Wednesday open thread: pro-life and religion
Posted by Eric Scheidler on Wednesday, October 31st, 2007
Before the hideous fence went up, someone formed the sign of the cross out of large rocks on the hillock facing Planned Parenthood. Several other rock crosses soon appeared.
Now that all of these crosses are barricaded behind the fence, they have a sort of "early church catacombs" quality. The remind me of those ikthys fishes etched into the walls of ancient cities by our Christian ancestors.
While of course any "life topic" is free to be discussed on the Wednesday Open Thread, the above reflection suggests the topic of religious faith and the pro-life movement.
Pro-lifers are often accused of trying to "impose our religion" on people—we hear chants of "keep your Rosaries off my ovaries" and we're called "born again bigots" and "fundies."
As a Catholic I have to chuckle when I'm called a "fundie," mindful of the heated doctrinal debates always ready to resurface when Catholics and Fundamentalists are together. I'm sure my Evangelical friends have a similar reaction to the "Rosaries" chant.
Fortunately—blessedly—Fox Valley Families has managed to bridge denominational lines in a way that groups across the country are looking at with pious envy. "How have you done this?" they ask.
My answer: We have prayed together. We have sung hymns together. We have walked together. We have recognized that our common faith in the sanctity of life is very pleasing to God, and we have heard his call to share that faith with each other and with our community.
But at the same time, there are evident differences between Catholics and Protestants. There is no need for me to enumerate them here, but perhaps this Open Thread might be an opportunity—building on the foundation of that deeply shared faith in life—to discuss some of them, along with the questions of whether we're "imposing" our religion and precisely what role personal faith has in our public witness against abortion.
While I am a fervent Christian (Protestant), and a new comer to the PL movement I have found my most sucessful witnesses to be from the standpoint of how women are being treated in abortion mills, and the ramifications of their "choice". People, even hardline PC friends of mine are disarmed when I don't bring up religion or politics, or even frankly what is happening to the babies. They will listen when they hear that women are being mislead, lied to and exploited. I don't care how I get thier attention ultimately….as long as they start listening.
October 31st, 2007 at 10:57 am
I am a Baptist and had not been involved in PL until now. I feel extremely blessed that we have been able to bridge denominational lines for the sake of life. I have met so many wonderful people. I have learned a great deal about other faiths and am better able to understand some. The bottom line is, our prayers may sound different and our songs may not be the same but we are all Christians. We have sent and will continue to send a clear message to PP, the city of Aurora and the Nation. Christians stand for life and we are here for life!
October 31st, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Although I am a born again Christian, I just want to note that there are people who show up that are of no religious denomination, that are there just to stand up for life!
October 31st, 2007 at 1:45 pm
Laura,
And that just goes to show how strongly people feel about abortion…because it's not just people of religious affiliation showing up to protest..it's people who just have morals and values..they don't necessarily have to have a religion. And I think that's what makes it so great what we are doing. Because people call us religious wacko's but then what can they call people who don't have a religion? It totally contradicts all the PCer's arguments that we are just crazy bible thumpers.
Elizabeth
October 31st, 2007 at 1:51 pm
I don't think you need to be religious to see the evil nature of ripping apart a human baby. I think the reason religious people get involved is they are trying to live out their commitment to their faith and their God. But non-religious people could certainly join in because of the massive human right abuse that abortion is. Now that our constitutional rights are being toyed with, non-religious people could also get involved from the angle of protecting our rights.
October 31st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
We have got to stand up for the rights of these innocent little babies being slaughtered at any cost. I volunteer at a Christian Family Planning clinic and some of those girls who come in there thinking we are going to help them murder their babies really make you want to throw up. If Fox Valley hates the sin of baby murder then it is an OK place with me!
God Bless!
Lynelle
October 31st, 2007 at 1:54 pm
The reason that the opposition to PP has been united and on-going is simply the outrageous actions of Planned Parenthood. No one appreciates being hoodwinked through lies into housing the largest abortion mill in the country. Even people who are generally pro-choice in the abstract don't like the concrete fact that it's happening in their town.
October 31st, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Brian,
Then there are MANY people who thought abortion was just "a word", or just "a simple procedure" and then found out actually how ugly it is! Then, top that off with PP's deceipt & pure evilness, and it brought MANY more people into the pro-life movement, like myself! (Although I was never pro-choice!)
October 31st, 2007 at 2:58 pm
My story may shock you.
I am have been attending a Methodist Church in the Area and put up a stink when I learned about Planned Parenthood opening up in Aurora, 23 minutes from my community. I asked my Pastor about it and I got no strait answers or leadership, but he did listen. He worked with others to have a multi congregational dialouge to speak openly about it.
The Meeting took place about a week and a half ago and was I surprised. I was going to put the word out to the PL group so that we could get representation, but instead assumed that this would be an in house dialouge to get a feel for the mood.
I did not bring my prepared notes since this was a discussion and I felt that might be over the top. I WAS WRONG!!! I had the unexpeced duty to attack Plan Parenthood face to face, because a board member and public relations woman from Planned Parenthood Chicago were in the front row. UNBELIEVABLE! I was fortunate enough to have gathered information through different those who I spoke with in front of PP, this site and other reaserch. I shot them full with arrows and they could only put Pink bandaids on thier wounds and point out how pretty pink is and everything was with the best intentions, because they could not refute anything I said.
At a 2 hour discussion they spoke for a good 40 minutes and when it was over, they had a table full of Pamphlets, window clings and window signs for the taking.
I gave good information to the 25 or so people that showed from 5-6 congregations. Needless to say, I was dissappointed in my chosen leadership. Only 1 of them even had a collar on and there was no substnative injection from any clergy with a pro life message.
I hope to open minds and encourage action as my mission has been placed before me.
Please say a little prayer for me….I NEED IT!!!
October 31st, 2007 at 5:04 pm
A very apt theme Eric, and ditto to comments about how this cause has united us across denominational lines and with others of good will. Most of us would agree that it has been truly inspirational and humbling to have been a part of this coming together. Surely our Lord is pleased to see us as one.
And not only have we come together on abortion but on many other things as well. Our critics often accuse us of not doing enough to take care of other pressing societal needs. Usually these are not well thought out criticisms and sometimes they are downright dishonest. But in response to them the first thing that comes to mind is Hesed House. Staffed primarily by Christian churches it would simply not be operating if it were not for our efforts. Food panties and soup kitchens and clothing drives also come to mind. If left to the devices of the Planned Parenthoods of the world none of these things would be addressed. It is Planned Parenthood that does not care about the whole person. Where are they when it comes to soup kitchens, homelessness and putting food on the tables of the poor? Would that our critics address Planned Parenthood about these things!
And then there are the annual time, treasure and talent surveys distributed to every member of our parishes. These surveys give up to a dozen different ways that people are encouraged to contribute to our communities. Most people fill out and return the surveys with multiple committments. But I digress.
The big concern to many of us is how is it that with the overwhelming number of our fellow citizens claiming they are of the Christian faith that our country is going off the deep end on so many issues, especially with abortion. Many abortions are performed on Christian women, sometimes by Christian doctors and with assistance of christian staff members. Christian men often foot the bill. On occasion we have seen people drive into clinics with rosary beads hanging from their mirrors and drop off women to have an abortion.
That brings us to the root cause of most of our problems–a crisis in faith. Many Christian teachers say that a crisis in faith is precipitated by a crisis in our prayer life. Indeed, with few exceptions attendance at Sunday liturgies has trended downward the past 40 years. This underlies the moral coming apart of our families, schools and communities, and could ultimately be the undoing of our country.
Our policy makers and judges often do not see themselves as beholden to a strong set of moral principles. Somehow the notion of the so-called separation of church and state has gained traction to the point where it is thought of as the standard for political discourse and the underpinning of judicial review. Moral relativism has crept in where Christian principle has waned. This has its consequences even for our survival. The age we are living in is unprecedented in terms of the sheer numbers of abortions and the decline of family size. Most western countries are not reproducing at replacement rates.
This has not gone without notice in the business community either. The great business writer/scholar Peter Drucker wrote in his book "Management Challenges for the 21st Century", that the decline in the birth rate will lead to political instability. He said this demographic implosion is "the number one fact that businesses must consider" and that "no developed country is likely to have stable politics or a strong government". He further stated: "Government instability is going to be the norm". We can already see this in Europe where political struggles exist between the ascending Muslim populations and declining Christian churches and population.
Most pro-lifers thank God on our knees for the beauty of the country we live in and we will continue to work to restore and/or re-invent our institutions to uphold the sanctity of life. Our faith sustains us in a thousand ways and we know that in Christ we are victorious.
October 31st, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Jerry,
Thank you for bringing up seperation of church and state. The liberal PC version is incorrect.
Article 1 of the Constitution states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
No where does it say that God should not be in government or the public square. All it says is that Congress shall not endorse a specific religion (like the Church of England). That is why it was put there, so that people wouldn't be arrested if they did not follow the Church of England's direction.
On the other hand, the government MAY NOT prohibit a person from exercising their faith in the public arena. Until the 1950's there was prayer in school. As my Mom told me they started every morning with the Pledge and then stopped to pray. Most people don't know that bc all they have heard for the last 30 years is there is no place for God in government or more recently and more dangerously in the public square. This is the "new" interpretation of seperation of church and state.
This country whether PCers like it or not was founded on freedom of religion. They came to America so they could worship God, without being told how. The foundations of our laws come from Scripture.
Our forefathers and foremothers were deeply religious and lived their faith openly. We should look to them and reclaim our heritage. We should not hide in our homes or churches. We need to be bold for Jesus. We should be compassionately seeking those who need help. We should be showing Jesus to our community by having gentle spirits, gentle words, and gentle hearts, especially to girls and women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. We need to help them finish school, help with child care, help with educational programs, help with housing and basic needs. This means opening our homes if need be to be mentors. This is what being Jesus means. He would expect nothing less then that from us who claim we follow Him.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Come Holy Spirit fill the hearts of the faithful.
And renew the face of the earth.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Thanks Paul!!!!!
Tara, I agree with you. Freedom of Religion was not intended for the removal, extinction or regulation of religion. We as citizens of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA have a country undoubtedly founded with on the values of Christianity and set boundaries for conduct through law to allow for other faiths and religions. That should be celebrated instead of disregarded.
I believe what has separated the cohesion that the Christian Churches should embrace is often lost because of the Media, Pride and the jockeying for sustenance. 1st, the media (liberal) loves to drive the stakes between denominations by using their granted authority to break down unity and elevate a socialist value system where we depend on them for values, leadership and dissemination of information. Pride of the Church and beliefs they have chosen to express publicly and to God, speaking down to others to discredit ones faith. Finally, Jockeying or preaching to a Market instead of from the soul of a true believer, in other words filling a market void to the point that one might ponder whether some have evolved or eroded the message.
Every Church has differances, every Preacher/Pastor/Deacon/Priest (in no specific order) is individual and every individual has a unique faith and relationship with Jesus. Therefore, we will always have some degree of difference between individuals and Churches.
Should we celebrate our Uniqe relationship with Our Creator as our forfathers had embraced, christian or otherwise or dusreguard other faiths, individual, denominational or religious as the socialist movement has and is.
Keep the Faith
Engage others, do not discount them.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:17 am
One Caviot with reguard to the regulation of relgion.
Since there must be a rule of law for society to function in its intended religious freedom. ANY religion seeking to inflict or insight physical harm should be given a watchful eye. Freedom of Religion is as much a responsibility as Freedom. The Nazis often used the church to justify their stance and included many Christian symbols in the Third Reich and that type situation we should not have to revisit to its potential.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:41 am
Dan the Methodist,
I completely agree. It was the Judeo/Christian faith that founded this country. And as any freedom, Freedom of Religion must be exercise with respect. You are correct, that any religion that promotes the destruction of others needs to watched.
But on the other hand tolerance in this country has run a muck. Tolerance does not mean that I have to accept, embrace or change my thoughts and feelings on an issue because someone else thinks it's right. It means that I have to respect someone who holds different views then me. Respect the person not the behavior. The media and the left want to wipe Christians off the map, all in the name of tolerance. The only Christians that are accepted by the media and left are "Progressive". Anyone who considers themselves as Traditionalists, Conservative or Evengelical are automatically deemed dangerous.
What has been wonderful to see and experience is the way that Catholics, Baptists, Prebyterians, Methodists have come together to at PP. I am a Presbyterian. We must remeber that we worship the same God, we all believe in the Trinity, but most important we believe that Jesus Christ is our Savior and apart from Him we have no life, either in this world or the next. He was crucified, dead and buried and rose again. He took on the sin of all the world so that those who believe in Him will have eternal life. We all believe this. This is what binds God's people together. When I look at the rallies and see Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian all praying it is like getting a glimpse of what Heaven will look like. It is so beautiful. We are truly stronger together, then seperated, and it is not like Satan hasn't tried to divide us along denominational lines either at PP. And there have been disgreements there, but when we stop and pray desention leaves, bc the Holy Spirit brings unity to God's people.
November 1st, 2007 at 8:06 am
"The only Christians that are accepted by the media and left are "Progressive". Anyone who considers themselves as Traditionalists, Conservative or Evengelical are automatically deemed dangerous"
———————————————
My question to the MSM and the left is: What road are they 'progressing' on? The road to Hell??
AS C.S.Lewis said:
"We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive".
November 1st, 2007 at 9:09 am
Ramir San Diego,
Excellent quote.
November 1st, 2007 at 9:17 am
Dan the Methodist: I will pray for you in your quest. May God be with you an this difficult journey!
Tara: Excellent points. We have a freedom of Religion not a freedom from Religion.
Also, I was wondering, there has been a "deacon" speaking at the city council meetings in favor of PP. This hurts my heart. How do the rest of you feel about it?
November 1st, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Bren,
It saddens me when I see anyone who calls themselves Christian say they believe abortion is acceptable. We say the Apostle's Creed and Nicene Creed. Both are pro-life creeds. Jesus could have walked out of the desert as a 30 year old man, but God chose Jesus to come the way we all do. The process of fertilization to birth is what makes us human. Jesus was a zygote, embryo, foetus, and infant. Doesn't this in itself show that God holds pregnancy as being special and so we should do all we can to protect both the mother and the baby.
My question for Christians is: Was Jesus any less our Savior at fertilization, as a zygote, as a embryo, as a foetus, and an infant then He was the day He hung on the cross for our sins, died, assended into hell, raised, and accended?
As far as crisis pregnancy, God showed us how we are to respond. Mary was a teenager who became unexpectently pregnant, being betrothed, and Joesph being a rightous man wanted to shield Mary from disgrace by divorcing her quietly. Yet he listened to God's message and took her as his wife anyway. He trusted God. Isn't that how we should react?
Joseph could have ignored God and brought Mary to the town leaders for a public divorce. There she and the unborn Jesus could have been killed. Isn't that what PP wants. Just today I saw men dropping of their girlfriends/wives at PP and leaving them there to have the abortion all by themselves. Real men, like Joseph, do not support the sacrificing of women to choice and the killing of unborn children.
Joseph accepted God's message, and adopted Jesus as his own son. This is no small matter. I'm sure there was plenty of talk going on about Mary. Yet he withstood the pressure and took care and protected Mary and Jesus.
This is our role model.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:32 pm
Tara,
I agree. It is so upsetting to see someone who professes to be a spiritual leader endorse ANY of the PP agenda. More like the fable "wolf in sheeps clothing". This is just another sign of the times.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:53 pm
I understand exactly what you mean. It sickens me to see hospitals with crosses on the building and performing abortions inside. They should either take the cross down or quit performing abotions.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 am
Tara says,
"It saddens me when I see anyone who calls themselves Christian say they believe abortion is acceptable."
It saddens me when I meet anyone who calls themselves Christian and believes that any murder besides self-defense is acceptable.
Any murdering in the name of God seems to be an oxymoron.
"As far as crisis pregnancy, God showed us how we are to respond. Mary was a teenager who became unexpectently pregnant"
Yes, but I don't think Mary was raped. The immaculate conception of Mary is hardly being raped in an alley.
I'm not using this point to defend abortion…its just I do not believe that Mary's prenancy can be compared to any other woman's pregnancy. We can and should learn from it, but not use it as rhetoric for all crisis pregnancies.
Maybe I'm wrong
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 am
John,
I wasn't even suggesting that Mary was raped. I know that she wasn't, The Holy Spirit overshadowed her. Her pregnancy was a miracle.
But, if you are looking from her family's, town and even Jospeh's point of view, her pregnancy was a crisis.
Mary was probably 14 years old. She was betrothed (not yet fully married). She didn't know if anyone would believe her. Afterall it was quite a story. The only one who got it was Elizabeth, which is why God sent Mary to her.
Joseph believe that Mary had an affair until the Angel came and told him what happened. He wanted to divorce her quietly so not to expose her. Because by exposing her she could have been stoned to death. He did not want that to happen. He would have built onto his family's home to bring Mary there. So when he obeyed the Angel to take Mary as his wife, he was taking a huge risk. He wouldl have brought a pregnant Mary into his family's house. He would have gone to Mary's family to get her, and walked down the street, to make the public declaration that he was taking her as his wife. Everyone would have been talking about it. Yet Joseph was faithful. From the announcement of Jesus's conception to Mary by Gabriel to his toddler years, was full of crisis.
This is an example of how to deal with crisis pregnancies. To be compassionate, to walk with the girl who is pregnant, to trust God that even in the mist of choas or trouble, He will show the way.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 pm
I saw my first abortion victim today comeing out of PP, she had on sweat pants and was walking funny to the car with some man who didn't even open the door for her. Then I saw her lay back in the front seat, while he went back inside for a long time. When he came out he had a sheet of paper with him, apparently post-abortion instructions. They drove off right in front of us. She had her head turned away from us as far as it would go, and he avoided any eye contact. This haunts me. I hope she will be OK. I said some prayers for her. We were by the rock crosses.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Tara says,
"But, if you are looking from her family's, town and even Jospeh's point of view, her pregnancy was a crisis."
What do you consider a crisis pregnancy?
Maybe I missunderstood what you meant by a crisis pregnancy.
November 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm
John -
The majority of girls who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant will say it is a crisis pregnancy. Some say it's a crisis bc it will intrude on their work, social life, school, or embarressment. Some say it's a crisis bc of money, or they are afraid of their boyfriends will leave them or their families will be mad. Those who trully are in a crisis are those who are raped. But these cases are very rare. And even in those cases, God is God and He can turn something ugly and horrible into something beautiful through the gift of life.
Does this answer your question?
November 2nd, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Tara,
Yes this does answer my question…thank you.
My confusion was that I would define a crisis pregnancy as rape or incest only. The other scenarios of pregnancy, if aborted, would be an abortion of convenience.
To me the story of Mary's pregnancy demonstrates that faith in God will prevail, even amidst isolation and persecution.
The people of that time would have judged/persecuted Mary immediatley and, as you stated earlier, probably stoned her to death.
What does this teach us about people/humanity?
November 2nd, 2007 at 3:22 pm
John,
I agree that the only time you could call being pregnant a crisis is in the case of rape/incest. In both cases the woman had no say in the action. All the other cases the woman consented to have sex and therefore are responsible for the consequences.
An unborn child should not have to pay with his/her life bc of irresponsible behavior. And like I said before, even in the case of rape/incest one violent act against an innocent doesn't justify another act of violence against another innocent.
Go to http://www.voicesofstrength.org look under Awareness and the pregnancy after rape. You can also go to http://www.preciouslife.net look under women's health then rape and abortion. This is an excellent article.
Then go to the ACLU's website and search under rape&pregnancy and read the difference. Let me know what you think.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:16 pm
GREAT CONVERSATION!!
I hope I get to meet you all in person.
I too am disturbed by the lack of leadership and action being taken with my church, pastor, and congregation. From a meeting of 5-6 congregations 25 show up????
It is the same blind eye Christianity used during the innocent killing done by Nazi's
Hitler even had 1 of his relatives killed in one of the afordable mental health care facilities for the mentally ill.
I wish I could post a picture I have of a holocaust boxcar that transported jews to thier doom. I colored it pink and put some choice logo's on it. It makes me think of PP and how they are going down the same track.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:19 pm
I am a Baptist, and as such do not have much truck with Catholics, but at least they are very successful at getting Catholic pharmacists to refuse to dispense the RU32 abortion pill.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Can you respectfully point out why you do not trust them?? I am Methodist, but have no issue with catholics that do not speak down to me.
If he does open up and explain himself, can we all be respectful.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Dan the Methodist,
I am a Prebyterian, I feel your pain. I attend a PCUSA church. I work at the national level of my denomination to bring my church back to it's historic place of being pro-life. Calvin was very clear on abortion, it was an abomination. I hear people advocate at our General Assembly (they make church policy) that abortion is a moral choice. That God has no opinion on abortion. Yet you and I know the truth.
I will be praying for you in your endeavor. - PEACE
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Brother Yancy,
Sorry if you had a bad experience with the Catholic faith. What specifically was your bad experience if you don't mind my asking? I am a Catholic and would like to know if/why another Christian would feel ill-will of any kind towards me just for being a Catholic.
Please tell me more about the Baptist faith. Does it derive it's name from the baptism of Jesus in the river Jordan by his cousin John.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:04 pm
I would love for there to be a real conversation between Christians who are so secure in their faith that they don't have to shoot darts at each other to win some religious contest made to stroke our egos.
REAL EXCHANGES WILL BRIDGE GAPS.
Come on Brother Yancy, lets have a real exchange of ideas, faiths and experiences.
With respect, tell us how the word Catholic makes you feel.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:17 am
Tara says,
"And like I said before, even in the case of rape/incest one violent act against an innocent doesn't justify another act of violence against another innocent."
I've written it many times, I also do not subscribe to "an eye for an eye" philosophy.
I went to all three of the sites you'd suggessted (voices of strength, precious life, and ACLU).
Thank you for having me visit these sites…they illustrate perfectly the dichotomy on rape and pregnancy.
The first two sites give a strong message of strength, support and compassion. Giving real life testamonials has a strong educational impact that abortion is not the only option women have.
The last site, ACLU, was difficult to navigate and filled with statistics. Political "pot shots" on religion and abstinence were every other article. The stats, however, on sex education were very straight forward, which to any one w/ a more scientific mind lends itself to be quite convincing. It is made very apparent on this website that God does not play a part in any of these decisions. By the look of this site it would seem that w/in the next decade or so we could see abortions turning into an OTC item.
Interesting…
November 3rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
John,
I am so glad you went to those sites. I to found the first two were full of compassion, and letting women know that God loves them and their unborn babies. Yet the ACLU's site is very cold and "clinical".
The stats on ACLU's website mostly come from Alan Guttmacher Institute, which is Planned Parenthood's stat and research arm. And the ACLU and Planned Parenthood are of like mind. So I am not surprised that they would say abstinence education is faulty. They want every school to bo forced to use PP's or something like PP's sex-ed curriculum. I don't know it you've ever read it, but it is horrid. Here is another website that PP tells our kids to go to http://www.positive.org. Let me know what you think. Not much surprises me, but this website did. They tell kids as young as 12 to visit this site.
November 3rd, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Dan,
The Christian fellowship for Life is the work of the Holy Spirit. A safe haven from darkness. May God bless you abundantly in your work for life within the Christian Methodist communinty.
Can you tell me a little about the Methodist faith. I have never had a chance to truly learn about the other Christian communities of faith and I am sure it would help me grow in my faith and understanding of Jesus.
And not to put you on the spot but what comes to your mind when you hear the word "Catholic".
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:13 pm
btw…
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum is Latin for "the peace of the Lord be with you always"
Latin was the language used in masses at Catholic churches throughout the world till about 50 years ago.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:31 pm
There is a website dedicated towards atheists and agnostics that are for life.
http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html
"because life is all there is and all that matters, and
abortion destroys the life of an innocent human being."
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:58 pm
http://tinyurl.com/fa26t If I did this right, that is a link to atheists and agnostics that believe
"… life is all there is and all that matters, and abortion destroys the life of an innocent human being."
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:11 pm
Interesting, a respect for the sanctity of life w/o acknowledging your own Creator.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:44 pm
The Methodist view is moving toward anti-abortion, but at a speed that wouldn't clock on a speed gun.
The United Methodist Church (UMC) was the founding member of the Religious Coolition for Reprodutive Choice (RCRC), the group that gives religious support for abortion in my opinion. The UMC during much of the 70's let PP use office space in their Church across the street from the US Supreme Court. Though the Church instructs that Abortion is always evil, they have a giant loopole the size of TEXAS. If there is any distress on the mother it's OK. Financial, mental, and physical distress are among the acceptable reasons. Can you be pregnant without all of those???
During the Clinton Era the UMC celebrated Mr. Clinton's veto of a Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
One of the charitable arms for the UMC committed 15 million dollars over 2 years to a program for islamic charity to provide small animals to be sacrificed. I wish I could remember the name of the mission group, because the word GOD was no where to be found on their website.
Chicago had a Bishop (= to catholic cardinal) that openly questioned the validity of the emmaculate conception and resurrection of Jesus.
I am not trying to marginalize Methodists, but I am not sure they know exactly what they are involved in.
I am not sure if they are just happy with nonconfrontational Christianity or if they just don't want to rock the boat, but the ship has been overrun by people that have not shown little leadersip to this point on abortion.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:35 am
The Catholic question for me is not much of a problem. My wife is Catholic as are my In=Laws. I would have to say that being read the riot act is disrespectful and disengaging. Prases like (chest puffed out) "The Catholic Religion is the oldest and best," are quite annoying. I also believe that Jesus shed his blood for all and when I go to Church with my wife, I am not qualified or acceptable to recieve communion.
What I like at Holy Cross is that the Priests are not on gag orders, they can address hotbutton issues with conviction and without the PC doubletalk so as not to offend anyone. I like that they have communion every week and view it as a sacrament.
I used to be somewhat offed by the Mary statues and worship, because I believed it was Jesus who was the Son of Man and he should be on a stage unto himself, but I have softened to the idea of Mary having a more significant role. The confessional has always puzzled me. If I want to confess my sins to God, why should I have to tell a man?? I know the answer is pennance, but it is just a sticking point.
I hope this makes for good conversation as I am bearing myself to this exchange. Please no hate blogging on me (kidding.) I hope that others follow so that we can identify differences, but more importantly build unity as Christians, because there is no "Master Religion" or Penthouse in heaven for the best of show. It is pass/fail and we are not Judges.
Disclaimer : The comments made in this post were not meant to hurt of demean Catholics, The Catholic Church or Catholic Clergy, simply observations of mine. LOL
November 4th, 2007 at 1:07 am
If you choose a clinic on your own, watch out for bogus clinics like Crisis Pregnancy Centers. These clinics seem like real health clinics, but aren't. They are actually run by anti-abortion groups and will try to scare you out of having an abortion. These bogus clinics are listed in the yellow pages under Abortion Alternatives. Real clinics are listed as Abortion Services.
I got that off the positive.org site.
You should also look at http://www.teenwire.com It is complete with cartoon imaging and interactive genital identification!!!
November 4th, 2007 at 1:23 am
Here are some good Scriptural resources for why Catholics go to confession. http://tinyurl.com/35mbma
November 4th, 2007 at 1:42 am
Dan the Methodist,
You can get many of your questions answered about the Catholic faith by listening to "Catholic Answers Live". They have audio archives you can listen to on each topic. Just type in the topic under "description" or "title". This should help out…
Catholic Answers Live Audio Archives.
Mike
November 4th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Dan the Methodist,
Here are more audio archives from EWTN. Just type in the topic in the second search engine to listen to the audio archives.
EWWTN Audio Archives.
Another suggestion would be to listen to Relevant Radio on the radio. Fr. Corapi is on M-F every morning I believe at 10AM central time.
Mike
November 4th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Dan the Methodist,
I also married a Catholic, although he is now a Prebyterian. I have learned that this is very common. I have been surprised about the number of men I have met at my church or other Protestant churches that grew up Catholic and are now active members in Protestant churches. I find this curious.
Dan, I to have a hard time when I hear Catholics tell me I am outside the "Church" community. That Catholics are the real church. Peter said all believers are bound by certain essentials. You can only claim to be a Christian if you: 1)believe in the virgin birth, 2) believe in the Trinty - Father Son Holy Spirit 3) believe that Jesus is God's only Son, 4)believe He was crucified, dead, buried, ressurected, and accended 5)believe that He is the Savior of all creation and He took on our sins so that we may have eternal life. That apart from Him we have nothing. These are the essentials. Other issues of tradition are not. When the Pope says that Protestants are outside the boundaries, it is really bothersome.
But at PP I see all denominations (Catholics and Protestants are Christians we are different denominations not different faiths/religions) praying together, singing together, talking with one another. I believe this is what heaven will be like (not broken down into who's Catholic or who's Protestant). Those who accept and openly proclaim that Jesus is their Lord and Savior will go to heaven. We are saved by Grace not works. We can never do enough good works to get there. Works is our response to Grace. We cannot help but do good works bc we recognize the cost of our salvation.
I share your preplextion of the confessional. As a Presbyterian I believe that the only intercessor I need is Jesus. Afterall, He said I am the Way, the Truth and the Life no one comes to the Father except through me, and He taught us how to pray. So I don't think or feel I need a priest to absolve or forgive me. That is Jesus's job. If the purpose for confession is for accountabilty then I have less of a problem bc we are to be accountable to one another in our behavior.
Paul2 or Mike I have heard many different explanations of confession, could either of you share your thoughts?
I am also learning to have more repect of Mary. When the Reformation occured, I think that Mary got lost. I know that they brought the focus where it should be back on Jesus, but Mary is special. I am beginning to see her in a new light. Although I probably will never pray to her, for that feels wrong to me, I do want to know her better. As a woman and mother she should be one of my role models.
November 4th, 2007 at 9:45 am
I am the Way, the Truth and the Life no one comes to the Father except through me.
This verse in the Bible has set up much strength for Christians and division in Religion.
What of Muslums and Jews???
Til now we have only spoke on Christian Religion and been very respectful. Can we do the same between religions???
Am I to judge by that verse that Muslum and Jewish faiths are nonrelevant??? (a question not insult)
I have faith that our creator has a plan for them also.
He has a plan for all of us right? I cannot pretend to know, but if I assume they are doomed, I don't need to show any respect… do I???
I feel this is the barricade before us to work together in our own religions to at their simplist forms to do unto others and live by laws of decentcy while dedicating yourselves to your creator. That may be simplistic, but maybe someone can expand.
If there are any Jewish or Muslum views on abortion I would love to hear them.
As Christians how do you see this.
Before I am questioned, I believe for me that Jesus IS my savior.
One other tidbit, Mary is mentioned more times in the Koran that she is in the Bible.
November 4th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
Thanks Mike and Brian, I will check those out.
I have respect for the Catholic Religion, I just don't subscribe to everything.
November 4th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
Dan the Methodist,
This is where it gets tricky, because in a increasing pluralist world it is considered hateful and intolerent to hold the view that there is only one way. But Jesus said this. He said there is only one way. I believe what Scripture says: "every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." He told us to go and take the Gospel to all nations and people. This is the Great Commission. If there were many paths, then Jesus would have said I am one way, one truth, one life. But that is not the case.
I think we must treat people of other faiths as we treat each other. We are to show the world Jesus through our loving our neighbors, by respecting them as fellow human beings. But we are to share the Gospel with them. And we must respect their decisions. We (Christians) are to be seed planters. It is the Holy Spirits work to do the rest.
I hear you, but then you open the door for Hinduism, paganism, wiccans, and all sorts of "ways". But I don't believe I cannot "water down" my faith bc it seems exclusive to some. In it's exclusivity there is incredible inclusiveness.
As for Mary - it is strange that Muslims believe in the virgin birth, but do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God and the Savior of all creation. They believe that Christians believe the Trinity is God, Jesus and Mary. This is why they have a hard time with the Trinity. I do not judge bc that is God's job, but it makes no sense to send His Son to redeem us and have multiple paths to salvation.
November 4th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
Tara:
I enjoy your thoughts!!
I hope we have not run everyone off.
If you have more, please share!!
November 4th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Dan,
Thanks for opening up and sharing the Methodist perspective. Please don't take these comments the wrong way. I thank God for the cathecism of the Catholic Church because it spells out the official stance on most social issues with the references from scripture that lead them to their position.
It saddens and angers me that any Christian community out there would celebrate the veto of a ban on such a barbaric procedure as partial birth abortion? It is just horrific. I feel certain Satan himself draws strength from that "procedure". We cannot condone followers of Jesus being supporting these grotesque slayings. Maybe you should read them a clinical description of a partial birth abortion at your next meeting. Reading it tends to take what might be an abstract concept open for debate and show it for the infanticide that it really is. If your church leader could be that far out of whack in there judgement then it is time for the fire of the Holy Spirit to start the
burning down the pulpits.
Intact D&E gained public notoriety when, in 1992, Dr.
Martin Haskell gave a presentation describing his method
of performing the operation. Dilation and Extraction In the usual intact D&E the fetus. head lodges in the cervix, and dilation is insufficient to allow it to pass. Haskell explained the next step as follows: At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the
fingers of the left [hand] along the back of the fetus
and hooks the shoulders of the fetus with the index
and ring fingers (palm down). While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger. [T]he surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having safely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening. The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he applies
traction to the fetus, removing it completely from the
patient. This is an abortion doctor's clinical description. Here is another description from a nurse who witnessed the same method performed on a 26½-week fetus and who testified GONZALES v. CARHART
Opinion of the Court before the Senate Judiciary Committee: Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby's legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby's body and the arms, everything but the head. The doctor kept the head
right inside the uterus. The baby.s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby's arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall. The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a highpowered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.
May God help you and bless you abundantly with the fire of the Holy Spirit in your ministry to the Methodist Christian community. Take your church back in the name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
November 4th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Hey Dan,
I just read the official position of the Methodist church in the "Social Principals of the United Methodist Church. It was a lot of doublespeak. It reminds me of Democratic politician….you know, reluctant, against it personally, but if you really feel like you need one than hey thats your decision. I think todays churches have really become too politicized to effectively communicate Christ's teachings w/o consideration of hurting someones feelings and losing the tithing of parishoners. Sad but thats the way I see it. The catholic church has the same type of problem with respect to the sanctity of marriage. Huge loopholes and annulments.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Same type of doublespeak in the Presbyterian church.
"In the Reformed Tradition, we affirm that God is the only Lord of conscience-not the state or the church. As a community, the church challenges the faithful to exercise their moral agency responsibly."
It wasn't until the Supreme Court decision overturning the ban on partial birth abortion that they were willing to take an official stand against it.
against it.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
The Lutheran position:
Our church's explanation of the Small Catechism puts the matter well when it says, "The living but unborn are persons in the sight of God from the time of conception. Since abortion takes a human life, it is not a moral option except to prevent the death of another person, the mother." The sin of willfully aborting a child, except in those very rare situations where it may be necessary to save the life of the mother, is a sinful act, totally contrary to the will of God.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
JUDAISM:
According to Rabbi Raymond A. Zwerin and Rabbi Richard J. Shapiro, writing for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, traditional Jewish law teaches that "the fetus is not considered a full human being, and has no individual rights, but rather, according to many sources, is a part of a woman's body. And just as any person may not voluntarily do harm to his or her body, a woman may not voluntarily abort a fetus. However, just as a portion of the body may be sacrificed to save a person's life, an abortion may be performed for the woman's overall well-being, and an existing life takes precedence over a potential life, if there must be a choice between them."
November 5th, 2007 at 12:04 am
HINDUISM Vasu Murti and Mary Krane Derr write in the Fall 1998 issue of the Journal of Feminism and Non-Violence Studies that "Hinduism teaches that abortion, like any other act of violence, thwarts a soul in its progress toward God. Hindu scriptures and tradition have from the earliest of times condemned the practice of abortion, except when the life of the mother is in danger. Hinduism teaches that the fetus is a living, conscious person needing and deserving protection. Hindu scriptures refer to abortion as garha-batta (womb killing) and bhroona hathya (killing the undeveloped soul)."
ISLAM Islam prohibits abortion except when the mother's life is in danger. Muslims consider a fertilized ovum that is attached to the womb a living being that has the potential of reaching its full formation. A developed fetus is considered a human life and is subject to the laws of inheritance to the extent that if the mother is sentenced to capital punishment, her life should be preserved because she is carrying another human life.
BUDDHISM Under the first of the five Buddhist precepts–to refrain from taking life, from insects on up the evolutionary ladder–abortion is proscribed. Life is deemed to begin as soon as consciousness arises, and fetuses are seen as having consciousness. The Buddha's rules for his community of monks also forbade anyone from recommending abortion. Some practitioners of Japanese Zen who have had a miscarriage or abortion honor or make an offering to the deity Jizo, the god of lost travelers and children. It is believed that Jizo will steward the child until it is reborn in another incarnation.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:04 am
I got all these views off the Net so they are not necessarily the true or current views. Anybody of the faiths referenced please clarify if I posted erroneous statements about your faith.
It's sad but it looks like Christian faiths are more "accepting" of abortions than most other religions. In most cases we are willing to turn a blind eye and offering no guidance… all under the guise of compassion and allowing each person their own personal path to God.
My Christian friends. I offer my daily prayers that we may be filled with the fire of the Holy Spirit and turn the Christian faith into one unified voice for life.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:26 am
Dan the Methodist,
I am very much enjoying our converstation. I too hope we are not scaring anyone off. But it is good to talk about these things.
November 5th, 2007 at 9:37 am
Paul2,
You are right. Actually the PCUSA (Please do not confuse the EPC, PCA and OPC with PCUSA they are all pro-life) has two positions. I call it the schizophrenic policy.
Position A: Pro-Life
For some of us, there are biblical passages that speak clearly and directly to the issue of abortion. For example:
The Scriptures clearly testify that not only is all life precious to God, but that all life also belongs to God. Despite the fact that human beings have been made in the image of God- an image now distorted by our sinfulness- we do not own either human beings or anything in the world that God has made. No. "The earth is the Lord's and all that is in it; the world and those who live in it" (Ps. 24:1), and this view is supported by a multitude of texts (see Deut. 10:14; I Chron. 29:11-12; Ps. 50:10-11; 60:7-8; 95:7; Isa. 66:1-2; Jer. 27:5; I Cor. 10:26). It therefore follows that since God alone created life, God has the right of life and death over it (see Gen. 9:1-6; Ex. 20:13; Deut. 5:17; 32:39; I Sam. 2:6; Matt. 5:21-22).
God's ownership of life extends not only to those who have been born, however, but also to those still in the womb. In the biblical view, God is actively involved in the creation of life in utero, before birth. This activity is vividly and poetically portrayed in Job 10:11-12, 31:15, and Psalm 139:13. There is also this statement about all persons: "Did not he who made me in the womb make them? And did not one fashion us in the womb?" (Job 31:15). The life that is formed in the mother's womb, as well as that already born, is made by God and therefore belongs to God.
To be sure, there is no doubt that the formation of life in utero is sometimes corrupted by the sin of the human race, and that miscarriages, congenital deformities, and birth defects occur because of the fallen nature of our universe. But the glad promise of God in Jesus Christ is that when the Kingdom of God, begun in the Son, comes in all its fullness, such grievous effects of the sin of the whole human race will be done away forever (see Isa. 33:24; 65:20; Rev. 21:3-4). God is the Ruler yet.
Nevertheless, by God's grace and mercy, God has also formed you and me and all persons while we were in our mothers' wombs, and we and all persons belong to God (see Mal. 2:10). It follows, therefore, that when we are dealing with life in the womb, we are dealing with that which belongs to God alone and we must always answer to God, both now and hereafter, for what we do with that life.
Interestingly enough, the Scriptures also never deal with life in the womb in impersonal terms. John the Baptist is filled with the Holy Spirit even while he is in his mother's womb (Luke 1: 15) and Luke says that John leapt with joy at the arrival of Mary, the mother of Jesus (Luke 1:41). Paul testifies that he was set apart and called before he was born to be the preacher to the Gentiles (Gal. 1:15-16). Jeremiah is told that before he was born, he was appointed a prophet to the nations (Jer. 1:5). The psalmist tells how God planned all his future days even before his body in the womb took on recognizable human shape (Ps. 139:16). Life in the womb may be just an embryo or a fetus or an impersonal blob of flesh to some, but that is not the case in God's eyes, and surely the grief of a woman over a miscarriage mirrors something of that reality. For God, the unborn child is human life, created for a purpose and belonging to God, incorporated into God's plan and loved by God, and then birthed and surrounded by God's mercy (Ps. 22:9-10; Gen. 4:1). Surely we must deal with such life only in reverent awe and responsibility toward the God who has given it.
Position B: Pro-Choice
Some of us would focus on the biblical material that emphasizes human decision making. Real decision making is one of the gifts of God to us as human beings. It is part of being created in the image of God. God's own dominion over all of creation does not deny this intention of the Creator: that human beings must make real decisions that have real consequences for their lives and for the world. Were every conception directly willed by God, it would be difficult to understand why methods of birth control are legitimately matters of human decision making. Would that not be preventing conceptions God has intended? What of conceptions that take place outside of marriage, or as a result of rape or incest? Did God intend that these parents marry, though that would have been difficult or abhorrent to the people involved? It is also difficult to claim that God's intentionality is present in every conception when there are so many genetic deformities and such a high percentage end in miscarriages.
To be created in the image of God and to be given dominion are gifts made jointly and equally to male and female (Gen. 1:25-28). The responsibility and consequences for sin are assigned to both (Gen. 3:16-19). These consequences include a distortion of the image of God and a corruption of dominion. The social barriers that stem from our fallenness, including those of gender, are broken down in the community of faith (Gal. 3:25-28). In his own ministry, Jesus affirmed the full moral responsibility of women in ways that contradicted their low status within the Jewish and Palestinian community. For example, his instruction to the woman at the well (John 4:7-42), his teaching of Mary and the confirmation of her choice to be taught by him which challenged Martha's choice (Luke 10:38-42), and his resurrection appearance to the Marys at the tomb (Matt. 28:1-10), all demonstrate that Jesus recognized women as responsible persons, capable of making decisions in the light and power of the good news of the gospel.
This stress on human responsibility does not take away from God's providence. Human reproduction brings human responsibility and God's sovereignty together in ways that are often confusing. Passages of Scripture do point to God's intentionality in the conception and birth of specific individuals, raised up for the continuity or preservation of the people of God. For instance, the theme of the barren woman makes it very clear that the survival of the people is in God's hands and is not left simply to the natural order. Isaac, Joseph, Samuel, John the Baptist, and others all are born to women who had been barren.
The list culminates in the Virgin Birth of Jesus in which God's direct involvement is of an even greater order, even as the role of Messiah is of a greater order than that of patriarch or prophet. In all these cases, the child born had a crucial role in the continuity of the people of God and, therefore, such cases ought not to be made into a universal model of God's direct involvement in the planning of every conception.
We cannot conclude that God intends some children, but not others. Even the child whose conception was under circumstances that are totally at odds with a biblical understanding of how human life should be ordered, is nonetheless loved by God as much as the child conceived by a loving, married couple. Sarah stopped believing the promise of a child for Abraham would be fulfilled in her and so she offered her slave Hagar to her husband. The child, Ishmael, was not the one God intended as the fulfillment of the promise. Yet God did not abandon Hagar or her child, but rather protected them and worked them into God's purposes (Gen. 16:1-15; 21:1-13). The first child of David and Bathsheba was the result of adultery. This pregnancy led to the intentional killing of Bathsheba's husband. God did not permit this child to live, perhaps since God did not wish the future ruler of Israel to be the result of such violence. Yet the next child of this union was blessed by God, who continued to work with the family in this new situation. In neither of these instances was the willingness of the woman considered. In the case of the Virgin Birth, Mary's consent is recorded and significant: "Let it be with me according to your word" (Luke 1:38). The Virgin Birth is not a violent act or a show of God's dominion without the need for human decision.
There is a mystery at the heart of life, a mystery that holds together God's providence, human decision making and responsibility, and the wider nature of which our bodies are a part and over which we do not and cannot exercise total control in regard to fertility and procreation. But there is a clear realm for decision making, for moral choice that faithfulness can and must carry out. It is in this area of decision making that the difficult choice of abortion can arise.
We have made improvements toward the pro-life side. For instance in 2004 were had not restrictions on abortions. That year we got the wording changes from woman/fetus to mother/child. Boy the PCer's went crazy. In 2006 we changed the policy on Post-Viability. We now state that in a case where a problem arises after viability all efforts need to be taken to save both the mother and child. If you would like to read the entire document go to http://www.ppl.org and look under topic index. There you will find the policy.
November 5th, 2007 at 10:00 am
Tara - in regards to Post#36…
Apologies for the delayed response…you had asked me to visit the following site recommended by PP:
http://www.positive.org
Here's my response…
The site definetly advocates promiscous behavior. Its as if they let young people know that they are going to have sex (not if and when) either way so here's what your options are. Of course they make the asthetics of the website appealing to a younger market as well.
My issue w/ this website and any site pertaining to the topic of sexuality is that these lessons need to be taught by childrens' parents or guardians (not a website). Why would I want a website, school teacher or anyone besides myself for that matter educating my child on such a serious topic.
The physiology and human anatomy portions are ok to teach since we as humans all reproduce the same way (and most of us lack the vernacular to explain these topics scientifically) however the topics of sexual orientation and when you should or shouldn't engage in sexual activity are topics of a more personal nature.
November 5th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
Paul, it will take a little while to absorb all of that, but I am getting the feeling that the issue of Abortion could actually bring groups who have been at opposition for centuries……together????
Are there any other religions willing to stand with us??
One issue that would cut through histories and media division???
Could it happen? Would it be allowed to happen???
November 5th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
John,
Thanks for going to the website. I am enjoying our conversations.
My school district teaches abstinence-only education. The first thing the health teacher said was we teacher abstinence and we recognize that parents need and should be the main source of information. We encourage parents to participate in this most important time of development of students. I was most impressed. But if that ever changed, I would remove my children from the sex-ed classes immediately. It is my job to teach my children about sexual behavior, what is appropriate and what's not. When schools teach PP's sex-ed they are helping to grease the path to PP. BAD NEWS!
I did some research earlier this summer and there are
12 K-12 schools within 2 miles of Aurora's PP. When I looked into it state wide, they place themselves in the middle (like a bullseye) of schools. There are 21 PP in IL and there are no less then 5 K-12 schools within 2 miles. Then I looked at income, racial make-up in the community, and if the PP does abortions. Eye opening. PP does abortions in communities where the median imcome is less then 50K (excluding univiersity towns). And they had significant or majority minority populations.
They have an agenda and it has never changed since Margret Sanger. Control minority populations, and those who are under educated. Get churches to buy into abortion & eugenics and the masses will follow. She was absolutely correct. We have seen this clearly. THe slogan Christian and Pro-Choice.
If you have time to visit one more website http://www.rcrc.org this is a coalition of different religions who claim their faiths state abortion is morally acceptable. They also have a political agenda and are very outspoken.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
Prayer brings us the grace of the Holy Spirit which can band all faiths together for "Life".
November 5th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
TARA and PAUL2 ROCK!!!
November 6th, 2007 at 6:36 am
Dan,
Thank you for the nice comment. What are you doing posting so early? My brain doesn't work before 9am after I get my kids on the bus for school.
November 6th, 2007 at 8:43 am
Tara,
That web-site that you posted ( http://www.rcrc.org ) that lists religions as pro-choice is so full of misinformation. They even twist their words to make the Catholic stance as pro-choice. Here is the Catholic churches stance from the catechism.
Abortion
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person — among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.(71)
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. (72)
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth .(73)
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish .(74)
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.(75)
2272 Formal co-operation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. 'A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae' (76) 'by the very commission of the offence', (77) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law . (78) The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
'The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.'(79)
'The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights.' (80)
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, 'if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human foetus and is directed toward its safeguarding or healing as an individual… It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.' (81)
2275 'One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing, the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival.' (82)
'It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material.' (83)
'Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity' (84) which are unique and unrepeatable.
Have a blessed day
November 6th, 2007 at 10:10 am
Paul2,
RCRC has been doing the same thing for the Protestant denominations as well. Calvin, Luther and others had very strong words and condemnation of abortion. It has only been in the last 30 years that you have had churches state that abortion is a morally acceptable choice. This waters down our ministry and ability to share the Gospel. 2 Timothy 3:16 said all Scripture is God breathed nd should be used for teaching, rebuking, correction, and trainig in righteousness. We have gotten soft of holding each other accountable through Scripture. And by not using descipline groups like RCRC are able to flurish.
But God has very harsh words for those who twist and corrupt Scripture and lead his people astray. They are in trouble. Pastors have a higher accountabilty to God because they are in a place of authority.
You to have a blessed day.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Tara,
In regards to your post#64
You had asked me to visit http://www.rcrc.org and respond.
Well after reading Paul2's lengthy (but appreciated) response I would like to take a different approach to my opinion on this site…
From an earlier post of mine, I am a self proclaimed novice in Christianity and its teachings, so the angle I am going to take are more the positive attributes of the website.
1. They do a great job at drawing in interest of every race and religion.
2. Easy to navigate
3. Terminology such as "interfaith" lends itself to positive collective thought.
Me being a person, as stated earlier, with a limited knowledge of Christianity, could have easily stumbled across this site and take it as 100% fact. W/out explanations of the Catachism by Paul2 or others w/in this site I could have taken everything written there as fact.
Credibility on the web is always very hard to come by. It is so easy to believe anything printed on the web, and I wouldn't doubt if our youth believe more and more of what they read on the web.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
John,
If you are interested in learning about Presbyterianism (not what RCRC says:)), try reading the Calvin Institutes. This would help you understand where I am coming from. There is a condensed version that highlights the major topics covered. But if you like to read and love to dig deep, read the entire series. It is 3 volumes. I am proud to call myself a Calvinist.
Also, I agree that kids believe are more apt to take what is on the web at face value. That's why it is so important to make sure we know when, where, and what our kids are looking at. The internet is great, but it can also be very dangerous.
Thanks for responding to me. I enjoy our talks.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Tara,
I appreciate the conversation as well. Should I just google the Calvin Institutes I would enjoy/appreciate the knowledge.
As far as your research in which I forgot to comment on…
"Then I looked at income, racial make-up in the community, and if the PP does abortions. Eye opening. PP does abortions in communities where the median imcome is less then 50K (excluding univiersity towns). And they had significant or majority minority populations"
To me the easy part about this fact is that the minority populations and lower income families unfortunately conincide w/ one another. So PP being located where they are, near the financially challenged or the young (as sad as it sounds) is a correct business strategy for them.
Here are my questions to this;
Where/why has religion failed in educating our youth?
PP education seems to be free/gov't funded correct?
How did this come about…?
November 6th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Excellent exchanges!!!
John, I am glad you joined the discussion.
I, personally do not know if Abortion will ever be against the law in the United States, but I am personally fighting to lower the number of Abortions to start. 3,000 + a clear indication that this is an issue that is beyond rapes and inscest (probably spelled wrong). Abortion has become a failsafe for an immoral society that does not see consequences for their actions. Sex is expected and reguard for life is an afterthought.
Respect and Responsibility are staples of your young generation and we need to bring it back
November 6th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
John,
Thanks for your post. The point you made(and I reference it below) was powerful.
"It is so easy to believe anything printed on the web, and I wouldn't doubt if our youth believe more and more of what they read on the web."
November 7th, 2007 at 12:13 am
And another thing I saw on that site that I just can't let stand is the slander of St. Antoninus. Posting his name as though he were an advocate of the pro-choice cause. Blessed be God in his angels and in his saints.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:29 am
And another thing I saw on that site that I just can't let stand is the slander of St. Antoninus. Posting his name as though he were an advocate of the pro-abort cause. Blessed be God in his angels and in his saints.
And blessed be God in you St Antoninus.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Respect and responsibility SHOULD be staples of our youth and we need to bring it back.
OOPS 1 word does make a huge difference!!!
Keep The Faith
November 7th, 2007 at 6:36 am
Me being a person, as stated earlier, with a limited knowledge of Christianity, could have easily stumbled across this site and take it as 100% fact. W/out explanations of the Catachism by Paul2 or others w/in this site I could have taken everything written there as fact.
John, it is amazing what people will believe. If you repeat the same lie over and over, sooner or later people will believe it. Marketing, like Politics has seeped into just about everything. I mentioned earlier that a certain church seemed to be marketing to fill a market void not preaching from conviction and it is true. I do not like being sceptical, however certain sources need double sourcing. Even if it supports your stance, I read one on abortion and breast cancer that states that abortion raises breast cancer chances by 50%, but want more info before I take it as Gospel.
Thanks for joining us John.
November 7th, 2007 at 6:43 am
Dan the Methodist says,
"John, it is amazing what people will believe. If you repeat the same lie over and over, sooner or later people will believe it. Marketing, like Politics has seeped into just about everything"
Marketing and Politics equate Propaganda. Why would anyone want to spread lies…for control. How does one get control in our current society…money.
Honestly, I try to maintain a positive view on humanity but it is so difficult when everywhere I look all evil that I can see is driven by one thing…money.
In humanity's current setup our motto should be…"Its better to be rich than it is to be good and true."
Paul2,
If you get a minute I would like to learn a little more on St. Antoninus. Is there a link I could check out or possibly a short synopsis on his life?
November 7th, 2007 at 9:34 am
Hi John,
How are you doing today?
November 7th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Tara,
I'm just fine thanks…really busy at work today and yesterday, so I've not had enought time to read the Calvin Institute yet.
Better busy than bored…
November 7th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
John,
I agree. Hope you have a good day.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
John, I feel the same way about money sometimes, but without capitalism we would not be free. I believe that freedom is one of God's greatest gifts to man. You might think I am crazy for pondering the meaning of life, but when I do my theory is surrounded by a test. I do not know what the test is for or what it's purpose is, however we are given dominion over the earth and given the freedom to screw up. Like a son or daughter that you give enough slack to hang themselves on, I believe God has loved us in that way also.
Freedom isn't a bad thing, Money isn't a bad thing, but we cannot control people's money or their freedom. So is it the money, society, or just admitting that evil exists and individuals make mistakes.
Have a Great Day
November 8th, 2007 at 6:47 am
D.T.M.,
Good early afternoon Dan and others. I have something that I would like to discuss further from your last post…
"…but without capitalism we would not be free."
This comment was written in response to my cynicism regarding human society's current economic model.
Can human beings be free w/out capitalism?
I believe the day that money's control over the human race is gone, will be the first day that we as humans are truly free.
Would Adam and Eve be the first and the last humans to ever be free?
November 8th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Yes, they would.
Our world includes Evil, whether we like it or not. This was not our choice.
Adam and Eve lived free from responsibility and need. We on the other hand do have needs and more importantly wants that we manifest into needs. Without capitalism it man would not have progressed as it has, we would probably be speaking another language, the shinning beacon of freedom may never have been and the world would be a demonsterably worse. (probably mispelled demonsterably)
The day money doesn't matter, we will have recieved the fulfilment, for better or worse, of Revelations. We will be welcomed to the Kingdom of GOD, (hopefully) but will we be free to make bad decisions???? Will the right answer be obvious, directed, or mandated? You are free to go to hell anytime you want??
For me, I give myself go God willingly, but to be a subject to a dictator or supreme socialist society, I will not.
"Give me freedom or give me death"
November 8th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Have a great day!
November 9th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Dan the Methodist,
Freedom comes from within. It is Christ who freed us from the yoke of slavery and from the law. A person in a Totalitarian prison could be "free" while a capitalist running amuck in society could actually be enslaved to sin.
November 9th, 2007 at 8:56 am
Dan says,
"Without capitalism it man would not have progressed as it has, we would probably be speaking another language, the shinning beacon of freedom may never have been and the world would be a demonsterably worse."
Not everyone benefits from capitalism. The "shining beacon of freedom" to one is enslavement to another.
Why do we have wars?
Why is there murder?
Why is there poverty?
Why is there starvation?
To me a world w/out money and greed would be an amazing place. Unfortunately the only way this type of sociologic reform can ever take place would probably be a catastrophic disaster…
This would make the human race realize that money is nothing…a man made entity that clouds the mind…
I hope you and everyone else has a wonderful day as well.
November 9th, 2007 at 9:32 am
I don't disagree with you, but this world is NOT perfect. We cannot make it perfect. Just like we cannot be the perfect candidate for President with out money. We have to make the best of it. I the freedom we have is the best. Freedom of religion, Freedom to buy what we want, where we want and so on.
There is plenty wrong with the world, but we cannot fix it all. Evil exists we cannot change that.
November 9th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
John, Dan and Paul2,
I read these interesting quotes today. What do you think? It's interesting to read our Founder Fathers view on God and government.
On February 22, 1756 – fully twenty years before our independence, Adams wrote in his diary, “Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God….What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be.” - Ben Rast post
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.” John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress
November 9th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Tara,
I think our Founding Fathers wrote beautifully and they "had it going on". But I would like to know nwho said
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
and in what context they said it. Cause man cannot even fathom the immutability of God. Also, I thought we won our independence through war, while the general principles of Christianity are to love one another.
November 9th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Paul2,
It was John Adams wrote that quote. He wrote it in his diary. You can read his letters and diaries online at the MA Historical Libarary. His letters are facinating. He understood that God was the mover of history, and that w/o His providence there could never be an America.
I don't know if you have ever read Washington's or Adams's letters, or any of the other Founder's letters but they believed God was calling them to seperate. They are always refering to how God was creating a new nation. War was just part of what they understood to be that process in motion.
There was no seperation of church and state as we know it today until I believe around 1947. If I remember my history correctly, The term seperation of church and state was created by the Supreme Court in 1947. No where in the Constitution does it mention seperation of church and state.
As I've stated before Feedom of Religion was meant to protect churches and individuals from the gov't telling them, they had to be Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian. It was never intended for God to be taken out of government. Prayer was in schools until the 1950's.
As a matter of fact, the majority of our Founding Fathers were Presbyterian, and we get our government structure from the Presbyterian Church. We have a Stated Clerk (President), General Assembly (Congress), Synods (Senate), Presbyteries (House of Reps), then Congregations. Congregations send elected officers to the Presbytey and Synod, and from these two entites form General Assembly. The Stated Clerk is the Chief Constitutional Officer. Just a bit of History that most people don't know.
November 9th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Tara, you are a doll.
Thank you for the added information.
No one is wrong here, but outlook does matter.
When asked about the Taxes that Jews were forced to pay the Romans, Jesus did not deny, put down or denounce Government, as I believe this was the heart of the question. He said something like give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and give unto God which is God's.
Government like evil will always be a part of this earth. We can effect evil by our deeds and behavior, as we can Government. Positive positions and communicating our core values effectively with a silencing media is difficult, but not imposible. Watch for the day that is comming, not the day that is over!
November 10th, 2007 at 6:54 am
Tara,
In that very general sense I would have to agreewith John Adams. God establishes the order that governs all ages, including the independence of America.
November 10th, 2007 at 9:04 am
Tara,
Thank you so much for the quotes and your comments.
Seperation of church and state in '47 and prayer out of schools in '50…I have some questions regarding this.
When the law was enacted to separate church and state was their a huge trial case that brought this about? (i.e. Roe vs. Wade)
Would/could there still be a way to have prayer during class in a public school?
Tara, I also wanted to let you know that I began reading a truncated version of the Calvin Inst. I'm about half way done but it will take me a while as it's a lot to ingest. He must have really rustled some feathers when he was writing and publishing his words.
Dan says,
"I the freedom we have is the best. Freedom of religion, Freedom to buy what we want, where we want and so on."
Our freedom that we enjoy was gained from another's suffering.
Either way, Dan I do agree with you that evil does exist and always will. The only way I silence this is by looking around and seeing God in everything.
Paul2 says,
"Also, I thought we won our independence through war, while the general principles of Christianity are to love one another"
Does God ever want man to go to war? Especially wars that are faught in His name.
November 10th, 2007 at 11:14 am
John,
The case before the Supreme Court was Everson vs. The Board of Education (1947)
This opened the door for all the challenges we have seen in the last 50 years.
Before the Supreme Court right now is a case that could dramatically change our nation's landscape SUMMUM v. CITY OF OGDEN. This group was it's "Seven Principals" to be displayed right next to the 10 Commandments. If not they have stated they will start sueing towns and cities. Again, our nation was founded on the principals of The 10 Commandments, not the 7 Principals, the Koran, or any other faith. Just because this nation has become more religiously diverse, doesn't mean we wipe out or silence Christianity, which is what these groups are trying to do.
Again I hate to pick on the ACLU, but they are the ones spearheading the wiping out of any mention of Jesus or God in the public arena. Every year they threaten schools who want to sing Christmas carols, have nativity scenes on city property, or call the time kids have off from school as Christmas Break. They have sued schools for moment of silences at graduations and football games. But it is considered intolerent if we don't diplay other faith's symbols.
Another book to read - Hilter's Cross by Erwin Lutzer. Excellent and the similarities to today are very scary.
Noting like throwing more books at you.
As for Calvin, he did ruffle some feathers for he truley believed that Scripture should be read by all not a select few. So I am glad you are reading it. Yes it does take quite a bit of time, but well worth it. It's been some time since I read them, so I will have to brush up on it:)
November 10th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
John,
I would have to say that God does not ever want us to go to war. We are supposed to trust in his divine providence even when treated unjustly. I believe this is the single biggest stumbling block for most Christians trying to live as Jesus taught us. From my experience the strongest example of faiths living today that do abide by this principle of non-violence even when confronted with violence against themselves and their loved ones is the Amish. The very day that somebody broke onto their scool and killed their children they spoke openly of their forgiveness towards the offender.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Here is alink to an article about the tragedy I am referring to. Needless to say I was somewhat in awe of the internal fortitude it must take to respond with such peace and forgiveness when something so evil had been perpetrated upon their community.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Here is a link to the Amish community reaction
http://tinyurl.com/yg7tu5
November 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Paul2,
Thank you for the remembrance of that terrible and amazing situation for that Amish community.
It makes me wonder if all Amish would react the same way as that community or if it was just that unique group of people?
Either way I agree 100% what an absolutely amazing story of forgiveness.
Why do you believe, or any one for that matter, that Christians do not attempt to live exactly as Jesus did?
Or what do you believe is the biggest cause for people to not live as Jesus did?
November 10th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Tara,
If you want to pick on the ACLU, maybe we should make that next Wednesday's Open Thread.
The governments rule of law toward the ACLU is not of a NON-FOR-PROFIT as we have come to know it. It is a Monster that is fed by a decision in their favor. Did you know that the ACLU wins in court, they "generate revenue," because the ACLU can recoup any and all legal costs they decide they would have recieved. I think this is only when they win a case against a government entity, like municipality, city, county, state and federal. Then they can have the money to put a case together to make Universities build foot baths for Muslim Students.
This is not a bash on Muslims, but a hipocritical stance the ACLU has that shows a consistant condemnation of Christianity.
GO TARA
November 10th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
John,
Like I said in Post 79. The hardest thing for me is seing other people persecute/hurt my loved ones without striking out against them. I do try to give people the benefit of the doubt and err on the side of charity. And I can stand it o.k. when they persecute me. But I strike back when they hurt someone I love. I imagine each person could have different strengths and weaknesses when trying to follow Jesus' example, but that is what I struggle most with.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:13 am
Also, I would guess that the reason I do this is because I believe nobody has the right to hurt somebody else without "just cause". And that opens up a whole pandoras box because then anybody can make up their own versioon of "just cause". Another reason is that I feel as though God put me here as a protector of my loved ones, at least here on earth.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:18 am
Dan the Methodist,
How are you this morning, I missed church, my kids are sick:(
I think we should talk more about the ACLU, Clergy for Seperation of Church and State and those type of groups. We (generally speaking) are ignorant in what their agenda is. We need to wake up and smell the coffee beans!! We need to publically denounce these groups and start fighting back. That means getting off the couch and out of our comfort zones. Getting politically involved and asking hard questions of our candidates. If all of us would work together, we could make significant imporvements and restore our country's Christian identity. It means not being politically correct, and not allowing the threat of lawsuits and exposure to stop us.
Jesus said you will be persecuted because of me. Well if I'm going to be persecuted, then I want to at least be persecuted for having stood for Christ and tried to make a change. I expect people will hate me, but that is okay. I'm in good company. I want a faith that is transparent to others like Peter, Paul and Stephen. If I keep my focus on Jesus, then no matter what the world throws at me, I wll be okay.
November 11th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Tara, May find comfort and peace in Psalm 144.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Paul2,
Thank you. I do like Psalm 144.
I also like Proverbs 2.
November 11th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
John,
One of todays scripture readings at church today seemed quite relevant to our discussion about how I have difficulty following Jesus' example of humility and obedience to the Father even when my loved ones are unjustly persecuted by evil doers. It was from Maccabees chapter 7. A whole family of brothers who accept persecution even unto death rather than break the commandments of God. I will pray and meditate on their example that I might gain the inner strength to keep Gods commandments so my lifes journey leaves me worthy of redemption on judgement day.
Since I am so weak, I through myself upon the mercy gained through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that I not be lead into temptation, but delivered from evil. This I ask in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ as I pray the words he taught us to pray.
Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but de;iver us from evil. Amen
November 11th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Hello Dan the Methodist,
I wanted to respond to you regarding the ACLU comments. While they are a not-for-profit entity, in a general sense, this simply means that they don’t distribute profits to shareholders. (This is similar to Planned Parenthood)
Many people believe strongly in the ACLU; as many people believe strongly in Planned Parenthood. Both have “genuinely good” sounding names which hides the actual intent of their organizations.
I am still surprised by the number of people living in my community who still do not know that Planned Parenthood: is here in Aurora, the vastness of their complex; the dark side of their organization; and the danger that they represent to our community and children.
Which is all the more reason to keep the yard signs up and the protests going!
Similarly, there are a number of parallels between Planned Parenthood and the ACLU. Not to say that they are one in the same, but rather they both seek to deceive the public into supporting them, and unfortunately, too many people do so without fully understanding their intent.
November 11th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
John,
Sorry that wasn't maccabees chpater 7, that was 2Maccabees chapter 7.
Paul2
November 11th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Paul2,
Did you say Post 79 as in VFW or American Legion?
I went to the Veterans Day Parade in Aurora yesterday. I don't know if this is encouraging or discouraging, but we got more people by far to our 1st Were Here For Life last month.
I could go on for an hour, but I was severely dissappointed with the attendance from the Greater Aurora Area to support our Veterans.
Great Parade though, my son even got one of the Gun Shells!!!
November 12th, 2007 at 6:51 am
Dan,
We would have loved to have been there. My husband is an Army veteran who spent 18 months in Viet Nam. I wish the organizers would have scheduled it later in the day, perhaps many more of us who were in church until after noon could have been there. If we have to choose between our worship service and a parade….
November 12th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Dan (not to be confused with Dan the Methodist),
Somebody in VFW Post 79 may have likely been talking about war and "just killing". However my Post #102 on this blog was referring to John's Post #79 on this blog. Let's give this day to the service of the Lord
in prayer and thanksgiving.
Paul2
November 12th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Sandy–
I used to work downtown, and I remember that the Veteran's Day Parade is always on Nov. 11 (WWI Armistice Day, which became Veteran's Day) even when it falls on a week day. That's why it was on Sunday this year. Hopefully you can make it next year!
Erin
November 12th, 2007 at 10:18 am
Sorry for not addint the Methodist part. I was mocking the Methodist church and their stance on Abortion when I began, but realized it might encourage other Methodists to stand up and do the right thing.
Paul2,
The Methodists are very anti-war are you Methodist also???
November 13th, 2007 at 6:40 am
Thanks for this conversation.
The exchange of ideas with passion and conviction are healthy when they are recieved ideas.
Those who are deaf will only hear by the grace of God.
For those who can hear, bless them that they might hear our message and feel a duty to stand up and be heard with us!!!!!
Disclaimer: The term deaf is meant as a annalogy and is not meant to hurt or impune individuals that cannot physically hear.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:59 am
Sara Bareilles - Love Song…
Sara Bareilles - Love Song…
February 1st, 2008 at 3:15 am