Life Matters

If the New York Times celebrates your Christianity, then be afraid. Be very afraid. I must admit that being a professing Christian is not an easy thing, particularly today. I hate religious ‘posturing' - especially in myself. The scripture is clear: Facts and action are clearly what define true religion. The Pharisee and tax collector, one a false ‘religious' leader, the other a genuinely broken, penitent man, is one of Christ's more poignant teachings on this. The Good Samaritan another. How real is your, or my faith? So it is with sadness and carefulness that I must insist mentioning the actual actions: the facts and policies of the late President, James Earl Carter. The recent media swoon and adulation compel me. They swoon precisely because of his policies. They adulate for his leftist, neo-marxist legacy, carefully clothed in wool. While giving us the smiling face of a Southern Baptist Sunday School teacher, Jimmy Carter implemented some of the most family-destructive cultural policies our nation has now come to suffer. The first Presidential Conference on Families sounded truly wonderful and nearly conservative, except for the fact that it was here, quietly, that the federal government first declared homosexual couples to be ‘families.' The Christian sacrament of matrimony was directly assaulted with a toothy Baptist grin. The real legacy of any President is the Courts they leave behind. Those justices will serve for life. You should know that every judge Jimmy Carter appointed was first vetted by the most radical abortion attorney in the nation, and her subsequent leftist panel on the judiciary. Carter appointed a total of 262 federal judges during his four years in the White House, more than any single-term president in U.S. history. And despite never getting to appoint a Supreme Court nominee, Carter's judicial appointments were history-making in their own right. That's because he appointed a record number of minority and female jurists during his presidency, 57 minority judges and 41 female. BUT IT WAS NOT their color or plumbing that made them eligible candidates in the Carter world, it was their unabashed commitment to leftist ideology. Strangely, the media at the time never examined the issue of ‘Judicial Temperment'. But that is precisely why Jimmy's judges were appointed. They had the temperment the press desired. When Ronald Reagan made appointments THEN the actual thinking and policies really mattered to the media, regardless of a candidates' gender or color, Reagan's appointments were excoriated. Legal knowledge and “judicial appointment help” for Carter came from Sarah Weddington, the Texas attorney who, at 26, had successfully argued Roe v. Wade before the Supreme Court. She had joined the Carter administration as an aide for women's issues and leaked (the even then, notorious) Ruth Bader Ginsburg's name as an Appellate Court pick to the press. She hoped by making it public, then Carter wouldn't be able to backtrack. As soon as Weddington leaked it, though, she went to the Oval Office and told the president what she'd done. He “didn't mind,” she later told the Washington Post. Yes, Jimmy Carter truly and faithfully served the leftist media-zeitgeist. For this his memory is now acclaimed. We too must remember. Mr. Carter in many ways served as a precursor to the ‘bumbling' leftist assault we saw in the recent Biden Administration. He was an easily manipulated figurehead who allowed far-left staffers to simply have their way through him. One recognizable difference was that Mr. Carter freely accepted and then implemented the radical policies into which he was hornswoggled and manipulated. Biden? We really don't know how much Biden actually understood; he was officially found mentally unfit to stand trial by his own Department of Justice. Jimmy Carter consciously and intentionally implemented policies designed to destroy the family and respect for innocent human life. You don't learn that in Sunday School.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian explores what's ahead in 2025 and how the election victory of November is merely the beginning. Brian also explained in detail the nature of his recent illness. His congestive heart failure had him hospitalized for three months - a month and a half in intensive care and a month and a half in cardio recovery care. He is now recovering at home. Brian explains that the year ahead includes many challenges, including the very strong push for killing the medically dependent. Eleven jurisdictions across the United States have currently authorized physician assisted killing. These laws are aimed at the emotionally vulnerable as well as the physically challenged and/or financially challenged. Brian admits that he was emotionally vulnerable, and depressed during his hospitalization and brush with death.  This made him a candidate for physician assisted suicide in California under current California law. Because the law is no longer an advocate, you must be willing to advocate for vulnerable family and friends.  Brian also explained that there is a great misunderstanding of the legal battles ahead for the ProLife cause. As his book, Evil Twins: Roe and Doe, how the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing, makes clear, the real attack on society and culture in Roe was that it instructed doctors to be killers. This cultural and ethical departure in Roe is explicit and even feminist leaders like Ruth Bader Ginsburg concurred: “Roe is not woman centered. It is physician centered.” These decisions instruct doctors to do whatever they see fit and in particular to even kill at their own discretion.  Many misunderstand what the Dobbs Decision of 2022 actually did to abortion law. It did not overturn Roe, it merely adjusted aspects of Roe v. Wade. In particular, the federalized compulsion to accept all abortions was removed and it was presented as a states' rights issue. It's a great mistake to present or even view the Right To Life cause as a states' rights issue. This does not address the real ethical, moral and cultural decay that was brought to us by Roe v. Wade. The right to life cause needs to be prepared to speak up for all vulnerable human beings, regardless of their age, and to be on guard regarding the efforts to promote the killing of depressed, vulnerable, and medically dependent persons. In addition, the real issue of protecting vulnerable human lives, and not merely the emotional attraction of helping babies and mothers needs to be understood.   Brian also announced that many of his writings will now be readily available online at Substack.  See @brianjohnston on Substack.  

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores the idea of popular opinion polls. At election time, the media will often present what they claim to be public opinion on the issue of abortion. It is critically important to understand that, very often the general, and unspecific nature of the terms used does not often reflect a valid view of public opinion. More specifically, generic feelings about “choice”, support for Roe, or reproductive freedom do not accurately reflect the average American's view of abortion particulars. Brian examine's the current habit for many polling organizations, Pew Research Center as one example, do actually take polls state by state and reach sweeping and generic conclusions. The most common is the statement that the citizens of (fill in the blank) state support all or most abortions. Yet the very terms ‘all' and ‘most' are, in fact, contradictory. All means 100%! Most means 50% or more. There is a chasm of difference. And yet this is the most frequently used phrasing of the Pew CharitableTrust. Specific polling questions regarding the reasons for the abortion, the gestational age of the child involved in the abortion, and other surrounding factors, greatly impact the public view of the medical procedure. The recent Wall Street Journal poll confirmed what polls have indicated for more than a decade: The majority of Americans are opposed to late term abortion, or abortions that are done for social reasons (i.e. just done for choice) and have varying views regarding the medical purpose that may be involved. Killing a child because of a genetic anomaly is still opposed by the majority of Americans.  Similarly, if the woman's life is actually in danger, the majority of Americans will condone such an abortion. If the definition of “health” is made specific, the majority of Americans only support abortions for very serious health issues. Under Roe versus Wade, because of its deliberate definition of “health,” as meaning any psychological or sociological reason that the abortionist himself could come up with, alarms the average American and such vague and unspecific definitions of health are not what they mean by endangering a woman‘s life. Yet, Roe versus Wade equated the two terms.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnson explains the importance of elections, each and every election.  More importantly, he focuses on the power of your vote the further down the ballot you go.  On a statewide level, your vote is a drop in the bucket.  But as various jurisdictions get smaller, the number of voters also gets dramatically smaller and this is why local elections are so important.  In order to have candidates for the state legislature, or for Congress, you must draw from people with some degree of political experience. Most people who run for these higher offices have had experience at the local level, whether it be school board, city council. or supervisor. Ironically, it is THESE starter positions, where your vote and the vote of your friends, make the greatest impact. By being involved in local elections, you can launch the career of people who share your values and ideals. Many elections for city office and for school board are determined by a relative handful of votes. That handful, five or six votes, may mean nothing on the larger level, but to keep Planned Parenthood out of your school district, that handful of votes can be the key difference.  By paying attention to these local races, you are not only effective in protecting your community from organizations like Planned Parenthood and others who seek to control the minds of your children, but you're helping to elect individuals who wish to see the government make wise decisions. You're helping out individuals who share your values. You're making a difference in your state, in your region, in your community.  All politics is local.  

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explains the real issues that are at stake. Brian warns listeners of the dangers of popular media culture. He reminds us that Orwell‘s purpose in writing “1984” was actually to portray how the average person responds to a dominant media culture, dedicated to influencing and controlling society.  But there are deeper issues that matter, issues that the media either ignores, misrepresents, or intentionally attacks. In order to be truly responsible for ourselves, our lives, our family, and if we believe in God, responsible to our Maker, we must, yes, we must, dig deeper. Sadly, we live in a culture that appeals to feelings and emotions as our primary source of understanding. These are immediate and surface reactions.  This is very unwise. The media knows exactly how to manipulate feelings. The media knows exactly how to direct those feelings into the wrong ideas. That is what it specializes in.  Advertising, promoting, and getting the masses to go in a certain direction is its art and inherently what our media culture is all about.  Brian again examined the actual significance of Roe v. Wade and Doe v Bolton. In addition to allowing babies to be killed, more importantly, it assigned a whole new class of killers, people who never were to kill, individuals whose job it was to protect and defend the most vulnerable humans at the most vulnerable time - those in the medical profession. Since January 22,1973, doctors are now professional killers for hire. Brian brings these phenomena full circle as he discusses the elections of 2024.  He reminds listeners that many elections of America's past were very, very close and would've changed history if they had gone the other direction. He explains the re-election of Abraham Lincoln and how Lincoln was hated by many Republicans in addition to many Democrats.  The fact that Donald Trump has a personality that many people don't like should not be an issue for the simple reason: the purpose of politics is actually implementing policy. We must look at the actual policies being sought. We must look at the actual policies being implemented. Kamala Harris is the most radical and extreme, progressive, socialist/communist to have ever run for president. The dominant media is currently trying to redefine and lie about her policies. The media is not your friend. The media has an agenda. Make sure that you and your family understand what's at stake for our nation and for innocent lives in this coming election. Make sure that you vote and vote for policies that protect life.  Vote all the way down the ballot for people who will stand for the Constitution, for the Right To Life, for the principles that we have been given as Americans. These are all at stake in this election. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston takes a deep dive into real science. He takes a deep dive into simple grade school science, of basic earth science, basic astronomy as taught in sixth grade, and the common sense science that any fifth or sixth grader can understand. The issue we must clearly destroy, and which is probably the most insidious and clever at this moment, is the whole idea of man-made global warming.  The president of the United States and many internationalists have proclaimed that man-made global warming is the single, in fact the only, true dispositive threat and the ultimate threat to the world.  They are simplistic deceivers. They are themselves deceived. But they are most desirous to deceive the population in order to control them, in order to limit them.  This argument is essential to undercutting the belief that human beings are uniquely significant and their lives should be protected. Man-made global warming argues that human beings are the world's greatest problem. It argues for population reduction and government control of the remaining population. It is a deceitful and dishonest argument, framing itself as the opposite - “protecting humanity” and “saving the planet.” Listen and use Brian's examples.   The truth is more obvious than you may think.  

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston takes an even deeper dive into the real significance of the recent presidential debate. Previously, he explored the debate through the eyes of Fox News host, Shannon Bream and United States Senator from Pennsylvania, John Fetterman. But both of those commentators from right and left were dealing with a very facile, surface analysis, particularly focusing on the significance of Joe Biden‘s performance.  But that is what EVERY media outlet has focused on - every Republican and even Democrat pundit has made America focus on that topic. And while competence of the current president is indeed an important topic, the deeper issue of the policies of this president and his party are being skated over. In this episode, Brian discusses the real issue of the Democratic Party and its extreme radical policies on the issues of life and family economics. In fact, every single aspect of life in the United States is being destroyed by the policies of this Democrat Party. Many pro-life individuals are committed Catholics or even committed Evangelicals and yet have remained registered Democrats. It is vitally important that whatever registration you may currently have, you must understand that only the Republican Party has taken a wise and measured position and life-affirming public policy stance. Only victory by the Republican Party can help restore the right to life for the innocent in the United States again.  Brian underscores an important principal regarding digging deeper into objective facts. That principle is outlined in many places, but in particular he points out Proverbs 14:15. “The simple believe every word. But the wise look well to their going.” Many people do not take the time to understand the language they hear and the language that they use. A single word can carry much more significance, and at times we ourselves can actually apply the wrong mean ing to a single word and then draw the wrong conclusions to the very language that we're hearing and using. That is what people do.  Wise people step back, look, and measure what the real meaning is. “The simple believe every word.”  Brian applies this principal to the single word “overturn.” Many people think that Roe v. Wade has been overturned. That isn't quite right. In fact, in someways Roe v. Wade has been thrown open, and pro- abortion states and advocates of death like Gavin Newsom, are actually attacking pro-life states and bringing the abortion industry into pro-life states - even violating their laws. In many ways, the Dobbs decision, by simply reducing our understanding of Roe as being a states' rights issue, has simplified and dumbed down our understanding.  In many ways, the Dobbs decision was like the Dred Scott decision, seeming to draw a line between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces, but actually giving a distinct advantage to the slaveholders and to advocates of slavery.  So the abortion issue still must be addressed by the Supreme Court in order to obtain a complete victory.  Nevertheless, in the presidential debate, former President Trump focused on the real issues and not just the stumbling and bumbling of President Biden. President Trump did what every pro-life individual must do today.  He understood that the Democrat Party themselves, not just Biden, are the radicals. He underscored the current law, which in fact, allows for abortion on-demand and simply empowers doctors to kill a baby through all nine months and even post-birth. Joe Biden, and all Democrats, like to pretend that that's not the case and will willingly lie. But Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton created that exact scenario. Doctors are now killers and unless we, as pro-lifers, focus on the killing nature of the medical profession as determined by Roe, we will not win. The debate has given all of us a great opportunity to cut through the fog regarding what Roe  is and was, and what real issues are at stake in this election.  Whether or not Joe Biden is the nominee really isn't the issue.  The entire policy structure of the Democrat Party is the real issue. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston examines the real implications of the recent presidential debate. Interestingly, he agrees with Pennsylvania Democratic senator, John Fetterman. In an interview with Fox News' Shannon Bream, Fetterman points out that he himself was in apparent mental collapse and his debates with candidate, Dr. Oz of television fame were complete failures due to Fetterman's slurring and confused use of language. It turns out that Fetterman went on to actually win the election by several points.  Brian points out that the real issues of the most recent presidential debate were not how either Trump or Biden spoke. The real issues in the debate are the ideas, the policies, the laws that are brought to bear by their respective political parties. Politics is about policy. The Democrat Party of America today is the single most radical entity that has ever existed in the United States of America. It is no longer the mildly liberal Democrat Party of perhaps your parents' generation or even of just recent years. On the abortion issue, they believe in unlimited government financed, government advertised, government promoted abortion through the ninth month and even after birth. That was admitted in the June 2024 debate! That is what Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton authorized.  Listeners from both parties were deeply disturbed by Biden's failures and many Democrats want a better leader to be the puppet for their policies in order to inspire victory. But the issue, nevertheless, is not who is at the head of the party. The issue really is the policies that that party will bring to bear and who that president will equip not only his entire cabinet with, but all the appointments of the federal government.  That president's policies are going to be what the rest of their party will follow not only on the federal level, but Democrats all the way down through state and local government are influenced by the policies stated by that party's platform and plank and leadership. That was the real significance of the most recent presidential debate.  In another program, Life Matters will examine the actual debate topics and demonstrate that the Democrat Party commitment to the logic of Roe v. Wade is very present. They want to insist that Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton remain the law of the land.  

Who has choice? It's not women! It was only doctors who were authorized to kill, to decide when to kill and what procedures to use. Yes, in Roe v. Wade choice was given only to doctors. In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explorers the confusion that many individuals have regarding what happened onJanuary 22, 1973. The Roe v. Wade decision is actually quite direct and explicit. There is no right of a woman to a woman's own body. Justice Blackmun, the author of Roe, was not giving women the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, and especially with a very difficult medical procedure like human abortion. Blackmun was explicit in both Roe, and in particular in Doe v. Bolton - only doctors would be authorized to kill. Specifically, they were to be free to decide when, where, how and for what reason, even for no reason in particular, to perform a human abortion. They were the ones given a choice.  Later, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, attempting to teach feminists that they still had not achieve their goal, underscored that Roe and Doe did not give women the right to choose. It only gave them a right to ask. All authority of the medical decision was to be made by a medical doctor, the now killer, the abortionist.  Brian reminds listeners that because of human psychology, and, in particular, the phenomenon known as attachment theory, human beings are emotionally supportive of young creatures, particularly young mammals. The wide eyes, mewling and ‘baby sounds' bring an innate adult reaction. That would include human babies, but for some people canine babies – puppies are even more emotionally attractive!  But the crime of abortion is not that cute babies are killed and that OUR emotions are stretched by that action. The crime is that this is a human being has been killed.  That is the most startling culture change that ever hit our society.  Doctors were now to kill their fellow human beings and explicitly to ignore the Hippocratic Oath.  Western medicine was now destroyed.  The most trustworthy and honored profession in society has become the most evil and diabolical profession. Doctors, regardless of their personality, are under tremendous financial, sociological and cultural pressure to endorse, and when put upon, to end the lives of their fellow human beings.  The foundation that Western Civilization was built on - protection of innocent lives - was now terminated.   The physician was now transformed to a paid killer.   A cursory look at the current practice of medicine reminds us that there are bizarre ideas and values, and sociological confusion, allowing doctors to say and do things that are explicitly harmful to their patients, but that was not the case before January 22, 1973.  In every state, the laws of that state regarding killing or harming were reflected by the ethos and guidelines of the medical profession, and the medical regulations, the laws, of the various states fell in line with that. Before Roe v. Wade doctors didn't kill babies because doctors didn't kill anyone.    The Oath We must restore the Hippocratic Oath. We must focus on what the crime is, who the perpetrators are.   If we make the mistake of focusing only on the victims, on how old they are, when they die, on what situations (rape, incest, difficult social circumstances) if that becomes the action of the pro-life movement, we have lost our way . We must restore the Hippocratic Oath to the medical profession. The laws of Georgia in 1973 were actually very good and reasonable and did allow doctors to determine if there were unusual circumstances, because a panel of three different doctors experienced in childbirth determine if this was indeed a problem pregnancy.  They could exercise their medical judgment, and the state could still hold them responsible. That law of Georgia, which was overturned in Doe v. Bolton, was ironically one of the best state laws that protected human beings because it protected doctors from the temptation to kill.  Unless we focus on who is exercising choice, who is the perpetrator, and restore that profession to its once noble position, we cannot win.  At present, the pro-life movement is not winning. It is viewed as emotional and emotions can be arbitrary. It is viewed as religious and religious doctrines can also be confusingly arbitrary. The Hippocratic Ooath was founded on the principles of natural law and the laws of nature and nature‘s God. Coincidentally, that was also the premise that America's founders insisted be our guideline in making law.  Restore the Oath.  That should be our goal. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston discusses the actual nature of how a republic works. It works by representing the people through elected representation. These representatives exist at every level of government and through diversified jurisdictions . Brian interviews Scott Peotter, a long-time pro-life advocate who has served in local jurisdictions and has enforced just laws on the most local levels, including city council. In July 2023, Gavin Newsom attempted, in his role of governor, to force the Temecula school board to promote LGBTQ doctrines and accept Planned Parenthood abortion mandates in that district. The school board, by a very narrow margin, insisted that they are held accountable and will be accountable for the assets of that particular school district and that the governor was functioning as a dictatorial autocrat. The school board prevailed. It is critical to understand, if you care about the direction of our country, that we are a nation and a government that is, “of the people, by the people, and for the people” in the words of Abraham Lincoln, America's first Republican President.   If you desire for your nation, state, county or community to embrace good values in the civic realm, you absolutely must be aware, and then be involved in your local community.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian interviews Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. They discuss in depth the recent failure of California Senate Bill 1196 by Senator Blakespear. The irony is that the bill was not defeated by pro-life efforts. The bill was actually attacked by other pro-death organizations, lobbyist and legislators. Why would other pro-death advocates attack this measure? The prospects of passage in the California legislature are very good - the progressive Democratic Party holds a super majority in both houses. The governor would've gladly signed off, as he himself has been supportive and wrote of participating in the intentional killing of his own mother before it was even legalized in California. SB 1196, would no longer allow a need for terminal diagnosis, would make provision to kill those who are not a sound mind, and would remove most qualifying limitations on assisted suicide.  The reason the bill was stopped is they knew it would likely pass, and that passage would send alarm bells to an otherwise sleeping public.  Assisted suicide is going on in California medical facilities. Assisted suicide is, in fact, the intentional killing of a depressed person. It is happening now and as the death lobby knows, because of media coverage or perhaps lack of coverage, most Californians have no idea California doctors are killing patients.   Brian and Alex point out that ‘choice' whether it be in abortion or in euthanasia, does not actually refer to the patient.  It is a medical decision and it is the choice of the doctor to do the abortion, it is the choice of the doctor to perform euthanasia. So when the term ‘choice' is applied to these procedures, it doesn't mean protecting a patient. It means protecting the choice of a killing doctor, a doctor who is blatantly defying the oath that made the medical perfection respected. That Hippocratic oath is now gone. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the importance of not being religious in our attempts to change the laws to protect innocent human life. Johnston reminds us that America's founders were themselves deeply religious individuals, but they understood that many of them had disagreements within their own theologies - differences in doctrine. The answer to this difficult challenge was actually found in the formation of other republics throughout history. A republic asserts that there is more than simple voting and majoritarianism in making law.   Votes must be according to higher laws. The founders referred to this existence of a higher law, a natural law premise, self-evident and ‘revealed in nature', when they spoke of creating a more just government and founded on the principals of the laws of nature and nature's God.  It is essential for earnest pro-lifers, now that the various states are free to create new laws regarding abortion, that these pro-life advocates not be merely religious or doctrinaire advocates, but instead realize that they must build our laws on self-evident truth and be able to work within the principles of natural law and the methods of conducting a republic's business through parliamentary procedure and debate.  This necessitates setting aside our personal theology, working towards those higher laws, those common goods, and most importantly, being willing to compromise in order to get as much as we possibly can within the political process. Johnston explains how the current debate regarding appropriate abortion measures requires an understanding of natural law theory and practice, “the laws of nature and nature's God” as the founders outlined it, and the ability and humility to compromise in order to accomplish goals.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explores the rapid expansion of medical killing - euthanasia. The pattern for euthanasia advocates is to first establish a right to “assisted suicide” - a form of voluntary euthanasia – and imply that there will be protections from any abuse, and that there will be no expansion of medical killing. California Senate Bill 1169 by Senator Blakespear demonstrates again that once the idea of legalized medical killing is established, it is impossible to monitor or prevent its “It's okay” expansion.  Currently, it is very difficult to monitor the use of assisted suicide in California facilities. The government is dependent on the honesty of those reporting the actions and there is no penalty for failure to fill out a report.  That being said, the new bill removes the idea that there be a six month prognosis of death. That language is changed to “a grievous and irremediable medical condition.” In other words, there need not be any terminal condition!  Secondly, the new bill allows those with dementia to consent to assisted suicide, even though they have a condition that impairs their capacity to consent! The measure will now allow the use of intravenous administration of poison.  Under current law, the person takes an oral dose of the poison at the time and place of their own choosing with or without witnesses.  The new bill removes any need for a residency requirement. If you live in a state where your doctor is concerned that your depression and emotions are causing you to desire suicide, you can simply travel to California, where the new doctor will kill you without any further questions being asked. There is no requirement now, nor will there be, of psychological testing of the individuals to be killed. The 48-hour waiting period is removed.  If you ask to die today, you will be killed the same day. The original California Assisted Suicide Law was scheduled to sunset by 2031. Most laws have a sunset in order to assess their efficacy. Now, medical killing - euthanasia - will be the law of the land for perpetuity.   Don't believe that euthanasia advocates want to limit euthanasia. They want to be free to dispose of any individuals whom they see fit for disposal. That's how medical killing works. That's how it worked under national socialism. That's how it worked under international socialism. That's how it works wherever the Hippocratic Oath is removed from society.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the February 2024 decision of the Alabama Supreme Court regarding in vitro fertilization. The issue of in vitro fertilization (IVF) is not a new debate, but sadly, media coverage has over simplified and reduced a deeper analysis. The issue of manipulating human beings and playing God by creating, and then destroying human lives, has grave and dramatic implications for all of society, many of which are being ignored. First and foremost is the issue of human ownership. There is no debate that these are human embryos. Yes, they can be preserved by cryogenic freezing,  But they are indeed human and as the movie, “Jurassic Park” intimates, via IVF, there are implications to the use of science to both create, and then possibly destroy the life created. In that film, the issue revolved around using science to create dinosaurs, using cryogenic freezing of the embryos. But also shows the implications of the creation and theft of such cryogenic “property”. President Trump was clear that it is a practice that should have parameters and limits. He endorses its use only for childless couples who are unable to conceive, not for routinely 'creating human lives.' The issue of creating living property, “playing God,” is only the beginning. The idea of owning another human being is obviously at the heart of IVF issues when it comes to human reproduction. And the issue of owning a human being is clearly at the heart of both slavery and abortion.  Western Civilization has recognized that it is unethical to claim ownership of another human being, much less destroy a human being you claim to own.  Brian continues the discussion by examining the work of the Swedish Council on Bioethics. In vitro fertilization is being practiced in Sweden, but there are grave implications which are impacting that culture. The Swedish culture is considered liberal and progressive, but the dire implications of owning and creating new human lives are only beginning to be understood. The Swedish Council on Bioethics is asking for a re-examination and some reasonable limitations to be put on this ‘practice of medicine.'

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston examines the pressure in 2024 to legalize assisted suicide nationwide in the United States. Many nations have now adopted assisted suicide throughout their borders, including Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France, in many others. The American euthanasia movement had attempted to do this through the courts, but in 1994 the Glucksberg decision by the United States Supreme Court announced there was no national “legal right” to be killed by medicine. In spring of 2024, there are 10 states that have legalized medical killing, plus the District of Columbia. There are another fourteen states that have now introduced measures for this year's legislative session. But this belies the long-term methods, the actual approach that euthanasia advocates are taking. Initially, they propose safeguards and limits on a measure to help it get through the legislative process and legalized.  But then they “adjust” the parameters of the law. One of the most common limits is to initially say it is only for residents of their state.  This is in order to prevent what is happening in Switzerland, where tourist suicide allows people to fly in and simply be killed in any of dozens of death centers established in Switzerland. Many states that had put safeguards, like the need for multiple doctors to agree, or the need to be a state resident, or the need to be personally present with the physician (many drugs are now being prescribed via Zoom); all of those “safeguards” are now being removed. And there is concerted effort in the media, and by agent provocateur, to encourage those who are medically and emotionally vulnerable to receive their poison pills across state line via Zoom, or to travel to states where their lies will be brought to a swift and immediate end .  What all of this means is that we, as individuals. must be extremely attentive to our elderly and dependent relatives. We must ensure that, if they are in any long-term care facilities, proper emotional and medical attention is paid to them. This can only be done by personal involvement. It can't be done from afar Just as in older cultures, it is the family, and our immediate involvement with family, that is the greatest safeguard in a confused and dying civilization willing to kill the isolated vulnerable.  

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnson explains the importance of elections, each and every election.  More importantly, he focuses on the power of your vote the further down the ballot you go.  On a statewide level, your vote is a drop in the bucket.  But as various jurisdictions get smaller, the number of voters also gets dramatically smaller and this is why local elections are so important.  In order to have candidates for the state legislature, or for Congress, you must draw from people with some degree of political experience. Most people who run for these higher offices have had experience at the local level, whether it be school board, city council. or supervisor. Ironically, it is THESE starter positions, where your vote and the vote of your friends, make the greatest impact. By being involved in local elections, you can launch the career of people who share your values and ideals. Many elections for city office and for school board are determined by a relative handful of votes. That handful, five or six votes, may mean nothing on the larger level, but to keep Planned Parenthood out of your school district, that handful of votes can be the key difference.  By paying attention to these local races, you are not only effective in protecting your community from organizations like Planned Parenthood and others who seek to control the minds of your children, but you're helping to elect individuals who wish to see the government make wise decisions. You're helping out individuals who share your values. You're making a difference in your state, in your region, in your community. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston reminiscences on Life Matters beginning in 1987, on its expansion, and the many friends and allies that have brought it to this point 37 years later. Life Matters began on radio station station KCBC the 50,000 Watt (The highest wattage allowed by the FCC ) flamethrower station covering northern California. It was the northern California cornerstone for the Bott Broadcasting Network. Life Matters with Brian Johnston gradually expanded to other Bott affiliates, then to the Wilkins Network, which is a nationwide Christian broadcast string of stations, and eventually was included on many stations of the Salem Radio Network. Life Matters is also broadcast on shortwave radio through Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia. Brian points out there are other Life Matters radio programs, the most notable a Life Matters program which is broadcast by Australian Broadcasting System, it is not related to Life Matters with BRIAN JOHNSTON.  There are also smaller local shows that might share the name, “Life Matters.” They are usually, as in the case of one, a home and lifestyle program that focuses on home economics and day-to-day life (which is a good theme! It's just not our theme!). Brian dedicates some time to the various sponsors of Life Matters, including Mike Lindell, the Pillow Guy (use promo code: LIFE); Car Easy which is a nationwide non-profit that will take your donated car, improve it and then share the proceeds with our work. Go to Californiaprolife.careasy.org.  Another important sponsor is the Life Fest Film Festival. Go to lifefilmfest.com and you can view some of the latest creative submissions from new, as well as experienced filmmakers, making their way in the entertainment industry with positive, life-affirming films and programs. You can view at home. You don't have to travel. You don't have to rent a hotel or buy theater tickets. You can watch in the privacy of your own home. Hundreds of films are now available at lifefilmfest.com.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the real implications of Roe v. Wade, the fact that language is being used to trick people into thinking that the abortion debate has been settled - when in fact, it is only just begun in seriousness. Brian examines how the media uses semantics and semiotics – the study of signs and symbolism - to confuse the American public. The issue of red state versus blue state is but one example of how symbols are presented as truth to the public. The blue, which originally represented the Republican party, was intentionally changed starting in 1980 so that Red would not be associated with the Democrats and their philosophy. Throughout the rest of the world, red has been associated with the principles of Communism and state control. If the media continued to announce that a Democrat victory was a victory for the Reds then people may begin associating the Democrat party with its actual ideas of statism: group division, group control, oppressor versus oppressed, and other principles outlined in revolutionary Socialism are aligned with Communism.  Starting in 1980, John Chancellor and the dominant media officially declared the color of Democrats to be blue, contrary to its historically use as representing Republicans. Instead, NBC and all media declared that Republicans should be considered red and Democrats blue. This use of symbolism or semiotics is an intentional act on behalf of the media. But media manipulation goes much further, and usually they use simpler forms of semantics, bending meanings - that is, the bending of words to come to a different conclusion than they are implying. They imply their own neutrality, but are, in fact, directing listeners to very specific conclusion. The word, “choice” has been used in different ways so that listening people, if they want some kind of exception for hard cases on abortion, are told that they are pro-choice for those hard cases.  But in political reality, what abortion advocates actually mean by “choice” is not to limit abortion, but to authorize unlimited abortion. ‘A woman doesn't have to give a reason if she wants the abortion.  She should simply be free to choose it.' Abortions of healthy babies inside healthy mothers is the political result of that meaning of choice. The media will use the term interchangeably to convince normal people that they support the radical feminist view of “choice.”  Finally, Dobbs itself as a decision has been declared to “ overturn Roe” but it really didn't. It did not address Doe v. Bolton which made doctors, the abortionist a killer. It also made doctors the killing decision-makers. Doe v. Bolton made doctors violate the Hippocratic Oath. And the Doe v. Bolton decision was not overturned. Brian's book, “Evil Twins: Roe and Doe, How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing,” is available online and also as an audiobook version on Amazon.  

Life Fest Film Festival is a very unique film festival from Hollywood California. Film festivals are an important part of the entertainment industry. This is where new filmmakers get their start and old filmmakers try out new ideas. Many film festivals are either geographically based, for example, Cannes, France or Park City and many are thematically based. Life Film Fest is an important aspect of the movie industry, and supported by many industry insiders, because of its unique and important message: the significance of each and every life, and in particular the seemingly insignificant life. We know that the Right To Life issue is facing an ideology which dismisses the value of individual lives. Many reasons or justifications are given to kill a young child in the womb or a newborn, a disabled person, or an elderly person.  Anyone who is dependent on others can easily be dismissed if the law will not protect them.  In today's culture, there are many who do not care about the Right To Life. The reason for this is simple - they do not understand the significance and importance of each life. They are easily persuaded to dismiss the lives of others. By focusing on the uniqueness of the human person, and the extraordinary nature of life itself, the gift of life is honored in this unique film festival. Life Fest is now Life Fest international. It has submissions from throughout the world, can be viewed year-round through streaming into your home, and is supported by stellar industry insiders. Go to lifefilmfest.com.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the growing embrace of euthanasia in western culture. Listeners of Life Matters understand that the Right to Life debate is a debate about whether the law should allow the killing of innocent human lives. Today, after the impact of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, medical killing has become widespread in the United States and accepted under the law. This is not simply in the act of human abortion. Numerous states have legalized “Assisted suicide”.  But understand that the emotions surrounding suicide can easily be addressed or even manipulated. The reason we have suicide hotlines is because the idea of taking one's life is one of emotional despair. This despair, these emotions, can be addressed if we care for that human being. However, if we no longer wish to care for that human being, those emotions can just as easily be exploited. That human being can then be disposed of.  In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the rapid acceptance of euthanasia in Canada. Prior to 2016 it was illegal for doctors to intentionally kill their patients.  But in 2016, using emotional arguments and misleading language, laws were passed allowing MAID (Medical assistance in dying), a euphemism for various forms of euthanasia. It was to ‘only be used' for those who were truly dying of an incurable cancer and at death's door. It was presented as simply relieving them of pain and suffering. But that quickly changed. Because Canada uses government-sponsored healthcare at every level, the idea of saving funds and being compassionate for many other lonely and suffering people has now been marketed to the Canadian people. Beginning in March 2023, it is now legal to kill a patient that has nothing physically wrong with them.  If they are depressed, it is considered very ethical to simply take their life.  This has not been a slippery slope.  Commissioner Johnson points out it has been a precipice. As soon as you authorize doctors to be killers and remove the Hippocratic oath as a guideline for their actions, you have embraced a form of technical savagery.  Vulnerable human beings are routinely killed, dismissed, and forgotten. The only way for this to be addressed is for this outlandish dismissal of our fellow human beings to be condemned clearly and loudly. In the meantime, should you or loved ones suffer depression, or suicidal thoughts it is up to us now to be involved in counseling and encouraging those who are in vulnerable situations.  If you have loved ones in nursing homes, please be sure that they are not being over-medicated or being ignored. Depression and neglect are some of the most common problems in long-term care and nursing home situations. Once we culturally embrace killing those who are no longer actively involved in our life, we, as a culture, have stepped off of the precipice of civilization and into moral darkness.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines what is really at stake in the issue of the Dobbs Decision. Many pro-life individuals errantly believe that the Roe v. Wade decision started the abortion debate in the United States, and that somehow the Dobbs Decision has resolved the debate. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Dobbs Decision was an apology by the Supreme Court, that it should NEVER have entered into the realm of making laws. The Supreme Court itself violated the United States Constitution. And in the Dobbs Decision, the court apologizes and says that now, 50 years later, it's actually only “up to the people themselves through their elected representatives,” to make law. This is an invitation to pro-life individuals to now be actively and passionately involved in their representative form of government, to work right now, to elect pro-life individuals to public office at every level of government. Brian reminds us that the constitution requires that each and every state must use this representative or republican form of government. Local city counties and state governments employ elected representatives. What the Supreme Court did in the Dobbs Decision was say, “We were wrong for 50 years.  We've allowed abortion on demand, but it was really up to lawmakers to make laws and not us, and for citizens to elect lawmakers.” Brian also took extra time to talk about the need to help our fellow Americans, and especially younger folks who are educated into a vapid worldview, to help them understand that human life is valuable.  The Life Fest film festival is dedicated to helping our culture reinforce, and understand the significance of each and every life, and in particular the seemingly insignificant life.  Life Fest '24 is currently viewing online and you can buy tickets at lifefilmfest.com.  From Thanksgiving through the end of December you can buy a complete season pass to view both this year and the coming season. Enjoy and support contributions of new filmmakers making creative films that underscore the significant importance of the seemingly insignificant life.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores the recent elections and the losses of November 7, 2023. Those losses for pro-life Issues and candidates can be attributed directly to the Dobbs Decision.  The Dobbs Decision was not understood by most pro-life individuals. The Dobbs Decision was not, in fact, a victory for the pro-life movement.  It did not “overturn“ Roe versus Wade. It was the Supreme Court apologizing for Roe v. Wade, and saying it's not going to get involved - that was it.  “Let's pretend that never happened.  Now you voters can do whatever you want.” But that is not ‘overturning'.  In fact, it is giving approval to the medical killing of children if so voted.   But that was never the case before Roe.  We have NOT ‘gone back to before Roe' because doctors were following the Hippocratic Oath before Roe.   They have not restored the legal or ethical standards of the Hippocratic Oath which is the key and essential violation of Roe and its conjoined decision Doe v Bolton.   Dobbs was exactly the same as the Dred Scott Decision.  The Dred Scott Decision was a Supreme Court decision that was expected to end the slavery debate. But, in fact, it did not.  It made it worse. It allowed slavery to continue in slave states, but worse, it allowed slavery to be enforced in anti-slavery states!  That's right! The Dred Scott Decision said that pro-slavery advocates could come in to free states, grab runaway slaves, and bring them back to slavery. Dred Scott had asked to be declared ‘free' because he had indeed escaped a slave state and was in a free state. The Supreme Court said, “No.” So under the Dobbs Decision, exactly the same legal standing has taken place.  As Justice Kavanaugh put it, “The Supreme Court should never have ruled on abortion and will never again rule on abortion.” “We don't want anything to do with this issue,” to paraphrase his concurrence.  “If you want to kill babies go ahead. If you wanna protect babies, go ahead, but we will not debate this at the Court ever again.” If you pro-lifers understood the meaning and implications, they should be truly appalled at Dobbs  Many still think that Roe somehow started the abortion debate, and the Dobbs somehow ends it. They are categorically wrong, and because if that have not been prepared for the battle at hand. They are walking in civic ignorance.  In the second part of the program, Brian has good news and that is that Life Fest Film Festival is now available to be viewed anywhere in the world. You can view it on your computer screen at home or as many people now do, stream it onto your flatscreen television. There's no need to fly to Hollywood to buy seats at the theater or stay in a hotel. It's a film festival where excellent new film makers and experienced filmmakers can explore the issue of innocent human life, and the significance of each and every life.   Lifefilmfest.com. Motion pictures have become the new literature of our culture. Visual storytelling is where most people get their feelings, emotions and ideas about what really matters in life.  This storytelling is an important art. It's what Jesus did - the Pharisees were religious. But Jesus told people stories to help them understand the truly deep underlying issues of life.  And that's what movies do. They tell important stories that impart knowledge and understanding in the most important things.   When it comes to the right to life, the significance of even the seemingly insignificant life is an essential premise.  So the good news is Life Fest can now be viewed on your home Screen!  There are special discounts for listeners of Life Matters and you can buy gifts of screenings for any young people you may know who want to go into the film industry. That's the purpose of Life Fest! It's changing Hollywood and Hollywood is what impacts our culture.  Lifefilmfest.com.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian focuses on the very specific nature of a very specific political party: the Democrat Party of the United States. He finishes with a comparative and contrastive look at the striking difference between a Democracy and a Republic. As an explanatory template, he uses a recent publication from a Democrat Party operative and New York Times contributor, Terry Golway. The book is, Machine Made; Tammany Hall and the Creation of Modern American Politics. While Brian clearly disagrees with the principles and nature of Tammany Hall, he recommends the book itself as a valid expose, and an unflinching examination of machine or collectivist politics. It was mastered in New York City and spread through much of New York, and is continuing to this very day. Golway, himself, states that the corrupt society of Saint Tammany or "Tammany Hall", founded in 1786, is the template being employed by the modern Democrat Party today. Stuffing ballot boxes, blanketing precincts with empty ballots, collecting and completing them, absence of ballot signature verification, less than honest voting tabulation were all a regular part of the Tammany machine.  Boss Tweed, one of its more notorious “bosses”, is perhaps the most infamous for gleefully celebrating his questionable methods, and eventually being exposed for obvious political corruption. Though caught, he was obviously less than penitent.   Many famous names from American history, Roosevelt and LaGuardia, are now familiar to us because they spent considerable efforts in attempts to limit the corrupt influence of Tammany on the city and state of New York.  When the Irish potato famine (1846-1852) drove millions to emigrate to the US, Tammany workers awaited them at the New York docks. Tammany "ward heelers" then knew where they lived and obliged them with employment if they could. All social and religious interests were accommodated and all accommodation came with political obligation. The machine was set. The resources of government and its influence would lubricate the machine. After exploiting the Irish immigrant population, Tammany spread its tentacles into the new Italian immigrant populace. Fiorello La Guardia was one who spoke out powerfully against the evils and corruption of racial exploitation, groupthink and machine politics as practiced by Tammany.  Before him, Theodore Roosevelt sought and received an appointment as a police commissioner in New York City in 1895, specifically because Tammany used the authority of government, as embodied in the police, to enforce its policies. Roosevelt was tenacious and popular with the press, but largely ineffective. But because of his commitment to stand against corruption and the evil of Tammany, he "rose like a rocket" in New York politics. But Roosevelt could not finish the job. The Tammany machine has not gone away. It still exists. It has morphed into the backbone of New York politics. Its methods are openly used by the modern Democrat party, and Terry Golway's, Machine Made:  Tammany Hall and the Creation of Modern American Politics. makes no bones about that. 

In the second part of our episode on natural law as a legal predicate, Brian explains at length why Christians should be the most comfortable with this idea - instead of insisting that their theology be the predicate for approaching the issue of life in America's laws.  Using raw political power to pass a measure that conforms with our religion is not actually an exercise in just law or a recognition of higher law. it is an acknowledgment that, “if we have the votes, we can pass this law“.  What if a political group passes laws on this foundation? It is in essence, the exact predicate used by the Taliban or any other religious group throughout history. It is exactly what gave rise to many of the political disagreements in Europe in the centuries before America's founding. Americas Founders did not invoke ‘natural law' unintentionally.  As most individuals who are involved in the right-to-life movement are of some Christian faith background, Brian takes an in-depth look at the Scriptures.  They both explain, and in fact, command, this approach to viewing life and the law. God uses nature to instruct us. The Sermon on the Mount and its appeal to consider flowers, birds, and nature itself is at the heart of much of Christ's teaching.   His parables from everyday life stood in great contrast to the religious platitudes of the religious leaders who demanded that religious practices were the way to understand God. But the scriptures themselves indicate that there are deeper things at work. Romans 1:20 , “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.” It is nature itself that proclaimed God‘s presence and nature, Gods higher law principles are made evident through the things that are seen.  Psalm 8 and Psalm 19 make extensive reference to astronomy and how, for believers, it is actually presented as instruction in God's nature and God‘s ways.  However, very few take the time to “consider deeply” what they see when they see the stars.  “Seeing” is not the same as understanding or contemplating, or “considering.”  And it is these latter, contemplative verbs that are indeed used in scripture.  As Jesus Himself made evident to the Pharisees, they did not live a practically applied spiritual life, they are pursuing religious precepts and traditions. “It is the traditions of men that make void the word of God.”  Religion is stifling, and most people intuitively know that when they look at the religion of others. Being able to apply it to ourselves is the hardest part. Jesus was very explicit with His own followers, and is blunt in Luke 12:56 - 57. He pointed out that they could indeed recognize objective reality in nature and come to valid conclusions, and yet they were not taking the time to think more deeply about the spiritual challenges of their own time. “You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and sky. Why don't you know how to interpret the present times? And why don't you judge for yourselves what is right?“ It is critically important for the pro-life movement to understand its foundation in natural law, as instruction for us and for how we deal with others.  It is also critically important for all Christians to understand their obligation to spend time with God and in the nature which He has created for us to help understand Him. It's not that we need to be classical scientists, but we should examine closely God's creatures in creation and contemplate, dwell on, think deeply about, how it impacts our day-to-day lives.  In fact, the scripture seems to indicate that is one of the purposes of creation:  and creation is waiting for us to do OUR job.  “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God.“ (Romans 8:19)  There is little doubt that for us to come to better understanding of ANYTHING we must consider it deeply. Nowhere is that clearer than in natural law, and the right to life.

In this extraordinary episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explores the biological miracle of twinning. More to the point, he explains in detail how even identical twins are not identical. The twins can share exactly the same DNA, but God still makes each of us unique, even individual “identical twins.” The bottom line is that human beings are not merely naked apes or mammalian animals. Human beings are spiritual beings first and foremost. While there are some aspects of secular science that refuses to acknowledge a spiritual dimension to life, ironically, the physical sciences actually indicate there are deeper truths, higher laws, more profound principles at work behind the machinery of nature.  These higher-law principles are the bedrock of Western Civilization.  Brian uses an amazing weekend trip in which he actually met two sets of identical twins. With them, he took the time to review more of their “identical” nature. You'll enjoy his story of the older boys, though identical twins, who are dramatically different in both height, manner and temperament. He also tells of meeting five-year-old twins while walking in his neighborhood. “I think this was more than a coincidence,” said Brian. Everything in life can tell you something.  Our greatest challenge is learning how to hear and see and understand the opportunities presented to us. The miraculous illusion of identical twins has been a very instructive piece in the amazing jig-saw puzzle of life.  Objective, physical science reinforces the uniqueness of each and every human life even amongst identical twins. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston takes a straight-forward look into what the overrule of Roe v. Wade actually means for our nation and our state. He reads from the decision and cites several other matters of court precedent, including Doe v. Bolton. Johnston explains that not a single baby is protected in the language of the Dobbs decision. Instead, the Court simply apologizes and declares they will now let the American people again regulate abortion, and do so through their elected representatives. It restores that essential principle of the Republic: government of, by and for the people. But it does not restore all those laws it struck on Jan 22, 1973. It does not actually address the 50 years of killing or the many other harms that emanated from that day. The Dobbs decision clearly states the Court's regret with the extremist and inappropriate Roe v. Wade misadventures of January 22, 1973. On that day the Court overturned all state laws.  The Court took upon itself the rule of legislators and superimposed its will on all the various legislative bodies. This was an unconstitutional act.  But on June 24, 2022 the Court did not go back in time. The Court did not reinstate all of those laws that were in existence. The Court was very clear in Dobbs, that it was not going to create ANY new abortion laws in either direction - that was its initial problem. Creating law is not the job of the Court. Instead, the Dobbs decision has returned the duty of regulating abortion to the involvement of the citizens doing so through their elected representatives. This is the model of a constitutional republic, and is the premise of the American Constitution. What that means is if a legislative body decides to restrict abortion, theCourt is promising it will never again interfere with that right. In discussing Roe, the language of Justice Alito clearly parallels the same language of dissenting Justice Byron White in 1973. The superimposing will of the Court was an exercise in 'raw additional power,' and without any basis in law or logic.  Alito is clear he would have joined the dissent in 1973. But he is also clear. This is no longer 1973. So what do we do now? Brian points out that the Dobbs decision is not specifically aimed at state representatives, but literally the people themselves who will regulate abortion through their elected representatives - so the principle can apply to Congress. It also can apply to local elected officials where those local officials deem it necessary to limit the involvement of the abortion industry in their respective jurisdictions.  School boards are but one example that comes to mind. Brian raises a deeper issue. How is the pro-life movement now to win in this chess board battle of ideas and laws? He turns, of all places, to California.  Californians, in fact, do not agree with the major media and the abortion industry when it comes to "choice" as meaning, unlimited abortion throughout all nine months, government funding of its promotion and underwriting, and the secret application of abortions to minors, whether they be from California or brought in from out of state.  The California Rasmussen poll demonstrates the vast majority of Californians -  as is the case in the rest of the nation, think that "choice” means very narrow limiting and control of abortion.  Brian insists THIS is the opportunity that pro-lifers should avail of: invert the public's common misunderstanding and welcome their desire to limit abortions. The respected Rasmussen poll found that only 13% of likely California voters of both parties believe abortion should be legal at any time during pregnancy up to the moment of birth.  Fourteen percent (14%) think abortion should be legal up to six months of pregnancy, while 32% say abortion should be legal up to three months of pregnancy. Nineteen percent (19%) believe abortion should only be legal during the first month of pregnancy, while 14% think all abortions should be illegal. Yes, Brian insists THIS is the opportunity that pro-lifers should avail of: invert the public's common misunderstanding and welcome their desire to limit abortions as understanding and being opposition to “choice".  Once we welcome them as opponents of Planned Parenthood and abortion as a 'universal therapy,' we can then focus on teaching them more. But we must get them in the door based on what they now DO believe!  They oppose Choice abortion. That is a very, very good thing.

The year 2022 was an extraordinary year for life. Roe versus Wade was overturned through the Dobbs decision of the United States Supreme Court. The Court was very clear, however, that it is a narrowly-drawn decision. Instead of doctors being the arbiters of when an abortion is appropriate (which was the conclusion of Roe and Doe), under Dobbs, “the regulation of abortion has been returned to the people themselves, through their elected representatives.”  This decision underscores the work of the right to life movement and the overall obligation to elect pro-life representatives, wherever we wish to see unborn children protected under the law. The year 2022 also saw the worldwide premiere of the International Life Fest Film Festival. More than 600 films had been submitted from around the world. Less than 40 were selected for viewing. The film festival runs online from Thanksgiving through New Year's day. Those with purchased tickets are free to vote on their favorite films at www.lifefilmfest.com. Radio and podcast listeners have been extended a special 40% discount for their tickets. The films will run on any computer or smart phone and can be projected onto a smart TV to view on the large screen at home.  2023 holds great promise with a new Congress and pending dramatic shift in news. With the exposé of Twitter and Facebook, we are seeing a change in the tide. A biased media has been one of the greatest challenges to the RTL and newly opened opportunities in mass communications mean that the overturn of Roe is just the beginning of cultural restoration.  

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston conducts an interview with Laura Lehmus, a Finnish director, currently residing in Germany. This interview is part of a series, exploring the Life Fest Film Festival. Life Fest is that unique film festival, dedicated to honoring those films which underscore the significance of an innocent human life, and in particular the seemingly insignificant life. For 12 years, Life Fest has been conducted from Hollywood, California. It has drawn filmmakers from throughout the world, with productions from experienced hands but also brand new students of film.  Its purpose is to give a vision, excitement, and definitive purpose to these aspiring filmmakers to continue on in this important theme, the actual theme of western civilization -  the dignity of each and every life.  This year's Life Fest film festival is now available online and can be viewed at www.lifefilmfest.com or accessed through the California Pro-Life Council webpage. Laura's is one of several films submitted in the foreign language category. “Sweet Disaster” is in German with English subtitles. It's a very unique film dealing with a young woman who struggles as an immigrant in Berlin, facing an out of wedlock pregnancy. Her suitor rejects her and she is very much alone in a big, strange, and seemingly heartless world. She is over 40 and her rather low paying job fires her for not telling them of her pregnancy. Working with the developmentally disabled, she is an individual who is full of compassion and yet, appears to be abandoned by all others. In a simultaneously deep discussion of the storyline itself, weaved with an over arching view of the filmmaker's challenges, they explore the seemingly tragic yet, simultaneously humorous storyline. It is Laura's first feature film but she had some tremendous opportunities with a powerful leading cast, excellent cinematography, and one of the better known script writers of German cinema helping her.  In this interview Brian and Laura explore the story and Laura explains some of her motivation in telling this particular tale. She was deeply honored to be chosen by Life Fest as we are a film festival that understood precisely her vision and purpose. This is just one film available in this year's Life Fest catalog. More than thirty films from throughout the world -from first time teenage filmmakers to more mature and seasoned directors, each film aims to tell the uniqueness of a human life, a human life that others might view as ‘problematic' and be all too ready to dismiss.  www.lifefilmfest.com

This episode of Life Matters explores the net results of the 2022 elections. In particular, the challenge is the dominant media narrative that somehow the pro-life issue lost in 2022 when, in fact, quite the opposite took place.  With the overturn of Roe v. Wade there were 12 states that passed pro-life legislation.  In each of those states the signing governors were affirmed and reelected. It has been suggested that somehow pro-lifer‘s are physically involved in harming individuals, or destroying clinics but that has not been the case in the least. In fact, the FBI, in a notorious media generated stunt, did arrest a Christian family involved in only praying in front of abortion clinics. There's no actual documentation of any physical harm brought by these individuals. Perhaps most tragically it has been crisis pregnancy centers that have been targeted with fire bombings and physical defacement and destruction. The stories have been covered in Life Matters earlier programs, and our hope is that these will come to an end.  The pro-life movement is dedicated to passing laws that will protect the integrity of each human life, and in particular the innocent, vulnerable individuals routinely dismissed by an uncaring culture. It might be seen as uncomfortable to call our current culture dystopian.  But given the incredibly pervasive cultural narrative which opposes the idea that the law should protect innocent and vulnerable human lives, one certainly sees the need to get information from a diversity of sources. Ideas have consequences.  Getting real facts, and not merely politicized agendas, is vital for our ongoing freedoms.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston gives a brief history of the Life Fest Film Festival which has been held in Hollywood, California for 12 years! This is the first of a special iteration of Life Fest which will be entirely visible from your home. All films and workshops, all breakout sessions will be available to you directly, and a special season pass is available for your viewing in the weeks after Thanksgiving.  The program contains interviews with Vanna White, Kevin Sorbo, Clint Howard and others.  This unique film festival allows aspiring filmmakers and ‘experienced hands' in the industry to present their work to film watchers around the world. In this episode, Brian gives a brief overview of his experience in the entertainment industry, and his teaching experience of both literature and film. This special online film festival is unique in the world and allows many of these international film makers an opportunity to reach an otherwise unreachable audience. Some Iranian filmmakers and those who have been cut off from free-speech rights have submitted films. Perhaps most importantly, the theme of this unique festival is that it honors films that underscore the significance of each individual life and in particular, the seemingly insignificant life.  It has brought a fresh hope to Hollywood and to the industry at large. Go to lifefilmfest.com for season tickets to this extraordinary life affirming entertainment venue.

Every Life Matters episode makes itself applicable to the immediacy of the news and the times, but simultaneously, Mr. Johnston explains the times in their context.  He underscores the evergreen and important principles that are needed in these times.  This episode is the penultimate episode leading up to November elections, 2022. Brian underscores the many misunderstandings that pro-life individuals have come to, and how those misunderstandings, once clarified and then acted on, could have a dramatic impact on the nation.  But this happens only through having a dramatic impact on one's immediate community, their county, and their state. This is done through the lawmakers which they elect, and which represent each of those jurisdictions.  The recent Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court decision, which nullified the Roe v. Wade decision, explicitly stated this principle. The authority to make abortion laws lies with each American citizen, and is done through their elected representatives. All of these down-ballot jurisdictions are representative of the federal representative form of government which we have inherited in the United States. On the national level, that representative government is manifest through the two houses of Congress. Most reportage of the moment rightly focuses in this election on the critical decisions in balance within the United States House of Representatives  and the United States Senate. These are essential political battles.  But without understanding the principles employed there, and how these representatives are hired at each election, the lack of clarity in civics has brought great harm to the pro-life movement. Many efforts made by earnest pro-life individuals don't actually accomplish a change in the laws. Activity is not the same as accomplishment.  This specific episode equips Christians of all backgrounds and denominations and even non-Christians in the pro-life movement, with an understanding of appropriate civic actions.  These election activities are not arbitrary.  They lead to legal accomplishment by lawmakers on behalf of the vulnerable innocent child and of all vulnerable innocent human lives. Brian quotes from Dr. Dobson's, “Family Talk” program of a previous week.  In it, Dr. Dobson bemoans the fact that in presidential elections, 25 million Evangelicals don't even register to vote nationwide. But it gets worse. In every general election, 65 million Evangelical voters will admit they will vote but they will not vote down the ballot and will leave blank whole sections of their ballot in what is known as down ballot races. The 65 million American Evangelicals are disproportionately very, very pro-life. Amazingly, the power of their vote is disproportionately more powerful in down ballot races.  This power is because in a state wide race - for example California - typically 4 to 8,000,000 ballots can be cast (sometimes more!)  The difference of say 50 votes from one particular church in Pomona, California is mathematically a drop in a very, very large ocean.  But as you descend down the ballot, (just as the properties of a nitrogen gas bubble expand the further down you descend), the value in properties of that ballot expand exponentially.  California has 52 congressional districts - your vote is 52 times more impactful for your Congressional candidate than it is for a state-wide candidate.  But continue down into the depths of civics.  As you go down to the very local level, those 50 votes are exponentially huge in the city of Pomona and further down in the separately segregated geographic portion of Pomona that's known as a school district.  But go further. Go down to District 5 of the school district board. That church in Pomona is in that district. Those 50 votes are now absolutely dispositive. They will help determine the disposition of that election and many school board candidates are elected by much, much smaller margins than 50 votes  That same ballot being cast by you has exponentially more power in speaking to your representatives as the Dobbs vs. Jackson decision directed.  Your voice is exponentially more powerful in your Congressional district and down to your very local community than it is state wide.  So this is the reason in federal and state elections that it is critically important to work with a comprehensive pro-life team in civics. National Right to Life is the team of diverse pro-lifer's. National Right Life PAC and its state affiliate pacs, allow your vote to have a great power on the state and federal level.  Your efforts with your local pro-life chapter has incredible power - expansive nitrogen bubble expansion - at the great depths of your local school board. Your same vote has devastating impact in the fight to keep abortion advocates out of your local schools  (I, of course, speak metaphorically and urge you to consider these things deeply and as you ascend make sure you decompress, taking this knowledge with you.  When you reach the surface please be natural about it. Go out and vote and vote with your local pro-life community.) California Prolife and many of the affiliates of National Right to Life Committee provide an important voter information tool. Historically, these were paper voter guides. But with the advancement in technology and the vast numbers of local candidates, the new vote.californiaprolife.org allows any citizen in the state of California to download their mailing address where they receive their ballot and every pro-life candidate and issue on their local precinct ballot is presented.  When pro-lifers vote pro-life, down the entire ballot, they change their communities, they change their counties, they change their members of Congress, they change their states.  Again, this tool is available at the California Prolife website www.californiaprolife.org, at the specific url Vote.californiaprolife.org, and national information directing you to each and every state affiliate is available at nrlc.org.

Each and every Life Matters podcast is designed to equip listeners for very specific and detailed understanding of particular aspects of the fight to protect innocent lives. This episode of Life Matters, recorded in October 2022, addresses itself to a very specific and ongoing issue in this fight for life. It focuses on the election coming to an end on November 8th.  It gives a much deeper, detailed explanation and understanding of the significance of this and future elections when it comes to ending abortion and the much larger issue of protecting all innocent life from medical killing.  The utilitarian use of medicine - medical abortions - is perhaps the most evil aspect of what the Roe v. Wade decision actually brought to America. The abortion aspect was the only aspect addressed in the Dobbs decision of June, 2022.  Mr. Johnston begins by giving an overview of the elections in California and nationwide. He reminds listeners that our electoral system has been dramatically changed under Democrat party policies. Historically, November 8th would be election day, and all those with the privilege of voting would cast their ballot on that day. To accommodate those unable to cast their ballot that day, a system has long been in place known as absentee balloting.  But throughout America's history the use of such absentee balloting has been extremely and closely monitored. There's a universal agreement by those concerned about the changes in election patterns of the last decade that the abuse of the absentee ballot has led to many mysterious and unaccountable ballots being cast. This alteration of America's voting patterns and voting laws was further changed during the COVID-19 worldwide epidemic. Many governments addressed the virus in many different ways. In the United States, it was used to dramatically alter the use of absentee ballots and other forms of balloting.  Brian, speaking from direct experience within California elections over the last 40 years and experiences with elections in the English speaking world (UK, Ireland, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand), warns that America must return - in order to preserve the nature of its government - to its constitutional form of electing its government.  The new election procedures have allowed unconstitutional premises to be the basis of the vote and thus of the laws emanating from those elected. The Constitution of the United States is what has in fact allowed the protection of the rights which American citizens are promised. The first and foremost of these rights is the right of the innocent to live.  Brian drills down deeply on the immediate application of these principles. He dedicates a portion of the program to the reemergence in California of Pro-life Democrats. It is crossover Democrats, historically, that have elected all pro-life legislators even in California, Ronald Reagan being the most shining example. But the influence of an effective and pointedly directed, pro-life Democrat effort greatly alters the outcome of elections because there are many, many people who have remained registered democrats (Roman Catholics, union members, and many others).  They prefer the pro-life position yet have felt compelled by social or cultural background to be registered in the Democrat party. This registration differential must be understood and clarifying principles applied.  This year's emergence of a national pro-life Democrat effort that instead of merely going along with the party and raising pro-life signs, attacks pro abortion advocates within their party for exactly what they are doing.  These new Pro-life Democrats are not silent even when asked to be silent. As Ronald Reagan said, “I did not leave the Democrat party - the Democrat party left me.” As important as they are for this election, Brian has promised an entire program dedicated to how California pro-life Democrats and nationally pro-life Democrats can be much, much more effective.  Brian goes on to explain that even in California, Democrats support for unlimited abortion is extremely rare. The recent Rasmussen Poll of California voters indicates that a very small proportion of such voters actually support the idea of unlimited abortion throughout pregnancy (13%). These numbers almost perfectly reflect the actual disposition of normal Americans across the nation.  In his book, Evil Twins - Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing, Brian had cited both the Marist poll of 2021 and the Gallup poll. Their detailed analysis revealed almost exactly the same thing nationally.  Approximately 12 to 13% of Americans want to ban all abortions and approximately 12 to 13% want to embrace all abortions. The vast majority find themselves defining their support based on the age of a child whether it be in three months or six months etc., or often because of very, very special and unusual circumstances (rape, incest, life of the mother, severe field deformities…). These Americans would like to see some kind of restrictions on unlimited abortion and a balancing of rights so that the child is given some legal consideration under the law. The average use of “pro-choice” in the Democrat party's  and in the media's lexicon means “abortion should be allowed without having to give a reason, allowed at any time simply because it has been chosen.” As a literature instructor, Shakespearian actor, and communications practitioner (writing, film television and radio), Brian is well aware that the electoral process is merely the culminating decision of other thought processes in the battle of ideas.  All Americans, and all human beings for that matter, are facing these critical ideas. A portion of the episode is dedicated to reminding people of Life Fest Film Festival now in its 12th year. The film festival will release after the election and be available worldwide instead of just in Hollywood and Park City, Utah.  It will be available for viewers to participate online, to view films and vote on them, to attend workshops, and to be involved in one of the most significant culture-changing film festivals of the entertainment industry. Information on elections in California are available at www.californiaprolife.org or national elections at www.nrlc.org and information on the coming Life Fest Film Festival at www.lifefilmfest.com. 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston pointedly focuses on elections in 2022. This is the first election since the overturn of Roe versus Wade. Because of that, the disposition of the elected representatives will be of considerable importance.  As usual, Brian goes into extraordinary depths to help individuals understand the details of the Right To Life fight for legal protection of the innocent.  First, Brian explains the history of PACs. PACs were formed in the 1980s in response to public employee unions forced withdrawal of money from union members, and the use of that money for political purposes. This gave the political left multiple millions to use at election time. This is actually government money.  PACs were formed to allow normal people to also “unionize” - that is to say, join together in a group and pool their resources together to impact particular elections. California Prolife, National Right to Life and various state affiliates have organized pro-life PACs. This is the time of year that these tools MUST come into play. Because of the importance of elections now in the wake of Roe v. Wade, pro-lifers need to focus sharply on electing pro-life representatives. The link to the CaliforniaProlife PAC is as follows:  https://www.efundraisingconnections.com/c/CaliforniaProLifeCouncil Brian also takes a moment to read directly from the Dobbs decision of earlier this summer. This decision is inescapable in its power and significance. There was never a right to abortion in the Constitution. The Supreme Court had wrongly held it in both Roe v. Wade and Casey and those decisions were overturned.  The Supreme Court explicitly returned to the people and their representatives, the authority to protect the lives of those in their jurisdiction.  Roe versus Wade and its progeny had given abortionists alone the authority to decide the propriety of an abortion and which child should be killed in which manner. This untrammeled right to abortion being given to MDs was a gross violation of the US Constitution. In affirming the authority of the people and their voting power in electing representatives, the Supreme Court has renewed this basic principle of the Constitution: we have been given a government of the people, by the people and for the people. This principle was reiterated by Lincoln in his desire to ensure that the self-evident truth of the humanity of then-slaves would be recognized, and their right to life (as he expressed in the Lincoln-Douglas debates) that their right to life could be affirmed and insured under the constitutional principles of The United States of America. Each and every affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee has focused on this duty of the people to speak up, and to elect representatives who would speak up for the innocent.  In the last several decades, the voting process has been altered and in particular during the Covid epidemic. Instead of a particular voting day (today marked as November 8, 2022) many states are practicing early voting and absentee voting.  Due to the serious questions regarding the tallying of these ballots, it is strongly suggested that our method of electing our representatives be returned to its original accountable model where abuses, false votes, ballot stuffing, and other questionable forms of electioneering are harder to implement. For this reason California Prolife is adhering to and suggesting the policies of the Election Integrity Project of California. While the state is still asserting one can send in an absentee ballot and it can be tracked electronically, it is only able to track its reception, but not the fact that it has been tallied. Voter IntegrityProject points out that the envelopes provided for this process indicate the political party of the recipient.  When that is the case, even if that envelope arrives safely at a voter registrars office, it no longer has the qualities of an “Australian ballot,” a ‘secret' ballot. In other words, those who would seek malfeasance could easily not count certain disfavorable ballots if they are cognizant that they're from Republicans or, from a particular precinct.  For this reason California Prolife strongly suggests that pro-life voters follow the guidelines of the Election Integrity Project and walk their ballot personally to their local voting precinct. The instructions on how to process that ballot are available at this website:  https://www.eip-ca.com/index.htm The exciting news is that there are many many concerned pro-life individuals now running for office all the way down the ballot. The non-aligned/nonpartisan offices of the county and city level, school board, city councils, various service districts - these races are often won by a handful of votes and when concerned citizens vote with knowledge they can win many of these races. These newly elected representatives, though it may be a small office, become the future representatives up the ballot. Brian points out he knows many members of Congress and state representatives. Nearly all of them began by running for office on the local level. The pro-life community must understand the need to be involved in local politics.  For this reason California Prolife has been coordinating with West Virginians For Life, and providing a very specific voter look-up tool. This is an app available for any computer or smart phone which upon entering ones ballot mailing address, all of the relevant offices from governor to constitutional office or state wide, to ballot measures, to state offices, to county city and local offices including school boards and special service districts, all of these are than made known to that pro-life voter. This voting tool is available at the following URL address:  https://vote.californiaprolife.org/ Finally, we must be reminded that the Supreme Court has returned to us, as the people, the ability to speak up for innocent life. A corrupt abortion law and government is attempting to silence further discussion. In California, Michigan and Vermont, constitutional propositions have been placed on the ballot that will forever silence the ability of the people and their elected representatives to put into place pro-life laws protecting young mothers and their babies.  This is a top-down, imperious and forced view of government, which Roe v. Wade had represented.   This corrupt, simplistic view of government power suppresses freedom of expression and the right to protect the lives of those who cannot protect themselves.

Commissioner Johnston explores the first election after the overturn of Roe versus Wade. Brian goes in depth into why this election, and in fact, every subsequent election, will require a vibrant and knowledgeable pro-life electorate. Brian explains that it is in fact the laws that have been at stake all along. That Roe versus Wade was significant only in that it overturned the laws of all 50 states. The laws had protected both mothers and babies up until January 22, 1973. When Justice Blackmun created a new law, and did so inappropriately in Roe v. Wade, he struck down the rights and duties of each of the state legislatures and the responsibility of legislators to make laws for their states.  The Dobbs decision of 2022,  in overturning Roe, made it clear that there is no right to an abortion hidden somewhere in the constitution. It also very clearly handed back to each of the state legislatures and the lawmakers in every state, the right to determine which human lives are protected and how they are to be protected under the laws of that jurisdiction. So now pro-life individuals in each and every election, need to understand that it is the LAW that is designed to protect life, that it is lawmakers who make laws, and that it is us, the voters, who elect lawmakers. So it is in voting that a pro-life individual can have a voice in whether or not innocent children are protected in their jurisdiction.   It really is that simple. But often because of the emotions, and the personal convictions of individuals, there are many tangents that we as pro-lifer's can be distracted by: one of the most common is our personal sectarian inclinations and its influence on our personal view of the Right To Life. Brian comments at length to explain that the right to life, is a self evident truth, (not a personal one) revealed through higher law, ‘the laws of nature of nature's God', which America's founders asserted as the foundation for all just laws, and that “to ensure this right to life and all of these rights given by a Creator, governments are instituted among men.“ So while there are many different churches, church groups, and passionate people of faith involved in the pro-life movement, this is not a debate about their personal faith. It is a transcendent, overarching issue. This, and all laws, are public policy questions which apply to all members of society and apply equally, therefore we must be able to demonstrate through objective facts, and not our own personal religious predilections, why the laws of our state should protect unborn children. Brian reminds us that the new Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Jackson has just been confirmed to the court, and points out how her judicial worldview, her judicial temperament – a positivist worldview – sharply contrasted with the most recent justice Jackson - Justice Robert Jackson, who was elevated to the court by Franklin D. Roosevelt. The previous Justice Jackson is one of the most notable and respected advocates of natural or higher law as applying to all human beings, and is most noted for leading the American prosecution of the Nazi regime.  That prosecution was not because the Germans had gone to war, (that happened a lot in Europe) it was much more specific. The Germans had killed their own innocent citizens. The Germans, in violation of natural law and higher law, had committed crimes against humanity. And for this reason it was necessary to publicly state the fact that though their country allowed such laws, (a positivist view of law), nevertheless such laws were unjust because they violated a higher law to which all human beings should be held to account. It is precisely this understanding of the law, which America's Founders loudly proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution, which pro-life individuals must reinforce.  The debate is not about our personal feelings or religious convictions or our geographic or cultural inclinations.  This debate is about the requirement that the law should protect innocent lives, a transcendent and principle element of any just society. It is the right to life.

n this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains why it's important to understand the nature of Roe v. Wade, and the fact that it gave all authority only to doctors, an authority that the Constitution says is that of the states.   Life and death legal decisions are to be determined state by state and by the legislators of that state. Many pro-life individuals errantly believe in the media version of Roe - declaring that Roe v. Wade gave women the right to choose, or gave women control of their own body.  But this is NOT is an actual text or application of the decision. It is not. This portrayal by the media is an intentional misrepresentation of Roe v. Wade.  Brian reiterates that even Ruth Bader Ginsburg was very clear and resented the fact that women were given no authority through Roe, but in fact, the entire decision gave all agency and authority - all decision making power - only to doctors. Today, abortion advocates, the media and many others are openly declaring they would like to reassert Roe v. Wade, or enshrine Roe v. Wade into statutory or constitutional law.  This is an intentional falsehood. What they actually desire goes much further than Roe.  Close examination of their actions and plans, for example, California's Proposition 1, or Vermont Proposition 22, gives unlimited rights to abortion without any regulation - something that Roe v. Wade had never granted.  In all reality. abortion advocates actually hate the specific application of Roe v. Wade, and have resented the “patriarchal attitude of medicine” being the final decider of when and how abortions are to be done. With the overturn of Roe versus Wade, the Dobbs decision specifically empowers each and every state legislature to determine the laws which they would like to see enacted and enforced within their jurisdiction. The only way that these laws can take place is by a vote of the legislature, and each legislature is elected by individual voters throughout that state. Therefore pro-life individuals, to fully understand their responsibilities at the moment, and the real significance of the Dobbs decision, must be actively involved in electing pro-life candidates at every level of office because pro-life laws can only be passed if we elect pro-life candidates. Failure to understand Roe, failure to understand Dobbs, failure to understand their right and ability to elect good lawmakers, is a failure of pro-life individuals who would prefer to go in different directions and ignore their civic responsibility.  Laws can only be changed through the civic process. Americans have a great opportunity to do and restore what Lincoln had promised and defended - “government of the people, by the people and for the people”, which is designed to protect the lives of all people.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston is joined by Karen Roseberry - district Director for the California Prolife Council. Karen is also the crisis pregnancy center coordinator for California ProLife communications. The focus of today's discussion is on how to protect innocent babies after the overturn of Roe v. Wade. As listeners to this program know, many Americans, and even many pro-life Americans, do not fully understand what Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton did.  It gave all authority of the abortion issue into the hands of one individual, the only requirement of that individual is that they have an ‘MD' after their name. The abortionist bares all responsibilities for deciding if, where, and how an abortion is to be done.  In Roe v. Wade it is very clear the woman is not given any authority, she is only given permission in Roe v. Wade to consult with an abortionist. The Roe v. Wade decision along with Doe v. Bolton was used to strike down the laws of all 50 states. In so doing, it robbed each and every state of its duty to legally determine if and when a human life could be taken. The Constitution refers to this as the compelling state interest to protect life.  The Dobbs decision overturn Roe and returned to each of the several state legislatures that authority to again define when and if a life can be taken and in the case of human abortion under what circumstances and what procedures are to be used.  Therefore, the right to life issue is indeed a legal issue of when a human life can or should be taken and if any prosecution should result from the unauthorized taking of life. The pending 2022 election is the first election since this dramatic change in abortion law allowing states to again protect lives. The state can only do this through their elected representatives. Elected representatives only hold office because voters have placed them there.  For this reason it is critical that pro-life individuals understand the power of their vote because it is their vote that will determine whether or not pro-life legislators will hold office and whether their state will protect the lives of babies at any time within its borders. Brian and Karen discuss the work of the California Prolife Council in identifying candidates all the way down the ticket to the most local of levels. This is critical because of two reasons.  Firstly, many decisions are made locally - the placement of school based clinics by Planned Parenthood, defunding of local abortion clinics and services by city or county grants. The abortion industry has weaseled itself into the most local of jurisdictions and often in deceitfully clever ways. Often they are not accountable for how they spend the very money they have elicited.  Secondly, the state legislature is usually made up of elected individuals that themselves have held office at a lower, local level. This is commonly referred to in politics as “the bench”. These potential state legislators or Congressional candidates are vitally necessary for success in the future. To develop a pro-life bench for the state legislature, we must identify and support local pro-life candidates who will stand for life at the local level. During the 2022 primary, California Prolife Council implemented a new tool, an electronic tool, to replace its earlier paper voter guides. These voter guides were establish to help elect local pro-life individuals as well as state and congressional candidates The new Get Out the Vote tool for pro-life voters will allow any individual in the state to insert their voting address and they will be able to identify, all the way down the ballot, the pro-life candidates available in their precinct. This simple tool overcomes many of the confusing aspects of elections and civics regarding, “Which district am I in for which particular office?” The project entails two parts. Pro-life volunteer‘s in all 58 counties will be assessing local candidates and gathering information from local candidate resources. These are then sent to be collated precinct by precinct in this huge state of 40 million people. The resulting tool allows the pro-life cause to have much greater success at the local level. It proved itself in the 2022 primary with an astounding 80% success rate.   Each state across the nation is working, as we speak through its National Right to Life affiliate, to both identify pro-life candidates and to ensure that the pro-life voting public knows the importance of putting these candidates into office. More information can be found at californiaprolife.org and nationally at nrlc.org

With the overturn of Roe v. Wade and the implementation of the Dobbs Decision, each state will now have the authority to create new laws protecting innocent human life. But there are some dangers, and we must consider well how these laws are to be presented. Most importantly, we must realize that every abortion has two victims: obviously the child, but the mother herself is a victim of the act of abortion. As discussed and examined in depth in my book: “Evil Twins: Roe and Doe - How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing,” it is very clear that the Supreme Court instructed that in all states, it was only to be doctors who were to make the decision of performing an abortion, that women were not given this authority, but could only ask. All authority for the abortion decision was given entirely to the doctor alone  It is critical as pro-lifers look at which new laws to put into place, that women not be viewed in the way that the radical feminist movement has portrayed them, i.e. as agents of ‘choice' but instead, the law must recognize it is the perpetrator of the abortion, the abortionist, who, in performing an abortion, has one goal - the ending of a human life. The indirect object of the abortion procedure is in fact a pregnant woman. Her ‘participation' is necessary. But Roe v. Wade itself is clear she is not given any moral agency or authority. Years later, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg underscored with vigor that irony.  Roe versus Wade and its progeny was very clear the woman did not have authority - she was free to have a consultation with the abortionist, but a consultation does not grant authority nor should it give culpability to the woman. Many women went through consultation, and while still on the abortionist's table had second thoughts about being there, had felt manipulated, had felt there was something wrong. In the best of situations they won against all peer pressure and the social pressure of the clinic staff and literally ran from the abortionist table. There are numerous such stories and young men and women who will tell those stories today, they are alive because their mother ran from the clinic.  Legally speaking, a consultation is not the same as performing an abortion. As we look to the future we must understand that the purpose of the law is not to blame, but in fact to instruct. The law principally is a teacher and a protector. We are as a society addressing abortion to protect children and young women.   Remember, when we protect young women who have been sex trafficked, we do not demand they be prosecuted as prostitutes. We hunt down the manipulators and pimps who took advantage of them. It is they whom the law must more stridently address. Similarly, laws regarding truancy are not designed to ‘punish' students who are absent from school. Rather their purpose is to ensure that that student is getting an education. And if there is to be any penalty, it ought to be directed toward malfeasant parenting. The student is to be protected by the truancy laws, not punished by them. As states consider enacting new pro-life laws, we must look to protect the second victim of the abortion: the indirect object of the abortionist pursuit, the vulnerable young mother. She is in that unfortunate situation. We must not punish women, but use the law to guide.  And to keep them from harm, we must punish the perpetrators.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston returns to the subject of public opinion polls and Americans' real attitudes regarding the legalization of human abortion. Johnston reminds us that we must focus on what the right to life debate is.  It is not about emotions, or feelings, how much we like babies, or our personal religious upbringing.  Very specifically, it is a legal question, as all questions of “rights” actually are.  It is essential to understand that this debate of the last 50 years regarding the legality of abortion and the impact of the Roe versus Wade decision, is a matter of legal judgment.  And therefore, public opinion must be viewed as a question of what legal protections ought to be offered to which human beings (babies in the womb), at which times, and under which specific legal conditions. This very particular and incisive understanding of the debate is required now.  This is required for each and every pro-life individual, and specifically in each and every state, because the Dobbs decision has returned the authority of each and every state and its legislatures to determine the laws of that particular jurisdiction, that particular state. As demonstrated in the previous program on this subject: 287: Public Opinion Polls, the nature of the question and the language used by the questioner will often determine the answer given by the respondent.  Because of this, many news outlets which seek to mold public opinion rather than inform, will use misleading and incomplete language. This is done in order to have the respondent come to a conclusion which the news outlet desires to see in all Americans.  When it comes to the abortion question and specific terms and references to the law, specific terms are often used.  Words such as ‘choice,' ‘freedom to choose', ‘reproductive rights', and even ‘Roe v. Wade', specifically because Roe v. Wade has rarely been accurately described and explained to the public.  These vague generalities are by no means capable of determining an American individual's actual sentiments regarding appropriate abortion law. There are however many polls which do respect the specific details of an issue: When is the abortion done? At what gestation is that child?  For what reason is that child's life being ended? These are very important determinative legal issues that the law applies to every legally questioned action.  Again the issue of the right to life is, at its heart, a legal question. California is often considered one of the most progressive and “pro-choice“ states in the nation. But the old LA Times/California pool which was changed in the 1990s, had indeed asked detailed specific questions after its first generic pro-choice or pro-life question. For some reason that pool no longer exists in that iteration. The most popular league reporting on California polls is taken from the Pew Charitable Trust which was discussed in depth in the previous program. A recent Rasmussen poll once again asked average California voters specific details of abortion law, and specific questions regarding what type of abortion law these Californians felt to be appropriate. This Rasmussen poll and its specific questions can be viewed here: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/most_california_voters_support_limits_on_abortion   The popular, dominant media culture does not like these polling results. And rarely if ever will make such results a dominant aspect of their reportage. But these results are extremely common and demonstrated in the most recent of national Gallup polls please see the Gallup survey here: https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-views.aspx   The same parallel opinions of all Americans are reflected as well in the recent Marist Poll, which can be seen here: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/marist-poll-most-americans-want-abortion-limits-that-roe-casey-wont-allow/   Polls across the nation, and yes even in California, demonstrate that the average thinking person does not regard abortion on demand, abortion at any time in pregnancy for any reason, or no reason in particular (just for choice), or unlimited abortion as a desirable legal outcome. The typical support level is 13 to 18% of the populace.  When asked, the vast majority of the public have consistently demonstrated a desire for legal restrictions on abortion, when they are done, and on the reasons for doing them. The average American when asked and informed, wants to see abortion limited, or in the words of the Democrat party of the 1980s: “safe, legal, and rare.“ Now that Roe has been overturn and each state can indeed exercise its authority to protect the right to life, laws that will in fact make abortions very rare can indeed be put into place. The question is: Will that phrase merely be a slogan or will it indeed take on the force of law? That legal question is the real issue of the Right To Life.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores the idea of popular opinion polls. At election time, the media will often present what they claim to be public opinion on the issue of abortion. It is critically important to understand that, very often the general, and unspecific nature of the terms used does not often reflect a valid view of public opinion. More specifically, generic feelings about “choice”, support for Roe, or reproductive freedom do not accurately reflect the average American's view of abortion particulars. Brian examine's the current habit for many polling organizations, Pew Research Center as one example, do actually take polls state by state and reach sweeping and generic conclusions. The most common is the statement that the citizens of (fill in the blank) state support all or most abortions. Yet the very terms ‘all' and ‘most' are, in fact, contradictory. All means 100%! Most means 50% or more. There is a chasm of difference. And yet this is the most frequently used phrasing of the Pew CharitableTrust. Specific polling questions regarding the reasons for the abortion, the gestational age of the child involved in the abortion, and other surrounding factors, greatly impact the public view of the medical procedure. The recent Wall Street Journal poll confirmed what polls have indicated for more than a decade: The majority of Americans are opposed to late term abortion, or abortions that are done for social reasons (i.e. just done for choice) and have varying views regarding the medical purpose that may be involved. Killing a child because of a genetic anomaly is still opposed by the majority of Americans.  Similarly, if the woman's life is actually in danger, the majority of Americans will condone such an abortion. If the definition of “health” is made specific, the majority of Americans only support abortions for very serious health issues. Under Roe versus Wade, because of its deliberate definition of “health,” as meaning any psychological or sociological reason that the abortionist himself could come up with, alarms the average American and such vague and unspecific definitions of health are not what they mean by endangering a woman‘s life. Yet, Roe versus Wade equated the two terms.

The right to life movement is built on the idea that there is a higher law which determines what laws are just or unjust.  All Republics operate under this idea of higher principles existing above immediate desires and majoritarian ‘seizure' of the legal moment.  An appeal to, “The laws of nature and of nature's God,” is the predicate for America's laws being just . This idea has, of course, been under concerted attack.  But with the passage of he Dobbs Decision, the principle has literally now been inverted in the minds of some.   Caring for mothers and their children is now being declared an immoral - even illegal act.  Senator Warren of Massachusetts has called for the closure of all crisis pregnancy centers.  Numerous Democrats have joined in, decrying the fact that the abortion of a child is not the foremost answer offered to these women at these centers.   Brian examines the overt attack against caring for babies and mothers. He includes a hearing conducted by Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, in which these allegations are discussed.  But now, it is worse.  Open crimes are being promulgated against CPCs and there is no effort at legal prosecution against these lawbreakers.  Rather than seeking justice and a higher law, law-breaking and violence are being promoted as a cultural tool.  Brian concludes the episode with an extensive interview with Daniel Tomlinson, Vice President and spokesman for Compass Care Crisis Pregnancy Center of Buffalo, New York. “Janes Revenge,” a pro-abortion terrorist entity, has targeted numerous crisis pregnancy centers, threatening those who operate them.  Daniel Tomlinson tells the story of the threats, the fire bombing, and the quick response by individuals in the pro-life community to rebuild Compass Care Pregnancy Center and continue providing caring alternatives to the desperation of killing a life in the womb.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the meaning of the right to life. Why does this have to be about the law? Where did this right to life come from? Did it begin at America's founding, or is it a deeper, more widely recognized, universal truth  - a self evident truth - that everyone should take the time and interest to deliberate?   The American founders strongly felt this was so. They proclaimed to the world that they would form a new form of government that appealed to this universal, higher law, view of life and society. Now, with the Dobbs decision, the entire issue is laid at our feet. Individual states which comprise the United States, are now free to exercise the explicit God-given and constitutionally-explained authority to protect or take lives within their own borders. If a state determines that a human life can legally be taken within its borders it is authorizing capital punishment. The state itself must outline the specific rules and procedures to be followed so that that individuals life has had the due process of law. A trial, with evidence, with adequate defense, with right to appeal - the law must protect even that person's life from being taken unjustly.  Similarly, if a human life is taken outside of the law (extra-judicially) the state must also outline how and under what circumstances the appropriate protective measure can be taken. For this reason, each state has proscribed various forms of homicide - levels of severity, and appropriate punishments for these extrajudicial killings.   The Dobbs decision, in overturning Roe v. Wade, which licensed abortionists to kill at any time they decided, now gives the authority over life and death back to the states, from which it had been taken. Each state now will determine how a child in the womb is to be protected: at what stage of pregnancy, what standards of evidence, what conditions, who is authorized to take this child's life.  Each of these determinations will now be set state by state. In many states, these measures are being contemplated in the summer of 2022.  Perhaps, most importantly, the November elections of 2022 will determine the nature of the lawmakers who will make these laws. Federal government lawmakers - the Congress and Senate, are already trying to prohibit individual states from exercising this authority. Yet, this is an authority granted, in fact, instructed by the United States Constitution. Dobbs, rather than ending the abortion debate, has brought it home to every citizen. They must determine whom they should elect. They must determine what ideas should guide the lawmakers within their own states, and given the approach of Planned Parenthood et al., even local communities and their elected officials will be addressing the abortion mentality in their counties, cities, and schools. The elections of 2022 are critical for enacting the laws which will reflect the self-evident truth: that every innocent human life should be protected under the law. Such laws must be enacted if that law is in fact the law of a just government. “To ensure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” The laws and elections of 2022 are critical. Brian gives in-depth insights into the danger of being mislead at this moment, misled by those who would lie and misrepresent the killing of human babies.  The state of Indiana offers just one example. There, lawmakers asserted SB 1 would protect babies in Indiana, but in fact the deceitful and misleading language which they presented was craftily worded and specifically designed to allow abortions. Brian reminds listeners and readers to consult the works of many insightful authors on this subject such as Orwell and Kafka, but in particular C.S. Lewis, and his book, the Screwtape Letters.  In Screwtape, Lewis describes the genuinely demonic twisting of language and meanings and feelings to accomplish truly evil ends. “We are now in a very serious battle of ideas, and ideas have consequences,” says Brian. “This battle of ideas is not far away, and we often considers ideas as removed and far from physical reality, but the battle is now on us. And we must apply ourselves to these elections and these laws as if the sanctity of every life is at stake, because in fact it is.”

The media that supports abortion (which is a large portion of popular media), has always misrepresented what Roe versus Wade did. Roe versus Wade never gave women the authority to kill their children. Roe versus Wade never ‘freed women to do as they wish.' Justice Blackmun's words were explicit, and Brian quotes directly from Roe, “…the court has never recognized such a right.” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself, in trying to explain Roe to radical feminists, reiterated that the decision never gave women the right to choose. “It was not woman-centered it was physician-centered.” But that did not stop radical feminists from claiming that right anyway. It did not stop the media from gaslighting, (lying directly and outrageously about objective facts,) in order to confuse you and the general public. The Dobbs decision of June 24, 2022 overturned Roe versus Wade and made very clear and concise what it would do. Roe had given all authority to determine which human lives should be killed in the course of abortion to doctors alone. Only the physician was given authority in the issue of abortion, not the woman.  The Dobbs decision said that authority over just life and death decisions is given by the Constitution to each and every state.  Under the Constitution, each and every state is given very specific authority. One of the primary purposes of the state is to protect the lives of those within its jurisdiction. The Constitution refers to this as the states' “compelling state interest to protect life.” There was never a constitutional right to abortion. Roe had falsely taken the authority of state government and given it to abortionists alone to decide if a child should be killed. In the Dobbs decision, the authority of each and every state was returned to that state.  It is now therefore, the responsibility of the state legislatures to determine within that jurisdiction, where and how to protect the lives of vulnerable children in the womb. Unfortunately, many do not fully understand what that means in their state. Right now there is a compelling duty of pro-life citizens to be actively and assertively involved in civics - to make sure that their state will indeed perform its duty to protect innocent human lives in the womb. This can only be affected by those who hold elective office. This can only be done by lawmakers.  The pro-life movement needs to understand the overriding importance of electing pro-life lawmakers in this election cycle.  The lies about Roe, then and now, have distorted the abortion issue.  The United States Congress controlled by Nancy Pelosi and radical pro-abortion lobbyists, has already voted to strike down the laws of each and every state and to federalize abortion far beyond what Roe v. Wade did. They have voted to prohibit states from any kind of laws that would protect mothers and their children. Fortunately, it appears the U.S. Senate will not pass this measure. But, in the election of 2022, if the Senate loses any more seats to the Democrats, that will no longer be the case in the legislative cycle of 2023! The elections of November 2022 are crucial! It is crucially important to realize - contrary to the media analysis –  that each and every pro-life law that has been proposed or passed, first and foremost protects the mother, the life of that woman and her health. In so doing, it also protects the life of a child in her womb. Every pro-life law, whether it be informed consent, parental notice before an abortion, or laws against distribution of RU-486: the abortion chemical drug, is designed to protect that vulnerable woman from the procedure that will invade her body in order to attempt to kill that child.  The abortion drug RU-486 is now being widely used but few understand that it operates by attacking the woman's body.  Powerful artificial steroids in two different procedures are used to seriously alter a woman's physiology and a very risky and in a blood inducing manner. The first dosage tells the woman's body to not allow nature to operate as it does in transforming her physical body, preparing it for motherhood.  The drug stops her body with a shock of chemical and unnatural dynamic. Days later, a second drug: progesterone, gives instructions to her body to expel anything in her uterus.  This will happen without her control. She is not in charge.  The deadly chemical will kick in with a shock to her body.  It is hoped that she at least will get to a bathroom.  Regardless, she will see the baby that is expelled. The drug can only be used after she had missed two periods - ten weeks.  She will likely be alone. Vast amounts of blood and hemorrhaging occur and  much of the blood is hers as well as the child's. Women have died from this powerful artificial steroidal concoction. But the media does not discuss this.  Pro-life laws are established first to protect mothers and secondly the obvious life at risk - the child. In this new political environment where the laws of each state determine whether certain human beings will be protected, it is not unlike our nation's history in dealing with slavery. In the Dred Scott decision, Justice Taney asserted each and every states' authority to enact laws of their jurisdiction. It also allowed slave states to enter free states, to enforce the slavery laws of that slave holding state. Similarly, the Dobbs decision, by asserting the authority of each and every state, also authorizes the intermeddling of a pro-abortion state with pro-life states. The states of California, Oregon and Washington fully intend to promote and encourage such intermeddling in pro-life states. California in particular has pledged vast sums of money to both promote and transport pregnant mothers to have their children killed within the jurisdiction of California. All expenses are paid, including missed pay and any other expense that the mother might see monetarily. This intermeddling of one state in the authority of another has grave implications for our nation and for the protection of innocent lives. The right to life debate is far from over.  

The scope, the breadth, the depth, the width, of the right to life movement... In this episode of Life Matters, Brian shares interviews from the National Right Life Convention, 2022. It was during this convention that the Dobbs Supreme Court decision was handed down. More specifically, Brian spends time exploring the fact that the right to life impacts all aspects of our life and society. While there is a conscious effort by elites in our culture to define ‘choice' as meaning ‘abortion,' Brian reminds listeners that there are in fact numerous, life-affirming choices available.  The simplistic and uncaring answer of severing that unique baby's body into pieces and discarding it has numerous and diverse alternatives.  In discussing adoption, Brian retells the true story of Jack Nicholson, the actor. Few people realize that Mr. Nicholson is outspokenly pro-life. He knows that this is contrary to many in his industry and even perhaps many of his fans. Nicholson discovered that he had been adopted when he was thirty-seven years old when a Time magazine reporter called him in a “gotcha” interview.  It turns out that the woman whom Jack thought was his mother was in fact his grandmother. The woman he thought to be his sister was in fact his mother. They never explained the actual details to him.  They merely loved him. Nicholson now says, “Of course, I'm pro-life. I understand I wouldn't be alive. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but I have to be pro-life.” Brian explains that this unique form of adoption is just one of many, many possible choices and that there are several legal types of adoption: closed, agency, partially open and completely open adoption. Each of these have a different story and way of proceeding relative to the mother and the unique child and family.  If this debate is in fact about choice, why are these other choices not described or more publicly discussed? Why does the word ‘choice' now simply mean ‘abortion'?   In the second part of the program. Brian discusses the many and profound religious impacts of the abortion issue.  The fact is that most pro-life individuals are from some religious background or faith. Brian explains the National Pro-life Religious Council's purpose and nature.  He has a specific interview with Concerned Methodists for Life, an organization of lay Methodists determined to assert the principles of the Christian faith and the hope and virtues of affirming life within their own, challenged denomination.   

It is somewhat ironic, as the new Supreme Court Justice Jackson is being sworn in, I marvel that so few Americans know of the previous Justice Jackson of the Supreme Court. He was one of the more brilliant and insightful,  and truly judicious individuals to have served in that capacity - Justice Robert H. Jackson.  Justice Robert H. Jackson is the only individual to have served in all three of the highest levels of American Jurisprudence. He served as Solicitor General of United States, Attorney General of the United States, as Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and would have served as Chief Justice, but the political nature of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration and its positioning of the Court, precluded that final honor. Finally, at least to my thinking, Justice Jackson's single, greatest and most important position was his appointment to, as well as insistence on serving as, the chief American prosecutor in the Nuremberg trials.  These trials underscored a basic principle of law and justice - that there is a higher law.  Without recognizing the existence of a higher authority, a higher law, to which all earthly or posited laws must be compared, there can be no question of justice or injustice. There is only the raw use of position in power. “If I have the authority, then that entitles me to make any law I wish.”  But, if that proposed, our posited law of “power” is in any way inequitable, we declare it deficient.  It literally is an ‘unjust law.' And that is for a very simple reason - there is indeed a higher law, a true justice, reflected in the orderly universe in which we live.  Justice Robert H. Jackson is frequently quoted not merely from his decisions, but often from his dissents, which were not fully understood at the time. Justice Jackson was the last Supreme Court justice to have never graduated from a law school! Perhaps more significantly, he never graduated from college - not as we view college that is! Nevertheless, his clarity, his insight, his commitment to the laws of nature and nature's God, helped to preserve and exult America's stalwart commitment to the truth and make it a shining light throughout the world, at a very dark moment in history. The program contains audio introduction from the Nuremberg trials, and several quotes from Justice Robert Jackson's thinking. As a matter of judicial temperament, the new Justice Jackson, Justice Ketanji Jackson reveals a diametrically different approach to legal reasoning. Sometimes called positivist law, the antipode of natural or higher law, these are laws which are simply created whole cloth by the lawmaker.  While called ‘positivist', this is not a reference to electrical charge, or mathematical deductions, it refers to the fact that they are simply ‘posited' as a statement or suggestion, or usually a declared mandate.  But as listeners to Life Matters already know, an assertion is not a fact. Declaring a statement is true, does not make it true. Positing a law, in particular an untested and unproven law supported only by verbiage and not actually demonstrably tested, is a recipe for cultural disaster.  Ideas have consequences. Ideas are expressed in words. Ideas and words that are enforced, are laws. Laws can be very dangerous things if they are not carefully examined, and tested, and proven under the weight of higher principles and reason. These higher principles are demonstrable in the laws of nature and nature's God, both physical laws of science and mathematics, as well as ethical and moral laws, such as stealing and murder. There is an order to the universe and these higher laws are in escapable.  But they must be sought out.   We ignore the order of the universe to our own peril. At the hearings for Justice Ketanji Jackson, her view of the law is made quite clear. There is no commitment to objective facts. It is created, posited, declared ‘de facto' law that guides her thinking.  Several minutes from her confirmation hearing are contained in the program. Senator Blackburn wisely examines definitive statements from Justice Jackson's past, her commitment to progressive ideology is examined, and the famous question of: “What is a woman?,” concludes a startling analysis of “facts” from the mind of a positivist, conjectural, Justice.  The two Justices Jackson offer a stunning contrast between higher law and asserted or posited law. The United States of America was founded on the principles that there is an ordered universe and that there is a manner by which to determine just or higher laws.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the actual meaning and significance of Dobbs, the recent and powerful decision of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. The Dobbs Supreme Court decision does not ban a single abortion. What it simply does is give back to each state government what the Roe v. Wade decision took away, the ability for each state to practice its duty and “compelling state interest to protect the lives of the innocent” within their own borders. In Roe, this constitutional duty and responsibility was instead given to one individual in the case of abortion - an individual abortionist.  Brian includes the comments of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who agreed that the real effect of Roe was not to give women rights, they had to get permission. All authority, and all rights were to be in the hands of abortionists alone. When the individual abortionist makes the decision to kill a particular child, he is assuming an authority which denies that child due process of law. In this act of intentional medical killing, the abortionist assumes the responsibility of an executioner, which government has only given such executioner authority to the powers of the state. And the state in turn, must exercise this authority very carefully because it has an overarching duty to make sure that the innocent themselves are protected from being killed. That is the purpose of having just law and that purpose and authority was denied to states. The Dobbs decision gave states the right to protect the innocent once again. Now the battle comes to each state and California will be the greatest challenge. Getting a Constitutional Amendment on the state-wide ballot in California usually costs multiple millions of dollars and most attempts fail. California Democrats have skipped that. They don't need money. In the Sacramento Capitol they simply have their way.  The Democrats own the process. The abortion lobby owns the Democrats. Because they have a supermajority of the legislature, on June 28, 2022, they qualified a Reproductive Freedom Constitutional Amendment for the fall ballot. It was "fast tracked." It was easy. Democrats who dissent are simply punished... Yes, it is like that.  The measure simply inserts the following into the State Constitution:  “The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual's reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives. This section is intended to further the constitutional right to privacy guaranteed by Section 1, and the constitutional right to not be denied equal protection guaranteed by Section 7. Nothing herein narrows or limits the right to privacy or equal protection.”  But the expensive, months-long signature process is skipped. This is when citizens start to hear and consider a debate. But it is skipped. In November, an already ignorant public will vote on ‘reproductive freedom.' They will be guided by a clearly biased media.   The media is not asking basic questions about the details of either “Reproductive Rights' or the new, tourist-abortion industry Gavin Newsom and the state legislature have now set up. Many states will require parents to be notified before a minor gets an abortion, and nearly 1/3 of abortions are done on minors. Will Gavin Newsom and your tax dollars be flying minors across state lines for secret abortions? Crickets.  Roe v. Wade falsely suggested that there were limits on abortion... but the famous definition of 'Health' as including, psychological, sociological, and matter that might impact the patient in view of the abortionist's opinion permitted late term abortions even if there were nothing wrong with either mother or child!   California enforces no regulation or accountability for individual abortions. Every other medical procedure requires very specific informed consent before that operation is performed on you. That's for the safety of the patient. Abortion is the only medical procedure in California that does not require the specific explanation and description of the medical risk to the patient.  RU486 chemical abortions are now very common. But women are not told how it functions. This is a double-barrel shotgun of artificial steroids which powerfully impact the woman's body with a stunning chemical slam. These chemicals alter her metabolic functions in a jolt. This risky shock to her system is what expels the child from her body.   Sometimes that child is alive and squirming. Often the mother is alone when it finally hits. And she is bleeding profusely. There is no requirement to explain these details to these women. But the state legislature wants to offer it not just to Californians, but apparently also to minor girls who live across state lines! And they want it protected in the Constitution. 

On June 24th, the United States Supreme Court issued its Dobbs Decision which overturned Roe versus Wade.  Sadly, very few people understood Roe versus Wade.  Roe versus Wade prohibited individual states from protecting the unborn child before birth. States have a compelling state interest, a duty, to have laws that will protect lives.  States couldn't do that under Roe.  Now, states are free to protect the lives of the child in the womb.  The states are going to have to decide to do it. California is going to continue ‘choice-abortion'.  ‘Choice', in this instance means a person does not need a reason to kill that child.  They simply choose to do it.  There may not be anything physically wrong with the child or the mother.  It's just a choice.  And the government is paying for that and marketing that. The right to life is the most important battle, it is the most important idea that you can consider because this gift of God, our lives, is the reason governments come into existence.  For this reason ‘governments are instituted among men,' said our Founding Fathers, to protect the inalienable rights that we've been granted. The battle for life continues.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston continues in his incisive examination of the creep of relativism into the pro-life movement. In an earlier episode Brian explained how the social teachings of the Seamless Garment, a common Roman Catholic misunderstanding of the place of the abortion issue, has led to great confusion and destruction. While many seamless garment advocates suggest that they will elevate abortion as a dominant topic of all the social issues, it in fact makes the Right To Life issue and the subject of abortion a relativistic portion of a confused moral morass of issues.  It is not, in fact, the actual teaching of the Catholic Catechism.    In ignoring the actual teachings of natural law and of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which clearly states that society has an intrinsic duty to protect innocent lives, and that this issue of legal protection of the innocent is a foundational element of society, the seamless garment has weakened many in their understanding. In particular, the many so-called Roman Catholic leaders of the pro-abortion movement who simultaneously claim that they are good Catholics as they lead the advocacy of the culture of Death!  While this grouping of the right to life with issues of the Left clearly minimizes its true significance as an essential premise for all society, it is also being done on the Right.  There are many who consider the abortion issue part of a constellation or a group of social issues - issues of great moral, ethical, and legal concern, like pornography, homosexuality, teaching of trans rights, etc. These moral advocates on the Right will make the same assertion as seamless garment advocates on the Left: “We will join in the fight and we will consider abortion the big one of all the issues.” This generic and confused use of “set theory” is a deep error.  Brian examines the mathematical logic of set theory and why it actually is a false logic and even if well intentioned, is a confused thinking to apply to the abortion issue. Once again, Brian reminds people that Lincoln clearly demonstrated the moral truth regarding the evil of slavery only when he could demonstrate the facts of mathematically and logically describing what a moral truth is.  Whereas all of his opponents were also claiming to be moral and ethical in declaring that the ownership of slave was legally permissible and ethical.  Lincoln's open demand that the logic of Euclid's proofs - QED “Quod Erat Demonstrandum” (That which has been demonstrated) is the only permissible use of asserting that a conclusion is indeed demonstrably true and a valid point to build upon.  Lawyers routinely make statements that are emotionally charged but full of deceit and have no truth in them. They are merely assertions and the speaker expects them to be treated as facts.  An assertion is not a fact.  Lincoln understood that and Lincoln understood that facts must be demonstrable before they can allow to be continued to be considered as valid.  Brian explains how many people, even some conservative Christians, will group abortion as part of a set of moral issues. There is much passionate feelings in Christians.  But as it says in Hebrews, they must mature and be able to reason.   Feelings are not enough.   In the Scriptures, God invites Christians to leave behind their own mindsets to engage in reason. And like a child's math class that groups coins together and each coin has value and significance but they may insist the largest is clearly the silver dollar: they will declare abortion is the “biggest” of the many social issues.  Such a grouping is a great disservice if one does not understand that abortion is not merely a big issue among many. It is transcendent.  It is comparable to a gold bar itself.  While also metal and also of value, it is of transcendent worth in contrast to the relativity meager social issues- the coins. Even calling the silver dollar the biggest, or also calling abortion issue the biggest, does not recognize the overarching transcendent quality of what the right to life actually is. It is the gold of the gold standard.  It is of transcendent nature and significance.  This program also introduces a new sponsor who has been persecuted for his pro-life commitments, Mike Lindell's My Pillow. Purchasers of My Pillow products that use the discount code: “LIFE”, will get the deepest of discounts and that's very exciting indeed!

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston pulls back the covers the relativistic social teaching that has crept into the pro-life movement called “The Seamless Garment.” Also referred to as “the consistent life ethic“ The seamless garment asserts that the right to life of unborn children is merely one of many life issues and that a focus needs to be spent on all of the plethora of these issues.  Contrary to adding to the protection of innocent life, the seamless garment has been used to undercut the protection of innocent life. Catholics routinely invoke it in the public sector, and especially to justify the leaders of the abortion movement who are Catholic. This includes individuals such as Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and Gavin Newsom.  One of the clearest thinkers and spokesmen for the Catholic faith, Cardinal Mueller, is eloquent in declaring the seamless garment a false doctrine, and repudiating it for its evil and confusing nature. He rightly calls it “intellectually dishonest.” https://www.ncregister.com/blog/intellectual-dishonesty-and-the-seamless-garment-argument The tragedy of the seamless garment is that many well-meaning Catholics can be confused by this false teaching. We know that many Catholics continue to vote for pro-abortion Democrats, and we know that the pro-abortion democrat leadership proudly says that it's a very Catholic position. This includes the recent statements by Nancy Pelosi in rebuking her own archbishop who had reminded her of the serious evil of intentionally supporting laws that allow the killing and disposal of innocent human lives.  Failure to make distinctions on these important moral ethical and legal issues is in fact failure to clarify the issues at stake. It gives great license and literally it gives the culture a lawlessness - for if the innocent cannot be protected by the law, what is the purpose of the law?  Catholics are not the only religious entity to have slipped into this religious moral relativism. And Brian's future focus will be on the widespread moral relativism that has crept into even those churches who claim to be “biblically-based.” The battle of our culture is very real and the values of a godless culture are already relativistic.  When churches who claim to speak for a higher law, for the “laws of nature and nature‘s God,” promote moral relativist teaching institutions they must be rebuked.  Society itself is at stake when we discuss the issue of the right to life. It is not merely a passing moral ‘opinion.' It is the very fabric of what allows individuals to function together in society.  The right to life must be firmly asserted and clearly explained.  It must be defended and protected if the innocent child, the elderly, the infirm or anyone who is physically under the power or control of other individuals is to be protected from deadly intent.

In this episode, Brian brings an important warning from the National Right to Life Committee.  On May 9, 2022, Carol Tobias, president of the National Right to Life Committee, urged all supporters, members, and affiliates of National Right to Life to refrain from ANY public demonstration of support or opposition to the results of the Dobbs decision, which is expected shortly. Brian, reenforces and explains how the California affiliate has actually stopped three different events in the month of May for that reason in particular. He uses the opportunity to explain the undergirding principles of our battle, and the effective means by which we should wage our battle, because it is a battle of ideas first and foremost. How ideas are presented is crucial to their understanding  Using examples of both the history of the pro-life movement as well as the conflict of ideas throughout human history, Brian explains the notion of a “false flag” attack. This is when a superior, and more evil intended force, creates a conflict that intentionally is designed to blame a more the benevolent yet ‘targeted' force.  It is used to justify great evil and has been used throughout human history at least as far back as Julius Caesar and other authoritarian despots. It is a frequent tool to both confuse the public debate and the members of both sides of the issue, justifying great evil, in the name of “just protecting ourselves.” Brian also explains the current situation in California and the authoritarian nature of the Democrat party and its unlimited abortion agenda. The same agenda is being sought throughout the world in many individual nations, provinces and jurisdictions, and at the United Nations itself. It is critical for pro-life individuals to understand the nature of this battle and the methods used by our opponents.

In this Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the elections of Spring of 2022 in California. Most importantly, he delves into how the principles that need to be applied there, also apply everywhere that citizens have the freedom to vote. Brian puts particular emphasis on understanding the nature of the electoral and civic system under which an individual lives.  As election processes now vary from state to state, there are better ways to analyze the ballot and vote on candidates, rather than on your simple ‘feelings.' California's election system has been dramatically altered in the last two decades, and Californians must make an effort to grasp the nature of the top–two, “jungle primary” system. Brian places additional emphasis on the importance of understanding the power of your local vote. Whenever a centralized form of government moves into place, this top down approach allows great abuses by those who control the system. But it is much more difficult for these power-hungry bureaucrats to control the most local of elections. It is there that the local individual can help elect school board, city and county offices.  It is also by remaining active in the civic process that citizens can hope and work to change those holding the highest level of government.  Regarding the importance of paying attention to local school boards, Brian read a tweet from Jo Leuhmann, from May 18, 2022.  “I would rather have an abortion than have a brown child who ends up being adopted by white evangelicals. It is not kindness to children of the global majority to give them to people who traumatize them with self-loathing and ancestor hatred. An abortion is an act of love.” While Ms. Leuhmann resigned shortly afterwards, her frank openness is not an uncommon attitude amongst the far left who seek to hold positions of local responsibility. Very few however are as frank and honest. It is very important therefore to determine the mindset and policy inclinations of candidates BEFORE they are elected, if one is hopeful of retaining influence on their local school boards, city councils, etc.

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston takes the opportunity to examine California's unique situation in the cultural battle now raging across the nation and the world. Few Californians fully realize that our form of government has been dramatically changed through extreme alteration of our method of voting and tallying votes.  But this is only one aspect of the very serious attack on our state's form of government and our nation's form of government. Justice Clarence Thomas explains the deeper significance of the Supreme Court leak in the midst of its deliberations. Justice Thomas is unequivocal; the very nature of America's legal system and form of government has been attacked, with the purpose of undermining and altering America. Brian further explains how California's open, ‘top two,' or “jungle primary” has given, not the individual voter, but those who control political groups the authority to determine election outcomes. This is not new in history nor even in American history. Brian explains the history of New York's Tammany Hall which for nearly 100 years had absolute and openly corrupt political power over the state and specifically the city of New York.  It was only the determined leader ship of Fiorello La Guardia and his allies who were able to both expose and ultimately undo the worst parts of the Tammany Hall political machine. Vestiges of it still remain in the state of New York and in many aspects of the Democrat, machine politics system.  Brian also explains how the American form of government, centered on the value of each and every life and the significance of the individual person, is in direct contrast to centralized authoritarian forms of government.  These governments often promise goodies and benefits to political groups, but in fact use these promises to maintain authoritarian control, even to the disregard of individual lives. From personal experience, Brian explains the nature of the European Union, the Maastricht Treaty which in many cases tricked individual European countries to surrender their sovereignty, and how it is a false and empty emulation of the principles of the United States of America. Further, Brian explains how failure to understand the civics of your community, and the methods of election, will result in failure for well-meaning, pro-life individuals who only vote based on their feelings and not on understanding. “Six Ways To Defeat a ProLife Candidate” outlines how many pro-abortion candidates gain office even though there are many pro-life voters in their district. Pro-life individuals must make an effort to understand the civic process if they wish to be successful in changing their laws whether locally, regionally, or on the state level and national level.  Knowledgeable voting is essential for good government, particularly when voting to protect life.