1517: These People Scare Me

Monday, January 26, 2009

These People Scare Me

When Nancy Pelosi (or any pro-abortion politician) says "family planning" they really mean abortion.

29 comments:

toothdoc said...: "We have to pay the consequences for the downturn in our economy."

I guess the national debt is not the only burden that is being "born" by the next generation. If abortion is "family planning" then assisted suicide is "retirement planning".

(sorry for the high volume of ""); January 26, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Todd Pruitt said...: Ric,

Exactly. In fact I propose that we begin selectively reducing our population of people over the age of 70. They've lived their lives. It's expensive keeping them around. They are draining Social Security. Really, it's selfish and unpatriotic for people to live beyond 70 years.; January 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Noel said...: This is the same argument used by Hilter to rationalize the murder of the mentally hanidcapped. Unfortunately, human life has been cheapened and when a country can easily ignore the rights of a particular people group (ie the unborn, the elderly, etc..) then who can say what other groups will become the next victims. Its a frightening thing when those who have the most power define what human lives have value, and which ones do not. We have clearly not learned from history.; January 26, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Todd Pruitt said...: Heather,

What we see in the pro-abortion groups and politicians is the moral desensatizing that occurs once a person deems abortion acceptable. Once you approve of something as clearly wicked as abortion then all else becomes imaginable.; January 26, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Jill said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 26, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Jill said...: Thought you might find this interesting reading.

http://www.urbancure.org/article.asp?idCategory=3&idsub=1&id=3137&t=Culture+of+responsibility+is+culture+of+life; January 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Jill said...: Okay, I can't figure out how to get the whole web address on there. It's www.urbancure.org and the name of the article is "Culture of Responsibility is Culture of Life"; January 26, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Somebody said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 26, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Alan, if you have the answer to the attitude that would encourage engagement, please fill us in...; January 26, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Gary said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Gary said...: I appreciate this blog, but lets not oversimplify everything because it is a nasty democrat giving the information. Family planning does not = abortion. Yes, abortion is a part of the package and we all despise its existence, but there are also positive family aspects. Counseling for pregnant teenage mothers (not just advising them to have an abortion). Contraceptives are issued which will hopefully prevent someone having to make the terrible choice of abortion.

Again, compartmentalizing everything into either completely evil or completely good does nothing to change anyone. All you end up with is people on both sides having painted themselves into such a deep corner than neither will budge even an inch.

Love the blog by the way, read it all the time. And yes - Nancy Pelosi is very very scary :); January 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Somebody said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 26, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Todd Pruitt said...: You will all understand that if I don't trust any politician with the responsibility of family planning. You will also understand if I don't trust Planned Parenthood.

Clearly I do not believe that abortion is a gray issue. If that sounds too simplistic then so be it.

Alan, it seems to me that you are using firey language to criticize firely language. I am also confused as to how being Gospel-centered should somehow lessen my passion on the abortion issue. Not sure where you're going there.

Also, you'll hopefully understand if I am a bit "scared" by the things Nancy Pelosi advocates. I see no gossip or slander here. The positions of Mrs. Pelosi are quite well known.

If we think that hearts are going to change concerning abortion while our politicians continue to champion and guard its legality then we are kidding ourselves. Indeed, our national leaders are making promises to fight for "a woman's right to choose."

Indeed, the deadening of our consciences are seen in the fact that for many evangelicals, abortion has become just one issue among many, nothing really urgent. Meanwhile we have raced past the 50 million mark. Astounding.

Also, for the purpose of full disclosure, I am not in the pocket of any political party. I chose not to vote in this most recent election. My conscience wouldn't allow it. Personally, I'm done with all of them.

I don't know why I should be expected to "support" or "believe in" a politician when he or she has already announced policies that are detestable to me. That does not mean I won't be praying for I surrely will. But I cannot support anyone who by force of the state takes tax payer's dollars to pay for abortions overseas. I cannot support any politician who would sign "The Freedom of Choice Act" - a truly wicked piece of legislation. I could not support any politician that opposed "The Born Alive Infant Protection Act." Perhaps that makes me obtuse but it seems pretty clear to me.; January 26, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Tim said...: I doubt that I can respond to Alan any better than Todd, but I would recommend that Alan reads "Here We Stand" by James Boice and Ben Sasse. True, many conservative churches have gotten so deep into the pockets of the GOP that they've lost their Gospel centeredness.. (Todd might say they were no longer Gospelish). All the same, let's not forget that many liberal churches have lost themselves in the various pockets of the Democratic party's pants as well (a friend of mine went to a local church two weeks ago and the entire sermon was on gun control - not very Gospelish either). As for these other issues you bring up - gossip, slander, women's inequality, poverty, avarice, ecological sanity, etc. You sound like a firebrand of your own merely for another partisan ideology. Tread carefully Alan, just because you're thinking differently, doesn't mean you're being more thoughtful.

Quite frankly, you sound to me as if you're desperately looking for a Christian reason to justify voting for someone who would sign such an evil piece of legislation.

You won't find it here.; January 26, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Somebody said...: I don't think any one of us will find anything close to a perfect politician any time soon. Politics is compromise and we pick a leader, warts and all.

On another site I wrote, before the election, that I didn't fall for the rainbows and unicorns, or the idea that Obama was somehow secretly a champion of the unborn. That's ridiculous.

My position is that a change in direction and tone is warranted after years of failure. There were simply no other options. McCain (2008) was simply not a credible candidate. I would have voted for McCain 2000 over Obama, but he wasn't on the ballot.

Even if this weren't about a change in direction on pro-life strategy, the fact is that God has allowed Obama to be our President at this point in time. I will oppose him on abortion, as will many pro-life Democrats and Republicans.

Todd, you're right about our forceful language of course. Maybe sometimes it is appropriate to fight fire with fire, but not in this case. (I agree with you wholeheartedly about Planned Parenthood--I cannot believe that so many are so ignorant about the dark history of that organization.)

I am convicted also by this post on Mark Dever's blog, reminding us of the middle way. I am so quick to forget that blogs and forums suck the subtlety and complexity out of language--at least my language. Sarcasm may be playful in person but is rarely gentle on-line.

Again, Mark Dever:

God has called you to be a messenger of his gospel more than any other message. And what is your witness? Do people think of you as argumentative or quarrelsome? We want to be known more by what we are for than by what we’re against. And we always want to be for the gospel, and for being reformed by the Word of God.

In essentials unity, in non-essentials diversity, in all things love.; January 26, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Somebody said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM
Todd Pruitt said...: Alan,

I agree with you.

We have to be very careful about investing too much hope in any politician. They will fail us every time.

I also love the quote from Dever. Spot on! I think men like John Piper, C.J. Mahaney, Randy Alcorn, John Ensor, etc prove quite well that being tenaciously pro-life is in no way contrary to being Gospel-centered. Indeed, being pro-life is entirely consistent with the Gospel.; January 26, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Gary said...: I would agree that politicians will fail us every time, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be politically involved. If every Christian faced with an impossible choice of voting decided to abstain then who is going to choose our leaders? I definitely agree that there are 'Christians' in the pocket of both the Republican and Democratic party, I just tire of the evil/good nature of every political argument.

There is no middle ground in the case of abortion. I agree with that 100%. Abortion is 100% evil, however in individual bills, legislation, and politicians there is almost always good mixed in with evil. This bill while coming from a very unreliable source in Pelosi, is not simply 100% abortion. That is all I was making the point.

The key for active Christians in my opinion is to search for the good and fight for the good no matter what the situation. There were no easy choices in this election as you pointed out, but that does not mean that we abstain from the process. Whether you think it is right to fight for abortion by voting for a 3rd party candidate (since McCain wasn't particular strong on abortion either) or whether you feel that you have to look at the whole of a politician and not simply one issue. Poverty kills and enslaves the helpless as well.

Anyway, that is my rant. Please keep up the good work on the blog, I hope that I have given some food for thought.; January 26, 2009 at 11:54 PM
rmc said...: I am not scared by these people because God is Sovreign and the verdict is not in yet on the Obama administration on abortion. It is in on the Clinton administration, the abortion rate took a significant dip. It is also in on the Bush administration, the abortion rate is rising among poor women. It also in for the Netherlands, with legal abortion and about 1/3 the abortion rate as the US. Clearly, there is more to reducing the abortion rate than laws and judges, like how a nation treats its poor and how it educates its youth. And since the social policies of the Obama administration will resemble those of the Clinton administration more than the Bush administration, there is great hope for reducing the abortion rate during an Obama administration. I would suggest that Christians could also help in this regard by recognising that a constant stream of condemnation toward the Obama administration is not likely to bring about the revival we so badly need and that would also help reduce the abortion rate. Instead we need to humble ourselves, recognise our ignorance, recognise that there are spiritual hotspots in the world where revival is occuring, learn from people in these regions who know what being the church is really all about, and move much more to becoming the church that God desires us to be right here in the USA.; January 27, 2009 at 7:06 AM
toothdoc said...: Not to be rude but are the "spiritual hotspots" in the world in countries where the church has "humbled itself" (which I take as a euphamism for "stopped speaking against") and gone along with collective social policies (aka France, Germany, Netherlands). Or, is it occuring in countries where the government is corrupt, oppressive, non-existent (or all of the above)?

If harm has come to the American church it is from our allowing our theology to be defined by our politics. Both sides do this and, rmc, you have done it as well. Supporting an Obama administration is not a WWJD issue any more than supporting a Bush administration was. My neighbor doesn't know Jesus, I have patient's that are losing jobs and hurting spiritually. Is Jesus going to be pleased with me because I supported a political administration???? Revival does not come to a country because it is united behind an ideology (right or left), revival comes when people are broken and hurting and turn to the ONLY source of hope.

That being said, let me rejoin the chorus - Abortion is an Abomination.; January 27, 2009 at 7:29 AM
Somebody said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 27, 2009 at 8:39 AM
Todd Pruitt said...: Gary,

I agree with much of what you say. However, I do believe that there are times when Christians may not be able to cast a vote in good conscience. This past election was a first for me.

Ric,
Good reminder on who the real problem is in the church - US!

Alan,
I disagree that there is a DIRECT link between poverty and abortion. Our own history shows that this is not true. Unwanted pregnancies are the result of the moral degredation of our culture. We have never had a more sexually educated generation in our history. There has also never been easier access to birth control. The same can be said in Africa but AIDS continues to run out of control. The key to bringing abortions down is not more spending on social welfare.; January 27, 2009 at 8:50 AM
Somebody said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; January 27, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Mike said...: Agree with Todd that there can be times when we cannot, in good conscious, cast a vote...I respect that.

Disagree regarding the link between moral degradation and abortion...because I don't know how moral degradation is measured. It is a great buzzword but how do we define it... abortion? war? genocide? slavery? injustice? totalitariansm? Certainly every generation has had its moral dilemmas. Are we more immoral that those of the past?; January 27, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Somebody said...: Normally I would agree with you on the link between poverty and abortion. At the same time I cannot help but think that the financial tsunami, the shadow of the tip of which is just now appearing on our shores, will sweep away many innocents as well.

If you're against spending on social welfare, are you against crisis pregnancy centers? I don't understand. Or are social welfare programs only a bad idea if the dollars funding them coming from Uncle Sam?

(And a minor correction: That was not Dever's blog but a resource list.); January 27, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Todd Pruitt said...: Alan,

What I am against is the government's continued ridiculous waste of our money. We have spent trillions of dollars to win "the war against poverty." Washington is hopelessly corrupt and incompetent when it comes to spending other people's money. Now they are wanting to take even more. It is the definition of insanity.

So, yes, in a sense if the government's funding it then it will far too expensive and far too ineffective.

I am hugely in favor privately funded pregnancy centers. I have seen first hand the difference they make.; January 27, 2009 at 9:26 AM
rmc said...: Lots of opinions here. How about some answers? The abortion rate in the Netherlands is 1 third of that in the US. And that's with legal abortion and a whole lot less Christian influence. Wouldn't that be a place to look for some real answers? The church fulfilling the great commission. That too, among other things, would reduce the abortion rate. And as there are places, mostly in the third world, where the spiritual climate of cities is being changed so that there is tremendous openness to the gospel and lots of people coming to Christ, and there are often common elements to how this happens, wouldn't that also be a good place to look for answers? That way we could have more than divisive opinions.; January 27, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Todd Pruitt said...: rmc,

Good thoughts.; January 27, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Nonetheless - nothing anyone has said dispels the notion that killing babies IS illegal – murder is illegal. It is also unconstitutional – it denies a person the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In our country, my rights of “choice” end when they infringe on another person. Now, personally, I count the fact that it is an abomination in God’s eyes as much more important, but I can rest on this legal rationale just as well, since many nominal Christians today have so little fear of a holy God that the argument often falls on deaf ears.

And, what interest has the President shown in engaging anyone in this wonderful pluralistic (and finally politically enlightened) time we find ourselves in? I don’t remember any – maybe I missed it. Looked a lot to me like a unilateral decision. The pluralism seems to flow one direction.

Off to strike another Faustian bargain...; January 27, 2009 at 2:09 PM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)