What would you do if you were beaten, kidnapped, taken away and . . . . .

                                                              Attention!

Please note:  The following blog does not imply or suggest endorsement, or approval, of the following ideas or practices.  F.Y.I. The author of this blog had been kidnapped multiple times, and believes that the good Lord, by HIS Word - by HIS teaching (and our good Lord is faithful), does not approve of using artificial insemination.  God's way is life!  God's will is life!

What if you were beaten, kidnapped, and then taken and ....?

Dear family, friends, and all others concerned about justice, mercy, peace, and love,

Greetings on this glorious day!!!  I hope that you and the loved ones are  in good health and are getting along.  How is your spirit on this glorious day?  Please remember that we humans are more than flesh and blood.  Also, please remember that we humans are created by our Creator Lord, in HIS image, for HIS glory!  Also, please remember that the unborn children deserve justice too!!!

Suppose that you are over-powered and kidnapped by many when no one is around to help you, or hear you cry out, and then you're terribly beaten and drugged by your kidnappers, and driven to a far away place.  You wake up blindfolded and are brought up to a high cliff and then tied up securely on your back.  Your kidnappers take off your blindfold, and then they tell you that there is also a cord tied to your right arm, and that at the end of the cord is a live infant (which you can hear crying).  Just barely within your reach of your right hand, is a knife.  The kidnappers tell you that you could use the knife to cut your right hand free, and then you'd be able to cut the rest of yourself free, however, when you cut your right hand free then the cord holding the infant will also make the infant plummet off the cliff to its death.  The kidnappers also set up a bunch of mirrors which allow you to see the infant, the cliff, the knife, video cameras watching you, and the ropes that bind you.  The kidnappers tell you that they'll go away for awhile and watch you on the screen, and if you don't cut yourself free, then they'll return periodically to feed both you and the infant.  They say that if they don't see you on the screen - even for a moment, then they'll never return.  They also promise to continually feed you and the infant after many weeks and weeks, until one day they'll set both you and the infant free if you continue to remain bound and don't try to escape.  What would you do?  Would it make a difference to you if the infant that was tied to the cord was your child?

Shouldn't we seek justice for the unborn children?  Don't the unborn children deserve to continue to live?  Life is a gift from the good Lord and is precious.  Our Creator Lord's will is life.  Our Creator's way is life!  The Holy Scriptures tell us about our Creator Lord, and how our Creator Lord created us humans in His image, and how we should value life, and how we should protect and support life, and how our Creator Lord loves us so much that He sent His only Begotten Son Jesus into this world to shed His blood and to die on a cross for us sinners, so that we might have eternal life!  The Holy Scriptures are pure, perfect, powerful, profitable for doctrine and teaching, and cannot be broken!  Our Creator Lord is faithful!  Our Creator Lord is true!  Our Creator Lord cannot lie!  Our Creator Lord can be taken at His Word!  Jesus is the Word of God!  Our Creator Lord is good!  Our Creator Lord is good all the time!!!  Our Creator Lord is love!  Love always protects.  Love always hopes.  Love always perseveres.  Love does not delight in evil.  Love does not envy.  Love always trusts.  Love rejoices in the truth.  Love is the commandment from the beginning.

What would you do if you went to a place to get artificially inseminated and were given a bio on the donor, chose a specific one, and after becoming pregnant you were told that they'd made a mistake on the donor, and was actually a different donor that was the father, but you didn't approve of the father's bio.  Isn't the life that the good Lord created inside you still a human being, with human DNA and human chromosomes, worthy of life even though it was not what you'd wanted (and was accomplished by a method that is contrary to the good Lord's teaching??)

Should we be guided by s-tan and his minions, or by the good Lord?  Let's speak out for justice - justice for all!  Let's call out to the good Lord and ask for His help!  Thank you very much for all your help!  Hope that you and the loved ones have a joyous and peaceful day.  May the good Lord, our Creator Lord, bless you and the loved ones immensely!

In hope, peace, and love,

Ken Miller

Main St. Rm. 103

kmillerbloggerablogbyken@gmail.com

still one of the working poor!

P.S.  Jesus is the Holy One of Israel!!!  Jesus is our Rock!!!  Jesus is our Shield!!!  We have been forgiven, we have been redeemed!!!

P.P.S.  Jesus is the Light of the World!!!!  Jesus is the Living Water!!!  Jesus is the Bread of Life!!!  Jesus is our Righteousness!!!  Jesus is our Atonement!!!

How about justice for the unborn children?  Let's seek justice for the unborn children - the preborn children!!!!! 

     Posted free of charge.  Posted for no financial consideration whatsoever.  Posted to help further the kingdom of GOD!!!  Please help spread the Word!  Jesus is the Word of GOD!!!

     The following article is from Life Line Summer 2015, pg. 6, a publication from Life Legal Defense Foundation.  For more information on Life Legal Defense Foundation please write them at P.O. Box 2105, Napa, CA 94558, or call them at (707)224-6675, or visit them at www.LLDF.org.

    Nick Loeb, Little Girls and the Paradoxes of IVF

The way the media reports it, it is a freakish story.  Two well-known Hollywood celebrities, Sofia Vergara and Nick Loeb, are involved in what amounts to a custody battle over frozen embryos that they had conceives together, through in vitro fertilization, back when they were an item.  Vergara, a major star known for her role in Modern Family, is now engaged to marry yet another celebrity.  She allegedly wants to thaw, and thus destroy, the embryos; she certainly wants to prevent their implantation and birth.  This has been treated by most commentators as a perfectly reasonable determination

     But Loeb, the father, isn't in accord with the Spirit of the Age on this point.  He actually has the temerity to refer to the embryos as his "girls" and boldly insists that he wants to save their lives. 

     When the story broke, wannabe celebrities - that is, reporters in the entertainment field - immediately strove to establish their progressive credentials by condemning Loeb's absurd concern for human life.  Lisa Guerrero, of Inside Edition, tweeted: "#NickLoeb is the ultimate jilted, obsessive, controlling ex ..." What?  Value of human life?  Was Nick Loeb nuts?

     And Kristen Caires, of the prestigious philosophical journal People, tweeted: "Hey #NickLoeb you're mental."  

     A column in the New York Post even demanded that Loeb shut up about "Sophie's eggs" as if the in vitro fertilization had never occurred.

     None of the celebrity journalists paused to consider how the very existence of the contested human embryos called into question the assumptions at the heart of that other troublesome embryonic issue:

          Advocates of the right to abortion obsessively appeal to a woman's right to control her own body.  But the disputed embryos are not and never were in Vergara's Hollywood body.

          Advocates of the right to abortion often insist - contrary to scientific fact - that the targeted human embryo of fetus is itself a part of the material body, like a spare liver or maybe a third kidney.  But how could tis be the case when Nick Loeb's girls are alive and in existence apart from Vergara's body?

          Advocates of the right to abortion typically assert that the father has no say at all about the continuation of termination of a pregnancy.  But how could this be the case when Loeb, just like Vergara, was required to sign a "form directive" by "ART  Reproductive Center, Inc."?

      Beyond these, there are so many contradictions inherent in the media critique of Nick Loeb that it is impossible to list them here.  One point - obvious but beautiful - was first indicated by S.E. Cupp, C.N.N. contributor and author of Losing Our Religion.  Cupp remarks that society is always complaining about absentee fathers, and yet, when a father such as Nick Loeb weighs in on the fate of his offspring, there same complainants wail that he's being way too concerned!  Why can't he just be a good father when the mother wants him to be - and a cool, detached sperm donor when that's more to her liking?

      In this context, the word "mother," though accurate, is a trifle disconcerting.  Sofia Vergara's only claim on the frozen embryos is that she is their mother, but that's exactly what she has no intention of being.

     For his own part, Nick Loeb is unequivocal in his application of pro-life principles to his bizarre situation.  "I've always believed that life begins at conception," he told CNN.  "How else would i define what two embryos are that happen to be female?  I can't say these are female property.  These are lives. And they're on a journey and a pathway to being born."  Loeb appears more prepared to take heat for pro-life principles than many politicians elected with pro-life support.

     Loeb also appears to have a better legal case than has generally been reported.. His amended complaint argues convincingly that the "form directive" imposed by ART does not constitute a contract, since after all it was not negotiated between the parties, nor was there any offer of an alternative to it.  Loeb presents evidence that Vergara herself has referred to their offspring as "girls" and in the past agreed that they would be brought to term.  Indeed, an unsuccessful attempt was earlier made to do just this with another of their embryos.

     Many observers in the liberal herd predicted that Loeb's amended complaint wouldn't even be admitted.  It has been admitted, and it introduces volumes of significant evidence to support his case.

     More important, the amended complaint makes the ground-breaking argument that the court should apply a "balancing test" that involves not only the conflicting interests of mother and father but also "the State's interest in potential life."  This interest, supported by California statute and by decisions of the State and U.S. Supreme Courts, has never been introduced into such a case before.  If it ends up exerting an important influence on the outcome, the argument may save the lives of many frozen embryos, including the so-called "snowflake" babies, embryos conceived in vitro as extras and never chosen for development.

     All this good news is, of course, hard to disentangle from the general insight that the dispute between Nick Loeb and Sofia Vergara is indeed a freakish story.  It is freakish not, as the media will tell you, because the father is trying to save the lives of his offspring, but because the new reproductive technologies, designed to supply unlimited personal choice without responsibility, inevitably result in crazed controversies whose resolution requires wisdom surpassing Solomon's.  Loeb's and Vergara's case doesn't even involve the problem of the egg donor, so cannily framed by Jennifer Lahl and the other insightful folks at the Center for Bioethics and Culture.  It is for this reason a lot simpler than many other applications of in vitro fertilization and of associated techniques.

     But simple it ain't.  Two of the beautiful people fall in love and head to the IVF center.  They conceive a number of embryos.  "Honey, when I think of you and our future, I think of cryopreservation!  How do I love thee?  Let me count the tubes!"  Then the poor couple falls out of love, but the embryos are still there.  The bust mom extends her right to control her body into regions as distant from her body as they are from Timbuktu or the lost kingdom of El Dorado.  And a cast of dozens rises to affirm the ubiquity of the maternal body.  The chorus even refers to the frozen embryos as unfertilized eggs.  Hey, what do the facts mean once love has gone?

     It remains much to his credit that, in the midst of this mess, and facing a barrage of unrestrained abuse from the partisans of disposability, Nick Loeb has his mind focused on the lives for which he is responsible.  He recognizes that no one has a right to a dead baby.

end of article . . . . .

     Are there scientists that say that only humans have human DNA and human chromosomes?

     What is an embryo? 

     Do only human beings have human DNA, and human chromosomes?