EPISODE 324:
Election 2024

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. 

Airdate: 08/24/24

EPISODE 323:
Global Warming

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.  

Airdate: 07/27/24

EPISODE 322:
The Actual Debate

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. 

Airdate: 07/20/24

EPISODE 321:
It's Not About Lucidity. It's About Policy

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.  

Airdate: 07/13/24

EPISODE 320:
Doctors Are The Issue, Not Babies

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. 

Airdate: 06/29/24

EPISODE 319:
How A Republic Works with Scott Peotter

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.

Airdate: 05/25/24

EPISODE 318:
Senate Bill 1196 with Alex Schadenberg

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.  

Airdate: 05/04/24

EPISODE 317:
Understanding Why the United States Founders Used Natural Law

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.

Airdate: 04/20/24

EPISODE 316:
Euthanasia Expansion

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.

Airdate: 03/30/24

EPISODE 315:
In Vitro Fertilization

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”.

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.’

Airdate: 03/09/24

EPISODE 314:
Nationalization of Euthanasia

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.  

Airdate: 03/03/24

EPISODE 313:
Local Elections Matter

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.  

Airdate: 02/16/24

SPECIAL EPISODE:
37th Anniversary of Life Matters

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.

Airdate: 01/27/24

EPISODE 312:
Red-Blue-Choice-Overturn

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.

Airdate: 01/13/24

EPISODE 311:
Life Fest International Film Festival

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.

Airdate: 12/23/23

EPISODE 310:
Euthanasia in Canada

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.

Airdate: 12/16/23

EPISODE 309:
The Real Meaning of the Dobbs Decision

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.

Airdate: 12/02/23

EPISODE 308:
The Dobbs Decision Did NOT End The Abortion Debate!

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.

Airdate: 12/09/23

EPISODE 307:
Deeper Discussion of Dobbs

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the actual significance of the Dobbs decision. More importantly, he explains how many Americans and even pro-life individuals don’t fully understand its repercussions.

The media, particularly in the preliminary release of the decision seven weeks before the official Supreme Court announcement, presented the Dobbs decision as completely changing and bringing to an end what Roe v. Wade had started.

This was a simplistic and very false representation of Dobbs. 

Many people errantly think that the abortion debate began with the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. But nothing could be further from the truth. As Brian and others have outlined in other works (for example, Evil Twins, Roe, and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing), the abortion debate reaches far back into the mists of time. In fact, it has very strong parallels with the debate over chattel slavery. The essential question is, “Can you own another human being? And can you dispose of a human being you claim to own?"

The British ended slavery long before the Americans and, in fact, actually ended slavery on the high seas. This was in the early 1800s. The British then went on and by 1860 the debate in the UK was now over human abortions. Was it morally right to kill this living vulnerable human being? 

The parliament decided that abortion was wrong, and in 1861 the parliament of the UK passed the Crimes Against the Persons Act. The United Kingdom led the way in ending slavery and the United Kingdom lead the way in ending abortion. 

Fortunately, a young Boston doctor (Horatio Storer) was studying childbirth in the UK in the 1860's, at the University of Edinburgh, the most prestigious medical school in the world. He wholeheartedly embraced the British ending of slavery and their ending of abortion, killing young human babies.

When he returned to the United States after the Civil War, which successfully led to the end of slavery in the U.S., he made it a personal mission to now end abortion in the US. He helped form the American Medical Association, which still believed in the Hippocratic Oath, and asked them to use its resources to protect unborn children in the womb and state by state.  The laws were changed to reflect this respect for civilization's protection of innocent lives. This was the actual beginning of the American pro-life movement ,

Roe v. Wade (and its companion decision Doe v. Bolton) nearly 100 years later dismissed every state's laws which were protecting human babies. Roe v. Wade was a sweeping abuse of power by the court. Roe v. Wade violated the constitutional role of the Judiciary. Roe v. Wade violated the Senate responsibility to pass laws which affect all of the 50 states . Roe v. Wade most seriously violated the laws governing the use of medicine to never kill and sadly, expressly dismissed the relevance of the Hippocratic Oath to American culture. Roe v. Wade was devastating beyond measure. It is this final and most sinister removal of medical ethics, that the Dobbs decision does not actually address, but is expressly what is authorized in the Doe v. Bolton decision, the often unread companion decision of Roe v Wade. 

Many pro-lifers do not understand these distinctions.

The Dobbs decision 19 times repeats that it is now up to "the people themselves through their elected representatives to decide" what abortion laws should go into affect. This is an exact description of how a Republic works.

Simply put, the Dobbs decision was the Supreme Court apologizing for making up law in 1973. In 2022 they said, that’s wrong. We now authorize you Americans to function as a Republic and make your own laws through those whom you elect.  Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence is more pointed. WE were wrong as a court to make law. WE as a court will never again revisit the abortion issue... loosely speaking, 'this is a mess you citizens can go clean up on your own.' And is it ever a mess!

Dobbs does not apologize for 50 years of killing and cultural assault on the practice of medicine in the killing of innocent human lives. In fact, the Dobbs decision specifically side steps that. It does not apologize for legally empowering doctors to practice medicine in any way they feel. The Dobbs decision is in essence, an apology, but doesn’t fix any of the hellish Pandora’s box that was released 50 years earlier all of the cultural problems malaise and misunderstanding regarding protecting lives that are still flipping through our culture, and in particular the disregard for the Hippocratic oath, and what medical ethics is all about. 

But now we are in a circumstance not unlike the Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott. The whole nation thought the Supreme Court was going to resolve everything in the divisive issue of slavery. But instead it did the opposite. The Court reinforced the idea that slavery should continue if that state wanted it to. But worse, the Dred Scott decision confirmed that a slave state could impose on a free state and enforce the laws of slavery by enforcing the Runaway Slave Act. This caused worse problems, as it disregarded the principal of ending slavery and the rights of a state to protect the lives those within its own border. California and other states are currently going into free states and paying for pregnant women to come and kill those babies in an abortion state.

Worse, the Dobbs decision strongly parallels the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This is the law that actually created the Republican Party in response in order to end slavery. The Kansas Nebraska Act removed the Missouri Compromise of the US Senate that insured if there would be new slave states there must be a new free state. But instead the Kansas Nebraska Act which directly caused the Civil War, created the idea of "popular sovereignty."  A state itself could decide if they would kill slaves. That is what is at stake in chattel slavery.  Most slave holders wanted to equate slavery with other forms of servitude, but as Lincoln eloquently pointed out in his debate with Douglas in Ontario, Illinois, the right to life of the slave is what is at stake in chattel slavery, and the right to life is guaranteed in our founding documents. Chattel slavery is in no way comparable to other forms of servitude like indentured servitude. The debate in slavery said Lincoln, is about the right to life.

So again today, there must be clarity in what the debate is about. Dobbs has merely said, "it’s up to you people. The courts are going to stay out of it." Unless pro-life individuals understand the crushing pressure of this moment, a moment where a media and pro-abortion lobby are lined up to use all their resources even against pro-life states; unless pro-lifers realize they must indeed be passionately involved with their representatives and through their representatives, passionately involved in this republic and its operant principles which should defend innocent life, they will likely lose this battle. Yes, and even the battle for their republic. 

Airdate: 09/30/23

EPISODE 306:
Are We Saving A Democracy or Saving a Republic?

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. 

Airdate: 09/16/23

EPISODE 305:
Religion, Marxism and Abortion

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston takes a deep dive into why the right to life is an essential part of a just system of government. 

Brian takes a close look at the tendency to undercut the principles of a just government. It is usually ideological or ‘new beliefs’ that undercut just laws . Equating a proven guilty life (that is to say an individual who has openly broken the law) with an innocent life, undercuts clear -thinking, and the basis for a just society. 

Justice itself is inverted by such thinking.

One of the clearest examples of this was when, for political and religious reasons, the Pharisees, at the time of Christ, demanded that a known and guilty murderer be freed, and that the obviously innocent Jesus, be sent to his death.

Religious sentiment was used for clearly political purposes by the Pharisees. Even Pontius Pilate, the Roman judge,  found the decision of the Pharisees to be odd and unjust but relented in deference to the religious customs of the Jews.

This same inversion of justice is being used today by those who proclaim that the guilty should be protected with the same protections offered the innocent. Some offer this based on personal religious inclinations. But if adopted, this has clear policy and political implications, and has resulted in a disordered view of a truly moral society under the principals of natural law, the basis of Western culture’s legal view.  As in the case of Barabbas, these religious sentiments can be traced to political loyalties and ideological sentiments.

Today, one of the most alarming cases of ideological assaults on just law, is Marxism. Marxism explicitly assaults the basic principles of Western Civilization and Western societies’ view of the law. Marxism creates a false assertion of what is just or unjust, and using facile emotional (religious) idea.  Marxism is its own belief system.  It is its own religion, which has disowned the idea that there is a God.  It seeks to create a disordered view of justice, a disordered view of the law, a disordered view of who is guilty and who is innocent. 

It creates a clearly disordered view of right and wrong.

Today, in the battle for the Right to Life, many pro-life advocates err when they make the issue one of personal religious morality and sentiment. 

Our opponents then have an easy time distracting from the deeper issue at hand. Rather than focusing on the specific issue of whether the law should protect an innocent life, our opponents, quickly promote the ‘religious morality sentiment’, and will gladly make the debate is about sex and sexual reproduction. They do not wish to focus on the nature of innocent life. 

If pro-life advocate insist this is a religious debate, they are bringing in their own personal feelings and ideology They are not appealing to self-evident truth. They are not appealing to “the laws of nature and nature’s God,” which are principles evident to everyone, regardless of their personal theology.

By bringing in personal theology about sexual morality, pro-life advocate are moving away from the actual point of contention. Abortion advocates will gladly embrace, and even promote the view that prol-ifer‘s are more obsessed with sexual morality. This is exactly what is happening in Ohio, in preparation for state-wide referendum.  A referendum is essentially a battle for public opinion. 

The audio portion of a planned parenthood pro-abortion ad which underscores viewing the issue as a debate about personal sexual morality, is being aired in Ohio. Sadly, Many pro-lifers do not know how to address that ad, for the simple reason that they are indeed, confusing their personal religion, with self-evident truths revealed by the laws of nature. 

These two contrasting views must be understood. Pontius Pilate understood that the religious sentiment of the Pharisees violated the self-evident truth that the innocent should be protected (“ I find no fault in him“). The self-evident truths revealed in nature by the God who created nature, transcends our personal religious sentiments.

In order to pursue truly just laws,  pro-lifers must base their worldview on the fact that their personal theology is not what is at stake. The higher law that orders the universe is what is truly just. 

The Right to Life, as America’s Founders asserted, is based on ‘higher law’ revealed in the laws of nature, and nature’s God.” Human laws may be asserted, but if they violate the higher law, they then are properly considered ‘unjust’.   

Finally, the most blatant example of a confused, belief system, or religion, creating unjust laws for various countries is in the belief system of Marxism.  In fact, Marxism intentionally disposes of human lives. It continues to do so.

Many people think that Marxism is an economic theory. It is not. It is, in fact, a theory or BELIEF that Western Civilization itself is unjust. If therefore authorizes a new view of justice.  It claims to  be a higher law by which Western Civilization is to be judged. Under Marxism, there is no right to life given by God as America’s founders asserted. 

Under Marxism, the great march to throw off Western Civilization requires dismissal of those lives that may stand in the way of this ‘progress’ towards their belief.  

When the Marxist revolution creating Soviet Russia was finally established in 1922, one of the first legal actions was to legalize, promote and pay for unlimited free abortions. This was based on the argument that if a man can walk away from a pregnancy, in order for there to be truly equal rights, a woman must also be free to walk away from pregnancy without any repercussions. 

This Marxist view is the predicate for contemporary feminism and pro-abortion thinking. It is a belief system. It is a religion. It is attempting to create its own view of a ‘higher’ law, but it is avoiding the God of nature and nature‘s laws. It is avoiding the self evident truth that human abortions mean a human baby being destroyed. Marxism continues in this. It is very much present in contemporary American thought.  It is at the leading edge of destroying the right to life. It is at the leading edge of destroying Western Civilization’s care for individual human lives, which are each a gift from The Creator. 

Airdate: 10/07/23

EPISODE 304:
Natural Law vs. Religious Law - Part 2

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.

Airdate: 07/22/23

EPISODE 303:
Natural Law vs. Religious Law - Part 1

In this two-part episode, Commissioner Johnson explores the deeper foundational premise upon which America builds its laws. They are built on “self-evident truths revealed through the laws of nature and nature’s God.”

In the pro-life movement, we explicitly appeal to this foundational premise by naming our movement, the “right to life” movement. The first and essential premise of this political philosophy, namely, that just laws must reflect the laws of nature and nature’s God is found in the duty of government to protect the rights of individuals to be alive, To judge miscreants who may want to take lives and therefore, make the necessary distinction to bring clarity to justice: protection of the innocent from the guilty. 

But more to the point,  since many in our movement come from faith backgrounds, they often substitute their personal theological inclinations as the predicate for the right to life which is something that America’s founders did not do.

Nevertheless, the appeal to natural law is clearly evident in the Christian Scriptures, and is in fact, replete in both the Old and New Testaments. But, that does not make that appeal a ‘religious doctrine’ anymore than my acknowledgment of the laws of mathematics makes mathematics my own personal religious preview.  My faith can concur with facts, that does not make those facts religious - or even doctrinaire - in nature.

Airdate: 07/15/23

EPISODE 302:
Identical Twins - Aren’t!!!!

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. 

Airdate: 07/08/23

EPISODE 301:
Victory In Idaho

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explains legislation in the post-Dobbs environment. With the Dobbs decision, many states had already passed what were called trigger laws. A trigger law was a law that a legislature passed before the overturn of Roe, but which stated once Roe is over turned, and the state is again free to protect unborn children, this new law would go into effect. 

One such trigger law was the law of Idaho. This law’s enactment created much media and pro-abortion distortion.   The Idaho law contained provisions for rape and incest, and the life of the mother. If a woman was raped, however, it needed to be reported to police agency first. Giving out free abortions does not end rape.  It is a crime. Incest required that the perpetrator be named, and again, that adult protective services be informed of the act. Abortion is not an answer for child abuse. If this is not done, and the pregnant person returned to that environment, abortion is used to accommodate, and in fact, in many ways, promote such abuse, because of the lack of legal protection for that person.

If an individual performed an abortion, and that abortion was not reported under the standards permitted that abortionist for taking that child’s life would be subject to both civil and criminal penalties up to a year and a half in prison.

Some pro-life advocates felt that this sentence is very light for intentionally killing a vulnerable human baby. Nevertheless, it is both a crime, and a civil tort to perform an abortion in Idaho without following the outlined permissible standards.

Both the media and pro-abortion lobby proclaimed that, “women would be imprisoned for having an abortion.” This is factually false.  The performer of an abortion which violates the law is the only individual who would be subject to these penalties.

In the case of a woman who attempts self abortion, she would be subject to intervention on the basis of creating self harm and subjected to the non-criminal intervention of having been a threat to the health, her own health and safety, or that of others. This is a common intervention practice in every state though someone may not have committed a crime. Their actions indicate a need for intervention. She would not be subject to any criminal penalties. 

As various states work to enact, pro-life laws regarding abortion, the pro-life movement has been adamant that women are in fact, the second victim of abortion, whether willingly or not, and the official position of the National Right to Life Committee, and all respectable pro-life advocacy organizations is that women themselves will not be treated as criminals in the case of an abortion, but rather as victims of a terrible crime against our fellow humanity. 

Airdate: 01/21/23

EPISODE 300:
The Deeper Meaning of Dobbs

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.

Airdate: 01/14/23

EPISODE 299:
2022 - The Year In Review

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.  

Airdate: 12/17/22

EPISODE 298:
Interview From Life Fest Film Festival 2022

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

Airdate: 12/10/22

EPISODE 297:
Elections and the Media: Fall 2022

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.

Airdate: 11/26/22

EPISODE 296:
Life Fest Film Festival 2022

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.

Airdate: 11/19/22

EPISODE 295:
The Further Down The Ballot, The Greater Your Voting Power

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.

Airdate: 10/29/22

EPISODE 294:
Your Vote Can Make Laws - The Supreme Court Must NOT

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. 

Airdate: 10/22/22

EPISODE 293:
October Is Election Month

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.

Airdate: 10/15/22

EPISODE 292:
After Roe, Only Your Vote Can Protect Babies!

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.

Airdate: 10/08/22

EPISODE 291:
The Power of Your Vote Is the Power of the RTL

In 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.

Airdate: 10/01/22

EPISODE 290:
Your Vote Now Can Protect Lives

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

Airdate: 09/17/22

EPISODE 289:
Will The New Laws Punish the Perpetrators?

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.

Airdate: 09/10/22

EPISODE 288:
Public Opinion Polls - Part II

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.

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.

The same parallel opinions of all Americans are reflected as well in the recent Marist Poll, which can be seen here.

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.

Airdate: 09/03/22

EPISODE 287:
Do Polls Tell the Truth?

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.

Airdate: 08/21/22

EPISODE 286:
The Threat of Making Crisis Pregnancy Centers Illegal

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.

Airdate: 08/13/22

EPISODE 285:
Dobbs’ Recognition of Constitutional State Authority to Protect Life

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.”

Airdate: 08/06/22

EPISODE 284:
They Lied About Roe Then. They Are Lying About Roe Now.  And They Are Lying About Dobbs

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.  

Airdate: 07/23/22

EPISODE 283:
National Right to Life Convention, 2022
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. 

Airdate: 07-16-22

EPISODE 282:
The Two Justices Jackson

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.

Airdate: 07/09/22

EPISODE 281:
Dobbs and California

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. 

Airdate: 07-02-22

EPISODE 280:
Relativism On The Right Too!

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!

Airdate: 06/25/22

EPISODE 279:
NRLC Warning Regarding Public Demonstrations In Wake of Dobbs Decision

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.

Airdate: 06/18/22

EPISODE 278:
The Seamless Garment Ideology

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.

Airdate: 06-11-22

EPISODE 277:
Elections - Spring 2022 and Onward

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.

Airdate: 06/04/22

EPISODE 276:
Your Form of Government Is Stolen In California &
Throughout The United States

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.  

Airdate: 05/21/22

EPISODE 275:
Radical Abortion Laws Can Only Be Stopped By Voting Wisely

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston interviews attorney Sheila Green regarding the current situation in California in Spring of 2022. While it is an unusual circumstance within the state, it is critically important to recognize the methods and procedures used by abortion advocates which have now become a worldwide tool. 

The radicalization of political parties both in the United States and abroad has brought abortion and the killing of innocent life through infanticide and euthanasia into nearly every Western culture. This has not happened accidentally. 

It is critically important that caring individuals examine closely the language and methods used by those committed to an authoritarian culture of death, as preparation and dedication to supporting wise civic activities and the prayerful involvement in wise civic action is critically necessary  n confronting this palpable evil.  

Brian and Sheila examine both the stunning proposal to legalize all late-term abortion and infanticide via AB 2223, a California legislative proposal which is part of the 42-point governor's “California abortion-magnet” program.

In the second part of the program, they focus on the work of every effective pro-life organization in helping to ensure that pro-life citizens vote wisely and carefully all the way down the ballot. 

The old maxim, that, ‘all politics is local,’ is a true one. It is these local races: school boards, city councils, county supervisors, where local conscientious citizens can much more easily thwart the political machinery of the death culture.

Airdate: 05-07-22

EPISODE 274:
Open Legalization of Infanticide

In this special episode from Spring of 2022, Brian Johnston interviews Sheila Green, Esquire, Vice President of the California ProLife Council. 

The California ProLife Council had filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the state in 2020 regarding the enforcement of existing law. That law, Health & Safety Code Section: 123435, specifically prohibits infanticide if a child is born alive in the course of an abortion. 

The state admitted it does not enforce or investigate this law in any manner. Subsequently, the California ProLife Council began an effort to expose this intentional, non-enforcement of infanticide.

Rather than begin enforcing the law, the radical pro-abortion lobby, which has complete sway over the state Democrat Party, requested that that law simply be stripped from the books and a law explicitly authorizing infanticide be put into affect!

In conjunction with 45 other abortion industry proposals that would make California the nation’s and the world’s home for the abortion industry, they introduced a measure - AB 2223, which explicitly removes the previous Health & Safety Code, and supplants it with a new law which allows all late-term abortions and even post-birth, perinatal death (variously described as 18 to 28 days after birth) as ‘un-investigateable.’

In other words, if there’s direct evidence or suspicion of intentionally killing a child in a late-term abortion or killing the child even after it’s born, the state prohibits any investigation of these matters.

Brian and Sheila explain the need to take action and to alert conscientious Californians everywhere of this incredible disrespect for vulnerable innocent lives. A special webpage for contacting legislators is available at Californiaprolife.org > Stop Infanticide Legislation.  Each and every legislator will need to vote on this.

Airdate: 04/23/22

EPISODE 273:
The Right to Life: The Desire Of All Humanity

This episode of Life Matters takes on current events and the whole current waterfront of legal and political battles.

Brian addresses the international flavor of the right to life and why America’s founders insisted that this premise be at the heart of America’s laws. As a nation, we continue to be a magnet for all of mankind’s hopes and desires for their lives to be affirmed and protected. 

Life Matters is heard internationally via short wave radio in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. It is heard via European Gospel Radio in Eastern Europe, the Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, etc.

Many listen to shortwave radio as a starting point to learning the English language, and shortwave is still an amazing tool which crosses international borders where local oppressive governments may prohibit any broadcasts which do not reflect the values of that government. Life Matters is functioning as a communication tool and lifeline for those who know there are bigger issues in life, and that the role of just government should be to protect innocent lives. 

Brian also explores the upcoming elections in the US, and specifically the primaries which will be taking place in California. While many congressional and state house races will be very difficult to win, ironically the more local elections, be it school board, city council supervisor, etc., the odds of good traditional valued pro-life individuals begins to go way up.  So we’re very pleased that many people are stepping forward. 

California ProLife will be holding a series of organizational events throughout the state: San Diego, Orange County, Los Angeles County, Santa Clara and elsewhere to prepare people for the opportunities that are ahead in their local school boards. In addition, Brian is returning to his original book tour which was cut short by the Covid epidemic.

Head to http://www.californiaprolife.org for more information.

Airdate: 04/02/22

EPISODE 272:
Tourist Abortion And California Law

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian interviews attorney Sheila Green, Vice President of the California Pro-Life Council. They discuss in-depth, the proposal that has been openly vaunted in the media, calling for California to be an abortion sanctuary for the entire nation.

Senate Bill 1142 provides the cost of travel to California, lodging in the state, childcare, doula support, and food for the duration of the out-of-state visitor’s time. There are also elements which provide for missed wages during their visit.

Ironically, the funds are not provided directly to the individual woman in question, but are instead put into a fund controlled by the abortion industry itself. They bill the new California fund for all of the mentioned benefits.

An obvious question is that of accountability which California has already failed to provide in so many other aspects of its budget.

Brian and Sheila spend extensive time describing the current situation of California law which allows no oversight of the abortion industry and yet, funds the industry without any accountability. That is existing law in California.

Because these proposals are aimed at out-of-state residents, there is the question of whether or not this interstate transportation is facilitating the breaking of another state’s protective laws. Does that state require parental notice before an abortion? Is there any investigation as to who is responsible for the pregnancy? Currently, many abortion clinics simply do not ask about the father of the child and there are documented situations where a trafficked girl is actually brought to an abortion clinic by the sex trafficking cartel.  There she is simply made ‘unpregnant’ so that she is available for further sex trafficking. How will this be accounted for ? 

Many other yet unanswered questions are raised by Commissioner Johnston and attorney Green.  

Airdate: 03/26/22

EPISODE 271:
World Conflict and The Right To Life

In this episode, Commissioner Johnston explores aspects of current world conflicts that are in fact directly related to the right to life.

The first part of the program is an interview with author Dr. Steven Mosher, whose most recent book, Bully of Asia: Why China’s Dream Is The New Threat To World Order, is now reaching best seller status.

As a graduate student at Stanford in the 1970s, Dr. Mosher was the first Western social scientist allowed access to observe and document Chinese rural life under Communism. He was deeply alarmed by the now infamous forced-abortion policies being used to control China’s population.

His writings were instrumental in bringing these policies to light and to the awareness of the world. Dr. Mosher is fluent in several languages and travelled to various parts of China. He has been one of the preeminent experts on actual life under the Chinese communist government. Ironically, China has paid a price for this one-child policy and has reversed course to allow two, and now three children. Tragically, the impact of the government policy has convinced Chinese citizens of childbearing age to not have children, as the now prosperous Chinese culture has become self-absorbed and having children requires a lifestyle of some self-sacrifice. 

But the Chinese problems are not merely domestic. As with many aggressive Marxist governments, China views its assertion over world order as a duty and it does not merely view Asia as its sphere of influence. It now has clear designs on global hegemony. 

As with all Marxist governments, human life is still viewed as a commodity, and wherever the heavy boot of its government has settled, innocent lives are disposed of without apology.

Brian ends the program with a brief discussion of the coming election year and the cultural significance of war itself, with lessons to be drawn from Clausewitz and the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict. 

The right to life in every American election year is a central issue.  It is essential that it be fully understood before and during each election.

Airdate: 03/12/22

EPISODE 270:
American Opinion On Abortion &
The Common Misunderstanding of Roe v. Wade

The popular media often describes American opinion as being in favor of abortion – as “pro choice”.

The media also asserts that most Americans support Roe v. Wade. But a more studied examination of the facts reveals quite the opposite. 

The word “choice” is intentionally used with two simultaneous meanings: Availability of abortion for just the hard cases, in case something goes “wrong”.

The other, operant definition, and that which is asserted by abortion advocates, is “abortion at any time and for any reason - just because I choose it.”

American opinion polls show that the average person does not support this latter definition. The average American would like to see some kinds of restrictions of unlimited abortion and a recognition and balancing act between the life of the child and the life of the mother.

Because of the life or health exception specifically outlined in Doe v. Bolton, Roe v. Wade’s conjoined companion decision, none of the supposed limits suggested in Roe have any effect. The term “health” is specifically defined as being anything: psychological or sociological, anything related to the woman’s age, anything the abortionist defines “health” to mean. The abortion can then be performed and no authority is allowed to question the legality or the thinking of the MD abortionist.

The public is never informed of this pivotal aspect of the abortionist’s choice. The public has been given little information regarding  the actual nature of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the two companion decisions which struck down the laws of all fifty states.

Commissioner Johnston’s book, The Evil Twins - Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing, takes a deep dive into the real facts of these two companion decisions and what they means for our nation and culture right now.

Airdate: 03/05/22

EPISODE 269:
All Politics Is Local

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explains how the pro-life movement, and every political movement throughout history, has been successful:

By organizing educating and motivating on the local level.

The National Right to Life Committee is composed of 50 separate organizations, one in each state. In turn, each of these state affiliates are comprised of local volunteers and chapters which address the right to life issue within their own community.

Brian addresses the methods by which the civics of each community should be engaged, in particular during elections. If pro-life candidates can be educated and encouraged, and pro-life voters educated and encouraged to vote for pro-life candidates, each and every community will be transformed from School Board, to City Council, to County Supervisors and up the ladder to the State Legislature and Congress itself.

This model has proven successful wherever applied. Brian shares several stories regarding effective pro-life organizing in those states which are ready for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, and why that approach is the only way that our movement can expect to be successful.

Airdate: 02/19/22

EPISODE 267:
Civil vs. Criminal Distinctions in the Case of the Texas “Heartbeat Law”

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston takes an in-depth analysis of the state laws recently examined by the Supreme Court. He explains, in particular, the Texas law which authorizes private individuals taking civil action against an abortionist.

While Brian‘s educational background is in comparative languages, he has worked for many years in the legal world, not only as an advocate (lobbyist) for many years in Sacramento and the various state capitols of the West, but as a young man he spent several years working as an assistant at a Los Angeles entertainment law firm.  

Drawing on this experience, Brian explains the stark contrast between the two states’ abortion laws recently considered by the US Supreme Court.

The Louisiana law simply draws a line at 15 weeks gestation and prohibits abortion beyond that date. The Texas law - the so-called “heartbeat law” - requires an abortionist to check the gestation of the pregnancy and if it’s six weeks or more, to also check for the beating heart of the child. 

As the human heartbeat can be monitored as early as 18 to 21 days from conception, any competent medical professional would be able to find the heartbeat of the six week-old child. 

But the most important aspect of the Texas law is that it does not create a crime when an abortionist performs an abortion. Instead it allows any individual citizen who is harmed by an abortion to be able to seek relief in civil court for that harm.

Brian goes to great lengths to explain the dramatic difference in the two types of law - civil and criminal. They require completely different standards of evidence, and offer very different answers for the harms done by the lawbreaker.

The discussion of prosecutorial discretion is particularly important.

The best and most startling example of the contrast between civil and criminal law can be found in the two cases of O.J. Simpson and the Simpson-Brown murders. While the criminal trial dragged on for weeks and ultimately ended in an acquittal, when the Brown family had a chance to sue O.J. for the harm of killing their daughter and sister, the case was settled in an afternoon. 

He was found guilty, and because they had clear standing. They suffered clear arms because of his actions, and were given an award of millions of dollars. This can hardly compensate for the intentional loss of life, but the purpose of the civil law is to give individuals their day in court and the ability to address an injustice, a serious wrong done to them . 

Brian gives several humorous examples of why the difference between civil and criminal law should be very clear to all of us. 

As a point of fact, in modern society you can be sued for nearly anything. Whether that suit will prevail is another matter. But if serious harm has been done and you can demonstrate standing to the court that YOU were harmed by an abortion, an individual - such as the father of the child, or the grandparents of the aborted child, clearly have a very, very reasonable case in seeking justice for the unnecessary destruction of that life. 

Airdate: 01/01/22

EPISODE 266:
The Implications of Right-To-Life Supreme Court Decisions

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the implications of the possible overturn of Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade prohibited all states from legally protecting children because it did not allow prosecution of abortionist doctors. Roe v. Wade was actually the combination of two conjoined decisions Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. 

In fact Roe v. Wade did not enforce a trimester system as commonly believed, because a powerful loophole exception was placed under Doe v. Bolton, allowing for abortion whenever the abortionist felt it might be appropriate for “health” reasons. Cases of health could include psychological emotional and sociological factors.  

If Roe v. Wade is overturned it will not outlaw a single abortion, it will merely allow the various states to once again ensure protection under the law for unborn children. Twenty-one states have already passed laws that will immediately take affect if Roe is overturned. But many states - California chief amongst them - will have to pass legislation to protect children once again. California will prove very difficult. 

Brian outlines that despite our current governor’s commitment to unlimited abortion, and the state legislature’s resolve to support abortion as a “choice“ there will be many things that local pro-lifers can do to impact their own community.  If they exercise the civic process they can dramatically work to help limit the influence of the abortion industry in their towns and cities.

Taking back state and congressional office will be determined by the local voters of a community.  If they are working to elect school board and city council members, those same voters will also vote for Assembly, Senate and Congressional candidates.  it is a trickle up principle of pro-life voting instead of trickle down. 

All politics is local.  Pro-lifers must make a commitment to the civic process and that commitment begins in their own local community.

Airdate: 12/18/21

EPISODE 265:
Roe v. Wade May Soon Be Overturned - But Few Understand What It Does

Roe v. Wade didn’t give women anything. What it did do is give doctors the right to kill babies.

“Roe really isn’t about the woman’s choice... It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice his profession as he thinks best.It was not woman centered. It was physician centered.” - Ruth Bader Ginsburg, University of Chicago lecture May 10, 2013

The media doesn’t tell you this. Very few people understand Roe. It is in fact an amalgam of two separate decisions that were then ‘conjoined’ by the Court. Roe v. Wade addressed a Texas

law. Doe v. Bolton dismissed the abortion laws of Georgia. On Jan 22nd, 1973, they were both handed down simultaneously and “conjoined” by the Court as one ruling. Many now call this conjoined action “Roe” or “the Roe regime.” Though they dealt with two different states, and each has very different tone, the net effect of the combined decision was to strike down not only those two states’ laws, but the laws of every other state as well!

In the Doe portion of the decision, the author, Justice Blackmun, inserted a special ‘health exception.’ He intentionally defined it in the broadest possible terms. The reasons need not be written down, but only exist, ‘in the judgement of the doctor.’ If the abortionist felt there may be any sociological or psychological implications for that woman’s motherhood, “all of these things may be considered health. (Roe and Doe @183).  A physically healthy child could be killed inside of a physically healthy mother – throughout pregnancy – if his judgement called for it.

In dissent, Justice White summed up this late term, ‘psychobabble’ exception:

“… for anyone of such reasons, or no reason at all, and without asserting or claiming any threat to life or health… [it was now to be legal for] any medical advisor willing to take up the procedure…. I dissent.” (Roe and Doe dissent @221). 

It’s funny how media analysts avoid any discussion of this ‘little’ exception. 

Since then, the media narrative has reduced the debate, and simply summed all this up as, ‘a woman’s choice.’ The media is intent on simplifying issues for consumption. But such simplicity often comes at the cost of stultifying its consumers as well. That’s us.

If you examine her statement carefully, Justice Ginsburg was right: the conjoined, twin decisions of Roe and Doe are clear. The choice and decision are the abortionist’s alone. The woman, even if ‘uncomfortable,’ simply needs to go along with what ‘the doctor’ has in mind. A killing profession was pulled from centuries of shadows. It was given license and legitimacy on that day. 

For millennia, the Hippocratic Oath had unequivocally condemned this killing of vulnerable children. And legally, abortion has always been frowned on by the law since at least Common Law times and in many cases long before that. But Blackmun and his fellows declared the healing profession turned on its head. Doctors were now free to be fully licensed killers. Their personal thoughts and judgments considered supreme in life or death.

The Oath and its centuries of influence on law and society were pronounced dead via Roe and Doe. ‘If babies are to be killed, then a professional will do it.’

Today’s USSC

In the oral arguments of this December 1st, Justice Kavanaugh very politely complimented abortion advocates, but summed up the challenge in contemplating Roe.

There are two competing interests and legal principles at stake, he said. The one, “the liberty interest,” (or ‘right to choose’) was forcefully and effectively presented by the Solicitor General of the United States, who was arguing the case. He gave her a ‘hat tip.’ But the other competing interest is the right to life which is at stake. These two interests exist in direct variance. We cannot ‘split the difference’: either one or the other will dominate. They cannot,“both win.”

The other five pro-life Justices who are oft-times silent, also offered questions and comments - yes, each spoke – and confirmed their pro-life positions. 

The three, abortion-supporting Justices: Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer, not only commented, but with acerbic resignation seemed to ooze bitterness.  Their jibes about contrary ‘political decisions,’ and the ‘danger to the court;’ their affection for ‘court precedence’ all seemed to aim directly at influencing the Chief Justice. Their implications: ’If you do this, our Democrat Party may need to change the structure of this Court. We will pack it.’

Chief Justice Roberts, known to be very susceptible to pressure regarding the image and nature of the Court, made statements that seemed to be supportive of the Mississippi law and of its 15-week limit. But this desire to ‘split the difference,’ while seeming to ‘cross the line’ that Roe had drawn, is in fact in direct variance with Justice Kavanaugh’s open statement that you can’t somehow cut the baby in two’ and ‘allow both the liberty interest and the right to life be given equal weight.’

While there are six openly pro-life votes on the Court, I urge you not to use the simplistic media analysis: ‘It’s a black and white, apolitical-head count.’  Yes, the hearing bodes well for life. But I sat with colleagues in 1992 as we read the result of the Casey decision. Remember, that Pennsylvania law was, “going to bring down Roe.”

But Casey itself was, as they say in boxing, a split decision. 

Few of the judges really agreed. The result was that Casey had to be ‘cobbled together.’ At the end of the day, Roe was in fact still upheld! Each of the justices had gone in different, nuanced directions.  This became what the court officially calls a “joint decision.”  Some judges upheld portions of the Pennsylvania law yet insisted on striking others.  There was no clear majority. 

Justice Blackmun, Roe’s author, was still on the court in 1992. Predictably, his decision in Casey proudly upheld Roe.

Back in Casey, then Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist voted with a plurality - Scalia, White, and Thomas, to ‘adjust’ Roe ( he did not have the votes to overturn.) But he attempted to continue to dismantle it.

The Court jettisoned the false and deceptive ‘trimester’ framework, (Has the media EVER told you that the trimester system was long-ago ruled meaningless and arbitrary? The Court also conceded that there was not in fact, a‘fundamental right’ to abortion. Does ANY local, or even national reporter ever comment on that? Nope. The actual status of abortion law is continually misrepresented by a simplistic media.)

But after Casey, and despite loss of credibility, Roe still stood. But in a simplistically meaningless salute to ‘choice’ and the legal folly of stare decisis (the legal insistence that a ‘previous decision continue to stand’). Chief Justice Rehnquist stated in his ruling,

“Roe continues to exist, but only in the way that a storefront on a western movie set exists: a mere façade to give the illusion of reality... Behind the façade an entirely new method of analysis without any roots in constitutional law…”   Casey Joint Decision, 1992

For us today, the question for 2022 is: What will this Court now do?

You just read that Chief Justices will throw their decisions in surprisingly unlikely corners - this to help frame and ‘craft’ the final decisions their colleagues may be offering. 

Will Justice Roberts, widely known for such politicking, try that? Will he attempt to ‘split the difference’ yet again? But with five other solid lifers, could he? I fully expect the old façade known as Roe to topple. This diseased tree will indeed fall. But in which direction?  

A bigger issue, that is almost never addressed, undergirds this entire debate: “Will doctors be free to continue in their now 50-year-old license to do what they want, even to kill? Justice Ginsburg, and a handful of others, knew this issue just never gets discussed. 

Whatever happens in the coming decision, you can expect the major media to enjoy the controversy. Just don’t expect them to get it right.

-----

Here’s a nice thought: the media has stopped talking about the Texas abortion law heard by the court two weeks earlier. But that law is powerful. The Court has allowed it to remain in effect.  Abortions have come to a halt in Texas. 

So, the media has joined in the terrified silence of the abortion industry regarding that law. 

Wouldn’t it be nice if the Court decided to rule on Texas as well? Then, as they did in 1973, perhaps issue a conjoined decision, but this time protecting the right of unborn children to be protected and honored under the law? 

 Brian Johnston is the author of Evil Twins - Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing available on Amazon and wherever fine books are sold.

Airdate: 12/11/21

EPISODE 264:
Marxist Ideology Coming To the Forefront of Our Culture

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores the statements and teachings of radical-feminist theory, specifically as expressed by Ruth Bader Ginsberg.  He repeats her quotes from the bench and shares her comments from later interviews. 

Ruth Bader Ginsberg openly quoted Marx from from the bench of the United States Supreme Court but does not give him attribution. Very few have read Marx nor do they understand the sweeping cultural dictates of the Marxist philosophy. They are therefore ignorant of these ideas when couched in progressive culture and then placed directly into the laws of our nation by the highest court of land.

When Justice Blackmun reviewed the various feminist arguments submitted in the amicus briefs for Roe v. Wade in Doe v. Bolton, he did not recognize those assertions as coming directly from the statements of Karl Marx - but they did. 

There is only one political philosophy in the history of mankind that has asserted the idea that unlimited abortions are an essential premise of political success. That political philosophy is Marxism.

Brian shares portions from his book “Evil Twins- Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing.”

In embracing abortion on demand, the twin decisions also instructed and authorized the medical profession to do what it has always sworn to never do, intentionally kill human beings.

Brian explains how this dramatic embrace of Marxist ideology, the dismissal of a government’s duty towards human lives, and the companion distraction of the medical professions ethical standards has left us in America vulnerable to government use of medicine against the most vulnerable individuals of our society. 

This can only be resolved through the intentional restoration of the right to life.

Airdate: 11/20/21

EPISODE 263:
What's Happened to the Hippocratic Oath?

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the vital importance of the Hippocratic Oath for retaining the values of Western Civilization - respect for the vulnerable innocent.

Reading portions from his book, Evil Twins - Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing, Brian underscores the incredible significance of these decisions in assaulting and redefining the healing role of the medical profession. Astoundingly, even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg openly condemned the Roe and Doe decisions for licensing doctors to kill as they saw fit, but not actually giving women any rights at all! 

The program includes extensive commentary on the importance of re-establishing the Oath and proclamation of the Rome declaration of ethical doctors who are calling the medical profession back to its roots, and reaffirming the Hippocratic Oath.

Airdate: 11/13/21

EPISODE 262:
Supreme Court Surprise - Sped Up Review of State Abortion Law

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston examines, in-depth, the surprising news that the Supreme Court is accelerating its review of Roe versus Wade. November 1, 2021 the Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in the case of the new Texas law known as the “Heartbeat Bill”.

Abortion radicals are deeply alarmed at the impact of allowing the Texas measure to stay in affect, which the Supreme Court has done up until this point. The Biden administration, fulfilling its loyalty to the abortion industry, has pledged to use every aspect of the federal government to stop this Texas measure.

The passionate desire to overturn the Texas law has precipitated the Justice Department to not only request a full hearing on the Texas measure immediately, they have specifically requested a ruling on the possibility that it may lead to the overturn of Roe versus Wade.

In addition to establishing a beating human heart as a definitive, objective measure of the presence of a human life, the Texas bill (SB 8) also allows private individuals to sue abortionists.

This novel approach of individual civil actions has brought great alarm and consternation to the abortion industry. This aspect has been grossly mischaracterized and maligned by the media and the abortion industry.

Private civil action will need to be assessed by local judges, and the propriety of individual litigants is always determined by local judges. Abortion advocates assert that the law will spawn nuisance lawsuits.  

But ‘nuisance lawsuits’ are, in fact, relatively common in normal civil court already. These courts stand ready to determine appropriate litigation. Determining the individual’s propriety as litigant is one of the first duties of local civil courts. 

Finally, the state’s compelling interest to protect individual lives emanates from the undergirding principle in normal society that stronger individuals have a moral duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves. The 10th Amendment clearly outlines the rights and responsibilities of the federal government as emanating from the originating rights of the individual, and the individual states.  

The federal government’s duties are, in fact, a reflection of more primordial rights and duties of human beings. As such, the authority of the government, is in fact, a reflection of the inherent authority and rights of the individual.

Airdate: 10/31/21

EPISODE 261:
It’s Good To Get Old

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston discusses why it’s good to get old and how the language and words we use can dramatically impact our attitudes towards our own aging and towards the aging of others.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal (9/24/21), examines how in Japan, demographically the oldest nation in the world, they have begun to re-define what the meaning of what ‘old’ is. For example, the city of Nagano is officially changing its legal definition of “elderly”. Beginning next year, in order to keep residents active and engaged in their lives, what is considered ‘old’ now, 65 or over, will only apply linguistically and legally at age 75.

Nagano was the site of the 1998 Winter Olympics.  Now the new definition will reduce the proportion of its population classified as ‘elderly’ to just 16% from 30% of the population under the old definition, transitioning it from one of the oldest to one of the youngest cities in Japan.

Ironically, the values, language, and legal definitions in the United States are moving in the opposite direction. Not only is the idea of age and senior ’senility,’ looked down upon in the United States, but many leaders and progressive government link thinkers, are advocating that 75 is actually the time to die. Seriously.

With the increase in the routine denial of medical treatment, and the stunning government actions of intentional exposure to Covid-19, an intentional non-treatment of the elderly in both the states of New York and California, the cultural shift and values and language are becoming more apparent.

With the introduction of Obamacare, the idea of a single-payer, government-sponsored and controlled health system, brought a new view of “appropriate” care for the elderly.

The intentional installation of seniors and giving them exposure to Covid, with the concomitant non-treatment and isolation was a stunning government response by the governors of New York in California in 2020. Tens of thousands of seniors were intentionally sent to die, for the supposed “greater good.”

At the height of the Obamacare debate the Atlantic magazine published an extensive article by Ezekiel Emmanuel. He was one of the policy figures essential to the healthcare debate within the Obama administration, and the brother of Obama Chief-of-Staff, Rahm Emanuel.

“Why I hope to die at 75: an argument that society and families - and you - will be better off if nature takes it’s course swiftly and promptly,” raised some concerns in the pro-life community, but was largely greeted by knowing nods of agreement by the academic and media elite. ‘Who wants to be senile?’

But the open public comment if not ‘instruction’ (remember the subtitle… “you will be better off if nature takes its course swiftly and promptly.’) and the not-so-camouflaged derision of senility brings a great risk.  The Covid reaction is but the tip of a not so hidden iceberg.   As far as the demographics of aging and population, the United States is not far behind Japan.

Brian is free to admit his personal inclination toward a Christian worldview, and points out that that perspective is, in fact, much more accommodating and closer to the Japanese embrace of the elderly than the new progressive ideology of American healthcare.

He gives several examples from both Old and New Testament, and the values that once were a foundation for our American culture, and Western Civilization itself. Honoring the elderly and embracing long lines for ourselves is nicely summed up in Deuteronomy 5:16: “Honor your father and mother as the Lord your God has commanded you. That your days may be prolonged and then it may go well with you and the land which the Lord your God gives you..” This was literally a commandment to us as individuals and to our culture as a whole.

The Christian influenced worldview of Western Civilization, as well as many old and established cultures revere the elderly and see it as a duty to honor, rather than disparage old age. Psalm 71:9; Proverbs 23:22; Proverbs 17:6, Psalm 91:16 and the list goes on and on.

Our culture is being invited to change its view of the elderly, to no longer view aging as a good thing, to avoid maturity with its challenges and wisdom, to embrace what is new, what is young, what is fashionably elite.  But the cost is great. It is very great. It is not only the loss of lives and wisdom, but may include the loss of our civilization itself.

Airdate: 10/16/21

EPISODE 260:
Recap of the California Recall Election September, 2021

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explorers what happened in the 2021 recall election of Governor Gavin Newsom.

Previous episodes leading up to the recall prepared listeners for the fact that it would be a difficult task and that aside from simply voting ‘YES’ on the recall, there was a great need to also vote for a replacement. 

Brian explains how, for the first time in California history, the Democrat party demanded that there be no Democrat replacement even suggested, and promised to punish any Democrat officeholder who presented themselves as a possible replacement candidate. All government employee unions instructed their members to only vote ‘NO’, and under the strong possibility of social exclusion, there was to be no discussion or suggestion of supporting a replacement.

In addition to the multiple millions spent by these government employee unions, outside leftist money from the likes of political provocateurs like George Soros poured into the state.

But Brian is not discouraged. All along, this particular effort was a long shot. The great advantage is that it brought serious question on the nature of both the Democrat party and the policies of the governor. What it has done is prepared conscientious voters for the very real election that is now upon us, the elections of 2022. 

Every Congressional district, State Assembly and Senate district will have new boundaries in the coming year. Recent efforts by California Prolife and other politically attentive organizations have encourage people to vote and be involved in the most local elections - county supervisors, city councils, school boards. It is this level of civic involvement that can have the most dramatic change. And because these diffuse elections are harder for both the media and the Democrat party machinery to focus on, the odds of gaining seats on all of these levels have increased dramatically for the year 2022.

Instead of being discouraged about the recall, it is merely the first salvo in an ongoing political war and the great advantage is that it was initiated by those that have had enough and are unwilling to simply walk away from their responsibilities as citizens.

Airdate: 09/25/21

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

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston issues a special update regarding the actual status of Texas law SB-8. When it was signed into law by Governor Abbot of Texas,  pro-abortion forces immediately sought to have it stayed by the courts, to prevent it from going into effect. This request was sent up to the US Supreme Court and specifically to Justice Alito, who is responsible for the sixth district federal court of appeals. He referred the matter to the full court. 

The US Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the law, it simply stated it was not appropriate to stop or enjoin the law until it has been reviewed by the lower courts. 

The media immediately swung into action and decried the Supreme Court for following its principles and standard procedures. Abortion advocates in the media are seeking to gin-up their grassroots supporters - requesting among other things - a demand to pack the US Supreme Court and to question all pro-life laws because supposedly this was now the overturn of I. 

This media analysis is grossly mis-representative and is designed to create a pro-abortion climate in the public sentiment. It is not an honest analysis of the facts of the case. 

In the second half of the program Brian interviews Jenny Rae Le Roux, candidate for governor. This is part of the ongoing interviews with pro-life candidates seeking to replace Gavin Newsom.

Airdate: 09/11/21

EPISODE 258:
Stop Assisted Suicide Measures - California SB-380

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston issues a California action alert on Senate Bill 380. The measure has passed out of the Senate and is now going to the Assembly floor.

Each and every member of the Assembly will be voting on it. If approved, it would go to the governor, who supports intentionally killing the depressed vulnerable patient.

SB-380 removes all existing ‘safeguards’ for depressed and dependent patients.

The Assembly is preparing to vote, and the death folk are pushing it hard!

Depressed COVID patients, nursing home residents, solitary elderly, the ill and infirm, disabled - all now in the crosshairs of a killing medical profession. Stop expansion of ‘assisted suicide’!

When assisted suicide was narrowly passed with bipartisan opposition during a special legislative session on Medi-Cal in 2015, then-Senator Bill Monning, a co-author of the bill, assured opponents in California Healthline that, “the joint and co-authors on this bill … have endeavored to build in protections in this [measure] that are stronger than the protections in any of the states where this has been practiced." Now the bill authors are proposing to remove their own “safeguards.” ”SB-380 (Eggman) will roll back the following “safeguards” that were assured in 2015 including:

• Prematurely ending the existing 2025 sunset date and legislative reevaluation option four years early with little to no scientific data to support this action (especially in light of the worldwide pandemic);

• No future oversight or evaluation of Annual reports about assisted suicide requests and their out outcomes. Existing reports do not contain any data regarding complications, reasons for requesting the lethal drugs, and for the limited data provided, much is listed as “unknown.” 

• Removes the 15 day waiting period “safeguard.”

Please immediately URGE your Assemblymembers  to vote ‘NO’ on SB-380 and protect patients.

Airdate: 09/04/21

EPISODE 257:
California Gubernatorial Recall of Gavin Newsom

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains the recall of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Particular focus is brought on the life issues as pursued and implemented by Governor Newsom. 

For a successful recall at least half of the voters must vote “yes” on the first question on the ballot: “Shall Governor Newsom be recalled?” 

If that question receives more than 50% ‘yes‘ then the second question is: “Who should replace him?”

Forty-two candidates have filed as potential replacements, and 14 of them are pro-life. Brian introduces both them and relevant issues of California policy. Future programs will allow opportunity for candidates to introduce themselves.   

Airdate: 08/21/21

EPISODE 255 & 256:
The Power of Ultrasound in the Fight Against Abortion - Part 1 & 2

Throughout Western Civilization it has always been asserted that human beings are more than merely animals.  They should not be treated like animals that can be owned or disposed of but that we have an intrinsic value, a spark of the divine, what the Judeo-Christian world calls the image of God.  There is something special about human beings.

Each individual is unique and deserves protection in particular when they are most vulnerable.

These episodes of Life Matters delve into the science of ultrasound and the power of this technology to see these individual lives within the womb.  Brian will talk with Bri Knaus, owner of Hello, My Baby which provides ultrasound services beyond the traditional 2D imagery that most people are familiar with.

The proof of life is in the pictures!

Airdate: 08/07/21

EPISODE 254:
The Agenda of Medical Killing

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

Airdate: 07/19/21

EPISODE 253:
Breeding Killer Doctors

Dr. Patrick Marmion is an obstetrician gynecologist that has worked in various aspects of the medical profession for more than 46 years. In this extended episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores questions of medical ethics and the incredible pressure that is placed on physicians to comply with the killing of patients.

In this first episode, Dr. Marmion relays his story of being forced to support abortion and even being dismissed from a Catholic hospital after his public lecture and demonstration of the direct harms that abortions cause to women.

Airdate: 05/29/21

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

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explains that we are in a battle of ideas, a frequent theme of the “Life Matters” program. It is critically important to realize that the dominant media culture is not merely tolerant of a pro-death worldview - it is selling it and selling it hard. In many ways, we, here today, are living in a dystopia.

Dystopias are not the merely fictional worlds of 1984 or Brave New World, but the authentic cultures in which a particular worldview is constantly repeated and reemphasized by the dominant media. Dissent from that worldview is not condoned. Those who disagree with the official way of thinking are condemned, diminished, and dismissed. The social pressure to accept those ideas are very strong. Look at Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Cuba, Communist China, Venezuela, around the world, where government and media work together to control the thinking and direction of the populace. That is a dystopian world. Nowhere is that clearer today than on the issue of life.

In this episode, Brian takes a deep dive into the real facts behind the media manipulation regarding public opinion and abortion. The intentional use and misuse of language is inescapable. Brian examines some of the key terms,  e.g. “choice,” but also takes a deeper dive into some of the admissions that public opinion polling actually reveals. Public opinion polling demonstrates that the vast majority of Americans actually respect life. The vast majority of Americans would actually like to see the vast majority of abortions prohibited. But you are not told that by the media and especially not by the commentators.  

Public opinion polls that ask more detailed questions rather than simply ‘pro-life’ or ‘pro-choice’  but ask about the circumstances regarding abortion, reveal that the average American, even those who call themselves pro-choice, do not believe in abortion-on-demand. In fact, they have a profound respect for the life of the child in the womb. This has been consistent in American polling since the issue came into the public sphere.

Both the Gallup Poll, which has conducted an annual poll since 1975, and the Marist Poll, used by NBC news, reveal that late-term abortions and abortions that are done for casual social reasons are very much opposed by the average American. The polling figures seen below show that barely 1/4 of Americans support the idea of any abortion, at any time in pregnancy. Yet this is the actual meaning of the word “choice” abortion, though the media plays with that word for its own misleading purposes.  

The media does not admit these numbers. The media does not want you to understand these numbers. The media has an agenda to influence casual inquirers, but also even YOUR thinking as a pro-life individual! They mean to discourage and dissuade you. Don’t let that happen - make sure that you think it through and share with others the objective facts of what happens in a human abortion.

The facts are on your side and facts are terrible things to waste.

Airdate: 05/07/21

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

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explores the more profound significance of the Roe v. Wade narrative. As has been discussed in other programs and deeply explained by other Supreme Court justices, by Justice Blackmun’s court clerks, and many other legal experts who would prefer legalized abortion, Roe versus Wade is a confusing jumble. It’s a wild story that leads us confusingly through legal and medical history, through an arbitrary division of pregnancy into trimesters and assertions of where abortion should be performed in the various trimesters.

Brian explains that this narrative, this story, is a spiel. That is why other legal experts can’t get it to make sense.  It’s a story to distract us and confuse us. The new real action taken is in Doe versus Bolton, where Blackmun clearly states that he will authorize and direct doctors to now be killers and that they can use their personal medical judgment at any time in the pregnancy.  They need not answer to anyone else for that decision.

The purpose of the spiel, just like the purpose of a criminal’s alibi, is to provide a justification for a crime that either has taken place or is about to take place.

The spiel is a relatively common aspect of social life, used by gypsies and thieves.   Unless you are fully prepared and understand that it is designed to distract you, there is great danger in trying to follow it or believe in it. Its purpose is to sell you on a final conclusion that may indeed be to your greater harm. Roe versus Wade is exactly that. Doe versus Bolton is the deadly real result. Roe is the distracting spiel, Doe is the crime.

Airdate: 04/03/21

EPISODE 248:
When Medical Killing Became Law 

Relatively few Americans understand the actual nature of abortion law in the United States. Many do know that the Roe v. Wade decision authorized abortion throughout the nation. Still, beyond that, there is mass confusion as to when it is approved, what conditions are legally necessary for the abortion to take place, etc. 

Even more specifically, few realize Roe was joined by a companion decision, Doe v. Bolton,  and it is this quiet, unexamined companion decision which authorizes a physician the absolute right to end the child’s life whenever the abortionist feel appropriate.

Due to garbled and ideological media coverage, many Americans think that the abortion issue is simply a matter of women’s rights. But so much more was changed by that decision. When the court authorized the ending of that child’s life, for that is what an abortion does, it had to confirm who was to do the killing.

Radical feminist groups had demanded the right to have, and even perform abortions at their discretion and at any time in pregnancy. The same ideological groups asserted that this was a constitutional right because of their right to control their own body.

But Justice Blackmun was clear, he was not giving women that right. She must have the permission and direct involvement of a professional that would kill the child. And that professional baby killer was to come from an existing profession which up until that time had sworn never to kill a child or any vulnerable human being within their care. 

The medical professional and that profession alone, was authorized and approved as legal killers of vulnerable children in the United States of America.  

And they could do so whenever they - and they alone - felt.  

This decision represented a dramatic assault on centuries of civil society and medical ethics. A doctor had sworn that to participate in their profession that they would never kill or intentionally harm a vulnerable patient in their care.  The Hippocratic Oath then needed to be dismissed for Roe v. Wade to take affect. This unlimited license to kill at discretion was then explicitly granted to physicians through the Doe v. Bolton decision.

The implications of discarding the Hippocratic Oath are now sweeping through our culture, and killing medicine has become a standard procedure. Doctor killing of the disabled became effective in Canada in March, 2021. Canadian doctors are even authorized to kill the mentally disabled.

In California, this license to kill has now begun to prohibit any dissent or alternative medical treatments. State Senate Bill 380 will require a physician to support and immediately hand their vulnerable patient to a termination doctor, should be attending physician feel killing is an inappropriate treatment for the request at hand. The conscience rights of excellent and effective doctors will now be removed in the name of unfettered medical killing. Additionally, Assembly Bill 705 would prohibit religious, medical institutions, or even hippocratic minded medical hospitals from having policies against terminating patients.

AB705 will push for such institutions to accommodate, approve and facilitate the killing if any physician they are employing so chooses. This new doctor's ‘right to kill’ has become a doctor's and the medical profession’s duty to kill.

Roe v. Wade did much more than authorize human abortions in America. Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton unleashed medical killing on our culture. This terminator role for doctors has happened in the past, and it has never ended well.

Airdate: 03/27/21

EPISODE 247:
Euthanasia Prevention In Canada And The United States

In this episode, Commissioner Johnson discusses the expansion of medical killing via assisted suicide and euthanasia.

The Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions of 1973 did not merely authorize human abortions but specifically directed that only physicians should be involved in these killings. That meant that the medical profession was changed from being a profession sworn only to help and care for and to comfort if they could not cure, but never to kill or in any way harm their patients.

With the adoption of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the medical profession is dramatically altered and medical killing was legalized in the United States for the first time.

The expansion of medical Killing has continued and has now swept around the world as a standard form of medical practice. Brian is joined by Alex Schadenburg, Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. Mr. Schadenburg is based in Canada.  The Canadian government is now requiring that anyone involved in comfort care or other forms of pain management and palliative care also be involved directly in intentional medical killing.

This expansion of the euthanasia movement has also crept into California where assisted suicide has been legalized. However, a new bill, SB-380, would now require a conscientious doctor who does not believe the patient should be put down, to expedite the process nevertheless and deliver the patient to a killing physician. This removal of a conscience clause provision for physicians will mean that the profession is bound in its commitment to kill. The window for the terminal diagnosis will also be reduced to fifteen days in some circumstances.

SB-380 has not yet been heard, and all pro-life individuals in California are urged to contact their state senators and assembly members urging opposition.

Airdate: 03/13/21

EPISODE 246:
Understanding History To Understand The Present

In this vital episode, Commissioner Johnston examines how history is being directly attacked and rewritten at this very moment. This practice is the ongoing pattern of progressive, historical revisionism.

It also reflects a fundamental principle lost on most of us in our day-to-day lives: what has preceded us has lead to this moment.  A proper understanding of history will empower us to address this moment in which we live.

Brian ties this to an understanding of the abortion culture surrounding us, and even more importantly, to what truly happened in the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. Many Americans and even numerous pro-lifers do not fully understand the impact these decisions, nearly 50 years ago, have had on our present moment and how we are to address it.

Brian explains that our misunderstandings of history are not our fault.  Many educational institutions, particularly in the United States, are under the sway of the John Dewey view of education, progressivism, and relativism.

In Europe, this had already taken place with the wide-spread adoption and excitement surrounding Hegel‘s view of history. History was considered matters of the past. But, “what is significant is that we are now going into the future.  What truly matters is that these old things are left in the past and we now progress into a brave new world of promise.” In this improved world, “the government is to bring about these courageous further steps of progress.”

But this is a very distorted view of history. History is cumulative. History has led up to this very moment.

In the Spielberg movie, Amistad, the lead Mende tribesman was brought before the United States Supreme Court. He was asked what he wanted to do and why he was doing it  His answer not only summed up their decision but summed up a view and understanding of history that all of us should share: “My ancestors lived so that I might stand in this moment.”

This incisive understanding of history and respect for the facts of history will also help us in understanding our moment, in understanding our present battles.

What happened in The Civil War 

Brian then takes a deep dive into exploring one of the most common misunderstandings of Abraham Lincoln, his commitments, and the real nature of the Civil War. Many think that the Civil War was about suppressing the slave states rights to own slaves. But that is not the case.

In fact, Lincoln’s position on states rights was exactly the opposite. Lincoln was fighting for the right of FREE states to exercise their duty within their jurisdictions to protect the lives of those under their authority. Once that ability was established, then the Senate could consider what laws ought to apply to all the states. That would eventually happen in the13th and 14th amendments, but it was not possible if free states were not even allowed to abolish slavery!

Several actions by the federal government were actually preventing the rights of the free states to be exercised within their borders. The Fugitive Slave Law, the Kansas Nebraska Act, and the Dred Scott Decision, all infringed on the rights of free states to exercise their duty under natural law to protect those who could not protect themselves (the same basis that individual states would later use to ban abortion).

Even though free states could say that they were free states, according to the federal government, a slave was never legally free until he or she crossed the Canadian border. The most odious of these offenses against free states is the blatantly pro-slavery Dred Scott Decision, which explicitly said that states could not ensure freedom or protect the lives of slaves inside their jurisdictions.

This was actually the same action of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions: proclaiming it as federal law that one could own another human being, and that one was free to kill a human being whom they claim to own. States were not free to ban this principle of deadly ownership of human beings.  

Roe and Doe specifically prohibited pro-life states from enacting their laws. This was a direct assault on the nature of the Constitution and the authority of the States. In addition, it assumed the authority of the United States Senate to both speak for, and then impose federal law on the several states. The nature of the United States Constitution was trampled by the Dred Scott Decision in slavery, was trampled by Roe and Doe and by the abortion culture which they unleashed.

Airdate: 03/06/21

EPISODE 245:
A Tribute to Rush Limbaugh - The Mayor of Realsville

I want to stop for a moment and honor a friend of mine and a friend of the California ProLife Council.

Now, I know some of our supporters are not Conservatives. I, more than most, understand that the ProLife Movement is very diverse. And that means that some of you may not be Rush Limbaugh fans. If that's you, please bear with me. I believe you need to know that the dominant media’s presentation of who Rush Limbaugh was, is false; very, very false.

And if you have been a supporter of the right-to-life for any time, you already know that the dominant media – the drive-by-media - is regularly false and misleading.

They most certainly had it in for Rush Limbaugh.

Don’t believe them.

Rush Limbaugh was a friend of mine.  It’s not that I knew him well, or even hung out with him. But I did work with him on several occasions. He knew me, and we were cordial. We had many friends in common.

First you should know that, in many ways he really was a gentle and “harmless fuzzball!” - his common self-description.

I first met Rush on October 5, 1986, in the studios of KOVR-13, in Sacramento. Jack Kavanaugh, the host, had aligned us as a debate team against the ACLU and Planned Parenthood. The topic was the pending parental notification law in the state legislature.

I can track that exact date because Eugene Hassenfuss, an employee of the CIA, was just shot down over Nicaragua. He was ferrying supplies to the Contra rebels and this dominated the news.

There were lengthy commercial breaks through the hour. Rush had strong thoughts on these events, and I listened intently.  I agreed with him (I personally hate Marxism for a number of reasons) but I explained that on public-policy discussions I was constrained to a very defined folio, the right-to-life. Rush nodded in agreement and we discussed certain aspects of the coming debate.

Rush was never hesitant to share his point of view. But contrary to his image, he was actually a very intense and careful listener. And a very kind and warm man. 

Over the years Rush donated many items to the California Prolife auction and sent kind supportive notes. His commitment to life was deep and if anything, only grew deeper. A common hero we both shared was William F. Buckley (WFB).  Years before, I began reading Buckley’s National Review because often in his column, Notes and Asides, Buckley would write jokes in Latin and without translation! (Finally, something fun I could attempt to translate!) 

But there is something deeper that William F. Buckley, Rush Limbaugh, you, and I share.  That is a commitment to objective reality, to self-evident truth. We share a commitment to stand as our founding fathers stood, looking for those self-evident truths, in “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” This is such a vital and down-to-earth premise for all of society.  And as I’ve said many times, “If Natural Law does not exist, there is no Right to Life.”

Rush made a point to address himself to objective reality. I believe this was the key to his success.  He regularly called himself, “The Mayor of Realsville”. People grow tired of political games and even though Rush was clearly delving into the realm of politics and policy, he was not playing political games. He was dealing with objective facts, not ‘politicized’ issues.         

In terms of American cultural personae, I can think of no greater chasm than in the cultural demeanors of William F. Buckley and Rush Limbaugh. The polysyllabic, Ivy League raconteur and the Cape Girardeau down-home, college drop out, son of the show-me state. Rush and WFB were cultural worlds apart, but like all great Americans, committed to the deeper, transcendent, inspired values America's founders have handed off to all of us.

Many listeners were deeply offended by the ‘caller-abortions’ that Rush would occasionally employ. He would stop in the middle, but usually the beginning of a caller's question and declare, "I'm choosing a caller abortion." He would then hang up, and you would hear the sound of a vacuum cleaner and a flushing toilet. Often the caller was a supporter, but still he insisted he could do it if he wanted to. It didn't matter. 

Many were offended by this. “But Rush, you are hanging up on supporters.” "So, it's my choice!" And the pro-abortion crowd were the most upset.  But unless you shock people, they often don't understand or get your point. 

"Why are you upset about me dismissing a unique person on a phone call, without even asking or informing them?" "Why is it offensive to dismiss a call, but you are not offended to dismiss unique lives, and to do so without any other consideration?" Why is choosing to abort a phone call offensive, but choosing to abort human beings not? What's wrong with this culture?

Talent returned to God. Thank you Rush, and God bless you!

Airdate: 02/27/21

EPISODE 244:
Watch Your Language.  Watch It Closely

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston outlines the incredible power that language has over our thoughts and perceptions.

Brian had studied Comparative Linguistics at Sonoma State University and explains a language phenomenon that many of us don’t often think about.  Just as we are unable to comprehend a completely foreign language, there is the related inability to think about or understand ideas for which we have no words.

This principle also extends to deeper implications - that the meaning of words themselves can be changed simply by their usage in society. Those who control the tools of communication - major media and academic circles, are given great control over the use of language. They often create new rules and usages.  

George Orwell eloquently illustrated the phenomenon in his book 1984. He had written an epilogue explaining how language is used to control the populace in collectivist-socialist cultures. Orwell’s epilogue is widely available and very recommended. It is entitled, “The Principles of Newspeak”. 

Newspeak is the method by which ‘Ingsoc’, ideas of the new English socialism, would be imparted and reinforced. It resulted in the inability to think of individual freedom or previous forms of government. The meanings attached to those concepts would simply be lost.

Brian further comments on the details of this phenomenon as illustrated in Comparative Linguistics.     

The language principle is known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Brian had studied the comparative dialects of the Pomo Indian Tribe of Sonoma, Lake, and Mendocino Counties. Many years earlier, Edvard Sapir had studied the languages of the Aleut and Inuit tribes (formally called Eskimos). Benjamin Lee Whorf studied the Hopi Indian dialects. Each made observations regarding vocabulary (Sapir) and verb tense (Whorf). They concurred that the different aspects of language directly impacted how the language-user viewed the world around them.

Brian explains how the right to life, abortion and euthanasia debates are directly impacted and even determined, by the language that is used.

Obviously, abortion advocates have intentionally changed the vocabulary (choice - a concept - is used to replace the specific action of dismemberment and disposal of the human child). And this is but one example. But in a larger sense, the use of the language and the presumptions that language carries, have also quietly induced pro-life individuals to engage in the debate of ideas, but only using the premises that our current culture has made popular.

Many pro-lifers feel a deep need to debate the relative merits and arguments of the Roe v. Wade decision.  But as Brian, pro-life judges, and even pro-abortion judges, have pointed out, Roe versus Wade is completely illogical in its premises, in its pattern of logic, and in its conclusions. 

Again, even Justice Ginsburg, the most-radical pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice has declared that Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, have not granted women a right to choose or the right to do what they wish with their bodies. Justice Blackmun was explicit that Roe does not create an unlimited right to an abortion. Yet abortion for ‘choice’ is still considered its result. 

Brian‘s point is that it is the companion decision, Doe versus Bolton, which explicitly sets aside the rambling confusion regarding pregnancy and culture and history (the actual content of Roe). It is Doe versus Bolton that explicitly allows doctors to kill, based solely on their own personal opinion, and without any further accountability. 

Doe is the enactment ‘provision’ of Roe v. Wade. And by making the physician (not the woman) the designated agent and ultimate decision maker, it has brought a direct attack against the very premise of the culture in which we live, Western Civilization. 

Western Civilization holds the premise that human beings are more than merely animals.  One profession was dedicated to always caring for and protecting the unique and vulnerable human person - the medical profession.  Throughout Western Civilization doctors have always sworn to never harm or kill.  

It is in Doe v.  Bolton that the medical profession is explicitly empowered to kill and directed to do so at their own discretion. 

Western Civilization a victim in the Roe and Doe companion decisions - they have done even more than simply authorize the killing of innocent babies. An unrestrained killing profession has now become an accepted part of our society.

But language has prevented many from seeing or even thinking about what that means. 

Airdate: 02/20/21

EPISODE 243:
Creating Zombie Law - The Fabled Return of the ERA 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explains how much of abortion rhetoric and abortion law is actually based on falsehoods. 

Pro-life individuals are aware of the absurd assertion that, ‘there is no human being killed,’ when a baby dies in a human abortion. But those familiar with objective facts and self-evident truths know that this is simply an assertion of ideology, separated from objective science, and biological fact. When looked at objectively and dispassionately, it is strikingly clear that in a human abortion, the life of a unique human being is taken. 

The actual nature of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, which together legalized unlimited abortion in the United States, is rarely examined in any depth. Brian‘s upcoming book: The Evil Twins Roe and Doe: How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing, is a deep dive into the objective facts and clear statements of both cases, which the dominant media culture and even many pro-life individuals refuse to examine. 

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston interviews Douglas Johnson, Federal Legislative Director Emeritus of the National Right to Life Committee as he explains how another intentional falsehood is being put forward by the abortion industry and its advocates. They are seeking to revive a long-dead proposal to amend the Constitution - the Equal Rights Amendment.

The Constitution is very clear that amendments may be offered but they must first pass through approval by two-thirds of the state legislatures. When first proposed in the 1970s, the ERA never did get the necessary two-thirds of the states approval, and in fact when it was realized that the ERA would enshrine abortion in the language of the Constitution, many states rescinded their previous approval. Even when attempted again in the 80s the effort failed.

Now, with abortion support in the White House and in both houses of Congress, the strategy has changed and their desire is simply to proclaim that the ERA never died, that there are no limits placed on its passage, and their goal is simply to proclaim it a fiat accompli - that the Equal Rights Amendment is law. They have great hope that the media will simply repeat this clearly false view of the constitution and its amending.

This attempt to create a “walking zombie” of law should be humorous on its face, but sadly there are many naïve and committed ideologues who believe that if they want something they can simply proclaim it to be true, and the dominant media culture will affirm that. Their hope is that natural opponents can simply be silenced! 

These battles for objective truth and reality do indeed impact our laws. It is crucial that conscientious individuals be ready with the facts to dispel the myths which are so often used to bring about unjust laws. Just such objective facts will be necessary in order to finally bury the zombie known as the ERA. 

Airdate: 02/13/21

EPISODE 242:
The Dramatic Shift In Washington, D.C.

Is this episode of Life Matters Brian interviews National Right to Life President, Carol Tobias. They discuss in depth the dramatic change to the culture of Washington D.C. in the agenda of the Biden/Harris administration.

President Biden has made a commitment to undo all of the pro-life gains won by President Donald Trump. But in addition to that, Biden intends to go much further. Up until his decision to run for president, Senator Joe Biden had supported the Hyde amendment which prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion or to promote abortion.

Biden’s dramatic decision to flip-flop on this final pro-life issue, places him firmly in the camp of radical abortion advocates. He now supports unlimited advocacy and funding for all abortions. 

In addition, the famous Mexico City policy, a policy of the Ronald Reagan era, has now been rescinded by the Biden administration. It is critical to note that the Mexico City policy which deals with the international funding of abortion and his promotion through various UN and other outlets, prohibited organizations from forcing abortion ideology onto various countries around the world. These countries, formerly referred to as “third world,” are often blackmailed into both accepting abortion into their laws and culture, but also funding agencies which promote abortion throughout their population.

“Population control” advocates use abortion as one more form of birth control and are more than willing to use the power of the United States government and the United Nations and multiple billions of dollars in leverage, to force nations to go against their traditional values and religious sentiments if they are to except other foreign aid. This is a form of abortion colonialism.

Carol speaks at length about other issues that could bring great change should they be adopted. The possibility of court packing, i.e. appointing a number of new pro-abortion justices, creating new states out of the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico - each of these acts would give the Democrat party two new United States senators cementing abortion policy into federal law for decades to come. 

Carol also discusses the resurrection of the long dead issue, Equal Rights amendment. Constitutionally speaking, the attempt to amend the constitution with ERA failed in the 70s and a second attempt to revive it in the 80s came to nought.  (Brian discusses this in much greater detail in his upcoming interview with Douglas Johnson).

Pro-life advocates will need to be particularly attentive to action items that impact the federal government contacting their representatives in raising their voice as the new radically pro-abortion Biden administration seeks to implement itself on our nation. It is our job to raise our voices on behalf of those that cannot speak for themselves.
Airdate: 02/06/21

EPISODE 241:
Ten Reasons Roe v. Wade Does Not Make Sense

* “Roe v. Wade has no foundation in either law or logic; it is on a collision course with itself.”

• * Edward Lazarus, a former law clerk to Roe's author, Justice Harry Blackmun, who writes:

As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible. I say this as someone utterly committed to the right to choose, as someone who believes such a right has grounding elsewhere in the Constitution instead of where Roe placed it, and as someone who loved Roe's author like a grandfather. . . . .

What, exactly, is the problem with Roe? The problem, I believe, is that it has little connection to the Constitutional right it purportedly interpreted. A constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent. ...

The proof of Roe's failings comes not from the writings of those unsympathetic to women's rights, but from the decision itself and the friends who have tried to sustain it. Justice Blackmun's opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding. And in the almost 30 years since Roe's announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms.7

Ten Legal Reasons to Condemn Roe v. Wade

1.    The umpires are there to call balls and strikes. In real baseball they cannot be players as well.   The Roe Court far exceeded its constitutionally designated legal purpose and authority. 

Under the U.S. Constitution, the power to make laws is vested in Congress and retained by state legislatures. Elected representatives are the proper ‘makers of law.’ These elected officials then answer to the voters. The role of the judiciary in constitutional review is to determine if the law being challenged infringes on a constitutionally protected right. It is not the role to then somehow come up with new laws of their own tastes and inclination.

Justice O'Connor, quoting Chief Justice Warren Burger:
Irrespective of what we may believe is wise or prudent policy in this difficult area, "the Constitution does not constitute us as 'Platonic Guardians' nor does it vest in this Court the authority to strike down laws because they do not meet our standards of desirable social policy, 'wisdom,' or 'common sense.'"8
In Roe v. Wade and its companion, conjoined case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court struck down criminal laws of Texas and Georgia which outlawed certain abortions by finding that these laws (and those of the other 48 states) violated a "right of privacy" that "is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." But such a right is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution nor even derivable from values embodied in it. It was a preference to have such a right and Justice Blackmun’s writings actually set themselves to devise the ‘rules’ that would then ‘emanate’ from such a preferred right. He simply made up new, substitutionary laws and imposed them on all the states! 
In his dissenting opinion in Doe v. Bolton, Justice Byron White, joined by Justice William Rehnquist, wrote:
I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers ... and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 states are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.

2. The Roe Decision seriously misrepresents the history of medicine and society’s view of abortion.

Justice Blackmun admitted to a serious fascination with the medical profession. Later in Doe v. Bolton we will see an almost passionate commitment to ‘protect the physician from the cloud of possible prosecution.’

The Mayo Clinic, for whom he served as legal counsel, admits to Blackmun’s unique obsession with the medical profession.  Proceedings of the Mayo Clinic Francis Helminski, J.D. Volume 69, Issue 7, p 698-699, July 01, 1994

Although three previous justices of the United States Supreme Court have had formal medical training, none has had more influence on medicine than Justice Harry A. Blackmun. Blackmun, a mathematics major at Harvard College, considered medical school but instead chose legal training. After becoming familiar with the legal work of the Mayo Clinic while practicing with a Minneapolis firm, he was internal legal counsel for the clinic from 1950 to 1959. Blackmun's work contributed to the development of the clinic, especially in the establishment of Rochester Methodist Hospital. As a Supreme Court Justice, Blackmun's concern for medicine was evident in many of his judicial opinions, including Roe v Wade and Regents of the University of California v Bakke. In Roe, he rested much of the constitutional foundation for legalized access to abortion on the integrity of the physician-patient relationship.

The apparent purpose of the Roe opinion's long historical excursion is to create the impression that abortion had been widely practiced and unpunished until the appearance of restrictive laws in the prudishly-Victorian 19th Century. One example is adequate to show the distortion of Justice Harry Blackmun's version of history.

He must overcome a huge hurdle in the person of Hippocrates, the "Father of Medicine," and his famous Oath which has guided medical ethics for over 2,000 years. The Oath provides in part: "I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion."9 This enduring standard was followed until the Roe era and is reflected in Declarations of the World Medical Association through 1968: "I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of conception. ..."10 But Justice Blackmun dismisses this universal, unbroken ethical tradition as nothing more than the manifesto of a fringe Greek sect, the Pythagoreans, to which Hippocrates is alleged to have belonged!

3. Roe wrongly characterizes the common law of England regarding the status of abortion.

The Court's language in Roe offers a plastic analysis and conclusion – "it now appears doubtful that abortion was ever firmly established as a common-law crime even with respect to the destruction of a quick fetus" – is patently false on its face. The Common Law drew its principles from Natural Law. Until quickening there were no objective signs that a human life was present. Quickening, the moment that movement can be detected, was considered objective scientific fact that the fetus was indeed definitively alive.11
William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-1769), an exhaustive and definitive discussion of English common law as it was adopted by the United States shows that the lives of unborn children were valued and protected, even if their beginning point was still thought to be "quickening" rather than conception:

Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it begins in contemplation of law as soon as the infant is able to stir in the mother's womb.    For if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb ... this, though not murder, was by the ancient law homicide or manslaughter. But at present it is not looked upon in quite so atrocious a light, though it remains a very heinous misdemeanor.12
Until well into the 19th century, it was assumed that a child's life may not begin – and certainly could not be proven to have begun to satisfy criminal evidentiary standards – prior to the time the child’s movements were felt by the mother ("quickening"), at approximately 16-18 weeks' gestation. The science of the time was being applied to the enforcement of the law.

After the invention of the modern microscope (1836) and the widespread, objective scientific revelation that mammalian life begins at conception, English law then increased the penalties for killing a child before quickening. Consistent with the principle that the law needs to follow objective, observable facts, in 1861 Parliament passed the Offences Against the Person Act. This law extended protection of the life of the child throughout pregnancy. This law was gradually whittled-away starting in the 1980’s. But the Act continued to protect pre-born life in Northern Ireland until 2019.20

The Roe Court looks at the distinction in early common law concerning abortions attempted before or after "quickening," wrongly. It falsely assumes that the law allowed women great latitude to abort their children in the early months of pregnancy. This is like saying people had an unspecified right to hack websites before such acts were criminally prosecuted.

The law is designed to enforce known and demonstrable crimes. A law could not protect a human being it did not know to be alive. But as demonstrated by the Offences Against the Person Act, when the facts are known, then the law can be enforced.

4. In Roe, the Court downplays and distorts the purpose and legal weight of state criminal abortion statutes that had been deliberated and passed by the several states

In the 19th Century, in virtually every state and territory, laws were enacted to define abortion as a crime throughout pregnancy. They contained only narrow exceptions, generally permitting abortion only if necessary to preserve the mother's life. The primary reason for stricter abortion laws, according to their legislative history, was to afford greater protection to unborn children. This reflected a heightened appreciation of prenatal life based on new medical knowledge. (See the Offenses Against the Person Act in the U.K.)

Dr. Horatio R. Storer… etc is significant that the medical profession spearheaded efforts to afford greater protection to unborn lives than had been recognized under the common law's archaic "quickening" distinction.

The existence of such laws, and their clear purpose of protecting the unborn, rebuts the Court's claim that abortion has always been considered a liberty enjoyed by women. These laws show broad acceptance of the view that the life of an unborn child is valuable and should be protected unless the mother's life is at risk. In that case, of course, both mother and child were likely to perish, given the primitive care then available for infants born prematurely.

How does the Court get around the impressive body of laws giving clear effect to the state's interest in protecting unborn lives? It attempts to devalue them by ascribing a completely different purpose: the desire to protect the mother's life and health from a risky surgical procedure. Applying the maxim "if the reason for a law has ceased to exist, the law no longer serves any purpose," the Court declares that abortion is now "safer than childbirth." Therefore, laws banning abortion have outlived their purpose.

5. A privacy right to decide to have an abortion has no foundation in the text or history of the Constitution.

Roe v. Wade locates a pregnant woman's "constitutional" right of privacy to decide whether or not to abort her child either "in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty ..., as we feel it is, or ... in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people."

The Court does not even make a pretense of examining the intent of the drafters of the Fourteenth Amendment, to determine if it was meant to protect a privacy interest in abortion. Clearly it was not. The Fourteenth Amendment was not intended to create any new rights, but to secure to all persons, notably including freed slaves and their descendants, the rights and liberties already guaranteed by the Constitution.

Several rhetorical devices are used to mask this absence of constitutional grounding. The Court mentions several specifically enumerated rights which concern an aspect of privacy, for example, the Fourth Amendment's "right of the people to be secure in their houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." However, the Court fails to connect these to the newly found "right" to abortion, because no logical connection exists.

Justice Blackmun attempts to graft abortion onto the line of decisions recognizing privacy/liberty rights in the following spheres: marriage (Loving v. Virginia, striking down a ban on interracial marriage); childrearing (Meyer v. Nebraska and Pierce v. Society of Sisters, upholding parental decision-making regarding their children's education); procreation (Skinner v. Oklahoma, finding unconstitutional a state law mandating sterilization of inmates found guilty of certain crimes); and contraceptive use by a married couple (Griswold v. Connecticut). Certainly marriage, and building and raising a family are fundamental aspects of human life that predate human laws and nations. They are implicit in the concept of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, though even these rights are subject to state limitation, such as laws against bigamy, incest, and child abuse and neglect.

But abortion does not fit neatly among these spheres of privacy. It negates them. Abortion is not akin to childrearing; it is child destruction. A pregnant woman's right to abort nullifies the right to procreate upheld in "Skinner." He no longer has a right to bring children into the world, but only a right to fertilize an ovum, which his mate can then destroy without his knowledge or consent. The fear of government intruding into the marital bedroom by searching for evidence of contraceptive use drove the Griswold Court to find a privacy right for couples to use contraception in the "penumbras, formed by emanations from" various guarantees in the Bill of Rights. But, however closely abortion and contraception may be linked in purpose and effect, they are worlds apart in terms of privacy. Abortions do not take place in the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms, preventing them does not require investigation of private sexual behavior, and they involve personnel other than the spouses.

A "privacy right" large enough to encompass abortion could also be applied to virtually any conduct performed outside the public view, including child abuse, possession of pornography or using illicit drugs. The liberty interest to be protected from state regulation is never really defined in Roe. Instead the Court describes at some length the hardships some women face, not from pregnancy, but from raising children:

Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by childcare. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it.

By this reasoning, one might argue that Roe's liberty encompasses ridding oneself of unwanted toddlers! Ordinarily, the defense of rights requires us to forgo lethal methods and use means likely to create the least harm to others. We may not, for example, surround our house and yard with a high voltage fence to deter trespassers. This principle is upended in the abortion context. Adoption, for example, would effectively eliminate all the "hardships" of raising "unwanted" children by non-lethal means.

6. Although it reads the 14th Amendment extremely expansively to include a right of privacy to decide whether to abort a child, the Court in Roe adopts a very narrow construction of the meaning of "persons" to exclude unborn children.

Much is made of the fact that "person" as used elsewhere in the Constitution does not refer to unborn children when, for example, discussing qualifications for public office or census-taking. That point proves nothing. The Supreme Court has held that corporations are "persons" within the meaning of the 14th Amendment and they are not counted in the census, nor can a corporation grow up to be president.

The Roe Court also ignored the clear and uncontested biological evidence before them that individual human lives begin at conception: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins." This is question determined by science, not philosophers or theologians or politicians. But while seeming to sidestep the question, the Court in fact resolved the question at birth, by allowing abortion to be legal throughout pregnancy. In the same vein, the Court refers to the unborn child as only a "potential life" (indeed, an actual life) from the moment of his or her conception.

The Roe opinion states that a contrary finding on "personhood" would produce the opposite result (presumably foreclosing the mother's privacy right to an abortion). One does not have to be a "person" in the full constitutional sense, however, for a state to validly protect one's life. Dogs can be protected from killing although they are not "persons."13 And under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), people are prosecuted, fined and jailed for acts that may harm creatures, such as sea turtles, that are not "persons" in the full constitutional sense. Sea turtles are protected not only after they are hatched, but even while in the egg. In fact, each sea turtle egg removed from its nest constitutes a separate violation under the ESA, regardless of whether the sea turtle egg contained an embryo that was alive or "quick" or "viable" or even already deceased at the time of the taking.

7. The Roe Court assumed the role of a legislature in establishing the trimester framework.

Roe holds that in the first trimester of pregnancy, the mother's "privacy interest" in an abortion trumps state regulation. From the end of the first trimester to the child's "viability" – which the Court presumed to be no earlier than 26 weeks – the state can regulate abortion practice only in ways reasonably related to advancing the mother's health. In the final trimester, the state – in the interest of protecting the "potential life" of the child – can regulate and even proscribe abortion, except where necessary to preserve the mother's "life or health." Health (see point 8 below) is the exception that swallows the rule.

Pre-decision memoranda among members of the Roe Court acknowledged the serious flaw in establishing arbitrary, rigid time frames. Justice Blackmun himself admitted it was arbitrary.14 A reply memorandum from Justice Potter Stewart stated:

One of my concerns with your opinion as presently written is ... in its fixing of the end of the first trimester as the critical point for valid state action. ... I wonder about the desirability of the dicta being quite so inflexibly "legislative."

My present inclination would be to allow the States more latitude to make policy judgments. ..."15

Geoffrey R. Stone, a law clerk to Justice Brennan when Roe was decided, was recently quoted as saying: "Everyone in the Supreme Court, all the justices, all the law clerks knew it was 'legislative' or 'arbitrary.'"16

Justices O'Connor, White and Rehnquist denounced the arbitrary trimester framework in O'Connor's dissenting opinion in Akron:

[There] is no justification in law or logic for the trimester framework adopted in Roe and employed by the Court today. ... [That] framework is clearly an unworkable means of balancing the fundamental right and the compelling state interests that are indisputably implicated.

The majority opinion of Justice Rehnquist in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services states:

The key elements of the Roe framework – trimesters and viability – are not found in the text of the Constitution or in any place else one would expect to find a constitutional principle. ... the result has been a web of legal rules that have become increasingly intricate, resembling a code of regulations rather than a body of constitutional doctrine. As Justice White has put it, the trimester framework has left this Court to serve as the country's "ex officio medical board with powers to approve or disapprove medical and operative practices and standards throughout the United States."

8. What Roe gives, Doe takes away.

Many Americans believe that abortion is legal only in the first trimester (or first and second trimester). Many pollsters and media outlets continue to characterize Roe v. Wade as the case which "legalized abortions in the first three months after conception."17 In a recent television appearance, NOW's former president Patricia Ireland falsely claimed that "thirty-six states outlaw abortion in the third trimester."

As noted above, under Roe state laws banning late-term abortions must contain a "health" exception. Health is defined in Roe's companion case, Doe v. Bolton, as including "all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age — relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health." This definition negates the state's interest in protecting the child, and results in abortion on request throughout all nine months of pregnancy. The fact that the Court buries its improbably broad definition of health in the largely unread opinion in Doe v. Bolton makes it no less devastating.

9. The Court describes the right to abortion as "fundamental."

The Supreme Court has found certain rights fundamental. Expressed or implied in the Constitution, they are considered "deeply rooted in the history and traditions" of the American people or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," such as the free exercise of religion, the right to marry, the right to a fair trial and equal protection. A state law infringing on a fundamental right is reviewed under a rigorous "strict scrutiny" standard. In effect, there is a presumption against constitutionality. The Roe Court claims abortion is fundamental on the ground that it is lurking in the penumbras and emanations of the Bill of Rights or the 14th Amendment, along with privacy rights like contraceptive use. It's ludicrous to claim abortion is deeply rooted in American history or traditions or that our governmental system of "ordered liberty" implicitly demands the rights to destroy one's child, but it was an effective way to foreclose state regulations of abortion. The strict scrutiny test was later abandoned in Casey.

10. Despite the rigid specificity of the trimester framework, the opinion gives little guidance to states concerning the permissible scope of abortion regulation

Abortion decisions that followed Roe chronologically have not followed Roe jurisprudentially. Many decisions have five separate opinions filed, often with no more than three justices concurring on most points. Eight separate opinions were filed in Stenberg v. Carhart (which effectively nullified laws in over two dozen states banning partial-birth abortion).

The 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey could have resulted in Roe's reversal. The Casey Joint Opinion (there being no majority opinion) comes close to conceding that Roe was wrongly decided:

We do not need to say whether each of us, had we been Members of the Court when the valuation of the state interest came before it as an original matter, would have concluded, as the Roe Court did, that its weight is insufficient to justify a ban on abortions prior to viability even when it is subject to certain exceptions. The matter is not before us in the first instance, and, coming as it does after nearly 20 years of litigation in Roe's wake we are satisfied that the immediate question is not the soundness of Roe's resolution of the issue, but the precedential force that must be accorded to its holding.

Instead they jettisoned Roe's trimester framework and standard of legislative review, but kept Roe alive: Chief Justice Rehnquist's dissent in Casey, in which he is joined in part by Justices White, Scalia and Thomas states:

Roe decided that a woman had a fundamental right to an abortion. The joint opinion rejects that view. Roe decided that abortion regulations were to be subjected to "strict scrutiny," and could be justified only in the light of "compelling state interests." The joint opinion rejects that view. ... Roe analyzed abortion regulation under a rigid trimester framework, a framework that has guided this Court's decision-making for 19 years. The joint opinion rejects that framework. ...

Whatever the "central holding" of Roe that is left after the joint opinion finishe[d] ... Roe continues to exist, but only in the way a storefront on a western movie set exists: a mere facade to give the illusion of reality.

And later in that dissent:

Roe v. Wade stands as a sort of judicial Potemkin village, which may be pointed out to passers-by as a monument to the importance of adhering to precedent. But behind the façade, an entirely new method of analysis, without any roots in constitutional law, is imported to decide the constitutionality of state laws regulating abortion. Neither stare decisis nor "legitimacy" are truly served by such an effort.

Roe makes no legal sense whatsoever. It is Doe v. Bolton, handed down the same day, and 'interlocked' by Justice Blackmun, it is Doe that explicitly authorizes medical killing, "without the shadow of possible prosecution."

Airdate: 01/30/21

EPISODE 240:
The Loud and Confused Roe v. Wade, The Quiet but Deadly Doe v. Bolton

Commissioner Johnston knows attorneys who are actively involved in the abortion debate and on both sides of the issue. Many assert a mastery and working knowledge of Roe v. Wade’s intricacies. But honest lawyers will not make any such claim.

Perhaps what is more frightening, he knows many more commentators and reporters who will ‘explain’ the decision at length.  The problem is, this ‘well-known’ decision cannot possibly be explained. It does not and cannot make sense. 

Even liberal legal scholars like Alan Dershowitz,1 and Cass Sunstein,2 deny its ability to stand on its own merits. Progressive Professor Laurence Tribe is clear: "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."3

Edward Lazarus was a Blackmun law clerk who "loved Roe's author like a grandfather." He wrote: "As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method .... Justice Blackmun's opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding. And in the almost 30 years since Roe's announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms."4

It is only in understanding this problem of Roe that one can see the real significance of its companion decision, Doe v. Bolton. The decisions were linked and released in tandem. In Doe, Justice Blackmun switches themes entirely. He does not focus on stages of pregnancy or the woman. He now focuses on the individual who is about to do the abortion. Doe v. Bolton, in many ways, is written for ‘the doctor.’

The state’s interest in protecting life is specifically downgraded. The Hippocratic tradition of never harming a human life: dismissed. At any time in pregnancy psychological and societal questions could be the determining factor. No physical medical conditions need be present. (Doe, 410 U.S. 191) Blackmun’s definition of the ‘health’ of the mother in gauzy, ‘gestalt’ concepts, justified a deadly surgical act.

By ‘combining it’ with the confusing Roe decision, he cleans up what he quietly had admitted is an arbitrary, pregnancy-stages framework.5 In Doe he cuts through the fog. He makes the physician’s opinion the arbiter of action.

Known feminist and abortion-advocate, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has openly faulted the Court's approach for actually being, "about a doctor's freedom to practice his profession as he thinks best.... It wasn't woman-centered. It was physician-centered."6   It is this then, that is the real overarching issue in these decisions: legally-authorized, medical killing.  

Pregnancy and abortion were confusedly and ham-handedly dealt with in Roe. But what is crisply and incisively granted to physicians in Doe is the right to use their profession to deadly effect and as they personally saw fit. 

The quietly implemented, largely unexamined Doe decision is responsible for the implementation of America’s abortion practices. Three thousand years of ethical guidance had protected the physician, vulnerable patients, and civilized society from the quiet, easy way out: simply kill the human being in question. The temptation to cover mistakes; save money; accommodate coercion; reduce workload on overworked medical staff; abet antsy heirs; cease careful pain management by simply ceasing the life; diminish populations of ‘imperfect’ dependent individuals; all of these utilitarian motives are easily implemented – and quietly so - once there is no external rule or oath to never use medicine to kill.

The Oath had served as the anchoring premise not only for medical doctors, but for society’s view of ‘unimportant’ human lives entrusted to them.

We are now living with the ever-expanding implications of this casual and quiet dismissal of three millennia of medical ethics. As Justice Ginsburg ironically points out, this new, physician’s ‘right to choose’ is actually the only definitive, conclusive aspect of the deadly, twin decisions, Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton.

 1.Dershowitz, Alan. Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000 (Oxford U. Press 2001): "Judges have no special competence, qualifications, or mandate to decide between equally compelling moral claims (as in the abortion controversy)...."

2. Sunstein, Cass. Quoted by McGuire, New York Sun (November 15, 2005)

 3.Tribe, Laurence "Roe v. Wade and the Lesson of the Pre-RoeCase Law". Michigan Law Review. 77 (7): 1724–48.

4. Lazarus, Edward. "The Lingering Problems with Roe v. Wade, and Why the Recent Senate Hearings on Michael McConnell's Nomination Only Underlined Them, Findlaw's Writ (October 3, 2002).

5. Blackmun’s personal note to fellow justices. Quoted in Woodward, Bob. "The Abortion Papers Archived June 14, 2008, at the Wayback Machine", Washington Post (January 22, 1989).

6.Bullington, Jonathan, (May 11, 2013) Justice Ginsburg: Roe v Wade not woman centered. Chicago Tribune

Brian Johnston is the Western Regional Director of the National Right to Life Committee. His new book, The Evil Twins: Roe and Doe; How the Supreme Court Unleashed Medical Killing will be published by New Regency Publishing and is scheduled for release on April 4, 2021.   Pre-orders available at special, pre-order pricing at New Regency, on Amazon and at AuthorStock.

Mr. Johnston is available for comment and remote or in-person speaking (800) 924-2490)

Airdate: 01/23/21

EPISODE 239:
Roe and Doe - The Evil Twins

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston explores the real issues hidden deep within Roe versus Wade and Doe versus Bolton, the twin decisions handed down on January 22, 1973.

Few people, even many pro-lifers are aware that abortion was legalized and the laws of all of the states overturned not by simply Roe versus Wade but by the twin conjoined decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

Roe v. Wade was addressing the abortion laws of Texas. Doe v. Bolton was addressing the abortion laws of Georgia.

Brian Johnston pulls from his new book The Evil Twins Roe and Doe:  How the Supreme Court unleashed medical killing.

It is scheduled for release on April 4th of this year.

Mr. Johnson explains first of all what very few public commentators and the public at large understand. Roe versus Wade is not simply despised by pro-life individuals. It logically is. Roe versus Wade is despised by many of the leaders of the pro abortion movement, not least of which was actually Supreme Court Associate justice Ruth Bader-Ginsberg.

Brian refers to the many attorneys who are deeply involved in the abortion debate and on both sides of the issue. Many assert a mastery and working knowledge of Roe v Wade’s intricacies. But honest lawyers will not make any such claim.

Perhaps what is more frightening, “I know many more commentators and reporters who will ‘explain’ the decision at length.  The problem is, this ‘well-known’ decision cannot possibly be explained. It does not and cannot make sense."

Even liberal legal scholars like Alan Dershowitz,1 and Cass Sunstein,2 deny its ability to stand on its own merits. Progressive Professor Laurence Tribe is clear: "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."3

Edward Lazarus was a Blackmun law clerk who "loved Roe's author like a grandfather." He wrote: "As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method .... Justice Blackmun's opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding. And in the almost 30 years since Roe's announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms."4

It is only in understanding this problem of Roe that one can see the real significance of its companion decision, Doe v. Bolton. The decisions were linked and released in tandem. In Doe, Justice Blackmun switches themes entirely. He does not focus on stages of pregnancy or the woman. He now focuses on the individual who is about to do the abortion. Doe v Bolton, in many ways, is written for ‘the doctor.’

The state’s interest in protecting life is specifically downgraded. The Hippocratic tradition of never harming a human life isdismissed. At any time in pregnancy psychological and societal questions could be the determining factor. No physical medical conditions need be present. (Doe, 410 U.S. 191) Blackmun’s definition of the ‘health’ of the mother in gauzy, ‘gestalt’ concepts, justified a deadly surgical act.

By ‘combining it’ with the confusing Roe decision, he cleans up what he quietly had admitted is an arbitrary, pregnancy-stages framework.5 In Doe he cuts through the fog. He makes the physician’s opinion the arbiter of action.

Known feminist and abortion-advocate, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has openly faulted the Court's approach for actually being, "about a doctor's freedom to practice his profession as he thinks best.... It wasn't woman-centered. It was physician-centered."6   It is this then, that is the real overarching issue in these decisions: legally-authorized, medical killing.  

Pregnancy and abortion were confusedly and ham-handedly dealt with in Roe. But what is crisply and incisively granted to physicians in Doe is the right to use their profession to deadly effect and as they personally saw fit.

The quietly implemented, largely unexamined Doe decision is responsible for the implementation of America’s abortion practices. Three thousand years of ethical guidance had protected the physician, vulnerable patients, and civilized society from the quiet, easy way out: simply kill the human being in question. The temptation to cover mistakes; save money; accommodate coercion; reduce workload on overworked medical staff; abet antsy heirs; cease careful pain management by simply ceasing the life; diminish populations of ‘imperfect’ dependent individuals; all of these utilitarian motives are easily implemented – and quietly so - once there is no external rule or Oath to never use medicine to kill.

The Oath had served as the anchoring premise not only for medical doctors, but for society’s view of ‘unimportant’ human lives entrusted to them.

We are now living with the ever-expanding implications of this casual and quiet dismissal of three millennia of medical ethics. As Justice Ginsburg ironically points out, this new, physician’s ‘right to choose’ is actually the only definitive, conclusive aspect of the deadly, twin decisions, Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton.

Airdate: 01/09/21

EPISODE 238:
The End of an Extraordinary Year

In this year end episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston reviews the essential purpose of the program and the extraordinary nature of 2020 as a year.

Doctor Anthony Levantino MD, a former abortionist, tells the story of his transformation to a Pro-life advocate.

For the sake of those who seek a year-end tax deduction, Brian outlines some of the many ways that donors can help the California Prolife Council, the principal sponsor of Life Matters.

Many of these various outreaches and opportunities are available directly at www. Californiaprolife.Org

Airdate: 12/26/20

EPISODE 237:
What Is A Case Of Covid? What Is A Death From Covid?

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston examines the implications of a 'changed medical profession' - changed by the Roe and Doe decisions, and what that means in how the government is addressing Covid-19. 

CDC Guidelines what is a 'CASE' of Covid-19?

Whatever a billing doctor says it is. There need be no confirming laboratory evidence.

Once a case of COVID 19 is declared, hospitals and medical officials may now bill their services under the CARES Act. The additional federal funds are applicable to all ongoing 'treatment' of this patient.

FROM CDC: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/case-definition/2020/

"Epidemiological reports from the field are demonstrating a growing importance of pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic infections from two lines of evidence: the serial interval of COVID-19 appears to be close to or shorter than its median incubation period and clusters linked to pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic index cases2, 3. CSTE realizes that field investigations will involve evaluations of persons with no symptoms and these individuals will need to be counted as cases.

Clinical Criteria

At least two of the following symptoms: fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s)

OR

At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing"

------

The CDC goes on to state that upon submission, no further personal details will be collected ('in the interest of privacy’). This makes follow-up and confirmation virtually impossible.

Why now these many "Deaths" from Covid? 

Please view this 40 second statement of policy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGHp1GdOD4k

DR. Birx is clear, even if the death is clearly because of a very separate and demonstrable, existing morbidity, if it can in ANY WAY be asserted that Covid is involved (You have just read that the assertion that Covid is present, without any objective confirming facts, is now a case of Covid). Therefore, any death you, as a recipient of federal medical funds, wish to ascribe to COVID is now incontrovertibly death from COVID in the eyes of the government. All evidence otherwise, as a billing medico, you are free to ignore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGHp1GdOD4k

The John Hopkins University newsletter published a startling confirming article, that the reportage of death numbers spiking does not make mathematical sense. The powers that be had the article removed, but certain conscientious outlets preserved copies. 

https://wbckfm.com/johns-hopkins-university-researcher-finds-death-rate-before-and-after-covid-the-same/

Johnston concludes, there is little doubt that COVID-19 is extremely deadly for those with lowered immune systems, particularly the elderly. But a deliberative analysis would conclude that instead of quarantining all those who do not have the illness (the opposite of what an actual quarantine is) WE should instead be focusing on protective, prophylactic measures for the most vulnerable. Wherever that did not happen, many elderly and vulnerable died. 

If these things are true, perhaps most ominously, it appears that, as with euthanasia, the illness appears to be affecting "those who would soon die anyway." The illness appears to be a utilitarian tool that simultaneously strikes great fear into the populace at large and 'eliminates' the burdensome.   It enables both the herding of the populace and the 'culling of the herd'.   

Many tyrannical forms of government have approached the human person as an object to be herded. Communism and other forms of despotism continue to do so.  But that is the opposite of the freedom that the USA is built on, the foundational premise that humans are more than mere animals, they are not to be 'herded.' They are 'endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights,' the first of which is the right to life.

Airdate: 12/29/20

EPISODE 236:
The Impact of Communism In China

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston again interviews Chinese expert, Steven Mosher, PhD.

Dr. Mosher is one of the world’s leading experts on China and the impact of communism on the Chinese people. He was the first Westerner allowed into rural China after the Communist revolution and in1977 began his work on his doctorate. He speaks two dialects of Chinese which are in fact quite distinct and mutually unintelligible.

After exposing the forced abortion policies of the communist Chinese government in 1979, he was expelled from the country and the Chinese government forced Stanford University to delete him from their programs.

In earlier episodes, Dr. Mosher describes the nature of the Wuhan laboratory, and the SARS-2 Covid virus which, by all indications, including expert medical testimony, was in fact created at the Wuhan Laboratory for Viral Research. 

Airdate: 12/05/20

EPISODE 235:
Why The Constitution Has An Electoral College

In this episode of Life Matters Brian Johnston explains how the Constitution outlines the method for electing presidents (Article II; and the 12th Amendment). 

The media culture, and even many Republicans that have not read the 12th amendment, are pressuring the public and the Trump administration into believing that popular acclaim, particularly when enforced by a media society, is our method of election.

Brian takes a deep dive into the methods that are being pursued at this moment by the Trump administration, and the guidance of the 12th amendment. 

In particular Brian explains the historical thinking of America’s founders, who in fact, were British patriots. The British Patriot Movement was a political movement of the British Parliament that fought for the voice of every nation within the United Kingdom. It was a movement that began in 1725, fifty years before America’s revolution. 

In essence, it was a reaction against the bureaucratic manipulations of Sir Robert Walpole, who surreptitiously created a form of deep state within the parliament and engineered vast personal power by arrogating to himself vast powers under his newly created office of Prime Minister. In so doing, he cornered the power of the London newspapers and shared power only with English friends, graduates of Oxford in Cambridge, “the insiders”.

Patriot members of parliament were comprised of representatives of the Midlands, Wales, Scotland and Ireland who saw the need for the British Empire to be representative. The patriot movement was very popular in British colonies as well, particularly in North America. 

Members of parliament such as Jonathan Swift, Edmund Burke, joined with William Pitt the elder to fight and suppress the deep state which Walpole was creating in the heart of London. 

Pitt, in 1850, actually gained control briefly and true to his movement lifted the Intolerable Acts, and the Stamp Act which had oppressed the colonies, whom he felt had every right to elect their own representatives and have their own courts. Had Pitt remained Prime Minister most historians agree there would never have been an American Revolution. 

But the British patriots were removed from power in 1856, and their respect for local authority and representative government was quickly dismissed by the new Tory government and the odious taxes were again resumed. The patriot movement in the colonies however continued to blossom, creating the Constitution and revolution we now know.

Because of this parliamentary concern of the British patriots that local authority be recognized, the American Constitution insured the power of the states, not only in electing the U.S. Senate by legislatures, and also electing the U.S. president by state legislatures, via the electoral college.

The election of 2020 should have followed the model outlined in the Constitution which cedes any failure of the electoral college to reach a consensus, directly to the House in Congress, specifically to vote by state delegation. Again the states, not the easily manipulated populous, elect our President under the Constitution. 

Airdate: 11/28/20

EPISODE 234:
Were You Lied To About Covid?

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston interviews Dr. Steven Mosher, world-renowned expert on China and Chinese domestic and foreign policy. This particular episode focuses on the origins of the COVID-19 illness, caused by the SARS-2 coronavirus.

It is inescapable that the origins are directly from Wuhan China, even though the Chinese government has asserted that visiting American soldiers had promulgated the virus. What has been debated and covered up has been the precise technical origins. Documented facts and interviews with employees of the Wuhan virus laboratory indicate that this is a man-made virus, and its distribution worldwide is the direct result of communist Chinese political decisions.

We conclude the interview with excerpts from an interview by Tucker Carlson with Ling-Ling Won, a virus researcher who worked both in Hong Kong and in Wuhan.

Airdate: 11/21/20

EPISODE 233:
Does the Media Get To Certify Elections?

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston interviews international political expert Dr. Steven Mosher, president of Population Research Institute.

They discuss the present dilemma of media organizations proclaiming election returns long before an official tally has been certified.

They also discuss a recent phenomenon in this election year, the widespread and broad distribution of unregulated and unaccounted for ballots. This is substantially different from the regular process of absentee voting. In an absentee ballot a registered and legally authorized voter specifically asked for and receives their personal ballot, and returns the same documented and verifiable personal ballot to vote.

Without documentation and accountability of ballots coupled with the new widespread “ballot harvesting procedures“, the possibility and temptation of voter fraud is very, very great, because the ability to double-check and determine fraudulent ballots has been removed from the process.

Dr. Mosher and Brian discuss the current situation, and aspects of the Covid crisis that have contributed to it. Dr. Mosher will return to discuss the nature of Covid, its mysterious origins in China, and what we should do about that in our next program.

Brian also introduces a new sponsor for Life Matters, Winged Spur Coffee. Winged Spur was founded by returned missionaries who discovered some extraordinary single-origin coffees in their travels. The company now roasts these exotic coffees on demand and fly them directly to your home on request - the richest and freshest coffees available.

Airdate: 11/14/20

EPISODE 232:
The Post-Election Battle -Disinformation Is Given Free Reign

Brian Johnston continually reminds us that the battle for the right to life is actually rooted in the battle of ideas. And in this battle of ideas they must be expressed through language, ideas must be embodied by words. 

Because of that, there is an ongoing battle over words and their meanings. It is a battle reaching a crescendo, an ongoing battle in which our entire culture is now immersed. 

Disinformation is the intentional relaying, retelling and re-emphasis of false information: false facts, false ‘truths’ and principles. We are currently witnessing a concerted attempt at a culture-wide disinformation campaign aimed at abandoning the foundational principles of our laws, culture, and society.

Brian examines, in-depth, the recent appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court. He examines the actual facts surrounding US Supreme Court appointments and the deliberate disinformation that has not only been inserted into the public debate, but is being re-emphasized and reenforced as somehow true.

Those who have been given the fiduciary trust to inform the public, not only news outlets and social media providers (who declare they offer a public service to the community of mutual communications (perhaps akin to the telephone system), but now these same public utilities of communications closely monitor and control what is said on this public communication system, social media. 

Most evident is the disinformation and redefinition of terms regarding language and knowledge which is so common now in the academic community.  The academic community and other factual information gathering agencies that have historically been focused on objective facts, were politically disinterested and moored in avoiding specific ideological battles. 

Alarmingly, even the most historically pristine outlet of communication, the dictionary, and other educational tools, are currently involved in this contorted effort to silence dissenting thought.  We are seeing outright disinformation and intentional manipulation of the words and subsequent thoughts in which the public engages. 

Nowhere is that clearer than the recent alacrity with which the English language itself was intentionally assaulted with great vigor and animus. 

During the Amy Coney Barrett Senate Judiciary hearings, Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii declared that Mrs. Barrett was a bigot and an unworthy justice due to her use of the term, “sexual preference” in describing homosexuals. She asserted this as a disqualifying matter of her nomination.

Mrs. Barrett responded that she was sorry as she was completely unaware that the use of this term was somehow judgmental or bigoted. Yet Mrs. Barrett reflected the cultural norm, such that even pro-homosexual and gay publications had used the term earlier in the month. It was not used as a prejudicial or slanderous term, but a self-described term. 

The very night of Senator Hirono’s accusation, the online version of the Miriam-Webster dictionary changed the meaning of the term “sexual preference,” and delineated that it was a bigoted and prejudice slander of LBGTQ individuals. The dictionary was changed seemingly in concert with Sen. Hirono’s political attack!

The English language reflected in the Miriam-Webster dictionary itself was intentionally altered and declared outdated and bigoted - with the click of a mouse.  

A widely respected and heretofore accurate, politically disinterested compiler of English usage was intentionally and immediately used for the creation of political newspeak. George Orwell‘s description of a dystopic cultures language patterns was employed before the eyes of the world. 

Disinformation - intentional confusion, emotional punishment, slander and cultural banishment have become extremely common tools of the pro-death, anti-life culture which seeks to destroy our foundational ways of even thinking and reasoning. 

Brian reminds us that the war of ideas is very real and one of the principle tools is to create linguistic confusion, to twist the meaning of words and force cultural assent to these newly twisted terms. 

Etymologically speaking, the word “war” is an English word derived from Indo-European languages and specifically German Gothic. The word “war” in Gothic-German literally means “confusion.” 

It is vitally important that advocates for life and objective truth understand this tool of language and confusion in this war of ideas. 

The Goths themselves were the only nation to have defeated the Roman empire in battle. They used confusion. That is their meaning of “war.” 

The Roman empire and its impact on civilization is built on order and principles. This was reflected in the Roman legionaries method of war - working as a cohesive unit marching in phalanxes,  locking shields and repelling all comers. 

This could not be used in the forest of Germany and specifically at the battle of the Teutoburg forest in 9AD.  Three legions of Roman soldiers were completely destroyed as the Goth warriors used the confusion of forest warfare and “concerted disorder” to overwhelm those in the habit of thinking and operating logically and in an orderly fashion. This loss of so many Roman legions was the starting point of Rome’s decline as an imperial power although the implications were to be felt over centuries. 

Confusion and disordered thinking, lack of clarity in the use of words and language, and charged emotional exchanges are the methods regularly used by those who seek to overcome objective facts and self-evident truths. In the right to live is the first and foundational premise of the self-evident truths.

It must be fought for and defended in this battle of ideas.

Airdate: 11/07/20

EPISODE 231:
Elections Weekend 2020

In this episode of Life Matters Brian Johnston explores the final weekend leading up to election day, November 3, 2020.

Brian gives an overview of the importance of the election itself, why pro-lifers across the political and religious spectrum need to vote, and in particular why they need to vote the entire ballot, including local candidates and school boards.

Brian has several guests including Ben Lopez, a long-time, pro-life political activist who is running for Montclair City Council, and Mike Cargile a pro-life individual running for Congressional District 35.

This particular episode focuses on the power of local and regional voting, and by way of example, examines San Bernardino county and its communities. But in point of fact, our state of 58 counties has, for the first time, had most of those counties set forward people who are the good candidates all the way down to school board level.

Californiaprolife.org publishes these county lists of pro-life candidates.

Airdate: 10/31/20

EPISODE 230:
Understand the Principles Behind the Moment

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores our current culture’s fascination with news. But the word, ‘news’ is actually a reference to immediacy and not necessarily actual meaningful substance: that which is ‘new.’ 

The word, ‘ephemera’ comes to us from Greek and refers to something that is very briefly lived. Many ephemeral insects literally live their lives in the course of a day or two. They then become food for other insects or animals, most famously the flies eaten by many trout and other fish.

Our cultural fascination with the news, or ephemeral data, can easily distract us from deeper, more enduring, more significant principles that should be guiding us and helping our understanding of life.

Life Matters is dedicated to the latter - exploring and understanding the deep, abiding principles of life and the law, of what really matters regardless of the passing news stories.

Election time is an exception to that. Elections are very narrow moments in time.  However the decisions that are made have great long-term impact. There are much more enduring principles and facts that must be brought to bear in those brief days and moments surrounding an election. 

Failure to recognize the deeper and more abiding principles is failure to understand the real meaning of elections in a free society.

Brian introduces a listener from Temecula, California who has sent greetings: Mike Garcia (not the CA congressional candidate Mike Garcia). Mr. Garcia comments particularly on the importance, and his enjoyment of, understanding these deeper principles on which Life Matters regularly focuses and equips the listener to address.

Sheila Green, Attorney and Central California Vice President of California Prolife, again joins the program and discusses, in depth, the real significance of Proposition 14 which is being sold to the public as a quick and easy cure-all for any number of serious illnesses. Their assertions are false and the multiple billion dollars that have been wasted have been without any accountability.

Brian closes the latter part of the program by mentioning key congressional races and assembly races in California. 

Finally, as this protracted election comes to a close, the integrity of the vote is vitally important. California Prolife Council endorses the work of the Election Integrity Project and Brian mentions how individuals can volunteer to help ensure an honest and honorable vote counting system.

Airdate: 10/24/20

EPISODE 229:
Your Vote Truly Matters

In this episode of Life Matters Brian examines the month-long election drive from October 3 to November 3, 2020.

Brian explains the significance of each and every vote, not simply on the national level, but perhaps most importantly on the most local of levels. He explains the “Teaspoon Theory” and the use of the “one question test.”

While many excited and passionate pro-life individuals will in fact quickly check the top of their ballots, because of media coverage of the positions of the presidential candidates - they will immediately vote for president. However, after that their eyes were glaze over.

Most ballots in California are chock-full of decisions. Because California is a direct democracy state, there are actually 12 specific laws that will be determined by the popular vote. These 12 propositions are very convoluted in the wording and often intentionally written to mislead and exploit an individual’s confusion and emotions.

In previous programs Brian and Sheila Green examined the deeper aspects of these propositions.

Each and every ballot will also have down-ballot races - not simply congressional and state house races, but offices like supervisor for counties, mayoral, city council, and school boards. These are incredibly important offices particularly given the fact that Planned Parenthood seeks to establish school-based clinics in each and every school throughout the state.

The teaspoon theory. A single vote for president is important but it is a drop in the ocean of the millions that will be cast across the nation. A vote for a member of Congress is also important, but it is a drop in a swimming pool of water. A vote for a State Legislative District is a drop in a gallon of water. A vote for city council is a drop in a very large glass of water, but a vote for a district school board is like a drop in a teaspoon. It will still take many drops but only a few will turn the entire direction of the race.

Brian tells the story of Mike Spence, who has passed away. He was the vice president of California Prolife council but had run for both school board and city council. He ended up as mayor of West Covina. 

His first race he had lost by several votes on election night. He went to bed dejected. But when he awoke it turned out he had actually won by three votes. Mike made it a point to fight Planned Parenthood and the radical left at every turn in that school district. 

Years later, Mike determined to run for city council. The radical left ran a candidate against him. This time he was much further behind on election day but the ballots were to take several days of counting. Again, Mike, through some odd circumstances, ended up being pushed over the top. A bag of ballots on the second day was discovered. It happened to have been the ballots of his own precinct. Not only did they make up the difference in his being behind, but he put him well ahead by a mere 10 votes.

Your vote counts in every election. But it is these powerful local elections that Planned Parenthood and the left are seeking to control - your local community and school boards. This is where your knowledgeable vote can have the most effective power.

Close to Election Day, when there’s very little time to assess where candidates stand, Brian suggests employing the one question test.

Ask the local candidate if they approve of Planned Parenthood coming into public schools and referring children for medical care and treatment, including abortion without parental knowledge or consent. This is applicable not merely to the school boards but the city council and county supervisors - as the abortion industry seeks government funds from these entities.

This specific policy issue allows clarity of a yes or no response. To ask a candidate if they are pro-life or pro-choice invites meandering opinions and weasel words regarding religious convictions, inclinations, personal versus public policy and other vagaries of semantic shifting. The question should always, always deal with very specific public policies that are being presented in the civic realm right now.

When people in the community hold candidates accountable before the vote it is of much greater significance than complaining after they hold office and make unwise decisions. Holding signs and heaping scorn on elected representatives is much less effective than educating and motivating them to make wise decisions before they ever have to. It also equips the voter to make wise decisions on election day. And elections really matter.

Airdate: 10/17/20

EPISODE 228:
California Ballot Propositions - Fall 2020

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston along with California Pro-life’s Vice President Sheila Green, discuss some of the many ballot propositions on the November 2020 ballot in California.

First and foremost is Proposition 14 which renews funding for the CIRM, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. In short, the CRM had been established in 2004 via Proposition 71. It received over $6 billion after counting interest and it was all to be dedicated to embryonic stem cell research and other forms of research, which then President Bush had declared unethical. The federal government would not fund such research.

So ironically that proposition only funded unethical research!

None of the promised benefits occurred. No cures of any kind were found, and many funds were directed to mysterious places, as the CIRM did not, and continues to lack, government oversight.

They have now returned to the ballot and are asking for an additional $5.5 billion!  We advise a ‘No’ vote.

Proposition 15 changes the tax structure on corporate buildings. The argument is to help fund the schools. This is a very common taxation and bond justification. Sadly, the schools are irresponsibly run and have become a literal bastion of leftist ideology. Planned Parenthood has easy access to the public school system, often without parents knowledge or consent. The education unions are 100% pro abortion, and the funds that are earmarked for maintenance and upkeep as required by law, have been pilfered through legal action by these union entities.

Education code 17070.75 mandates that these funds should have been set aside for annual repairs renewals and replacements.  The teachers union simply pilfer the money and ask for more bond measures using the children as their empathy hostages. The California State Lotto has wasted $2 billion per annum. As with Proposition 19, there is a constant drumbeat to pour money into the education system where it has been used to grade harm.

Proposition 16 actually reverses current law and makes legal the intentional discrimination against individuals on the basis of race or age or any other factor. It is clear that the radical left now wishes to justify the extreme racial divisions it has been creating. One such example is the known and documented targeting of the black and Hispanic communities for abortion by Planned Parenthood

Proposition 18 would grant the vote to 17-year-olds provided they were to turn 18 on, or before, the general election. This measure allows a whole new category of vote harvesting by the Democrat party, and its Planned Parenthood associates who would simply be free to enter the classroom, indoctrinate and even instruct in voting methods before they harvested those same ballots without any parental knowledge or consent. We suggest a ‘No’ vote.

Proposition 19 alters the taxation methods of individual homes, but it is clearly designed to get more tax money into state coffers, principally the education coffers. See our concerns regarding proposition 15. We recommend a ‘No’.

Proposition 23 would impose new regulations and increased cost for kidney dialysis clinics. This measure with grant favorability to certain union employees would drive other more economical kidney dialysis units out of the state. Many dialysis patients are at risk of morbidity and mortality should they miss just two dialysis treatments. We recommend a ‘No’ vote.

Airdate: 10/03/20

EPISODE 227:
The Ideologies of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

With the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is  a renewed understanding in the American conscience that the purpose of the Supreme Court is to affirm laws that are truly just.  It is absolutely essential that we have an understanding of what determines justice from injustice. 

If Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman on the Supreme Court, why is Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG) heralded as the cutting-edge, feminist icon of American jurisprudence? Simple: Political feminism is not about advancing women. It is about advancing ideology.

"There will never be enough women on the Supreme Court until there are nine."~RBG

In this special Life Matters broadcast, Brian Johnston explores the recent film lionizing "RBG", what it really says about society and the Supreme Court, and RBG in particular.

Commissioner Johnston may stun some when he asserts that there is in fact nothing original to Justice Ginsburg's political and legal theory. Even in the 1960's when Ginsburg was working her way through the legal world, her thoughts were not in fact 'unique'. Ginsburg, like many Ivy League graduates of the time, seemed to be expressing 'creative thinking' when in fact they were simply mouthing essential Marxist talking points. In the '60s such statements were not often openly credited to a Marxist worldview. That does not alter the content, nor the academic origins of this ideology to 'fundamentally change' the nature of our society. In 1848, Marx wrote that a woman, in the 'idealized Communist state' of perfection, would no longer be seen by her husband as 'a tool in his means of production.' She was to control and be her own means of production. The natural outflow of this in the case of childbirth, is that she alone was to control how, when, or if a birth were to take place.

Ginsburg was unhappy with the Roe v. Wade decision because she understood - and proclaimed in the program - that it created problems going too far at once in striking down even the mildest restrictions on abortion. (In 1973 California's/New York's/ Mass./Colorado's were all liberal abortion laws at the time.) Her preference was a sweeping decision which would give unlimited-abortion rights, the right to treat the child in the womb as disposable chattel, and to grant this right on the basis of gender; or as the title of her 'bio-pic movie suggests, "On the Basis of Sex". Airdate: 09/26/20

EPISODE 226:
Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God

The power of objective facts, and why the right to life is actually built on a much firmer foundation than opinion or religion or guesswork - the idea that just laws can be determined by observing nature and the principles revealed in nature is very much an assertion that even predates Christianity! 

On Christianity’s arrival it confirmed that God has revealed His invisible nature through His visible creation so that no one has an excuse. (Romans 1:20) Everyone can seek to know what is truly just, and as long as they are willing to have their personal feelings and opinions challenged by those objective facts, they can come to a clearer understanding of the truth. (Romans 2:23) 

But sadly, many Christians have not spent time thinking on these principles. 

With the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is a renewed understanding in the American conscience that the purpose of the Supreme Court is to affirm laws that are truly just.  It is absolutely essential that we have an understanding of what determines justice from injustice. 

Brian quotes Martin Luther King, Junior in his letter from Birmingham Jail. King quotes from St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine in their demonstration from scripture that God has revealed, through His creation, basic principles of justice. God has revealed that there is a higher law to which individual man and governments must answer. 

This ‘higher law’ premise is essential for justice and freedom and the right to life. 

Even before the Christian Era,  Aristotle and Cicero clearly described that there is a natural order to the universe and that the best laws that man can discern are laws that attempt to reflect these higher moral principles that apply to everyone, everywhere. 

This principle of natural law has been known throughout the history of Western Civilization. It is the precise foundation on which America’s founders built the American experiment in freedom and liberty, upon “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.”

Brian asserts his alarm that many Christians themselves do not understand what is meant by these principles and the frequency with which the Bible instructs the earnest individual to look to nature. This is reflected in both the Old and New Testament. Christ’s injunction to “behold the lilies of the field,” the Psalmist’s injunction to consider the heavens the work of God’s fingers, the reminder in the parables - the very practical reality of every day life, of seeds in sewing of the workday world, God is revealing His principles. Jesus was very clear in His parables and He used every day life.

There are clear ongoing injunctions for God's followers to look at nature and understand the principles God displays there. Instead many Christians have erred toward religiousness. 

One example was a pro-life group in the 90s that demanded that all American laws should conform to the laws of the Old Testament, requiring execution for all abortionists, but even the public stoning of rebellious teenagers. Fortunately, many had to re-examine this notion of “biblical voting“ and examine more deeply the significance of natural law, the laws of nature and of nature‘s God.

That is the job of the RTL movement - not to present our personal religion, but to present the objective facts. The facts are on our side and facts are terrible things to waste.

Airdate: 09/19/20

EPISODE 225:
Embryonic Stem-cells and California’s Prop 14

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston examines the issue of embryonic stem-cell research and California’s upcoming ballot measure Proposition 14. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) was established in 2004 with the help of more than $6 billion (after interest) by California taxpayers through then Ballot Proposition 71.

CIRM has now run out of money. It has spent billions of dollars. Though it had promised miraculous cured through the use of embryonic stem-cell research, each and every experiment was a failure. But they weren’t just failures in the sense of ‘not successful.’ These ethically-questionable medical experiments created tumors, growths and other serious medical problems. In this episode, Brian examines the ethical aspect in addition to the medical, scientifically demonstrated problems of embryonic stem-cell research.

Brian goes into depth regarding the facts of the new Proposition 14 which is seeking 5.5 billion dollars more. 

Airdate: 09/12/20

Life Matters Special Episode:
Zinc Part II, Fear, and Films

In this program California's former Commissioner On Aging, Brian Johnston explores the current cultural ‘climate’ surrounding the COVID-19 debate.

Brian has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable and cherish their lives. Today, he discusses the now intentional fear mongering and dismissal of startlingly obvious science by those who prefer a ‘police state’ approach to illness. 

Common sense and medical ethics would direct caregivers to provide treatment and boost the immune system of all vulnerable and immunodeficient individuals. But instead, large swaths of government and an accommodating media have adopted the ‘objectified approach’ to individuals, the same policy as the Chinese Communist government.

Earlier programs of Life Matters have deeply explored the actual documents and scientific evidence of how hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses, including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

Brian, in discussing literature and film surrounding dystopian cultures and science fiction, draws a contrastive analysis with today's 'real life' approach that is now subjecting large populations to greater hardships and government oppression. 

Two specific works, M. Night Shyamalan’s Signs, and the various iterations of H.G. Wells', War of the Worlds, provide dramatic insight into the current ‘terror of the unknown,' which government entities are both fomenting and using for other expansions of government authority.

The World Health Organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness as officially, "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2)”.  It is nearly identical to the first severe acute respiratory syndrome, SARS 1. (Virology, May 2020) 

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it. 

Brian again takes a deep dive into the documented, international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls. (Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

It is the intentional suppression of these documented facts that has led to thousands of deaths, particularly in nursing homes and in immunodeficient populations.  

Brian points out our current cultural environment ignores the value of these individual lives. Their value and protection as individuals has been taken from them.  It is intentionally causing widespread ‘surrender' to fear and ignorance.  This is not science fiction. It is happening to us - now.

This inchoate fear being spread by a controlling media culture can only be ended when freedom of speech and objective facts are allowed to be examined. 'Cancel culture' and political hatred of the current administration is apparently a root cause of this cultural phenomenon.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor-patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness. 

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

Studies cited:
Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections
Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050

Zinc Deficiency    
Laya Caulfield and Robert Black
https://www.who.int/publications 

Zinc ions and the fight against SARS
https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/29/zinc-ions-and-fight-against-sarsBritish Medical Journal
2003;326 dpi
BMJ 2003;326:409

British Medical Journal - immunutrition for fighting Covid 19
https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/2020/05/04/bmjnph-2020-000071

Airdate: 08/14/20

EPISODE 224:
America’s Frontline Doctors

In one of the most stunning and invasive actions against medical ethics, the major media and many state government organizations have acted to suppress documented medical evidence that there are treatments available for the COVID-19 illness.
(America’s Frontline Doctors, July 2020) 

In this program, Mr. Brian Johnston, who has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable, discusses the actual documents and scientific evidence of how hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

The World Health Organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness officially as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2) it is nearly identical to the first Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS 1.
(Virology May 2020) 

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it. 

Brian takes a deep dive into the documented international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls.
(Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor-patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness. 

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

Citations:

Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections
Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050

Zinc Deficiency    
Laya Caulfield and Robert Black
https://www.who.int/publications 

Zinc ions and the fight against SARS
British Medical Journal
2003;326 dpi
BMJ 2003;326:409

Airdate: 08/08/20

Life Matters Special Episode:
The Importance of Zinc in Combating SARS 2 (COVID-19) - Part I

In one of the most stunning and invasive actions against medical ethics, the major media and many state government organizations have acted to suppress documented medical evidence that there are treatments available for the COVID-19 illness.
(America’s Frontline Doctors, July 2020) 

In this program, Mr. Brian Johnston, who has spent years in researching and advocating the most effective ways to protect the medically vulnerable, discusses the actual documents and scientific evidence of how Hydroxychloroquine works in its treatment against various viruses including the SARS 2 virus, commonly referred to as COVID-19.

The world health organization and its Bureau of Taxonomy (the naming of illnesses and viruses) have named the virus which causes the COVID-19 illness as officially Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 - Covid (SARS 2) it is nearly identical to the first Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS 1. (Virology May 2020) 

But if it was routinely referred to as SARS 2, the average person would logically consider the fact that we have faced a SARS epidemic before (2003-2004) and what we are doing now was NOT how we addressed it. 

Brian takes a deep dive into the documented international virology reports on the nature of zinc and zinc transport in attacking viruses. The efficacy of zinc has been long demonstrated, and the use of hydroxychloroquine is actually very effective because its sole purpose in addressing viruses is to help zinc transport through cellular walls. (Caulfield)

Viruses attack us on the cellular level, mimicking proteins. The presence of zinc prohibits viral reproduction.

Literally dozens of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of zinc and hydroxychloroquine. The current suppression of these studies is an assault on the doctor- patient relationship, the freedom of speech of conscientious doctors, and an oppressive attempt by governments to continue a fearful response to this illness. 

The politicization of this illness is unconscionable and those who are doing so should be held directly responsible.

Citations
1. Comparison Of the Covid 2019 ( SARS2) pathogenesis with SARS Cov 1and MERS Cov infections
Future Virology: 2020May. https://doi.org/102217/fvl-2020-0050

2. Zinc Deficiency  
Laya Caulfield and Robert Black
https://www.who.int/publications 

3. Zinc ions and the fight against SARS
British Medical Journal
2003;326 dpi
BMJ 2003;326:409

Airdate: 08/01/20

EPISODE 223:
The Opportunities and Importance of Local Elections

In this episode, Commissioner Johnston examines, along with Stephen Frank, the upcoming local elections on the November ballot. 

In every one of California's 58 counties there are local, city and county elections. Whether it be for supervisor, school board, City Council, Mayor or special districts such as library district, junior college district, water districts, even fire districts.

Many are anxiously looking to the national elections and often feel helpless as they 'observe' from afar. But in point of fact, 'All politics are local."

There are literally thousands of important offices that often go uncontested or are intentionally captured by big government bureaucrat types who seek to use government position to herd citizens according to their social inclinations. The value of the human individual is minimized and often dismissed by those who see the State as the arbiter of right and wrong.

Much of our current cultural confusion is due to the fact that those who have solid moral, ethical and cultural values, have NOT been involved in the civic process.

In a masterful summation of how to plan and run a local political campaign (some have paid thousands of dollars to be trained in, and understand these strategic concepts)

Stephen Frank outlines what a newcomer should do as they examine, "entering the fray."

Stephen Frank has experience in state and local elections and is the editor of California Political Views and Review. He discusses how to run an election for local office in what is essentially a straightforward process. But essential steps need to be followed.

Key volunteers are necessary, and key tasks are easily pursued if understood. Further information on local campaigns are available from stephenfrank@sbcglobal.net

Airdate 07/25/20

EPISODE 222:
America's Freedom: Based On The Significance of Each Life

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston explains why the actual right to life is the keystone of America’s founding principles. Recorded on July 4th of 2020, Brian explains how the value and significance of each and every human life is the predicate for all of the other freedoms the American System offers to individuals.

The right to life movement derives its name from the statement of political philosophy which we know as the Declaration of Independence. This Declaration was written to explain to the whole world why the American form of government and its attempt to establish a more just government was necessary. It is based on the God given value of every human life.  

In July 2020, the entire foundation of America’s founding has been called into question. Riots and revolutionary ideas are sweeping the nation. Brian reminds us that first and foremost this battle takes place in the minds, in the thoughts, and the inclinations of every individual. If we are not prepared for those battles - the battle of ideas - then the precious gift of freedom and the right to life itself will easily be taken from us.

Brian addresses the differences in revolutions and uses in particular, the actions and statements of the Marquis de Lafayette, who declared at America’s founding that, “Finally, mankind has its own nation.” Brian explains the incredible significance of that statement and the fact that like Lincoln, Lafayette is emphasizing that America’s founding is not based on any racial or particular national origin. It is based on the value of each and every individual human life.

The intentional misrepresentation of both America’s founding principles and the values that are being super imposed by new revolutionaries is very clear when examining the major mass media of our day. 

For example, Brian examines the significance of having both treatments and possible cures for individual cases of COVID-19.  These treatments and prophylaxis are being intentionally ignored. Much of the media intentionally defames these treatments on the sole basis that President Trump has endorsed them. 

Remember that these same media ‘elites’, in support of a cultural ideology, are willing to kill any baby for any reason, just for choice. So the dismissal of possible cure for Covid should not be surprising. Life Matters: Episodes 110, 111, 112 explain in depth the real workings of this particular coronavirus. They examine in depth the extensive international studies that have demonstrated the impact of both hydroxychloroquine and zinc in literally killing the virus in individuals, and the intentional media desire to not offer any hope of a cure.

In short, Commissioner Johnston warns listeners to not simply believe major media, particularly in recognizing their skewed political commitments, and their intentional abuse of the word “science.” 

The scientific method is something that is available to all individuals and should be taught as a tool of learning to every fifth grade student. Sadly, American academic culture has moved away from offering the tools of learning and instead has focused on only forcing ideology into the minds of students. The four stages of science 1.) observation, 2.) hypothesis, 3.) testing, and 4.) theory; are designed only to increase our understanding and knowledge. They are not tools of moral guidance. They are not an assertion of absolute truth. They are an attempt at using ideas to come to a deeper understanding, but they are never a moral absolute. 

Finally, Brian examines the very obvious use by leftist academics of false opinion polling and “new information” to declare racial division and animus by all Americans. By implying through a created study by UC Berkeley and University of Michigan department of psychology and cultural diversity (better described as ‘divisiveness’) that contrary to decades of iIconic mascots, suddenly in 2020, as opposed to all common sense and previous studies,  the ‘department of diversity’ has declared that American Indians are in fact now deeply offended by the use of these mascots.

The message of Michigan’s psychology department of diversity (divisiveness) is that America is a racially bigoted country from its founding. They are asserting that America’s founding principles should be based on group warfare (as most revolutions are) instead of the intrinsic value of individuals. 

These accusations are a heavy weapon in the battle of ideas. They aim squarely at each and every American - declaring them bigoted - and most importantly they aim at the principles that America is built on. America was not and is not based on favoring particular groups one over the other, as is the case in all other revolutions: the French revolution, the Russian revolution, the Cuban revolution, etc.  

America’s revolution is unique and has offered the template that has offered hope to all countries around the world – the value of each and every human life and its gift from a Creator should be esteemed by the government which governs these individuals. 

Airdate: 07/18/20

EPISODE 221:
The Killing of George Floyd :
How it reinforced the principle of a right to life and how it has been twisted to create a race war

In this episode of Life Matters, Our host Brian Johnston explores the deeply disturbing video of the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020. The worldwide distribution of the clear killing has created national and cultural turmoil that echoes throughout the known world.

Johnston shares his outrage at this apparently unjustified use of force and the killing of a man that has not had a trial. It is a public declaration that we, all of us, recognize that George Floyd had a right to be alive. We witnessed the violation of his right to life. 

Officer Derek Chauvin was the perpetrator and his apparent disregard for the safety of George Floyd during his apprehension appalled all viewers. Brian pointed out the familiarity of Chauvin’s last name and the fact that the term ‘chauvinism’ is a common phrase referring to the attitudes and values of a certain Nicolas Chauvin of the early 19th Century. These values of Statist authority were again displayed by Derek Chauvin. But it is essential to realize the crime was against an individual... both Chauvin and the incited mob apparently view it instead as a 'crime against a group.'  And the reason our culture is doing that is because we have forgotten, if we ever understood, that it is individuals who must be protected, and an individual's actions must be held to account, in a just society.  Pitting groups against groups leads to greater conflict and is, in itself, a violation of higher law.

The original Nicholas Chauvin, after whom 'chauvinism' is named, was an officer in Napoleon Bonaparte’s army. Napoleon, a revolutionary statist, superimposed the will of the state as the final arbiter of right and wrong.  In the world of French Revolutionary thought, your Creator is of no consequence.  Napoleon was a dictator whose inspiration was drawn from the French Revolution.  The value of individual lives is always minimized in a progressive world order, and certain groups must be punished while other groups are elevated to power.  Each human life itself is seen as a mere cog in history.  

Both Derek Chauvin of the 21st Century, and Nicolas Chauvin of the 19th Century saw themselves and their fulfillment, as agents of the state. Their fulfillment was in embodying the power and decisiveness of state authority. That is the opposite of the principles of the American Republic. The American principles of government are built upon the intrinsic value and worth of each individual.

Created Equal: The Clarence Thomas Story In His Own Words. Clarence Thomas is one of the few United States Supreme Court justices who has ardently advocated the essential principle of natural law. As such, he has been clear that the value in our rights do not emanate from the group of which we may be a member, but our rights emanate from the fact that our individual lives have been given to us as a gift from our maker.

Justice Thomas while a college student had himself been leeward into the groupthink cultural hatred that is fostered by the progressive worldview. Justice Thomas had been a black radical. It was only on returning from a riot that Clarence Thomas felt overwhelmed by the uncontrolled hatred in his heart and knew he could not free himself from that emotional cancer. In the film, he is quite clear that his prayer asking God to free him of hatred became the first step in his walk of faith.

Finally, Commissioner Johnston turns to what has become a pervasive starting principle in all of America’s public schools, which now views human beings as merely animals, and teaches the same. This view rooted in the Darwinian concept of evolution, minimizes the uniqueness of mankind’s creation, unique gift of life, and responsibility under a higher law. In the evolutionary worldview whoever or whatever is most evolutionarily advanced becomes the ultimate authority. This denial of higher law and greater truths has robbed the American educational system  The result is students who are incapable of recognizing higher laws. Perhaps most telling is Charles Darwin subtitle, clearly stating that his principles invoke a racial superiority system (On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life).  It is progressives who separate human beings into racial groups and declare their proper hierarchy in society. Natural law, on the contrary, deems each and every human life as worthy of protection and accountability. That is the basis of the right to life. 

Airdate: 06/13/20

EPISODE 220:
Unborn Sanctuary Resolutions

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Brian Johnston interviews Eric Eisenhammer, Vice-president for Communications of California Pro-Life Council. They discuss the Unborn Sanctuary Resolution, a powerful educational and civic action which encourages locally elected representatives to distance themselves from the oppressive state sponsorship of unlimited abortion.

Unborn Sanctuary Resolutions have been in enacted in New Mexico (Roswell) and Utah (Riverton) in reaction to the open unlimited acts of abortion authorized in New York and Virginia and other states in 2019. The animating influence was governor Northam’s of Virginia open admission that if a child should be born alive in the process of abortion it is simply “set-aside”.  

When a similar measure was introduced in the Santa Fe legislature for New Mexico the town of Roswell would have none of it, and immediately passed the Unborn Sanctuary Resolution. These resolutions (unlike some measures proposed in Texas, do not ban anything). They simply are a public proclamation of disdain for the wanton killing of unborn children and children born alive in the process of an abortion. As a resolution, they cannot be enjoined in court. They are merely an expression of documented distain and distancing from an evil state-wide policy. Local council-members have been very excited and pleased to have this opportunity to air their grievances and opposition to the wholesale abortion industry operating in California  

Perhaps most importantly, the introduction of the resolution and the public debate that follows, is an educational opportunity for not only the public at large but even the local pro-life community. Because many have been deceived by the intentionally misleading, fake news and the media’s protection and adherence to “choice” being unlimited abortion rights.

The Resolution

WHEREAS, the State of California, through Medi-Cal (https://files.medi-cal.ca.gov/pubsdoco/publications/masters-mtp/part2/abort_m00o03.doc) pays to kill a human child at any stage of gestation and without requiring any medically-indicated reason, such as disability of the child or health of the mother; California is paying to kill healthy children in healthy mothers, without accountability.

WHEREAS, CA Health and Safety Code Sec. 123435 states that a child born alive in the act of abortion must receive the same medical care and support as any other child born spontaneously. However, the current administration of the State exercises no meaningful oversight or enforcement of this life-affirming law, the law is toothless;

WHEREAS, the State of California under CA Health and Safety Code § 18944.18.(b) repealed regulations on California abortion clinics, greatly reducing accountability, cleanliness standards, emergency and safety regulations;

WHEREAS, as outlined in the MediCal provider manual cited above, the state of California funds and promotes unlimited abortion as a matter of ideological preference;

WHEREAS, every city in CA is nevertheless standing in direct opposition to this ideology of human disposal, and is already using its civic power to affirm a preference for human life by offering - in answer to the many "trash-can babies" that had been discarded at birth - an open-armed safe place at every fire station where a young mother can leave the newborn without any legal or personal risk;

WHEREAS, polls indicate even those in California who consider themselves pro-choice do not necessarily support the killing of these older children and the government funding of such killing, especially when there is no medically indicated reason. Marist, Gallup, LA Times).

THEREFORE, We the City/County of                 do hereby affirm our preference for the acceptance and protection of vulnerable human lives, particularly of vulnerable viable children about to be thrown out.

• We repudiate the euphemistic use of the term "choice" to cover up what is in fact the killing and dismembering of a child in the womb, i.e. human abortion.

• We assert and affirm the actual life-embracing "choice"-- letting the child live.

• We affirm the many other options - "Choices" - that are widely available to women experiencing unwanted pregnancies and we uphold that these are in preference to killing the child. 

• Keeping the child;

• raising the child with the comfort and support and assistance of others;

•  involvement of grandparents, church, care homes, and other non-profit support teams; and adoption are all options that have existed and should continue to be asserted as preferable and elemental acts of human kindness. There are an estimated 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States. https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families. Every child killed in an abortion or thrown away in an abortion is indeed wanted, and will gladly be cared for right now, by loving, adoptive parents, if only given the chance.

• We affirm that Life is the best choice available and the only one that preserves the integrity of human life, the protection of which is the foundation of a civil society, and the principal purpose of this City Council's existence.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

We do hereby proclaim that our community is a Sanctuary for the Unborn Child, and should his or her life be sought by means of abortion or any other destructive act, we pledge to protect her if born alive. As we have already demonstrated through our police and fire station safe place commitments, We commit ourselves to his and her protection as a matter of civic responsibility. We strongly affirm and proclaim the many voluntary citizen resources that are available in our community to aid both mother and child.

Airdate: 06/06/20

EPISODE 219:
Why Gavin Newsom Must Be Sued In Federal Court

California Prolife Council is preparing legal action against Governor Newsom’s sweeping executive order to make all balloting a, ‘vote by mail’ process. While in preparation for filing the case, Congressman Darrell Issa and the Republican National Committee have also filed suit. CPLC attorneys, in consulting these other actions, have determined that the points of law California Prolife Council is raising are substantively different and important for a comprehensive judicial analysis.

In this program, our Chairman, Brian Johnston explains the steady erosion of the integrity of the California vote and the Democrat Party’s intentional re-definition of who is an appropriate voter.

A sympathetic media offers little criticism or analysis of the steady voting process corruption, but often simply pushes forward the rhetoric of the Democrat Party. This is substantially the practice used by the Tammany Hall machine of New York - collecting ballots from groups in order to empower and “push forward” a particular group of people.

But in the United States of America, the power to vote is vested in each and every individual voter. This is because of the value of each and every individual life which is at the very heart of our freedoms. The purpose of government is not to organize groups into winners and losers and punish some and advance others.  But the whole purpose of just government is to establish just laws which treat every individual with respect and individual dignity and accountability.

This is the basis of the right to life.

Johnston details the many treacherous laws that have already been been put in place in California. Governor Newsom’s dictate is merely a capstone to make “bushel-basket voting,” routine, as was the case in Tammany Hall  and communist countries.  As Lenin said, “It doesn’t matter who votes - what matters is who counts the votes.”

Airdate: 05/30/20

EPISODE 218:
The Seduction of Progressivism

Commissioner Johnston has previously laid out the foundation for a just society as emanating from the principles of natural law. The value of individual human lives is recognized in natural law as the predicate for a just society and just laws. As America’s Founders said, “To ensure these rights, governments are instituted among men.”

In this episode Johnston explains the current climate in the battle of ideas which rages against the idea of a right to life for innocent individuals.  The current climate even rages against the use of natural law principles in creating society’s laws. The greatest, single fountainhead for this antithetical approach to the basis of our laws is best summarized in the philosophy of Hegel. 

Hegelian Progressivism, which swept through the academic world of the 19th century, quickly began to fulfill its asserted “destiny” by seizing governments in the 20th century.

Essential to Hegelian thought is the pseudo-spiritual idea that history itself gives spiritual purpose and direction to mankind; and specifically the form of government is what enables the human spirit to be fulfilled. This combined spirit of contemporary government with its human participants (or “zeitgeist”) is the essential, animating and spiritual aspect of the Hegelian view of history.  

Because Hegel builds on the conflict of ideas - the dialectic - the synthesis of new ideas and forms of government replacing previous ones, the revolutionary idea of constant change and ‘progress’ has become a familiar invocation for social warriors.  Individuals are not held to account for justices are injustices but social groups and classes are either oppressed or oppressors. Elevating the oppressed and suppressing the oppressors becomes the goal of the Hegelian Progressivism. Such thinking in the late 19th and early 20th centuries lead to widespread civil unrest and anarchy, and finally the collapse of Russian government and its Marxism takeover.  

Decades later, the identical principles were put into action, but as philosopher Brian McGee puts it, the ultimate goal is simply changed.  Instead of economic justice, German National Socialist sought racial justice. As Magee states, it’s very easy to substitute for ‘X’ as your goal and use the formula for Hegelian thinking to see his government for whatever purpose you may seek. 

Within a few years, the competing Hegelian progressive idea of national Socialism focusing on racial superiority emerged in Germany. It was a direct stepchild of the socialist and Hegelian worldview. By its very nature, Hegel‘s philosophy of progress demands changes of government. Everywhere Hegelian progressivism has taken over, millions of lives have been taken. Individual human lives are disposable to the flow of history.

Johnston includes direct comments from contemporary philosophers: Peter Singer, the animal rights activist who teaches at Princeton, and public intellectual, BBC commentator, Brian Magee.  Commissioner Johnston points out that the Hegelian notion of progress pushing towards a brave new future and dismissing traditional values has become an inherent part, not only of foreign governments and ideology, but is widely accepted currently in American academia and even by large numbers of American office holders.

With significant quotes from Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, the current push to embrace certain new truths and new principles and a new radical form of government, is religiously and spiritually exciting to individuals who otherwise have no spiritual or ethical foundation. Hegel’s compelling, ‘spiritualized’ religious motivation is extremely widespread throughout American culture of the 2020s.

Hegelian disciples (even if they never heard his name) practice the routine ‘grouping’ of individuals, by race or class, or any other social structure. Rather than holding individuals responsible, the social conflict of groups is an essential element of Hegel’s dialectical conflict. The American principles of the value and significance of the lives of individuals is dismissed by Hegelian thinkers.  They view humanity as groups - oppressors and oppressed, and injustices as accomplished as only corrected by sweeping social change, and not by holding individuals accountable for their individual actions. Ultimately, The human individual is seen as merely a cog in history. Their purpose and fulfillment is only to be found through the flow of history and righting society’s wrongs. Those who refuse to go with the flow seem to be obstacles to “the changes progress is calling for,” and must be re-educated or removed.  

Wherever the Hegelian worldview is embraced, that form of government routinely dismisses the lives of entire classes of human individuals. The right to life of each individual is of little or no significance when it comes to changing mankind’s destiny and affecting the flow of history.  That is the ultimate goal of the Hegelian progressive.

While many progressives associate the feelings and quasi-spirituality of Hegelian thinking with freedom, they are often disappointed with the reality that it mandates a belief in a controlling government which is “necessary to bring this inspired “freedom.” Their faith in statism is, in fact, an alarming call for authoritarian change.

The vague, pseudo-spiritual appeal of Hegel is akin to the now widespread American syncretism of George Lucas’ Jedi religion, which many Americans now espouse as their personal model. See, “How We All Became Jedis.” (Religious News service December 20, 2019.)

Failure to recognize the widespread influence of Hegel and his influence on contemporary society is a failure for those who wish to protect innocent lives. The falsehoods, the pseudo-science, pseudo-religion of Hegelian progressivism must be directly repudiated. As Pope Pius the Tenth wrote in his encyclical on Modernity (1907), progressive ideology seduces and destroys clear thinking, the desire to recognize truth and instead presents a synthetic truth, a synthesis, which misleads and superimposes itself on other human beings.

Airdate: 05/23/20

EPISODE 217:
The Culture of Relativism, Progressivism and Hegelian Influence

Commissioner Johnston explores the popularity of, and the origins of, the cultural wide embrace of relativism. What is it? Where did it come from? Why does it seem so prevalent?

He builds on the exposition of the previous episode which dove into great depth as to the nature of “self evident truths,” natural law, “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” These principles are essential to grasp and understand if one is to understand the nature of America’s experiment in freedom. 

America’s founders, in starting a new nation, realized they could create any form of government they desired, but their greatest desire was to learn from the errors of those who have gone before them. Most importantly, they wanted to ensure that they were going to build a more just government. They needed to be sure they were building on sound and true principles. They asserted that these principles could be observed in nature. 

As heirs of the British Renaissance they were fully aware that Western Civilization‘s ideas sprung from this singular notion that man has a spiritual quality and is able to discern spiritual principles as revealed in nature. In other words, despite their many different opinions, the one thing they could agree on is that they all shared a common Creator. Their Creator had given them their rights, and their Creator had shown, in the designed laws of nature, an understanding of justice and equity and truth.

Commissioner Johnston dedicated the last program to those Christians whom he has met, that shy away from thinking about the very obvious fact that God has revealed His principles through His visible creation. Johnston, for their sake, gave extensive biblical references to the fact that God has demonstrated truth to everyone. The real problem is when people bring their own preconceptions and don’t want to seek the truth. But again, this is where Christians themselves should be the best studied and the most committed to be able to explain to others why the God of reality is the God of reality through what He has actually demonstrated, as in Paul’s presentation at Mars Hill in Athens, and his inducement to Timothy to be apt to teach, and explain the truth to those who have been taken captive in the futility of their mind to do the will of the devil.

In this program Johnston builds on the basis of natural law as demonstrating that the truth can be known. But unfortunately, academia has been infiltrated by another view of truth and of how we come to conclusions. 

While there are many relativistic philosophers, clearly the most dominant in the academic world is a man by the name of Hegel. Hegel’s …History builds on the idea that there’s a purpose to history, and that man has risen out of the depths of confusion and come up with new ideas on how to govern himself. These ideas may conflict with one another, but even the conflict of these ideas creates even newer ideas - compelling history to move forward and presumably “upward.“

This conflict of ideas, or dialectic, has become the dominant view of most intellectual institutions. It has infiltrated every aspect of modern life. One of the reasons is by viewing history in this way it gives a sense of purpose, an explanation for those whom might otherwise still be asking  “What is the meaning of life?“

Hegel gives a spiritual quality to history referring to the spirit of the times the “zeitgeist” as being a fulfillment of man’s purpose and the form of government under which he lives - uniting an individual with this greater, higher purpose.

Many progressives, animated by a spirit of injustice, seek to create and influence history in a Hegelian manner. This was the foundation of national socialism, international socialism, and modern progressivism. The conflict of ideas is an essential and spiritual aspect of the struggle to change and formulate history. For this reason progressives are passionately religious about a belief system regarding the future, but a future that has nothing to do with God. It is a future in which man’s spiritual destiny will be fulfilled and all injustices made right.

This passionate belief system allows the adherent to ‘do whatever it takes’ to bring this preferred future to pass. All of mankind and the destiny of mankind is dependent on this struggle moving forward.  And by definition, those who disagree, those who have an older, “old-fashioned idea” about things, are now obstacles. They are impediments to history and to freedom, and to mankind’s fulfillment. If need be, these old world types, should be removed from the path of history.

Sadly, wherever progressive ideas get hold of government, that new form of government is willing to dismiss entire categories of human beings who may be seen as impediments to the brave New World they wish to bring about.  And that is when the ‘right to life’ is lost for those ‘disposable obstacles’, those ‘hindering’ human beings.  

Objective history has shown this time and again.  

Airdate: 05/16/20

EPISODE 216:
Natural Law, the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God

Life Matters is your program on the right to life, on the culture that has emanated from that singular and foundational premise: the idea that your life is actually a gift given by your creator and not given by the government. 

And yet the government does have a specific role in your life. It has a responsibility, and that responsibility is to ensure your right to be alive. All of the rights that you have emanate from your existence. It is a very simple premise, but it is clear and straight-forward. And America's Founders put it in writing in the Declaration of Independence. 

The American Founders in the Declaration of Independence told the whole world about these rights that emanate from every human life, endowed by their Creator. They felt an obligation to clarify that the laws they were claiming weren’t merely asserted because they had now 'seized power,' that they could somehow make new rules because they had taken over government. "A decent respect for the opinions of mankind compel us to give the reasons that we are breaking these bonds, these unjust bonds," that had previously held them to the Old World. 

And they were very clear on why they were ethically, morally and legally justified. They gave objective facts that can be demonstrated and seen through natural law. They were invoking principals therefore, that were not personal or self-created, but could be objectively recognized by deliberative people throughout the world. 

Today Life Matters is going in-depth into natural law - why you should know it and be familiar with it as a premise, why it's not something you should be afraid of. It's a very important foundational element for understanding the right to life, because the right to life is an assertion from natural law principles revealed in nature. 

Commissioner Johnston spends extra time talking about that in order for you to understand why the ideas arrayed against natural law are so wrong. We're going to do what's known as a contrastive analysis, a comparative and contrastive analysis with, ‘the other way’ of looking at laws, ‘positivist law’. 

This other way of looking at laws is where you can come up with your own ideas. “How 'bout I come up with a new idea for new laws, to address this ‘new age’ we now live in?” You see, laws are basically ideas that are enforced. And what America's Founders said, and what much of Western Civilization reinforced, is that there are principles that can be seen in nature: a ‘higher law.’

Western Civilization actually carries an ongoing assertion about mankind. This assertion is rather essential, and of course it is held to be ‘self-evident.’ The very fact that you can consider it, reveals a deeper reality - that is, that human beings are more than merely animals. Human beings are able to see and understand spiritual things, that human beings have a spirit as well as a soul and a body. This is an important principle of Western Civilization. 

Judeo-Christian tradition asserts such in the “Imago Dei” - the premise that mankind is made in the image and likeness of God. The Greek and Roman traditions also viewed mankind as ‘a little lower than gods.’ And indeed, in the Greek and Roman worlds , humans were capable of making the transformation to godhood, an apotheosis, “becoming a god” should their life and ‘genius,’ or spirit, reach a destiny of fulfillment. 

We will examine this natural or higher law now and in our next episode exploring the contrastive principles of relativism and in particular, some of the philosophy that your opponents routinely use to dismiss the notion of a higher law, or perhaps more pointedly, the assertion that their ‘relativistic view of laws’ should be higher still. 

There are people who oppose your right to assert there even is a, “right to life.” They oppose the idea that all innocent lives should be protected. They oppose it and they have new ideas which they wish to substitute to govern you and all others.

Where did they get those ideas? We're going to talk about Hegel and the relativist philosophers that justify much of the opposition you're seeing right now. Right now there is virulent opposition to the premise of the right to life. Many of those advocates of killing human babies, of euthanizing your grandma, they've never heard of Hegel. And yet, they've adopted a world-view that emanates from his teachings. They've been imbued with ‘values’ that justify the government -sponsored killing of these babies, and those dependent and elderly, or sick - and maybe some of them aren't sick. They're simply seen as less than perfect, less than human. A Hegelian Progressive view of the world justifies this.

So this battle of ideas is very, very real. I'm going to give you some very tangible examples. Unless you understand that the right to life is a self-evident truth, as America's Founders said, you're not going to be equipped for this battle. But the right to life is based on objective facts, demonstrable facts, the fact that that baby's heart is beating as early as 18 days after conception. Or that it has unique DNA proclaiming their humanity in every cell of their dynamic body. This has nothing to do with my belief. That's an objective physical fact about a human child, about you. You were once that size. And science declares every cell in that child's body declares that that's unique human being. The DNA is a combination of the mother and father, and that unique signature is used by science to demonstrate individual lives. Science is confirming and echoing the objective reality of the God of nature.

And we're going to spend time today going into depth, into natural law and why you should understand it. And especially if you're a Christian, I want you to understand it, because if you're a Christian, you say that you know this God that made nature. And I do have frustration at times with Christians I know who don't want to deal with the world of ideas. They say they don't want to deal with science or they're intimidated by science, when in fact, it should be Christians who are most interested and most committed to understanding what is objectively true. And that's what science tries to figure out. 

Now some people falsely assert a 'false science.' They have made conclusions and are simply trying to create evidence to support a conclusion already in hand. Wrongo. This is not uncommon, and particularly in our era of 'talking heads' and forced public-policy is based on who talks loudest and longest.

But if you claim to be a Christian, you should be the best equipped to demonstrate why a falsehood is false. If you haven't spent time in learning how to observe what God has made and realize, as it says in the Book of Romans: Chapter 1 - Verse 20, that ‘God has revealed His invisible nature through His visible creation, so they're all without excuse.’ If you don’t understand that God has proclaimed truth objectively, and that truth is objectively provable, you will simply fall back on your feelings and opinions, and that worst of all possible assertions for making laws to rule others… “because I believe it.”

All of us have no excuse to dismiss self-evident truths, and especially Christians who believe in the Creator. He has demonstrated that in natural law, in the laws of nature and of nature's God. You should really be the best at understanding and promoting natural law and the laws of nature and nature's God. And if you're not a Christian, listen in to these scriptures anyways. They're not scary. They are self-evident truths. And you'll be amazed that it's actually those who oppose the right to life, it's actually those who oppose the laws of nature and nature's God, those who oppose self-evident truth; they're the religious ones. They have a belief system that they've adopted. They've made it their own and they're committed to it. And it is not founded in objective facts, but the conjectures of their “belief.’

Founded in assertions, and conjectures, Hegelian Progressives are seeking to prop up a sweeping and ‘spiritualized’ world view in order to justify their undying passion to move forward. To ‘progress’ to new truths and to a truly ‘just’ brave new world.

Well, as pro-lifers, we're asserting that killing an innocent baby in the womb actually violates natural law. 

The laws of nature and of nature's God is that it's a self evident truth that that is a human baby that can't defend his or herself. Before our times that was demonstrated in the English Common Law. The child was legally protected from the moment that objective evidence existed that he or she was alive. As soon as there was 'quickening' (that movement of the child in the womb could be detected), that the baby could kick, then it was obviously a unique human being and was now protected under the English Common Law. That was a demonstration of physical evidence and it demonstrated a 'self-evident truth,' that there was a human being present and alive. 

And then later, Dr. Horatio's Storer, who is the Founder of Modern Gynecology, started a legal crusade to protect these children in the late 1860s. He insisted that in the United States abortion be clearly outlawed because it was so obvious wrong from his study of childbirth in the UK. (In the UK they were protected in the Crimes Against the Person Act.)

Dr. Storer, through his medical exposition, demonstrated this is a unique human being. As he said, “This child is my patient.’ So these are assertions of natural law. Self-evident truths in the appeal to natural law are very important when we seek to enforce civil laws in our society.

And it goes way back. It goes back to the time of Aristotle, who was an observer of nature and a natural philosopher. He asserted that there was a prime mover, a great designer who designed all things. And that's why truths and objective facts could be validly observed, and you could make sense out of your observations. He referred to the moral qualities revealed in nature as natural law. Aristotle was a Greek, but when the Romans came along, Cicero was probably the best known of the legal advocates in Roman law to assert natural law. Certain facts had to be followed because they were self-evident and revealed to be morally justified or morally wrong based on what others could observe in nature. So he wasn't asserting that law should be made up by tyrants. Those with power can make up whatever law they want. He was appealing to a higher law.

Cicero was an eloquent advocate for natural law and really one of those who greatly influenced Roman law. And then, throughout the Middle Ages, the laws that various European nations adopted emanated from the Roman law. Thomas Aquinas, in the Middle Ages, took these principles and he elucidated them. He underscored the fact that natural law, the laws of nature and nature's God are evident, and should be followed in a just society.

These are self-evident facts, objective truths that can be seen. So I want to take just a second as we're talking at this stage that there is a contrast between objective truths and conjectured truths. 

When we talk about relativism, ideas that are conjectured to be “true and asserted to be true, and sometimes ‘temporarily true,’ for me, or for you. But everyone can have their ‘own truth.’ Sometimes, those who make such assertions and conjectures feel a need to justify their conjectured truths and they'll claim scientific evidence to validate it, but remember, by invoking science, they are suggesting that nature is proclaiming it, and that it can be seen in nature! (A silent salute to natural law!). In the very process of fighting nature’s dicta, they invoke natural law principles!

We'll spend some time talking about such false science. And in our next episode, we'll go into great depth about a philosophy known as Hegelian progressivism that has its own, 'pseudo science' to justify incredible moral turpitude by governments. Hegel is a very important philosopher. Most of us haven't spent a lot of time with Hegel. And yet, as you will see in our next episode, Hegelian philosophy has imbued our current era, and is in direct war with natural law. 

So the reason you need to know that the right to life is rooted in natural law is because that's the foundation of your assertions. You need to assert what is objectively true about a human child or about an elderly patient that's vulnerable. Maybe they're in physical pain, but you can deal with the physical pain. That doesn't mean you need to kill them. And yet, false thinking and false science is being used to justify wanton killing under the law. Ultimately, these are debates about what is a ‘just law.’

So I told my Christian friends I would spend some time in the scriptures. And if you're not a Christian, that's OK. These scriptures won't hurt you. But you need to know as a Christian that you should understand natural law. 

Throughout the scripture, the God of Scripture is asserting that His presence is demonstrated in nature. Psalm 19 says, the heavens are declaring the glory of God that night unto night is being proclaimed and there's no country in the world, there's no language where the language of the heavens are not understood. It is proclaimed and known to everyone that there is a God who made all things, and therefore a God to whom we are responsible. This may seem very simplistic, but it is it's actually straightforward. It's not complicated. In order to avoid the evidence of God’s presence, it is we who must complicate and distract from its self-evident proclamation. 

Acts 17:22-29. Paul was learned in the Hebrew scriptures, but he was a Hellenic Greek. And in Tarsus, where he grew up, he learned Greek and he learned Greek poetry, obviously, because he quoted Greek poets when he went to Athens at Mars Hill. He told the Greeks there again, he wanted to speak in their language, not just verbally, but culturally. He wanted to relate to them, where they lived emotionally and intellectually. He pointed out that, “You have an altar here on Mars Hill to the unknown God. Well, that's great, because I want to tell you about this God you don't know, that He has made himself physically evident. In fact, “in Him we live and move and have our being.” 

Paul is explaining to others that God is here, now. God is not far away. Everything that has been made is made by God. And all of creation exists in God because you can't go anywhere to escape from Him. He existed before anything else existed. And therefore, wherever you go, there He is. David said that in the Psalms. (Psalm 139:7-12) He said, “If I took the wings of the dawn, you'd still find me. Where can I go to run and hide from you? I can't. If I descended into the deepest hell, you would still be there.”

So of all people, Christians SHOULD know, God is here. And that's a very important principle in natural law. Truth can be known right now, right where you are. It's not a far-away thing. And you have heard the phrase ‘Just be here now?’ You should also know that refers also to the kingdom of God. The more you read in scriptures about God's kingdom, you'll learn - it's right now. Listen to the verb tenses that God uses. It's right now. And very often we may misunderstand when it is said that the kingdom of God is at hand or the kingdom of God is nigh. It's actually saying “it's right here, right next to you. Just turn around.” (Matthew 6:33; Mark1:15; Luke 17:20-21) It should be crystal clear to committed Christians: The kingdom of God is in the present. And we have to understand that about truth. God has made known His truth. Right now. And it's revealed in nature right now. So being in the present is an important part of understanding God's kingdom rather than adhering to conjectures about who God is.

Conjectures and misplaced preconceptions are what bring us problems. And I think you'll recall some of the stories, the parables Jesus told. In the parable of the talents, it was that last servant he gave a talent to who got things wrong. The misinformed and worthless servant had conjectured about who God is. He didn't really know his Master. (Matthew 25:20-30) He wasn’t watching and observing his master, didn't spend time right now understanding the nature of God. And that's what we are called to do - spend time in the PRESENT, observing and noting the things of God, physically and then spiritually. He has most immediately manifested Himself in His physical creation.

Remember, whenever God identifies himself, He uses the present tense verb- constantly. Literally “I am who am.” God is in the present. And you're in the present too, right now. You're invited right now into His presence. So if you're not a Christian, you should know that God is inviting you. He is present and He's inviting you through Jesus to have forgiveness for your errors because that's what sin means. You made a mistake. It's an error. You missed it. You simply don’t get what He has already shown you in nature. 

Sin means to miss a target. It’s from old English archery. You miss it. And once you realize you're missing it, it is a great opportunity to adjust, and take a better shot with that new understanding. Nature is still proclaiming, “God is still here,” and because He is eternal and unchanging, He still loves you and wants to hang out with you. You can have that opportunity through Jesus, through the Christ. 

One of the most compelling truths about natural law, and understanding truth through looking closely at nature is said in, 'He who made the eye can see and you can see me,” a very straight forward deduction from natural law in the present. The God who made the eye can see. You have the ability to see. Therefore, it is only logical that your Maker also is able to see. (Ps 94:9)

And of course, throughout the Old Testament when God and the Jews rebuke heathens for their ignorance, for their misconceptions; they point to the obvious: made idols. The idols can't see or do anything. They're phony, carved of wood or stone. They were made up. They are arbitrary. They were conjectures. They're made up out of the futility of the mind of the misled individual. But what those individuals needed to do is simply look closely at what God had actually made: (Jeremiah 51:17-19) 

God is. He always was. He always will be. He always remains the same. He's here and He wants to show Himself to you. He has demonstrated that and He is demonstrating it through nature. And once you recognize His existence, then you can start seeking Him. You have to, as it says in Hebrews (Heb. 11:6), “Those who come to God must first believe that He is”. This is the starting point. He Is - right now. And then it says they must also believe, “He is a reward for those who diligently seek Him”. So in all these statements of scripture, as we talk about natural law, we can talked about it in depth, both with Christians and those who aren't! All of us live surrounded by the natural world, which is imbued with ‘demonstrating truth.’

We're talking about coming to an understanding of what really is, what is really true, and that's God. God made all things. And He's trying to tell you that. 

That's what natural law is. That's what America's founders were appealing to - the laws of nature and of nature's God, to knowable and ‘self-evident truth'.

There's so many other scriptures I want to share with you. The scriptures are replete with demonstrating that God is in the present. And if you want to follow God, you must also live in the present. And you must also take the time to consider deeply. 

I know there are a lot of people who look at the stars, but they don't consider the deeper significance of the vastness of creation and the designer of creation, so in our next episode we'll spend a little time contrasting the ‘natural law’ with arbitrary ‘synthetic law’. We are doing a comparative and a contrasting analysis of relativism and natural law. You should be an advocate of natural law and you should be able to disprove those relativists, those who are asserting their own conjectures about laws they think should be there. But you, if you believe God made all things and especially if you claim a relationship with Him, you should be able to demonstrate what the good and just principles of God's nature are that He's revealed in nature. 

Again, if you're a Christian, you should be a master of natural law. 

Progressivism is the passionate religion of cultural ‘progress’. It's actually a faith in conjectured principles, in things that the particular branch of that religion may deeply believe. So there's a lot of feelings, a lot of strong feelings in the religion of progressivism. And I do want to remind you, if you're a Christian, you know that you're not supposed to build your faith on feelings. That's one of your problems. It's true. And Christians who think religion and feelings are the same thing only get in trouble. You need to build your faith on who God is, on the principles He has laid out for you to consider - not on how you feel about Him or His principles. You will make big mistakes if feelings are your guide. Remember the unworthy servant and the talents.

Following and empowering feelings is a big error of those who follow Hegelian progressivism and in our next episode I'm going to spend time again with Hegel, because you may not know his name, but the philosophy of Hegel has infected our culture and seduced it to make conjectures, unsubstantiated and emotional conjectures, to be honored as ‘new truth’. They are the “new truths” for this very-secular religion, this belief system that is at war with sound thinking.

They say that US Treasury agents are taught to recognize counterfeit money by spending lots of time with real currency, feeling and examining and understanding its qualities. The real thing is their basis of knowledge. Then, they can readily recognize counterfeits. So it is with the principles of natural law

When you truly are rooted in an understanding and appreciation of natural law as the premise for just laws and “self-evident truth,” you will have a clearer ability to see the seductive deceitfulness of progressivism’s ways and influence on every aspect of our culture. You will be able to detect and reveal it for what it is: counterfeit ‘truth’.

Hegelian progressivism is compellingly seductive. You will see why. These are dangerous ideas. Remember, you're in a battle of ideas. So sharpen your intellectual tools, “Gird up the loins of your mind.’ Be ready for this battle, because life is at stake.

Airdate: 05/09/20

EPISODE 215:
California Freedom of Information Act: Block-Buster Admission

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Brian Johnston interviews attorney Sheila Green of the California Prolife Council. Attorney Green had filed a California Freedom of Information Act request with the state Department of Health Care Services. She had requested an explanation of monitoring abortion in California and the system by which abortions are paid for and conditions under which these abortions will be paid for.

In a stunning admission which the state has never given heretofore, the Department of Health Care Services admitted it pays for all abortions, at all times, without question of gestational age - in other words, throughout all nine months of pregnancy. In addition, there need not be any medically indicated reason, nothing wrong with the mother - nothing wrong with a child, the abortion is simply paid for without question. 

Additionally, there seems to be very little oversight over the actual abortion procedures

The significance of this admission is great. The average Californian may often call themselves pro-choice when polled, but when asked about late-term abortion or circumstances under which abortion should be legal or government paid for, they do not approve of unlimited abortion at all times, for any reason at all. The Gallup polling organization, Marist Polling, and the Los Angeles Times, have consistently shown that even in California, those who consider themselves pro-choice are not in agreement with the way abortions are being paid for and promoted in California.

It is the intentional hiding of the facts and misleading by an abortion sympathetic media that allows this deceitful late-term killing to continue unexamined. 

Airdate: 04/25/20

EPISODE 214:
Fighting Viruses - Your Immune System Is Designed To Do That...
Why Zinc Matters

Your first line of defense against COVID-19 is not masks, gloves, moon suits, or distancing.  Your first line of defense is your natural immune system. Failure of your immune system and compromised immune systems are the number one factor in COVID-19 deaths.

Scientific studies have demonstrated there are very practical and straightforward resources available including the supplementation of zinc to quickly and effectively ensure a more robust, human immune system.

In a post-Covid environment it will only be our immune system’s that will continue to protect us against many deadly airborne viruses. In the politically charged environment of the year 2020, any hope offered, particularly if it has been mentioned by the President, whose first job is to provide vision and hope for the nation, has been met with false analysis and fake science to dismiss and disregard this most obvious of obligations: our need to protect ourselves first.

Commissioner Johnston explains that in any urgent situation our first obligation is to protect ourselves so that we might be able to protect others. If an aircraft is failing at altitude, oxygen masks drop down but our first requirement is to save our lives to keep ourselves conscious, that we might then be able to help others.

Commissioner Johnston relates the fact that it is not uncommon for us to face many dangers but it is our own actions and protection, rather than complete fear and avoidance, that allows us to live normal lives. Having very fair skin, Brian relays the story that he must protect himself naturally from over exposure to the sun.  He uses sunscreens and and gradual gentle exposure, because skin cancer is common in his family. There are, however, members of his family that have actually refused to go into the sun for fear of debilitating sunburn and the potential for skin cancer. This has dramatically limited their lives and left them just as vulnerable. They have nearly albino skin!   Fear and avoidance are not the best way to face the challenges of life.  We must prepare for the challenges of life and face them if we are to lead dynamic and meaningful lives.

President Trump cited the successful studies in France demonstrating that hydroxychloroquine was proven effective and dramatically so against a Covid-19 virus.  He was attacked by those who do not want there to be hope in this battle.  The immediate politicization by those who seek to limit control or actions through fear has been palpably evident.  Other studies are as compelling and demonstrate the efficacy both in vitro and in vivo of zinc's dramatic impact on numerous respiratory tract coronaviruses. https://aac.asm.org/content/48/3/783

Commissioner Johnston takes a deep dive into the reason hydroxychloroquine is effective. He cites numerous studies as well as an interview from Med-Cram with Dr. Seheult which explains the operant quality of hydroxychloroquine is not that it kills the virus, but that it simply allows zinc to more efficiently enter the human cells that carry the virus. It is the zinc that actually stops the virus in its tracks.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4182877/

Dr. Seheult's conclusion, as Commissioner Johnston’s, is that it is vital for our immune system, and in fighting ALL VIRUSES, that our bodies not have a zinc deficiency, as zinc is a vital element in an effective immune battle against these illnesses.

Med Cram on Zinc and the nature of the Covid-19 virus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eeh054-Hx1U Poignant passage used in episode starts at 18:11.

Airdate: 04/18/20

EPISODE 213:
Intentional Medical Neglect and the Novel Coronavirus of 2019

Commissioner Johnston reminds us of the real battle regarding Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, and the fact that in 1973 the Supreme Court of United States declared war against the practice of medicine, as well as assaulting the foundation of the law. For three thousand years medicine has always sworn that it would, 'only care or comfort, but never harm a patient.' (Hippocratic Oath)

With the passage of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v Bolton decisions, doctors were told they were free to be hired selective killers, using medicine to intentionally take a human life which until that day had been protected, in the 50 states, the life of a vulnerable unborn child.

This fundamental assault on the nature of American law and society has had grave implications. The inversion of medicine's values and abandonment of the principle that the law has a duty to defend the lives of those that cannot defend themselves, has created a cultural dystopia. In the era of national emergency and social upheaval caused by the coronavirus we are seeing the impact of these relativistic ideas and how deeply they have scarred the American psyche and value system. 

Brian explains the once former crime of, "intentional medical neglect," whereby basic necessities of life: food, water, comfort care, are denied to a vulnerable patient with the goal of the patient quickly succumbing by virtue of that same neglect.

This principle was openly advocated by Governor Northam of Virginia when the laws of New York, New Jersey and Virginia were proposed to kill a child throughout all nine months of pregnancy and should the child be born alive during and abortion, to simply set it aside to decide later what to do with it. The casual dismissal of a human life as something to be thrown out alarmed the majority of Americans and awakened them to the great evil that is abortion-on-demand.

In the spring of 2020, numerous proposals and desperate assertions were put forward as necessary and utilitarian answers to the spread of the Covid-19 virus: automatic DNR orders, refusal to treat patients above a certain age, intentional abandonment of nursing homes. Thankfully, Dr. Deborah Birx, one of President Trump’s principle advisers on infectious disease openly rebuked the ethicists who had been advocating such ideas.

What is critically important is to recognize the very common presence of these 'disposable human' values. It will only be with intentional and open opposition to such utilitarian values that America can restore itself once again to respecting the value of the human person. That is the job, not for a few, but for all Americans of goodwill.

Airdate: 04/11/20

EPISODE 212:
Protecting Lives - Especially Your Own

In this episode Brian Johnston explores the unique worldwide phenomenon from the spring of 2020  - the Coronavirus epidemic.

Brian brings personal experience as an elder advocate, a California Commissioner on Aging, his experience on the board of the National Legal Center for the Medically Dependent and Disabled, and on the California Board of Examiners of Nursing Homes.  In addition, he brings his personal experience in studying and applying lifestyle tools to address and offset the impact of aging.

In addressing the coronavirus, or any epidemic of this nature, Commissioner Johnston suggests it is critical to follow the directions of the federal, state and local authorities to prevent the spread of the illness. Perhaps, most importantly, one must make sure that personal habits prevent further spread.

But in addressing these external issues one must not forget our own responsibility to ourselves. We should not only prevent spreading the illness but as much as possible ensure that our health and immune system is equipped to fight such viruses. 

Brian outlines numerous common sense approaches to personal health that apply not only to fighting viruses but also to maintaining one’s health into life. Such common sense answers include regular and efficient exercise, knowing how to hydrate your own body (70% of your body is literally made of water and failure to hydrate can result in desiccated and failed organs). 

Use of supplements is recommended and Brian explains some of the reasons why, given the fact that the modern Western diet does not adequately supply the nutritious vitamins, minerals and phytonutrients necessary for a healthy lifestyle.

Johnston concludes with his personal observations regarding methods for fighting other viruses in building up your personal immune system including the use of zinc which has been widely documented in fighting the common cold – which is actually a form of coronavirus!

Our obligation to the lives of others, particularly in ensuring that the laws protect those who are most vulnerable to lethal predation requires us to protect our own lives first - because every life matters.

Airdate: 04/04/20

EPISODE 211:
Corona Virus Opportunity and Dangers

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston outlines the bright side of this unusual moment in history. Brian served as California Commissioner on Aging from 1995 to 1999. He also served on the State of California Board of Examiners of Nursing Homes from ‘95 until the year 2000.   

Brian brings this experience, coupled with his active advocacy on behalf of the right to life of the vulnerable, to focus on the coronavirus outbreak of 2020.

The bright side: On the deeply personal level that all of us experience in day-to-day life, the coronavirus outbreak has brought us home. The emphasis on staying domestic and focusing on the immediacy of life in our homes is of huge significance for a busy and distracted culture.

Because of restrictions on church services, this has even required individuals to no longer view their faith as something that is exercised only in a special building. The advantage is it makes the living out of our faith that much more personal and an important aspect of our lives and family relationships.

Brian and his wife Valery have raised five children and homeschooled them all. He makes note that while the state of California’s education system has been at war, politically, with the homeschool movement, there has come a sudden and drastic need for homeschooling. Governor Gavin Newsom became a public advocate for the homeschool movement in March of 2020 in order to address the dangers that the spread of the virus posed.

But there is also a darker side posed not only by the virus itself, but in some of the answers being presented.   

Throughout the world and especially in Italy - which was initially the hardest hit of the European countries - it appears that seniors, as with the flu virus, are the most lethally affected. The public has been warned, and young people in particular, to avoid contact with the elderly.

In Washington State the highest mortality rate has been in certain nursing homes outside of Seattle. These hotspots encourage a definitive ‘rule’ of interaction: avoidance of contact with seniors.

But as Commissioner Johnston pointed out, sadly, this has already been a cultural phenomenon in the United States. The nature of our nursing home system is such that it removes any sense of responsibility or involvement with the older members of our family. Culturally, nations like Italy, even in employing nursing homes, continue to be actively involved and engaged with the oldest members of the family. Such is rarely the case in America. While there are certainly exceptions, the vast majority of nursing home residents rarely have visitors. 

This decided disdain, removal and distancing from our own eventual mortality has included an embrace of voluntary euthanasia - assisted suicide in all of the Western states and in many other parts of the nation and large swaths of the medical community. 

Commissioner Johnston is joined by nursing home advocate, Joyce Unangst, as they discussed their experience in a visitation of a local nursing home in 2018.

Commissioner Johnston underscores that the recent change in laws to allow and encourage the killing of the medically vulnerable is an ominous indicator of an existing abandonment syndrome which many Americans and the American culture is already routinely practicing.

Commissioner Johnston ends the program on a positive note, giving specific guidelines and suggestions as to how to continue to be involved with the senior community and to encourage others in their care and the needed respect and protection our seniors deserve.

We should continue to be involved and engaged with the oldest members of our family and community.  Perhaps we should be even more engaged given the depressing quality of this pandemic. Modern technology allows for extraordinary avenues of communication and intervention even remotely.  So this current crisis actually offers a great opportunity to be other-centered and actively involved, even if not physically, in the lives of the most vulnerable.

Airdate: 03/28/20

EPISODE 209-210:
Dr. Patrick Moore and the Global Warming Debate - Pt. I & II

Are human beings destroying the earth? What’s the real science on that question? 

Dr. Patrick Moore was one of the founders of Greenpeace. He was the only actual scientist on their entire board. Eventually, he determined he had to leave the organization. They refused to listen to his objective scientific facts regarding the use of chemicals, biological principles, and self-evident observable facts.  He takes direct and explicit exception to the widespread ideological assertion that mankind is harming the earth and is the cause of global warming. 

The last straw straw for Dr. Moore was their repeated return to the premise that human beings are in fact the enemy of the planet, that human beings are inherently bad. This is the opposite premise of the value of each and every human life, essential principles guiding the idea that there is a ‘right to life.’

Dr. Moore’s studies led him to conclude exactly the opposite of Greenpeace’s pervasive message. He has seen and demonstrates the fact that human beings are in fact the real answer to societies’ challenges and any of the environment’s problems. 

If not for the advance of Western civilization on the planet we would still be living with dirty water, and malarial conditions. The lifespan of not only human beings, but all animals and nature will be greatly threatened without human involvement.  Dr. Moore believes that human beings are not the problem, but are, in fact, the real solution.

Airdate: 02/29/20, 03/07/20

EPISODE 208:
Nancy and Joaquin and the Higher Law

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston discusses the tendency of pro-abortion and anti-life advocates to use higher law against the principles of the right to life, inverting logic and defying their own appeals to conscience.

Two recent examples are House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s condemnation of the President attempting to hold accountable the illegal gang MS-13. She insists that he referred to all illegal immigrants as animals. But she intentionally twisted the words of the President, as he was clearly referring to this particular El Salvador and criminal game.

President Trump was appealing to a very basic principle of society: that individuals who use the desire to control and rule over others by violent force, or appealing to their own lower nature and seeking to employ the baser elements of humanity, or lower nature, is the reason that laws exist, to restrain those that use brute force and the “law of the jungle“ to get their way in society.

Similarly, actor Joaquin Phoenix made a passionate appeal to justice and a sense of higher law, to address our entire society. Phoenix rightly pointed out that selfishness and self-absorption is a bane of modern society. He appealed to a sense of responsibility and justice in his speech accepting the award for Best Actor at the recent Oscar award ceremony.

Phoenix was clear that personal feelings can cloud our understanding of the principles of justice and a higher law to which society must be accountable. Unfortunately, he immediately gathered a collection of perceived emotionally difficult social questions - from animal rights to sexual diversity and other contemporary confusing issues based in individuals’ feelings.

While appealing to a higher law, Phoenix, like so many others, defies that very principle in relegating the idea of injustice as being based on individual feelings. This is a common thread amongst those who rely on disordered thinking and emotionalism to establish their standards of right and wrong.

Western Civilization has advanced in bringing great freedom and prosperity, has ended slavery. [A recent Reuters news story (Feb. 2020) states that this work is not yet done, that half of the nations in the world still have not banned slavery.] Western Civilization has established justice, on the basis that there is a higher law to which all societies and other cultural standards must be held accountable. The right to life was proclaimed by America’s founders as the pre-eminent and essential element of a just society.  It is not a passing feeling.  It is a self-evident truth.   “To ensure these rights governments are instituted among men.”

Airdate: 02/22/20

EPISODE 207:
The Secrecy and Establishment Of School-based Clinics

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston interviews Lydia Gutierrez, a California schoolteacher and member of the California Teachers Association.

Lydia outlines the extremely dangerous nature of a current phenomenon in the public school system: the establishment of school-based clinics by Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood is a third-party, outside agency with very clear cultural and ethical messages for children. Planned Parenthood promotes, and in many cases provides abortion for minor children without parent’s knowledge or consent.

Once introduced into a school setting, this outside, third-party agency has complete privacy and government protected secrecy for any conversations or interaction with the minor student. These counselors are not functioning in the same manner as a school counselor, school psychologist, teacher, or principal.  In fact, even the school employees are not allowed to know or be privy to the interaction between the student and the Planned Parenthood employee. The parent is not allowed to know the nature of the relationship between the student and the Planned Parenthood employee.

In December 2019, Planned Parenthood established fifty school-based clinics in the Los Angeles County school district. These clinics are directly aimed at circumventing parental involvement, and inculcating an ethical and moral view, as opposed to the actual purpose of the educational system: equipping students to use their intellectual capacities.

Airdate: 02/15/20

EPISODE 206:
The President Takes Real Action On Life

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston replays the speech of President Trump at the rally and March for Life in Washington, D.C. In addition to the entirety of the President’s speech, Brian also explains the true significance of the Weldon Amendment, which the President requested be applied to the state of California on January 24, 2020.

The Weldon Amendment prohibits a state from forcing private-party insurers to pay for and promote abortion. Many have mistakenly thought that it in someways cuts government funding for abortion, or in someways limits the actual practice of abortion. It does not. It is, in fact, a conscience clause for private individuals and private insurance companies.

The State of California, and Governor Newsom’s insistence that not only should the state pay for abortion with California tax funding, but also force any private individuals and private insurance companies to also promote and pay for abortion is a draconian use of raw political power.

Airdate: 02/01/20

EPISODE 205:
The Unborn Child Needs Legal Protection - Do More Than Walk!

The famous Roe versus Wade and Doe versus Bolton twin-decisions of January 22,1973 are a black mark on American history. Since 1974, pro-life individuals from across the nation have gathered in Washington, D.C. on that anniversary. They have gone from the ellipse at the White House (often hearing a speech from the President and others) and then they march up to Capitol Hill. 

The reason this is done is because an unjust law went into effect on this anniversary, the right to life was suspended by those twin decisions, and American citizens come as concerned individuals to their nation’s Capital. We gather in Washington, D.C. on behalf of the innocent child and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Legal protection must be restored for the unborn. 

In subsequent years there have been many other walks assembled in the emulation of the March in Washington. In California, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego have all established local walks as a local substitute for the D.C. March For Life, but they have gradually taken on a slightly different character from the D.C. March.

First of all they do NOT direct people to hold accountable their elected representatives who either will vote to protect or to kill these children. Several of these walks prohibit that discussion in order to have a happy, celebratory event.  This lack of civic responsibility and accountability by pro-lifers has come at a great cost. 

Secondly, many of these walks now focus their walk on tangential issues of an emotional and perhaps religious nature, and some explicitly and openly are redefining what the right to life actually is.

This has led to a confused and generic concern over abortion, but specifically prevents an understanding of why pro-abortion legislators must be held accountable. With that direction it makes it impossible to restore the legal standards they are continuing to destroy.  

The “Do More Than Walk” campaign was devised by a California Prolife volunteer in order to make the symbolic “efforts“ of walking around in a California city have much more significance and impact.  “We don’t want to just make a statement, we want to make an impact.”

She decided to get pledges for her walking - much as a jog-a-thon does and direct those pledges to the California Prolife Education Fund, which educates on the real facts regarding abortion and the need to protect the unborn child through the law. This also allows pledgers a tax-deduction. Most importantly, she is also continuing to exercise for her own health and the sake of her own life but wants to continue exercising the rest of the year and wants to do that on behalf of those who can’t speak for themselves. 

She’s brilliant!

You should exercise too, you know. We need you around! 

You can also join in by going to Californiaprolife.org and signing up for the “Do More Than Walk” campaign. You get the exercise you need to lengthen your life, and you’ll make a difference on behalf of the lives of others who cannot speak for themselves.

Airdate: 01/16/20

EPISODE 204:
Assessing Your Communities’ Candidates

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston interviews Sheila Green, Esq., Central Vice President of the California ProLife Council, and Bob Cièlnicky, a long time life activist and volunteer and formerly Southern Vice President for the California ProLife Council.

Relatively few pro-life individuals understand the deep significance of local elections. Yet, many abortion businesses receive direct authority and government funds from not only the federal and state governments, but counties and cities. Often, permission to operate within school districts is decided directly by the local districts themselves.

In December 2019, the Los Angeles County Board of Education announced it was allowing Planned Parenthood to directly insert 50 school-based clinics into Los Angeles county high schools. The permission and funding for this third-party access to California school children was determined solely by the vote and authority of the local school board.

If Pro-life individuals have understood the importance of local elections and local civics they are in a position to stop this incredible intrusion and access to children in school. Failure to understand or act on these opportunities is failure to protect your own community.

Sheila, Bob and Brian explain the methods employed to assess the stances of candidates on the local level, how to further educate those who don’t understand the local issues, and how to publish a pro-life Voter Guide to be used in those election cycles that elect local candidates.

In election year 2020, county school boards and county supervisors, as well as several other lower-level offices are elected. The opportunity to change them won’t come for another four years. If pro-lifers are awakened and take action for this early primary (votes to be tallied March 3), there is a good chance at preventing further expansion of the abortion industry into the schools and throughout the state through local funding and support by abortion supporting candidates.

The tools to accomplish this are offered by the California Prolife Council and are available at www.californiaproife.org\2020-questionnaires.

This podcast program is a step-by-step guide for how local pro-life individuals can help protect their community. Further guidance can be found by calling 800-924-2490.

Airdate: 01/09/20

EPISODE 203:
Unenforced Abortion Regulations in California

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston (former Commissioner an Aging for California) interviews Sheila Green, J.D., Central California Vice President of the California ProLife Council and Right To Life Federation. 

Attorney Green explains the actual state of abortion law in California, a situation that both the media as well as the abortion industry and the government do not wish to have publicly discussed. Citing government statute, and the Medi-Cal handbook for abortion providers, Ms. Green explains that abortion in California is unregulated. It is legal through all nine months of pregnancy, and there is no requirement for medically indicated reasons, even in late-term. It is any abortion at any time, for any reason, or for no reason in particular. All abortions in California are available for payment by the California tax-payer.

Ms. Green also explains that there are existing statutes that would require a child born in the course of an abortion to be protected, but given the fact that all other abortion regulations have been suspended, there is no enforcement vehicle or inspectors to ensure that infant’s life is protected. There are no penalties associated with violation, and without a system of accountability, the law is meaningless. (California Health and Safety Code, 123435) While unenforced, it does reflect the sentiment of most Americans. 

Airdate: 01/04/20

EPISODE 202:
Later Abortions - Part II with Dr. Pat Marmion OB/GYN

In this episode, Commissioner Johnston discusses that aspect of abortion which the abortion industry seeks to hide, the media rarely discusses, and yet, is the most shocking and appalling aspect of abortion.  

It is an area on which the majority of Americans agree - killing a child, big enough to hold in your arms, is killing a vulnerable human baby. Most Americans – even those who self-identify as pro-choice– oppose this practice. Yet, this is exactly what is allowed under Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

Included is a presentation by Gianna Jessie, who was born in 1977 during a saline abortion. Her comments are riveting and incontrovertible: our nation is legally killing human babies who are wanted. Gianna was adopted and there are 2 million couples hoping for and awaiting adoption each year.  

Dr. Patrick Marmion OB/GYN joins Commissioner Johnston for a second interview regarding the dramatic change in obstetrics, and the oppressive nature of current medical training. Dr. Marmion considers the current profession of obstetrics to be practicing in a police-state of pro abortion medicine, forcing obstetricians to participate in abortion during training in order to move ahead in their profession. 

The nature of medicine has been dramatically impacted by Roe v. Wade as the Hippocratic Oath’s principle of never harming a patient has been completely removed, and physicians have become legalized killers. This has impacted not merely obstetrics, but also how other vulnerable patients can now be treated – by killing.

Airdate: 12/08/19

EPISODE 201:
Killing Older Children: The Facts About Late Term Abortion with Dr. Pat Marmion OB/GYN 

In this episode of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston conducts an extensive interview with Dr. Pat Marmion, OB/GYN. Dr. Marmion, who has been involved as a pro-life physician for almost 40 years, explains the real facts regarding the routine killing of older children, children who could survive outside the womb, children big enough to hold in your arms.

Dr. Marmion describes the Weisberg incident of 1982, when a shipping container left in a storage facility in Los Angeles was found to contain over 16,000 young, aborted baby corpses. The media did cover that incident at the time, but most recently when an abortionist was found to be storing thousands of aborted fetuses at his home, the major media employed a media blackout.  It was not to be made known. 

The issue for our culture is quite simple - when your fellow citizens see human babies, they do not want those babies wantonly killed. If the debate is only words, semantics and numbers, your neighbors’ attention span is brief. The media and the abortion movement want no discussion of these living, unique and incredible human beings. The job for the pro-life movement is to show the facts of these lives. 

In this amazing interview, Dr. Marmion explains his experiences with the medical industry and the new, dramatic assault on both obstetrics and gynecology, in the creation of yet another specialty, the euphemistically titled, “complex family planning“. 

‘Complex family planning’ trains the physician to kill older children in the womb through various methods of dismemberment, skull crushing, and in some cases, doing so in a method to preserve valuable human organs - but this is certainly not, “family planning”.

Shine the Light of Day.  Text GIVE to 916 347-5644

__________________

CALIFORNIA ProLife has initiated an ongoing educational program to alert Californians regarding the maturity of the children being killed in abortion. The Light of Day project can be supported by going to californiaprolife.org and clicking on “The Light Of Day Project” tab or through your mobile phone by texting, the word GIVE to 916-347-5644.  

Airdate: 11/30/19

EPISODE 200:
The Truth About Later Abortions

The State of California will pay for any abortion, at any time, regardless of the gestational age of the child. There need be no medically indicated reason for the killing of that child. Do your friends know that that’s the law? Do your neighbors understand that they’re paying for unlimited abortion in California? Do they really know what Roe versus Wade and Doe versus Bolton has done to the law and to the practice of medicine? 

In this edition of Life Matters, Commissioner Johnston explores the real facts of how late abortions are being performed. He points out the inescapable fact that the media and the abortion lobby minimizes the humanity of the child, and will rarely, if ever, use any human terms in referring to the baby. In a callous and dismissive way they intentionally want to make the debate about tangents: “When does life begin?” etc. but that, as he points out, has nothing to do with when the killing begins and when it is authorized.  It is as much a tangent as killing any person is not a debate about when that person’s life began. 

Brian has an extensive interview with Johanna Hyatt, who, while 23 weeks pregnant, presented herself to a number of late term abortionists and clearly stated that there was nothing physically wrong with her nor was there anything wrong with the child. 

There were many other expectant mothers in each of the waiting rooms. No one at these abortion clinics attempted to dissuade her from killing that large a child, and even when she was public about there being no medically indicated reason. 

The public debate will not change until these facts are front and center in the minds of actual pro-life individuals. It is our job to defend these human lives and to make sure that the language and intellectual arguments avoid the dishonesty of minimizing the age which abortions are done and the value of each and every unique human life killed. 

Airdate: 11/03/19

EPISODE 099:
Why Join A Chapter? With Lawrence Lehr

In 1973, the Roe versus Wade decision overturned the protective laws of all fifty states. These laws respected the humanity of a child in the womb and had been established immediately following the Civil War. That War established that black human beings who were innocent could not be owned or killed at will. Medical science and the medical profession, through the American Medical Association and other advocates, had insisted after the Civil War, that now a vulnerable and innocent human being in the womb also needed the protection of the law.

Roe versus Wade in 1973 ignored the humanity of the child and gives this vulnerable human being absolutely no protection whatsoever throughout the United States. Many people have come to disagree and bemoan this legal situation. But being pro-life is much more than merely a feeling or opinion about that decision. The essential question for the pro-life movement is, “What shall we do now?”

While there are many projects and social work proposals that are pursued, failure to address the reality that the law has legalized and is promoting the killing of these children, is failure to recognize what the ongoing battle truly is.

When Roe v. Wade is overturned it will be up to local citizens to elect life-respecting representatives who will enact life-protecting laws. 

Many religious groups are either ignorant of, afraid of, or perhaps worse, feel it to be unspiritual to be involved in the civic process of their community. But those who are committed to protect innocent lives understand the need to organize locally with fellow pro-lifers of diverse backgrounds. This is what a local Right To Life chapter does.

Lawrence Lehr, of Sonoma County Pro Life joins us in this episode of Life Matters.  He explains how local individuals who consider themselves pro-life have a duty, responsibility and the very easy ability to impact their community. 

Training local pro-life speakers, focusing on the objective scientific and legal facts regarding these departures from Western Civilization; and making known these principles to the community help prevent this from being seen as merely a religious opinion, but instead recognized for what it is: the number one civil rights issue of our time. 

When local communities become pro-life, entire states become pro life, and it is the states that will once again, with the overturn of  Roe v. Wade, be free to protect the vulnerable innocent. That the law should protect innocent lives is the very basis of our civilization and the very heart of our legal system. Working for that change is the entire purpose of the right to life movement.

Airdate: 10/19/19

EPISODE 098:
Mom’s, Babies, and Emotions: How Do We Protect Them?

Because of the strong emotions that are associated with the abortion issue it is tempting to overlook how we got here and why. There are so many abortions daily.  

Instead of working to end this tragic chapter in American history: government sponsorship and protection of the entire abortion industry, we might simply get caught up in ‘cleaning up’ after the ongoing human tragedy.  It is very easy to become obsessed only with helping the young mothers and their children whenever an abortion is being considered. Secondarily, when a young mother succumbs to emotional or social pressure with the tragic mistake of having an abortion, the emotional and psychological counseling necessary can consume the resources of many. 

Dr. Mildred Jefferson, M.D., a former president of the National Right Life Committee, and the first black woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School, put it succinctly: “The crisis pregnancy centers of America are the Red Cross in this important battle for life, but the Red Cross never won any battles. And the Red Cross has never won any wars. We must fight for the laws to once again to protect and defend the vulnerable.”

Dr. Jefferson nicely summarizes the real challenge that we face when we fail to recognize the battle of ideas - surrender to the laws allows the killing of millions every year. We have a Christian duty to help see to the needs - physical and emotional - of these young mothers and children, but that does not replace the need to engage in this pressing battle for society and culture.  We must work in the civic realm to ensure that the laws are not promoting, encouraging, or paying for this killing. 

In Western Civilization the law is always the first line of defense for the vulnerable innocent. The law is a teacher and protector.  Failure to recognize that it was the suspension of these protective laws that brings this widespread evil is failure to recognize the challenge of our times.

Airdate: 10/05/19

EPISODE 097:
Dismissing Human Lives - The Subtle Cancer of Radical Environmentalism

In this episode Commissioner Johnston discusses recent events in the news that involved mass shootings. The popular media, in examining the cause and the issue, neglected to point out a common factor between the two gunmen. While one seemed to be on the “right,” and the other on the “left“, in reality both in their writings admitted to being environmentally concerned and deeply troubled over the issue of overpopulation. They both expressed a pressing need to lower the population and saw their acts as doing so. 

While a handful of outlets did make known these express writings of the killers, the popular media by and large ignored these express statements of motivation and instead focused on other topics. 

Troubling in all of this is the fact that the current push in the American educational system imbuing a sense of social justice regarding the environment, global warming, and overpopulation, has created a culture with the not so subtle message: human beings themselves are a problem, and the number of human beings should be reduced. We saw this exact statement asserted by Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in urging Third World abortions to reduce the population. 

Brian tells his sad experience of having an acquaintance killed by the Unabomber. Again, the popular media avoided any deep analysis of the Unabomber‘s manifesto, but those who did bother to look into it saw that it repeated many of the very common environmental assertions and dire warnings from Al Gore’s books, all of which have been proven wrong. 

Brian, like many other Americans, cares deeply about nature and preserving and protecting the natural resources of our nation, but these sentiments are being twisted by an ideology which sees human beings themselves as mere “creators of carbon dIoxide and enemies of the earth”.

Such an ideology must be exposed and repudiated for the great evil that it can inspire through its malice towards fellow human beings, particularly the most vulnerable. 

Airdate: 09/29/19

EPISODE 096:
Abortion Advocates Fear Language First

In this episode, Brian explores some interviews with abortion advocates in which they admit that the use of language is what scares them the most.

Drawing from a podcast interview from VICE media, abortion advocates publicly admit that the words “prolife” and “Right to Life” are themselves deeply harmful to the “pro-choice” cause. Even the phrase “right to choose” has become less powerful in their vocabulary. They are now adjusting to use “reproductive liberty.” But is an abortion, in anyway, reproductive? Isn’t it in fact the exact opposite of reproduction? The need for abortion advocates to deceive and misrepresent their true goals can only be fulfilled through their manipulation of language.

Commissioner Johnston, whose undergraduate degree was in Comparative Linguistics, explores the power of language and the need for all of us to listen carefully, and weigh the meaning of the words that are being used in this very important battle, a battle that indeed will either cost or save lives.

Airdate: 09/08/19

EPISODE 095:
The Connection of Banning Slavery to Banning Abortion

In this episode Brian outlines the direct legal and historical connection between the banning of slavery and the legal banning of abortion in the United States.

It is critical to understand that it was the British who first ended slavery in the western European world. That happened in 1833 through The Slavery Abolition Act by Parliament, which ended slavery in all UK possessions as well as on the high seas. 

A young Bostonian physician who had graduated from medical school and began practice in 1857 decided to specialize in childbirth.  He went to Edinburgh University, the finest medical school at that time. In 1857, even though the British had ended slavery 30 years earlier, the United States had cemented slavery through the terrible Dred Scott Decision of 1857, as well as attempting to expand slavery through the bloody Kansas-Nebraska Act. 

Senator Douglas, the sponsor of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, said he was ‘personally opposed to slavery’ and he only wanted states to have a “choice” regarding slavery. This directly violated the compromises on slavery that started with the Constitution and lead all the way to the Missouri Compromise, all of which were designed to prevent the growth of slavery. 

1857 was a very dark year for those who wished to end slavery - but back in the UK slavery had already come to an end. Another advancement in the UK was the dramatic advance of scientific medicine. Thirty years earlier, the invention of the modern microscope demonstrated beyond any question that life begins at conception. The legal and medical systems of the UK in that year were also addressing another human injustice - the injustice of ‘slave ownership’. In 1860, the UK Parliament passed a very important law which banned legalized abortion in the UK and its possessions. It was called The Offenses Against the Person Act.

At that time Horatio Storer was studying maternal care and childbirth. He, like other British doctors and lawyers, clearly understood as a medical scientist that this was a living and vulnerable human being from conception. He wrote on the matter and on the current injustices of abortion in America. He understood quite clearly that this was, “my second patient”.  He determined, upon his return to the United States, to ensure that every unborn child was protected under the law. Because such laws dealing with health and safety and various forms of homicide are dealt with on the state level, Storer campaigned for the newly founded American Medical Association to help enact laws in every state. 

Through his concerted efforts this would bring protection to those children, previously slaughtered in abortion and treated as mere ‘human possessions,’ and bring an end to legalized abortion in our nation.  Just as our British ‘cousins’ first protected the obviously human slave and offered new legal protections, abortion laws would protect the obviously human child. 

This campaign was dubbed the Physicians Crusade Against Abortion and it was extremely successful. By 1880, every then state adopted laws outlawing human abortion. And as each subsequent state came into the Union it also adopted laws regarding abortion, recognizing those children as part of the human family.  

Nearly 100 years later in 1973, with the sweeping Roe v. Wade decision, all of those state laws were swept away. The tyrannical Roe v. Wade dictate created abortion clinics in every state and prohibited legal recognition for the child at any time within the womb.

Dr. Horatio R Storer, using medical science and knowledge and the law, was the true founder of the modern pro-life movement.  In helping to ensure that once slaves were recognized as human beings under the law and that unborn children who also had not been protected by the law, that they too would be recognized as human beings and offered protection under the law.

Airdate: 06/15/19

EPISODE 094:
Understanding the Significance of Overturning Roe V. Wade and Doe V. Bolton

In this episode, Brian Johnston reminds us of the actual nature of the Roe versus Wade decision and the companion decision, Doe versus Bolton. Unfortunately, the major media has misrepresented these decisions since they came down on January 22, 1973. 

Brian points out the amazing fact that the average person, when fully informed just how far Roe and Doe reach, does not agree with these Supreme Court findings. What that means is your neighbors, and the average person, even in California, more than seventy percent of Californians do not agree with unlimited abortion on demand.

In Roe v. Wade, Justice Blackmun declared he did not know when life began, and from that point on, the entire decision refuses to recognize the life of the child or the rights of the child at any time within the womb. In Doe v. Bolton, again Justice Blackmun, the author, wrote it as a companion decision to work with Roe and it then institutionalized a new abortion law across the entire nation - overturning the laws of every state.  

Such judicial legislating is in direct violation of the constitutional role of the Supreme Court. 

In Doe, Blackmun does not refer to the life of the mother, but in fact explicitly instructs the abortionist regarding the “health“ of the mother. He defines health as including “familial, psychological, emotional, factors – anything that may impact the well-being of the patient.” He does not use the word “mother” as this would imply there is a child. 

The generous instructions to the attending abortionist are based on the abortionist’s opinion of the well-being of the mother and not on the woman’s immediate opinion.

This is significant in that there are many women who have indeed gotten up from the abortionist table to refuse an abortion. Women can be very torn about the actions at hand. Justice Blackmon is clearly stating it is the abortionist’s decision whether or not to do the abortion. He is situated to ‘guide’ the woman if her psychological ‘alarms are going off’   It is this passage in particular that has drawn great fire from radical feminists, because they believe it is not up to the abortionist, a paternalistic decision-maker, but in their mind, abortion should entirely in the realm of the woman’s decision.

When the average American fully understands the far reach of Roe versus Wade, they do not agree. What that means is, our job is to explain what Roe really does. Our job is not to explain our theology or philosophy or our opinion of when life begins.  We can discuss that later.  If they agree that Roe goes too far, we should accept that wise conclusion.  They are on our side and want a pre-Roe world.  If you demand they accept all of your ideas at once you are pushing away your natural allies.  

Only if they are in a more unusual position of being a judge or actual lawmaker, then extensive philosophy and proposed options to Roe should be examined. In the meantime, if you can get them to understand Roe, they are very likely to disagree with Roe. 

THAT is a win, and the more folks that demand Roe’s overturn the better.  Until Roe is overturned there will be no laws written - so if they are with you, let them know they have some insight, let them know it is good to disagree with Roe.  

Your job in this present moment is to restore the legal right to life.  That can only be done when Roe is overturned. Let them help!!! 

Airdate: 05/25/19

EPISODE 093:
The Light of Day - Abortion Happenings In Our Nation

The right to life is a very specific thing. It is an assertion of a legal principle. It is not an expression of feelings, or of personal theology, but rather an assertion that the duty of government is to protect innocent lives.

The abortion controversy has taken a dramatic turn in 2019 with the adoption of laws in some states and proposals in others, that abortions be legalized throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy, and in the situation where a child is born alive in the course of the abortion that that child be set aside to die. This has caused an alarm both within the pro-abortion camp as well as the pro-life camp. 

The President has proposed in the Senate a measure that would assure that a child born alive in the process of abortion get full protection under the law. Numerous quotes from television and radio broadcast as well as the statements of Governor Cuomo of New York and Governor Northam of Virginia are included in today’s program. 

Our host to Brian Johnston points out that this is a tremendous opportunity for the average person to learn exactly what it is that Roe versus Wade has allowed and the unlimited nature of abortion as it exists under Roe v. Wade. It is because of the soon possible demise of Roe that abortion advocates are seeking these freedoms in the various states. 

Brian reminds the listeners of the real facts of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Under our nation’s Supreme Court abortion regimen the child has no rights whatsoever. The only reference to the child is a brief statement by Justice Blackmun in Roe, “…we don’t know when life begins.“ With that sweeping statement no legal protection is offered to the child in the womb throughout pregnancy. 

In Doe v. Bolton, Blackmun offers complete license to the doctor to perform abortions through any of the trimesters, even later, based not on the mother’s life being in danger, but on a vague description of generic health. “…the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors – physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman’s age – relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.”

Roe v. Wade authorized abortion on demand but the abortion sympathetic media insists on reducing it to a matter of “choice” and misrepresenting the nature of both the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. We now have an opportunity to talk about how abortions are being done, how late they are being done and how offensive they are even to the average person who does not consider themselves to be pro-life. These are living, squirming children, big enough to hold in your arms. Now is the time to communicate just how deadly and how extensive the Roe versus Wade decision is.

Airdate: 05/18/19

EPISODE 092:
The Significance of the Individual

In this episode Brian Johnston looks further into the insidious legislation being put into law around the country - law that allows for late-term abortions including post-term abortions. In California, where the Democrat party is essentially pupeteered by Planned Parenthood, the danger of this law coming to our state is very, very real.

We need to condemn this great evil while it is exposed.  Do not let the opportunity to remind Americans of their own conscience pass you by. 

This episode of Life Matters also explores the upcoming Life Fest Film Festival. Life Fest is dedicated to showcasing films that affirm the intrinsic worth of innocent human life, and the profound significance of each life. Brian touches on the ‘significance of the individual’, a notion imbued in the films of Frank Capra who understood this basic human principal and set it as the focus of so many of his films.

Life Fest Film Festival 2019 will be held at the Raleigh Studios facilities in Hollywood from May 2 to May 5th.

Airdate: 04/29/19

EPISODE 091:
Life Fest Film Festival 2019

This episode of Life Matters explores the upcoming Life Fest Film Festival. In particular, this episode focuses like a laser on one extraordinary film, Unplanned.

Unplanned is the story of Abby Johnson and her escape from the influences of, and employment by Planned Parenthood affiliates of America. Abby had been a nominal Christian and risen to the highest levels of recognition within Planned Parenthood. Her conscience was finally awakened when she was asked to participate in a sonogram-directed abortion.  

Brian includes excerpts from a special interview with star, Ashley Bratcher, who portrays Abby, conducted by Alex Marlow of Breitbart News. 

Brian further explains the nature of Life Fest Film Festival which takes place at Raleigh Studios, Hollywood, California. Raleigh is the original Chaplin studios, which was so instrumental in putting Hollywood on the map. One of the goals of Life Fest is to restore powerful storytelling and dynamic life-affirming films to the cultural milieu. 

Airdate: 04/20/19

EPISODE 090:
California Specific for April 2019

Brian dedicates this episode to specific issues within California in April, 2019. SB-24 is the reintroduction of last year‘s SB-320, a measure which would require every state college and university to distribute the abortion drug RU486. RU486 is not a “morning after pill.”  It is a chemical, an artificial steroid designed to alter a young mother’s body - taken only after she has missed her first two periods. There is clearly a young, growing child in her womb. The first part of the regimen causes the mother’s body to shut down any nutrition going to her uterus. It is designed to literally wither the child within the womb, but may not cause death. The second regimen forces all parts of the child in her uterus to be expelled spontaneously. The woman may not know exactly when that will happen. It is a grotesque and very personal form of abortion. 

The first weekend in April also marks the distribution of a new film, Unplanned, the story of  Abby Johnson’s escape from the clutches of Planned Parenthood. She had been the youngest Planned Parenthood administrator in the corporation’s existence. The film, coincidentally, vividly shows an RU 486 abortion. It is an extremely unpleasant and emotionally devastating portion of the film.

Another measure introduced in Sacramento is Assembly Bill 624, which would require every student identification card in California to include the phone number of sexual and reproductive health counseling lines - that is Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion agencies. It applies to all students in public schools but it also applies to charter, private and religious middle schools and high schools as well as colleges. It is a sweeping mandate on all students in all environments. 

This attitude of super-imposition, even on the voters and concerned Californians who may disagree with government policy, was reflected as well in an alarming declaration of Governor Gavin Newsom. 

The governor, who had said he respected the votes of Californians regarding the death penalty, instead made a declaration that - based on his own power and position - he would defy their decision made at the ballot box.  He single-handedly prohibited any use of the death penalty in California. Thankfully, there is some discussion of bringing such a sweeping act of fiat to the courts as it clearly violates both the principles of democracy and plebiscite as well as the functioning office of the governor.

Airdate: 03/30/19

EPISODE 089:
“Medicare for All” - The Tragedy of Socialized Medicine

Commissioner Johnston discusses the tragedy of socialized medicine and its failure wherever it has been employed. Brian relates personal stories of Canadian healthcare and the healthcare system of the NHS in the UK as well as the similar system in Ireland. 

Professor David Warner, a dear friend and colleague with whom the Commissioner had worked, received an appointment to a professorship in Canada. While there, David Warner was diagnosed with multiple myeloma bone cancer. The Canadian health service did indeed treat him. It did indeed diagnose as well as treat the cancer. 

But David suffered and ultimately succumbed under the extremely common phenomenon of “queuing.” Queuing refers to the wait time between diagnosis, treatment, ongoing tests, and ongoing treatments. The extreme lag time between each procedure increases the likelihood of ineffectual treatment and non-curative care.

The National Health Service in the UK  has a very similar procedure.  The government offers less medicine to more people. Recently, the physicians of the NHS protested the system, stating they were forced to offer third-world care to British patients. 

In spite of the demonstrated failures of socialized medicine there is now a renewed push for “Medicare for all.” Starting with Bernie Sanders, each of the Democratic candidates for president has pledged to expand the Medicare system to just such a vast, sweeping, ineffective level. For the sake of egalitarianism such programs require that no individuals may avail of a private health insurance.

Brian includes an interview with the Heritage Foundation as they summarize the real physical problems of “Medicare for all.”

The reason you want to have insurance is not for the little things - aspirin, colds, flu shots. You want to be insured in case of the potentially catastrophic illness - cancer or other expensive treatments - cancer treatment or other interventions that would personally bankrupt you. The reason you have insurance on your home is not to protect you from a baseball through the window. That’s a relatively inexpensive event. Your house insurance is in case of a cataclysmic event that would otherwise impoverish you. 

So the purpose of insurance is not to give you a little bit of coverage but instead give you necessary protection in the possibility you may need extraordinary interventions.

Airdate: 03/23/19

EPISODE 088:
Spring of 2019 - A Startling Turning-point in the Battle for Life

There has been an amazing change in the right to life debate in the United States. Starting with the actions of the New York State Legislature on January 22, 2019 and continuing through several other states from Vermont, Virginia and New Mexico. Each has introduced late-term and even “post-term” abortion laws.  The push for unlimited abortion is wide open.

The United States Senate voted on the “Born Alive Infant Protection Act” on February 26, 2019. In that vote, 44 Democrats were opposed to protecting a baby after they are born. But that same deliberative body, the United States Senate, voted on an identical piece of legislation protecting children born alive in 2002 and it unanimously passed. At that time all Democrats supported such a common sense view of life. In this Life Matters program we hear from Senator Mitch McConnell and Melissa Ohden, an abortion survivor.  

The government-protected killing of survivors is a new and terrifying ‘necessary element’ of the abortion mentality.  Brian explains that it is the duty of all conscientious individuals to expose this evil. Do not be silent. 

Airdate: 03/02/19

EPISODE 087:
President Trump and Late Term Abortion

We are at a unique moment in the fight for life.  The State of New York and several other states are pushing beyond all sensible bounds and legalizing late-term and even post-birth abortion.  

The vast majority of Americans oppose such abortions.  The deceptive reporting of the abortion issue has camouflaged the fact that late Term abortion - Gosnell type abortion - has been legal under Roe.  

The President has led the way in boldness and clarity.  He has openly exposed and condemned such evil.  It is time for all to openly condemn the great evil of killing these children.  Why? The majority of Americans - even those who call themselves ‘pro-choice’ agree.  This is going far beyond anything they had been told or imagined. 

The task for us, says Brian, is to simply now do what the President has done.  Speak the truth: Openly.  Condemn this great evil while it is exposed.  Do not let this moment pass.  

Do not let the opportunity to remind Americans of their own conscience pass you by. 

Airdate: 02/23/19

EPISODE 086:
The Legalization of Infanticide

Mid-February 2019 saw a dramatic change in the public acknowledgement of the Right to Life.  The State of New York passed a sweeping abortion measure and also struck down a law protecting children who were born alive in the process of abortion.  They legalized infanticide.  Worse, the entire legislature then “celebrated” this as part of feminist liberation. The states of Virginia, Vermont, New Mexico and others also introduced similar legislation.  

As we have noted in previous programs, the precarious state of Roe v. Wade and the likelihood that it will soon be overturned, has caused radical feminists to overreach in their attempts to secure the unlimited right to kill their baby.  

President Trump made a point of reminding Americans of this great evil.  And after presenting a proposal for a new family leave act, in order for parents to bond with their children, the President strongly condemned the infanticide measures.  

He asked Congress to pass the Pain Capable Act that would protect a child from late term abortion.  

Brian discusses the implications and includes an interview with Fr. Frank Pavone who met with Brian at the West Coast gathering for life. 

Airdate: 02/16/19

EPISODE 084-85:
The Attack on Common Sense - Parts I & II

Progressivism has embraced moral and ethical absurdities as somehow 'true,’ even 'Post-birth' abortion is now seriously being put forward as just law in a number of states.   Few people understand the genesis of this widespread thinking, where it came from, or just how deeply-engrained and pervasive it actually is.

Because the abortion issue and all of the ‘right to life' debate emanates from the 'battle of ideas,' Brian examines the actual roots of 'progressivism' and the deadly serious, yet oddly infectious ideas of German philosopher Fredreich Hegel.

In his own words, Peter Singer, the modern progenitor of the idea of 'post-birth abortion,'  explains WHY modern culture is so susceptible to progressivism and 'progressive- Hegelian' thought. Singer admits it is not scientific, though it pretends to be a 'scientific' examination of history and the history that is to come.  Both he and secular philosopher, Brian Magee underscore that progressivism is, at its heart, a religion. Brian Johnston explains that many of our contemporaries, even those who may sit in pews in your church, self-described 'Christians,' in practice have been caught in their minds by the pseudoscience-religious appeal of progressive thinking. They have replaced Christian principles of 'self-evident truths' revealed in nature by the God of nature (Rms 1:20) with the emotionally attractive feelings of Hegelian conjecture.

Most importantly, Americans and Westerners (as this is an idea designed to undermine all of Western culture) need to understand it is PRECISELY Hegelian philosophy that spawned National Socialism (Nazism) and International Socialism (Marxism). Hegel is clear that the government, (der stadt) must be used to 'bring others' to its collective will, even if it may be against their will.  The 'conflict,’ the struggle, the dialectic, 'der Kampf' entails forcing the revolution on those who 'just don't get it ... yet.' 

You are in the battle of ideas. You must be prepared. The battle is on you now.

Airdate: 02/02, 09/19

EPISODE 083: 
The Real Ruth Ginsburg - Radical Feminist

If Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman on the Supreme Court, why is Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG) heralded as the cutting-edge, feminist icon of American jurisprudence? Simple: Political feminism is not about advancing women. It is about advancing ideology.

"There will never be enough women on the Supreme Court until there are nine."~RBG

In this special Life Matters broadcast, Brian Johnston explores the recent film lionizing "RBG", what it really says about society and the Supreme Court, and RBG in particular.

Commissioner Johnston may stun some when he asserts that there is in fact nothing original to Justice Ginsburg's political and legal theory. Even in the 1960's when Ginsburg was working her way through the legal world, her thoughts were not in fact 'unique'. Ginsburg, like many Ivy League graduates of the time, seemed to be expressing 'creative thinking' when in fact they were simply mouthing essential Marxist talking points. In the '60s such statements were not often openly credited to a Marxist world view. That does not alter the content, nor the academic origins of this ideology to 'fundamentally change' the nature of our society.

In 1848, Marx wrote that a woman, in the 'idealized Communist state' of perfection, would no longer be seen by her husband as 'a tool in his means of production.' She was to control and be her own means of production. The natural outflow of this in the case of childbirth, is that she alone was to control how, when, or if a birth were to take place.

Ginsburg is unhappy with the Roe v. Wade decision because she understands - and proclaims in the program - that it created problems going too far at once in striking down even the mildest restrictions on abortion. (In 1973 California's/New York's/ Mass./Colorado's were all liberal abortion laws at the time.) Her preference is a sweeping decision which would give unlimited-abortion rights, the right to treat the child in the womb as disposable chattel, and to grant this right on the basis of gender; or as the title of her 'bio-pic movie suggests, "On the Basis of Sex".

Airdate: 01/19/19

EPISODE 081:
The Incredible Ethical Pressure On Nurses - Parts 1 & 2

There has been a dramatic change in medical ethics, not only allowing medicine to be directed at killing the patient, but in many cases, encouraging and promoting immediate, direct, and intentional lethality. Often nurses are being pressured to be the implementers. Refusal to participate or approve of medical killing can sometimes place a conscientious nurse's employment at risk.

Commissioner Johnston interviews Nancy Valko, R.N. and Zonya Townsend, R.N., regarding the dramatic sea-change that has come to the once noble practice of nursing. Both nurses explain the nature of these pressures and what practicing nurses should do to prepare for these situations.

Although called 'physician aid-in-dying' in many states, in practice the physician is often not present. He or she is merely the prescriber. The poisoning is simply a prescription, it is 'doctor's orders'. It is left to others to ensure the procedure is carried out.

More information on ethical nursing and the current challenges faced in the field can be found at nancyvalco.com and California Nurses for Ethical Standards.

Airdate: 01/05,12/19

EPISODE 080: 
Christmas Is Here And Now

Brian brings a special program discussing the first Christmas and outlines its ongoing significance here and now. 

We are in a spiritual war, and there is deep significance as to why innocent human beings are targeted. There is a reason why that baby in Bethlehem was targeted, and now, why ALL innocent babies are targeted. 

The king of this world is deeply threatened by any baby that might grow up to prove a spiritual threat to his kingdom. 

We need Christ. And we need to walk in Christ in order to be a threat to our enemy, the devil, who is seeking to destroy those whom he wishes to devour. 

Spiritually speaking, all human beings are potentially a threat to the kingdom of darkness, just as all the babies of his kingdom were a potential threat to Herod. 

Let us celebrate Christmas! And let us celebrate and truly walk in what it means for us.

Airdate: 12/22/18

EPISODE 079: 
Voluntary Euthanasia

Together with Nancy Valko, spokesperson for the National Association of Prolife Nurses, Brian discusses the insidious growing trend of voluntary euthanasia and how it is being pushed upon vulnerable individuals. Is being sold as a "good thing" in the news and the media and the copycat effect is real.

The culture of life is being targeted. You and your loved ones are being targeted. Now is the time to take up this battle and fight against the culture of death.

Airdate: 12/08/18

EPISODE 078: 
Getting Older

Brian discusses the importance of not only taking care of your health now but also of educating yourself on the current state of the healthcare system ideals in particular regards to nursing homes and care for those who in a vulnerable state in their lives.

Be aware. It could mean saving your own lives and those of your loved ones.

Airdate: 12/01/18

EPISODE 077: 
Republican Party Principles vs. Democrat Party Principles

Sadly over the last several years, California's Republican Party has grown quiet on the issue of Life and asserting the principles of its own platform.

This has had a dramatic impact on its support and following in the state. But that need not be the case. Brian Johnston explains the founding of the Republican Party and its specific purpose of asserting the core values of the American founding - in particular, the assertion of the 'Right to Life' of slaves and the civic duty to free them through legal means, and to end the practice of slavery through the law.

Reaching back through the 'Whig' party of the 1830's (of which Lincoln was the Illinois leader), the Republican roots and principles have always asserted the firm commitment to a Constitutional foundation.

Many current Republicans do not fully understand their own party or its founding, and when they do so, they fail to stand for these essential elements of a just society. With this failure, they also tend to lose elections.

Airdate: 11/17/18

EPISODE 076: 
Election Movement in the Right To Life 

In this episode of Life Matters Commissioner Johnston examines the aftermath of the 2018 General Election. There are several important principles to be learnt in looking at how candidates addressed the life issues, and in particular those candidates who are willing to stand and declare what they are against - that is to say what the pro-abortion opponent’s actual position is.

The vast majority of Americans do not support unlimited abortion on demand, for any reason or for no reason in particular - this is the actual meaning of “choice” In the 2018 election, although the Democrats did win a majority in House of Representatives, it was substantially smaller than expected. Also, the Republicans increased their position in the United States Senate, opening the door for more Judicial and Administration appointments.

Donald Trump who has become an icon of American politics, and he has done so by directly challenging his opponents and clarifying their dishonesty in framing his position. But by also framing their position he has created an unexpectedly new form of politics. He is the first American president to so directly challenge his own media coverage.

In many ways he has become an media “Colossus,” that is to say, an impressive overarching character on the American political landscape. People either love him or hate him and he personally doesn't mind either way.

When it comes to the pro-life issue the need to clearly declare what the facts are and not be bothered if others are uncomfortable with them is a defining element of why we must explain the real facts of abortion, the real facts of intentionally killing another human being. Whether it be in the womb, or a sick or elderly individual, the intentional killing of another innocent person is the very issue at hand in the right to life debate. Failure to clarify that is simply failure.

In 2018, candidates who were willing to do so found they did retain their pro-life base and added to it. Candidates who are uncomfortable with the conflict tended to not inspire or create any sense of great interest. In California, Congress members Denham, Kim, and Mimi Walters were expected to lose, but by defaulting their opponents they stood strong. This is an ongoing principle in the very real battle of ideas with which we are faced.

Airdate: 11/10/18

EPISODE 075:
The Why of Elections and Specific Candidates

In this final episode covering election season, Brian gives an overview as to why the "Right to Life" is an essential concept when it comes to laws, law making, and the current elections.

The Right to Life presumes an important foundational element to our legal system. It is a statement that the government has certain duties, principally the duty to protect the lives of the governed, and specifically the innocent governed. The 'non-innocent', the miscreant, it has a duty to restrain in its protection of the innocent vulnerable. 

So determination of 'guilt or innocence' is one of its jobs, and government has ascribed that job to the courts. It is important to note that before 1973 it was recognized that human beings were innocent before birth, and that every state in the nation had laws protecting that child. That was up until the Roe v. Wade decision.

Roe did not say that children were 'guilty' and could therefore be killed, it did something even more sinister: the court merely said it didn't think the child was a human being, and therefore ALL of those laws which had been passed in the several states protecting that innocent human life could be dismissed. 

"Roehas no foundation in either law or logic," said Sandra Day O'Connor years later. Interestingly, it appears that the desire to protect the illogic of Roe v. Wade was the motivating factor in the defamation of Justice Kavanaugh. But in so doing, the unsubstantiated assertions, repudiated by even the supposed witnesses, were offered in all seriousness based on a VERY different premise.

"Innocent until proven guilty" was no longer the predicate of this view of law and truth. 'Assertion is guilt' and proving guilt is no longer necessary for some people who wish to be rid of a 'problem' and appear to use law and justice to do so.

This violation of America's essential legal premise was clearly the 'weapon' used against Justice Kavanaugh, as it is also used against other human beings unable to defend themselves.

Brian concludes this episode talking about specific elections in this election year.

Airdate: 11/03/18

EPISODE 074: 
A Single Vote Makes A Difference

Brian reviews some of the many situations where one vote has made a difference. He spends special time reflecting on recent California elections.

As important as voting is, it is meaningless and even dangerous if there is not some understanding of the principles being voted on. We don't vote to simply vote. We vote to implement policy via the people we put in place.

With a special focus on this election cycle, Brian then ticks through the significant races in California. Perhaps the most important are the Congressional seats as these seats may determine Congressional leadership in Washington, DC.

Finally, there is an important emphasis on local elections: Supervisor, City Council, School Board; these are the elections most easily influenced and it is those positions that have great influence on the community. Planned Parenthood regularly targets these lower-level offices.

Airdate: 10/20/18

EPISODE 073: 
The Culture Is Dependent On YOU Voting!

In this edition of Life Matters Commissioner, Johnston builds on the basic premise of what the 'Right to Life"really is. It is not about your opinion or your feelings. It is not about your personal religion. It is about a simple fact often asked in the history of Western Civilization: "Does the law protect the innocent? And if not, why not?"

Brian begins from a rather extraordinary source, the Catholic Catechism (2273). The Catholic Catechism itself declares that this issue is not religious in nature, but is instead the basic element of any civil society... religious predilection is not the debate. A just government will protect those innocent lives that are dependent upon it, or it is not a just government.

Brian also explores several films that underscore this essential premise. One is a Western film, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

Drawing from his experience as an English teacher, Brian explains that movies are about much more than meets the eye. Like all good stories, they actually have an undergirding theme - the theme of Liberty Valance is very clear, and it is not gunfights.

Another new film also gets our attention. Brian interviews John Sullivan, producer of Gosnell. Be sure to get to the theaters opening weekend, Oct 12, 2018. It is an excellent and engaging film and is not your typical 'abortion film.'

Airdate: 10/06/18

EPISODE 072: 
The Civic Responsibility of Fully Participating in Elections

The right to life is a very specific idea that our founding fathers put in the founding documents of our nation. They were reflecting a cultural value they’d inherited through Western Civilization - the idea that human life is significant, that human beings are not merely animals. Therefore, the laws should protect vulnerable human beings from the predations of people who would take advantage of them, including the government.

We are in a battle of ideas. If you do not engage in the issues that are threatening the culture of life, then you risk being taken in this battle. If you casually them aside, or reduce them to mere passing emotions, or personal religious inclinations, you are hurting rather than helping. We want to equip you to help fight the battle. It is a battle over objective facts, and today we want to encourage you to fight by becoming engaged in the election season.

Rabbi Dennis Prager joins us, and underscores the need to accept the civic responsibility of participating in elections. This is true of all people, but in particular for religiously inclined people.

Pastor Rob McCoy also joins us to discuss doing due diligence in getting to know what issues candidates stand for and in understanding the significance of local elections.

Go to NRLC.org to find more information about pro-life candidates.

Airdate: 09/29/18

EPISODE 071:
Understanding the Election “Season”

The right to life, the principle that every individual is unique and that every human life is valuable and should be protected are important concepts that are enshrined in the founding documents of the United States.

Today we will talk about the culture that emanates from those ideas which is important because it is the culture that we’ve inherited as citizens but one that is also under attack. So often we can take these ideals that our culture is rooted in for granted and fail to see that what is inherently ours as human beings, our right to life, can be taken from us if we don’t fight against laws and ideas that fail to protect that right to life.

We experience a variety of seasons throughout our existence: life seasons, natural seasons, holiday seasons, etc, but today we are considering Election Season. Election Day is not the be all, end all of an election. Many people may find themselves overwhelmed with the information thrown at them throughout a campaign. Many are uninformed. Many are disinterested and therefore, many people do not vote and miss the opportunity to help make a difference in society.

We have an election “season” in order to prepare for Election Day. Just as we have holiday seasons, ample time to prepare for the primary holiday, so must we use the election season to prepare to vote on Election Day. It is the time to truly get to know candidates and the policies they stand for, to educate ourselves, and by the mere act of voting, we empower ourselves to make a difference, to make change, to defend our right to life, to protect ourselves, and to stand up for those who can’t protect themselves.

We must equip ourselves to stand up for the right to life during this time and by participating in election season and on Election Day we exercise our civic responsibility and fight for what is right and just.

Airdate: 09/22/18

EPISODE 070:
Interview with Jim Wilson, Author, “Generation”

Brian interviews Jim Wilson, Author, lecturer, Anglican priest, regarding his new work Generation, a novel exploring the deeper issues of the 1960's.

Brian explains how Life Matters explores the ideas of the right to life, that every life has a significance that can not be readily recognized, yet is given by our sheer humanity. "Endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights," was how America's founders put it. But this was a reflection of the ideas which they had inherited up to that moment. They had inherited the values of Western Civilization.

At its heart Western Civ is built on the premise that human beings are not mere 'smart animals', but that we are more, that we are spiritual entities. This assertion lies at the heart of our assertions regarding the nature of mankind, and the moral duty of the law to protect the lives of those who cannot protect themselves.

It is this cultural premise that is under attack at this moment. Our culture is trying to determine if the core values of Western Civ should be retained, or if a 'new order', a tribalism of new cultural norms and control is a 'better way.'

Rev. Wilson discusses the foundation of the Right to Life, and how his novel is actually an exploration of 'what is true'? What is right? What values should we as individuals and we as a society embrace, and why?

Airdate: 09/08/18

EPISODE 069:
Manipulated Suicide

Brian joins Alexandra Snyder of Life Legal Defense Foundation at the State Capitol as they discuss AB 282, a measure to expand assisted suicide marketing in California.

Assisted suicide was legalized in California in 2015 but has been in court challenges, led by Life Legal Defense. On June 15, 2018 an appeals court again removed the stay on the law, and it will apparently remain legal until the case works its way up to the State Supreme Court.

It is therefore legal at the moment for you to ask a doctor for lethal medication in California. What is NOT legal is for third parties, other people to encourage you to kill yourself. If AB 282 becomes law, it will be legal for third-parties, heirs, nursing home staff, anyone else for that matter, to encourage and promote suicide to a vulnerable patient.

The way the measure is written it may also authorize mass-marketing via radio and television. Suicideologists and psychologists strongly warn against ANY positive portrayal of suicide in mass communications as viewers can easily see themselves as eligible candidates and follow those emotions.

This measure greatly expands the societal reach and cultural influence of voluntary euthanasia.

Airdate: 08/22/18

EPISODE 068:
What are the REAL public sentiments regarding abortion?

The facts matter!

In this program Brian is on the other side of the table in his interview with Craig Roberts, host on "Life Line" on SF Bay area's KFAX.

This is a more careful analysis of polls and of the language used by pollsters, NOT in an attempt to discover public opinion, but instead to intentionally form public opinion. This is being done in the summer of 2018 precisely because advocates of abortion on-demand fear the approval by Judge Brett Kavanaugh may pose a threat to abortion-on-demand.

This unconscionable misrepresentation of legal facts, the nature of the Roe decision, and the actual feelings of Americans about abortion needs to be understood. A recent NBC poll on "Roe v. Wade' is contrasted with a contemporaneous Gallup poll that examines when and why abortions are done.

Make sure that you and your friends and family understand what the real abortion situation is in America.

Airdate: 08/11/18

EPISODE 067:
The Truth About China, the Truth About Population

Once China fell to Communist control in the 1940's, a deafening silence was all that could be heard from its people and even its government. Bits and pieces were known of the on-going 'Cultural Revolution'. Mao's decades long, vice-like grip on the lives of millions slowly loosened only to be wrenched from his dying hands by more faceless, less iconic members of the politburo. In the early 1980's the still VERY Communist China slowly allowed foreigners access to its culture and its people.

Steven Mosher was a young Stanford graduate student and one of the first foreigners allowed direct involvement with the people of rural China. His knowledge of the language allowed him an unprecedented and immediate rapport with these oppressed people.

Today he is recognized for his heroic work in revealing the forced-abortion, one-child policy of Communist China. He has gone on to write many books on both China and the deadly myth of 'overpopulation'. He serves as the President of the Population Research Institute. He is recognized as a clarion voice for the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world.

Airdate: 08/04/18

EPISODE 066:
Self-evident Truths and the Laws of Nature with Fr. Frank Pavone

At the 2018 National Right to Life Convention, Brian had the opportunity to speak with Fr. Frank Pavone. Fr. Frank is a Catholic priest who has been in the right-to-life movement for a long time. But, the right to life issue in simply a Catholic issue. But, is the right to life simply a Catholic issue? As Fr. Frank points out, it is not about Catholicism or any other religion for that matter. It is not about our faith. It transcends that.

This battle is a battle for the heart of Western Civilization. Once you understand what Western Civilization is and what it is built on, you will see that this is a battle for the foundational structure of those ideas that have shaped our society.

Airdate: 07/27/18

EPISODE 065:
The Importance of State Laws. The Real Significance of Roe and Doe

Every human being is unique. We are not mere animals. Our founding fathers put it well that human beings did not invent themselves and government did not create human beings. We are created by a Creator and endowed uniquely by that Creator with certain inalienable rights, first and foremost the right to life. It is the government’s duty to protect your right to be alive and all of the rights that then emanate from your life.

We will talk about California today and the need for the state to get ready for the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The California legislature is one of the most radical in the nation as the laws that are being introduced are beyond the pale. Now is the time to discuss these issues, to educate yourself on the laws they are proposing, and to fight for your right to life and the rights of you loved ones.

Airdate: 07/14/18

EPISODE 064:
Danger! Girl Scouts!

Are you surrendering your daughters to an ideological machine promoting abortion? Many Girl Scout troops are actually sponsored by churches!

Brian examines one of the 'nicest' and appealing institutions that has been co-opted by the wrong ideas: The Girl Scouts of America and the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGS).

Anne Saladin of mygirlscoutcouncil.com explores what has happened to the organization in just recent the recent past. She had been a Girl Scout and enjoyed it. It was her Church that re-introduced her to the 'new' Scouts which is now promoting much more than merit badges and cookies. This organization has become one more tool of ideology aiming itself precisely at young, developing, and vulnerable minds.

Airdate: 07/07/18

EPISODE 63
Stop Assisted Suicide!

The right to life is a very specific idea and that idea has created a culture that revolves around the notion that human beings are significant. Each of us has a significance in the life we are given. This is an assertion adopted by the founders of the United States. They coined the phrase, “right to life,” - that every individual is endowed by our Creator with a right to life. This is an inalienable right. The government does not bestow it upon us. The government’s job is to protect this right to be alive and the other rights that emanate from our life, our very existence.

If the wrong ideas, the wrong laws are put into place, lives are taken. Lives are lost. Lives become things that are disposable. The significance of this debate over the protection of lives is very present in our culture and we need to be prepared and educated in order to fight for the right to life.

Assisted suicide is a very real issue in our culture right now. Go to stopassistedsuicide.com to sign a petition to prevent this travesty from overcoming your life and the lives of your vulnerable loved ones.

Check out my book: Death As A Salesman for more information on this issue. And go to NRLC.com for information on how to fight against it and stay tuned for information from the 2018 National Right To Life Convention.

Airdate: 06/30/18

EPISODE 062:
Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer - Cloning w/Dr. David Prentice
 

Today we discuss a practice banned in much of the world but government sponsored in the United States, and particularly in California: the artificial creation of human beings and their routine disposal which sometimes this includes bizarre experimentation. Go to nrlconvention.com. We address not merely in-vitro human 'creation' but altering and 'experimentation' via cloning or Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. Dr. David Prentice explores these procedures and their implications. 

Join Dr. Prentice, our host Brian Johnston, NRLC President Carol Tobias, and pro-life folk from across the nation at the 2018 National Right to Life Convention.

Airdate: 06-16-18

EPISODE 061:
Elections, The War On Women As Mothers, The Breast Cancer Connection

Brian starts by examining policy implications of the top two primary system in elections. California is one of a handful of states that have adopted this system that ignores party affiliations. Elections matter because elected representatives make policy. Policies matter. Laws matter. Laws are merely ideas that are enforced. If you are not paying attention to the world of ideas then you are going to see some terrible ideas FORCED upon you and others that are helpless to resist them.

Brian replays an interview with Dr. Joel Brind (Baruch College, CUNY), the world's leading expert in the abortion-breast cancer connection. The interview is from a previous NRLC convention and Brian reminds folks to make the extra effort, if at all possible, to come the the annual NRLC convention, where they can get an in-depth understanding of all the many aspects of the Right to Life issue.

Airdate: 06-09-18

EPISODE 060:
The Subtle Seduction of Eugenics

Brian explains one of the more subtle and seductive 'ideas' that has wormed its way into contemporary thought: Eugenics.   He gives a quick background to its origins and to the common misunderstanding that eugenics, as a cultural value, was somehow eradicated through the defeat of Nazi Germany.

But before the 'deep dive' and interview with some folks from Iceland, where the gene pool has been 'cleansed of Down Syndrome', he examines the events in Ireland of May 25, 2018. Brian, who's a first generation American from Ireland, had explained in depth the significance of the Irish debate over abortion in earlier broadcasts (hear Podcast 56 and 57). 

During his most recent journey to Ireland, his flight stopped in Iceland, and there he interviewed Icelandic citizens on the eugenic practice of testing for and eliminating individuals with Down Syndrome.

Eugenics is the practice of applying genetic manipulation to human beings. In practice, it usually (as in the case of Iceland) requires the 'culling' or removal of 'inferior' or unwanted progeny.  And that is the question that must be examined, the question that lies at the heart of Western civilization: should human beings be treated as 'things' or is there something unique about the human person which requires of us a deeper examination?

Perhaps most importantly, Brian returns us to understanding the difference between science and 'scientism', the quasi-religious faith in science as a universal moral and ethical guide.

Airdate: 06-02-18 

EPISODE 059:
What To Do If A Candidate Lies!

It's a battle out there. You know that. That doesn't mean you should hide or avoid the battle. In the political world, and the question of whether laws will protect vulnerable live, lives are at stake. 

Don't drop out or shrink back from your responsibility to ensure that the vulnerable are protected. As a citizen it is your responsibility, and substituting emotional feeling-stuff instead of speaking up about your own laws is not facing the reality of the times in which we live.

As in our previous program, Brian uses the very specific election of 2018 to actually examine deeper, ongoing issues that tend to come up in most elections. Failure to understand these deeper issues only ensures that you will be confused about what to do the next time around.

Brian examines the most important race in California and how attempts by 'deep state players,' many of them billionaires from out of state, have been specifically designed to mislead and alienate pro-life voters.   In California's primary system, only the top two go on to the fall ballot. These top two can actually be of one party, greatly limiting the choice of voters in November. In a state like California, if the Republicans should split their vote and the top Republican is prevented from being in the top two, because Republican votes were also siphoned off to other candidates, then two Democrats would be the only choice in the fall - in this case Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco and Mayor Anthony Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, both pro-abortion, leftist Democrats.

A minor assemblyman is getting millions in out-of-state support to declare he is pro-life, even though he avoided the pro-life issue like the plague. Millions are being spent to suck votes away from the committed and solid pro-life candidate John Cox. 

Brian tells how to determine when a candidate is lying to you for their own gain.  The first rule is to look at what their commitments have been. The best indicator of what someone will do, is to look at what they have done.

If they are sorry for their past errors, it is possible to get them to renew commitments, but not to 'say words.' They need to commit to specific policies. John Cox has been a long-time advocate for life.  He has also signed a specific pledge to pro-life policies and to appoint pro-life judges.

Travis Allen's avoidance and even negative votes, as well as his unwillingness to sign a specific pledge to pro-life policies, is an indicator that he is mouthing words in accommodation for the out-of-state players who seek to divide the Republican vote. 

On May 14, 2018 the State Fair Political Practices Commission confirmed that the millions in backing Allen has received (much of it from progressive, pro-abortion billionaire Michael Bloomberg) is designed specifically to ensure Republicans split their vote and aid Villaraigosa. The disclaimer required by the FPPC states it expressly. Republicans are being snoockered into 'belief in Allen' for the express purpose of keeping Republicans from having a candidate on the fall ballot.

This is politics. You must learn how to see it clearly and fight in this very real battle of ideas.

Brian mentions other candidates and legislators that explicitly lied about their positions and showed that then by their votes. Congressman Brian Bilbray misrepresented what he would do in office. Right to Life voters opposed him in the next election, he needed them to win and made the deep mistake of lying to them.

Assemblyman Rocky Chavez is another candidate that turned-coat upon being in office. He is now opposed by those whom he turned on.

Politics is about digging deep into the battle of ideas, finding the truth, and fighting for the truth, especially on life, because life matters.  The facts are indeed on our side, and facts are terrible things to waste!

Airdate: 05-26-18 

EPISODE 058:
Understanding Words and Politics - The Battle of Ideas
 

Words and politics - how can you discern?

Brian takes a deep dive into the actual principles at stake in the coming election by examining how they are always at stake in ALL elections. If you understand that you are better prepared to think this election and all elections through.

California geography makes California of great importance. Since at least the 1950’s, the California Governorship has impacted the whole country. Governor Earl Warren went on to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. But even if they don't go on to President, as Ronald Reagan did, the Governor of this state plays  a huge part of influencing the nation.

So geography matters. If you move to Minnesota in the summer, don't complain about the harsh storms of the winter, if you don't understand your surroundings, your geography.

California is subject to harsh political storms because of its huge importance. Prepare to face the political storms and understand them. Don't just curse the 'weather you don't understand.'  Rise above it. Prepare for it. Politics is the battle of ideas.

John Cox is a millionaire outsider who wants to change the culture of California politics and can't be bought (which is the normal way people succeed in politics... they are bought).

In the California primary if the Republican vote is split and the leading Republican is not in the top two, there will be NO Republican on the fall ballot.

Travis Allen is a termed-out Assemblyman (Assembly district is 1/80th of the state). He bought the Tea Party list but is now lying to them to keep them on board his campaign. He found out the hard way that Tea Party folk are very prolife, not just into taxes like him. 

He is always asked by them if he is prolife, so Travis proclaims that he is, and that he has always been. But, he had the highest 'avoidance record' of any Republican in the state.  He made a point of abstaining on the issue whenever it came to his desk.  It was only when he knew he had to change in his last session that he gave a few votes, but not many.

He refuses still to sign the prolife pledge signed by Cox and Trump.  He is backed by financial backers that 'buy his support from other groups. California Prolife does not sell its support.

Some swamp powers want to split the vote so there is NO Republican on the fall ballot, or if there is a Republican, they want one that can be bought. It's how that swamp works.

John Cox, like Donald Trump, is a millionaire pro-lifer who wants to change things and can't be bought. Travis Allen uses words to seduce voters but won't make the very specific commitments that some view as controversial - being truly prolife.

Even worse, he is actually draining votes from the lead Republican and may actually keep Republicans off the fall governor ballot.

Once you dig down on the facts - and through the blizzard - the facts speak. And the facts are on the side of life.

Airdate: 05-19-18

EPISODE 057:
Ireland: Last Outpost of Civilization - Part 2

 

Under Ireland's 8th Amendment, the laws of that country re-enforce the legal right to life for all vulnerable human beings, particularly those in the womb. 

But on May 25th, 2018, a national plebiscite will be held. It is being pushed by all of the political parties that control the Dublin government.

A pro-abortion media and a political climate that favors European progressivism has placed Ireland as one of the final holdouts against the legalized dismissal of human lives. 

Brian explains how this ‘deeper battle’ against a life-dismissing, government-centric ideology has been reflected in many poignant ‘stories’.  Stories are the transmission tools of culture. 

C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and many others tell of how quiet love of life more accurately carries Western values than obedience to technology. Christianity reminds followers to hold this in mind in upholding secular leaders: “Pray for kings and all who are in authority that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence”. ( 1 Tim. 2:2)  In Tolkien terms, the life of the shire is far preferable to the “progressive”, ongoing, technological advances of Mordor. Civilization is cherished and embraced in the quiet shire. It is actually destroyed by “advances” that have no moral compass.  Technological advancement is not the same as civilization.

Airdate: 05-12-18 

EPISODE 056:
Ireland: Last Outpost of Civilization - Part 1
 

Abortion-On-Demand is now routine throughout all of Europe and in most of Western civilization. One of the last holdouts is the nation of Ireland. Under Ireland's 8th Amendment, the laws of that country re-enforce the legal right to life for all vulnerable human beings, particularly those in the womb. 

But on May 25th, 2018, a national plebiscite will be held. It is being pushed by all of the political parties that control the Dublin government.

A pro-abortion media and a political climate that favors European progressivism has placed Ireland as one of the final holdouts against the legalized dismissal of human lives. 

Ireland is the youngest, most prosperous per capita country in the European Union. It has the lowest death rate and the highest birth rate of that entire greying continent. 

Brian Johnston gives background on the laws protecting innocent lives in Ireland and the political efforts to bring those to an end. He includes a special interview with Peadar Tóibín, member of the Irish Dáil, and explains the political dilemma facing the Irish people at this crucial moment in history. 

You are living through this very moment in history. The same challenge that is facing the Irish is facing you.

Airdate: 05-05-18

EPISODE 055:
Medical Ethics with Wayne Cockfield

The right to life isn’t just about the tragedy of abortion, which needs to come to an end.  It’s about restoring the right to life for all individuals who are vulnerable.

Today we talk again with Wayne Cockfield.   He is the Vice President for Medical Ethics for the National Right to Life Committee.  We will discuss how medical ethics is an essential part of the right to life and also Wayne’s experience in receiving ethical care, but also his being at risk of receiving unethical care for life circumstances that left him very vulnerable.  

The purpose of medicine is to care for the vulnerable.  However, in today’s society, medicine, changed by law, has given way to a “freedom” of doctors to kill vulnerable patients they deem unworthy or unnecessary to be alive.  How frightening that the power to decide over life or death is in the hands of those meant to treat people in need.

You must be aware, be prepared, and be equipped to care for you and your loved ones in this battle.

Airdate: 04-28-18

EPISODE 054:
The Martian - The Value of A Single Human Life

Western civilization is unique in that it recognizes the value of the human person, and the significance of a single human life.

In this edition of Life Matters, Brian examines the cultural influence of that basic premise and explorers a recent Hollywood film: The Martian. In The Martian, an exploration journey to Mars is dramatically altered and the significance of a single life becomes the central concern of a distant crew, an overextended NASA, the nation, and even the world. 

A similar story of risking the lives of others to save one individual's life occurs frequently in battle, but it is Western culture that most poignantly embraces the ‘no man left behind’ philosophy.  

Brian relates the powerful nature of this life protecting ethic via a true story. During World War II, through the unique methods of submarines in recovering downed pilots, all the lives of the subs crew are put at risk. The Japanese culture and the soldiers attempting to kill the airman and sink the sub found this so foreign and foolish and extraordinarily absurd when compared to their value system. 

There are many different cultures that have different cultural values. What makes Western civilization unique is that it asserts that individual human lives have value in and of themselves. 

In Western Civ’s clearest iteration, the American founding, the value of human lives is beyond measure and it is the first duty of government to protect the uniqueness and the rights of every individual life.

You need to work at this moment in history to ensure the survival of Western Civilization.  It is at immediate risk. You need to fight to preserve the right to life. 

Airdate: 04-14-18

EPISODE 053:
Dismemberment Abortion & Dehydration with Wayne Cockfield

Life Matters interviews Wayne Cockfield of South Carolina.  He is the Vice President for Medical Ethics for the National Right to Life Committee.

Wayne recently testified in the South Carolina legislature regarding the ban of dismemberment abortions.

We recommend if you have very young children you may not want them to hear this as this discussion on the importance of the dismemberment abortion ban does bring the focus onto what actually happens in the abortion.

Be ready for a surprise turn about seven minutes in, because Wayne Cockfield makes this whole debate regarding abortion procedures very, very real and in his own person he humanizes the nature of the abortion dismemberment debate.

Later in the program Wayne talks about his experience losing his legs in Vietnam and how dehydration was actually used to save his life. He knows how difficult and painful dehydration is and how today, medicine is using dehydration not to save lives, but to take them.

Airdate: 04-07-18

EPISODE 052:
Carol Tobias, President of the NRLC

Brian interviews Carol Tobias, President of National Right to Life Committee. 

Carol discusses the rapid implementation of euthanasia in Canada.

She also outlines the year ahead for Prolifers in the United States.

Airdate: 03-31-18

EPISODE 051:
Understanding The Civic Process with Karen Cross,
Political Director for the National Right to Life Committee

In this edition of Life Matters Brian interviews Karen Cross, Political Director for the National Right to Life Committee.

Karen explains the importance of pro-life individuals understanding the civic process and how to elect lawmakers who will vote to protect innocent lives. She explains her experience in West Virginia in trying to pass pro-life legislation and being thwarted by a pro-abortion committee chair.

After deciding to find a candidate to replace that individual, not only were they successful in replacing the pro-abortion legislator but they were then able to pass the Woman's Right to Know Bill in West Virginia.

Karen explains how pro-life legislation like the Hyde Amendment have saved millions of lives; millions of human beings are alive today because of the Hyde restriction on government funding of abortion.

Karen then changes emphasis and explains how well-meaning pro-life people can actually work against their own interests if they don't understand the need to unite behind a winning candidate.

Airdate: 03-24-18

EPISODE 050:
Heroes Of The Right To Life Movement –
Dr. Bernard Nathanson And Dr. John Willke

Since the early 70s, Dr. John Willke and his wife Barbara were significant in publishing a handbook on abortion and abortion questions and answers; two books that went into multiple editions around the world and provided the pro-life movement with clear and concise facts as to what really happens in abortion and the cost to both lives and cultural values.

Dr. Willke went on to become president of the National Right to Life Committee for many years the 1980s and early 90s.

The second part of the program Brian dedicates to a pro-life convert, Dr. Bernard Nathanson who had nearly the opposite beginnings. He began as an abortion advocate and was one of the principal founders of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Dr. Nathanson personally oversaw more than 75,000 human abortions, acts which he came to deeply regret.

On one floor of a hospital he would fervently work to save the life of a child with a disability and on another floor of the same hospital a perfectly healthy child would be killed for no reason whatsoever in the act of abortion. The dichotomy was too much for Dr. Nathanson and he had to reconcile himself to the fact that human abortion is an intrinsic evil. It violates the very nature of medicine. Thus, his conversion to the pro-life cause came about.
 

Interviews with both Dr. Willke and Dr. Nathanson explain the traumatic years of the 70s and 80s as America has wrestled with the divisive issue of human abortion.

Airdate: 03-17-18

EPISODE 049:
Dr. Mildred Jefferson, MD

In 1973, the laws of all 50 states were overturned; laws that had protected the children in the womb, laws that carefully outlined what a doctor should and should not do. The impact of that decision has been incredible. The significance for your culture, the significance to the right to life, is quite extraordinary and unless you look at it you won't understand the dramatic changes that have faced our society and the culture in which you live. It is you that can bring about change when you apply yourself to restoring the right to life. 

Today's program is dedicated to an old friend of the right to life movement, Dr. Mildred Jefferson, MD. Dr. Jefferson was the first black woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School. She was a central part of the founding of the National Right to Life Committee in 1973.

I served on the board of the National Right to Life Committee as a delegate from California during the late 80s, early 90s.  Dr. Jefferson, who had served on the board in the 70s, returned again representing Massachusetts and during that time made a point of befriending me and that is always very humbling. For someone whom you respect and admire, to make a point of befriending you, it really opens you up to to who they are.

Mildred, as a person, was an extraordinary woman. You're going to hear some quotes from her that will shed some light as to what the right to life is and what the role of the doctor is.  

The appropriate role of the physician is an essential element in what has made Western Civilization. Western civilization is known for asserting, respecting, and protecting the innocent and vulnerable. Dr Jefferson is a hero of our movement and all that it stands for. 

Airdate: 03-10-18

EPISODE 048:
The Real Push for Medical Killing Is On Us

In today’s program Brian will speak with Dr. Mark Hoffman, PhD who is a clinical psychologist and chairman for the Stop Assisted Suicide Coalition.  You can find out more information at stopassistedsuicide.com

Many of you know that I've been involved in the assisted suicide battle for many years starting with Kevorkian, but also with Derek Humphry the founder of the Hemlock Society who came here specifically to get this nation to embrace euthanasia and assisted suicide.

I had many interviews with Mr. Humphry and I wrote a book about it called, Death As A Salesman: What's Wrong with Assisted Suicide because that's what this is.  This is the selling of death. Californians are now getting ready in the legislature to legalize the promotion and essentially, selling of suicide. That's Assembly Bill 282 which we will discuss in today’s program.

You can go to stopassistedsuicide.com to find out more and to download a petition. This petition is applicable across the nation and we will get it to legislators in your particular state. But, here in California even though assisted suicide has been legalized it's not yet legal to promote it to people. You will see in the weasel language used by advocates of death the real goal is to get rid of people that they don't want to have around anymore and really it's the people who are kind of “lingering” that really bother them. 

Assisted suicide isn't designed for people that we care for; it’s actually designed for people we no longer wish to care for. 

Airdate: 03-03-18

EPISODE 047:
The Startling Facts About RU486

Today we are talking about an insidious drug - RU486.

We're not talking about the morning after pill. The morning after pill has been marketed as kind of a backup contraception. It can be an abortifacient if conception has taken place, but primarily the morning after pill is designed to prevent conception so it's only taken when sex has already happened or shortly thereafter. RU486 is NOT contraceptive in nature. RU486 is only taken when a woman is pregnant. In fact, it can only be taken after the child is somewhat developed. The child has to be at least six or seven weeks old and doctors will insist that a woman be further along in her pregnancy in order for this drug to really kill the baby. 

A lot of abortionists refer to use of RU486 as medical abortion and that's a little bit ironic because abortions that are done by a doctor would be medical. What they're trying to imply is a distinction between the use of this drug RU486 as a medicine and surgical abortion. But, as you can tell in the language game, it's misleading to call RU486 a medical abortion. It really should be called chemical abortion because this is not medicinal. RU486 is a very powerful steroid. It's a chemical that attacks the mother's body first and after doing so then the child dies in the womb because the child doesn't get nutrition from the mother anymore. This is designed to adversely affect women with the goal of killing that child in the womb. 

Dr. Anthony Levatino is a former abortionist and we’ll hear him tell his story and explain how the chemicals work step by step. 

We’ll also hear testimony of Kaye, a woman who took these pills to end her pregnancy and experienced the horrific nature of these chemical abortions. It is very important to understand the facts regarding these chemical abortions. Go to Abortionpillrisks.com to find out more about RU486 and the dangers of this drug.

Airdate: 02-17-18

EPISODE 046:

Ronald Reagan, Life Advocate

Brian outlines an overview of Ronald Reagan and his stalwart commitment to life. 

Ronald Reagan, the 40th President of the United States, was the only president to publish a book while in office, Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation.

Numerous quotes and portions of Reagan speeches punctuate Brian's commentary on the Reagan years. These incisive stories on adoption, the need to stop abortion, and the political challenge of addressing law as both Governor and President are instructive and inspiring.

Brian also retells the story of being befriended by Judge William Clark, Justice of the California High Court, National Security Advisor, Secretary of the Interior and many other important, yet less vaunted roles.   Judge Clark was the man that Reagan's official biographer considered the 'one individual spiritually closest to Ronald Reagan.'

"... there is purpose and worth to each and every life. " - From Ronald Reagan's tombstone.

Airdate: 02-10-18

EPISODE 045:

Cultural Values with Joe Langfeld of Human Life Alliance
 

Brian Johnston discusses how to impact our culture with the message of life. He’s joined by Joe Langfeld of Human Life Alliance.

Human Life Alliance provides excellent cultural impact communication tools for people everywhere to use where they see fit.

It’s very good to have spoken to Joe about culture and how Human Life Alliance is addressing the culture and communicating in an image inclined world of memes. What an excellent resource they are. It's important to understand the nature of culture. Brian lives on the banks of the Sacramento River. It's the largest river in the state of California. Where the Sacramento river is joined by the American, at the confluence of those two rivers, is where the town of Sacramento was founded. That's because it was the farthest inland you could actually come up from the sea, through the bay, and come inland with a seagoing ship to Old Sacramento.

Culture is a lot like a river. Culture flows. It is the result of contributing factors and streams that are upstream. Little rivulets go to little rivers, to bigger rivers.

Creeks, tributaries contribute to a larger river and that's the case in your culture.

These rivulet sometimes are contaminated. But sometimes they're very, very pure and I want you to understand that cultures are also that way. There are things in our culture that aren't good for you and you know that.

But the most important aspect of this stream, this river we live by and where we draw water from - our culture, is the fact that it has banks. That's what defines the river. Now at times it may overflow its banks but those banks will, once the waters have receded, reemerge. The banks of the river define and delimit the river.

The banks for a culture are the laws of a culture. In 1973, the Supreme Court threw out the laws regarding abortion. Every state in the nation had protective laws for those babies but the Supreme Court threw them all out. The laws are critically important. Laws define your culture.

If you care about human beings and the cultural values we want to establish to protect those who are the seemingly insignificant - if you know that they are indeed significant, then you need to pay attention to the laws. The laws are there to help protect the flow of culture, to make sure that it doesn't over run its banks and destroy people and lives and property. That's really what happens when laws are broken. That's what happens literally here in Sacramento if these levees break or are overtopped. It brings great harm. So it is true with our laws. Our laws are there to protect and this being an election year, I want to remind you - wherever you are in the nation to go to: nrlc.org because National Right to Life pays attention to these laws on the federal, on the state and on the local level. Here you can find your state's affiliate. It is important because it allows you to be involved in building up the banks of our culture, building up the levees, building up the protective nature of what's flowing through our lives so that people are not harmed. We have to pay attention to the laws. We have to pay attention to politics.

You may not believe it but, just a handful of votes turns many elections and that is much more common on the local level from city council or supervisors in the county to the school boards. Planned Parenthood targets school boards. Very often it's a school district’s policies that determine whether they give access to the children.

So it is very important in this election year to get involved with National Right to Life to make sure that the protections that need to be in place for our culture and the way to do that is to understand the need for good and just laws and understand your need for civic involvement. I mentioned the school board because if you get involved in local school boards and find out who the pro-life candidates are, who wins sometimes by 5 or 10 votes, are some of the smallest jurisdiction in your state. Everyone who votes for pro-lifeschool board members is going to vote for a pro-life city council member and anyone who votes for those two is going to vote for the pro life County Supervisor and for the pro-life State Assembly and State Senate and for the pro-life candidate for Congress and pro-life candidate for governor and yes for the pro-life federal offices all the way to the president. So by getting involved in helping your community be aware of the cultural war and the cultural values and being aware that they can make a difference where they are, that the laws are important, the laws are the banks of the cultural river. You can make a difference right where you are go to nrlc.org.

Airdate: 02-03-18

EPISODE 044:

California Senator, Mike Morrell (R)

So much of what goes on in our culture is influenced by ideas, by the ideas that you have about those things, about the words that are used to express the idea and sometimes those words are intentionally misleading. They're meant to mislead you and to mislead your loved ones. 

In this episode of Life Matters we're going to talk about the legislature and the fact that laws are made by people that you elect every two years.  That's when you get a chance to hire someone to make laws for you.  If you don't pay attention to the work they're doing for you, to the laws that they're proposing, well, that's your responsibility to get rid of someone when they consistently make bad laws.  It's a great gift that we live in one of the greatest nations on earth because you have the ability to influence your own laws and you'll be held responsible for that.  You can't point your fingers at others.  You're going to have to take up that burden and pay attention to the ideas and the battle of ideas in which were in.

We're going to join Senator Mike Morrell an old friend of the pro-life movement and we'll talk about some of the things that you can do.  One of the things that Senator Morrell brings up is the issue of government finance of the abortion industry. There are many pro-lifers that don't understand that the abortion movement is actually government-financed. While pro-abortion and pro-choice advocates will use language like “hands off my body,” or “Get the government out of abortion.”  In reality, it is the government that's promoting abortion, promoting the idea that abortion is a good thing. Planned Parenthood gets millions of dollars to promote these ideas but also to perform the abortion and to advertise to young, pregnant women.  That's government money, that's your money being used.  If the government were to pull out of the abortion industry in many ways it would wither on the vine. It would dry up. 

That's your tax money.  You’ve got to know about that and you’ve got to demand from your legislators that your money not go into this industry. Go to CaliforniaProLife.org and find out more about getting the government out of the abortion industry. We also want to give you a heads up: this being an election year, this is a year you can do something about this but you need to plan now to make sure that you find out the resources you can use in your community to get involved.  School board races are very important. It's the school boards that can release kids secretly for abortions.  You need to elect school board members who are going to say, “No. We're not going to release these children without parental consent to Planned Parenthood.”  The only way to do that is to elect good pro-life school board members. Do that this year. Get involved.  We’ll give you the tools. Go to CaliforniaProLife.org and find out how you can change your community.

Airdate: 01-21-18

EPISODE 043:

John Cox (R): 2018 California Gubernatorial Candidate

Life Matters interviews John Cox, Candidate for California Governor - the only ProLife candidate for California governor endorsed by the California ProLife Council PAC.

Brian interviews Mr. Cox by phone and they discuss one of the candidate’s core values: the importance and joy that comes from personal responsibility, the abortion issue, the position of both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, the need to drain the Sacramento swamp, and the many things that the average Californian can do to dramatically change our culture right now, right where they are.

This is an exciting and important Life Matters broadcast that is paid for by the California Prolife Council PAC.

Airdate: 01-11-18

EPISODE 042:

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God

The battle of ideas is for your mind and the minds of your loved ones. If you're not on guard and thinking through the ideas that have been placed there by the popular media and maybe even by friends who are misinformed, then you can bring great harm to yourself and others and to society itself.

Laws are just ideas that are enforced. So this battle of ideas is more than just a metaphor because what we're talking about is human lives. The right to life is about restoring legal protection for human beings. That was taken away in 1973 and it's getting worse. It's not just human babies in the womb. Now it's the elderly sick. It's those who are seriously ill. And the best answer is suggested to be, of course, to kill them “with compassion”.

Assisted suicide and other forms of euthanasia are now being practiced in the United States. If you don't understand this battle of ideas you will succumb to this battle. And you won't be able to protect those that you love because the laws won't protect them. So I'm going to talk today about a very important issue in this battle, about our laws, and how our laws are made. 

This episode is called “The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God.” This is an exciting episode for me. Our program is heard on many Christian stations so I'm particularly excited about explaining and exploring the foundational elements in our society.  What was it that our founders had in mind when they talked about the laws of nature and of nature's God?

Let me explain why we're going to go through this, because I have met many Christian believers who actually don't fully comprehend the details of what America’s founders did and how they offered us a Biblical worldview at our national founding. They did not insist that a particular theology was going to be the basis of our laws and if you look at who are founders were, each and every one of them and every one of those colonies actually had a different Christian tradition.  They had already had some conflict regarding that - which particular theology would guide one's laws.  

They had come from the Old World where continental Europe and yes, even England, had some serious - literally bloodbaths - over particular nuances of theology in the law. They did not want that and yet somehow, they were able to offer us a Biblical worldview. How did they do that? It's really amazing. It's critical that you understand this. And the reason is that many Christians don't believe in the laws of nature - they don't believe in natural law! That’s a big mistake and what it indicates to me is that they don't understand the idea. They're confusing ideas.  And so they can't get it right.  

They're confusing it - the laws of nature and of Nature's God - natural law with the laws of the so-called law of natural selection. It’s quite different but that's what they think it is.  They think it's the same as the law of the jungle - the survival of the fittest - lex talionis, where natural inclinations determine what laws should be.  Only the strong survive, etc.  but that particular premise, the so called laws of natural selection- that's the opposite of what the Founders talked about in natural law. Natural law refers to viewing nature and the nature of human beings as uniquely ordered and that's actually a tradition in Western Civilization - the idea that there's something special about human beings. 

Later in the program, we’ll be joined by actor John Demakas who does an excellent job in his reading Scriptures.  I'm going to explain to you if you're a Christian, and even if you're not a Christian, why the laws of nature and of nature's God is very much reflected in the Scriptures as the premise on which we should make laws.  It’s not according to my theology, not according to your theology, but according to the laws of nature that are objectively revealed. These are self-evident truths that are objectively seen and can be understood by pointing them out, rather than saying, “I believe it, you've gotta believe it”

If you think you can just make the laws of your state or nation based on your theology and you're going to put your theology into the law, then you're just acting like American Talabani. You must be able to demonstrate what the good and just law should be.

EPISODE 041:

Baby Organ Selling + Gaining Ground From Local Level of Government on Up

In this edition of Life Matters, Brian Johnston interviews Albin Rhomberg, a board member of the Center for Medical Progress. They discuss the exciting news that the Orange County, California, District Attorney has taken legal action and shut down DaVinci Biologics, an international marketer of human baby body parts.

The significance of this action has reverberating consequences, not just for the baby-body parts industry, but for the pro-life movement all the way down to your local level.

Local elected representatives can and will take action if they are encouraged by local pro-life citizens.  The role of pro-life individuals is to function as citizens and ensure that their local, state, and federal laws protect the lives of those who cannot protect themselves.

Airdate: 12-16-17

EPISODE 040:

Why Do Some Christians Hesitate to Defend the Lives of Others?
Interview with Hon. Bill Redmond, Congressman (Ret.)
 

You know many Christian stations run this program and while we focus on the right to life as a very clear and non-sectarian commitment to the founding principles of this nation, it's actually a commitment to the founding principles, if you will, of Western civilization.

Western Civilization is unique and America is the distillation of the ideals of Western Civilization. That's what happened in 1776. Our Founders took the best ideals of civilization and assertively placed them as their Foundation. There's a Common thread through Western Civilization about the nature of man. He is extraordinary.

After the the fall of the Greek culture and its inheritance by the Roman culture, the rule of law and protection of the innocent continued to be affirmed. This thread was reaffirmed by Christianity as Christianity became the dominant cultural influence. The Hippocratic Oath had spelled out the importance of protecting vulnerable lives, but in other aspects of Western Civilization we see reverberating throughout its history a message- and that is the unique nature of the human person. There's something unique about the human person and that's always been a guidestar for Western Civilization.

If you have other questions about that premise, go to the podcast site and go to the program on Western civilization and why the Hippocratic Oath has been recognized by anthropologists as the dividing line - as the beginning point of Western Civilization. This was specifically because it meant that those who cared for the most vulnerable would care for, but never kill them.  Primitive and savage cultures before this lived under the law of the jungle, the lex talionis, that freely allowed such killings

Under Hippocrates code, those who cared for the most vulnerable human beings swore they would never kill that vulnerable human being because there's something extraordinary about even the most ‘limited’ human life.

Again this ‘rule’ is more often demonstrated and its breaking as Shakespeare said, but that truth has echoed throughout human history, particularly in western civilization.

So on today's program again, because we're aired on many Christian stations, we're going to get into a little bit of Christian theology for the specific reason that you may go to a Christian church and be appalled that people from your church don't understand or support the right-to-life issue.

It can be surprising there's a lot of people, who even though they are Christians and involved in Christianity, it's very clear one of the premises of Christianity is - that you and I are made in the image of God. So not only is there something unique about every human being, but God has endowed us with these unique rights. For Christians to not get that is appalling.

Today’s program comes from a trip I took to Albuquerque, New Mexico. We visit with Congressman Bill Redmond.  While he has served in Congress, he is now very active in the Christian Community in Albuquerque.  I think it's very enlightening  - again in the right to life we approach in a non-sectarian matter because our founders said it is according to the laws of nature and of Nature's God and so they don't go further than that  - but Christians do!! Christians say they have a relationship with Nature's God!!! And so Christians more than anyone else should be able to explain why the right to life is important and it really is disappointing when you find fellow Christians who can't or won’t stand for the vulnerable innocent. Bill Redmond takes a shot at explaining why that is.

Airdate: 12-02-17

EPISODE 039:

Nursing Home Patient Advocacy

In this edition of Life Matters, Brian Johnston interviews Joyce Unangst, a paraplegic volunteer and activist.

Joyce has been involved for many years in supporting those who cannot defend themselves in a long-term care setting.

Brian joins Joyce at a local nursing home in the Sacramento County area. Joyce describes the actual life within a nursing home, the abandonment of many individuals, and family members assuming that professional care, paid by the state or insurance, is adequate. But, that care is overworked and often very unprofessional. Institutionalized neglect and abuse has become rampant in America and Joyce explains what you can do about it.

Airdate: 11-18-17

EPISODE 038:

The Ideals of Western Civilization

So in the broadest sense, Western Civilization is actually dependent upon a view of the human person, that there's something extraordinary about the human person and therefore, the human person should be respected in a certain way.  We see that in the Hippocratic Oath, very specifically the most vulnerable human persons, when at their weakest, should actually be protected. That's the opposite of the law of the jungle. That's the opposite of savage civilizations. That's the opposite of many civilizations that give the powerful absolute authority.

Western Civilization started it with the Hippocratic Oath. The Judeo-Christian model reflecting the teachings of Scriptures confirm that and affirm that man is made in the image of God. The value system, therefore, that came out of the Greco-Roman Judeo-christian model continued on. The Hippocratic Oath was embraced by the Romans as well and then when Roman culture was imbued with Christianity, they continued to honor the Hippocratic Oath. The value of the human person continued to be affirmed and in the European tradition that emanated out of England in 1215, it was declared that your values don't come from the king.  And the divine right of kings was brought into question by the Magna Carta and the 39th Chapter the Magna Carta it was clearly codified. It was written down that no one should be deprived of their life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Of course, that was in Latin but that principle is very much at the heart of the American system.

In the American view of the human person we know that the right to life was established by the founders as a primordial right - a right that does not come from the king or the government, that it's the human person that is special and because of the value of human life government derives its just powers from the value of human lives and not the other way around. So the right to life is the finest expression and defending the right to life of the vulnerable is the finest expression of Western Civilization.

Now to be honest, it's most often been demonstrated as a rule by its breaking. We’ve seen it throughout history and even recent history - in wartime, if soldiers intentionally kill innocent people. For example in My Lai in Vietnam, well unfortunately, they were killing the innocent and they had to be brought to trial and that's the case in Western Civilization.

What defines us from other civilizations is how we view those who are vulnerable and dependent. Will we protect those who are vulnerable and in need? That's the issue. Will the law protect lives of the innocent? And that's where the right to life is at the very foundation of Western Civilization.

Airdate: 11-11-17

Music for this episode was provided by Borrtex via freemusicarchive.org using a Creative Commons license:
"Passion"
"Animals"
"Human"

EPISODE 037:

When Emotions Affect Decision Making & The PowerOf7 App

While Life Matters focuses on the battlefield of ideas, something that often trumps ideas and influences many people’s decisions, are emotions.

Emotions predate our consideration of ideas. As infants, emotions dominate our experience of, and understanding of, the world around us. 

Dr. James Dobson once wrote a book called “Emotions: Can You Trust Them?”  Emotions are often indicators. They can indicate something to us about life or our circumstances, but they are not always the best guide for making important decisions.

Images of an unborn child can carry powerful emotion and that’s good news for us in the pro-life movement. The journal Neuromarketing has examined the use of a child’s image in marketing because it universally draws on the emotions of the viewer. Not unlike images of a small animal, these images draw emotions of compassion and protection. That’s good news for us.

But, if that commitment to protecting that child is only based on the emotions surrounding that cute pre-born child, then that pro-life education is incomplete, because killing that unborn child is not wrong because that child is "cute,” killing him or her is wrong because that’s a vulnerable human being. On the other end of the spectrum, when someone is older or incapacitated by serious illness, the decisions we make based on our emotions can be very dangerous if we permit, for emotional reasons, the killing of a vulnerable person just in order to be free of the emotions we feel at at the moment.

Emotions surrounding illness and terminal conditions are very, very powerful. Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross outlined them in her book on the five stages of grief.  These were clarified in her book, “On Death and Dying” (1969). It is a phenomenon that all of us will face. But if we surrender to the emotions and are willing to kill either ourselves or a vulnerable person because of the emotions out of the desire to escape those emotions, we are engaging in a most heinous and reprehensible act. You’re killing a fellow human on the basis of emotions.

The resources that are available for physical pain, Kübler-Ross points out we will often need to help sdeal with the emotional pain, but the rewards of caring for that person instead, are wonderful. She indicates that that is the reason FOR the emotions, to draw people DEEPER into life and help them accept their mortality in a mature way.

Like the foxhole conversion, an individual that is finally willing to face and accept their mortality is transformed in a remarkable way. They no longer wish to just, "get it over with," they appreciate every breath.

Legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide for emotions is very wrongheaded, and prevents individuals from coming to that mature understanding of life.  Kübler-Ross adamantly opposed killing patients because of these emotions. You should too.

Later, Sylvia Aimerito of the PowerOf7 App explains its use and importance for the pro-life movement. The app is free to download to iPhone, smart phones, iPads, etc. Familiarity with the PowerOf7 allows individuals to quickly and easily answer the seven most common pro-abortion arguments. If you ever feel at a loss or insecure about advocating for unborn children, you should consider downloading the free PowerOf7 App to give you the tools you need.   

November 18th, 2017 there is a conference on these issues at BIOLA University, La Mirada California. Go to www.CaringNotKilling.wordpress.com. 

EPISODE 036:

PowerOf7 App & Importance of the Law

Sylvia Aimerito of the PowerOf7 App explains its use and importance for the pro-life movement. The app is free to download to iPhone, smart phones, iPads, etc. Familiarity with the PowerOf7 allows individuals to quickly and easily answer the seven most common pro-abortion arguments. If you ever feel at a loss or insecure about advocating for unborn children, you should consider downloading the free PowerOf7 App to give you the tools you need.

Brian is again joined by Karen Cross, Political Director of the National Right to Life Committee. They discuss the purpose of the law in protecting the pre-born. Today, in states where pro-life legislation has been allowed to pass, the abortion rate drops precipitously.

Karen reiterates the five ways that pro-life individuals inadvertently elect pro-abortion candidates. The most common is falling in love with just one candidate and if that person doesn’t win then those pro-life supporters fail to work for any other pro-life candidate. This gives victory to the other side.

A very common error of well-meaning people is the idea that we must run third-party candidates against a less than perfect nominee. This inevitably gives the election to the worst of candidates. This was demonstrated in 2008, when Al Franken had won in a very, very close election, but the reason he won was because the pro-life vote was split and 17% of all votes went to the third-party candidate. They guaranteed that Al Franken would become a US Senator. He is one of the most radical, pro-abortion legislators we have seen in modern US history.

Airdate: 10-28-17

EPISODE 035:

Euthanasia and A Special Interview with Carol Tobias

Brian interviews Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

The medical profession in California and in Canada have both abandoned the basic principles of the Hippocratic Oath to never bring harm to a patient. The implications are severe. Ultimately, it is not the patient but the physician who decides which patients will be killed and when.

Later in the program, Brian brings an interview from his visit to the New Mexico Right To Life Convention. There he met with Carol Tobias, President of the National Right to Life Committee. Carol explains what to expect in the coming year, some of the recent votes in Congress, the importance of the 2018 election, and the opportunity to join with National Right to Life at the National Convention in July, 2018. The right to life movement is on the march and individual pro-lifers need to be equipped to address the factual issues.

Airdate: 10-21-17

EPISODE 034:

Why The Right to Life Actually Is ALL About Politics

Brian Johnston interviews Karen Cross, Political Director of the National Right to Life Committee. Karen tells the story because she initially was involved in only wanting to help crisis pregnancies. She felt this was the easiest way to address the widespread abortion culture sweeping her state.

A young woman she was counseling told her that she had had an 18-week saline abortion. She had been told at the clinic that there was no baby, that it was merely a piece of liver. Seeing the expelled child horrified her.

Karen felt that giving such a simple and false description before a decision like abortion is made should be illegal, but it was quite legal. Virginians For Life had introduced an informed consent measure that was always defeated in the state legislature because of the chairmanship of one key committee. Karen finally got involved in the election to replace that legislator and the dam broke! Without that ‘pro-abortion’ legislator stopping all the good bills, West Virginia law could be substantially improved for vulnerable women and their children.

Karen documents the 100,000 fewer abortions – living children that have benefited.

It is critically important to realize that the abortion question is determined by the laws of the states and when Prolife individuals get widely involved in the civic process they can dramatically change the number of abortions.

Professor Michael Jason New has written extensively on the dramatic change brought about by Prolife laws.

In Brian’s final statement he reminds us that the right to life is essentially a statement of political philosophy: it is the duty of the government to protect the lives of those governed. He urges listeners to join with the diverse community of Prolife people in their states to restore the protection of life as the basic element of just law. NRLC and its state affiliates exist for that purpose. 

Airdate: 10-14-17

EPISODE 033:

Will Your Vulnerable Life Be Dismissed By Medicine?

Confronting the Culture of Death

Brian interviews a returning guest, Nancy Valko, RN. Nancy is a medical ethicist and she discusses her hands-on experience in seeing various medical professionals dismiss vulnerable, medically dependent patients.

Nancy demonstrates what the medical practices in many other nations have proven to be true; neurologically impaired individuals are greatly benefited by involvement, interaction, and personal regard, even if they are not initially able to personally respond. The new American medical “tradition” of considering a human being to be a “vegetable” and let him or her simply lay in a hospital bed has proven to be a decidedly ineffective treatment for restoring and healing neurological conditions.

With the recent legalization of medicine to kill vulnerable people, the minimized value of human life presents a great danger for patients in any medical situation. Without concerted efforts and family advocacy, vulnerable patients can be at great risk.

Brian, Nancy Valko, and Alex Schadenberg will be speaking at the Caring Not Killing Conference at BIOLA University on November 18, 2017. Interested individuals can register at CaringNotKilling.WordPress.com

In the latter part of the program Brian is joined by Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. Alex, a Canadian national, is dealing with the widespread growth of euthanasia in that country. The use of government sponsored medicine has made euthanasia an economic tool in the nation and Alex warns us of what that means for America’s coming changes.

Airdate: 10-07-17

EPISODE 032:

Get Ready! The Aging of America Is At Your Doorstep
 

In this episode, Brian again interviews Nancy Valko, R.N.

As a Commissioner on Aging and an elder advocate, Brian has seen, up close, many of the issues Nancy refers to; the overworked nursing home employees, the failure of families to visit the medically dependent, the sometimes intentional but often unintentional neglect of nursing home residents.

Both Brian and Nancy give concrete suggestions to prepare you for caring for loved ones that end up in those circumstances.

Because of the current government takeover of healthcare the threat of limited and intentional rationing of the care given to these patients is very, very real. This is a seed bed for the widespread euthanasia of the neglected and forgotten.

The Obamacare rationing system is still law and is still in place (as of October 1, 2017).

In a later discussion, Brian explains the cultural challenge in legally ending abortion. The incredible parallels between the legalized practice of slavery and the legalized practice of abortion is legally and ethically in escapable. Similarly, the approach taken by Abraham Lincoln is the approach needed in our day to restore legal protection to the pre-born child. Brian’s booklet, Lincoln on Life and the Law is an excellent resource for understanding why we pursue the gradual re-establishment of the child’s rights under the law. Lincoln was very clear that both law and public opinion are needed to proceed in the direction of a gradual, step by step approach toward changing the law and ensuring the right to life for the previously enslaved. The right to life of the unborn must likewise proceed steadily and effectively turning both public opinion and the law towards considering the life and rights of the child.

Airdate: 09-30-17

EPISODE 031:

Suicide Contagion
 

Brian Johnston interviews Nancy Valko regarding copycat suicide and suicide contagion. Nancy, a nurse with a 47 years of experience in the clinical setting dealing with trauma patients and depression, has dealt with all aspects of suicide, including the push for assisted suicide. She is very aware of effective approaches to dealing with depression and suicidal ideation from patients.

Suicide contagion is a phenomenon that has been witnessed throughout history. Starting with the works of the first historian, Herodotus, the only way a culture has been able to prevent suicide contagion or suicide clusters is if society clearly condemns the act of suicide. Endorsing, ‘tolerating,’ or approving of the act only creates more suicidal individuals.

In the second part of the program we examine the ongoing threat of the Obamacare rationing board, the independent payment advisory board, which would force a federal standard of medical care on the entire nation in the name of keeping low cost of medical inflation. It would do so only by prohibiting any “costly medical treatment it deemed beyond the scope of appropriate care.”

Congress must act soon to prohibit this law from remaining in effect.

Airdate: 9-23-17

EPISODE 030:

California Victories & Work Ahead

As the California legislature comes to a close for 2017, Brian announces several legislative victories in stopping SB 309, the prochoice license plate bill, and SB 481, regarding intentional dehydration of nursing-home residents.

California ProLife citizens responded to a decidedly pro-abortion California legislature and made known they were concerned about the ideological super imposition of the abortion and death culture on our state. Because of their effective work, both of these bills were stopped. It was the state wide messaging of Life Matters Radio that made a difference and the faithful follow through with prolife individuals from San Diego to Redding.

In the second part of the program Brian interviews Sylvia Aimerito, one of the creators of the “PowerOf7,” a free smart phone app that helps with the tools to become effective in presenting the Message of Life.

In the third part of the program we hear congressional updates and information on upcoming events at BIOLA University as well as in New Mexico, South Dakota, and North Dakota that address the assisted suicide debate.

Airdate: 9-16-17       

EPISODE 029:

California’s Forced Abortion Culture

The State of California is unique in the nation when it comes to abortion. When Roe versus Wade is overturned and states again have the ability to protect unborn children, many states will immediately enact such law.

But, California is dramatically different. Not only is abortion allowed at all times and can even be performed by non-physicians, but the state coffers of California are now underwriting the abortion industry. Every aspect of abortion marketing is paid for by state funds. The rent, the overhead expenses in the day-to-day operation of abortion clinics are all eligible for state financing. It is not just the ‘doctor’ with blood on his gloves who is being paid for the abortion, it is the entire infrastructure of the abortion culture and industry.

But the State of California has gone even further, and is now forcing pro-life pregnancy centers to violate their conscience and promote abortion to every young pregnant mother that enters their facility. Assembly Bill 775, which passed on a party line vote, forces California’s crisis pregnancy centers to offer mandatory information that there is a free abortion available, and instructions to the nearest abortion clinic to each and every pregnant woman who walks in the door.

In this episode, host Brian Johnston discusses the coming court battles over AB-775 with Scott Scharpen of the Scharpen Foundation. The foundation underwrites the ongoing day-to-day operation of a mobile crisis pregnancy counseling center, which offers pregnancy tests, ultrasound, and the many resources available for a young mother to care for the child in her womb. AB-775 will force this mobile crisis pregnancy center clinic, and all pro life crisis pregnancy centers in the state, to force abortion promotion against their will. A federal court case has been brought and a state case is being pursued. It is interesting to note that the state’s freedom of speech clause had been interpreted as giving much more freedom than even the federal free speech clause, so this California state court case may have an even greater chance of being upheld.

The California Prolife Council is supporting both of these cases, and provides many opportunities for Californians to stand for life.

Airdate: 9-09-17

EPISODE 028:

Glycine - The Necessary Amino Acid

Life Matters is dedicated to life culture in the battle of ideas: the abortion and euthanasia debate, and the fact that there’s been a dramatic change in medical ethics. When our health begins to fail, it is no longer incumbent on medical ethics to care for and comfort the patient, instead it is now ethically acceptable to simply eliminate vulnerable human beings.

Brian is again joined by Dr. Joel Brind, biologist and endocrinologist. Dr. Brind explains the phenomenon of inflammation, and the direct relationship of many contemporary illnesses to the physical phenomenon of inflammation.

Airdate: 7-29-17

EPISODE 027:

Abortion, the War On Motherhood, And the Breast Cancer Connection

Brian interviews Dr. Joel Brind, Professor of Biology and Endocrinology at Baruch College, City University of New York. Dr. Brind is world renowned for his research and exposure of the abortion breast cancer link, a direct linear connection that the scientist demonstrated as incontrovertible.

In Brian’s introduction he explains a deeper issue that is often lost in the abortion debate and in this important battle of ideas: the push for abortion is actually a concerted part of the war against motherhood.

This war against motherhood is the part of a larger cultural battle that includes the false claim that human beings are what is harming the planet, that there is a “problem” of overpopulation, and that young women should not embrace or look forward to the idea that motherhood is a good thing.

This ideological battle that necessarily includes killing young children in the womb, is harmful to women and to all humankind, as it is only through motherhood that human beings can come into the world. The laws of nature, and of nature’s God, are under direct assault. The implications of this war on motherhood, the war on the unborn, and the distain for humanity which has become rampant under the current cultural zeitgeist, brings great harm and personal danger for those who fall under its sway. The abortion- breast cancer link is one of the most striking examples.

Dr. Joel Brind explains how pregnancy and the hormones that accompanied it immediately begin to change the nature of a woman’s body. One of the most striking and evident changes is enlargement of her breasts and the growth of mammary glands to provide future sustenance for the child she is carrying. As we now know from stem cell research, certain cells are given assignments for a specific job. Before that time they are known as undifferentiated, or stem cell’s, the cell’s that are to become memory glands begin to develop during pregnancy but do not reach maturation until very late in the pregnancy. An abrupt end of the natural sensation of pregnancy holds their development in mid-stage. They have not reached the “assignment” stage of being productive memory glands yet. Later in life their presence and undeveloped nature allows them to be susceptible to growing in a disorderly manner, which is the definition of a cancer.

 Our Wordsworth section examines the term “reproductive rights” as exposed in testimony before the California State Senate by Brian Johnston. The intellectually dishonest use and abuse of language is one of the essential tools used by advocates of abortion in the battle of ideas.

The opportunity to donate a vehicle, boat or other items to California Pro-Life allows for the best return because of its conscientious attempt to get the best value from each donation: a tax-deductible receipt and the knowledge that their own vehicle has helped helped the pro-life cause.

Airdate: 7-22-17

EPISODE 026:

Wesley J. Smith, Bobby Schindler, Wordsworth: At the NRL Convention
 

In this episode Brian interviews several stellar individuals in the Right to Life movement at the 2017 National Right to Life convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He also has an in-depth analysis of the Charlie Gard story and why it is significant in an era of socialized medicine. Finally, “Wordsworth” examines a new concept in medical ethics “futile care,”and what it really means.

Wesley J. Smith discusses his new book: Culture of Death: The Age of Do Harm Medicine, and how medical ethics has now been inverted. The average individual who does not understand this change will be at great risk when they are subject to the whims of a medical situation.

Bobby Schindler discusses his work on behalf of medically vulnerable individuals who are in danger of being killed in the same manner as his sister, Terri Schiavo.

Brian goes into greater depth regarding the Charlie Gard case, where parents who are willing and able to pay for a treatment to help their son live are prohibited from doing so by the British health service. The British health service has proven itself inadequate in addressing truly serious cutting-edge medicine. Even though Charlie’s parents have raised the funds to send him to the United States, the British National Health Service insisted they have the authority to decide what happens to Charlie, and their intention was that he should, “die with dignity.”

Dignity is the adjective most commonly used when someone who wants you dead desires to sell the method of killing. It is a word that has come to mean whatever the speaker intends.

“”Wordsworth" examines a popular new adjective in medical ethics, “futile”. The adjective implied refers to the care provided to the patient, but in many ethical settings the adjective is actually being applied to the human being in someone’s personal judgment of the value of their ongoing life. “Futile care”, is a phrase regularly used to intentionally deny all food and water thus ending the life of someone who is not actually terminal.

Airdate: 7-15-17

EPISODE 025:

The Importance of Being a Pro-Life Speaker, Wherever and Whoever You Are

Brian interviews Olivia Gans Turner, director of American Victims of Abortion and spokeswoman for the National Right to Life Committee. Olivia explains that being a pro-life advocate is really not that difficult. There are standard questions that come up every time. Once you understand what they are it is not difficult to help people over the hurdles that are often used to justify unlimited abortion.

What is more important to recognize, especially now that abortion has been legal since 1973, is the fact that many personally know someone who has had an abortion or they themselves may have had an abortion. This may create in them a sense of defensiveness and they need to justify an abortion supporting position.

Olivia, who has had an abortion herself, underscores the need to be empathetic and compassionate towards those who may disagree with us. This sense of emotional support of the individual, as opposed to support of the action, often allows the listener to be more receptive to the reasoning as to why abortion has been and should be against the law and not facilitated by the government.

Call In: Grace called in from Santa Rosa. She asked who Charlie Gard is, because his name has been in the news. Brian explained that he is a boy born in England with a genetic illness that impacts his brain development. His parents have heard of a treatment available only in the United States. They took it upon themselves to raise 1.5 million British pounds, more than $2 million to send Charlie to the U.S. for this special treatment. The British health system, however, prohibited him from going for this treatment. They declared that what he needed to do was, "die with dignity”.

Charlie's parents appealed to the British court system but the government denied them the right to have their child treated even though they were going to pay for it. The parents then appealed to the European court of human rights. Again the courts sided with the bureaucrats. Charlie's parents have also appealed to the public conscience. Soon, President Trump and many other world leaders urged the British government to allow the parents to care for their child if they so wished.

This is a stark example of government overstepping its bounds in assuming that the role of government is to determine who is worthy and who is not, who has a right to live, and who should be denied care and treatment. This is extremely common wherever socialized medicine becomes the law of the land.

Airdate: 7-08-17

EPISODE 024:

Abortion Pill Reversal and Church Involvement in the Battle of Ideas
 

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian interviews Dr. George Delgado, founder of “abortion reversal”. Dr. Delgado has developed a procedure whereby the RU-486 abortion pill can be reversed should the young mother change her mind in time.

Brian also interviews Jonathan Keller of California Family Council. They discuss the need for churches to be actively involved in the civic realm and in the very real battle of ideas. Helping and encouraging pastors with the tools and resources in volunteering to be the touchstone for the congregation are great ways to encourage civic involvement. Churches are an essential part of changing our culture right where you are.

Airdate: 7-01-17

EPISODE 023:

The Right To Life As the Essential Building Block of Society

There is a battle of ideas raging all around us. One of the principal ideas that our society has been built upon is exactly what America’s founders stated clearly in the Declaration: that self-evident truths need to be put forward and protected for a just society. The first and foremost of these is the right to life.

I'm going to talk about what happens when the right to life is no longer understood or ensured by the government – how bad can it get? Without the right to life as a guiding principle of society there is no standard of right or wrong in protecting vulnerable human beings. Bizarre experimentation and disposal of human beings as mere property cannot be stopped unless the right to life is again asserted and enforced as a basic principle of the law.

The idea of the right to life predates even the Declaration of Independence reaching back, at the very least to the Magna Carta in A.D. 1215. Article 39, the due process of law concept, first set forth that no one can be deprived of life or in anyway destroyed, without the intervention and protection of the government to ensure that the innocent are protected.

Since 1973, in the US Supreme Court's dismissal of a right to life for the unborn child, there is no longer any standard that can be used to judge what is medically and ethically appropriate.

Airdate: 6-24-17

EPISODE 022:

Be A Pro-Life Speaker
 

Brian Johnston and James Jenkins, Chair of California Pro-life Speakers Bureau, discuss why it's important to read up and be trained in giving an effective pro-life presentation.

Commissioner Johnston and Mr. Jenkins explore several books which they recommend: Who Broke the Baby, by Jean Garton, Handbook on Abortion, by Dr. John Willkie, and the subsequent Willkie books.

Various slide presentations and videos are also discussed as well as the opportunity to be involved as a pro-life presenter through any of the National Right to Life state affiliates. In California we have the California Pro-life Council and Right to Life Federation. Go to www.californiaprolife.org.    

Airdate: 6-10-17  

EPISODE 021:

SB-481 Long-term Health Facilities: Informed Consent
 

Brian Johnston, interviewed by Craig Roberts of Life!Line, discusses the pending Senate Bill 481. The Bill, sponsored by Senator Pan, allows nursing homes to declare non-terminal and conscious patients to be incompetent, and thereby have authority to withdraw a patient's food and water.

Craig discusses the relationship with the assisted suicide issue and the tendency to present it benevolently, as an act of kindness or an act of autonomy. But, at its heart it is the dismissal of individuals that society no longer wishes to care for.

Brian explains the nature of SB 481, what happens in nursing homes (he was on the Board of Examiners of California's Nursing Homes, and a California Commissioner on Aging). The great danger posed to medically dependent individuals is inescapable and opposition to Senate Bill 481 must be made known.

Airdate: 6-3-17

EPISODE 020:

California Legislation (2017-2018 ) with Ashley McPartlin
 

Brian Johnston and Ashley McPartlin discuss legislation introduced for the two-year session of the California legislature: 2017-2018.

Brian gives background on the nature of legislation; it is simply being ideas that are enforced. There is a critical need for pro-life individuals to be aware of, and comfortable in the realm of ideas.

If you are not from California, the discussion is pertinent to all states, as California like every other state, has a two-year, two-house (bicameral) legislature (except for Nebraska which is a unicameral legislature). The United States Congress on the federal level also elects in two year cycles.

Every election year we, as citizens, elect those who will look at ideas and decide whether or not they should become law. We as citizens must also look at those ideas, as well as at the individuals we hire (elect) to make such decisions.

Several dangerous ideas have been submitted to the California legislature. One is SB-562 which would entrust all health decisions and their financing to all California's citizens to the state of California itself. This is known as ‘single-payer’ healthcare. In every jurisdiction where it has been implemented it results in rationing and denial of treatment for those individuals that government bureaucrats have determined should not get any more healthcare. In addition, in California all abortion services would be funded without limit. This is a very bad bill.

Brian and Ashley discuss the implications of collectivist medicine as it has been expressed in Canada, the UK, Russia and other collectivist systems. It always results in rationing and inferior medicine for the masses. Citizens in such countries have only gotten good treatment for serious illness when they engage in what is known as medical tourism. Buffalo, New York is one city that has enjoyed the financial benefit of Canadians seeking better healthcare and avoidance of the infamous medical “queue.” In Canada you must wait months to see specialists.

Senate Bill 309 will establish a “Celebrate Choice” license plate that the state of California would distribute via the DMV. It also creates a fund that would give the money raised from these plates to abortion providers. This would be the first such "pro-choice plate" in the nation. Twenty-seven other states have “Celebrate Life” license plates.

SB-320 would mandate that state colleges will distribute the abortifacient pill RU486 to students through their health system. There are extensive issues to this abortifacient. This is not a “morning after pill” or a contraceptive. It is only used when a child is known to be present. It is extremely dangerous for the young mother as it attacks her body first in order to get at the child. This has been slowed, and has now become a two-year bill.

SB-481 would allow nursing homes to declare vulnerable, conscious patients, who are not terminal, to be incapacitated and then allow the administrators to withdraw all sustenance and care resulting in their death. In England this was referred to as the “Liverpool Pathway to Death.” It was so horrific that the UK parliament banned the practice. Senator Pan’s Bill SB-481 would allow the practice to continue and would offer legal protection for medical facilities that killed their patients through this form of intentional medical neglect.

Senate Bill 743 gives even more funding to Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry in expectation of federal funds that are going to be cut off by the Trump administration.

Senate Constitutional Amendment 7 by Senator Moorlach would cease the funding of the embryonic stem cell research measure passed by the voters which gives $6 billion to an industry that has had no successes. There has been extensive discussion of why embryonic stem cell research is a failure on our other programs. It is important to know these things. Please listen to those programs.

Airdate: 5-27-17

EPISODE 019:

Euthanasia By Intentional Medical Neglect
 

Euthanasia is being practiced in the United States under what is supposedly voluntary circumstances. This is known as “Dr. Assisted Suicide”. But whatever voluntary euthanasia is, it quickly has moved to involuntary euthanasia.

Euthanasia is currently legal in the United States under the auspice of “Dr. Assisted Suicide”. But there are many cases of euthanasia by intentional medical neglect as well. All around the world where physicians are allowed to kill patients, euthanasia quickly moves from voluntary to involuntary.

Brian interviews with Mike Hodas of San Francisco, California who witnessed the intentional medical killing of his wife and the not too subtle approach of medical professionals to remove him from any decision-making capacity. Mrs. Hodas had all food and water removed from her although she was not terminal. It is the removal of food and fluids that makes anyone terminal. It is an act of intentional medical neglect which results in the intentional killing of the patient.

Airdate: 5-20-17

EPISODE 018:

Ensoulment and the Issue of Animal Rights
 

Brian Johnston gives an overview of why the assertion of the right to live is not based on the theological question of Ensoulment. The right to life is based on self-evident truths as demonstrated through observation and demonstrated in the laws of nature.

“Ensoulment” is an issue which is often raised regarding the question of the right to life of a pre-born child. But this issue of when the soul enters the body is solely one of conjecture and religious opinion.

The invocation of such a question is merely an invitation to uncertainty and ultimately leads to a lack of conviction regarding protection for that child. The right to life, on the other hand, is based solely on self-evident truths that are demonstrable and can be shown objectively, and is not determined on personal predilection or personal enlightenment in opinion. The founders of United States asserted that this was necessary in establishing justice and that, in fact, right to life was the first and most immediate of the self-evident truths established for the purpose of government to protect.

Brian tells the story of his cat “Tiger.” The friendship and comfort we get from animals is often confused with a question of soul and is currently being used to promote the notion of animal rights. It is critically important that this very pernicious idea, that an animal should have the same rights as a human being, be confronted for what it is: a confusing assertion, based not much on fact, but in our emotional feelings towards those animals.

The protection of innocent children in the womb is based upon scientific evidence. Common law protected the child after quickening, but protection of the child from conception began in England in the mid-1800s after Sir Thomas Barry had witnessed conception is the beginning of human life in the modern microscope. By 1860, the British Parliament had enacted the “Crimes Against the Person Act,” making all abortions a felony.

The United Kingdom had moved to outlaw the slave trade long before the United States rose to the proper understanding of the humanity of the slave. Similarly, the United Kingdom rose to the protection of the unborn child long before the United States. An American student at the University of Edinburgh was in fact studying childbirth at the time. His name was Dr. Horatio Storer and he became the Father of Modern Gynecology.

On his return to the States, he took it upon himself to similarly pass laws to protect that vulnerable child who had been denied legal protection. Storer, along with the American Medical Association, went state by state, not asserting his faith as the premise, but asserting the self-evident, scientific truths of the child's life in the womb which was demonstrable and which was beyond debate. Those are the laws that were in effect up until 1973.

Those laws are obviously under attack, but what is worse is that logical thinking is under attack with the new assertion that animals are essentially the same as human beings and should be afforded the same rights. There is confusion in both mind and heart regarding this battle of ideas and even well-meaning Christians have errantly been seduced by such thinking.

It is vitally important to understand the battle of ideas that human laws are first and foremost designed to protect human lives; that animals should indeed be cared for and protected, but they are of an entirely different nature than the laws which need to be in place for human beings. Professor Peter Singer is one of many thought leaders who is forcing on the culture the idea that animals are in fact in some cases more worthy than certain human beings of having their lives protected. This is a direct assault on the right to life.

Airdate: 5-13-17

EPISODE 017:

Socialist Medical Science - with Special Guest Sir Winston Churchill
 

In the battle of ideas it is not uncommon for people to carry ideas in their head, but they don't know what the name of that idea really is. One of the most common, dangerous ideas abroad today is that of socialism. Socialism is a faith that, at its heart, believes that government must be empowered and government must address evil that emanates from classes of people, and that the purpose of government is to limit the evil done by certain groups of people. It is a faith that doesn't necessarily believe in individual right and wrong, but clearly believes in group right and wrong and is therefore a religious worldview, although it is a worldview that is quite free to deny God. It has its own morality and ethics, teaching sense of cultural sin and sense of redemption - all of which is dependent on the centralized government that is established to determines these things

The election of 2016 voting patterns demonstrated just how widespread this idea is as Bernie Sanders garnered millions upon millions of supportive votes for his very clear proclamation of socialist ideas. It is vitally important to realize that socialism views groups as the basis of society not human individuals and that socialism is – as a systematic approach to human events, willing to dismiss the value of individual lives.

The great challenge of World War II was actually in warring against this idea of socialism. Socialism came in two major forms. National Socialism - a collectivist form of government tried to right the wrongs of a nation which was perceived as an oppressed race, the defeated Germanic people as a cultural group. The other form of socialism is international socialism, which had gained a foothold in Russia, destroyed the foundations of that country and quickly spread like a cancer to the other Slavic nations creating a Soviet union. Inter-national Socialism, or Soviet communism, believes that the entire world should be governed by governments that treat people as groups and addresses the evil done by certain groups. It views ‘The perfect society’ as one, giant, egalitarian group.

Sir Winston Churchill recognized that freedom required opposing,, and ultimately destroying, both forms socialism, as science and all the tools of mankind would be perverted and individual human lives crushed under such ideas.

His speech, Their Finest Hour, is but one example of his clarity on the idea that the role of a just and free government is to protect the lives of its people and to not act against them.

Airdate: 5-06-17

EPISODE 016:

California Legislation Regarding Right to Life
 

Brian Johnston, host of the Life Matters along with Roger Marsh, host of the Bottom Line, discuss several important pieces of California legislation. One is a bill which would mandate the distribution of the drug RU486 throughout the California college system. There are many many people including many pro-lifers, who regularly confuse RU486 with other pills taken, such as the morning after pill. The morning after pill is actually designed as a contraceptive, and is regularly included in rape kits issued at police stations in order to prevent the onset of pregnancy.

RU486 is a dramatically different and a very lethal drug taken only after the woman is quite pregnant, usually she has missed at least one period. RU486 literally attacks the woman's body first. This very powerful artificial steroid is a combination of several drugs it causes the mothers body to no longer be a nurturing motherly body in spite of the fact that nature has designed her to dramatically change during pregnancy to fulfill her role as a mother. The drug causes her to cease providing nutrition and hydration to the child resting in her womb. Eventually, the child within her dies and is expelled as a miscarriage which she witnesses. Only then, upon seeing the head and arms and legs, will many women realize this is not merely a vague cluster of cells or a blob of tissue.

Women in France, where this was designed, numerous women have died from the effects of RU486 on their own body. Many feminist authors have spoken out against RU486 because of the fact that it essentially attacks the woman's body in order to impact the body of the child. Giving this drug to young women in their late teens, who have no real understanding of the risks involved, is a very, very dangerous proposal.

A second bill has to do with the other end of life and that is a bill authorizing nursing homes to, on their own recognizance, declare patients to be incompetent. This declaration empowers the nursing home to make any medical decisions they choose. What is not understood by many is that a very common medical decision, now being made for the sick, the terminally ill, seriously ill and even the disabled or otherwise medically dependent, is to simply end the life of that patient.

Voluntary euthanasia through self-starvation and volunteer euthanasia through physician assistance (i.e. physician-assisted suicide), is already illegal in many places. The doctrine of substituted judgment allows a third-part to make that decision on behalf of a vulnerable patient. Thus, voluntary euthanasia has already moved to the status of non-voluntary euthanasia and is being practiced in California.  State Senator Pan has sponsored SB 481 which protects nursing homes and other medical facilities from action when they decide to deny essential care or even intentionally cause the death of one of their patients. While this is a challenge in California in the growing battle of ideas, it is now a challenge nation and world wide.

Airdate: 4-29-17

EPISODE 015:

Life Film Festival

Brian Johnston meets with Roger Marsh of the radio show Bottom Line and they interview Beau Brians: Communications Director of Life Fest Film Festival.

The single most influential town in our nation is that place we refer to as "Hollywood". In the battle of ideas regarding the value of human life, Hollywood is a natural starting point. The influence of films on our culture and the thinking of the modern American, in fact, every member of the western world, is influenced by the films that are exported from Hollywood.

Life Fest Film Festival is an annual event in Hollywood, California that honors those films that,  in particular, value the significance of even the seemingly insignificant life. This had been a hallmark of classical Hollywood, but those values seem to have been lost.

Life Fest Film Festival provides an opportunity for industry professionals as well as rising filmmakers and film aficionados to network together and to work on changing the message of Hollywood to affirm Human Life once again.

More than 300 films from throughout the world are submitted each year for screening at the Raleigh Studios screening rooms. Raleigh Studios is the original studio for Hollywood founded by Charlie Chaplin in 1915 and is still a working studio lot for both film and television shows throughout the week.

In addition to the film screenings, there are workshops for those interested in film-making and the Hollywood culture, and there is a special Filmmaker's Challenge: The 5 x 5 for Life where filmmaker's are given five days to write, produce, direct, and score a five minute film. All submissions that follow the rules are guaranteed to screen on the big screen in Hollywood.

Airdate: 4-22-17

EPISODE 014:

National Right to Life - Equipping You for the Battle for Life

Brian Johnston, the host of Life Matters does in-office interviews with key staff members of the National Right to Life Committee. Brian interviews Jackie Ragan, Director of the NRL Convention, on the importance of the National Right to Life convention in bringing together the Pro-Life family from across the nation, and equipping individuals with a deeper understanding of how to win in the battle of life. This year, the NRL convention is in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

In the second segment, Brian interviews Dave Andrusko, of the NRL News and NRL News Today. It is critically important that Pro-Life individuals have an understanding of what is happening both nationally and internationally, and that they are equipped to deal with issues as they come into their own community. 

Air Date: 4-15-17

EPISODE 013:

The Difference One Life Can Make

Brian Johnston interviews author, businessman, radio host Marty Pay. They discuss how one individual’s involvement in the needs around them is the most immediate answer to human challenges, and it always has been.
         
The message of the Right To Life is the significance and value of each and every human life. What is often forgotten is that this principle applies to each and everyone of us. Each of us has the ability to change circumstances around us but often we are lulled into inaction. People in a local nursing home are you just as much emotional and spiritual being as people die in the streets of Calcutta. And while it is noble to help those in Calcutta, ignoring those who are immediately at hand, is the greatest tragedy.

Includes review of Pierre Sauvage's award-winning documentary, Weapons of the Spirit (1987).

Air Date: 4-1-17

EPISODE 012:

Team for the Battle – National Right to Life Committee

Brian Johnston and his special guest, Lawrence Lehr from Sonoma County ProLife, discuss how you can get involved and make a difference in the Battle of Ideas with the help of volunteer programs and the unifying ideals of the National Right to Life Committee.

A national unifying team. We are in a Battle of Ideas, but there seems to be so many volunteers and so many team directions. How can we work together? What unifies us? A house divided cannot stand. National Right to Life unifies pro-life efforts.

There are many groups and organizations, religious or helping centers, but how will we actually change the law? How will we end this scourge of legalized abortion?

N.O.E.L. (National Organization of Episcopalians for Life), are great folks. I like them and work with them. But this is not an Episcopalian issue. The Right To Life is a human rights issue. A civil right for the vulnerable innocent to have their vulnerable lives protected.

National Right to Life Committee. Non-sectarian, Non-partisan, single issue in focusing on changing the law and restoring the Right To Life.

Interview with Lawrence Lehr, Sonoma County ProLife.

Brian answers a listener's question on whether or not assisted suicide is actually an act of compassion for the dying or an emotional escape for the living.

Air Date: 3-18-17

EPISODE 011:

Trump Addresses Abortion Funding and More

Few people realize how much government support, underwriting, and protection the abortion industry receives in the state of California. Brian Johnston and his special guest, Albin Rhomberg, discuss the actual issues of government sponsorship of the abortion industry, Donald Trump's commitment to stopping federal funding of Planned Parenthood, and the failure for many private individuals to recognize that abortion is now a government sponsored program coming from your local tax dollars.

In addition to federal grants, state funds directly go to abortion as well as in the name of family planning, in addition to county funds, municipal funds, and secret special discrepancy funds find their way into Planned Parenthood and the conference of other abortion promoting and providing organizations.

Albin Rhomberg discusses his experience in chronicling and documenting of the horrendous discovery of 16,000 baby corpses, the human remains of aborted children in a cargo unit that had been left by the side of a freeway in Woodland Hills, California in 1982. The incident was later referred to as the Los Angeles fetus disposal scandal. After an extensive court battle these children were finally given a respectful burial in Boyle Heights, California, a suburb of Los Angeles but no criminal charges were ever filed against any of the parties involved.

How can you make a difference in this Battle of Ideas? Think locally, and get involved in local elections. Ask questions of your local politicians. For a great resource for asking the right questions in your localtown hall meetings and political conferences, go to the California ProLife Council and NRLC to learn more about the Right To Life.

Help Stop Assisted Suicide

Air Date: 3-11-17

EPISODE 010:

Is Suicide Infectious?

Is suicide infectious? Suicide contagion has been documented throughout history the earliest historians of Western civilization Plutarch and Herodotus recorded several examples of suicide cults in addition to suicide epidemics.

Human beings are extraordinary creatures capable of great and noble acts but we are also capable of terrifying and frightening acts, such as engaging in suicide and the infectious nature of suicide. Ancient history documented suicide cults and the suicide contagion is present in modern times even in our more recent history, such as the Jonestown cult in 1978 and the Comet Hale–Bopp cult of 1997. Individuals involved fulfilled a need or a strong suggestion to take their life even though some expressed skepticism at the logic of their fellow suicidals.

A common error in addressing suicide is to express sympathy in our regard for the individual but fail to strongly and clearly condemn the action itself. An example of successful suicide prevention was the intentional act of Courtney Love in publicly condemning the action of her husband, Kurt Cobain, while still respecting her and her daughter's loss. It is believed that her clear distinction and condemnation of his suicide may have saved many, many lives.

The implications of copycat or socially manipulated suicide once assisted suicide is legalized is inescapable, it has been documented in the rapid rise of suicide where ever assisted suicide is legalized.

Special guest interview with Dr. Mark Hoffman.

Clinical psychologist Dr. Mark Hoffman joins us to discuss the 5-Stages of Grief outlined by Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross in her book, On Death and Dying (1969). Terminal diagnosis often leads to depression and makes an individual extremely susceptible to suicidal suggestions.

Help Stop Assisted Suicide

Air Date: 3-4-17

EPISODE 009:

Silver Tsunami

Dispelling the myth that the seniors in society are a burden. There is a wave of an aging population now crashing down upon us. What we decide to do about it will reveal what we truly value and determine if we are still a society that protects vulnerable human lives and their Right To Life.

The law is there to protect the lives of the vulnerable. RTL is built on that. Western civilization is aging. Healthcare/assisted suicide/ ethical debates are not in a vacuum.

Eastern and other cultures deeply honor the elderly ours no longer does that! It's good to get older, Brian was a Commissioner on Aging when he was younger.

Status US Census Bureau:

in 1900 6.4% of population was 60 or older.

In 2000 16.8 % 60 or older.

By 2020 22% will be 60 or older.

By 2025 over ¼ will be over 60 years old.
 

You will need healthcare when you get older.

Obamacare was a scam. Only if the very young signed up would it have worked, but the young don't need or often use Obamacare. The tidal wave is now crashing on us. We don't have the younger workers needed to care for the growing senior segment. The answer is in the family, society's basic premise. Age well.. stay healthy...eat your veggies, said your mom! Because she wanted you to get older.

The sad growth of elder abuse. Emotional/physical/fiduciary abuse. The push for assisted suicide – the ultimate form of elder abuse. Designed for the dependent population to eliminate them, if the agree. Or if you can get them to agree. Already the highest suicide rate is among elderly white men, because of loneliness.

The non-productive, ill, and dependent are a new class of the kill-able, i.e. approved for suicide. Assisted suicide is not for those who are actually dying. they die. assisted suicide is for those who aren't dying fast enough according to an external schedule.

Myths about medical care.

The Open Society Study - 7 Myths Of Senior Care. "They cost too much." In fact, Journal of American Geriatric Society says seniors are not getting more treatment they are getting dramatically less. They are not getting extraordinary care.

Air Date: 2-25-17

EPISODE 008:

Assisted Suicide - The Killing Assistant

The laws on assisted suicide only really change one thing. Now assistants and those who encourage suicide will no longer be scrutinized or held accountable.

What is the actual change in the law? Who benefits from these new changes?  This is a dramatic change   in medical ethics. The bright line, the protective nature of medicine is now gone.  But on another level the legal nature of the law has been lost. The principle of the law is to protect your rights, but to be dead is not a right. Rights apply to living human beings. Rights emanate from your living humanity, so there is no Right To Die. It is an inevitability.  When assisted suicide is legalized the only change is that the assistant is no longer investigated or prosecuted. This is an invitation to abuse and emotional manipulation.

Derek Humphry admits in his first book, Jean’s Way that his wife was entirely dependent on his decision – not hers.

Manipulation of the emotions of the vulnerable is an inescapable possibility. Margaret Pabst-Battin an assisted suicide advocate, has admitted that this is the case.

Wordsworth – the deceitful use of the word “hopeless”.   It does not describe a physical condition or state, it is actually a reference to an emotion, to a feeling.  The use of such language to justify medical killing.  Brittany Maynard's emotions and the emotional nature of her sweetness and her illness were sold as hopeless. This was in fact a misrepresentation of the medical reality.

Air Date: 2-18-2017

EPISODE 007:

Lincoln on Life and the Law

You are in a battle of ideas. It will be getting more intense...you will be immersed in it. How you decide to deal with those ideas will determine if you are successful and if the right ideas are successful.
Lincoln fought in the realm of ideas and the issue of slavery is extremely parallel to the abortion issue. Lincoln is also our example for how we must deal with the Supreme Court's decision to deny legal rights, or the Right To Life to vulnerable human beings.

Abortion and slavery very parallel in California. The child in the womb has no rights. The state even pays for the abortion and the abortion industry. Several states fund the abortion industry.

See the Movie – Lincoln (2012) by Steven Spielberg

Read the Lincoln – Douglas debates...reveal that the Republican party was founded to give anti-slavery people a civic voice. Abolitionists did not address the civic process, they merely wanted it ended and would often use confusing procedures and reasoning... violent riots, John Brown's Harper Ferry uprising, religious arguments on both sides. The Republican Party was founded to end slavery via civic process. "Ballot's not Bullets."

Abolitionism was a confused and arbitrary commitment to just do something against slavery. Republican Party was committed to passing laws via elections, and using self-evident truths. Civics is the battle of ideas. The Civic process is how we will end abortion. We, like Lincoln must wisely transcend emotion and pursue the compelling truths of life.

Two significant Supreme Court Decisions in American History were supposed to end the contentious debate once and for all.

Instead they used the power of the court to simply claim absolute authority over citizens and the laws of the state, and, "the matter is closed." The abuse of the power of a supreme tribunal over human lives did not solve any issues it created much worse problems.
 

Dredd Scott, 1857 and Roe v Wade, 1973 - dramatic parallels

• Both were an overwhelming 7-2 decision

• Black slave not a person v Pre-born child not a person

• Property of the owner (caretaker) v Property of owner (mother)

• Owner could keep, sell or kill v Owner (mother) may keep or kill

• Others could not impose their morals v Others could not impose their morals

"If you are opposed to slavery, that's fine, Just don't own one."

How did Lincoln deal with this most difficult of decisions and the previous 87 years of commitment to self-evident truths and the national resolve to bring to pass an end to the scourge of slavery? (Yes, even at the founding, many Founders wanted to end the cruel practice. They were called the Whigs and carried on the traditions of the founders and Framers) His example is absolutely necessary for us to understand what to do today.

The Lincoln–Douglas Debates extremely insightful. Alton, Illinois site of deadly slavery riots. Was the setting of the pivotal debate. Douglas proclaimed that he did not favor slavery, but like others in previous American history did not see the duty to deny others this manner of industry. They were making a living.

The Lincoln–Douglas Debates of 1858 - Lincoln Home
National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

You must prepare for your Battle of Ideas now. The past is prologue. We can best understand what to do in the present and future when we understand what has actually goes on in the PAST. Most of us have had an inadequate and simplified view of Lincoln and his challenge.

Lincoln was not an abolitionist. Abolitionists had no specific plan. They operated out of emotion and moral outrage, and justified doing bizarre and counterproductive things. The Republican Party was specifically founded to give voice – in the civic realm – to opposition to slavery, so that the laws would protect the vulnerable innocent lives. It is the law that we must fight for .. the law is where the battle of ideas takes place.

The Republican Party was the tool by which slavery could be removed from the law, and the tool through which the XIIIth, XIVth and XVth Amendment could be passed. Many abolitionists resented Lincoln's distinction between unfettered abolitionism and the Republican Party, but it was a bright and clear line. Republicans would work through the law to change the law.

We are dedicated to do that today.

Go to NRLC and California ProLife Council to learn more about the Right To Life.

Air Date: 2-11-2017

EPISODE 006:

Relativism v Objective Reality
 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident..." America's values and principles are built on objective facts, self-evident truths, not opinion or feelings.    If an individual embraces relativism, (the idea that truth is changeable at different times and different places), then there are no objective facts, no definitive truths on which to agree. If relativism is embraced as valid, there then would be no such thing as a definitive Right To Life or any definitive truth or facts. The Right To Life is an idea. Ideas that are enforced are laws. Laws based on subjective relativism are changeable and sometimes dangerous. They are not based in facts, but in ideologies.

The objective facts of human life are recognizable and not opinion. Nature itself shows forth these objective facts. One such fact is the beating heart of every one of us, which started beating as early as 16 days after conception. The Right To Life is not about opinions, it is about self-evident truths. The child's heart does not beat because I believe that it beats. It simply does. WE have to stick to the facts in making our laws, not to personal beliefs or opinions.

America's Founders did not assert a religious but rather a logical conclusion. The assertion that there is a Creator is shown forth in nature itself. The government did not create us, it is we who were created and we in turn create governments. The principles of sound government therefor must be based in, "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

Relativism is a cancer of the thought process. It in itself is a faith at odds with objective reality, at odds with the laws of nature. Sadly it has been the church itself that has allowed relativism in its doors, and blessed its consideration by society.

CS Lewis/ Francis Schaeffer/Pius X

Nature reveals the existence of God.

Ps. 8 "When I consider the heavens, the work of your hands..."

Romans 1:20 "God has revealed His invisible nature through his visible creation."

Ps. 18 "The heavens proclaim the glory of God...there is no nation where their language is not understood."

Soren Kierkegaard and his Leap of Faith assertion has fostered relativism and the idea "if you believe" something that's what makes it real. But faith is not merely an assertion or feeling it is substance, it is evidence of the unseen. Hebrews. The walk of faith is to take steps by faith. Existentialism encourages leaping into the unknown, the leap of faith is not outlined in scripture, but is an idea that makes evidence, and reason suspect. Existentialism, even Christian existentialism encourages a disjointed and subjective view of God and nature.  Francis Schaeffer, Christian philosopher, asserts that Kierkegaard's Leap of Faith not only twisted the teachings of Christianity, but infected all of Western thinking. Schaeffer's book, The God Who is There, explores the essential premise that God's existence is what is displayed in objective reality, in nature itself. He is there and He is not silent. Dismissing objective facts and self-evident truths leads to intellectual and moral confusion.

In C.S. Lewis' The Abolition of Man he says "Post-Christian" thinkers are not reasonable, Lewis asserted that it was easier to convert pagans to belief in the Creator because they recognized that nature is reality...pagans get reality, relativists dismiss reality.  They live in their head. Lewis calls them "men without chests."

Pope Pius Xth recognized the battle of ideas was the greatest of spiritual battles and issued an Encyclical on 'Modernity' in 1907. Modernity is not a reference to Scandinavian furniture or Buck Rogers, it refers to the thinking of modernist philosophers: Freud, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, etc. Pius proclaimed such relativistic thinking had already infected the Roman Catholic Church and required all teachers and priests at every level to swear a repudiation of such relativistic teaching. This oath was required until 1967. 

Relativism is the single, greatest enemy of a Right To Life.

Interview with special guest,

Carol Tobias – President of National Right To Life
@caroltobias1

NRLC deals with the policy issues that impact the Right To Life of the innocent. Carol briefs us on some of the policy issues coming our way.

Air Date: 2-4-2017

EPISODE 005:

The Laws Before Roe v Wade

What were abortion laws before Roe v Wade? Where did they come from? Science and the law. Dr. Horatio Storer defended life as a fact-asserting advocate. British Common Law protected children after quickening because that was the most advanced and conferrable science.

"Homunculus."

With the advancement in scientific medicine conception was confirmed as the start of human life when mammalian conception was witnessed under the modern microscope in 1836. The British Common Law followed in protecting children from the time of conception.

American Dr. Horatio R. Storer was studying in Edinburgh and came back to encourage each of the United States to now respect those human lives, even as they now had freed and protected slaves. From 1860 to 1880 he campaigned until all states protected that child, his second patient. Dr. Storer is also known as the Father of Gynecology. His education underscored that the child in the womb was a vulnerable human being. Started in 1857, recruited the AMA to assist righting the injustice of slavery and the injustice of abortion - objective facts demonstrate that both are human beings.

Active civic involvement by Horatio R. Storer is what ensured protection for children. We must be like Storer. Bring facts to bear so that the laws will protect those who can't protect themselves.  If the Life issue is an issue that matters -and it indeed is let's study and present the facts of life, so that innocent lives can again be protected.

Horatio Robinson Storer, M.D. (1830-1922)

Scientific Proof of the Beginning of Human Life

THE RIGHTS OF THE UNBORN: From Common Law to Constitutional Law

Amazing Grace (2006)

Air Date: 1-28-2017

EPISODE 004:

Roe v Wade, What Did It Do?

There is a lot of emotion that swirls around any discussion of abortion, emotions can cloud ideas and cloud our judgement that's why we want to help you cut through the thick fog emotions - on both sides-  and deal with the objective facts, and the real ideas at stake.

Demonstration: Hear that.... well you will be hearing those sorts of things... and the reason is, they want you to be quiet if you go to Church...

But from our earlier programs , and even if you've just studied biology you know that it is science and natural law that proclaims that that is a unique individual, a dependent child in the womb. That child can inherit property, and in many other elements of the law have full legal rights... 

That's why years after Roe v Wade's passage in a famous dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connir stated this:

Interview with special guest,

Carol Tobias – President of National Right To Life
@caroltobias1

Air Date: 1-21-2017

EPISODE 003:

Science and the Right To Life

Science is not your enemy. In being alive,  God is introducing us to observable facts. Life. This is the beginning of true science. Dealing with observable facts.  There is NOT a war between faith and science, in fact many of the greatest scientists were men and women of deep faith.

Science is a tool for learning. 

In the early 1200's Roger Bacon was considered the Father of Modern Science. Science can only work in an ordered universe. Bacon was a Christian.

America's Founders used essential observable facts - science. Our laws are built on self-evident truths.. not arbitrary assertions. This debate is not about your personal faith. You are always dealing with ideas, your thoughts, you must guard and understand the thoughts you entertain.

The reason abortion laws came into existence was because of observable facts about human lives. Don't capitulate to this being based in someone's faith or religion. That is a trap that will make the whole issue 'subjective' and not 'self-evident.'

Unless the lives of the vulnerable are protected by the law. Be able to explain the principles you are getting at. Study to show yourself able to rightly explain.

Science is on your side, the facts are with us. Don't make this about your personal theology.

Equipping you for the The Battle of Ideas.

Air Date: 1-14-2017

EPISODE 002:

What Is The Right To Life?

Understanding the Right to Life. Equipping individuals to cut through the fog surrounding the issues of Life. How to be effective in understanding and presenting the issues.

Confronting and dispelling the common errors in positioning the RTL.

It is about objective, self-evident facts.

It is NOT about anyone's personal theology - this is a common error.
It is NOT about the powerful emotions that surround babies, children, childbirth, etc.
It is a statement of the essential, founding principles of this nation.  These principles have been the hope of mankind through civilization's difficult trail up to this moment.
The RTL is a simple statement regarding the relationship of human beings to government, and government's responsibility to protect their lives. Government does not give them that right to exist, it merely has a responsibility to protect that right to exist.

What the ongoing program will cover:
Because of its essential nature the RTL impacts all of society: 
Law/Medicine/Science/The Arts/Relationships

"A society that consciously allows the intentional killing of innocent lives is impacted in every other aspect of society."

What you can do to help restore the RTL

E.g. One tool Communications and the Arts.

As an avocation, host Johnston acts and produces film (professional name, Keenan Johnston on IMDb)

Because we now live in what is essentially a 'post-literate culture' the moving image and electronic arts have incredible power over peoples understanding of life and society. Ideas are ingested and then projected for us by others. (i.e. film, television, videos even 'memes').

The average person does not wrestle deeply in the battle of ideas.

Life Fest Film Festival | Life. It's worth the effort.

Based in Hollywood and dedicated to honoring those films that underscore the significance of an individual life, even the seemingly insignificant.

Interview with special guest,

Carol Tobias – President of National Right To Life
@caroltobias1

Air Date: 1-7-2017

EPISODE 001:

Guard Your Mind

Oxford English Dictionary Word Of The Year 2016 - "Post-Truth"

Do we really look at the facts? 

The RTL - as asserted by American founding documents -emanates from actual self-evident truths, observable facts.

So for example we know abortion isn't wrong simply simply because it offends my feelings, or even my personal theology, it objectively takes a human life.

Commissioner Johnston explains his interest in language and the significance of language, language carries ideas and ideas have great consequence. Taught English. Latin, BA Linguistics.

You are already living in eternity: sometimes our day to day language and ideas cloud that from us.. we view temporal world as the summation of reality . But you are already in eternity and a part of eternity, that is not a theological assertion but an observation of the temporal order.

E.g. if you are in Stockton, California, you are still in the United States. and if you view time space continuum the same way, time - and your lifetime in particular - is still a subset of eternity.   Renew your mind; don't be conformed to the thinking of the world around you. Just this moment does not capture all of reality.

Film released end of 2016, Arrival.

About Language (seems like science fiction but look deeper)and the fact that how we view the temporal world and what's important is actually determined by the ideas we allow in our head.

The importance of film, entertainment, social media and cultural clutter is forming our ideas and remember ideas have consequences.

In 2017 China has announced a new and assertive round of propaganda campaign. "Soft power" media is the most effective...do you what that means for you?  

I'm not worried about China at the moment. yes, they are still Communist, but the deeper issue is what is revealed in their understanding of the most effective methods. you and I right now, we are being subjected to soft power media daily. Many of the thoughts ideas, predicates, being sold to us daily are exactly that ideas that carry the most destructive conclusions and yet they want you to accept the conclusions as your own.

BTW an illustration of what words you think can impact your life. Chinese language...they do not have a subjunctive mood - could, would, should.

Indicative only. Chinese culture and those who speak related languages have reputation as being very good with practical application. Newspeak - a limited vocabulary, in George Orwell's 1984.

Air Date: N/A Podcast Exclusive

EPISODE 000:

Introduction To Life Matters

A glimpse of what's to come in every podcast. What is the Right To Life - to be alive, what does it mean? Brian's background as an advocate, How the implications of an absence of the Right To Life has impacted the law, medicine, science, the arts, relationships - all of culture. What does that mean? What can we do about it? Each podcast will examine a specific aspect of Life, culture and the ongoing battle of ideas.

Air Date: N/A Podcast Exclusive

Regarding Brian's book and documentary,
Death As A Salesman: What's Wrong With Assisted Suicide