Religion & Politics: part 2

The conclusion of my thoughts regarding an important social issue of our time:

If you don’t believe in the God of the Holy Bible, then I will beg you to consider what He has to say.  If you continue to reject Him then that is your decision and I will still love you.  But don’t tell me that I am being hateful towards others when I have their best interest at heart.   

It brings the alcoholic happiness when he drinks, but he is worse off because of it.  No one would dispute that, and many work to help him find happiness in something that will not harm him.  It brings the homosexual happiness to be with his partner, but it also brings insecurity, disease, an early death, and as a non-christian: torment in hell.  How is that something that we can condone even on a secular level?

From a completely secular standpoint the constitution of the United States calls for the separation of church and state.  For years, the government has struggled with how to keep a line between the two.  On one hand the majority of our citizens have shared common beliefs, such as the right to life, but on the other they are not all of the same religion.  Government has walked on this line off and on in regards to certain issues.  Like when it started acknowledging marriage for the sake of collecting more taxes.  Now the government is trying to step completely into the marriage issue and change its definition.  The government does not have the authority to do this because marriage has  always been a religious matter.  There is no example in history where marriage was considered a matter of the state.  Therefore, I vote against the government getting involved in religion and in marriage. In order to maintain the separation of church and state the government needs to step back and completely abandon any connection that it has with marriage.  

To honor the constitution and respect the many religions practiced in the United States please vote No on question 1.  The government has no right to get involved in religion.  

Religion & Politics: part 1

It has been a long time since I have posted anything offensive.  Which, by the way,  leads me to remember that I was told this week that as Americans we have the right to offend others, but not the right to not be offended.  So here is me exercising my right.  Unless of course you read this with an open heart and see that I am writing from my heart.  Truly, I struggle with this topic.  I desire so much for others to see this simple fact:  That God loved us while we were sinners and sent His son (Jesus) to die for our sins so that we may have life and have it abundantly!   This reality brings tears of thankfulness to my eyes for myself and my children,  and tears of sadness for all of the people that refuse to acknowledge their need.   So without further ado, I give you my thoughts:

I am sick and tired of being labeled as hateful because of being a Christian.  I read over and over how those who oppose sin are hateful towards the sinners.  Yet, I have not found one example where a Christian was arrested for a hate crime.  Mind you, plenty of non-Christians have been arrested for hate crimes.  Christians make great scapegoats as we believe in showing love to others.  We are told by Jesus to overcome evil with good, and that God alone is good.  So we try, not always successfully, to love our neighbors.  Don’t label me as hateful because I think that a murderer should not kill, and that a liar should be told not to lie, and a man should be told that homosexual acts are wrong.  God judges ALL sin.  If I hate my neighbor then I am guilty, but I know to repent and turn to Jesus and ask for forgiveness.  

If God judges all sin.  Then it is in our best interest to repent of our sin and ask for His forgiveness.  If our neighbor is engaging in sin whether it be murder, lying, stealing, or homosexual acts then the best thing that we can do for them, as a human, is tell them what they must do to receive forgiveness and escape the wrath of God and the torment of hell.  You might say that me pointing out someone’s need for forgiveness is hate speech, but how can me trying to help my neighbor escape the wrath of God be hateful to them?  The worst thing I can do is let them think that they will not be judged for their sins by the all powerful God.  That is truly hateful.  

How are they to know that they need forgiveness if we don’t tell them, and how are they to know to repent and ask for forgiveness if they don’t know that their actions are sinful?  

God gives to all freely who come to Him to ask and ask with a pure heart.  Is your heart pure?  How are you to know if your heart is pure if you don’t know what isn’t?  

Pro- Death Government

What makes our nation great? God amongst the people. Why should we pray for God to have compassion, and mercy on this nation? Because while the people with power may not repent, the citizens may. The citizens of this country are far greater than the government. 

Everyone is making a huge deal of President Obama's first 100 days in office. So far he has done a great job defining himself as the most anti-life (a right listed in our declaration of independence) President that this nation has ever had. Despite our lack of money he has decided to fund international abortions, and yesterday he decided to fund and allow scientific research on embryos (babies). All of this despite the scientific research that shows that embryonic stem cells have contributed nothing to the cure of diseases and all research related to them has failed to produce any credible reason for further use. 

I read an article this week from Christianity Today in which the author spoke on Obama's technique regarding the issue of abortion:

"The bad news is that Obama declares a false unity. He claims that all Americans share his goal "to prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the need for abortion, and support women and families in the choices they make."  .....He assumes that we can all unite, as he said in his Roe anniversary comment, "to ensure that our daughters have the same rights and opportunities as our sons,' suggesting that abortion is not just a need, but a right. It's savvy rhetoric precisely because it is so subtle. It quietly isolates pro-life advocates while appealing to those who are tired of the abortion debate.

Obama is not the only politician on the bandwagon. Senators have reintroduced the Prevention First Act which on the surface seems to help reduce abortions, but actually promotes and funds abortions, and even requires hospitals to explicitly lie about emergency contraception. This strategy that he is using is very deceitful to the pro-life citizens because although we can relate with his desire to reduce abortions we must understand that by doing so we would be ostracizing anyone who supports the complete elimination of this murderous practice. 

Government control has been an interesting topic to consider lately as I am reading the biography of John Adams written by David McCullough. Among the many things that I have found interesting is the apparent contrast between Adams and Jefferson. One particular difference that I read about was Jefferson's desire to give the Senate more power and the President less, while in complete contrast Adams' concern over the Senate's ability to give itself power too easily. I have not quite decided with which one I stand, although I continually find myself agreeing with Adams on most other issues. What I have decided is the government in general has too much power and the people too little. 

With this last note, I would like to remind you to pray for the leaders and citizens of this country to be drawn to God through repentence, especially of this genocide called abortion, and to pray for God's merciful hand to be on His remnant that is currently spread throughout this great nation. For God alone can make this country great.

Supporting the Pro-life Position

"The Pro-Life position is true" – Scott Klusendorf




Focus on the Family had an absolutely wonderful program today, and it continues tomorrow. Scott Klusendorf is speaking on abortion, truth, and morals. If you want to learn how to argue then you should listen to him, it is absolutely incredible to me that he can speak on a topic like abortion and defend the life of the fetus without bringing the bible into the conversation. Why is that good? Because most of the pro-choice (pro-death: hey if you are going to do opposite sides use opposite words) people that we talk to about abortion do not accept the bible as the absolute truth. Anyway, he uses an acronym to help us remember what to talk about when we meet someone who supports abortion. Whether you "know" that abortion is right or wrong; please keep reading. All are welcome to read here, and hey feel free to leave me a mean comment if you want to. (It doesn't really matter, I only have two readers anyway.)

SLED: size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency.
1 Peter 3:15 tells us to give an answer for the hope that lies within us: we need to know how to argue intellectualy with someone.
Below is a synopsis of what the acronym sled means, and how to discuss it with someone (this is taken from the family.org website). If you would like to see more please visit family.org and get the free podcast for today and tomorrow and listen to Scott yourself.

Here's how to use the SLED test

* The unborn is smaller than the toddler, but toddlers are smaller than adults.
* The unborn is less developed than the toddler, but toddlers are less developed than elementary school kids.
* The unborn is in a different location than the toddler, but toddlers can change environments without changing their value.
* Finally, the unborn is more dependent than a toddler, but toddlers are more dependent than adolescents (even if some parents would deny this). And many other born people depend on medications, caregivers, and spacesuits to sustain their lives. They are more dependent than those who don't need these things.

So, there are only four ways the unborn differ from toddlers, but many toddlers and other born humans differ in exactly the same ways. So how can we justify killing the unborn on these grounds, when we protect born humans who have the same deficiencies?

I hope that this information has given you a reason to research more about the immorality of abortion. No respectable person could say that abortion is morally right when they analyze it through the eyes of even their own morals, or better yet, through the eyes of an unborn child.