote>
My lips will not speak wickedness, and my tongue will utter no deceit.
</blockquote>

==Further reading==
*[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22725 People of Deceit], by [[Michael Reagan]], ''Human Events'', 10/05/2007.
*''People of the Lie'', by psychiatrist [[M. Scott Peck]]

==See Also==
*[[Abortion deceit]]
*[[Flattery]]
*[[Fraud]]
*[[Previous Breaking News/Liberal deceit|Examples of '''liberal deceit''' from previous "Breaking News" articles]]
*[[Intellectual dishonesty]]
*Michael Reagan, [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelReagan/2007/10/05/people_of_deceit People of Deceit]
*[http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/27429.html Politically Correct Terrorism] ''The Conservative Voice'', August 21, 2007

== References ==

{{reflist|2}}

{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Sin]]
[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]

[[category:political Terms]]