In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston discusses why it’s good to get old and how the language and words we use can dramatically impact our attitudes towards our own aging and towards the aging of others. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal (9/24/21), examines how in Japan, demographically the oldest nation in the world, they have begun to re-define what the meaning of what ‘old’ is. For example, the city of Nagano is officially changing its legal definition of “elderly”. Beginning next year, in order to keep residents active and engaged in their lives, what is considered ‘old’ now, 65 or over, will only apply linguistically and legally at age 75.   Nagano was the site of the 1998 Winter Olympics.  Now the new definition will reduce the proportion of its population classified as ‘elderly’ to just 16% from 30% of the population under the old definition, transitioning it from one of the oldest to one of the youngest cities in Japan. Ironically, the values, language, and legal definitions in the United States are moving in the opposite direction. Not only is the idea of age and senior ’senility,’ looked down upon in the United States, but many leaders and progressive government link thinkers, are advocating that 75 is actually the time to die. Seriously. With the increase in the routine denial of medical treatment, and the stunning government actions of intentional exposure to Covid-19, an intentional non-treatment of the elderly in both the states of New York and California, the cultural shift and values and language are becoming more apparent. With the introduction of Obamacare, the idea of a single-payer, government-sponsored and controlled health system, brought a new view of “appropriate” care for the elderly. The intentional installation of seniors and giving them exposure to Covid, with the concomitant non-treatment and isolation was a stunning government response by the governors of New York in California in 2020. Tens of thousands of seniors were intentionally sent to die, for the supposed “greater good.”   At the height of the Obamacare debate the Atlantic magazine published an extensive article by Ezekiel Emmanuel. He was one of the policy figures essential to the healthcare debate within the Obama administration, and the brother of Obama Chief-of-Staff, Rahm Emanuel. “Why I hope to die at 75: an argument that society and families - and you - will be better off if nature takes it’s course swiftly and promptly,” raised some concerns in the pro-life community, but was largely greeted by knowing nods of agreement by the academic and media elite. ‘Who wants to be senile?’ But the open public comment if not ‘instruction’ (remember the subtitle… “you will be better off if nature takes its course swiftly and promptly.’) and the not-so-camouflaged derision of senility brings a great risk.  The Covid reaction is but the tip of a not so hidden iceberg.   As far as the demographics of aging and population, the United States is not far behind Japan. Brian is free to admit his personal inclination toward a Christian worldview, and points out that that perspective is, in fact, much more accommodating and closer to the Japanese embrace of the elderly than the new progressive ideology of American healthcare.   He gives several examples from both Old and New Testament, and the values that once were a foundation for our American culture, and Western Civilization itself. Honoring the elderly and embracing long lines for ourselves is nicely summed up in Deuteronomy 5:16: “Honor your father and mother as the Lord your God has commanded you. That your days may be prolonged and then it may go well with you and the land which the Lord your God gives you..” This was literally a commandment to us as individuals and to our culture as a whole.   The Christian influenced worldview of Western Civilization, as well as many old and established cultures revere the elderly and see it as a duty to honor, rather than disparage old age. Psalm 71:9; Proverbs 23:22; Proverbs 17:6, Psalm 91:16 and the list goes on and on. Our culture is being invited to change its view of the elderly, to no longer view aging as a good thing, to avoid maturity with its challenges and wisdom, to embrace what is new, what is young, what is fashionably elite.  But the cost is great. It is very great. It is not only the loss of lives and wisdom, but may include the loss of our civilization itself.

Life Matters

261: It’s Good To Get Old

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explorers what happened in the 2021 recall election of Governor Gavin Newsom. Previous episodes leading up to the recall prepared listeners for the fact that it would be a difficult task and that aside from simply voting ‘YES’ on the recall, there was a great need to also vote for a replacement.  Brian explains how, for the first time in California history, the Democrat party demanded that there be no Democrat replacement even suggested, and promised to punish any Democrat officeholder who presented themselves as a possible replacement candidate. All government employee unions instructed their members to only vote ‘NO’, and under the strong possibility of social exclusion, there was to be no discussion or suggestion of supporting a replacement. In addition to the multiple millions spent by these government employee unions, outside leftist money from the likes of political provocateurs like George Soros poured into the state. But Brian is not discouraged. All along, this particular effort was a long shot. The great advantage is that it brought serious question on the nature of both the Democrat party and the policies of the governor. What it has done is prepared conscientious voters for the very real election that is now upon us, the elections of 2022.  Every Congressional district, State Assembly and Senate district will have new boundaries in the coming year. Recent efforts by California Prolife and other politically attentive organizations have encourage people to vote and be involved in the most local elections - county supervisors, city councils, school boards. It is this level of civic involvement that can have the most dramatic change. And because these diffuse elections are harder for both the media and the Democrat party machinery to focus on, the odds of gaining seats on all of these levels have increased dramatically for the year 2022. Instead of being discouraged about the recall, it is merely the first salvo in an ongoing political war and the great advantage is that it was initiated by those that have had enough and are unwilling to simply walk away from their responsibilities as citizens.

260: Recap of the California Recall Election September, 2021

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston issues a special update regarding the actual status of Texas law SB-8. When it was signed into law by Governor Abbot of Texas,  pro-abortion forces immediately sought to have it stayed by the courts, to prevent it from going into effect. This request was sent up to the US Supreme Court and specifically to Justice Alito, who is responsible for the sixth district federal court of appeals. He referred the matter to the full court.  The US Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the law, it simply stated it was not appropriate to stop or enjoin the law until it has been reviewed by the lower courts.  The media immediately swung into action and decried the Supreme Court for following its principles and standard procedures. Abortion advocates in the media are seeking to gin-up their grassroots supporters - requesting among other things - a demand to pack the US Supreme Court and to question all pro-life laws because supposedly this was now the overturn of I.  This media analysis is grossly mis-representative and is designed to create a pro-abortion climate in the public sentiment. It is not an honest analysis of the facts of the case.  In the second half of the program, Brian interviews Jenny Rae Le Roux, candidate for governor. This is part of the ongoing interviews with pro-life candidates seeking to replace Gavin Newsom.

259: The Truth Regarding the Texas Abortion Law + CA Recall Candidates

In our ongoing effort to awaken Californians to the very real possibility of replacing Gavin Newsom, the single most outspoken advocate of intentionally killing human beings for social reasons, we are making known some of the alternative candidates. We have already published under the California Prolife Council webpage a listing of the life stances of all the candidates there are 14 candidates who have either signed pledges or made public statements that they believe the law should protect innocent human lives. In today’s program we interview three more of the diverse and interesting people who are pro-life, and seek to replace Gavin Newsom for governor. * Chauncey "Slim" Killens * Joe Symmon * Diego Martinez California Prolife Council has not made a specific endorsement, but is encouraging voters to first vote ‘Yes’, to replace Gavin Newsom and then of the 14 remaining alternatives choose a favorite pro-life candidate. The combined ‘Yes’es  for recalling Gavin Newsom are absolutely necessary in order for the recall to be successful.

Special Gubernatorial Recall - Get To Know More Candidates

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston issues a California action alert on Senate Bill 380. The measure has passed out of the Senate and is now going to the Assembly floor. Each and every member of the Assembly will be voting on it. If approved, it would go to the governor, who supports intentionally killing the depressed vulnerable patient. SB-380 removes all existing ‘safeguards’ for depressed and dependent patients. The Assembly is preparing to vote, and the death folk are pushing it hard! Depressed COVID patients, nursing home residents, solitary elderly, the ill and infirm, disabled - all now in the crosshairs of a killing medical profession. Stop expansion of ‘assisted suicide’! When assisted suicide was narrowly passed with bipartisan opposition during a special legislative session on Medi-Cal in 2015, then-Senator Bill Monning, a co-author of the bill, assured opponents in California Healthline that, “the joint and co-authors on this bill … have endeavored to build in protections in this [measure] that are stronger than the protections in any of the states where this has been practiced." Now the bill authors are proposing to remove their own “safeguards.” ”SB-380 (Eggman) will roll back the following “safeguards” that were assured in 2015 including: •Prematurely ending the existing 2025 sunset date and legislative reevaluation option four years early with little to no scientific data to support this action (especially in light of the worldwide pandemic); •No future oversight or evaluation of Annual reports about assisted suicide requests and their out outcomes. Existing reports do not contain any data regarding complications, reasons for requesting the lethal drugs, and for the limited data provided, much is listed as “unknown.”  •Removes the 15 day waiting period “safeguard.” Please immediately URGE your Assemblymembers to vote 'NO' on SB-380 and protect patients.

258: Stop Assisted Suicide Measures - California SB-380

In this episode of Life Matters we continue interviewing several of the many Pro-life candidates running for governor. Today’s program includes: James Hanink, Robert Newman, comments from Larry Elder, and reference to Doug Ose, who has withdrawn from the race due to a heart attack. There is also reference to the upcoming LifeFest Film Festival with update from Actor Kevin Sorbo.  LifeFest will be available for online streaming in your home beginning August 26-31, 2021.

Special Gubernatorial Recall - Get To Know The Candidates

257: California Gubernatorial Recall of Gavin Newsom In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the recall of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Particular focus is brought on the life issues as pursued and implemented by Governor Newsom.  For a successful recall at least half of the voters must vote “yes” on the first question on the ballot: “Shall Governor Newsom be recalled?”  If that question receives more than 50% ‘yes‘ then the second question is: “Who should replace him?” Forty-two candidates have filed as potential replacements, and 14 of them are pro-life. Brian introduces both them and relevant issues of California policy. Future programs will allow opportunity for candidates to introduce themselves. 

257: California Gubernatorial Recall of Gavin Newsom

Throughout Western Civilization it has always been asserted that human beings are more than merely animals.  They should not be treated like animals that can be owned or disposed of but that we have an intrinsic value, a spark of the divine, what the Judeo-Christian world calls the image of God.  There is something special about human beings.   Each individual is unique and deserves protection in particular when they are most vulnerable. Today’s episode delves into the science of ultrasound and the power of this technology to see these individual lives within the womb.  Brian will talk with Bri Knaus, owner of Hello My Baby which provides ultrasound services beyond the traditional 2D imagery that most people are familiar with. The proof of life is in the pictures!   https://hellomybaby3d.com

255: The Power of Ultrasound in the Fight Against Abortion - Part 1

In this vital episode, Commissioner Johnston examines how history is being directly attacked and rewritten at this very moment. This practice is the ongoing pattern of progressive, historical revisionism. It also reflects a fundamental principle lost on most of us in our day-to-day lives: what has preceded us has lead to this moment.  A proper understanding of history will empower us to address this moment in which we live. Brian ties this to an understanding of the abortion culture surrounding us, and even more importantly, to what truly happened in the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. Many Americans and even numerous pro-lifers do not fully understand the impact these decisions, nearly 50 years ago, have had on our present moment and how we are to address it. Brian explains that our misunderstandings of history are not our fault.  Many educational institutions, particularly in the United States, are under the sway of the John Dewey view of education, progressivism, and relativism. In Europe, this had already taken place with the wide-spread adoption and excitement surrounding Hegel‘s view of history. History was considered matters of the past. But, “what is significant is that we are now going into the future.  What truly matters is that these old things are left in the past and we now progress into a brave new world of promise.” In this improved world, “the government is to bring about these courageous further steps of progress.” But this is a very distorted view of history. History is cumulative. History has led up to this very moment. In the Spielberg movie, Amistad, the lead Mende tribesman was brought before the United States Supreme Court. He was asked what he wanted to do and why he was doing it  His answer not only summed up their decision but summed up a view and understanding of history that all of us should share: “My ancestors lived so that I might stand in this moment.” This incisive understanding of history and respect for the facts of history will also help us in understanding our moment, in understanding our present battles.   What happened in The Civil War  Brian then takes a deep dive into exploring one of the most common misunderstandings of Abraham Lincoln, his commitments, and the real nature of the Civil War. Many think that the Civil War was about suppressing the slave states rights to own slaves. But that is not the case. In fact, Lincoln’s position on states rights was exactly the opposite. Lincoln was fighting for the right of FREE states to exercise their duty within their jurisdictions to protect the lives of those under their authority. Once that ability was established, then the Senate could consider what laws ought to apply to all the states. That would eventually happen in the13th and 14th amendments, but it was not possible if free states were not even allowed to abolish slavery! Several actions by the federal government were actually preventing the rights of the free states to be exercised within their borders. The Fugitive Slave Law, the Kansas Nebraska Act, and the Dred Scott Decision, all infringed on the rights of free states to exercise their duty under natural law to protect those who could not protect themselves (the same basis that individual states would later use to ban abortion). Even though free states could say that they were free states, according to the federal government, a slave was never legally free until he or she crossed the Canadian border. The most odious of these offenses against free states is the blatantly pro-slavery Dred Scott Decision, which explicitly said that states could not ensure freedom or protect the lives of slaves inside their jurisdictions. This was actually the same action of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions: proclaiming it as federal law that one could own another human being, and that one was free to kill a human being whom they claim to own. States were not free to ban this principle of deadly ownership of human beings.   Roe and Doe specifically prohibited pro-life states from enacting their laws. This was a direct assault on the nature of the Constitution and the authority of the States. In addition, it assumed the authority of the United States Senate to both speak for, and then impose federal law on the several states. The nature of the United States Constitution was trampled by the Dred Scott Decision in slavery, was trampled by Roe and Doe and by the abortion culture which they unleashed.

Understanding History To Understand the Present

In this second episode of Life Matters with Dr. Patrick Marmion, Brian explores the current debate and dramatic culture change that is being brought upon end-of-life care and the presumption of both non-treatment and termination of dependent and vulnerable patients.

254: The Agenda of Medical Killing

Dr. Patrick Marmion is an obstetrician gynecologist that has worked in various aspects of the medical profession for more than 46 years. In this extended episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores questions of medical ethics and the incredible pressure that is placed on physicians to comply with the killing of patients. In this first episode, Dr. Marmion relays his story of being forced to support abortion and even being dismissed from a Catholic hospital after his public lecture and demonstration of the direct harms that abortions cause to women.

253: Breeding Killer Doctors

251: The Subversive Agenda of the Media in Silencing to Right To Life   In this episode of “Life Matters”, Commissioner Johnston explains that we are in a battle of ideas, a frequent theme of the “Life Matters” program. It is critically important to realize that the dominant media culture is not merely tolerant of a pro-death worldview - it is selling it and selling it hard. In many ways, we, here today, are living in a dystopia. Dystopias are not the merely fictional worlds of 1984 or Brave New World, but the authentic cultures in which a particular worldview is constantly repeated and reemphasized by the dominant media. Dissent from that worldview is not condoned. Those who disagree with the official way of thinking are condemned, diminished, and dismissed. The social pressure to accept those ideas are very strong. Look at Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Cuba, Communist China, Venezuela, around the world, where government and media work together to control the thinking and direction of the populace. That is a dystopian world. Nowhere is that clearer today than on the issue of life. In this episode, Brian takes a deep dive into the real facts behind the media manipulation regarding public opinion and abortion. The intentional use and misuse of language is inescapable. Brian examines some of the key terms,  e.g. “choice,” but also takes a deeper dive into some of the admissions that public opinion polling actually reveals. Public opinion polling demonstrates that the vast majority of Americans actually respect life. The vast majority of Americans would actually like to see the vast majority of abortions prohibited. But you are not told that by the media and especially not by the commentators.   Public opinion polls that ask more detailed questions rather than simply ‘pro-life’ or ‘pro-choice’  but ask about the circumstances regarding abortion, reveal that the average American, even those who call themselves pro-choice, do not believe in abortion-on-demand. In fact, they have a profound respect for the life of the child in the womb. This has been consistent in American polling since the issue came into the public sphere. Both the Gallup Poll, which has conducted an annual poll since 1975, and the Marist Poll, used by NBC news, reveal that late-term abortions and abortions that are done for casual social reasons are very much opposed by the average American. The polling figures seen below show that barely 1/4 of Americans support the idea of any abortion, at any time in pregnancy. Yet this is the actual meaning of the word “choice” abortion, though the media plays with that word for its own misleading purposes.   The media does not admit these numbers. The media does not want you to understand these numbers. The media has an agenda to influence casual inquirers, but also even YOUR thinking as a pro-life individual! They mean to discourage and dissuade you. Don’t let that happen - make sure that you think it through and share with others the objective facts of what happens in a human abortion. The facts are on your side and facts are terrible things to waste.

251: The Subversive Agenda of the Media in Silencing to Right To Life

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explores the more profound significance of the Roe v. Wade narrative. As has been discussed in other programs and deeply explained by other Supreme Court justices, by Justice Blackmun’s court clerks, and many other legal experts who would prefer legalized abortion, Roe versus Wade is a confusing jumble. It’s a wild story that leads us confusingly through legal and medical history, through an arbitrary division of pregnancy into trimesters and assertions of where abortion should be performed in the various trimesters. Brian explains that this narrative, this story, is a spiel. That is why other legal experts can’t get it to make sense.  It’s a story to distract us and confuse us. The new real action taken is in Doe versus Bolton, where Blackmun clearly states that he will authorize and direct doctors to now be killers and that they can use their personal medical judgment at any time in the pregnancy.  They need not answer to anyone else for that decision. The purpose of the spiel, just like the purpose of a criminal’s alibi, is to provide a justification for a crime that either has taken place or is about to take place. The spiel is a relatively common aspect of social life, used by gypsies and thieves.   Unless you are fully prepared and understand that it is designed to distract you, there is great danger in trying to follow it or believe in it. Its purpose is to sell you on a final conclusion that may indeed be to your greater harm. Roe versus Wade is exactly that. Doe versus Bolton is the deadly real result. Roe is the distracting spiel, Doe is the crime.

249: Roe v. Wade - The Alibi for Doe v. Bolton

Relatively few Americans understand the actual nature of abortion law in the United States. Many do know that the Roe v. Wade decision authorized abortion throughout the nation. Still, beyond that, there is mass confusion as to when it is approved, what conditions are legally necessary for the abortion to take place, etc.  Even more specifically, few realize Roe was joined by a companion decision, Doe v. Bolton,  and it is this quiet, unexamined companion decision which authorizes a physician the absolute right to end the child’s life whenever the abortionist feel appropriate. Due to garbled and ideological media coverage, many Americans think that the abortion issue is simply a matter of women’s rights. But so much more was changed by that decision. When the court authorized the ending of that child’s life, for that is what an abortion does, it had to confirm who was to do the killing. Radical feminist groups had demanded the right to have, and even perform abortions at their discretion and at any time in pregnancy. The same ideological groups asserted that this was a constitutional right because of their right to control their own body. But Justice Blackmun was clear, he was not giving women that right. She must have the permission and direct involvement of a professional that would kill the child. And that professional baby killer was to come from an existing profession which up until that time had sworn never to kill a child or any vulnerable human being within their care.  The medical professional and that profession alone, was authorized and approved as legal killers of vulnerable children in the United States of America.   And they could do so whenever they - and they alone - felt.   This decision represented a dramatic assault on centuries of civil society and medical ethics. A doctor had sworn that to participate in their profession that they would never kill or intentionally harm a vulnerable patient in their care.  The Hippocratic Oath then needed to be dismissed for Roe v. Wade to take affect. This unlimited license to kill at discretion was then explicitly granted to physicians through the Doe v. Bolton decision. The implications of discarding the Hippocratic Oath are now sweeping through our culture, and killing medicine has become a standard procedure. Doctor killing of the disabled became effective in Canada in March, 2021. Canadian doctors are even authorized to kill the mentally disabled. In California, this license to kill has now begun to prohibit any dissent or alternative medical treatments. State Senate Bill 380 will require a physician to support and immediately hand their vulnerable patient to a termination doctor, should be attending physician feel killing is an inappropriate treatment for the request at hand. The conscience rights of excellent and effective doctors will now be removed in the name of unfettered medical killing. Additionally, Assembly Bill 705 would prohibit religious, medical institutions, or even hippocratic minded medical hospitals from having policies against terminating patients. AB705 will push for such institutions to accommodate, approve and facilitate the killing if any physician they are employing so chooses. This new doctor's ‘right to kill’ has become a doctor's and the medical profession’s duty to kill. Roe v. Wade did much more than authorize human abortions in America. Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton unleashed medical killing on our culture. This terminator role for doctors has happened in the past, and it has never ended well.

248: When Medical Killing Became Law

Contemporary media as well as the leadership of the Democrat Party have become incredibly aggressive now that the party controls all levels of the federal government.  There is apparently a conscious decision to simply use that newly grasped authority to 'declare as law' those measures which have previously failed. The expectation is that an accommodating media will simply echo the 'establishment of these precious new rights' and demand acquiescence. This enactment of dead provisions appears to be an essential part of progressives political hegemony. Legally and culturally speaking, it is making law by proclaiming a ‘Zombie Apocalypse'. Measures which were dead and defeated are simply dead no longer.  In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston again interviews Douglas Johnson, Federal Legislative Director Emeritus of the National Right to Life Committee as he explains how another intentional falsehood is being put forward by the abortion industry and its advocates. They are seeking to revive a long-dead proposal to amend the Constitution - the Equal Rights Amendment. The Constitution is very clear that amendments may be offered but they must first pass through approval by two-thirds of the state legislatures. When first proposed in the 1970s, the ERA never did get the necessary two-thirds of the states approval, and in fact, when it was realized that the ERA would enshrine abortion in the language of the Constitution, many states rescinded their previous approval. Even when attempted again in the 80s the effort failed. Roe v. Wade had never actually drawn from the Constitution. It made up an abortion right from the 'emanations from the penumbra' (a shadow) of the Constitution. Now, with abortion support in the White House and in both houses of Congress, the strategy has changed and their desire is simply to proclaim that the ERA never died, that there are no limits placed on its passage, and their goal is simply to proclaim it a fiat accompli - that the Equal Rights Amendment is law. They have great hope that the media will simply repeat this clearly false view of the Constitution and its amending. This attempt to create a “walking zombie” of law should be humorous on its face, but sadly there are many naïve and committed ideologues who believe that if they want something they can simply proclaim it to be true, and the dominant media culture will affirm that. Their hope is that natural opponents can simply be silenced!  These battles for objective truth and reality do indeed impact our laws. It is crucial that conscientious individuals be ready with the facts to dispel the myths which are so often used to bring about unjust laws. Just such objective facts will be necessary in order to finally bury the zombie known as the ERA. 

Zombie Apocalypse - The Fabled Return of the ERA 

Commissioner Brian Johnston examines, along with various guests and experts, how the dismissal of the legal right to life has impacted the nature of the law, the practice of medicine, ethics, the arts, and personal relationships. With constant reminders of how a culture of life invigorates and ennobles the human experience, Johnston and his guests give positive answers and access to numerous available resources.

hubhopper

Life Matters

hubhopper