New poll/Old poll
The new poll question is up:
Which Democrat candidate would do more to further abortion ideology and the industry as president?
The most popular response to last week’s poll question surprised me. Almost 85% of you think a pastor should steer clear of political talk? Not good….
In reality, American churches were free and did speak passionately on grave moral issues like slavery, women’s suffrage, and child labor for nearly the 1st 200 years of our history, weaving politics and candidates’ positions into their teachings.
In 1954 all that changed with the (Lyndon) Johnson amendment to the tax code, chilling the constitutional right to free speech from the pulpit, including abortion. Pro-lifers should support restoring First Amendment rights to churches. Of course liberals don’t want churches speaking out on the issues. Why would we concur?
If you voted, find your personal brightly colored flag on the maps below, the top of the USA and the bottom International. This week all seemed to agree on the poll answer. Click to enlarge:
The International map fascinates me. I’m learning geography. For instance, the green flag below right of Australia is in New Zealand. The blue flag above left Australia is in Singapore. And the blue flag off the coast of Africa? That one appears to have come from a ship. There is no land mass in the vicinity.
If you want to view these maps in more detail, click on “Comment” on the Vizu poll, You’ll see this week’s map, which can be manipulated and enlarged. If you want to check a previous week’s poll map, after clicking “Comment,” highlight “My Vizu,” click on “My Polls,” and then click on the poll question that interests you. You’ll see the map.
As always, please make comments to either the old or new poll here, not at the Vizu website.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Churches can talk about politics all they want…as long as they’re willing to pay taxes like everyone else.
Well it seems like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. defied that ban, and thankfully he did. Thankfully clergy of all faiths who supported civil rights did as well.
I don’t believe clergy have ever paid much attention to it. what’s the gov’t going to do, put agents in every house of worship during every service?
The only time I have seen any “concern” expressed for seperation of church and state is when clergy began speaking out against abortion.
I heard no such “concern” when a collection was taken in church for presidential candidate Jesse Jackson or when Bill Clinton and Mario Cuomo campaigned together for Clinton’s presidency from the pulpit of a church.
Yes, Mary, there seems to be a double standard enforcing the tax code in black churches.
I have a question: How do you put yourself on the map, and also how do you see others on the map? I must be missing something???
Andy,
The new poll question is on the right of the comments section. Answer that and results will be posted next week by Jill with maps.
I have heard many, many pastors speak out on the evil of abortion in their churches. In fact, it is what I am praying to see more of!
Are you talking about being able to endorse a political candidate then?
Carla,
I recall that when pastors spoke out against legalizing abortion, there were those who cried “seperation of church and state”. Like I said this “concern” was highly selective.
I guess they should not endorse a political candidate either but this too is subject to some selectivity as well.
Hi Mary,
Maybe you can clear this up for me..separation of church and state has to do with government run churches? The government shall not endorse ANY type of religion or church?
I voted in a church in the last election…shall I have a snit fit about that??!! :)
I refute the idea that free speech is subject to taxes.
And I despise the idea that the government should control speech with the force of money.
It’s time for a generation of free thinkers to rise up.
Andy, 11:34a: When you vote in the poll, a little flag appears on the map at your geographical location.
Carla, 1:11p: Confusion on what exactly is meant by the Johnson tax code is one problem. Pastors unclear or have been given bad information do shy away from speaking against issues like abortion and homosexuality. And they certainly feign from discussing candidate positions (even though it’s still legal for them simply to say where candidates stand on the issues without stating an opinion about the candidates).
Thanks Jill.
Confused is right. :)
I know that other countries try very hard to legislate what pastors can say to their own congregations. Speaking out against homosexuality is considered “hate speech.” Crazy.
I think there is very little difference between Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama on abortion.
Both are co-sponsors of the Freedom of Choice Act.
The most popular response to last week’s poll question surprised me. Almost 85% of you think a pastor should steer clear of political talk? Not good.
AAAAHAHAHAHAHAA
Wow, it’s almost as if this blog were populated with a bunch of Americans who understand that church and government need to be separate. Imagine that.
From my understanding, a pastor can’t just say “Vote for McCain or Bush or Ron Paul, he’s the best” but he can say its a responsibility to vote, as its a right that many fought and died for.
I was a green flag.
However, after thinking it over some more, I think I’ll change my flag to a blue one.
I think the man/woman speaking from the pulpit has every right to talk about moral issues like slavery, women’s suffrage, child labor, etc., but showing support (or lack thereof) for a particular candidate is not a good thing. I think there could possibly be many “greedy” priests/pastors that would take “bribes” from politicians to endorse them to their congregations.
That being said, there are many publications that one can receive that shows where each of the candidates stand on moral issues. I used one the last time I voted. The churches can put these booklets in their foyers, and make announcements from the pulpit regarding the publications, but to talk about it from the pulpit makes no sense to me at all. The church should be a place to worship God, and teach about God.
Perhaps the congregation could also form “side groups” for studying and discussing political candidates for those interested?
I agree JLM.
The pastor at my church basically gives the church teaching on whatever the pressing moral question is: such as abortion or homosexual “marriage”.
Then he tells us as Catholics we have a duty to elect someone who will not implement these immoral policies. We will all be accountable to God for every one of our actions some day.(Sorry Hal and SoMG)
He doesn’t actually come out and endorse a specific candidate or a political party.
He has also had the local MP (Member of Parliament) leave our parish because of his stand on abortion. Our pastor refused him communion if he persisted in his support for abortion.
Father has a place in heaven, I’m sure of it. He lives what he believes down to the holes in his socks.
Patricia,
“Holes in his socks”…lol!
He sounds like a good man.
Churches can talk about politics all they want…as long as they’re willing to pay taxes like everyone else.
Posted by: Hieronymous at May 17, 2008 9:45 AM
Tax on what?
Look at creative non profit groups like Planned Parenthood who have separate entities some of which are for profit or not tax exempt and those entities are the ones who engage in non tax exempt activities. Through the machinations of creative accounting, very little money actually goes through those taxable entities therby minimizing any taxes. The bulk of the income flows into the non profit arm and out in the form of salaries or held in endowments.
While churches themselves may not be able to speak out politically their members certainly can, and they can organize into politically oriented groups and easily spread the word to other members because they see them all the time at church.
The constitution says that the government may not interfere with religion. It does not say that churches may not say anything about the government.
I mean really, shouldn’t any organization be allowed to talk about or criticize the government and anyone in it?
Good logic, hippie… :)
Well JLM, I don’t think many of our parishoners really know what he’s like.
A friend of mine decided to drop in on Father near Easter (a few years back) to bring him some homemade Polish sausage (he’s Italian, but hey he eats it!). When she arrived he was thrilled because he’d just given the last bit of food he had in the rectory to a family that came by and was terribly needy. They brought him some coffee and that was his dinner!
He’s known to give away everything he gets – money, gifts, jackets and new socks …..etc.
I don’t think many of our parishoners really know what he’s like.
Not only does he sound like a good man, but a humble one as well!
gives away new socks??? That explains the holes in his!
It’s these types of people…you know, the one’s that don’t ask for things but do so much for others… that I am more than willing to donate my time, money & belongings to. God bless them!
If there’s every anything he needs, please let me know. I’d be more than willing to help.
I saw Bob Barr is running for President under the Libertarian Party. He used to be a Conservative Republican. I liked him on all the issues when Glen Beck interviewed him on his show last week. My only question is Bob Barr Pro-Life?
Anyone know or have links?
——-
This was a great article I found. It’s called “In Defense of Catholic Sexual Ethics” by William Donohue of the Catholic League.
Here are a couple quotes..
In 2006, the U.S. spent an average of $48 per diabetes patient on research. We spent $144 for those suffering from Alzheimer
Carla: Speaking out against homosexuality is considered “hate speech.” Crazy.
Carla, I’m sorry you feel that way. Geez, what a world…. (And I know that works both ways.)
Doug
Jill, I noticed that vote out there off the west coast of Africa too, and Janet mentioned that there had been a poster from Ghana in the recent past, so to me it makes sense that perhaps something is a bit awry and the proper location is either straight north a bit (latitude error) or east a bit (longitude error).
Reality: Wow, it’s almost as if this blog were populated with a bunch of Americans who understand that church and government need to be separate. Imagine that.
I’m surprised at how many blue votes there were from the US, given the nature of Jill’s blog.
And – have to laugh – check out that little green dude from New Zealand! Sweet! I think it was Jasper that told Jill she’d “gone international” and oh heck yes….
But yes indeed – thank goodness for all those who realize the need for keeping religious dogma out of government.
You think that’s crazy, Doug?
There is absolutely nothing WRONG with speaking out against the homosexual lifestyle.
Again, you misunderstand the Christian ethic of hating the sin but loving the sinner.
Or, you deliberately misunderstand it, to advance the liberal agenda.
Homosexuals are no more discriminated against today than you having two heads (although I do wonder sometimes…).
Homosexuals are no more discriminated against today than you having two heads (although I do wonder sometimes…).
Posted by: Patricia at May 17, 2008 8:36 PM
Oh really? They can’t get married in 48 states. In most places they can be fired for their sexual preference, or denied the ability to rent an apartment. Oh, they have to hide who they love if they want to serve their country in the Military.
Maybe you think this discrimination is okay, but you can’t deny it’s discrimination.
Mike, I know that Bob Barr USED to be a rabid right-to-lifer, when he was a congressman.
I have not heard of him changing his position.
Oh really? They can’t get married in 48 states. In most places they can be fired for their sexual preference, or denied the ability to rent an apartment. Oh, they have to hide who they love if they want to serve their country in the Military.
Maybe you think this discrimination is okay, but you can’t deny it’s discrimination.
Posted by: Hal at May 17, 2008 8:53 PM
I don’t think this is discrimination AT ALL.
There is no such thing as a “homosexual marriage”, despite what you proabort liberals would have us think. And no law in any land will make it real, even if every country in the world enacts such. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
I believe that pregnant women being FIRED or told to abort or they’d lose their job is a LOT worse discrimination.
Hier had it almost right: this is a tax-code question, not a church-state question. However, churches that are organized as 501(c)(3)s — as most are — are allowed to speak about politics. They can come out for or against abortion, war, homosexuality, the death penalty, and other issues of the day. What they can’t do is campaign for candidates for office, or lobby for specific legislation except in a very limited way. The same is true of all 501(c)(3)s, not just churches.
Churches could campaign and lobby if they organized as 501(c)(4)s, but then donations to the church would not be tax-exempt, just as donations to political campaigns aren’t.
Re: this week’s poll, it’s “Democratic” (adjective) candidate, not “Democrat” (noun) candidate.
Patricia, not everyone who’s for same-sex marriage is proabortion. For that matter, not everyone who’s for same-sex marriage is a liberal, as I’m sure the libertarians would be happy to inform you. :)
I forgot to mention: if churches were passing the hat for an election campaign for Jesse Jackson or any other candidate, they absolutely were in violation and should have been penalized.
Having candidates speak is a bit stickier. If all candidates are invited to speak, and if the church doesn’t officially endorse any of them, it could be OK. It’s a fine line, though.
This is the key to ending legalized abortion. Period.
This is the key to ending legalized abortion. Period.
I don’t think so at all. Abortion won’t end until greed and selfishness end. That won’t happen. Things and people will keep getting worse and worse until Jesus comes again. Watch the news and tell me I’m wrong.
Abortion won’t end until greed and selfishness end.
I would agree with this is you’re referring to the abortionists. I would say they’re greedy and selfish.
I wouldn’t agree if you were speaking about aborting mothers. Not all aborting mothers are greedy or selfish…I’m sure some think they’re doing what’s right for the child by not bringing it into the world given the circumstances the child will face. While misguided, I wouldn’t refer to it as greedy and selfish.
But greed and selfishness will never end….more compassion and love would help end abortion I think.
I would agree with this is you’re referring to the abortionists. I would say they’re greedy and selfish.
Actually, I refer to both parties: abortionists and the abortive female. The only abortive females (can’t call them mothers!) that aren’t doing it for self-centered reasons are the ones that are lied to that it’s not a baby. Any other excuse they use is a cover-up for self-centeredness.
Remember…they can always put the baby up for adoption!
The only abortive females (can’t call them mothers!)
Why? They’re still mothers..just of dead babies.
that aren’t doing it for self-centered reasons are the ones that are lied to that it’s not a baby. Any other excuse they use is a cover-up for self-centeredness.
So if they have other children that need to be fed..they’re being self-centered wanting their other children to be able to eat?
See, what I’m trying to say here, JLM, is that it’s not as cut-and-dry as you are saying it is on here. (Just interpreting from your own words) I’m not saying the reasons mothers abort are right or good..I’m saying, that many women have valid reasons that don’t stem from being self-centered. That doesn’t make it OKAY! Part of being a compassionate pro-lifer is realizing that the circumstances women find themselves pregnant in and considering abortion ARE hard/complex. They are not black and white.
Remember…they can always put the baby up for adoption!
I know they can…but that’s not an easy fix kind of solution. You say that like many people say, “Well you can go have an abortion.” Like that will just make everything better. Handing your child over to people to raise forever with or without the assurance that he/she will ever know what you did for them is a very heart-wrenching decision.
The constitution says that the government may not interfere with religion. It does not say that churches may not say anything about the government.
I mean really, shouldn’t any organization be allowed to talk about or criticize the government and anyone in it?
Posted by: hippie at May 17, 2008 6:49 PM
You’re absolutely right, and Jen R is correct also. I threw out a comment too quickly earlier. Churches and pastors are absolutely allowed to talk about political topics. What they can’t do, if they want to protect their tax exempt status, is endorse a particular candidate, which can include denouncing a competing candidate.
See, what I’m trying to say here, JLM, is that it’s not as cut-and-dry as you are saying it is on here. (Just interpreting from your own words) I’m not saying the reasons mothers abort are right or good..I’m saying, that many women have valid reasons that don’t stem from being self-centered. That doesn’t make it OKAY! Part of being a compassionate pro-lifer is realizing that the circumstances women find themselves pregnant in and considering abortion ARE hard/complex. They are not black and white.
Elizabeth –
You are an amazing person. If everyone on the pro-life team had your compassion, love and energy, I wonder if this would be such a big issue.
Elizabeth,
Sorry, I forgot, are you pro-life or pro-choice?
JLM:
I’m glad yo’re back.
You said: “I don’t think so at all. Abortion won’t end until greed and selfishness end. That won’t happen. Things and people will keep getting worse and worse until Jesus comes again. Watch the news and tell me I’m wrong.”
I agree that abortion won’t end, however, I said “legalized abortion” will end when……
Legalized slavery ended, i.e., government sanctioned slavery, however, slavery still exists. I am saying that legalized abortion will end when the church is woken up and roars against this grotesque evil.
C’mon Elizabeth…abortion is murder. Are you telling me that we should have compassion towards people that are considering the murder of someone as a solution to their “hard/complex” circumstance?
You are either against murder/abortion or you are not. To show compassion towards someone who has gravely sinned by committing an abortion/murder in no way means that I consider their reason for committing such an act.
Our Lord never excused sin. Never did he say I understand why you sinned. Even when he forgave the adulterous woman he told her to go and sin no more. I don’t thin a liberal would consider that statement very compassionate.
I show compassion by obeying a command from the Creator to forgive, however, I never, ever give sway to their reason or circumstance for committing heinous acts. That opines to moral relativsm.
Beware of the flattery of a pro-abort:
Daniel 11:32
With flattery he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant, but the people who know their God will firmly resist him.
Romans 16:18
For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
1 Thessalonians 2:5
You know we never used flattery, nor did we put on a mask to cover up greed
In my opinion, if a church really believes that God was their source and provider thay would forfiet their tax exempt status so they could say anything and endorse anyone.
The fact that this hasn’t happened indicates the level to which the United States church has sunk serving mammon and not God.
I know of many churches in Arizona that have done this and they do quite well.
Hisman and Jasper…
Here’s a thought for you. Out of all the pro-lifers who post on this site, Elizabeth is one of the few who actually makes me think differently about things. Possibly because she’s more “liberal” in her thoughts, but also because she seems to come from a sincere position of concern for others, rather than control of others. Elizabeth, PiP, and Jen R have a tangible concern for not only conceived life, but also for the women who deal with unwanted pregnancies. I admire them and their convictions. I’m not trying to flatter. I just think they’re admirable, and I don’t see anything wrong with expressing it.
Heiro:
Good try.
I’m not going to let you or any other pro-abort on this site get away with assuming or characterizing us pro-lifers as a people who don’t care about others.
My whole life is a testament of care for others, my family, my friends, and strangers and even people like you whose thinking is so distored that you can somehow relativize and justify the murder of an innocent baby in the womb who has no voice. In fact, the most loving and caring thing a person can do to a mother in distress is tell her how wrong it is to murder her child, the consequences of doing so, and urge and pray that she not do it. And contrary to the tripe spewed about love and caring, to enable a mother to commit murder by somehow acting compassionate is actually an act of gross hatred.
Part of that caring is not letting pro-aborts sway us by flattery. When pro-aborts change their murderous thinking then I will consider accepting their compliments when they thank me for standing firm on the truth.
Until then, know this, I oppose vehemently the heinous and murderous acts purported on innocent children and nothing will change that until pro-aborts are made irrelevant. And I do this because I love and care for people. I am not an enabler of evil.
Let’s say there was someone I wanted to murder because they took advantage of me, or hurt me or hurt one of my loved one. Are you trying to tell me that if someone told me that this was absolutely wrong that they would not be loving me but the person who said they understood why I wanted to murder and supported a law that legalized that murder was somehow loving?
The relativistic thinking in the minds of today’s many young and impressionalbe people is proof of how successful pro-aborts have been in twisting morality, injecting moral relativism and perverting those young minds turning them into “sons of hell”.
That is exactly why the subject of this post is so important. The oracles of God in declaring the absolute satanic nature of abortion have been muzzled by the government and specifically by Liberals. The blood of all aborted babies be on all their heads.
There is no compromise on this issue and peace will not be realized until the enemies of life, all life, are defeated thoroughly.
Priests can and do speak openly ofr they serve only one master. Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Hier 11:48PM
There’s certainly a double standard here. I saw on the national news, on TV for millions to see and even the seperation of church and state police couldn’t have missed it, a collection taken in church for the then presidential candidacy of Jesse Jackson. I also saw Clinton and Cuomo speaking from a pulpit.
Separation of church and state is an argument used very selectively, usually when clergy actively oppose abortion or evangelicals support a certain candidate.
Carla,
It looks like Hier and others addressed your question to me throughout this thread and did so very well. If I can still help you, please post a question.
Thanks Mary. :)
HisMan,
Yes, abortion is murder.
Unfortunately there are those of us who were told it was a bunch of cells, some tissue, that we could get on with our lives, that it is simple, painless and quick. Only YEARS later did I realize that the rash decision that I made in fear, killed my baby. YEARS later I realized I was lied to in a crisis, in a complete panic I believed everything I was told.
I am not alone in that experience.
Elizabeth,
You are such a sweetheart! I believe you are right about women finding themselves pregnant and NOT knowing what in the world they should do. Compassion, love, caring can change that.
Heir,
Elizabeth, Rae and I were talking about this on the way home from the Aquarium.
I agree that sometimes prolifers make it sound like once you make the choice to continue the pregnancy, a fairy Godmother will appear to make everything hunky dory.
I remember talking to moms outside of clinics and their stories were heartbreaking. No parental support, no support from the fathers of the babies, no money, nowhere to live…these are desperate situations and simply telling a woman that she is murdering her child can often add more pressure to a woman already traumatized.
NO! Abortion is never the right answer, but the alternative is not so easy or clear cut either.
While I don’t think that we should provide a free ride for all women that find themselves pregnant, which to me would be “enabling” them to continue making poor life choices, much like taking an alcoholic out for a beer, I recognize that A LOT more must be done for women that find themselves pregnant and virtually alone.
I have volunteered at a number of homeless shelters and was appalled at how the women were given food and a sleeping bag, but absolutely no “training” in the practical art of
“living”.
They had no idea how to shop for groceries, the children walked around with litres of coke and giant bags of chips, the women were doin crack in the bathrooms, and even tho they didn’t have two nickels to rub together, they somehow found the 50 dollars it took to get their nails done by the woman who ran the shelter!
I don’t blame the women. I blame our system. These women need help learning how to manage money, basic nutritional knowledge, child care, relationship skills…they need to know that they are worth more than just being used as warm bodies and incubators.
Before we ask them to refrain from killing their children, we better start making sure that we have a viable alternative. And I don’t just mean a sandwich and a stroller.
If this task seems monumental to us, people with degrees, education and full refrigerators, imagine how overwhelming it must feel to poor, uneducated women that find themselves pregnant and alone.
Obviously, many women have abortions that aren’t in these types of dire straits, and reaching them is a whole different battle, but for those that are truly desperate, we need to rethink the battle plans…
Carla,
Please see my post on the proliferations entry about abortion sequelae.
You were not alone.
mk:
“I agree that sometimes prolifers make it sound like once you make the choice to continue the pregnancy, a fairy Godmother will appear to make everything hunky dory.
“I remember talking to moms outside of clinics and their stories were heartbreaking. No parental support, no support from the fathers of the babies, no money, nowhere to live…these are desperate situations and simply telling a woman that she is murdering her child can often add more pressure to a woman already traumatized.
However, today there are many many organizations that can and do help women. I’m sure if in her most desperate hour a woman showed up at a church, people would be running to help her.
Thirty years ago, many women didn’t have a place to go – that’s why Louise Summerhill founded Birthright.
I believe in Toronto (Canada), there is a women’s counselling centre located either just next to or down the street from the Scott abortuary.
My experience with sidewalk counselling is that many prolifers put their beliefs into action – we often offered to help these women – naming tangible actions we were prepared to do, including long term assistance. By the time the woman gets to the clinic though, it’s usually too late. It takes incredible courage to turn around.
I think the difference is that PP does an amazing job of getting their name and info out there. We do not.
One day at the library my boss told me that the teacher from a Catholic elementary school who had just brought a class into the library for a tour, asked her where to get pregnancy info. She directed her to PP (and then later felt she shouldn’t have because the school is Catholic! – she was right on that one!!). But why? Because that’s the first thing that comes to mind!!
Maybe what we need is a worldwide organizaton that dispenses prolife information on the scale of PP and offers medical assistance.
However, today there are many many organizations that can and do help women. I’m sure if in her most desperate hour a woman showed up at a church, people would be running to help her.
Right, and those same women who don’t know how to shop for groceries are going to know that help is out there.
Jasper,
So having compassion for people in difficult situations means you forgot whether I’m pro-choice or pro-life? Get real. I’m pro-life..I just understand all sides of what people are saying. I know abortion is murder..and I don’t think any reason justifies it, but in the woman’s mind it does. It’s about changing hearts and minds..I thought you knew that. The only way you’ll make women see abortion as wrong is if you can open their mind..and the first of that is understanding their reasons for wanting to have an abortion.
Heir,
Thank you for your kind words..Perhaps why I am this way is because I’ve been there and I understand that it isn’t all as cut and dry as people like to make it. I don’t believe forcing my beliefs on anyone is the way to encourage women to not have abortion. I believe showing them how strong and capable they are will. That, despite the circumstances they face, THEY CAN DO IT! That’s just how I am. I guess it’s because the people who I went to when I was pregnant were this way with me, and it lifted me up and gave me confidence at a very hard time in my life.
“Before we ask them to refrain from killing their children, we better start making sure that we have a viable alternative. And I don’t just mean a sandwich and a stroller.”
Like what MK? what would you propose? Every women I knew who had an abortion wasn’t in these circumstances. I mean, there has to be some personal responsibilty here…look at your statement above -> “Before we ask them to refrain from killing their children” …while were at it let’s extend it this to theifs and murderers too, many of them are in dire circumstances…where does the permissiveness end exactly?
Pro-abort Edyt fequently brings this up-> (once we make the world perfect for all expecting mothers, then abortion can stop). This is lie, she knows full well that this will never happen.
MK, please don’t fall for the lies.
Why? They’re still mothers..just of dead babies.
Mother’s protect their babies. I stand corrected, though…”biological mothers”.
So if they have other children that need to be fed..they’re being self-centered wanting their other children to be able to eat?
Wow! I can’t believe you actually said that. Yes, of course they are being self-centered. You’re not looking at this from the scriptural viewpoint. I’m not going to post a scripture out of respect for you, but God did say that He will provide. He said to ask and it shall be given. He clothed the lilies of the field, how much more will He do for you? He loves you and loves this unborn child more than anyone else on earth. How big is your God? Mine is HUGE & capable of providing what I and my family needs. When one aborts for the reason you stated above, they are simply relying on themselves instead of God to be the provider. “I instead of He”. God made many beautiful promises to us in the bible, and I hold on to each one dearly and thankfully. It’s amazing what will happen in one’s life when they put their complete faith and TRUST in God!
See, what I’m trying to say here, JLM, is that it’s not as cut-and-dry as you are saying it is on here. (Just interpreting from your own words) I’m not saying the reasons mothers abort are right or good..I’m saying, that many women have valid reasons that don’t stem from being self-centered. That doesn’t make it OKAY! Part of being a compassionate pro-lifer is realizing that the circumstances women find themselves pregnant in and considering abortion ARE hard/complex. They are not black and white.
I’ll agree…the reasons are not cut and dry. There are a whole slough of reasons “why”…but each one, (I’m coming from faith in God, here) comes down to being self-centered or greed (synonymous). As I stated above, the only women who abort that don’t do it for self-centered or greed reasons, are the ones that are lied to that it’s not a baby. The ones that really don’t know that they are pregnant. To me, the most passionate thing a pro-lifer can do is tell these hopeless women that their hope lies in God, and He will provide for them and He will lead them through a fulfilled life. Maybe not an easy one, but I haven’t met one person yet who claims that life is easy.
I know they can…but that’s not an easy fix kind of solution. You say that like many people say, “Well you can go have an abortion.” Like that will just make everything better. Handing your child over to people to raise forever with or without the assurance that he/she will ever know what you did for them is a very heart-wrenching decision.
Of course it is a heart-wrenching decision. The alternative is much worse, though. There are open adoptions, too.
I commend each and every mother (true mother) that put their child up for adoption instead of taking the “easy way out” and aborting them. Their rewards will be great in heaven. If one is looking for rewards here on earth, it’s not going to happen. We are only here for a very, very short time…a nanosecond compared to eternity. One has to simply decide who and what they are living for. Themselves, and an easy earthly life….or, God, and an eternal, rewarding, happy life!
PIP was right. Too many people put God in a box. He’s huge…He’s everywhere…He’s loving…He’s kind….He’s a true “giver”….and He is the Author of HOPE!
How big is your God?
This is the love and compassion people need to be shown. This is real and it’s eternal.
“It’s about changing hearts and minds..I thought you knew that.”
this is all pie in the sky nonsense…
Let’s stop the slaughter of unborn children first by removing the alternative of abortion.
Hey Jasper,
Didn’t your mother ever tell you that you catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar?
No? I figured that.
Mike, you wrote: “When adolescents knew the least about sex, they engaged the least in it.”
Where did you get this idea?
Edyt:
Those women who end up at the abortion clinic without life skills – they need much more than help than the average prolife or preg counselling centre can provide. But, they also need the desire to want to improve their lot which many of them don’t.
Even Birthright, which I volunteered with many years ago, gives the woman the information but has her follow through on it. People have to be responsible as adults for their situation to some degree. We would help them find housing etc but only would go so far, because the idea is that we don’t impinge upon their dignity.
By my statement, I meant that being single and pregnant is no longer socially unacceptable and a young woman would likely find people more sympathetic to her situation today than 50 years ago.
I think the difference is that PP does an amazing job of getting their name and info out there. We do not.
BINGO!
That would be a HUGE first step. I go to the movies all the time and see ads for the most ridiculous things. A coupon for a buy one get one free lunch, or diamonds or fur coats and I also wonder why we don’t advertise help for pregnant women.
And the media. For heavens sake. Why isn’t the television INUNDATED with advertisements for help.
I also think that getting help should mean taking courses, life courses, on cooking, cleaning, nutrition, etc.
I think that anyone on welfare should be made to “work/contribute” to receive their check. Good heavens, kids with down syndrome hold jobs, (God bless them), surely able bodies women could do the same. Why aren’t they pulling weeds for the elderly, babysitting/daycaring for each others kids while those moms go to school, sweeping the streets, painting the projects, patrolling the parks…the options are endless. Teach them a skill. Don’t just give them a place to live. Make them earn it in whatever way they are capable.
Every person on this earth is useful in someway. It’s a diservice to slap a bandaid on their situation and then send them right back out to the same situation. Doomed to repeat their past mistakes.
Jasper,
I’m not going soft. I’m just looking at long term solutions as well as short term ones. Realizing that women need help does not mean I won’t be first in line to vote for a personhood amendment, or to overthrow Roe V Wade. I will NEVER stop trying to end abortion. But can’t we do both?
Mk, 3:08 p.m. WOO HOO!!
So, is it “changing hearts and minds”, “more pro-life advertising”, “education”, “welfare reform”…or, all of the above making absolutely every single cog (or voice) in the pro-life wheel important?????
So, is it “changing hearts and minds”, “more pro-life advertising”, “education”, “welfare reform”…or, all of the above making absolutely every single cog (or voice) in the pro-life wheel important?????
I’m not sure what you’re saying here, JLM. Could you please clarify?
I think a lot of those listed are combined in the pro-life message or they should be at least.
Elizabeth – I agree with Heir… you, PIP, Jen R., and Rae actually get me thinking about things…
The whole movement just makes more sense from a perspective of someone approaching life’s difficulties with compassion and tolerance for everyone.
Hippie: Your excellent comment bears repeating: The constitution says that the government may not interfere with religion. It does not say that churches may not say anything about the government.
I mean really, shouldn’t any organization be allowed to talk about or criticize the government and anyone in it?
Posted by: hippie at May 17, 2008 6:49 PM
One thing that’s been bugging me lately is how certain PC’rs harp on how the pro-life movement would be so much more effective if we PL’rs would just be more tolerant. That would be the ideal, but let’s remember that joining the PL side isn’t like joining a sorority. We aren’t all moving into a house together for the next year. We can have our different opinions on some major issues, as long as we agree on the fact that abortion is wrong. It’s a cop-out to say “I’d be pro-life, but I don’t like their stand on (fill in the blank), so I wouldn’t be caught dead being associated with them.”
Babies are apolitical. Imagine that. People of all walks of life should be able to come together and say, enough is enough, let’s end abortion, who cares about all the other stuff for now. We have to start somewhere. Why not with the least of us – the unborn. What a great example we would be for the next generation. *Stepping of my soapbox now.*
I still can’t believe how many people wanted for pastors to be able to allow junk being put on people’s vehicles in the parking lot….
Doug: 6:56 AM
In all of my church-going years, I don’t think I’ve ever found a “political” flyer stuck on my car windshield in a church lot…but I wouldn’t mind as long it was in line with my church’s teachings.
JLM,
So, is it “changing hearts and minds”, “more pro-life advertising”, “education”, “welfare reform”…or, all of the above making absolutely every single cog (or voice) in the pro-life wheel important?????
If I’m understanding you correctly, then, yes.
There are so many different ways to go, that their is room for all pro life voices.
Some will be more involved with the protesting, some with the counseling, some in politics, some in volunteering…just like the body of Christ, many parts, one body.
Janet said it well. The focus is on the unborn. The means are many.
Doug,
I still can’t believe how many people wanted for pastors to be able to allow junk being put on people’s vehicles in the parking lot….
I don’t want pastors putting “junk” on my car either.
I don’t want info on how to lose weight, find out my future, or how to get my carpets cleaned.
But I don’t think Jill was talking about “junk”.
I believe she was referring to “how to vote according to your faith info”
This, I would welcome.
Hi mk:
How was the Great Adventure?
Janet, 11:37 p.m.
I agree with you to a point. I mean my position on being pro-life isn’t really that affected by my disagreement with pro-lifers on other issues. I still think all life should be respected and cherished. But I also think we should focus on that. And I emphasize the word FOCUS.
We may disagree about the methods to go about doing so, but keeping our eye on the prize so to speak should always be important.
I’ve been breaking out in pimples lately, and I realized it’s because this blog stresses me out. For beauty reasons, I must quit. I’m probably getting hypertension as well. I look forward to not reading the future posts about how proabort liberals care more about their looks than arguing for their cause.
To Carla: If your argument for speaking out against homosexuality comes from the Bible, well, we don’t live in a theocracy, so you technically are committing hate speech (at least until the government decides the Bible is the final word, which is when I defect to Mexico- I’d take delicious enchiladas over Canadian winters any day!). And since homosexuality was removed from the DSM as a mental disorder, the term “chosen lifestyle” (not that you said it) drives me nuts. Why would anyone willingly choose a harder life? It’s not a choice. It’s a part of who you are that you can’t deny unless you want to live a life of emotional emptiness and personal repression. The first thing I’m teaching my kids is that no matter who a person is, no matter their race, religion or sexual orientation, when you cut them open, they are 100% exactly the same on the inside. An important lesson even us adults could sometimes use. But then again, I tout tolerance over Biblical teachings, so there’s my standpoint and judge as you will.
Dear ali,
I am sorry you are stressed and that you are leaving.
I have homosexuals in my family. I love them dearly. I disagree with their lifestyle. That doesn’t mean I throw a Bible in their face every time we get together. They are flamboyant to no end and throw their sexuality in everyone’s faces. Fun times at family reunions I must say.
Sorry you interpret what I said on here with me running around yelling God Hates Fags. I have my beliefs and you have yours but, you think what I say is hate speech. So be it.
My children will not be taught that it is “normal or natural” or that homosexual marriage is acceptable. They love their cousins as much as I do. :)
They are flamboyant to no end and throw their sexuality in everyone’s faces.
Carla, would you elaborate on how they do that?
Oh no, Carla! I would never accuse you of that! I have no idea what you personally would do/say that falls under the category of hate speech, I was just commenting on the thought in general. I don’t know you but you seem quite rational so I would never think that of you:) Ok, now I’m gone!
“It’s a part of who you are that you can’t deny unless you want to live a life of emotional emptiness and personal repression. The first thing I’m teaching my kids is that no matter who a person is, no matter their race, religion or sexual orientation, when you cut them open, they are 100% exactly the same on the inside. An important lesson even us adults could sometimes use. But then again, I tout tolerance over Biblical teachings, so there’s my standpoint and judge as you will.”
Posted by: ali at May 19, 2008 12:01 PM
Indeed. What we often see as the religious position on homosexuality is most unfortunate.
Jenna! Did you hear the California Supreme Court made gay marriage legal? That’s worth celebrating, isn’t it?
There is absolutely nothing WRONG with speaking out against the homosexual lifestyle. Again, you misunderstand the Christian ethic of hating the sin but loving the sinner. Or, you deliberately misunderstand it, to advance the liberal agenda.
Homosexuals are no more discriminated against today than you having two heads (although I do wonder sometimes…).
Yes it’s wrong, Patricia. You’re taking the prejudices of some people way back in time and unfairly looking down on people today.
Carla, 1:11p: Confusion on what exactly is meant by the Johnson tax code is one problem. Pastors unclear or have been given bad information do shy away from speaking against issues like abortion and homosexuality.
This is a problem with education of pastors and others who preach in churches. Seems to me the law is pretty clear. If churches stay out of the political process, they don’t pay taxes. If they involve themselves, they do.
However, preaching about faith and morals is not political speech. Preaching against the evil of abortion and leaving a flyer at the exit door outlining each of the candidates positions about abortion is not political speech.
Endorsing a particular candidate is. Also, any church who has a political candidate speak from the pulpit during services should have their tax exempt status yanked. That goes for all churches whatever their color.
Mr./Miss Poll-taker from Africa’s Ghana Coast – Can you tell us where you are commenting from?