Human embryos should not be created whimsically, nor should they be destroyed.

Oh, they don’t call it murder. To these mad scientists, it’s just “embryo research.”

A week ago, scientists in Massachusetts announced that they have cloned the first human being. Many are protesting this attempt to “play God.” But how are they arguing their case?

Recent polls indicate that many Americans have no objection to the production of “designer children” from which to extract needed materials for the use of others. In the process numerous, innocent, unborn children will be sacrificed. Has our nation lost her conscience?

The California Supreme Court is one of the most reckless judicial bodies in the nation. Once more it has intruded into, and trampled upon, the right to religious freedom. Consider one of its latest infractions.

Does a human person begin at conception, uterine implantation, viability, birth or at some point after birth?

With every advancement in our understanding of life, especially our own bodies, the fingerprint of an all-powerful, all-wise Creator is even more clearly seen.

Some years ago a few scientists declared that the theory of evolution was as well established as the rotundity of the earth. But evolution is still a theory, not a law. All of the basics of this theory stand in opposition to known science.

How does one evaluate the ethics of the practice of human cloning?

Most everyone of the civilized nations finds the practice of human slavery abhorrent. The shocking fact is, however, slavery exists in profusion today, though it is scarcely recognized by most people. Read this engaging article on the “New Slavery.”

The following article is the true story of Clyde Thompson, once known as the “meanest man in Texas.” It wonderfully relates how the power of the gospel of Christ changed a vicious murderer into a great, soul-winning instrument of evangelism on behalf of men behind bars. This narrative was first published in a small tract (now out of print) distributed by Star Bible. It is reproduced here (with some slight editing and reformatting) for the benefit of our readers.

A frequently asked question is: “Where did the different races of mankind come from?” For many years evolutionists contended that racial differences were the result of different lines of evolutionary development. This theory has been thoroughly disproven. The Bible presents an entirely different viewpoint.

In his letter to the Christians in Rome, Paul describes a certain level of human activity as “inexcusable” (Rom. 1:20). Does this imply that some conduct, even that which is bad, is “excusable”?

Does 1 Corinthians 7:14 teach that a non-Christian is “sanctified” (saved) by being married to a Christian?

Why does there seem to be a sort of new “romance” between science and faith? Is it because people of “faith” have been willing to compromise their convictions about evolution?

A recent book by renowned crime journalist, Ann Rule, has a one hundred-plus-page discussion of the 2006 sensational Mary Winkler case—the woman who shot her minister husband in the back. This is a brief review of Rule’s conclusions.

In an article published sometime back, we denied that Peter was the “rock” upon which Christ built his church, as alleged by Roman Catholicism. A kindly critic objects to this position. Wayne Jackson discusses the matter further.

Here we address the evolutionists’ problem of explaining the missing links in the fossil record, and the war raging between evolutionary proponents.

On May 17, 2009, President Obama called for a sensible debate on abortion during his commencement speech at Notre Dame University. However, when he was asked directly, “At what point does a baby get human rights?” by Rick Warren, the President ducked with the best of them: “that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”

Do preborn babies deserve human rights protections? An honest look at the scientific evidence.