Some statements

After more than two months of blog silence, here are some statements I'd like to express publicly (to both of you).

I am young.
I am well educated.
I am intelligent.
I am a Christian.
I am not a pacifist.
I believe in helping the poor and disadvantaged.
I am unlikely to vote for President Obama in November.
I am not racist.
I can and do think logically.
I do not despise the notion of church or denominations.
I oppose the legalization of same-sex marriage.
I am not a bigot (nor am I Bigfoot).
I believe in absolute truth.
I believe all people are sinful.
I believe abortion should be illegal.
I believe Americans should be free to own guns.
I believe that the U.S. Constitution is important.
I believe in both heaven and hell, and I do not believe that everyone ends up in heaven.
I love Jesus Christ and seek to serve him in all I do.
I fear for the future of religious freedom in America.

I understand that many people don't believe all of these statements can be true... but they are.

Confounded Logic

Over the last month I've come across a number of stories and articles related to the issue of abortion. All of them made me scratch my head a little bit regarding the logic of our culture (especially the "pro-choice" political position). I thought I'd mention each article and then make some of my own comments.

In January I learned of Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his filthy, disgusting, horrific abortion operation that he had been running in Philadelphia since 1979.

Also last month a Christian friend of mine linked to some of his top blog posts of 2010. His #1 post of the year had to do with his views on abortion. While my friend considers himself "pro-life," he believes that the practice of abortion should remain legal. In reference to Roe v. Wade he writes, "...we have forgotten that one of the primary reasons for legalizing abortion was to put an end to the then common and extremely dangerous practice of 'back-ally' abortions. In other words, abortion was legalized so that it could be closely and safely regulated. In effect, legalizing abortion did not create the practice but instead served to wrangle it in."

A few days ago I read of a pregnant woman here in Colorado who was given an incorrect prescription from her pharmacist - an abortion pill - by mistake. Last I'd heard, the devastated woman didn't yet know whether the fetus inside her was still alive or not. If it is, it will likely have severe birth defects that will almost certainly take its life shortly after birth.

Yesterday I read of a survey that was done in which babies with the disease spina bifida were surgically treated. In some cases, the surgery was performed on fetuses in utero (between 19-26 weeks old), and for other babies, the operation took place shortly after birth. The study found that the surgeries performed on the unborn fetuses were more effective than those on the already-born babies. In other words, having the operation done before birth made it more likely that the child would be able to walk, and have fewer neurological problems.

Everyone (regardless of political persuasion) seems to agree that Dr. Gosnell (from the first story) is a disgusting creep. I don't quite understand, however, why "pro-choice" people are at all outraged. Is it because his clinic was dirtier than others? It certainly can't be the fact that he killed babies - that's the very foundation of their position! Maybe it's that he used scissors. Barbaric? Perhaps. But if I were given the choice between being murdered by a scissors-wielding doctor and being murdered by a doctor with a giant vacuum that would crush me to death, it wouldn't really matter which one I chose, would it?

The last two stories I mentioned (the incorrect prescription to the pregnant woman, and the study about fetal surgery) are discussed well in THIS blog post by Joel Lindsey. Joel points out the "moral schizophrenia" of America's response to these stories. We're outraged because a pregnant woman has (most likely) lost her baby, but the only difference between her baby and the million that are legally aborted each year is that she wants hers. Similarly, in the story about fetal surgery 19-week old fetuses are treated as patients, given the very best of medical care... but again, the only difference between these fetuses and those that are aborted is that the mothers want them.

So we come to my friend's view on abortion, which frankly has so much wrong with it I don't even know where to begin. I guess first of all I'll point out that facts are facts. Estimates are that perhaps 50-60,000 abortions took place the year before Roe. Since the practice became legal, the numbers have climbed dramatically to more than a million per year today. If my friend is "pro-life" as he claims, I take that to mean that he believes abortion is the killing of an innocent life. How can you possibly believe that the killing of one million lives is preferable to the killing of 60,000? I'll agree that 60,000 is still a shocking and horrific number, but it's 94% better than a million, right? Or is it because the 60,000 were killed in private homes and not culturally- and government-sanctioned medical centers (like the lovely one run by Dr. Gosnell in Philadelphia)? That's quite a job the government seems to have done "wrangling in" the "dangerous" practice of abortion. The words "safely regulated," when used in reference to a practice that is, by definition, murder, sound pretty silly to me. That's like saying we ought to make genocide safely regulated. A lot of good that will do, I'm sure.

"Back-ally" or not, abortion is every bit as dangerous to the fetus today as it was then. Now there's just a whole lot more of it.

Violence against women?

You should read THIS quickly (it's quite brief). Then come back here and leave a comment answering the following question:

How does the National Organization for Women expect to be taken seriously when they do things like this?

Thank you.

An article you should read

If you haven't heard, (former) Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow will star in a pro-life Super Bowl ad this weekend. Apparently this is a really controversial and somewhat offensive idea to some people.

I just read THIS article in the Washington Post from a woman who is pro-choice, but who calls out ultra-liberal feminist groups for what they are: not pro-choice, but pro-abortion. She also talks more generally about how we could use more athletes (and young men!) like Tebow. I liked it.

Dear President Obama,

Watch this video, and then explain to me why you're pro-choice. Then watch an ultrasound during an abortion and explain to me why you're still pro-choice. After watching a baby in the womb try to escape from the instrument of its death, this former Planned Parenthood clinic director quit her job and began speaking out against abortion. Perhaps you, Mr. President, ought to do the same.

Cokesbury and Santos on abortion

There's a Christian bookstore near our home called Cokesbury. Once when we were driving past Elizabeth said, "Every time we pass that store I want cake." I was confused. I asked, "Cake?" She said, "Yeah, that store is called 'Cakesbury.'" I pointed out, "Actually, it's called 'Cokesbury.'" She said, "Oh... Every time we pass that store I want coke."

I laughed. hard.

P.S. Matt Santos' position on abortion is silly (Matt Santos is a character on The West Wing who runs for president as the democratic party's nominee). I used to think it wasn't so bad. Even though he's pro-choice, he says that abortion should be "...a whole lot rarer than it is now." I respected that. I didn't like the pro-choice stance, but was glad that he truly sounded like he'd like to reduce the number of them in the country. Last night when we watched that episode (and I don't know why it's taken me so long to realize this), it hit me that his position is pretty darn stupid. He believes that life begins at conception. He asserts that abortion is "a tragedy." Yet his political stance is that it should be safe and legal. If you think life begins at conception and that abortion is a tragedy, then you concede that it's basically the murder of a person who can't defend itself. Why IN THE WORLD could you believe that it should be legal? (For the record: Yes, I understand that the show is fictional, and that Matt Santos doesn't really exist. Still, I've heard Democrats who hold this same position, or positions very much like it. Plus, I like The West Wing and I get passionate about abortion, so I thought I'd share.)

a bumper sticker made me mad today

This is a post that illustrates how quickly I tend to judge people and that sometimes I get instantly pissed off without ever having met a person. My biggest problem might be that I almost always feel justified with my judgmental-ness. Anyway...

Today Elizabeth and I were driving down the street when we noticed the car in front of us had a bumper sticker that said, "Just say no to sex with pro-lifers." Yeah, that's what it said. We pulled up next to the car. There was a car seat in the back. The driver was a slightly overweight man with grungy long hair and a long, unkempt goatee. From his rearview mirror hung an extremely disgusting-looking zombie head that had apparently been severed off its body (because the neck was red with blood). 

And I judged him. Pretty negatively.

abortion, and annoying internet

Do you have any idea how annoying it is to have internet connectivity that flashes in and out so much that you can only load a full web page about once every 45 minutes?

I found this article, "Four Reasons You Might Be Aborted: An Open Letter to Fetal Humans" extremely interesting, and I thought I'd recommend it for your perusal.

Fight the Freedom of Choice Act

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) will by signed by Barack Obama as his first act in the Oval Office, unless he's a liar (he told Planned Parenthood that's the first thing he'd do).

You can go here to sign a petition against this legislation, which would nullify ALL state and federal mandates regarding abortion, including bans on partial birth abortion, requirements that women considering abortion be given information about the risks of the procedure, and parental notification and consent if a minor wants an abortion.

It takes about four seconds to do this. You give them your name and address and click "submit."

I frankly hope that Obama turns out to be a liar rather than an advocate for genocide, but only time will tell.

Politics and stuff

Today the blogs I frequent were full of good stuff. Below are some links and descriptions of some of the better entries and articles I found. Below that are some of my own rants and raves about those topics.

Here is an article by Princeton professor Robert George called Obama's Abortion Extremism, detailing the extent to which Obama supports abortion. He refers to Obama not as pro-choice, but as pro-abortion, because he seems to oppose anything that would even attempt to curb the number of abortions in this country. It's a little scary.

Here is a blog post by Justin Taylor which summarizes George's article and is very interesting.

Here is a blog post by Dr. Ben Witherington III on pacifism. Dr. Witherington, whom I respect immensely, is a pacifist, and I really loved reading about his position.

A post from Denver Seminary Philosophy of Religion professor Dr. Doug Groothuis that was written back in March. It's about what he calls "fetus fatigue," or evangelical Christians who are sick of abortion being the only issue other Christians care about.

Another Justin Taylor post that picks up on the "fetus fatigue" idea and has some ideas from Al Mohler on the same topic.

Regarding Dr. Witherington's post on pacifism. I completely respect his position, and I don't strongly disagree with very much of what he's written. However, his main argument seems to be that Christians should not act violently against those who act violently toward them. If I'm being beaten I should still take it and be kind to my enemies. I actually don't have much of a problem with that. Witherington, though, doesn't address what we're supposed to do when violence is taking place against others. If I see a woman getting raped or beaten across the street, am I really supposed to let it happen because I'm a Christian? Or when rebels in Africa invade a village and torture all of its inhabitants before killing them, should we stand by and let it happen because we're Christians? Or when a German with a funny mustache is systematically exterminating millions of humans, should we allow it to go on because we're Christians? This is where I don't understand the extent of pacifism. I think even pacifists would probably say that we should intervene in those situations. Does it just mean that we don't kill the perpetrators but instead put them behind bars?

Regarding Obama on abortion. I've been bombarded by pro-lifers pointing out his terrible views on the issue, but today's blog post and article linked above pointed out even more to me. Obama did not support a Democrat-sponsored bill referred to as 95-10 legislation, that would seek to reduce the number of abortions in America 95% over the next 10 years by strengthening the social safety net for poor women. This bill would in no way make abortion illegal, it would simply make it rarer. I could respect a Democrat who believes abortion should be legal but acknowledges that it's tragic and undesirable, and who seeks to make abortion rare. This, however, seems to illustrate the fact that Obama does not want fewer abortions. It's like he wants more of them. Like it would be better for a poor woman to get pregnant and have an abortion than it would for her not to get pregnant at all. Utterly ridiculous.

And regarding the "fetus fatigue" stuff. I understand that Christians shouldn't care about only one issue. We should be committed to peace and to feeding the hungry and being kind to our environment and other very important things. However, as Al Mohler says in the last Justin Taylor post (linked above), "Our vote will determine whether millions of unborn babies live or die. The Freedom of Choice Act [which Obama plans to pass as president], if passed, would lead directly to a radical increase in the numbers of abortions. The abortion industry has told us that themselves. The question comes down to this: How many lives are we willing to forfeit -- to write off as expendable -- in order to 'move on' to other issues of concern? There is no way to avoid that question and remain morally serious."