The Hypocrisy of Gay Marriage Activists

I am weary of talking about this issue.  I am weary of the tired rhetoric of homosexual activists.  I am weary of Keith Olberman’s polarizing caricatures of conservatives.  Most of all, I am weary of the liberal intolerance (interesting article here).  There will be a powder keg issue on the ballots for the next 12 years.  No, sadly, we cannot vote on propositions to halt the murders of unborn children.  The issue will be homosexual marriage.  There is a militant drive to adopt such legislation across the United States seen just recently in the Pan-American protests in lieu of the majority’s acceptance of Proposition 8 in California.

 

When gay marriage is accepted in America, we will lose something which Americans have treasured since we founded this nation – separation of church and state.  Incidentally, Separation of Church and State began as a Baptist doctrine.  Read on the life of early Baptist pastor James Leyland if you don’t believe me.  Separation of church and state is something the liberals don’t even understand, and the evangelicals hate the “wall of separation,” not realizing that they should be grateful for it and support it!  This is because both are working from the same understanding of the idea.  Incidentally, godlessness and atheism is as much a “church” as Christianity and Islam, and the state must be separated from such control. 

 

I slap my forehead when I hear the protestors chanting “Separate Church and State!”  Oy vey!  When gay marriage had been legalized in California they immediately began to pressure the Methodist church telling them to “live up” to their slogan (“Open hearts, open minds”) by performing gay marriages.  School children had to sign pledges to accept gay marriage.  Similarly, a pastor in Canada (where gay marriage is accepted) was arrested in the last year for preaching that homosexuality was a sin.  So the state has begun to make hermeneutical interpretations for the Church up in Canada.  Also of note, a Christian adoption agency was shut down in Great Britain because it was their personal conviction not to allow homosexuals to adopt.  There were plenty of other orphanages and adoption agencies through which homosexuals could achieve this, but they specifically targeted the Christians.  Shutting down orphanages to achieve one’s own agenda… classy.  Article here.

 

We will eventually see homosexual marriage adopted in America on the Federal level.  This will be a grave time for the Church.  Preachers of the Gospel will be indicted for hate crimes, but hopefully this will not go too far before our leaders see their hypocrisy.  I expect then that, like in the case of abortion, free speech will be allowed to everyone except to Christians in the vicinity of a metropolitan church performing a gay marriage.  In view of such dark times, Christians should take hope in and be reminded that we are citizens of a Kingdom far greater than America.  Build that Kingdom:  Preach the Gospel, though the pagans demand your blood, and Herod rages against the children! 

Double-decker Dumping

Great Britain has reached a new level of secularization as the government is beginning to move and remove older gravesites because of supposed land limitations.  Apparently “burial space in England and Wales will be full in 30 years, while some urban boroughs are already out of room.”  The problem is clearly not a space issue as one scan over Great Britain on Google Maps shows that they aren’t running out of space any time soon.  The issue is that culturally they have lost any regard for the human body after death.  “Human remains are to be dug up and re-buried deeper in the ground in double-decker graves to tackle a shortage of space for new burials.”  The fact that two-thirds of the English get cremated each year demonstrates that they are loosing all contact with the past as they stack and rack corpses.  This is the natural progression of hedonistic thought.  Once the body looses its value it is only a matter of time before the dead are longer regarded.  It is only a matter of time before this disregard for the dead will eventually permeate all areas of life, no only in England but in America as well.  It will be the responsibility of the living to plan on eliminating themselves after death. The Christian community has historically valued the saints who have gone before as the church looks forward to the resurrection of the body despite death.  The church must therefore clearly hold to its veneration of the dead, as it looks toward the resurrection and reunion of the soul with the body in the psychosomatic unity that is the composition of man.

via: http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3085406.html

-Brad

Obama’s Top Ten Reasons for Voting Against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act

From Justin Taylor:

Some have sought to defend Senator Obama’s votes against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act by explaining the reason/argument he advanced against it. But actually, Obama has offered 10 different reasons for his opposition. Jill Stanek–the nurse who started the national discussion about this act–has an article with quotes explaining the various reasons. Here they are in outline form–but for more detail and documentation, read the whole thing.

10. Babies who survive abortions are not protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

9. A ban to stop aborted babies from being shelved to die would be burdensome to mothers.

8. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a doctor’s prerogative.

7. Anyway, doctors don’t do that.

6. Obama apparently read medical charts and saw no proof.

5. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a religious issue.

4. Aborting babies alive and letting them die violates no universal principle.

3. Introducing legislation to stop live aborted babies from being shelved to die was a political maneuver.

2. Sinking Born Alive was about outmaneuvering that political maneuver.

1. Introducing Born Alive was a ploy to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Convictions Without a Choice: Sarah and Trig Palin, my friend Emma, and special needs babies.

I remember first reading about down syndrome in my developmental psychology class as a sophomore in college.  The book showed a picture of a 2 year old with down syndrome.  I had heard of down syndrome, but I had never met a child with it.  This was the first time I had looked at a child with down syndrome, and it broke my heart.  Four years have passed since that day, and generally, I had forgotten about down syndrome.  Then, my wife and I joined a church here in Louisville, KY.  A lady in the church, Wanda, brings a little girl named Emma who has down syndrome.  She is five or six and quite adorable.  She has the typical down syndrome characteristics: slanted eyes, shorter stature, stubby hands, inability to solve more complex problems, hearing disability.  A few weeks ago I went into the nursery to help watch her.  I’ll be very honest, I felt uncomfortable.  I didn’t feel uncomfortable because she looked different, nor because she had the mind of a two year old.  What made me uncomfortable was my inability to communicate with her.  She was learning sign language, a language of which I am wholly ignorant.  As I sat there and looked at picture books with her, helped her put puzzles together, and helped feed her I began to realize what an awesome opportunity I had.  Emma has a tough home life and so Wanda, who is her neighbor, keeps her and tries to give her the extra love and attention she needs.  I am growing to love this little girl dearly and look forward to seeing her all the time.  I’m so glad she’s a part of this world and I’m so glad that God has given me the opportunity to love her. I’m even more thankful for the example of Mrs. Wanda.

            Why do I say all this?  First, I want to encourage you to embrace children who are different.  You may not feel you can communicate with them; but, every child recognizes warmth, a smile, and love.  Second, I want to react to the news media and to a blog I recently read regarding Trig Pax Palin.  Trig Pax Palin is the 4-month-old son of Sandra Palin, running mate of John McCain and governer of Alaska.  The media has expressed outrage over Sarah Palin’s ‘choice’ to keep Trig.  Medical professionals call her a hypocrite for agreeing to genetic testing and then deciding to keep the baby.  They call her a hypocrite because she made her choice but stands against other women who may want to make a contrary choice.  Read the article here.

            I wish to re-define the terms.  This is not Sarah Palin’s choice, or any other mother’s.  I shared the story of Emma to remind us all that ‘choice’ is a euphemistic word concerning the sanctity of human life.  I am so thankful that Sarah Palin had this baby.  She is a shining example to all mother’s nationwide that any baby can be kept, cared for and loved.  She is a shining example of the pro-life movement, and I am glad we have her on our side.  Sarah Palin now has five children, which in and of itself, is a miracle.  The average number of offspring per couple is below 2 now.  This statistic marks one of the many reasons pro-choicers are outraged by a governer keeping her down-syndrome baby.  We Americans are selfish.  Down syndrome is tragic, for the baby.  Yet, they call it tragic for the mother as well. 

Listen to what one doctor has to say: “Rabid anti-choice activists have called that trend eugenics via medicine. But try telling that to a mother who  Sure, its hard.  That doesn’t grant any woman the ‘choice’ to murder a baby.  Children, special needs or not, are gifts from the Lord and are special stewardships from God.  Psalm 139 proclaims the awesome truth that every human being as knit together by God in the mother’s womb.  As John Piper says in the video below, “Don’t mess with that!”  I am concerned for America.  We are so concerned with our own personal welfare, our ‘rightful’ comforts that we can’t imagine the possibility of having to care for a special needs child.  The pro-choice group notes that special needs baby are typically abused more and so, they infer, women shouldn’t have them.  There reasoning is this: “That child is going to have a horrible life, so let’s just end it for them.”  They argue its salvation for the baby, when the way I see it, they are only wanting to save themselves.  As Christians, we need to promote special needs and promote a culture that is thrilled to care for these little gifts from God.  The only reason a special needs baby will have a harder life is if the mother also daily ‘chooses’ her own needs and rights above her babies. 

We need to praise Sarah Palin for her keeping her child.  I can guarantee one thing: its tough for her.  Also, remember that for Sarah Palin, this wasn’t a choice.  Trig Paxin is a gift from the Lord and a stewardship given to the Palin family, and praise God for them recognizing that.  Sarah Palin has convictions that don’t give her the opportunity to make a ‘choice.’  I doubt she prayed for a special needs baby, but she has clearly exemplified the way a mother should react when this gift is given.  She has wholly embraced the job and I’m sure she will raise her newborn son and lead our country well at the same time.  Sarah Palin is a heroine of life, a heroine of conviction, a heroine of special needs families all around the world.

-Randall

Miller vs. Piper on abortion

Sorry for the first two posts being about Don Miller, but I found these videos particularly interesting (courtesy of Timmy Brister)

Donald Miller: “Just deal with it”

John Piper: “Don’t mess with that”