March for Life in Washington DC

I just wanted to encourage everyone who supports the sanctity of life to get involved in some way on this saddest of days. There are many opportunities: marches, rallies, prayer vigils, etc. It’s important that every life minded person show their solidarity for this cause on a day when we basically have the microphone (the issue gets national and local attention). If you live in Michigan, RTL of Michigan has a list of state-wide events sorted by city or affiliate: https://secure.rtl.org/apps/affiliate_events/listing, and I’m sure every other state has them listed as well.

Any way, let’s all of us get up and get out and speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; ensure justice for those being crushed – and this includes the mothers and fathers.

If you get a second, tell me what you’re doing on January 22nd.

Want to learn how to defend your pro-life views? Join us at lifeminded.org.

Speak out against abortion

No one really wants to think about abortion, much less talk about it. And because so few are talking about, it’s that much easier to forget. As someone who hates to be confrontational and is a peace maker by nature, I totally get it. It’s hard to bring up an unpleasant and controversial topic.

But we must keep the conversation going if we ever hope to influence hearts and minds. I don’t mean be obnoxious about it, but rather be deliberate and be creative and of course, always be gentle and respectful. But equally important, be knowledgeable. Learn how to articulate the pro-life position at lifeminded.org and sign up for a free course that will train you in the art of pro-life persuasion.

But the hardships, emotional and otherwise, these women are experiencing are real. And the younger they are, the more terrified. That is why we, you and me, need to do everything in our power to support them- to be there for them in a tangible way. They need to be embraced by their communities – not shunned. They need to be told the truth about all of their choices – not just the so-called easy way out (which is not easy at all). How can you help these young women? Get involved! There are many opportunities, including supporting and volunteering at your local Pregnancy Resource Center. If you live in Midland as I do, that would be the Mid-Michigan Pregnancy Resource Center.

These non-profit volunteer organizations provide material, emotional, educational and spiritual support to any woman facing an unplanned pregnancy.

The entire web has been recorded and is available to you (free) to download or listen on line by going to http://endingabortion.com/

So here’s what I don’t get: if there are 12 pro-life Dems who will not vote for the current bill unless the Stupak language is inserted; and if Congress needs their votes in order to pass the bill (and they do); and if the current bill truly would not allow tax payer funded abortions without the Stupak language; then why would the pro-choice Dems refuse to insert the Stupak Amendment language?  If we end up with the same bill either way, why would they be willing to risk not passing health care reform because of this one issue? Why wouldn’t they just go along with it to get the bill passed since it supposedly doesn’t change anything?

The resistance to the Stupak Amendment by pro-choice Dems, even to the extent of no health care reform at all, doesn’t make sense unless the Stupak Amendment actually would make a difference in whether abortions are paid for with tax dollars. Or am I missing something here? Somebody help me out.

“Under the amendment, individuals receiving federal subsidies for health care coverage are prohibited from using those subsidies to pay for abortions or to purchase insurance policies that cover abortions. The amendment does not prevent private insurance plans from offering abortion services nor does it prohibit individuals or states from purchasing abortion coverage with non-federal matching funds. The amendment specifies that even those who receive federal subsidies may purchase a supplemental policy with private money to provide abortion coverage.

The language in the Stupak amendment is completely consistent with the Hyde amendment which has been in place since 1977 and has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law currently prohibits federal funding of abortion in all federal health programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). My amendment simply applies current law, the Hyde amendment, to H.R. 3962, health care reform.”

Even though currently legal, I believe abortion is morally wrong because it takes the life of an innocent human being. Naturally, I would be outraged if the Federal government were to force me to pay for abortions via either tax funded abortion services or tax funded insurance policies covering abortion.

You can learn more about the amendment and H.R. 3962 at http://www.house.gov/stupak/.

In other words, we now live in a society where moral questions have been relegated to personal preferences, like choosing your favorite colors, rather than objective realities (think gravity) that are true for everyone. Add to this subjectivism a new definition of tolerance that basically finds intolerable any one who disagrees with another’s ideas, no matter how ridiculous or heinous they may be, and the result is rational chaos. Given this state of cultural confusion, is it any wonder then that so many are unable to think clearly about the abortion issue? This climate of relativism and so-called tolerance produces at best, a modified pro-choice position by those who claim their personal opposition to abortion while insisting it should remain an option for others.

Twenty years ago, most pro-life activists might have been able to approach the abortion topic using God centered, Biblical arguments that perhaps persuaded the opinions of some, but this is no longer the case. Arguing the pro-life position from scripture presupposes the listener a) believes in God, and b) believes in the credibility and reliability of scripture. These days that just simply is not the case. A Christian perspective on the issue of abortion seems irrelevant to 21st Century listeners and makes no sense to them without this frame of reference.

A casual observation reveals that the majority of people claiming to be pro-life are also Christians and Catholics: followers of Christ who believe it is their duty to “do justice.” While I am not denigrating or devaluing the many individual and collective pro-life efforts made by these well-meaning and good hearted people over the past 35 + years, as a Christian myself I do think it’s time to step back and reevaluate our methods and strategy and to perhaps be wiser in our approach.

I am concerned that Christian pro-lifers have inadvertently marginalized the pro-life message and under-cut their own efforts. How, you might be asking? By confusing the pro-life cause with the over arching mandate of evangelism, and by wrapping the pro-life message so tightly with the Bible and Christian vernacular, that the two (being a Christian and being pro-life) are inseparable in public perception.

While Christians believe that fundamentally the idea of morality must be traced back to a Moral Lawgiver, they must also understand that if the goal of the pro-life movement is persuasion, neither God nor salvation can be the focal point of this debate. Why raise objections in the mind and hearts of your audience that divert the conversation to arguments about the existence of God, when the objective is to effectively change hearts and minds about abortion? Doesn’t it defeat the purpose if by making the pro-life movement synonymous with being a Christian, you lose the majority of your audience?

I’m not suggesting a denial of beliefs and worldviews while working as pro-life activists, but I am calling for an end to the duplicity that some seem to engage in. Bringing such a spiritual emphasis to the forefront of the abortion debate, or turning pro-life organizations into para-churches creates a barrier, not only for many who might otherwise be activists for life but also to reaching the wider, watching post-Christian community.