I wonder if FOCA will really be an issue...

Maybe the approach we take as pro-lifers is not working. Ok.. it isn't working... Maybe we need to change our philosophy to reach folks in a more compassionate manner..

After reading through this blog day after day.. I noticed a bit of anger and judgement posted that would turn people off to the cause... I think we need to ponder how we approach the subject..

Jenny,

You are correct in your observation about the tone of the conversation.

I am convinced that we cannot persuade any one to change the way they view prenatal children, any more than we can persuade anyone to believe in Jesus. I believe both of these are the work of Holy Spirit.

But we can choose to be polite and not engage in personal attacks. We can learn to listen and hear what others are saying in a way that they know we are listening.

The gospels indicate that Jesus could be very blunt, even offensive. He seemed to have the least tolerance for religious hypocrites. He warned his disciples to be wary of the leaven of the pharisees. The leaven was hypocrisy.

He was kind with sinners who knew they were sinners. He treated the social outcasts with respect. He hung out with some people who lived life of the edge. They did accuse HIM of being a drunk and whoermonger because he spent too much time in the temple with the religious folk.

We can disaree without being disagreeable. We can admit when we are wrong and ask forgiveness. We can ask God to grant us repentance. One the greatest revelations I have ever received is: GOD is friendly. We should try to be friendly. If we ask HIM, HE will teach us how.

As members of the body of Christ we can correct one another in love, gently, without condemning or judging.

Just a note: stem cell research passed in MI--to add to your list.

Not to gloat or whatever. Just... in case you were wondering.

Just got off that phone seminar with the pro-life leaders. It seems they were not really concerned about FOCA passing.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'nominal', Jill, but I have to imagine something as extreme as FOCA would alienate a few of the 61 (at worst) pro-abort senators and some of the pro-abort reps. Obama would probably sign it. After all that, I wonder how a challenge would go in the Supreme Court. It probably would be worded to fit within the context of precedent, but then again (with the current Court) it might also be eliminated, further punching a hole in Roe.

I don't know the properer Constitutional analysis of FOCA and I'm guessing about all this. And we certainly don't want to leave it to speculation. However, the confidence of those pro-life leaders inspired me to think that FOCA is not yet set to pass, despite favorable political climate.

FOCA is even more radical than Roe, which is saying a lot. And it certainly would upset the 'middle ground' of the Casey Court. FOCA would be going out on a limb and I don't think enough would do it.

Again... fighting it constantly and not making assumptions. Just relaying my thoughts.

What are the chances that Obama and the pro-aborts congress will pass federal funding for abortions? That scares me more than anything else because I feel like the work of my hands (taxes I paid) would then be paying the murder of these children. I would not be able to stand for that in good consience.

Its amusing that in your quest for control of women's bodies you seek the vote of a convicted felon, Ted Stevens. It just shows the moral depravity of the right. Larry Craig, still a republican, then there's Diaper David Vitter and of course Mark Foley. Oh and who can forget David Horsley who admitted to sex with a mule at age 11 in an interview with Fox News. Its quite an esteemed group.

"Maybe the approach we take as pro-lifers is not working. Ok.. it isn't working..."

That is absolutely 110% correct jenny!

The problem with the approach is the INCREMENTALISM that some so-called pro-lifers are promoting. Of course, they aren't actually pro-life since they support laws that end with "....and then you can kill the baby".

The moment someone supports the passing of a law that ends with "....and then you can kill the baby" is no longer pro-life but nominally pro-life as Jill and the liars, um, I mean lawyers with AUL refer to those 32 members that are mentioned above.

Over the next year Jill and everyone else that is cool with "incrementalism" will realize how huge an error it was for them to disobey God by supporting pro-abortion laws with minor exceptions attached to them. How they played right into the Devil's hands giving him exactly what he wants.

Today I am as glad as I have ever been that I am what you guys refer to pejoratively as a "purist". Which means I will never support or endorse any laws that says its OK to murder the baby as long as you do this or that little thing first. Do this little thing and then you can kill the baby. Just sick.

re: Ezek13:19 at November 6, 2008 2:08 AM

For whatever problems I have with Larry Flynt, the Democrats did not elect him to Congress or run him for any office. Unlike David Vitter, Fynt is actually honest about the business he participates in. When the conservative movement is so depraved of leadership and morality that it must haul out a smut mag producer as a comeback you know the movement is beyond hope.

Just as there is a time when lion shall lay with lamb, so too is there a time when republicans shall lay with whores (and\or lobbyists). I just didn't think it would happen this early into the Rapture.

Jenny,
There is no one approach in the prolife movement. The most powerful one we have is prayer.

Please do not judge all of us in these days because of the comments here. Emotions are running high and speaking for myself I am saddened beyond belief for my country. I will pick myself up though and move on more determined than ever to do what I can.

God bless this nation. God help us.

Carla said:

"There is no one approach in the prolife movement. The most powerful one we have is prayer."

Um, wrong Carla. We need MUCH LESS PRAYER and MUCH MORE ACTION. Prayer doesn't save babies from being murdered, only action does. Take action first and then pray that it succeeds.

The only approach to pro-life activism is the one that obeys God's command YOU SHALL NOT MURDER - and for anyone that hasn't connected the dots yet, that means NOT SUPPORTING PRO-ABORTION LAWS WITH MINOR EXCEPTIONS IN THEM!

We've LOST/WASTED/MISHANDLED years, even decades, of pro-life effort by supporting pro-abortion laws.

Our only hope is to do a MUCH MUCH BETTER JOB of teaching children the Christian faith and teaching them to implement it each and every day of their lives. Having failed to do this has created the grim reality that we are experiencing today.

So I"m not trying to be flippant here, Zeke, but do you believe that FOCA passing would be in our best interest? Because if it does what some think it will do, it will overturn ALL those minor exception laws that you talk about- parental notification, waiting period, etc. What do you think?

I have linked to this post from Genocide in the USA
I think all we can do is speak the truth and let God take care of the rest.

Zeke,
Please don't assume I am doing nothing other than prayer. Um, wrong Zeke.

Bobby Bambino said:

"So I"m not trying to be flippant here, Zeke, but do you believe that FOCA passing would be in our best interest? Because if it does what some think it will do, it will overturn ALL those minor exception laws that you talk about- parental notification, waiting period, etc. What do you think?"

That's my point exactly! If Obama passes FOCA then that will show that the strategy of the INCREMENTALISTS was a very dumb strategy! That we should have focused on PERSONHOOD - the scientific fact that human life begins at conception INSTEAD OF trying to pass pro-abortion laws with minor exceptions in them like the vile parental consent law.

Zeke: we should have focused on PERSONHOOD - the scientific fact that human life begins at conception

You are confusing two different things. There is the biological reality, sure, the "human" DNA, the living organism, etc.

But what you want changed is public policy. You want a different status to be attributed to the unborn.

That's my point exactly! If Obama passes FOCA then that will show that the strategy of the INCREMENTALISTS was a very dumb strategy! That we should have focused on PERSONHOOD - the scientific fact that human life begins at conception INSTEAD OF trying to pass pro-abortion laws with minor exceptions in them like the vile parental consent law.

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at November 8, 2008 12:14 AM

If a personhood amendment is such a logical, accessible goal , do you think Roe V. Wade would have even passed? Spend more time with babies instead of lawyers and you might understand the incrementalists. This is not about your side being RIGHT. It's about saving babies from mothers who abort, for an assortment of reasons. They know instinctively their babies are persons - the struggle they have with raising a baby involves more than that. A personhood amendment doesn't change the dire situation perceived by the pregnant woman. Parental consent laws will at least give a girl a responsible adult to consult with before making a life or death decision for her child.

Janet, thought I don't quite agree with everything you said, very nice post above.

It does pay to try and put yourself in another person's shoes, so to speak.