Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Sunday, April 24, 2011
How would you feel if right before your eyes someone intruded into this child's sanctuary and began to rip an arm off of this baby alive? How would you feel if they then ripped the next one off, and then a leg, and then a chunk of the back, and then the other leg as the child writhed and squirmed frantically? How would you feel if they then crushed the skull of this baby to finish the job?
...How would you feel if I told you that the Liberal Party, the NDP, and the Green Party are all indignant because the Tories have defunded the organization that is most well known for this kind of brutality to the most vulnerable and defenseless people in our world and in our country -- indeed, that they have made public professions of their unwavering support for this inhumane procedure? Elizabeth May, for example, has said that she strongly disagrees with Harpers decision to defund IPP, one such death organization. What would you say if I told you that not only do they support this brutality, they also refuse to allow anyone else to debate it.
This is the reality of what they give their unswerving support to:
I say I am disgusted. I say that is not my idea of progression. That is not what I want my country to be known for on the global front.
http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/gap-photoalbum.html
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Your “WOMAN” not every woman…
I found the choice of title for Antonia Zerbisias’ article quite interesting: “Tory legacy leaves little to attract women voters.”
I would like to ask why it is she thinks she has a monopoly on the desires and aspirations of women. Right off the bat, I must say that I get quite annoyed with the SOW for doing this very thing. They aren’t interested in representing all women; they speak and advocate only for those particular women whose ideologies align with their own. Any women who disagree are ostracised, defamed, belittled, and have their motives impugned. Suddenly, being a woman matters very little to them.
The truth is, they do not speak for all women; they speak only for women like them. So why should the government fund their special interests?
I think the reason (at least in part) that women still trail behind their male counterparts economically is simply because working mothers usually can't climb the corporate ladder unless they are willing to sacrifice the time with their children for their jobs the way men so often do. Employers usually prefer people who can work late hours with no distractions, and, unfortunately, who will "be one of the guys." It has much to do with the fact that working mothers, statistically speaking, shoulder the brunt of the practical and emotional work associated with family life, as W.Bradford Wilcox notes in his book "Soft Patriarchs, New Men”: Though society has taken an egalitarian trajectory in the public worlds of law, education, work, politics, and the cultural understanding of gender, the private institution of the family has not changed as quickly, largely because men have failed to take on an equal portion of the responsibility for family life. Men’s behaviour in this regard has two important consequences: first, it contributes to gender inequality in public and private life as women’s domestic responsibilities limit their public opportunities; and second, it places tremendous practical and psychological pressure on women, especially mothers who work outside the home. Thus, as Frances Goldscheider and Linda Waite have observed, the way to an egalitarian “new family” order “will lead through men.”
Married men with children seem to be the primary obstacle to the complete triumph of the gender revolution, not a lack of daycare. I am not saying daycare isn’t important; I am just saying daycare will not change the male chauvinism that is standing in the way of an economic gender-equality, and you cannot honestly attribute a lack of daycare to this imbalance.
Something else worthy of noting is that owing to this pressure that has been put on mothers who work outside the home, there seems to be more of a trend among young Generation Y women who have watched their "superwoman" mothers struggle and would prefer themselves to stay home with their young children. Dual-parent, single income homes are on the rise. Several other working mothers would prefer to quit working to raise their young children, but they can't afford to. So it could be that the Tories are tapping into the desires of this quite notable group of women.
The private member bills invoked here that were purportedly "aimed at curtailing abortion rights" were:
1) a bill that would make it an offense to kill a woman's baby against her will.
Currently, you can kill a woman's unborn baby in Canada, leave the mother to bury her dead child, and then be charged not with murder, but merely with assault of the woman. The unborn child is a non-existent entity in this country. That means you can do whatever you want to that child throughout the duration of the nine months (with or without the mother's consent) and walk away unscathed; And
2) a bill that would make it an offense to coerce a woman into getting an abortion against her will.
Coerced abortion has been proven to be psychologically, spiritually, and mentally devastating for women.
These bills were both consistent with the “choices” of women; both very pro-woman. But it seems that because these particular women’s desires aren't compatible with the ideology held to by the SOW, they are not considered important Women’s issues.
I am a woman, and I don’t approve of the gun registry. In fact, the registry does very little to protect women from abusive spouses. Being shot with a registered gun makes very little difference when you have a bullet in your head.
Finally, the Maternal Health Initiative: How can you call abortion uniformly pro-woman? How many little girls are killed through abortions? In several developing and third-world countries (even in Canada!), there is a huge problem with sex-selective abortions: little girls are unwanted by virtue of their femaleness. The problem for women snowballs from there, as there is a marked ratio imbalance between men and women. Women and female children from neighbouring countries are later abducted to be brides, or trafficked into prostitution to meet the sexual appetites of a population of unmarried men. The reason there are these 70,000 women dying from illegal abortions every year (if this number is accurate), is because so many women in developing countries do not have access to antibiotics or adequate health care. It is not because illegal abortions are more dangerous. (In fact, even in countries like the US where abortion is legal, abortion clinics are private, unregulated, and their cleanliness often leaves much to be desired. The same doctors that perform illegal abortions are the ones performing legal ones.) The real problem is that abortions are known for causing severe infections and other events that require immediate surgery….not to mention the psychological risks associated with abortion often propels women into suicide. At first glance, you’d think providing safer abortion services would make be better for these women, but if you really think about it, bringing abortion into some of these countries (especially where women cannot easily travel to get to the doctor in the likely event something goes awry) would be extremely reckless. It is much safer to deliver a baby (which is a natural process), then to abort it (which requires an invasive and dangerous procedure that obstructs a natural process).
Furthermore, Harper’s initiative was a “Maternal Health Care” initiative; it was not a reproductive health care initiative. Therefore, it covered maternal health and not reproductive health.
The majority of these women would prefer not to have their children aborted, but the opportunity to carry them to term, deliver them safely, and be able to provide for their needs. (Why are his efforts to help impoverished women deliver safely not being applauded by these women's agencies - why do they advocate strictly for women who choose abortion?)
Offering abortion to impoverished women instead of working to make proper maternal health care accessible is a cop-out at best, and at worst, a deceptive strategy used to target the poor in a pursuit of population control.
Now the 500 missing Native women, I have a HUGE problem with. That said, I don’t see any other party real passionate about justice for aboriginal women….though I desperately wish they were. It actually took a woman Conservative MP (Joy Smith) to come up with a bill that would establish mandatory minimum sentencing for the sex trafficking of children. This is a real issue in the aboriginal population. Native women make up the majority of women who are sexually exploited through prostitution in this country….and most of those entered “the trade” in their early adolescence (average 13 years-old). It's the generational fall-out of the residential school systems that leaves these young girls vulenerable to trafficking. The theory of many aboriginal women's associations is that the sex-trafficking of aboriginal women in this country has something to do with the 500 missing aboriginal women.
My point is that we don’t need more Conservatives, Liberals, or NDP’s; we need more women in parliament.
I would like to ask why it is she thinks she has a monopoly on the desires and aspirations of women. Right off the bat, I must say that I get quite annoyed with the SOW for doing this very thing. They aren’t interested in representing all women; they speak and advocate only for those particular women whose ideologies align with their own. Any women who disagree are ostracised, defamed, belittled, and have their motives impugned. Suddenly, being a woman matters very little to them.
The truth is, they do not speak for all women; they speak only for women like them. So why should the government fund their special interests?
I think the reason (at least in part) that women still trail behind their male counterparts economically is simply because working mothers usually can't climb the corporate ladder unless they are willing to sacrifice the time with their children for their jobs the way men so often do. Employers usually prefer people who can work late hours with no distractions, and, unfortunately, who will "be one of the guys." It has much to do with the fact that working mothers, statistically speaking, shoulder the brunt of the practical and emotional work associated with family life, as W.Bradford Wilcox notes in his book "Soft Patriarchs, New Men”: Though society has taken an egalitarian trajectory in the public worlds of law, education, work, politics, and the cultural understanding of gender, the private institution of the family has not changed as quickly, largely because men have failed to take on an equal portion of the responsibility for family life. Men’s behaviour in this regard has two important consequences: first, it contributes to gender inequality in public and private life as women’s domestic responsibilities limit their public opportunities; and second, it places tremendous practical and psychological pressure on women, especially mothers who work outside the home. Thus, as Frances Goldscheider and Linda Waite have observed, the way to an egalitarian “new family” order “will lead through men.”
Married men with children seem to be the primary obstacle to the complete triumph of the gender revolution, not a lack of daycare. I am not saying daycare isn’t important; I am just saying daycare will not change the male chauvinism that is standing in the way of an economic gender-equality, and you cannot honestly attribute a lack of daycare to this imbalance.
Something else worthy of noting is that owing to this pressure that has been put on mothers who work outside the home, there seems to be more of a trend among young Generation Y women who have watched their "superwoman" mothers struggle and would prefer themselves to stay home with their young children. Dual-parent, single income homes are on the rise. Several other working mothers would prefer to quit working to raise their young children, but they can't afford to. So it could be that the Tories are tapping into the desires of this quite notable group of women.
The private member bills invoked here that were purportedly "aimed at curtailing abortion rights" were:
1) a bill that would make it an offense to kill a woman's baby against her will.
Currently, you can kill a woman's unborn baby in Canada, leave the mother to bury her dead child, and then be charged not with murder, but merely with assault of the woman. The unborn child is a non-existent entity in this country. That means you can do whatever you want to that child throughout the duration of the nine months (with or without the mother's consent) and walk away unscathed; And
2) a bill that would make it an offense to coerce a woman into getting an abortion against her will.
Coerced abortion has been proven to be psychologically, spiritually, and mentally devastating for women.
These bills were both consistent with the “choices” of women; both very pro-woman. But it seems that because these particular women’s desires aren't compatible with the ideology held to by the SOW, they are not considered important Women’s issues.
I am a woman, and I don’t approve of the gun registry. In fact, the registry does very little to protect women from abusive spouses. Being shot with a registered gun makes very little difference when you have a bullet in your head.
Finally, the Maternal Health Initiative: How can you call abortion uniformly pro-woman? How many little girls are killed through abortions? In several developing and third-world countries (even in Canada!), there is a huge problem with sex-selective abortions: little girls are unwanted by virtue of their femaleness. The problem for women snowballs from there, as there is a marked ratio imbalance between men and women. Women and female children from neighbouring countries are later abducted to be brides, or trafficked into prostitution to meet the sexual appetites of a population of unmarried men. The reason there are these 70,000 women dying from illegal abortions every year (if this number is accurate), is because so many women in developing countries do not have access to antibiotics or adequate health care. It is not because illegal abortions are more dangerous. (In fact, even in countries like the US where abortion is legal, abortion clinics are private, unregulated, and their cleanliness often leaves much to be desired. The same doctors that perform illegal abortions are the ones performing legal ones.) The real problem is that abortions are known for causing severe infections and other events that require immediate surgery….not to mention the psychological risks associated with abortion often propels women into suicide. At first glance, you’d think providing safer abortion services would make be better for these women, but if you really think about it, bringing abortion into some of these countries (especially where women cannot easily travel to get to the doctor in the likely event something goes awry) would be extremely reckless. It is much safer to deliver a baby (which is a natural process), then to abort it (which requires an invasive and dangerous procedure that obstructs a natural process).
Furthermore, Harper’s initiative was a “Maternal Health Care” initiative; it was not a reproductive health care initiative. Therefore, it covered maternal health and not reproductive health.
The majority of these women would prefer not to have their children aborted, but the opportunity to carry them to term, deliver them safely, and be able to provide for their needs. (Why are his efforts to help impoverished women deliver safely not being applauded by these women's agencies - why do they advocate strictly for women who choose abortion?)
Offering abortion to impoverished women instead of working to make proper maternal health care accessible is a cop-out at best, and at worst, a deceptive strategy used to target the poor in a pursuit of population control.
Now the 500 missing Native women, I have a HUGE problem with. That said, I don’t see any other party real passionate about justice for aboriginal women….though I desperately wish they were. It actually took a woman Conservative MP (Joy Smith) to come up with a bill that would establish mandatory minimum sentencing for the sex trafficking of children. This is a real issue in the aboriginal population. Native women make up the majority of women who are sexually exploited through prostitution in this country….and most of those entered “the trade” in their early adolescence (average 13 years-old). It's the generational fall-out of the residential school systems that leaves these young girls vulenerable to trafficking. The theory of many aboriginal women's associations is that the sex-trafficking of aboriginal women in this country has something to do with the 500 missing aboriginal women.
My point is that we don’t need more Conservatives, Liberals, or NDP’s; we need more women in parliament.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Abortion is wrong - what then shall we do about it?
The Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform's Truth Tour is in Thunder Bay for the weekend. Tonight JoJo Ruba kicked off the tour with "A Case for Life" at the LU for (I guess) close to fifty of us -- some of which were, happily, new, young faces. Tomorrow JoJo will resume his "Making Abortion Unthinkable" series at St.Peters Roman Catholic Church with " Becoming Pro-life Ambassadors.” On Sunday at Westfort Baptist Church, at 11:00am, JoJo will speak on "Loving our Unborn Neighbour" to be followed later at 8:00pm at the United Reformed Church with "True for me but not for you."
I am really looking forward to being strengthened in my pro-life beliefs and learning from JoJo's expertise and experience this weekend and I am thankful that the Lord has opened doors for him to get the Truth out there where it can make an impact. Especially encouraging for me were the events immediately preceding this weekend's tour, in which the "pro-choice" protest and subsequent suspensions of a few St.Patrick school students sent waves throughout the city of Thunder Bay, stirring up the subject of abortion, freedom of speech and expression, and provoking some much needed dialogue and debate from the community. This will be the fourth time this year that abortion has made the press and has brought to the surface the nature of the heated abortion debate once again. This, I think, is a very good sign. As JoJo so rightly observed tonight, we pro-lifers have a winning argument if we would just engage people in conversation.
JoJo began tonight by helping us to identify and confront moral relativism by emphatically asserting our pro-life views as objective truth owing to the basic fact that abortion kills a human being.
He then explained the usefulness of realistic, graphic pictures to unmask the abhorrent nature of what abortion is -- which is killing a human being. Delineating upon this notion further, he took great pains to underscore the humanity of the unborn child -- that this personhood is not merely a personal belief; rather, it is scientifically supported by the principle of BIOGENESIS (like produces like). Then, to help us in our efforts to more effectively engage with others and dispel faulty conceptions of what determines personhood, he introduced us to the SLED test:
1) Size
Does size determine personhood?
2) Level of Development
When do our abilities determine personhood? (It's a rhetorical question.)
3) Environment
Does where we are determine what we are?
4) Degree of Dependency
Does dependency determine personhood?
Now, the example he gave to prove his point here (I felt) was seriously lacking. JoJo used the example of the dependency of a born child to a parent, and reasoned that a parent could not just kill his or her child because the child's dependency is an inconvenience. I have debated pro-choicers before who have appealed to the dependency of the unborn to the mother as the basis of the pro-choice argument, and I see their point. The unborn child is dependent on the very body of the mother for his or her life, and not on the certain extrinsic tasks the parent must undertake for the child's survival. If such a case arose wherein the parent was not willing to take on these responsibilities, they can be deferred to somebody else who is willing. The child does not necessarily die as a consequence -- he can live with the help of another; however, the mother of the unborn child does not have this option. She may not be choosing to kill the baby -- perhaps she is choosing to assert her right to her own bodily integrity. But when she makes the choice to disengage herself -- her own uterus (and she does not have to necessarily target the child at all...she simply refuses her organs to the child) -- the child will die, but indirectly. Her intent was merely to excercise her own autonomy that the child happened to be subsisting upon.
So there is a fundamental difference between these two scenarios, obviously.
And pro-choicers, who are coming from this viewpoint, will ask you if we should also force people to give blood to save others. And what do we say? Of course not! If we see that a person is in need, and we have the capacity to meet that need should we sacrifice something of our own, whether we choose to meet that need or not is a matter of choice -- of personal values -- and there is no place for the law to infringe on our freedom to choose in such a case. Even though it is true that the mother of the unborn child needs not actively "do" anything to preserve the life of the unborn child, she must still carry that child, be stretched, endure labour pain, and then deliver that child and recover from childbirth. We are still compelling her to sacrifice something of her own personal space, comfort and ownership for the sustenance of another. In light of this, one can rightfully argue that this is not a matter for law, but for individual conscience.
Now, there is a problem here for the pro-choicer too, as the abortion procedure never simply evacuates the contents of the uterus without infringing on the integrity of the child. But one can argue still that when one has trespassed on your property, there are allocations for the use of force in removing the intruder, if necessary.
We pro-lifers can draw the "choice to have sex" card, but when it comes to sexual reproduction, there is really no choice at the very heart of the matter: Women did not choose to have their bodies designed in such a way that sex and pregnancy are inextricably linked. Many women, if there were a choice, would choose sex without the capacity to produce human lives that would subsist within their wombs. Many women take birth control and still experience breakthrough pregnancies.
If you have debated with enough pro-choicers you quickly come to see that very few of them who have done their homework (which are the most avid pro-choicers) really believe the unborn child is not a human being. They simply believe that the unborn child (human or not) should not be entitled to subsist on another person's body against that person's will.
To be clear: I am not sympathizing with the absurdity that Joyce Arthur subscribes to in maintaining that the nature and value of the fetus is subjective to the mother (this defies both logic and reality); I am saying that even though we recognize the human nature of the fetus and ackowledge it's inherent value, there is question as to whether or not we ought to use the law to force someone to continue to have their body used as a life support system for that human being -- and this is really the crux of the matter.
I am not quite sure what to think at this point. I care deeply about the lives of the unborn. I mourn for them. I remember the little body (the eyes, little nose, mouth, hands and fingers, feet and toes) of my tiny son and think abortion is a grave evil. I can't imagine how it would feel for him to have his precious arms and legs torn off of him as he writhed in pain. But I also think leaving the poor to "stew in their own juices" while we live it up here in the West is a grave evil too. (Yet, we make sure our own families are liberally provided for, and then we give the poor some of the left-over. Poor children are dying too, but we do not think it is our responsibility to make any real sacrifices for them.) The question is, do we use the law to force us to donate to the poor? Do we use the law to give a kidney to someone who is going into kidney failure?
What I do know for sure is that we should never gloss over the horrendous reality of abortion and the severity of that choice. We should not even pretend that it is morally acceptable. We do have a mandate to fight for truth and to make sure that women making this choice are given straightforward facts instead of deceptive euphemisms. We have a responsibility to our young women who are under the age of consent to not abort their babies when they are not of age to make such a decision. (We also have a responsibility not to let abortion clinics cover up the crimes of pedophiles by destroying the evidence.) We should fight insofar as truth is being systematically concealed. There is much pro-life work to be done. But should we use the law to force people to be moral, and if so...where do we draw the line? That is what I would like to know.
I guess I am just questioning a lot of things lately. I am trying to distinguish between man-made religion, and what is biblical Christianity.
EDIT:
I did manage to speak with Jojo while he was here, and he helped to clear some things up (which I will blog about in the near future). He also pointed something else out that instantly reminded me of a conversation I once had with a few pro-choice activists.
Jojo made the point (and I have to paraphrase) that this argument (the dependency of the child to the mother) is really a non-issue for pro-choicers; they simply use this argument as ammunition against Life. His words instantly stirred up something these choicers had said to me in a conversation we were having regarding the prospect of a future artificial womb, and what effect this would have on the pro-choice movement. Basically, it mattered not to them; not one bit.
"What if", I asked, "a future abortion procedure became available which simply removes the child from the womb without any additional violence? What if technology did permit us to transfer the child from the woman's womb to an artificial womb, for example?"
And the answer?
It makes no difference to them. "The woman should be entitled the right not to be a parent against her will."
So basically, they want the right not to allow the child to exist at all. All logic and morality and basic humanity tossed to the wind. Make way for the almighty woman (or the man who is manipilating that woman)! We now live in a might makes right country.
This really is an argument to get us sidetracked.
I am really looking forward to being strengthened in my pro-life beliefs and learning from JoJo's expertise and experience this weekend and I am thankful that the Lord has opened doors for him to get the Truth out there where it can make an impact. Especially encouraging for me were the events immediately preceding this weekend's tour, in which the "pro-choice" protest and subsequent suspensions of a few St.Patrick school students sent waves throughout the city of Thunder Bay, stirring up the subject of abortion, freedom of speech and expression, and provoking some much needed dialogue and debate from the community. This will be the fourth time this year that abortion has made the press and has brought to the surface the nature of the heated abortion debate once again. This, I think, is a very good sign. As JoJo so rightly observed tonight, we pro-lifers have a winning argument if we would just engage people in conversation.
JoJo began tonight by helping us to identify and confront moral relativism by emphatically asserting our pro-life views as objective truth owing to the basic fact that abortion kills a human being.
He then explained the usefulness of realistic, graphic pictures to unmask the abhorrent nature of what abortion is -- which is killing a human being. Delineating upon this notion further, he took great pains to underscore the humanity of the unborn child -- that this personhood is not merely a personal belief; rather, it is scientifically supported by the principle of BIOGENESIS (like produces like). Then, to help us in our efforts to more effectively engage with others and dispel faulty conceptions of what determines personhood, he introduced us to the SLED test:
1) Size
Does size determine personhood?
2) Level of Development
When do our abilities determine personhood? (It's a rhetorical question.)
3) Environment
Does where we are determine what we are?
4) Degree of Dependency
Does dependency determine personhood?
Now, the example he gave to prove his point here (I felt) was seriously lacking. JoJo used the example of the dependency of a born child to a parent, and reasoned that a parent could not just kill his or her child because the child's dependency is an inconvenience. I have debated pro-choicers before who have appealed to the dependency of the unborn to the mother as the basis of the pro-choice argument, and I see their point. The unborn child is dependent on the very body of the mother for his or her life, and not on the certain extrinsic tasks the parent must undertake for the child's survival. If such a case arose wherein the parent was not willing to take on these responsibilities, they can be deferred to somebody else who is willing. The child does not necessarily die as a consequence -- he can live with the help of another; however, the mother of the unborn child does not have this option. She may not be choosing to kill the baby -- perhaps she is choosing to assert her right to her own bodily integrity. But when she makes the choice to disengage herself -- her own uterus (and she does not have to necessarily target the child at all...she simply refuses her organs to the child) -- the child will die, but indirectly. Her intent was merely to excercise her own autonomy that the child happened to be subsisting upon.
So there is a fundamental difference between these two scenarios, obviously.
And pro-choicers, who are coming from this viewpoint, will ask you if we should also force people to give blood to save others. And what do we say? Of course not! If we see that a person is in need, and we have the capacity to meet that need should we sacrifice something of our own, whether we choose to meet that need or not is a matter of choice -- of personal values -- and there is no place for the law to infringe on our freedom to choose in such a case. Even though it is true that the mother of the unborn child needs not actively "do" anything to preserve the life of the unborn child, she must still carry that child, be stretched, endure labour pain, and then deliver that child and recover from childbirth. We are still compelling her to sacrifice something of her own personal space, comfort and ownership for the sustenance of another. In light of this, one can rightfully argue that this is not a matter for law, but for individual conscience.
Now, there is a problem here for the pro-choicer too, as the abortion procedure never simply evacuates the contents of the uterus without infringing on the integrity of the child. But one can argue still that when one has trespassed on your property, there are allocations for the use of force in removing the intruder, if necessary.
We pro-lifers can draw the "choice to have sex" card, but when it comes to sexual reproduction, there is really no choice at the very heart of the matter: Women did not choose to have their bodies designed in such a way that sex and pregnancy are inextricably linked. Many women, if there were a choice, would choose sex without the capacity to produce human lives that would subsist within their wombs. Many women take birth control and still experience breakthrough pregnancies.
If you have debated with enough pro-choicers you quickly come to see that very few of them who have done their homework (which are the most avid pro-choicers) really believe the unborn child is not a human being. They simply believe that the unborn child (human or not) should not be entitled to subsist on another person's body against that person's will.
To be clear: I am not sympathizing with the absurdity that Joyce Arthur subscribes to in maintaining that the nature and value of the fetus is subjective to the mother (this defies both logic and reality); I am saying that even though we recognize the human nature of the fetus and ackowledge it's inherent value, there is question as to whether or not we ought to use the law to force someone to continue to have their body used as a life support system for that human being -- and this is really the crux of the matter.
I am not quite sure what to think at this point. I care deeply about the lives of the unborn. I mourn for them. I remember the little body (the eyes, little nose, mouth, hands and fingers, feet and toes) of my tiny son and think abortion is a grave evil. I can't imagine how it would feel for him to have his precious arms and legs torn off of him as he writhed in pain. But I also think leaving the poor to "stew in their own juices" while we live it up here in the West is a grave evil too. (Yet, we make sure our own families are liberally provided for, and then we give the poor some of the left-over. Poor children are dying too, but we do not think it is our responsibility to make any real sacrifices for them.) The question is, do we use the law to force us to donate to the poor? Do we use the law to give a kidney to someone who is going into kidney failure?
What I do know for sure is that we should never gloss over the horrendous reality of abortion and the severity of that choice. We should not even pretend that it is morally acceptable. We do have a mandate to fight for truth and to make sure that women making this choice are given straightforward facts instead of deceptive euphemisms. We have a responsibility to our young women who are under the age of consent to not abort their babies when they are not of age to make such a decision. (We also have a responsibility not to let abortion clinics cover up the crimes of pedophiles by destroying the evidence.) We should fight insofar as truth is being systematically concealed. There is much pro-life work to be done. But should we use the law to force people to be moral, and if so...where do we draw the line? That is what I would like to know.
I guess I am just questioning a lot of things lately. I am trying to distinguish between man-made religion, and what is biblical Christianity.
EDIT:
I did manage to speak with Jojo while he was here, and he helped to clear some things up (which I will blog about in the near future). He also pointed something else out that instantly reminded me of a conversation I once had with a few pro-choice activists.
Jojo made the point (and I have to paraphrase) that this argument (the dependency of the child to the mother) is really a non-issue for pro-choicers; they simply use this argument as ammunition against Life. His words instantly stirred up something these choicers had said to me in a conversation we were having regarding the prospect of a future artificial womb, and what effect this would have on the pro-choice movement. Basically, it mattered not to them; not one bit.
"What if", I asked, "a future abortion procedure became available which simply removes the child from the womb without any additional violence? What if technology did permit us to transfer the child from the woman's womb to an artificial womb, for example?"
And the answer?
It makes no difference to them. "The woman should be entitled the right not to be a parent against her will."
So basically, they want the right not to allow the child to exist at all. All logic and morality and basic humanity tossed to the wind. Make way for the almighty woman (or the man who is manipilating that woman)! We now live in a might makes right country.
This really is an argument to get us sidetracked.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Life Chain '10
I want to start this entry by saying first, there is no inconsistency with the title of this blog, "garments of praise," and the subject of this entry, which is abortion. The way I see it, fighting for the defenseless and taking a stand to stop violence against women is an act of worship. I am God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for me to do. (Ephesians 2:10)
I am not about to let my life go to waste just because standing up for what's good and true and right is uncomfortable and makes people angry. As Gianna Jessen says so perfectly,
I just finished watching 22 Weeks...
...and I am terribly angry. I must be careful of what I say right now because I am angry not only at what is happening to women and babies out there, but because the vast majority of WE CHRISTIANS are ignoring it altogether.
I just think, how easy it is to be a self-righteous hypocrite. We are so self-deceiving the way we justify our apathy. We say we love, but then we completely ignore those all around us in our country whose need is most urgent.
I really don't believe we will have an excuse when we stand before the throne. We could see the humanity of the unborn very clearly now through modern technology. There's no excuse. And I am so discouraged at the way we judge all those Christians who lived in the middle of the holocaust and did nothing...and yet we are the same. The holocaust of unborn babies is so cloaked that we do pretty much nothing to defend them. Not only that, but then when other Christians speak up, we get mad at them and tell them to stay out of political issues. That is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard! Defending helpless human beings is NOT a political issue. It is a God issue.
I'm really trying not to judge my brothers and sisters in Christ--I am no better I'm sure--but I just don't think we really believe what we say we believe. If we *really* believed these were babies, why no action on their behalf? Because we are lying to ourselves.
That said, I was really encouraged at Life Chain this year. Not only was there a wonderful turn out as compared to other years, but I really felt hopeful this year that God is moving. I don't know how exactly, but I am convinced He is and He will just for the fact that we are asking Him to and moving out in faith so He can use what little we give Him.
TBT news was there and it provoked some good dialogue. That's always a good thing.
So let's not get tired of doing what is good. At just the right time we will reap a harvest of blessing if we don't give up. Galatians 6:9 NLT
You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? ... You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid... Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. Matthew 5:13-16
Some say it is a waste of our time--a futile cause. I say since we have a high and lofty God we owe it to Him to believe Him for high and lofty goals. He will never be disappointed in us for believing too much, but He will be if we believe too little.
we will probably never know this side of eternity the impact these few hours of our lives have made and how far it has rippled out to touch the lives and hearts of others.
"See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven." Matthew 18:10
"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' Matthew 25:40
I am not about to let my life go to waste just because standing up for what's good and true and right is uncomfortable and makes people angry. As Gianna Jessen says so perfectly,
"I didn't survive so I could make everyone comfortable. I survived so I could stir things up a bit!"
I just finished watching 22 Weeks...
...and I am terribly angry. I must be careful of what I say right now because I am angry not only at what is happening to women and babies out there, but because the vast majority of WE CHRISTIANS are ignoring it altogether.
I just think, how easy it is to be a self-righteous hypocrite. We are so self-deceiving the way we justify our apathy. We say we love, but then we completely ignore those all around us in our country whose need is most urgent.
I really don't believe we will have an excuse when we stand before the throne. We could see the humanity of the unborn very clearly now through modern technology. There's no excuse. And I am so discouraged at the way we judge all those Christians who lived in the middle of the holocaust and did nothing...and yet we are the same. The holocaust of unborn babies is so cloaked that we do pretty much nothing to defend them. Not only that, but then when other Christians speak up, we get mad at them and tell them to stay out of political issues. That is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard! Defending helpless human beings is NOT a political issue. It is a God issue.
I'm really trying not to judge my brothers and sisters in Christ--I am no better I'm sure--but I just don't think we really believe what we say we believe. If we *really* believed these were babies, why no action on their behalf? Because we are lying to ourselves.
That said, I was really encouraged at Life Chain this year. Not only was there a wonderful turn out as compared to other years, but I really felt hopeful this year that God is moving. I don't know how exactly, but I am convinced He is and He will just for the fact that we are asking Him to and moving out in faith so He can use what little we give Him.
TBT news was there and it provoked some good dialogue. That's always a good thing.
One of the highlights of going to Life Chain each year--Isn't she beautiful?
My buddy.
Bella Donna
very hopeful that God will use whatever little bit we give Him in faith for His infinitely wise purposes, and His ultimate glory.
want to see some signs reading Jesus forgives and heals.
ECLIPSE OF REASON - Abortion Documentary
Re-post:
It seems some people are convinced that I needed to abandon my pro-life "agenda" and return to doing "Kingdom work". Whether or not I should have, I have taken these suggestions to heart and struggled with them for the last four days. Am I, as Beth Moore calls it, allowing myself to "become the enemy of my best?" Should I put my pro-life battles in only one little compartment of my life and use the rest of it to pursue Kingdom work, or should I abandon it altogether?
The problem is, the more I seek God, the more I can ever so slightly see His image in those around me, and then the more fervent my desire is to "Deliver those who are being taken away to death,and those who are staggering to slaughter"(Pro 24:11), and am more moved with compassion for the "least of these".
So, I've been praying that if my passion for the unborn and the time I spend defending them is interfering with my relationship with God, that He would show me. That if it is His will for me to tone it down, that He would relieve me of this intense burden. Yet the more I pray, the more my heart wrenches for them.
On day 4's homework of this week, God made it crystal clear to me that He has, in this area, "made His passions my passions", as I've been praying for Him to do.
And here's my answer:
'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'(Matthew 22:37-39)
Kingdom work and rescuing those in need are not mutually exclusive vocations. Loving our neighbours goes right to the very identity of Christianity and is an integral extension of faith.
However, God did warn me through day 5's homework not to work until I have sought His direction through prayer and His word, so that my God-given passions would be poured out within the safe framework of His agenda, so as not to be used destructively or in vain. After all, to fulfill the law you must love all your neighbours. I need to be careful to go where He tells me, and to say what He tells me to say.
I love this Scripture...
Delight yourself in the Lord and he will give you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the Lord; trust in him and he will do this: He will make your righteousness shine like the dawn, the justice of your cause like the noonday sun.”(Psalm 37:4-6)
But I must also remember the prayer He gave me...
"now lift up my eyes and let me look at life."
The wise words Shelly gave to Harry on the movie My Girl are whispering in the back of my mind..."I'm not asking you to stop feeling for those people..but life isn't just death. Don't ignore the living." I must remember to allow myself to live, as well as take pity on the living:The women who are in need, half-dead, stigmatized by society and the church... That again, I am to not only hate what is evil, but then also to CLING TO WHAT IS GOOD....and that's where I lack big time.
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" He answered: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"
In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'
"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"
The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." (Luke 10:25-37)
Is it possible that just as the religious leaders of the parable were so consumed with pursuing "God's agenda" that they forgot that, as Paul writes,
"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing?"(1 Corinthians 13:2),
we do the same with our lack of action on behalf of the unborn and their mothers? Beth Moore writes
"often the tests of our hearts will be similar...they usually involve behaviors and reactions to one another. How we deal with people may be a truer test of the heart than how we relate to things....Stepping across a boundary to help is sometimes our first introduction to the commonality of humanity on the other side. Offering help in a time of need can be the first step to overcoming God-dishonoring prejudice."
So...the question is...
...WHO IS YOUR NEIGHBOUR?
According to Jesus, your neighbour is anyone in need....or are we ourselves attempting "to hide in loopholes of terminology", instead of taking pity (remember, that word means "to feel deeply or viscerally") on the unborn and post-abortive women, and compassionately acting on that?
"It's not a real 'person'...just a fetus...sub-human...not like us..."
"She made her choice...it's her own problem...She's a murderer...sub-human...not like us..."
And so we justify passing by on the other side...after all...we're just so busy doing the important work of God.
If you faint in the day of adversity, your strength is small. Deliver those who are drawn away to death, and those who totter to the slaughter, hold them back [from their doom]. If you [profess ignorance and] say, Behold, we did not know this, does not He Who weighs and ponders the heart perceive and consider it? And He Who guards your life, does not He know it? And shall not He render to [you and] every man according to his works? (Proverbs 24:10-12)
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Tiller "The Killer" Murdered
.jpg)
I'm assuming everyone knows about the murder of Abortionist George Tiller, also known as Tiller the Killer. If not, you can read about it here.
As an avid pro-lifer, I am heartbroken. I am heartbroken because I am...and listen carefully...Pro-LIFE. Yes, that means for the lives of even terrible sinners. And why am I for the lives of terrible sinners...like...uhum....murderers? Because Jesus was for sinners... like...uhum....murderers. Or did we forget that even the apostle Paul was a murderer?
What urks me is this attitude we have developed where we think God grades on a curve. But guess what. He doesn't. I too find myself locked in this mindset too often. It's so easy to slip into without even realizing it. It's our sinful nature. But Romans 3:23 says, "we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Even better, "There is none righteous. No, not one."( Romans 3:10). And even more scary is this: "For the wages of sin is death..."(Romans 6:23)
As an avid pro-lifer, I am heartbroken. I am heartbroken because I am...and listen carefully...Pro-LIFE. Yes, that means for the lives of even terrible sinners. And why am I for the lives of terrible sinners...like...uhum....murderers? Because Jesus was for sinners... like...uhum....murderers. Or did we forget that even the apostle Paul was a murderer?
What urks me is this attitude we have developed where we think God grades on a curve. But guess what. He doesn't. I too find myself locked in this mindset too often. It's so easy to slip into without even realizing it. It's our sinful nature. But Romans 3:23 says, "we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Even better, "There is none righteous. No, not one."( Romans 3:10). And even more scary is this: "For the wages of sin is death..."(Romans 6:23)
Ever sinned? You, along with Tiller and me, deserve to die. But glory to God! Jesus has died in our place! Now if we trust in Jesus for our salvation, we will be saved because even though the wages of sin (that's all kinds of sin) is death, "the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23 cont.)
This is the Gospel...the Good News!!
Yes, Tiller killed unborn babies in a ruthless fashion. He had seared his conscience with a hot iron. But that's exactly where we'd all be if we had not been restrained by the sheer grace of God. Do you think any of us are better than Tiller? I beg to differ. We are all capable of the same crimes as Tiller. We can all be deceived by our evil hearts. We should just be grateful to God that He has been so gracious as to give us enough light to know that murdering babies is wrong, because not everybody knows that. It's much easier to lie to ourselves than we like to think, so it would be a good thing for us to not be so self-righteous. Whatever we have -including sight- has been given to us. "What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?" (1 Corinthians 4:7)
Here's the horribly sad truth. Tiller is dead. Chances are, he didn't have time to repent. He's most likely not in heaven and will not have a change to be again. Whoever killed him took that chance away. We should have all been praying for his salvation, for God to unveil his eyes and see the error of his ways, instead of plotting his murder. Satan comes to kill and destroy, not Jesus. Jesus came so that we might have life and have it abundantly.(John 10:10)
Remember Luke 9:51-16? The Samaritans rejected Jesus. James and John asked, "Do you want us to call fire down from heaven and destroy them?" And Jesus did what? He rebuked them. Why? Because Jesus is a friend of sinners. They don't get a whole lot more sinful than Tiller. My guess would be, if Jesus were among us in this age, we'd be shocked to find the abortion doctors dining with Jesus because He would accept them. Yes...abortionists, Planned Parenthood employees, porn stars, homosexuals, atheists, murderers, prostitutes, pedophiles, sex offenders, and the whole works. Jesus has the power and is willing to wash the crud off of all of us, including abortionists.
If God wanted Tiller dead, He had the power to kill him, but He has already revealed to us that "The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some people understand slowness, but is being patient with you. He does not want anyone to perish, but wants everyone to repent." (2 Peter 3:9)
Here's the horribly sad truth. Tiller is dead. Chances are, he didn't have time to repent. He's most likely not in heaven and will not have a change to be again. Whoever killed him took that chance away. We should have all been praying for his salvation, for God to unveil his eyes and see the error of his ways, instead of plotting his murder. Satan comes to kill and destroy, not Jesus. Jesus came so that we might have life and have it abundantly.(John 10:10)
Remember Luke 9:51-16? The Samaritans rejected Jesus. James and John asked, "Do you want us to call fire down from heaven and destroy them?" And Jesus did what? He rebuked them. Why? Because Jesus is a friend of sinners. They don't get a whole lot more sinful than Tiller. My guess would be, if Jesus were among us in this age, we'd be shocked to find the abortion doctors dining with Jesus because He would accept them. Yes...abortionists, Planned Parenthood employees, porn stars, homosexuals, atheists, murderers, prostitutes, pedophiles, sex offenders, and the whole works. Jesus has the power and is willing to wash the crud off of all of us, including abortionists.
If God wanted Tiller dead, He had the power to kill him, but He has already revealed to us that "The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some people understand slowness, but is being patient with you. He does not want anyone to perish, but wants everyone to repent." (2 Peter 3:9)
If you disagree, let me ask you this:
What does Isaiah 59:14 say the real problem is in this world where we think wrong is right and dark is light, and there is no justice? It says, "Justice is turned back, And righteousness stands far away; For truth has stumbled in the street, And uprightness cannot enter." Did you read that? TRUTH HAS STUMBLED IN THE STREET.
Our problem is not Tiller. It isn't even abortion. It is that the truth has fallen and has wreaked havoc in our world. It has been the cause of a chaotic traffic jam, and the only way to get things in order again is to pick up the truth and get things moving again.
What we need to be doing is speaking the truth in love and sharing the gospel with the lost. Or what do we think is accomplished by killing abortion doctors? I'll tell you. Absolutely nothing for the kingdom of God. Tiller is dead and most likely wasn't saved. Another doctor will take Tiller's place. Babies will still die. Jesus looks like a condemning judge to unbelievers, and abortion doctors and women who've had abortions think Jesus hates them. Christians look hateful, hypocritical and self-righteous, and lo and behold, pro-lifers once again get slapped with the label "psycho".
I am mourning over Tiller's death. I am praying for his family. The only one that wanted Tiller dead is Satan. That way his fate would be sealed, and Jesus' name drug through the mud again. This is not a time for rejoicing.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Pregnant Fathers
I'm posting another post from Casualties. Not just because this is only like my favorite topic in the whole wide world, not only because of the implications it could have on our death culture, but also because I'm blown away at how our God has put us all together. What I find so huge about this research is that God has designed fathers to be engaged with their children. It's natural. It's unnatural for fathers to be absent or distant. It's against God's design. It also has profound implications for bereaved fathers and/or fathers touched by abortion. Good stuff to reflect on and keep in mind.
In the article Stretch Marks for Dads, Emily Anthes discusses what fatherhood itself does to the male brain and body. I'm curious to know how this plays out when it comes to abortions. The father's brain and body react to the mother's hormones when she delivers the child and so wouldn't the father also react to the hormones of the woman who's had an abortion? It's not like his body would know the difference between a natural birth or an induced birth of a dead child. The woman experiences the same hormonal shifts regardless of the cause of birth or the fate of the child.
So, if it does turn out that abortion and pregnancy does in fact impact the father's brain and body (and it would appear it does), can we women continue to use the slogan "my body my choice"? Wouldn't that be a erroneous statement?
In the article Stretch Marks for Dads, Emily Anthes discusses what fatherhood itself does to the male brain and body. I'm curious to know how this plays out when it comes to abortions. The father's brain and body react to the mother's hormones when she delivers the child and so wouldn't the father also react to the hormones of the woman who's had an abortion? It's not like his body would know the difference between a natural birth or an induced birth of a dead child. The woman experiences the same hormonal shifts regardless of the cause of birth or the fate of the child.
So, if it does turn out that abortion and pregnancy does in fact impact the father's brain and body (and it would appear it does), can we women continue to use the slogan "my body my choice"? Wouldn't that be a erroneous statement?
Thursday, November 13, 2008
How would you know?
Enlightening post from Jennifer @ Conversion Diary:
*click photograph for info*
"...For me, this picture symbolizes all average folks who ever lived during times where particularly dark shades of evil gripped societies. It reminds me that though today we can see through the distance of history the thick pall of darkness that overshadowed the world in which these people lived, many of them could not see it themselves when they were in the midst of it. Like being in a city with air pollution, it's easy to think that the air is clean and fresh when you're standing in it; it is only when you get some distance and look back that you can see the dark cloud looming over where you were, and know that you were breathing soot all along...
But the question is: How would you know?
What litmus test could you offer that would apply to all places and all times as a way for a person to look around themselves with completely clear eyes, piercing through even the thickest fog of self-delusion and widespread cultural acceptance, and see that they are surrounded by grave evil? Is there any simple way for a person to immediately undergo an earth-rocking paradigm shift in which they look up and realize that the world around them is not what they thought it was?
So here is the advice I would offer to my children, and to my children's children:
Every decade or so, take a look around the society in which you live, and ask yourself if there is any group of human beings who are seen as something less than human. A big tipoff is if dehumanizing words -- terms other than "man," "woman," "child," "baby," or "person" -- are used to describe any category of people.
And if you ever see that going on, you might be in the midst of something gravely evil."
CONTINUE READING
Another sobering read: Abortion and Holocaust Comparisons
Friday, November 7, 2008
Who is my neighbour?
I ranted and raved about my precious sister in Christ who genuinely felt the need to inform me that "Jesus is a pacifist, don't you know", but what I didn't write about was how a few more of my brothers and sisters added their own two cents to the matter as well...and actually in a very humble and gentle manner.
It seems they were convinced that I needed to abandon my pro-life "agenda" and return to doing "Kingdom work".
Whether or not I should have, I did take these suggestions to heart and struggled with them for the last four days.
Am I, as Beth Moore discussed, allowing myself to "become the enemy of my best?" Should I put my pro-life battles in only one little compartment of my life and use the rest of it to pursue Kingdom work?
The problem is, the more I seek God, the more I can ever so slightly see His image in those around me, and then the more fervent my desire is to "Deliver those who are being taken away to death,and those who are staggering to slaughter"(Pro 24:11), and am more moved with compassion for the "least of these".
So, I've been praying that if my passion for the unborn and the time I spend defending them is interfering with intimacy with God, that He would show me. That if it is His will for me to tone it down, that He would relieve me of this intense burden. Yet the more I pray, the more my heart wrenches for them.
On day 4's homework of this week, God made it crystal clear to me that He has, in this area, "made His passions my passions", as I've been praying for Him to do.
And here's my answer:
Kingdom work and rescuing those in need are not mutually exclusive vocations. Loving our neighbours goes right to the very identity of Christianity and is an integral extension of faith.
However, God did warn me through day 5's homework not to work until I have sought His direction through prayer and His word, so that my God-given passions would be poured out within the safe framework of His agenda, so as not to be used destructively or in vain. After all, to fulfill the law you must love all your neighbours. I need to be careful to go where He tells me, and to say what He tells me to say.
But I must also remember the prayer He gave me... "now lift up my eyes and let me look at life."
The wise words Shelly gave to Harry on the movie My Girl are whispering in the back of my mind..."I'm not asking you to stop feeling for those people..but life isn't just death. Don't ignore the living." I must remember to take pity on the living too. The women who are in need, half dead, stigmatized by society and the church... That again, I am to not only hate what is evil, but then also to CLING TO WHAT IS GOOD....and that's where I lack big time.
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"
In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'
"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"
The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." (Luke 10:25-37)
Is it possible that just as the religious leaders of the parable were so consumed with persuing "God's agenda" that they forgot that, as Paul writes,
step to overcoming God-dishonouring prejudice."
So...the question is...
It seems they were convinced that I needed to abandon my pro-life "agenda" and return to doing "Kingdom work".
Whether or not I should have, I did take these suggestions to heart and struggled with them for the last four days.
Am I, as Beth Moore discussed, allowing myself to "become the enemy of my best?" Should I put my pro-life battles in only one little compartment of my life and use the rest of it to pursue Kingdom work?
The problem is, the more I seek God, the more I can ever so slightly see His image in those around me, and then the more fervent my desire is to "Deliver those who are being taken away to death,and those who are staggering to slaughter"(Pro 24:11), and am more moved with compassion for the "least of these".
So, I've been praying that if my passion for the unborn and the time I spend defending them is interfering with intimacy with God, that He would show me. That if it is His will for me to tone it down, that He would relieve me of this intense burden. Yet the more I pray, the more my heart wrenches for them.
On day 4's homework of this week, God made it crystal clear to me that He has, in this area, "made His passions my passions", as I've been praying for Him to do.
And here's my answer:
'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is
like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'(Matthew 22:37-39)
Kingdom work and rescuing those in need are not mutually exclusive vocations. Loving our neighbours goes right to the very identity of Christianity and is an integral extension of faith.
However, God did warn me through day 5's homework not to work until I have sought His direction through prayer and His word, so that my God-given passions would be poured out within the safe framework of His agenda, so as not to be used destructively or in vain. After all, to fulfill the law you must love all your neighbours. I need to be careful to go where He tells me, and to say what He tells me to say.
I love this Scripture...
Delight yourself in the Lord and he will give you the desires of your
heart.
Commit your way to the Lord; trust in him and he will do this: He
will make your righteousness shine like the dawn, the justice of your cause like
the noonday sun.”(Psalm 37:4-6)
But I must also remember the prayer He gave me... "now lift up my eyes and let me look at life."
The wise words Shelly gave to Harry on the movie My Girl are whispering in the back of my mind..."I'm not asking you to stop feeling for those people..but life isn't just death. Don't ignore the living." I must remember to take pity on the living too. The women who are in need, half dead, stigmatized by society and the church... That again, I am to not only hate what is evil, but then also to CLING TO WHAT IS GOOD....and that's where I lack big time.
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"
In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'
"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"
The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." (Luke 10:25-37)
Is it possible that just as the religious leaders of the parable were so consumed with persuing "God's agenda" that they forgot that, as Paul writes,
"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries andwe do the same with our lack of action on behalf of the unborn and their mothers? Beth Moore writes "often the tests of our hearts will be similar...they usually involve behaviours and reactions to one another. How we deal with people may be a truer test of the heart than how we relate to things....Stepping across a boundary to help is sometimes our first introduction to the commonality of humanity on the other side. Offering help in a time of need can be the first
all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love,
I am nothing?"(1 Corinthians 13:2),
step to overcoming God-dishonouring prejudice."
So...the question is...
...WHO IS YOUR NEIGHBOUR?
According to Jesus, your neighbour is anyone in need....or are we ourselves attempting "to hide in loopholes of terminology", instead of taking pity (remember, that word means "to feel deeply or viscerally") on the unborn and post-abortive women, and compassionately acting on that?"It's not a real 'person'...just a fetus...sub-human...not like us..."
"She made her choice...She's a murderer...sub-human...not like us..."
And so we justify passing by on the other side...after all...we're just so busy doing the important work of God.If you faint in the day of adversity, your strength is small.
Deliver
those who are drawn away to death, and those who totter to the slaughter, hold
them back [from their doom].
If you [profess ignorance and] say, Behold, we
did not know this, does not He Who weighs and ponders the heart perceive and
consider it? And He Who guards your life, does not He know it? And shall not He
render to [you and] every man according to his works? (Proverbs 24:10-12)
Monday, November 3, 2008
Think On These Things...
So busy lately...and I don't even know with what exactly I've been so busy. I just know I'm exhausted and can't seem to steal a moment of silence. And what do you know, I have one now and all I could do is agonize over this claim that was so matter-of-factly asserted to me today... "Jesus is a pacifist, don't you know." (This would make good company on your "things we don't believe" list, Beth. Can you sense my irritation? It's just oozing off the page, isn't it? Who knows...maybe there's plenty of Christians who believe this and I've just not encountered them before.)
UH! This would be a great example of a time the Holy Spirit could intercede for me because there are just no words and I don't even know how to deal with this attitude in the body. Of course, there are plenty of things about me I'm quite certain the body wouldn't care to deal with either. Mine would be worse.
I am learning little by little... firstly, not to respond when I'm so emotional. Secondly, to respond gently and humbly...because I just don't know it all, as much as I'm bent to think I do. And I guess it matters more to God, not whether I'm right or wrong, but the way I treat people and the way I conduct myself.
So, by God's grace, I had written this little prayer down yesterday as I was reading through the book of Romans, and it was fresh in my mind throughout the day today...
And last but definitely not least...
I think that's where there's been an imbalance with me. I lay this burden I have down on Will all the time and he doesn't know what to do with it because neither of us have the power to change it. My very thoughtful and wise husband decided to pray with me...and for me (I can't tell you what that means to me) and then he went to bed, leaving me alone with God. A few minutes and I decided to check my email before I hit the hay, and there it was--in a daily devotion from Lifeway--a word from God in a prayer format that couldn't be clearer:
I guess I have to meditate more on Philippians 4:8.
Not that we should all stop thinking about and concerning ourselves with the "least of these", but there has to be a balance, and at the end of the day I have to realize that it is God Who is in control...not me. It's not my burden to carry. It belongs to Him. I do what's right, and fair, and just, and He does the rest. And He is so good, and so beautiful, ...and He is rest.
Rose is done art classes next week and I'm looking forward to that. It'll give Will some extra time at home. That man never gets a minute to rest. He's always off doing something and I think it's catching up with him. Honestly, I miss him.
I'm off to bed now...
UH! This would be a great example of a time the Holy Spirit could intercede for me because there are just no words and I don't even know how to deal with this attitude in the body. Of course, there are plenty of things about me I'm quite certain the body wouldn't care to deal with either. Mine would be worse.
I am learning little by little... firstly, not to respond when I'm so emotional. Secondly, to respond gently and humbly...because I just don't know it all, as much as I'm bent to think I do. And I guess it matters more to God, not whether I'm right or wrong, but the way I treat people and the way I conduct myself.
So, by God's grace, I had written this little prayer down yesterday as I was reading through the book of Romans, and it was fresh in my mind throughout the day today...
If there are things that I am indifferent about, just as some of us Christians are indifferent about abortion, please show me. Help me to sincerely esteem others higher than myself. Conform my passions and hatreds to be Your passions and hatreds, and teach me how to express my heart in a God-honouring and God-glorifying manner. Forgive me for my conceit and help me to respect those who disagree with me.
And last but definitely not least...
Show me how to not only hate what is evil, but to also CLING TO WHAT IS GOOD.
I think that's where there's been an imbalance with me. I lay this burden I have down on Will all the time and he doesn't know what to do with it because neither of us have the power to change it. My very thoughtful and wise husband decided to pray with me...and for me (I can't tell you what that means to me) and then he went to bed, leaving me alone with God. A few minutes and I decided to check my email before I hit the hay, and there it was--in a daily devotion from Lifeway--a word from God in a prayer format that couldn't be clearer:
GRACIOUS FATHER, I HAVE LOOKED UPON THE KINGDOM OF THE WORLD UNTIL MY EYES ARE TIRED- TIRED OF LOOKING AT DEATH. NOW LIFT UP MY EYES AND LET ME LOOK AT LIFE. LET ME LOOK UPON YOU. AND I SEE YOU, NOT AS A RECLINING GOD, BUT AS A REIGNING GOD. HALLELUJAH!
I guess I have to meditate more on Philippians 4:8.
Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable— if anything is excellent or praiseworthy— think about such things.
Not that we should all stop thinking about and concerning ourselves with the "least of these", but there has to be a balance, and at the end of the day I have to realize that it is God Who is in control...not me. It's not my burden to carry. It belongs to Him. I do what's right, and fair, and just, and He does the rest. And He is so good, and so beautiful, ...and He is rest.
Rose is done art classes next week and I'm looking forward to that. It'll give Will some extra time at home. That man never gets a minute to rest. He's always off doing something and I think it's catching up with him. Honestly, I miss him.
I'm off to bed now...
Monday, October 27, 2008
22 Weeks
Is the name of a new short film by Angel Manuel Soto, based on the true story of a woman who struggled to keep her baby alive after an induced abortion which resulted in the live birth of her baby.
Unfortunately, there are reports that the same thing has been happening here in Canada too...at places like Calgary Foothills Hospital, where In August of 1998, a baby was born alive after an abortion - the child in this instance reportedly lived for 12 hours.
Just imagine that. A baby gets the death sentence because she had the unmitigated gall to be unwanted...or because she failed to be normal by our culture's standards, or to not be too much of a burden.
Despite what pro-aborts will tell us, late term abortions do happen in this 'civilized' country. I was offered a "termination of pregancy" at over 24 wks (6 mos) when I was pregnant with Willy because he had a Congenital Cystic Adenomatoid Malformation and a Diaphragmatic Hernia.
THIS could have been Willy. Just let that one sink in for a moment...I have...and it scares me half to death.
He was born completely healthy regardless of the not-so-promising prognosis. Even after he was born healthy and breathed on his own with little intervention, the doctors still wouldn't accept the fact that he was healthy, telling me "don't get your hopes up. We'll probably find out that he really isn't ok and it just didn't show up on the scans."
I'm so thankful to God that these issues are starting to get out from behind the abortion clinic and hospital doors. If we would only be faced with this horrifying reality, we might be more persuaded to act. Evil thrives where no one can see it.
Unfortunately, there are reports that the same thing has been happening here in Canada too...at places like Calgary Foothills Hospital, where In August of 1998, a baby was born alive after an abortion - the child in this instance reportedly lived for 12 hours.
Just imagine that. A baby gets the death sentence because she had the unmitigated gall to be unwanted...or because she failed to be normal by our culture's standards, or to not be too much of a burden.
Despite what pro-aborts will tell us, late term abortions do happen in this 'civilized' country. I was offered a "termination of pregancy" at over 24 wks (6 mos) when I was pregnant with Willy because he had a Congenital Cystic Adenomatoid Malformation and a Diaphragmatic Hernia.
THIS could have been Willy. Just let that one sink in for a moment...I have...and it scares me half to death.
He was born completely healthy regardless of the not-so-promising prognosis. Even after he was born healthy and breathed on his own with little intervention, the doctors still wouldn't accept the fact that he was healthy, telling me "don't get your hopes up. We'll probably find out that he really isn't ok and it just didn't show up on the scans."
I'm so thankful to God that these issues are starting to get out from behind the abortion clinic and hospital doors. If we would only be faced with this horrifying reality, we might be more persuaded to act. Evil thrives where no one can see it.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Abortion Survivor Gianna Jesson Shares Her Story
I posted this on Casualties but thought I'd share it here too.
__________________________________________________________________
On Focus on the Family.
"If abortion's about a woman's rights...
...what were mine?"
Timely conversation indeed.
I just love her humility and thankful spirit. God be praised for giving this world the gift of Gianna Jesson. She speaks a gentle truth that cuts deep into the heart. It's hard to be self absorbed and stay in your pity party after listening to her.
I am thankful to God that He is using Gianna to remind the world that these unborn babies are real human beings. Gianna is the reality of that life we are snuffing out and that blessing we are depriving the world of because of abortion. How we need God to make that connection within us. May we all be convicted by this living "statement" God has made. May we never even have a thought that children with "disabilities" will somehow have sub-optimal lives.
The Bible says,
After listening to her and being so truly blessed by her, I wonder...
How many times has God placed a blessing like this in our hands only to have us destroy it before we have a chance to witness God's grace and love for us?
How many rape victims did God, out of His love, give a child to in order to be an arrow for that woman to fight off the pain and shame of what has happened to her?
How many gifted children have been aborted who God gave to make the world a better place and teach us more than we can imagine?
How many times has He, in His grace, blessed the fornicator or the adulteress with a child, instead of condemning and pouring down His wrath on her as she deserves, so that she might repent because of the goodness and love He bestowed upon her?
Could it be that the very things we perceive as being curses and hindrances to us are actually the very things that God is giving us to bless us abundantly?
__________________________________________________________________
On Focus on the Family.
"If abortion's about a woman's rights...
...what were mine?"
Timely conversation indeed.
I just love her humility and thankful spirit. God be praised for giving this world the gift of Gianna Jesson. She speaks a gentle truth that cuts deep into the heart. It's hard to be self absorbed and stay in your pity party after listening to her.
I am thankful to God that He is using Gianna to remind the world that these unborn babies are real human beings. Gianna is the reality of that life we are snuffing out and that blessing we are depriving the world of because of abortion. How we need God to make that connection within us. May we all be convicted by this living "statement" God has made. May we never even have a thought that children with "disabilities" will somehow have sub-optimal lives.
The Bible says,
Behold, children are a gift of the LORD,The fruit of the womb is a reward. Like
arrows in the hand of awarrior,So are the children of one’s youth.
After listening to her and being so truly blessed by her, I wonder...
How many times has God placed a blessing like this in our hands only to have us destroy it before we have a chance to witness God's grace and love for us?
How many rape victims did God, out of His love, give a child to in order to be an arrow for that woman to fight off the pain and shame of what has happened to her?
How many gifted children have been aborted who God gave to make the world a better place and teach us more than we can imagine?
How many times has He, in His grace, blessed the fornicator or the adulteress with a child, instead of condemning and pouring down His wrath on her as she deserves, so that she might repent because of the goodness and love He bestowed upon her?
Could it be that the very things we perceive as being curses and hindrances to us are actually the very things that God is giving us to bless us abundantly?
"do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering,
notknowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?"(Romans 2:4)
Strong's definition of 'riches' (ploutos) says "valuable bestowment".
He has given the unborn child as a valuable bestowment upon us out of His goodness so that His gentleness, kindness, patience, and tolerance will lead us to repentance, because He is not willing that any should perish but that all might come to repentance... And we despise His gift?
In so doing, our calloused and unrepentant hearts store up even more wrath for the day of judgment. And then we foolishly assume He would not condemn us because He is a God of love? It's because He is a God of love that He will condemn us. The blood of the children He has given us cries from the abortion clinic and hospital trash cans and sinks. He loves these children. They belong to Him. He knows them. His eyes are constantly beholding them.
What have we done, Lord? Forgive us. We know not what we are doing.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Iron Shaping Iron
I've been challenged this week about my "pro-life" views and strategies, and I admit I needed it...to a degree.
I know many Christians don't understand my urgency and need to fight for the unborn. I don't blame them, really. Most people think I'm putting unborn babies or the issue of abortion before God, when the truth is just the opposite. It's my faith in Jesus that's motivating me, and the more I absorb the Word of God and let it really transform my beliefs and thinking, the more urgency and compassion I feel for the unborn. My perceptions of the unborn are changing, and I am coming to see the unborn through the eyes of God and love them more and more.
I guess it's hard to understand what I mean. When I look at Leila, I picture her as a 1 1/2 inch fetus, with the same features, yet immature, the same eyes, nose, mouth, fingers, toes, ears, and the head that would have a form, but still be growing, hardening, and developing. I imagine how she sucked her thumb, made faces, and even cried in the womb when she was startled. I picture my precious baby Elam...I see his face, his open mouth, his eyes, his tiny fingers, his heart through his transparent chest, and I picture Leila when she was that size. I look at Leila now, and I don't remember just when she was a newborn babe, but I remember her as a fetus, no less than who she is today. -Just less developed. If I could have seen her then or held her, would I love her any less than I do now? ...Did God?
God is first for me, and fighting for the unborn comes as a natural response to my relationship with Jesus. This may not be for everyone, but it is reality for me that I have no power over. I may be able to keep it all in, but I'll never be able to stop feeling so outraged and hurt about it all. I'll never be able to speak about it as if it were any less than what it is -murder. I'll never be able to stop picturing their little tiny faces during the inhumane abortion procedure.
What I did need to be challenged on was how insensitive I've been to post-abortive women, which I have never intended to do. I hold no bitterness against them. I see most of them as victims of a deceptive society which portrays the unborn as non-existent entities. It is only by the grace of God that I have never had one. When I was pregnant at 15 I was blessed with the support of my mother. I don't know what I would have done if she would have pressured me to get an abortion. I am also very aware that though I never walked into a doctors office and intentionally had my unborn child killed, I have been strung out on drugs, binged on alcohol, went without eating and sleeping, and all the while practicing "unsafe sex". The chances are pretty good that in those years my bad behaviour and lifestyle caused at least one spontaneous abortion that I never knew about. Not to mention that my first miscarriage was most likely due to my lifestyle, and my last probably because I was letting myself get stressed out and wishing I wasn't pregnant again.
I'm just saying that to God, I would be no less guilty than the woman who deliberately did it.
However, while most others see a lack of mercy and outreach for women who've had abortions, I see a disconnect in the Christian "pro-life" movement in another aspect. I see Christians speaking out against abortion, and showing potential abortive and post abortive mothers mercy, which is good, but I don't see a genuine compassion for the unborn children. I don't see people's reality merging with their theology, as Beth Moore would put it.
Abortion does hurt women.
But, abortion also hurts unborn babies.
To say that we should only approach the abortion issue on one angle, the angle of the woman, is to dismiss the reality of the unborn child and the child's suffering. It is precisely this notion that has allowed abortions to continue unabated in our country to the demise of millions of unborn children.
Abortion does not just concern the woman. There is also the very real issue of the child and we should not forget that.
So while I believe there needs to be programs for mothers, and support and love for abortion minded women, it's not enough. It's not enough to only focus on the women, and abortion will never be ended using only this strategy, though it is vitally important.
And it's not fair to say we shouldn't be trying to make abortions illegal, or that we should not push our "morality" on the rest of the country. It's not enough to only focus on the church because the Lord tells us to pursue justice, and women - and even born children- are being deprived of justice all over this country because abortion is legal with no restrictions or laws.
In order to maintain the fictional conception that the fetus is non-existent, we deprive women of justice when their unborn children are murdered. There are absolutely NO penalties for killing someone else's unborn child against her will. How's that for justice? Should we still keep our religion out of the public sector? Are potential and post-abortive women the only focus we should have?
In Canadian hospitals babies are being born alive and left to die because of our abortion minded society. Should we still only focus on the women and not get too political over it?
Most unborn babies with down syndrome are being aborted. It looks as though sex selective abortions are becoming more common now too.
There are late term abortions happening in our country.
The unfortunate truth is that abortion impacts the rest of our country in countless ways. Our laws, our justice system, and our health care system, not to mention the fact that we, the tax payers, are footing the bill for abortions.
Not to minimize the pain and suffering of post-abortive women, but the issue goes so far beyond the women.
So what's my point??
My point is that although I will not stop highlighting these issues, I will do it with more caution and regard for the sufferings of post-abortive women. While this issue can never be discussed truthfully without feelings getting hurt, I can make it a point to bring it all back to the grace of God through Jesus Christ, Who also died for women who've had abortions.
I apologize to anyone I may have hurt with my insensitivity.
As far as the pictures go...I dunno. It was the pictures that moved me to take the issue seriously, though I know that's not usually the case. That one's gonna take some prayer and Bible reading before I know what to do about that.
I know many Christians don't understand my urgency and need to fight for the unborn. I don't blame them, really. Most people think I'm putting unborn babies or the issue of abortion before God, when the truth is just the opposite. It's my faith in Jesus that's motivating me, and the more I absorb the Word of God and let it really transform my beliefs and thinking, the more urgency and compassion I feel for the unborn. My perceptions of the unborn are changing, and I am coming to see the unborn through the eyes of God and love them more and more.
I guess it's hard to understand what I mean. When I look at Leila, I picture her as a 1 1/2 inch fetus, with the same features, yet immature, the same eyes, nose, mouth, fingers, toes, ears, and the head that would have a form, but still be growing, hardening, and developing. I imagine how she sucked her thumb, made faces, and even cried in the womb when she was startled. I picture my precious baby Elam...I see his face, his open mouth, his eyes, his tiny fingers, his heart through his transparent chest, and I picture Leila when she was that size. I look at Leila now, and I don't remember just when she was a newborn babe, but I remember her as a fetus, no less than who she is today. -Just less developed. If I could have seen her then or held her, would I love her any less than I do now? ...Did God?
God is first for me, and fighting for the unborn comes as a natural response to my relationship with Jesus. This may not be for everyone, but it is reality for me that I have no power over. I may be able to keep it all in, but I'll never be able to stop feeling so outraged and hurt about it all. I'll never be able to speak about it as if it were any less than what it is -murder. I'll never be able to stop picturing their little tiny faces during the inhumane abortion procedure.
What I did need to be challenged on was how insensitive I've been to post-abortive women, which I have never intended to do. I hold no bitterness against them. I see most of them as victims of a deceptive society which portrays the unborn as non-existent entities. It is only by the grace of God that I have never had one. When I was pregnant at 15 I was blessed with the support of my mother. I don't know what I would have done if she would have pressured me to get an abortion. I am also very aware that though I never walked into a doctors office and intentionally had my unborn child killed, I have been strung out on drugs, binged on alcohol, went without eating and sleeping, and all the while practicing "unsafe sex". The chances are pretty good that in those years my bad behaviour and lifestyle caused at least one spontaneous abortion that I never knew about. Not to mention that my first miscarriage was most likely due to my lifestyle, and my last probably because I was letting myself get stressed out and wishing I wasn't pregnant again.
I'm just saying that to God, I would be no less guilty than the woman who deliberately did it.
However, while most others see a lack of mercy and outreach for women who've had abortions, I see a disconnect in the Christian "pro-life" movement in another aspect. I see Christians speaking out against abortion, and showing potential abortive and post abortive mothers mercy, which is good, but I don't see a genuine compassion for the unborn children. I don't see people's reality merging with their theology, as Beth Moore would put it.
Abortion does hurt women.
But, abortion also hurts unborn babies.
To say that we should only approach the abortion issue on one angle, the angle of the woman, is to dismiss the reality of the unborn child and the child's suffering. It is precisely this notion that has allowed abortions to continue unabated in our country to the demise of millions of unborn children.
Abortion does not just concern the woman. There is also the very real issue of the child and we should not forget that.
So while I believe there needs to be programs for mothers, and support and love for abortion minded women, it's not enough. It's not enough to only focus on the women, and abortion will never be ended using only this strategy, though it is vitally important.
And it's not fair to say we shouldn't be trying to make abortions illegal, or that we should not push our "morality" on the rest of the country. It's not enough to only focus on the church because the Lord tells us to pursue justice, and women - and even born children- are being deprived of justice all over this country because abortion is legal with no restrictions or laws.
In order to maintain the fictional conception that the fetus is non-existent, we deprive women of justice when their unborn children are murdered. There are absolutely NO penalties for killing someone else's unborn child against her will. How's that for justice? Should we still keep our religion out of the public sector? Are potential and post-abortive women the only focus we should have?
In Canadian hospitals babies are being born alive and left to die because of our abortion minded society. Should we still only focus on the women and not get too political over it?
Most unborn babies with down syndrome are being aborted. It looks as though sex selective abortions are becoming more common now too.
There are late term abortions happening in our country.
The unfortunate truth is that abortion impacts the rest of our country in countless ways. Our laws, our justice system, and our health care system, not to mention the fact that we, the tax payers, are footing the bill for abortions.
Not to minimize the pain and suffering of post-abortive women, but the issue goes so far beyond the women.
So what's my point??
My point is that although I will not stop highlighting these issues, I will do it with more caution and regard for the sufferings of post-abortive women. While this issue can never be discussed truthfully without feelings getting hurt, I can make it a point to bring it all back to the grace of God through Jesus Christ, Who also died for women who've had abortions.
I apologize to anyone I may have hurt with my insensitivity.
As far as the pictures go...I dunno. It was the pictures that moved me to take the issue seriously, though I know that's not usually the case. That one's gonna take some prayer and Bible reading before I know what to do about that.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Abortion is About God!
We have a lot to learn from Christians in the States. At least there abortion is a voting issue...and they already have at least some laws restricting abortion. We get more of a reaction from most Christians here when the provincial government tries to take the "traditional" Lord's prayer out of the legislature than we get for the fact that unborn babies in Canada can and are being killed in the womb up until the ninth month.
I'm sorry for the rant, but it just infuriates me to no end. Abortion is no less than child sacrifice. In ancient ceremonies where children were being sacrificed, as the child was lowered in the fire they made a tremendous noise with flutes and drums so the cries of the child would not reach the ears of the people. Pro-aborts use the same strategy. They make a lot of noise about "choice," "reproductive rights," and "a woman's right to choose", calling those who want to protect the children "misogynists" and "superstitious" to cloud the real issue at hand, which is THE CHILD who's paying the price. This is precisely why the unborn victim's bill was soooooo threatening. They just can't allow those cries to reach the ears of the people. Meanwhile, women who want to birth their babies are deprived of their choice and there is absolutely NO retribution.
I'm sick of the babies being brutally murdered. I'm sick of their mothers being traumatized and scarred. I'm sick of the dishonesty. I'm sick of the injustice. I'm sick of sites like Adult Christianity promoting the death culture in the so-called name of Christ. More than anything, I'm sick of the silence and apathy in this country. This should be an election issue and we need to be pushing it until it becomes one. We need to never shut up about it no matter how tired or annoyed people get with us. We need to pray like we've never prayed before and ask God to move in the hearts of the doctors, nurses, abortionists, mothers, fathers, and politicians.
This issue IS about God, and though prayer is the most important weapon against the spiritual warfare in high places, it can't be all that we do. After all, we are supposed to be His hands and feet. Can you imagine what would have happened if William Wilberforce prayed but then didn't act to see God answer his prayers? Where's the faith in that?
As the story goes...
There were two farmers who both desperately needed rain to water their fields. They were both praying for the rain, but only one farmer prepared his fields to receive the rain. Which one had more faith?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)