Kaci

Christian, Wife, Mom x 3, Homemaker, Abortion Abolitionist, Conservative

[Lila Rose @LilaGraceRose]

It is hypocritical to oppose the death penalty but to support abortion.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

How much pain did her victim feel when she beat her over the head with chunks of asphalt and butchered her with a meat cleaver? For that matter, how much pain did her second victim feel when Pike tried to strangle her to death in prison?

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

You can in fact be opposed to the murder of innocent babies while supporting the execution of convicted murderers. There is absolutely no conflict between these two positions. And it's actually grotesque to suggest that there is one.

[Samuel Sey @SlowToWrite]

Jesus Christ wasn’t an agent of the government who stole people’s money in order to heal and feed people.

Communists are thieves who kill and destroy.

An authoritarian government killed Jesus.

If you support a communist, they will persecute Christians like they always do.

[Josh Howerton @howertonjosh]

Watch the bait-and-switch:

A) When the Bible is used to advance a “conservative” cause, it’s “evil Christian Nationalism” (that he’s spent his entire campaign decrying) or it’s “forcing your religion on other people” and must be FORECEFULLY DENOUNCED.

But when the Bible is used to advance a progressive cause, aw shucks it’s just me being Christlike, “speaking truth to power”, and seeking “justice” or “compassion.”

His whole campaign is, ”Christian Nationalism for ME, but not for THEE” and hoping you won’t notice.

B) What progressives do is take the commands Jesus gave to INDIVIDUALS and apply them to the GOVERNMENT.

When Christians use words like “caring” or “generous” they mean caring for people and being generous with their own resources.

When progressives use the words “caring” and “generous”, they mean “vote for the government to forcibly take OTHER PEOPLE’S RESOURCES at gunpoint and redistribute it against their will.”

Of course, this *always* backfires because governments do not work like people and churches, so with governments you tends to get more of what you INCENTIVIZE and less of what you PENALIZE.

This is why cities and states that throw billions of $ at “solving homelessness” end up with MORE HOMELESSNESS, they do not “solve homelessness.”

This is a theology-nerd thing, but in general progressives want the government to do the roles of the church and individual (charity, compassion, care), and they want NOBODY to do the role of the State (administer justice and be a “terror to the wrongdoer”).

^^^this always results in societal chaos and darkness.

Further…

What Talarico (and other progressives) always do is selevtively edit Jesus, so that he becomes a mascot for their cause.

I can do a “when Jesus…” list too, but James won’t like mine…

- When Jesus defined marriage, he defined it as only between a man and a woman

- When Jesus talked about gender, he rooted it in biology, saying “he made them male and female”

- When Jesus talked about harming children (abortion), he said it would be better for you to have millstone tied around your neck and be cast into the ocean

- … that time when Jesus encouraged his followers to buy weapons for self-defense (Luke 22:36)

- Jesus’ family strictly obeyed the government’s border / migration / census laws.

- When Jesus talked about salvation, he said belief in him was the ONLY WAY

- When Jesus healed the sick, he didn’t need a deductible… there were no insurance companies in AD 30, and Jesus was using miraculous power, not paying doctors. This would be like an anti-vaxxer saying “JESUS WASNT VACCINATED!” as justification for their position)

- When Jesus fed the hungry, he FED THE HUNGRY. He did not vote for the government to forcibly take other people’s stuff at gunpoint and redistribute it against their will.

I could go on and on and on and on…

The point is, Jesus is a LORD of the universe, not a MASCOT for your cause.

[Katy Faust @Katy_Faust]

At the airport, watching a dad with his probably seven-month-old. He has her in the air, shifting her around mechanically, like a robot. She’s kicking her legs and squealing.

Mom comes back from the bathroom and immediately straps the baby to her chest. She leans in and snuggles.

Nobody tells Dad to engage in stimulating play with his child. Nobody tells Mom to pull her close and soothe her.

They interact with the same child differently because men and women are different.

Children don't need two adults tossing them in the air. They don't need two parents soothing and comforting them. All stimulation and no security leaves them unmoored; all comfort and no challenge leaves them afraid to venture out.

Children need one parent who promotes attachment and one parent who promotes independence.

Children need a mother and a father.

A culture that treats either one as optional asks children to go without so adults can feel affirmed.

[Allie Beth Stuckey @conservmillen]

Toxic empathy got us here: bending over backwards to accept hoards of migrant men who sacrifice their children to strangers.

The primary victims of toxic empathy are always children. Here’s what I mean:

Empathy turns toxic when you feel so deeply for one person on one side of the equation (in this case, the illegal migrant) that you forget about the plight of everyone else (in this case, a child). Toxic empathy makes you lose sight of true victims and causes you to obscure objective morality and reality.

When it comes to abortion, toxic empathy feels so deeply for the mother that it justifies the murder of her baby.

On transgenderism, toxic empathy relates so profoundly to the pain of the gender-deceived person that it ignores the well-being of children and women.

On immigration, toxic empathy is so focused on the hard journey of the migrant that it belittles the effect of the chaos of illegal immigration on children, innocent citizens, and victims of illegal immigrant crime.

That’s why being *led* by empathy is dangerous. Empathy that isn’t reigned in by objective morality will always lead to destructive, lopsided, unjust policies — the main victims of which are always vulnerable kids.

Being so empathetic toward one set of people that you’re blinded to everyone and everything else isn’t just misguided, it’s evil.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

There’s a solution but too many people in this country are soft and don’t have the stomach for it. Execute these women. Ideally in public. A lot of people with “mental health problems” are going to suddenly get over it if they know the other option is hanging from a rope.

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@dejardinant @Prolife_Sam Human life begins at conception, a new distinct life separate from the mother with his or her own DNA and characteristics. That's the line. Anything else is arbitrary and will be pushed to allow more and more "exceptions"

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@dejardinant @Prolife_Sam It's cheapening of human life. It's elevating some lives as being more worthy of life over others because they're just not as developed as we are. It's a slippery slope that then leads to society dehumanizing other groups of people, not just the preborn. We already see this.

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@dejardinant @Prolife_Sam What's wrong with killing human beings in the toddler stage of development? The problem with requiring any other criteria to be met other than simply being a distinct human life is there will always be someone who comes along and disagrees & then advocates for pushing the limit.

[Allie Beth Stuckey @conservmillen]

I was wrong about Lindsay Clancy. Here’s why I changed my mind.

She was never diagnosed with postpartum depression or psychosis. She was not on 13 medications at once. She was not “hearing voices.” She was not abandoned by her family.

She was diagnosed with a mood disorder - never psychosis - and went to a variety of doctors who all prescribed different medications, which she took unreliably and not simultaneously.

She only heard a voice one time - and that was right before she killed her kids. Extremely atypical for psychosis.

She carefully planned her children’s murders down to the minute. She researched the distance of a restaurant she’d ask Patrick to go to. Added on a last-minute errand before he left. Calmly answered his phone call in the middle of her crime. Brought her children down to the basement one by one, overpowering their resistance and killing them slowly.

It does seem like she had support from her family. She may have still been overwhelmed, but it’s not true that all of her cries for help went unanswered.

I originally placed too much blame on the many SSRIs she was prescribed. For years on my show, I’ve talked to health professionals who have been warning about the violence-inducing effects of these drugs, and I thought Lindsay’s case may be an example of that reality.

Is it still possible these SSRIs had a negative effect? Absolutely. But the case that these drove her into a psychotic episode is weak.

This evidence continues to reveal, in my opinion, that Lindsay Clancy methodically murdered her children and she was fully aware of what she was doing.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

Hey Tiffany, you went on TV and said that your "heart breaks" for a woman who brutally strangled all of her children to death, and blamed her crimes on "the health care system" while putting zero blame on the murderer herself. You can't just breeze past that and try to carry on being some kind of public defender of conservative values or whatever. You're going to have to own up to what you said, retract it, and explain why your first instinct was to sympathize with a mass murderer rather than her victims.

[Lauren Chen @TheLaurenChen]

The support for Lindsay Clancy has honestly radicalized me against modern women.

Materialism, substance abuse, promiscuity, abortion. Now triple child murder?

Is there no sin the feminine hivemind WON'T embrace?

Feeling very... dejected? I don't even know how to describe it.

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@kangminlee This is why you should be an abortion abolitionist, not a fake "pro-lifer" like Kristan

[Alexandra Voetberg @Realalexclark]

Here’s the biggest thing ALL people, but especially *women* currently need to understand:

I think one of the hardest things for people to accept is that sometimes evil really is just evil. We almost WANT there to be some giant system behind every horrible thing that happens, because systems can theoretically be exposed, dismantled, or fixed. That gives us a sense of control.

What’s much scarier is accepting that we live in a FALLEN world filled with FALLEN people, and sometimes one person’s sin, rage, selfishness, or brokenness can cause unimaginable suffering. There isn’t always a hidden explanation that, if we could just uncover it, would make everything make sense.

This is why the Gospel is so important. Christianity NEVER promises that if we become discerning enough, expose enough corruption, or figure out “who is really pulling the strings”, we can finally engineer a world where evil can’t touch us. Jesus actually promises the opposite:

“In this world you will have trouble.”

But He doesn’t leave us there!

“But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

Our hope isn’t that we will eventually understand every evil thing. Our hope is that Christ has already overcome evil. Our peace was never supposed to come from figuring everything out. It comes from trusting the One who already knows.

[Samantha D. @Prolife_Sam]

From abortion, to women being furious that a surrogate mother wouldn’t kill her baby late term, to women demanding freedom for a mother who murdered her three born children, and now THIS being called an act of love?

Women are NOT okay.
What is going on???

[Katie @thebereanmillen]

I think abortion culture has a lot to do with women thinking Clancy shouldn’t get the book thrown at her. If she came into YOUR HOME and k*lled YOUR kids, you wouldn’t care WHAT kind of psychosis she was in– you’d want her charged to the fullest extent of the law. But since it was her own, now there’s a ton of nuance.

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@polemoskarios @Prolife_Sam Her post is still correct. We shouldn't murder people for being born with genetic defects.

[Kaci @KaciS34]

@IAmTheKimmel If a mother is truly in a medical emergency that requires the pregnancy to end, it is much quicker and safer to induce & deliver than to perform an abortion first & then deliver. You clearly know nothing about these procedures & shouldn't be speaking on it without being informed