How to Make the Case for Life in a Post-Christian Culture

Justin Taylor:

Every family and youth group should consider watching this video with their pre-teen kids and older. It is a compelling case for being pro-life and learning how to engage these issues, but it is also a crash course in moral and logical reasoning. 

Scott Klusendorf—author of The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture and co-author of Stand for Life: Answering the Call, Making the Case, Saving Lives—makes the case that if you can achieve clarity on three questions, God can use you to start a conversation with the goal of at least planting seeds of doubts with those who disagree. The three questions are:

• What is the unborn?
• What makes us valuable as human beings?
• What is our duty in all of this?

 

Help Fund a Movie That Needs To Be Made

Owen Strachan:

You can be a part of movie history. A group of courageous and award-winning filmmakers are committed to doing a documentary film on Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia abortionist who killed dozens, hundreds, and perhaps thousands of babies by delivering them at his clinic and then severing their spinal cord with scissors. 

The film is being crowdfunded and needs $2.1 million dollars by May 12, 2014. It has currently raised $1.36 million through Indiegogo. That’s under 20 days. If you’re pro-life, I strongly encourage you to support this film. Just go to Indiegogo and sign up–it takes 2-3 minutes. If you’re on social media–Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc–I strongly encourage you to spread the word. Take a risk for the cause of truth! 

The mainstream media ignored the Gosnell trial. In the face of horrific killings of babies, America has averted its face. Let’s do all we can to see this movie funded.

The Surprising and Sickening Outrage over Josie Cunningham’s Abortion

Trevin Wax reflects on the news story from Britain about Josie Cunningham and her decision to have an abortion to further her career.  Click over to read the whole thing.  His concluding reflections are quite insightful and enlightening.  

The surprising response is also sickening. British society reacted with revulsion toward a woman who decided to sacrifice another human in order to further her career. (I use sacrificial terminology deliberately, since all idols demand sacrifices, and a career can function as an idol.) 

What’s sickening is to see how society bullies and shames a woman who is following the script that society itself has given her. Over and over again, we are told that women’s rights hinge on access to abortion, that women can be equal to men only if they have full freedom over their reproductive choices, that women need to put themselves and their careers first. One woman follows the logic, and all hell breaks loose against her. 

Other news outlets have reported on the vitriol, so I won’t link to the comments made about this woman, many too vile to print here. Abortion is dehumanizing toward the unborn. The treatment of Josie Cunningham is dehumanizing too. It makes her a monster, when in fact, the monstrous act of abortion is something we as a society have created and promoted. (I wonder if there is a reverse sacrifice going on here. Josie Cunningham sacrifices her child on the altar of her career ambitions, and then British society sacrifices Cunningham as a collective easing of the conscience of a society with blood on its hands.) 

Absent from this discussion, sadly, is the baby’s father. Where is he? Who is he? We are quick to heap scorn and judgment on a woman, as if she is the only person responsible for this debacle. How is it that a society that promotes woman’s rights can so quickly demonize a woman? Meanwhile, the man walks away after his romantic fling without consequence. Far from elevating our view of women, the abortion culture has led to a sickening double standard. 

So, yes, the outrage over Josie Cunningham’s abortion is both surprising and sickening. As Christians, we should weep for the baby who was lost and be encouraged by society’s shock at abortion for selfish gain, even as we shake our heads at the double standard on display in society’s demonization of a woman.

Read the rest.

This is What You Used To Look Like

My Questions for President Obama In Light of His Statement on The Anniversary of Roe. vs. Wade

President Obama:  "Today, as we reflect on the 41st anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, we recommit ourselves to the decision’s guiding principle: that every woman should be able to make her own choices about her body and her health. We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care..."

My question:  I agree! I want that for women too! But what about the other person inside of her?  What about the unborn female?  Does that female have any women's right?  Shouldn’t we be in favor of safety for that person too?  The process of abortion is the farthest thing from "health care" for the littlest women in the womb.  Why don't they get good health care too, even if they are unwanted?  Are you in favor of bad health care for a toddler if their parents don't want them?  We know that is not how you feel, so what is the fundamental difference between the toddler and the unborn, such that one should receive great health care, no matter what, and the other should receive the opposite of health care (termination) if their parents see fit?  It seems that you assume that the unborn person should have no rights whatsoever.  Why do you feel that way?


President Obama: "...and her constitutional right to privacy including the right to reproductive freedom."

My question: I agree that privacy is a really big deal and I too greatly value my personal privacy.  But what if a mother want’s to kill her six-month-old baby?  We don’t claim she has a right to privacy in that case.  So what is the fundamental difference between the unborn and the six-month-old baby,  where one should be protected by law with full human rights and the other has all their human rights stripped away?


President Obama:  "And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health..."

My question: But shouldn’t we care about the health of those children who are in the womb too?


President Obama:  "...and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children."

My question:  But if we truly cared about safety for all children, what about the unborn children in the womb? On what basis do they not count?


President Obama:  "Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams."

My question:  But who is protecting the right of the unborn to freely fulfill their dreams? Why don’t our laws protect the human rights of the unborn Mr. President?

55.8 Million in Perspective

This sobering image really helps grasp the enormity of the issue.

A Conversation on Abortion and the Gospel: Francis Chan and John Piper Talk with John Ensor

Justin Taylor:

John Ensor is the president of Passion Life and the author of several books, including Stand for Life: Answering the Call, Making the Case, Saving Lives (co-authored with Scott Klusendorf), Answering the Call: Saving Innocent Lives One Woman at a Time, and most recently, Innocent Blood: Challenging the Powers of Death with the Gospel of Life. 

He recently sat down to talk with Francis Chan (whose mother died giving birth to him) and John Piper (who has spent time in jail for peaceful pro-life protest) 

Chan talks about his struggles to stand up for life. Piper talks about the need to expose evil, standing up for and defending the voiceless victims of injustice. They view depictions of abortion and talk about the need to respond with the cleansing power of the gospel of grace. 

WARNING: Graphic Images.

"How Many Babies Have You Adopted?"

Good response here to this common objection to the pro-life view.

The Tie Between MLK Jr. and Sanctity of Human Life

A picture says it all.

(HT:  Thabiti)

Don't Hate, But Pray For Those Who Hate Pro-Life Convictions

Trevin Wax writes beautifully here.  

Trevin Wax:

In the never-ending battle over abortion, it’s easy to lose yourself in the heat of the moment and to feel a sense of disdain toward those who defend the “right” to take the life of an unborn child. But as Christians, we must not give in to the cultural tendency to denigrate and demonize people on the other side of the political aisle. 

How can we make a stand for the unborn and yet also love our political opponents? 

By praying for them by name. 

It is hard to hate someone you pray for. 

So, instead of raging against people you disagree with, people made in God’s image, pray:

• Pray for the day Wendy Davis’ pink sneakers will be what she wears at the annual March for Life.

• Pray for the day our president, who comes from a people long acquainted with the indignity of being treated as something less than human, will throw his support behind human rights for all.

• Pray for reporters like Sarah Kliff, that her passion for human life will one day outstrip her devotion to “reproductive health.”

• Pray for leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who out of political convenience have left behind their pro-life convictions. Pray that they will join with Alveda King and other African-American leaders to end the massacre of their people.

• Pray for Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, that her eyes would be opened to the miracle unfolding in the womb. Pray for the day she leads her organization to never again earn a penny through stopping the heartbeat of a human child.

• Pray for the day Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL, joins forces with those who want to stop the war on women in the womb.

• Pray for Hillary Clinton, that she will come to realize the main reason why she refers to abortion as a “tragic choice.”

• Pray for the abortion-rights activists who berate and belittle those who speak up for the voiceless.

• Pray for the countless men and women in our country who are uncomfortable with the reality of abortion, but are unable to fully articulate why.

• Pray for pro-life Christians who remain silent, who unwittingly stand by as little humans beings are discarded in clinics within driving distance of their homes.

• Pray for Supreme Court justices like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to see the instability of the Roe decision and return the decision to the states.

• Pray for abortion providers, that God would prick the conscience of those who piece together the remains of unborn children every day.

• Pray that the abortion culture would unravel from the inside, as more and more “doctors” are rightly uncomfortable with stilling the heartbeats of other human beings.

• Most of all, pray that God would have mercy on us for treating the gift of life as an inconvenience.

Don’t hate. Pray.

"The reason why I oppose abortion, and the reason why you should oppose abortion is actually quite simple, and it is this: The fetus is a human being."

Keith Mathison:

Dear Neighbor, 

We have been neighbors for many years, and on several occasions you have both expressed some consternation about my position on abortion. You have told me that when you have discussed this with our other neighbors, none of them can comprehend how I can take a position that “sets women’s rights back fifty years.” As you know, a few of our neighbors have even gotten angry, especially during those months leading up to elections, arguing that I want to let politicians control private medical decisions. 

You asked me if I could give you one good reason why you should change your view. I can and will. The reason why I oppose abortion, and the reason why you should oppose abortion is actually quite simple, and it is this: The fetus is a human being. 

Notice that I did not say, “I believe that the fetus is a human being.” Such a statement would imply that this is a matter of opinion or faith. No, it is an objective fact that the fetus is a genetically distinct individual human being from the moment the sperm cell fertilizes the ovum. It is a human being in the earliest stages of its growth and development, but it is a human being nonetheless. Read any standard textbook on embryology used in any college or university, and you will find the same fact stated in all of them. 

Once this very simple and basic fact is grasped, once we understand that conception results in a living human being, it changes everything. We can no longer look at abortion as simply a debate over a woman’s right to choose because the choice involves the life or death of another human being. We can no longer look at abortion as a private medical decision involving only a woman and her doctor because there is always a third distinct human being involved as well. We can no longer look at abortion as merely the ending of a pregnancy. That is a euphemism. Abortion is, quite simply, the killing of a living human being. 

The fetus is a genetically distinct individual human being from the earliest stages of embryonic development. It is not a “potential” human being or a “potential” human life. Arguments comparing the embryo to a sperm cell (which does contain the “potential” to initiate human life) are red herrings and irrelevant. A sperm cell and a human embryo are qualitatively different things. One is a genetically distinct human being in the early stages of development. The other is not. 

There is no rational excuse for supporting abortion today. Every competent scientist knows what a human embryo is. Every competent scientist knows that conception is the time at which a new genetically distinct individual human being begins to live. They knew this in 1973, and they know this now. And if it is a living human being, no one has the right to kill it any more than they have the right to kill any other human being. 

People continue to support abortion, however, because they have concluded that other “rights” are more basic and more fundamental than the right of a human being not to be killed. I am hardly exaggerating when I say that in our modern culture, the most fundamental and cherished of all “rights” is the right to engage in any kind of sexual intercourse imaginable without fear of consequences. And if the preservation of this “right” involves the killing of another human being, so be it. 

You can easily find numerous quotations by prominent advocates of abortion, acknowledging that it is the killing of a human being. Most who support abortion, however, redefine the fetus and deny that it is fully human. History has not been kind to those generations who deprived certain people of their basic rights to life and who did so by defining them as less than fully human. When the history of our generation is written, will you be among those who shut their eyes to injustice on a massive scale, who looked the other way as human beings were systematically killed? Or will you be among those who spoke up for those who could not speak for themselves? 

The fetus is a living individual human being. The unjust killing of a human being is murder. If these two statements are true, and both are true, then the only conclusion we can reach is that abortion is murder. You asked me why you should change your view of abortion. This is why.

"Progressive evangelicals can't tout social justice while side-stepping the sanctity of life."

Dan Darling and Andrew Walker:

As evangelicals who came of age during the culture wars, we're part of a generation ready to move past the pitched left-right debates. The critiques of Christian political activism have held some merit: A hyper-focus on elections, voter guides, and strategy has often buried the gospel story. Sometimes following Christ has strangely looked like following an elephant or a donkey. 

We need the hope, optimism, willingness of new generation of evangelicals to get dirty serving the poor, fighting for justice, and eschewing party labels. Their wide-eyed engagement has awakened new interest in bipartisan horrors such as human trafficking, environmental degradation, the orphan crisis, and child poverty in underdeveloped nations.
And yet, in our rush to justice, we cannot forget the prophet Micah's haunting words: 

He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8, ESV) 

These words motivate our desire as God's kingdom people, to pursue justice where we can and pray for it where we cannot. But what about causes that push against the culture? Surely God's intention for his church didn't simply include only a portfolio of chic causes. 

And that leads us to the pro-life movement, dating back to the 1970s. Being pro-life was missional, incarnational, and radical way before those terms became evangelical buzzwords. And yet, caring for and advocating on behalf of the unborn remains controversial. 

Thankfully, its controversial status may be a thing of the past if trend lines continue. Younger generations are markedly more pro-life than their parents. We're observing a rising generation of pro-life Americans, many of whom (though not all) identify as Christian. 

But sadly, among progressive evangelicals, there's a reflexive hesitancy to tout or raise the banner of human life as a preeminent justice issue. 

Read the rest.  

"Things have a price and are sold, but people have a dignity, worth more than things and they don’t have a price."

The Pope:

“The culture of waste, which now enslaves the hearts and minds of many, has a very high cost: it requires the elimination of human beings, especially if they are physically or socially weaker,” he said, according to a English translation offered by The National Catholic Register. 

“Our response to this mentality is a categorical and unhesitant ‘yes’ to life. … Things have a price and are sold, but people have a dignity, worth more than things and they don’t have a price.  Many times we find ourselves in situations where we see that which costs less is life. Because of this, attention to human life in its totality has become a real priority of the Magisterium of the Church in recent years, particularly to the most defenseless, that is, the disabled, the sick, the unborn child, the child, the elderly who are life’s most defenseless. 

“Each child who is unborn, but is unjustly condemned to be aborted, bears the face of Jesus Christ, bears the face of the Lord, who, even before he was born, and then as soon as he was born, experienced the rejection of the world.”

Read the rest.  

"I do think that Roe v. Wade will definitely be overturned, because I think the fissures and the defects are just so profound that it is just like the fall of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev wanted to hold on but couldn't."

Very interesting article here about the history of Roe vs. Wade and the future toppling of this Supreme Court decision which profoundly undermines the human rights of the unborn.

"You Offended Me!"

Jay Watts:

A young woman sat with her arms crossed and lips pursed while shooting me a look that must have been intended to vaporize me on the spot. I was talking to her and some of her fellow students about abortion and the pro-life position, and it clearly made her unhappy. She finally raised her hand and the whole room seemed to gird their loins for what was about to come. I asked her, “Did you have a question or comment?”

She rather forcefully said, “I am offended that you would come here and say these things.”

My response was as follows:

Ok, let's talk about that for minute. I have presented an argument in support of the position that abortion is objectively wrong because it unjustly takes the life of an innocent human being. The lines of evidences that I appealed to were scientific (the identity of the unborn as a human life from fertilization) and philosophical (human beings have value by virtue of what they are not what they can do or how I feel about them).

I also understand that hearing people argue for views you disagree with can be unpleasant. It bothers you to hear someone say you are wrong, just like it bothers anyone including me. I can get really irritated over people disagreeing with me about trivial things. It is natural to have emotional responses to discussions about all sorts of things, but especially about something as objectively important as abortion.

Anytime someone disagrees with us and offers arguments for their position there are only a few options open to us in response. (1) We can quietly listen, consider their views, weigh the counter arguments, and decide they were wrong. (2) We can listen, consider, weigh, then decide we are wrong and adjust our beliefs appropriately. (3) We can listen, consider, weigh, and then decide that we simply lack sufficient information to come down on one side or the other. (4) We can offer counter arguments on the spot addressing the specific lines of evidence offered.

All of those are perfectly appropriate. There are certainly counter arguments to everything that I have said today offered by genuinely brilliant people at an academic and sophisticated level. I've read them and learned from them, though I obviously found them less than persuasive in the end. I encourage you to find and read them and would be happy to point you in the right direction.

But when you say that you are offended, all that you are doing is telling us how you are emotionally responding to what I am saying. I already conceded that we all struggle with our emotions in this kind of conversation, both in my original talk and just a moment ago, so you aren't adding anything to the discussion that addresses the substance of what was argued.

Finally, and I'm not saying you are doing this, but when some people say they are offended what they are really saying is that I'm upsetting them so I ought to stop talking about abortion. I reject that all together. No one has a right not to be offended. Sometimes there are questions of such importance that we are compelled to engage in public discussion knowing that it will be upsetting to do so. Imagine how you would feel if someone suggested that you shouldn't be allowed to argue for positions with which they disagree simply because they are incapable of controlling their emotions. 

“It’ll Be Inserted Through the Head”

Owen Strachan:

I saw this Live Action video on Twitter via ace journalist Mollie Hemingway. It features Dr. Carmen Landau of the Southwest Women’s Clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

She’s an abortionist, and according to the video, she’s quite happy to kill late-term babies.
You should watch this video. It’s about 4 minutes long. If you have a conscience, and if you care about children, it may make you weep, sweat, and audibly cry out. You’ll hear two voices–Landau’s and another counselor’s–that are soothing, gentle, and assured, in the way that medical experts often are. But there’s a difference in these tones. They speak words of death. Landau is the same doctor who said that killing a baby is like getting “a flu shot.” 

These accomplished, socially able women use their gentle voices and quiet comfort to encourage women to murder little babies after the 20-week mark that would have an increasingly strong shot at survival. I was surprised in this video, by the way, to hear the baby in the womb called just that: a “baby.” Not a fetus. Not some other clinical term. A “baby.” 

I don’t know what your reaction to this video will be. Many Christians will watch it and mourn and grieve for a lost world. But that is not enough. We should get involved in pro-life ministries. We should pray in our churches against this practice. We should offer up anguished prayers to God to stop this practice and rescue these children from those who would kill them. This includes both their mothers and the “doctors” who hunt them down in the womb. 

And we should also give thanks to the God of life that, against all the odds, dozens of states–as New York magazine recently showed amidst a series of “abortion stories”–are embracing pro-life measures. There is a growing, rushing backlash against abortion today. Justice is on the move.

Just Tightening Up The Aim On The Kids That Create Problems

The NY Times:

More than 30 years ago, a 37-year-old friend of mine with an unplanned fourth pregnancy was told by her obstetrician that an amniocentesis was “too dangerous” and could cause a miscarriage. She ultimately bore a child severely affected by Down syndrome, which could have been detected with the test. 

Today, my friend’s story would have a different trajectory. She would have a series of screening tests, and if the results suggested a high risk of Down syndrome, then an amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (C.V.S.) to make the diagnosis. She’d be given the option to abort the pregnancy. 

In the future, a woman who decides to continue a Down syndrome pregnancy may also be offered prenatal treatment to temper the developmental harm to the fetus. 

Prenatal diagnosis, today a routine part of obstetric care, has made great strides since the mid-1970s and is now on the cusp of further revolutionary developments. 

In the nearly four decades since amniocentesis became widely accepted, new techniques have gradually improved the safety and accuracy of prenatal diagnosis. Prenatal tests for more than 800 genetic disorders have been developed. And the number of women who must undergo amniocentesis or C.V.S. has been greatly reduced. 

The newest screening test, highly accurate and noninvasive, relies on fetal genetic fragments found in the mother’s blood. Available commercially from four companies, this test is so accurate in detecting Down syndrome that few, if any, affected fetuses are missed, and far fewer women need an invasive procedure to confirm or refute the presence of Down, according to studies in several countries. 

The new test, done late in the first trimester of pregnancy, can also detect other genetic diseases, like extra copies of chromosomes 13 and 18, and a missing sex chromosome. It is not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration, however, and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology currently recommends it only for women at high risk for having a baby with a chromosomal abnormality. 

But any woman can get the new screening test if her doctor orders it and she is willing to pay for it herself, according to Dr. Diana W. Bianchi, a neonatologist and geneticist at Tufts University School of Medicine. Dr. Bianchi, who serves on the advisory board of a company selling fetal DNA tests, said she expects these tests will soon become routine for all pregnant women because, in addition to their “extraordinary accuracy” in detecting a Down syndrome pregnancy, they can be done earlier than other tests, and reduce costs and the risk of complications. 

Down syndrome, which occurs in about one in every 700 births in the United States, is by far the most common chromosomal abnormality. It causes physical and intellectual disabilities that range from mild to severe.

Translation = We know more about the kid in the womb so if we want to kill it, we can be appropriately informed.  If you are over 35, ever wonder why you see way less people with Down Syndrome walking around today than when you were a kid?  The answer should be chilling.

Jasmine's Victory

Ground Breaking Abortion Ban

The is significant progress.

WorldMag:

Ground-breaking abortion ban. U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland last week dismissed part of a lawsuit challenging a new North Dakota law that blocks abortions based on gender or genetic defects such as Down syndrome. The judge’s ruling makes North Dakota the first state to ban aborting children with genetic defects. 

Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo, the state’s sole abortion provider, filed suit in June against the law, which also included abortion restrictions when a heartbeat is detected. The Red River center requested that the court drop the gender and genetic defects part of the lawsuit saying it didn’t perform abortions for that reason anyway. Hovland dismissed that portion of the lawsuit without prejudice, which means the clinic can revive a legal challenge later. The heartbeat ban was temporarily blocked in July. 

Russian statistics. Close to 2 percent of Russia’s population is being aborted every year, according to foreign policy expert Ilan Berman. With abortionists performing almost 1.2 million abortions in Russia each year, “that equals out to 300 babies every hour,” Berman told the Daily Caller. “According to unofficial projections, however, the true abortion rate could be as much as double that figure.”  

In his book Implosion: The End of Russia and What it Means for America, Berman said the abortion rate, combined with Russia’s HIV/AIDS, alcoholism, and drug addiction problems, factors into the country’s shrinking population. 

Closed doors. Pro-life organization And Then There Were None, which offers a safe haven for those wanting to leave the abortion industry, told the Baptist Press that 44 abortion centers in the U.S. have closed this year. Of those, 42 provided both surgical and chemical abortions. Last year, only 25 surgical clinics shut down. The closure of an abortion facility in Bryan, Texas, in July was especially memorable for ATTWN founder Abby Johnson, who formerly worked at the facility.

"Your Pro-Life Views are Just Religious"

Recommended reading:

• The Case For Life
• Defending Life