Pro-Life

Recently, I was involved in a short discussion on Twitter about my pro-life apologetic after lamenting the Obama White House’s decision to strip away from the conscience clause protections enacted under President Bush. It was a great, honest discussion, but, Twitter being what it is, I decided to write up a basic summary of my pro-life position here. What follows, then, are the highlights of one plank of the pro-life argument. Read the rest of this entry »

From Oklahomans for Life:

Support is needed for Two Key Pro-Life Bills; Committees are to Vote This Week on PAIN Bill and Bill Confirming ABORTION Is NOT “Health Care”

Read more here.

Not a few years ago, the country’s oldest pro-life policy organization showed Oklahoma barely in the top ten of states, in terms of friendly policies toward the unborn.

This week, Americans United for Life (AUL) promoted its 2011 rankings, showing the Sooner State as number one! Many thanks to pro-life leaders in Oklahoma, such as Lt. Governor Todd Lamb, for their efforts in this rise. We’ve come a long way and have further to go.

Read the story here. 

\”The Right to Life is Self-Evident\”

“Will a federal emergency-medical-treatment law be rewritten to mandate that all hospitals provide abortions?”

Read more here.

“Colorado voters on Tuesday rejected what was said to be the nation’s only pro-life amendment.”

“Personhood Amendment 62, which would have given human rights to the unborn, was defeated by a nearly 3-to-1 margin. This is the second time the pro-life measure was voted down.”

“‘Tonight’s victory sends a strong message that Colorado is a pro-choice state,’ Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Monica McCafferty told The Colorado Independent.”

Read more here (and weep).

Recently, Sanctus Real lead singer Matt Hammitt and his wife shared with the world the news that their unborn son had an underdeveloped heart. Matt has shared updates on Bowen since then via twitter, as well as on radio stations like K-LOVE. A listener heard Matt’s story, and called in with one of his own.

The caller shared how he and his wife were expecting, just like the Hammitts, and received word that there was a problem with their unborn son’s heart. The doctor told them that if the baby survives to term, that he wouldn’t live long after birth, and advised that the couple abort their baby. They refused, and seventeen years and a few surgeries later, their boy is alive and well, having recently received a transplant of a healthy heart.

Obviously, not every story has such a happy ending. Sometimes, the doctor is right and the baby dies, but as long as there’s hope, we have no right to end that child’s life preemptively. Every life is precious, and every life deserves a chance.

A U.S. district court issued a preliminary injunction on Monday stopping federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, in a slap to the Obama administration’s new guidelines on the sensitive issue.

Read more here.

New York Times Magazine has a new piece that every pro-life person ought to read. Called ‘The New Abortion Providers‘, the piece shows has the medical community has silently trained a new general of doctors to provide abortions outside the context of abortion clinics, as part of their regular medical practices.

Below are pictures of two doctors, “Dr. Rachael Phelps (left), an alumna of the Family Planning Fellowship. Dr. Emily Godfrey (right), whose specialty is family medicine, with a patient undergoing a routine checkup.” Hardly the monstrous-looking depictions of abortion-providers we heard of in the 80s and 90s.

While the pro-life movement celebrates the closing of abortion clinics–and we should–the pro-choice movement, says the NY Times piece, feels just fine about the trend.

It’s a must read piece to understand the new landscape of the pro-life struggle in America. And it makes me all the more thankful for pro-life doctors who stay true to the pledge to “do no harm.”

Beginning to think about whom you’ll vote for in Oklahoma’s primary on July 27?

Check out Oklahomans for Life’s pro-life questionnaire, to see how the candidates answered the number one policy topic.

From Oklahomans for Life’s email blast:

Urgent Need for Help:
Abortion-Reporting Bill Vetoed by Governor,
Please Ask Legislators to Override Veto

Governor Brad Henry today vetoed HB 3284, which provides for reporting of abortions and abortion complications to the Health Department.

Please send an email immediately which will reach pro-life Representatives and Senators, asking them to override the veto.

Your message to prolifelegislators@okforlife.org will reach members of the House and Senate who have consistently voted pro-life this session. Please thank them for their pro-life support and urge them to override the veto.

An appropriate message would be: Thank you for your pro-life support this session. Please override the veto of the Abortion Reporting bill.

With countless unborn children being killed across Oklahoma on a daily basis, requiring the abortion industry to report what they’re doing is a very small thing to ask.

One email to prolifelegislators@okforlife.org will reach the pro-life legislators who can override this pro-abortion veto. Please urge them to override the veto.

Thank you for being the voice of the voiceless unborn child.

Tony Lauinger
State Chairman

Christian Evangelical scholar and author Dr. Albert Mohler’s answer to this question might surprise you.

The piece linked to above was re-posted to his website on this, the 50th anniversary of “the Pill.”

Also check out this profound discussion between Dr. Mohler and author Randy Alcorn, “who agree that the Pill’s effects can be seen in a culture now far more relaxed in its approach to sex.” The two gentlemen “challenge the listening audience to ensure their thinking on this and every other technological advance is subjected to the Word of God.”

According to the Telegraph, conservative leader “David Cameron has pledged to review Britain’s abortion laws and stop assisted suicide in moves designed to place religious issues at the forefront of the Conservative election campaign.”

“The Conservative leader said that he would personally favour reducing the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20 or 22 weeks.”

Read the rest of the story here. While it’s not the ideal solution, Britain certainly seems to be getting closer to the ultimate goal than we in the United States.

Hat tip: JR

According to The Economist: “Killed, aborted or neglected, at least 100m girls have disappeared—and the number is rising.”

Blogging about the story, Southern Baptist’s Dr. Al Mohler states, “In other words, even as the spread of ultrasound technology has greatly aided the pro-life movement by making the humanity of the unborn baby visible and undeniable, among those determined to give birth only to baby boys, in millions of cases the same technology has meant a death warrant for a baby girl in the womb.”

Read the rest here.

According to this new analysis from the Southern Baptist’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the President’s health care plan advances abortion, in that:

• funding goes to Planned Parenthood;
• subsidies go toward insurance plans that cover elective abortions; and
• there is no language in the bill that speaks to barring federal funding of elective abortions.

This even after the Stupak amendment had passed and made clear the will of Congress. This is an absolute outrage!

“The uproar over Tim Tebow’s Super Bowl ad with his mother, who is expected to talk about how she ignored medical advice to have an abortion when she had complications during her pregnancy, shows the underlying hypocrisy in the so-called abortion ‘debate’: There can be no debate, no conversation at all.

“A simple ad with the theme ‘Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life’ has now been deemed by the National Organization for Women ‘extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.’” Read the rest here.

So let’s see: GoDaddy’s SuperBowl ads each year don’t create a reaction from radical feminists, but the pro-life Tim Tebow ad is a bother. Can’t remember who first pointed out to me this contradiction, but it’s true.

Hat tip: JR

Byron White was the senior dissenting justice in Roe v. Wade

As you may be aware, today marks the thirty-seventh anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the “landmark case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion.” It remains “one of the most controversial and politically significant cases in U.S. Supreme Court history.”

I have long maintained that the solutions to this moral outrage created by men in black robes must include legislative and cultural reform.

Whereas a good deal of damage can be done through politics, great men like William Wilberforce understood that to overcome evil with good, more than laws must be changed (though America’s liberal abortion laws must be changed indeed).

To that end, I present actions you can do as an individual to ACT pro-life, not just identify yourself as pro-life (items quoted from “52 Simple Things You can Do to Be Pro-Life,” by Anne Pierson):

[ ] wear the “feet pin,” the universal symbol for life

[ ] march in a parade for life

[ ] babysit for a single mother

[ ] write a letter to the editor

[ ] give financially to crisis pregnancy centers

[ ] volunteer your time for a crisis pregnancy center

[ ] hold a baby shower for a crisis pregnancy center; and

[ ] most importantly pray for an end to abortion (surgical and chemical) in America and abroad.

May the Lord God give us help and mercy.

Jennifer Lopez was recently asked about artificial insemination. The actress/singer said she preferred the natural process for pregnancy because she believes it demonstrates her faith and submission to God as the One who is responsible for bearing children.

“I … believe in God and I have a lot of faith in that, so I just felt like you don’t mess with things like that,” said Lopez, who conceived her twins Emme and Max through natural methods in 2008. “And I guess deep down I really felt like either this is not going to happen for me or it is. You know what I mean? And if it is, it will. And if it’s not, it’s not going to.” 

Though this is an issue for couples to consider when having children, it is appreciated that Lopez recognizes who is the Author and Creator of life and the Blessed Controller of all things.

National religious leaders release historic declaration of conscience

The Manhattan Declaration was released on Nov. 20, 2009, and was signed by 152 prominent religious leaders of our time. The document gives a very clear message to Christians on three fundamental truths that have been challenged in today’s society.

These truths are the sanctity of life, the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife, and the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Those of you who visit the Pilgrim’s Progress site know all three of these truths are valued by the editors, and we do our best to preserve them by reporting and offering commentary on relevant issues to life, marriage and religious liberty.

After reading through the Manhattan Declaration, I have decided to feature some of the passages I found insightful. I plan to do this in segments with this blog entry focusing on passages from the Preamble and sections of the Declaration that uphold Life:

Read the rest of this entry »

Happy Thanksgiving to, in our opinion, the brightest group of blog readers on the World Wide Web! May the Lord bless you and yours.

You likely heard about  the election results in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York. Here is a story from the New York Times about a ballot issue in Maine:

In a stinging setback for the national gay-rights movement, Maine voters narrowly decided to repeal the state’s new law allowing same-sex marriage. …

With the repeal of the same-sex marriage law, Maine became the 31st state to reject same-sex marriage at the ballot box. Five other states — Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire and Vermont — have legalized same-sex marriage, but only through court rulings and legislative action.

Read the rest here.

Me: I agree with Pastor Rick Warren that rampant divorce threatens the future of marriage more than the movement for so-called same-sex marriage. Be that as it may, it appears the general electorate in various times and places may still consider so-called same sex marriage a counterfeit version of marriage that could weaken the value of traditional marriage, also known as, well, marriage.

Abby Johnson said watching an abortion procedure for the first time made her change her view and led to her quitting her position as director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in southeast Texas. An article on FoxNews.com reports her decision.

“When I was working at Planned Parenthood I was extremely pro-choice, ” Johnson said. “But after seeing the internal workings of the procedure for the first time on an ultrasound monitor, I would say there was a definite conversion in my heart … a spiritual conversion.”

Johnson also revealed the clinic was stressing to perform more abortions because the need for more money. Johnson confessed that abortion clinics are a “very lucrative business.”

I wonder how many other abortion clinic directors would respond when viewing an abortion procedure?

On Wednesday, October 21, CNN broadcasted an interview between Oklahoma State Senator Todd Lamb (who is the Republican candidate for Lieutenant Governor) and “Jennifer Mondino, a lawyer for the Center for Reproductive Rights.”

The two discuss an Oklahoma law regarding abortion. Here is the transcript.

Of course I’m biased, but think Lamb did a great a job and came out on top. But don’t merely take my word for it. Read it for yourself.

“(LifeSiteNews.com) – A massive crowd of pro-life Spanish citizens captured international headlines Saturday after marching on the country’s capital to protest plans to loosen abortion restrictions in the country.

“Estimates for the numbers of those in attendance varied, with mainstream media such as CNN and the New York Times reporting simply “thousands” or ”tens of thousands.” However, the Christian Post reports that Madrid’s regional government estimated the numbers of attendees at around 1.2 million, and a spokesman for one of the pro-life organizers said 1.5 million people attended. The U.K.’s BBC and numerous other media outlets also put the crowd at over a million.  According to Agence France Press, police put the number at 250,000.

“Signs reading “For Life, Women and Motherhood,” and “Women Against Abortion” greeted Spanish Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero’s efforts to push through a law making abortion-on-demand legal up to 14 weeks’ gestation, and allowing girls as young as 16 years old to abort their unborn child without parental consent.  The measure is due for consideration in Parliament soon.

“The full text of the story is available here.”

HT: JR

I’m not sure what Irene Vilar will accomplish by publishing her book “Impossible Motherhood: Testimony of an Abortion Addict.”

The South Florida  Sun Sentinel describes Vilar in this article  “… a striking 40-year-old literary agent … from the age of 16 to 33, she could neither stop herself from conceiving, nor from terminating her pregnancies. Fifteen of them.”

Charmaine Yost, president of Americans United for Life said, “Her story is just so tragic. It really underscores everything we always say in the pro-life movement — that abortion is part of a very sad story for women.”

The article also quotes Robin Morgan, who wrote the book’s forward, “There is a perfectly human tendency to say we can’t afford ambiguity, we can’t afford nuance. I am afraid it comes from years of being pummeled by the extreme, anti-choice right. The truth is it’s a complicated issue.”

I believe Ms. Morgan’s perspective contributes to the complexity she states. I’m curious who she includes in the so-called “extreme, anti-choice right.”

From the Baptist Press:

Irene Vilar’s “abortion addiction,” as she describes it, resulted in 15 of the lethal procedures in 16 years.”

If Vilar is sensing hatred, Tom McClusky, vice president of Family Research Council Action, wrote on the organization’s blog (www.thecloakroomblog.com), “I doubt it is coming from anyone in the pro-life movement.”

After reading the ABCnews.com article, McClusky wrote, “I am sure many would have the same reaction as me, one of pity for this poor woman who has had a troubled life, compounded by her multiple abortions.”

Amen. We do aim to be compassionate conservatives, after all. Read the rest here.

The media silence has been deafening in the wake of the recent murder of a pro-life activist from Michigan. Here is the Associated Press story that has received almost no coverage that took some digging to find:

OWOSSO, Mich. (AP) — A man fatally shot an anti-abortion activist near a Michigan high school Friday, drove to a gravel pit and shot its owner to death and planned to kill a third man, but was arrested before he could act, a prosecutor said.

Harlan James Drake, 33, was charged Friday with first-degree murder in the deaths of James Pouillon, 63, and Mike Fuoss, 61, said Shiawassee County Prosecutor Randy Colbry.

“The defendant had ill will toward these three individuals — not for the same reason necessarily, but had a grudge,” Colbry said.

Before classes were to begin Friday, Pouillon was protesting across the street from Owosso High School about 70 miles northwest of Detroit. Drake then drove by the school and shot Pouillon several times in front of horrified students and parents, officials said.

Owosso Police Chief Michael Compeau said he also believed Pouillon was targeted.

Here is more coverage on The Washington Times: http://washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2009/sep/11/national-right-life-committee-withholds-attack-unl/

Tell me: had you heard about this until now?

“To the vast majority of Americans, the purpose of health care is to protect, improve and lengthen life. Life is the primary goal; issues of health care financing are secondary.”

James Pinkerton offers this provoking statement in his column “Why Obamacare Will Fail and the Media Will Fail to Notice Its Flaws.” He also points out an alarming perspective given by the Washington Post as the paper analyzes President Obama’s health care plan slipping in approval ratings because the president’s “opponents seized control of the discussion, elevating side issues such as abortion and end-of-life counseling.”

Sanctity of Life should always be valued. Affordable health care is a reasonable pursuit, but not at any cost. Lowering the level of care so that “everyone” can be covered should not be the primary goal.

To my sheer disappointment, information about Rick Pitino’s adulterous affair in 2003 was revealed this week. The University of Louisville basketball coach followed a very tragic trail to cover up his infidelity including paying $3,000 for an abortion.

Pitino spoke in a news conference about how he apologizes every day to his family for his failure. What is unfortunate is he hasn’t admitted his lethal mistake regarding his unborn child.

Pro-life student organization Cardinals for Life is calling for the University of Louisville to dismiss Pitino immediately.  The organization challenges the university if action is not taken, UL is condoning the abortion of Pitino’s child.

Here is my suggestion. Pitino should make a confession that he was wrong to pay for that abortion and publicly join the pro-life ranks. He made a horrible, immoral decision, but he can be forgiven.

Whether or not he should be dismissed is up to the university, but as a successful basketball coach who holds great influence on many, even beyond the basketball community, Pitino needs to take a stand and tell the world abortion is wrong.

A greater, more positive outcome would result, the Sanctity of Life would be emphasized, and healing would begin.

“A person’s a person, no matter how small.”

-Dr. Seuss, Horton Hears a Who!

“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”

–Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (1973)

President Obama has oft discussed finding common ground on the pro-life issue. His remarks at Notre Dame, in fact, hinged on that. Taking him at his word, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission explores whether common ground can be found on the life issue and comes up with some satisfying answers, championed largely by Democrats for Life of whom I largely approve:

Can pro-life and pro-choice people find agreement on how to reduce the number of abortions in a way that honors the sanctity of all human life? The answer lies in the Pregnant Women Support Act. The bill addresses the sad reality of widespread abortion by encouraging pregnant women and girls to bring their babies to term. It was crafted with a specific goal in mind: reducing the number of abortions by 95 percent in 10 years.

The Pregnant Women Support Act would make grants available to adoption centers and establish a toll-free telephone number to direct women to organizations that provide support during pregnancy, including information on adoption centers. It would also make adoption information available to women whose babies are prenatally diagnosed with conditions such as Down syndrome. Additionally, it would increase and make permanent the adoption tax credit. Women and girls who intend to keep their babies would be helped in many similar ways, such as assisting pregnant students with child care through colleges and universities.

Read more here about this attempt to make immediate progress for life.

“To argue for abortion on demand from the hard cases of rape and incest is like trying to argue for the elimination of traffic laws from the fact that one might have to violate some of them in rare instances, such as when one’s spouse or child needs to be rushed to the hospital.”

-Dr. Francis J. Beckwith

From WORLD magazine:

Planned Parenthood researchers report in the New England Journal of Medicine that a revised method of conducting drug-induced abortions has allegedly reduced the risk of serious complications by 93 percent. Previously Planned Parenthood diverged from the FDA’s recommended guidelines for RU-486 by administering an oral dose of mifepristone followed by a vaginal dose of misoprostol. But the 2005 deaths of four American women and one Canadian woman from bacterial infections spurred Planned Parenthood to conform to FDA standards and instead have women dissolve the misoprostol pill in their mouths, followed by a precautionary course of antibiotics.

As a result, Planned Parenthood said the number of serious infections resulting from drug-induced abortions has declined to one-16th of the original rate. Experts say the latest research will likely spark a future increase in chemical abortions, although Family Research Council spokesman Chris Gacek said, “It’s hard to know whether this increases the (total) number of abortions.” Last year, approximately a quarter of all U.S. abortions were performed with drugs rather than surgery.

Me: As we celebrate the closing of abortion clinics and the sunset of surgical abortions, let us stay aware that the Brave New World of abortion in a bottle is only dawning.

“The truest lengthening of life is to live while we live, wasting no time but using every hour for the highest ends. So be it this day.”

• Charles Spurgeon, Faith’s Checkbook entry for June 22.

“I still think, although I was much too optimistic in the early days, that the possibility of stopping a pregnancy very early is significant. The morning-after pill will become more accessible and easier to take. So I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they’re fighting a losing battle. Time is on the side of change.”

-Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in a recent interview with the New York Times

Me: The so-called morning-after pill can likely act as an abortifacient and threatens the life of a conceptus. So, contrary to her thought, it can end a life and end a pregnancy after it begins. Justice Ginsburg is right, however, that the next wave of abortions won’t be done in a clinic but in the privacy of people’s home through prescription and over-the-counter drugs. May God help us.

“From the Brody File today — 19 pro-life Democrats have sent a letter to Nancy Pelosi saying they will not support a public option if the government covers abortion or abortion-related services,” reports WORLD magazine.

To Speaker Pelosi they wrote:

“We believe in a culture that supports and respects the right to life and is dedicated to the protection and preservation of families.  Therefore, we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan.  We believe that a government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan, should not be used to fund abortion.”

Christianity Today has a must-read article on public policy and abortion in America. It claims, “The current proposals to lower the abortion rate will only make things worse.”

The piece goes to analyze some of Obama’s words and actions pertaining to abortion, which in this case are not the same.

The article, part of a complete series on the pro-life cause, even examines the next wave of abortion on demand: chemical abortions under other names, like “emergency contraceptives.”

Bill Shuler gives 10 provoking points that I hope encourage more people to value the sanctity of life. As he says, “There is no higher standard that a nation can adopt than to value and to protect life.”

“America may have a president and Congress that support abortion rights, but a new Gallup poll suggests that for the first time such a stance is not the majority view.”

Gallup said on Friday that a new poll, conducted May 7 to 10, found “51 percent of Americans calling themselves ‘pro-life’ on the issue of abortion and 42 percent ‘pro-choice.’ This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995.”

“The new results, obtained from Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs survey, represent a significant shift from a year ago, when 50 percent were pro-choice and 44 percent pro-life. Prior to now, the highest percentage identifying as pro-life was 46 percent, in both August 2001 and May 2002.”

I submitted this to The Oklahoman, which seems to have passed on it, so here it is
The Oklahoman published my thoughts on The Flaming Lips Flap:

I learned something in the last couple of weeks. I learned that one Oklahoma band likes the Communist party. I also learned that some Oklahomans like bands that like the Communist party, as well as that the State House does not. Most importantly, I learned that when the State House “snubs” a band that likes the Communist party, we have a governor that will swoop in and save them. Sadly, that same governor is sympathetic to those who like to destroy human life in the name of economic growth. Maybe if we wrap those embryos in the Hammer and Sickle our fine governor could be bothered to protect them.

“The U.S. Senate easily confirmed Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of Health and Human Services April 28 despite controversy over her record on abortion and the political contributions she has received from the country’s most notorious abortion doctor.” Read some commentary from Richard Land here.

This is by far Obama’s most controversial, partisan, pro-choice pick in my book. I could easily look the other way on almost all of the others, but this is inexcusable. And so is Sam Brownback‘s voting to approve her.

“A Georgia Senate committee has approved legislation that would limit the use of in vitro fertilization and embryo research. With concerns that the use of the medical technology is going overboard, pro-life groups are promoting the bill, the Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos Act.”

Read the rest here.

courtesy of kathyireland.com

As a former subscriber to Sports Illustrated, I am very familiar with Kathy Ireland. Now that I am older and wiser, I have a greater appreciation for the former swimsuit model.

“My entire life I was pro-choice — who was I to tell another woman what she could or couldn’t do with her body?” said Ireland while promoting her book Real Solutions for Busy Mom: Your Guide to Success and Sanity. “But when I was 18, I became a Christian, and I dove into the medical books. I dove into science. Read the rest of this entry »

I think I speak for all the Pilgrim’s Progress bloggers. We love living in Oklahoma.

There are many reasons why we love our state, but one of the significant reasons is Oklahoma has great people. We even have some of these great people as elected officials, which not only says a lot for them but also for those who vote for them.

I love the language used in the Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act, which is close to being passed in the Oklahoma State Senate. Rep. Mike Thompson and Sen. Glenn Coffee are heroes for the unborn and determined warriors for the Sanctity of Life.

Now I am curious how the governor will respond when this bill reaches his desk.

This comes from National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru:

The other day when I turned on the tv, the channel was set, as it often is, to Noggin, the toddler network. There was a cartoon image of our president with an announcer saying something like, “Noggin congratulates President Obama. And now here are some things that he likes.” I flipped the channel before finding out whether abortion and taxes made the list.

Priests for Life have a short, yet pretty compelling video up on their site. Before watching it, though, you should be warned that some may considered it a bit gruesome.

Yesterday, President Obama rescinded President Bush’s ban on federal funding for expanded embryonic stem cell research. Adam Keiper, in a post on The Corner, made some really interesting points regarding the policy shift. One of the most interesting parts of the analysis was this question that Keiper asks of the President:

What counts as a purely “scientific decision”? What issues can we possibly decide on scientific grounds alone — that is, without also inquiring after the kinds of important ethical, political, and economic concerns that President Obama denigrates as mere “ideology”? On what future issues will the president claim that science dictates a policy and trumps all other concerns?

If we’re not going to let ideology play a role in determining what happens in the name of science, why not allow unrestrained animal — or even human — testing? Is vivisection on the table then (no pun intended)? History has clearly shown that restraints must be put in place, or some very cruel, and, yes, evil people will push that laissez faire attitude as far as they can. If Obama envisions a scientific world untethered by any sort of ideology, whence comes morality in some respects, then he’s opening a Pandora’s Box that we will rue for decades.

Stem cells can cure a lot of things, just not the stem cells the President is pushing. Given the success of adult stem cells and the resounding lack of success of embryonic stem cells, the President’s decision is anything but non-ideological. It’s misguided, deluded, and infanticidal.

If you haven’t heard by now, an Oklahoma City motorist made the news because a police officer pulled him over for featuring an “Abort Obama Not the Unborn” sign on his car.

The reason for such action was due to the motorist possibly being a “threat against President Obama.” Dear friends, don’t you find this conclusion quite fascinating?

Someone says they want to “Abort Obama,” and that is a terrible thing. However, someone wants to abort an unborn child, and that is acceptable?

The police officer’s action provokes so many alarming responses. Of course, the issue of first amendment rights is one of the cards one would pull immediately. Many who tolerated the negative Bush signs for so long could voice their disgust as well.

For me, the greater concern is the overemphasis given to the first part of the phrase of the confiscated sign over the latter. Instead of a negative focus on our current president, let us use our energies to focus on giving life to the unborn.

North Dakota state representatives made a strong move yesterday. They drew a proverbial line in the sand that boldly states when life begins – which is rightly declared at conception.

Rep. Dan Ruby is a hero for the unborn. He is to be commended for sponsoring a bill that declares “any organism with the genome of homo sapiens is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.”

Oklahoma representatives also are mentioned in the linked article. Rep. Dan Sullivan authored a bill that prevents doctors from performing abortions strictly on the grounds of gender of the unborn child.

Many would say this is mostly a useless bill because such reason for abortion has never been recorded. However, I believe it provokes public thought and can be influential in encouraging future parents to not consider abortion.

It’s naive to say that by being nice to each other we can avoid issues of sin. — Bishop Martyn Minns of the Anglican Church of North America

Things that go on in public schools never cease to amaze me. In a day where the need for more parental involvment in the education and lives of children is the school’s battle cry, one school in Nevada City is underfire for stepping way over the line. What’s all the fuss about? Parents in the school district are up in arms over the 12 year old girl who was forced by the school’s counselor, Steve Davis, to take a pregnancy test.

The counselor cited various rumors at the school that Celine Randall was pregnant. He took it upon himself to pull her from class, confront her about the rumors, and then forced her to take a pregnancy test. The biggest shock of all is that Randall’s parents were never contacted. They knew nothing of the rumors, and more importantly they knew nothing of the pregnancy test their twelve year old daughter was forced to take. A lawsuit was filed by the girl’s parents in late October 2008. You can read more about the story here: http://www.theunion.com/article/20090211/NEWS/902109975/1053/rss

I experienced my first Rose Day at the Oklahoma State Capitol yesterday. It was a great thrill to participate in this significant event.

I witnessed many people throughout the floors of the building, scampering to find their respective senators and house representatives. There was quite an array of families, senior citizens and school groups in attendance. I appreciated being among the many of my state who made a concerted effort in telling our government officials that Sanctity of Life is a valuable and sacred thing.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Oklahomans have an opportunity to express their belief in the sanctity of human life to their legislators during the 18th Annual Rose Day February 4 at the State Capitol. (Rose distribution at 10:30 a.m. and rally begins at 11:45 a.m.)”

The Capitol never has such a pleasing aroma as today. I hope to see many of you there.

Interesting article on National Review Online today. It begins:

“For the first time since Jimmy Carter ran for the White House in 1976, large numbers of evangelical and Catholic voters pulled the Democratic lever in a presidential election. Last week, Pres. Barack Obama decided to reverse a policy that prohibits U.S. tax dollars from funding abortion providers overseas.”

“How to square the two? Some younger Christians probably saw it coming: Obama’s campaign emphasized social-justice issues like overcoming racism, combating poverty, and tackling global issues like AIDS, and for them, this agenda trumped abortion. For others, however, the new policy is a betrayal: While courting the evangelical and Catholic vote on the campaign trail, Obama also promised to reduce the number of abortions.”

Though I chose to start out neutral and/or favorable to him, this one major policy switch (and the disloyalty to his campaign rhetoric it represents) is why I cannot in good conscience approve of the job Obama is doing. Read more of the piece here.

Last year, I wrote a post about the priority of environmentalism from a Christian perspective (March 14). After reading Father Jonathan’s article “Limiting Couples to Just Two Kids is Not the Way to Save the Earth,” I have witnessed one of my greatest fears regarding the global warming issue.

Promoting abortion for the ridiculous notion that it would save the Earth is an absolute low. Father Jonathan’s article even presents Jonathon Porritt’s concept of making sure teenage mothers abort their children for the sake of the environment.

Please friends, let us pray this does not become the norm.

Thanks to Ross Douthat for this link:

The number one reason why Barak Obama disappoints me in his taking the Office of President of the United States is his future decisions to diminish the progress done on pro-life issues.

As reported, President Obama will lift the ban on funding for groups providing abortions overseas. This comes as no surprise, but it is still a sad moment.

Dear friends, please pray that there could still be hope for abortion practices to be lessened in spite of the President’s decisions.

The indispensable Christian journal, First Things, has an interesting piece on pro-life politics. It begins:

It happens every four years—maybe every two years: Anytime there’s an election in this country, the pundits and political experts take to their soapboxes and proclaim the death of pro-life politics. The unwashed yokels in Utah, Alabama, South Dakota, Oklahoma: They’re an embarrassment, you see, and the sooner we stop paying attention to them, the sooner the nation’s politics will regain its equilibrium.

Are pro-life politics yesterday’s news? Read the rest here.

In a not quite accurately titled article (I would expect the top pro-abortion moment to be Obama’s election ; ), American Life League has an interesting, if not depressing, run down of some the more appalling quotes from pro-abortion advocates in 2008. You can see the whole list here, but I’d like to point one out in particular:

Comedian Doug Stanhope

These are not empty words. I, Doug Stanhope, am offering you, Bristol Palin, the sum of $25,000 so that you can abort your child and move out of that draconian home. I have also set up a PayPal link so that others around the world can help increase this amount to ease the burden of starting out on your own at such an early age.

While it’s a pretty despicable comment, what I find interesting is how he phrased things: “..abort your unborn child…” In making the statement, he seems to be implicitly accepting the pro-life stance that the unborn is indeed a human child, but still offers to pay to kill it. Pretty chilling.

“When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”

Ted Kennedy
August 3, 1971

(hat tip: BTD)

The name of the movie is The Unborn.  It is a horror film starring Gary Oldham who plays a “spiritual advisor to a young girl who is tormented by the soul of her unborn twin brother.”

Did you catch that?

Read the rest of this entry »

Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.

Proverbs 31:8 (NIV)

The indispensable Christian journal, Touchstone, has an interesting new piece entitled “Morality Ploys,” underscoring the pro-life setbacks in 2008. It begins:

If 2008 is remembered as the year of the “bailout,” when the federal government spent billions to rescue the nation’s financial system, it should also be recalled for another kind of bailout—Christians with impeccably pro-life records who suddenly abandoned what they declared to be a sinking ship.

Read the rest here, if you can take it.

Update: Touchstone mag just really lost me. They, in the same issue as the piece above, published a column that lauded the Harry Potter books. Even worse, it praised the phenomenon they’ve created. I probably still need to blog about my antipathy for those works, but suffice it to say, I think everyone should stick with the Chronicles of Narnia.

According to the Baptist Press, U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) sponsored a bill, which was subsequently signed into law by President Bush, that seeks to protect unborn babies who have been diagnosed with down syndrome or other conditions.

“The Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act requires parents who receive a diagnosis of Down syndrome or another disability to be provided the latest information regarding the condition and be informed of support services available. The law also establishes a registry of families willing to adopt children with special needs.”

Read more here.

Sarah Palin is taking some heat for doing a press interview in front of some turkeys being bled out on a turkey farm.  It seems some in the media find that offensive.  One quick-witted NRO reader had this to say,

She should tell the media that she apologizes and she’ll do her next interview inside an abortion clinic.

Zing!

In a key vote that our blog has been following closely, “South Dakota voters once again rejected a proposed law that would have banned most abortions.” Read the rest here.

Also, “Voters [in Washington] approved Initiative 1000, an assisted suicide measure that would make Washington the second state to allow doctors to prescribe lethal doses of medication for terminally ill patients seeking to hasten their deaths.” If you can take it, read more here.

Lastly, Colorado rejected a pro-life “persohood amendment.” Read about it here.

Happy Election Day, to the brightest readership on the Web.

OK, I’ll admit this is trite to say, but… we implore you to vote today. I’d hasten to remind you not only to vote, but vote pro-life.

May God help us.

A new campaign, “Just One Judge,” is calling on pro-lifers to vote that way next week. View the website here, which argues:

“The next President and U.S. Senate will appoint and confirm the one Justice who will be the deciding vote on whether to overturn Roe v. Wade… Today’s U.S. Supreme Court is just ONE appointment away from determining critical matters of life. Your vote is your choice in who the next Supreme Court Justice will be.”

Looks like you can sign a pledge and join others, including Norma McCorvey (i.e. “Jane Roe” herself).

Randy Alcorn, founder of Eternal Perspective Ministries, has an insightful blog post on Barack Obama’s pro-choice stance. He admits up front, “My blog on Barack Obama’s pro-abortion stance, and the fact that various evangelical Christians are supporting and campaigning for him, has been getting lots of comments, some of them heated.” You can read the rest here, and scroll to the end which has video clips of Obama speaking at a Planned Parenthood event.

If you are weary of abortion being a political litmus test, then I would encourage you to wrestle with this new piece from Touchstone magazine. Here is an excerpt:

“There has been a steady campaign by some Christians who regard themselves as orthodox and conservative to persuade the rank and file of their Christian brothers and sisters to rethink their predictable support for political candidates who are pro-life. They bring other issues to the fore—war, torture, taxes, education, health care, and poverty—in an attempt to undermine the claim that conscientious Christians must always support pro-life candidates. They imply that such ‘single-issue’ pro-life voting is unsophisticated, often in lockstep with the mostly uneducated ‘religious right,’ and perhaps not even very moral in the long view.”

Two years after a failed attempt to protect the lives of pre-born babies in South Dakota, pro-life advocates in the state are trying again, this time fixing some of the wording that caused the bill to fail the first time.  As can be expected, pro-abortion advocates are vowing a fight.  Those on both sides of the issue are watching this measure closely, as its passage will likely send the question to the Supreme Court.  If Obama wins, though, the chances that it would be upheld are slim as Obama believes that “Roe was decided correctly.”  Get the full story here, and pray.

Thursday morning, I will participate in a round-table event to discuss pro-life issues in Oklahoma. The featured guest will be Americans United for Life’s Vice President Daniel McConchie. As you may recall, AUL is the oldest, and in my opinion, perhaps most effective, pro-life law and policy organization in the country.

One of the featured topics will be the future of stem cell research. Later in the day, Mr. McConchie is scheduled to testify before the Oklahoma House of Representatives Health Subcommittee on Thursday, October 16 at 2:30 pm. Mr. McConchie will be addressing the moral and ethical issues surrounding stem cell research.

As we have blogged about before, adult-stem cell research is an exciting field, one that does not pose the moral problems of embryonic stem cell research. Read the rest of this entry »

Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, has the story.

I know I keep beating this Obama-and-abortion drum, but I think this is an extremely important issue to consider as November approaches. Andrew McCarthy, National Review’s legal-affairs editor, has a very sobering look at Obama’s abortion radicalism in an articled titled “Why Obama Really Voted For Infanticide.” Here’s a sampling:

• There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was “movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”

• No. In Obama’s hardball, hard-Left world, these least become “that fetus, or child — however you want to describe it.”

  Most of us, of course, opt for “child,” particularly when the “it” is born and living and breathing and in need of our help. Particularly when the “it” is clinging not to guns or religion but to life.

• When it got down to brass tacks, Barack Obama argued that protecting abortion doctors from legal liability was more important than protecting living infants from death.

Read the whole article for yourself. It’s quite a chilling and damning expose, I think, of the Senator’s position. If there’s ever an issue over which to be a one issue voter, this is it.

In discussing an article written By Jonathan Martin, “Boston Kathy” made this comment:

The Obama camp is extremist on the issue of abortion. They miss the point that while many are Pro-Choice…no one is Pro-Abortion. That they would try to politicize and victim of rape is disgusting.

The first half is correct: the Obama camp is extremist (and even that word is too kind) on the abortion issue. The second half is wrong, though. There are lots of people who are not pro-choice, but who are, rather, pro-abortion. I discussed this in an earlier post, for example (A New Media Low: Targeting Trig). Perhaps the biggest pro-abortion group (in every sense of the word), is Planned Parenthood, sarcasticly but aptly refered to as Planned Barrenhood. Planned Parenthood, ostensibly “the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care advocate and provider,” is really more about Profit than Parenthood, as the former is usually the only thing that comes of the organization. Don’t believe me? Look here, here, here here and here, and that’s just for starters.

Note the dollar figures. In 2007, Planned Parenthood earned over $1 billion in revenues. That’s a “b.” In 2006, they recorded a profit of $112 million, with an astounding $336 million of that coming from tax payer funds.  That’s our money they’re using to turn a profit. Some people, like the authors mentioned above, are pro-abortion in at least some cases because the “should-be” aborted would be a burden.  Others, like Planned Parenthood, are pro-abortion because they’re making a killing.  In every sense of the word.

As a technology junky, Google has long fascinated me.  When they burst on the scene, they had amazing technology and spunk, and that facet continues today.  One of the things that has set them apart corporately is their motto “Do no evil” (see item #6).  Unfortunately for pro-lifers, that philosophy is distorted or ignored to exclude us when it comes to advertising.  While denying the chance to buy targeted advertising to pro-life groups, Google has made a regular practice of selling ads to pro-abortion groups.  Thanks to the yeoman’s effort by the Christian Institute, a cross-denominational pressure group, Google has had to reverse its discriminatory policy and allow the pro-life ads.  You can read more about it here.

As you’ve likely heard by now, John McCain has chosen a running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.  You’ve also likely heard that she has several children, the youngest of which, Trig Palin, has Down’s Syndrome.  Have you heard, though, the new depths to which the main stream media (MSM) have gone to tear down Gov. Palin?  James Taranto has, and he’s not happy:

Fowler uses Palin’s motherhood to disparage her accomplishments, an obvious betrayal of the principle of women’s equality. And although proponents of permissive abortion laws nearly always claim to support not abortion but “a woman’s right to choose,” here we have three of them rebuking Palin for choosing not to abort her baby.

So a woman has the right to choose, as long as she chooses to abort her baby.  Their true colors finally shine.

This quote is from Al Mohler’s blog:

Speaking Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Senator Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee for Vice President, made headlines by stating that he accepts “as a matter of faith” that human life begins at conception, but he would not impose that view on others as a matter of law. Sen. Biden’s statement is similar in form to those offered by other Catholic politicians like former New York Governor Mario Cuomo.

Biden’s remark, which made Mohler think of Cuomo, made me think of another New York politician who thinks likewise. During his bid for President, Rudy Giuliani explained his pro-choice stance to include that he “hated abortion.”

This line of thinking is what the pro-life debaters, such as Stand to Reason’s Gregory Koukl calls, “personally opposed to abortion.” Koukl reminds pro-life spokesmen to follow up these kinds of statements with, “Why are you personally opposed?” Or, “Why do you hate abortion?” Their answer almost invariably is, “Because it takes a life.”

By taking them to the logical end of their position, I have even known some to abandon the “personally opposed” position for the solid ground of “personally opposed and publicly opposed.”

The pro-life movement has long needed an eloquent spokeswoman on the national stage. In Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, we appear to have been given that gift.

For this reason and more, we wholeheartedly endorse this historic selection by Sen. John McCain.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research has long been one of my hot button issues. Despite all the promises its supporters that the cures are worth the ethical implications, they’ve never been able to produce any credible evidence that this approach is the best way to go. In fact, research has shown that non-embryonic stem cell sources actually deliver on the promise of their child-destroying variant, having delivered over 70+ cures currently in testing, with more being discovered all the time. This dilemma-free source for stem cells works by “reprogramming” somatic, or body, cells (e.g., adult skin cells) to act like embryonic stem cells. As amazing (and effective) as the discovery of the technique was, researchers may have found a way to achieve the same goals without even requiring stem cells at all!

A team at Harvard has succeeded in directly reprogramming one type of adult cell into another, without even the need for the intermediary step of reprogramming to a pseudo-embryonic state and only then differentiating to a new developed cell type. In other words, not only do they not need embryos, they don’t even need stem cells at all; they can just turn one type of cell into another directly. What’s more, they’ve done this inside a living animal (a mouse), and not just in a laboratory dish.

Yuval Levin has more on this amazing discovery.  Could this signal the end of embryo-destroying research and the accompanying, non-sensical cry for government funding?  We can only hope.

Friends, there are two upcoming opportunities in central Oklahoma to take a stand for life.

(1) A Walk for Life in Norman, Oklahoma, on Saturday, September 27. You may find information about this walk, which benefits the crisis pregnancy center in Norman, by clicking here. Or you could always sponsor yours truly, Brian Hobbs, who will be walking for life, by clicking here.

(2) 40 Days for Life… is a peaceful prayer vigil held in the Oklahoma City area, praying for an end to abortion. Check out this national effort, which has been endorsed by heavyweights like Fr. Frank Pavone, here.

Thanks for taking a stand for life.

Have we posted enough commentary about Rick Warren’s Faith Forum?

I am thinking more and more that Pastor Warren’s table talk is the pivotal point of this presidential campaign. I read a great op-ed from the Wall Street Journal outlining some of the heavy questions featured in Warren’s oral quiz.

Also, regarding the Democrats featuring “faith” at their convention this year, Pew Forum’s Michael Cromarty says it does not have an effect on Evangelicals due to the fact that Evangelicals are “interested in policy not just language.” Obama’s usage of “church speak” will not hold as much clout until he changes his position on non-negotiable issues such as abortion.

My friend Brian Hobbs has done an excellent job of promoting Rick Warren’s recent forum with the two presidential candidates. Warren was phenomenal with his line of questioning.

Personally, I expected the typical shallow dialogue that was featured in the primary debates. Warren’s questions were well-phrased with no vague political slant.

The question of the night was “At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?” Of course, McCain was spot on with his answer, “At the moment of conception.”

Obama, however, failed miserably with his answer: “I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that quesiton with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”

I watched Warren in a follow-up interview on Fox News’ Hannity and Colmes. The man gained my confidence again after his exchange with liberal commentator Alan Colmes:

Colmes: And “above my pay grade,” he’s coming under fire for that as if to say — I interpreted — to me, you know, that’s really between a person and God, that’s really higher than any of us.

Warren: Yeah. Well, you know what? He is right in the fact that it isn’t his decision, it’s God’s decision. If you believe Psalm 139 where — as a pastor I do — it says I formed you in your mother’s womb and I planned all your days before you were born, so obviously to me, that was — an answer that I wasn’t comfortable with, but I thought that he shared his view and people know where he stands.

Excellent Pastor Warren! May all future debate moderators follow your lead!

In this article, new Pilgrim’s Progress contributor Derek McCarver, Pharm D., discusses the “so-called emergency contraceptive.”  Read on for a pharmacists perspective on this controversial drug. Read the rest of this entry »

One of my favorite conservatives from one of my favorite, though least well-known, think tanks has an important piece this week. Ken Connor (formerly of the Family Research Council) and his Center for a Just Society have distributed, “How to Produce Real Change.” It begins:

“Change! It’s the mantra of the political season.  But what kind of change—from what to what?”

Connor then pulls lessons from one of the greatest reformers of all time, William Wilberforce. Click here to read the piece. You’ll be very glad you did.

In 11th grade English, we had to write an essay on our favorite invention. At the time, I selected, if memory serves me correctly, the air conditioner. Even with the record heat we are seeing, I would like to change my vote to the Ultrasound machine. Not only have my wife and I personally enjoyed the benefits of this technology, it has given the pro-life cause an enormous boost.

Today’s edition of The Oklahoman has an interesting story on how getting Ultrasound photos is quite fashionable. There is a story, unfortunately, published right by it questioning the safety of recreational Ultrasound. Nevertheless, the trend is in our favor, and I stand by amending my (mediocre) high school essay.

National Review has an insightful piece about the struggle going on inside the United Methodist Denomination. Below are some excerpts from the piece, which centers around Hillary’s long-standing membership in the UMC:

This pervasive advocacy for legalized abortion is one of the reasons Hillary says with a smile, “I’m comfortable in this church.” But Hillary Clinton may begin to feel less comfortable. The UMC recently concluded its 2008 General Conference — Hillary has addressed the conference in the past — where it made some positive steps back from the abyss of the Culture of Death advanced by its most liberal members.

Among the steps taken was a statement encouraging the church to “assist the ministry of crisis pregnancy centers and pregnancy resource centers that compassionately help women find feasible alternatives to abortion.” The conference made some important changes in language, deleting a previous assertion that advocating legalized abortion was “in continuity with past Christian teaching,” and even adding a sentence informing Methodists that they are “bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother and unborn child.”

Read the rest here, and pay notice to the important positive role the Methodists in Africa are playing.

The Iowa Independent has published an open letter to Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. Barack Obama. The powerful piece, which has an Oklahoma connection, begins:

You recently spoke with Cameron Strang, publisher of Relevant magazine. During that interview, Strang asked if you could clarify your position on “third-trimester and partial-birth abortion,” and you replied:

“…I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.”

Your response leads me to believe that you’ve either never had a one-on-one discussion with a woman who has had a late-term abortion, or that you’ve been too uncomfortable to ask such a woman difficult questions concerning not only the procedure but what led her to make that choice. Because a president needs to be given as much first-hand knowledge as possible as he develops policy, I’d like to help remedy this deficiency.

Thirteen years ago I had a late term abortion.That’s the concise sentence I use when I don’t want to talk about what really happened.

Me: You may or may not want to read the rest of this gripping, heart-breaking story here. But I certainly hope the Senator reads it.

Earlier this week, I blogged about some good news in the pro-life cause, in the form of a Dallas, Texas, abortion clinic that closed. Then comes this bad news from Albert Mohler’s blog, which shows our opposition is clever, well-funded, and on-the-move.

It sometimes seems as though each time we see progress in one area, we see setbacks in another. Consider how some statistics show surgical abortions are on the decline in America, but chemical abortions are on the rise, due in part to the advent of the “morning-after pill,” Plan B, and the RU-486 drug.

But take heart, this is just one more reason to pray and work more fervently toward a culture of life.

I just received good news, my friends:

“In what pro-life advocates have described as nothing other than the miraculous work of God, a series of abortion clinics throughout Dallas have closed down after a prominent bishop began leading prayers for their closure 18 years ago.”

“Since Bishop Charles Grahmann of the Catholic Diocese of Dallas first began leading his monthly prayer vigils outside the doors of abortion clinics over a decade ago, seven of the 13 abortion clinics in Dallas have closed, including, most recently, the only late term abortion clinic that deprived life to babies over 3 months old.” Read more here.

This just goes to show that we Christians–Evangelicals and Catholics together–can accomplish great things, united in the Lord, to Whom we give the praise for this victory.

Over at National Review, Bill Bennett and Seth Leibsohn have published a list of their top ten concerns regarding the potential of an Obama presidency.  The list is pretty interesting, but I found it distressing a bit that life was listed at number 9, and then relatively briefly:

9. Barack Obama is to the left of Hillary Clinton and NARAL on the issue of life. As a state senator in Illinois, Barack Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, a law that would have protected babies if they survived an attempted abortion and were delivered alive. When a similar bill was proposed in the United States Senate, it passed unanimously and even the National Abortion Rights Action League issued a statement saying they did not oppose the law.

That quibble aside, it’s a good read for anyone thinking of voting for Barack Obama.

Fox News is one of several news outlets carrying an amazing story.  Fox’s story is titled “Stem Cell Treatment Credited for Helping Boy, 2, Regain His Sight.”  It’s a heart warming story about a 2 year old boy who was born with a rare disease that guaranteed to rob him of his sight.  His parents, though, paid $43K to fly to China for a medical procedure using stem cells that they hoped would fix his sight, and that it did.  As a father of two boys, of course, I was thrilled to see such a happy outcome, but the pro-lifer in me wanted to know what kind of stem cells were used, so I started digging.

The first link didn’t say, so clicked the link at the end of the story to read the original article written by the Fox affiliate in Orlando.  This article, too, lacked the all important detail for which I was searching, so I turned to Google News.  A search for the boy’s name (Tre Burgos) turned up four articles, some of which had questionable relevance.  The search did, though, turn up an article that brought an end to my short search.

The New Smyrna Beach Observer had an article on the boys plight,  but with much more detail, including the object of my quest.  Written prior to the Fox News articles above, the NSB Observer reports (emphasis added):

On Feb. 21, of 2008, Elioe [Tre's real name] will travel with his mother and father, to Bieke Biotech Treatment Center in Hangzhou, China and undergo 4-6 umbilical stem cell injections, which consist of 10-15 million cells per injection.

The miracle treatment, then, was not embryonic stem cells, but umbilical, or “adult” stem cells.  Now, you can call me paranoid if you want, but why is that the Fox News story doesn’t mention what kind of stem cell was used?  Could it be that by trumpeting the success of this stem cell treatment (and omitting the type of stem cells involved), someone hopes to sway the popular opinion with regard to any type of stem cell treatments (namely embryonic), thus removing the political and emotional barriers to emryo-destructive research in the future?  Nah, surely not.

A study should be done on how foolish and inconsistent the phrase “reproductive rights” is. Apparently the originator and deprived endorsers believe the birth mother is the only one responsible for a pregnancy to occur and thinks she should be the one who decides whether or not her unborn child should be born.

If you can’t tell, I totally detest the phrase. The loathing I possess goes beyond the sound of fingernails on a chalkboard. It may equate ice picks in eye sockets.

Who actually qualifies for “reproductive rights”? What about women who are barren? What are their so-called “reproductive rights”?

And what happens when a woman who tries to demonstrate this monstrosity and aborts her child, only to discover that the baby survives the procedure?

Am I being ridiculous? Am I over-dramatic? Not at all.

As reported in this article, Jodie Percival of Nottinghamshire, England, decided to abort her unborn son eight weeks in her pregnancy. She decided to do so because he was projected to have a life-threatening kidney condition.

The abortion failed. Percival was angry at first, but her frustration turned to joy.

“I just couldn’t believe this child had got through it all and looked so perfect,” she said.

Her son Finley was born three weeks premature. He had minor kidney damage but is expected to lead a normal life. 

“He may need an operation but as only one of his kidneys is affected he can survive,” said Percival. “I still struggle to believe just what he has fought through. Now he’s here I wouldn’t change it for the world.”

So I ask again, how does this wonderful occurrence fit in the absurd philosophy that promotes “reproductive rights”? 

Operation Rescue, no stranger to bad press, has posted some photographs of our neighboring state Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (who by the way, is rumored to be in the Veepstakes for Sen. Obama), with one of the most notorious late-term abortionists in the country, George Tiller. Yikes.

I just read this article about an Australian baby who was born after an ectopic pregnancy, which occurs when a fertilized egg develops outside of the uterus.

The birth is described as “a medical phenomenon” as such pregnancy usually miscarries or is terminated by doctors because of the threat it can cause to the mother.

A justifiable argument for the practice of abortion is potential harm to the birth mother. However, I believe this wonderful event demonstrates God’s sovereignty. This is why I believe whoever came up with the horrible term of “reproductive rights” is foolish.

I apologize for the delay in blogging, but I went on a nice fishing trip with the family. A bit of personal news: my best friend and his wife just had their (second) child, a baby boy, today. Ultimately, that is just about the most pro-life thing you can do.

On Stand To Reason’s blog, they have an entry up title, “The Irrelevance of Relevance.”  It’s an interesting discussion of the modern church’s appeal to be “relevant” (which I think means that churches want to show they’re hip, wit’ it, cool, etc.) and how those efforts may actually be contributing to the declining church numbers:

A very interesting and sobering thought, especially after just hearing about the possibility of a new service at my church becoming even “edgier” and more like a “TV church” (which is a topic for another day).

If you are an avid reader of this blog, you would know that America’s abortion laws are some of the least restrictive in the world. You would likewise know that Britain has far more restrictive laws, and tonight, those could become even better.

This evening, Members of Parliament “will debate a cut in the time-limit for abortion from 24 to 20 weeks.” Notice that even the debate is on “when” not if to restriction abortion, which is impressive. Though it probably should not surprise me that the nation that abolished slavery without an epic war is working their way toward abolishing abortion-on-demand before we do.

Hat tip on the story: JR

Update: If you thought Britain as a whole was good, northern Ireland has it even better. In the land of strife between Catholics and Protestants, there is one thing they can agree on.

“The country’s leading abortion provider celebrated Mother’s Day by asking for donations in honor of mothers. Inconceivable, you might say—not if it is Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA).” Read more here.

What would William Wilberforce do? That is a question that oft runs through my mind, and that was a fulcrum in this intriguing interview between Christianity Today and the evangelical Rev. Jim Wallis. It reads in part:

CT: You repeatedly cite William Wilberforce as someone who did Christian political engagement right. But aren’t your views on abortion—”protecting unborn life in every possible way, but without criminalizing abortion”—fundamentally at odds with Wilberforce’s efforts to totally abolish slavery? He felt that “protecting slaves” without criminalizing slavery was unjust.

Wallis: The abortion debate has really gotten very stale. It’s a symbolic legal battle that takes place mostly only in election years. And it’s a litmus test on the Left and the Right. No one seems to care about the abortion rate. The Republicans want a constitutional amendment banning abortion. That’s just symbolic. It’s never going to happen in America. And even if you do ban it, you’re still going to have a huge problem in the culture.

Read the rest here.

It appears that the “art” project mentioned yesterday was just a hoax:

The story about Aliza Shvarts’ project, published Thursday in the Yale Daily News, swept across blogs and media outlets — including the Drudge Report, Fox News and The Washington Post — before Yale issued a statement saying it investigated and found it all to be a hoax that was Shvarts’ idea of elaborate “performance art.”

All sides seem to agree, though, that it was in very poor taste.  I’ve never been happier to report that I was wrong. :)

Just received the good news: the state house voted 81-15 to override the veto! According to The Oklahoman, this is “the first veto override of Henry since he took office in 2003.” The Legislators made it a good one.

News reports confirm: “The Oklahoma Senate on Thursday voted to override Gov. Brad Henry’s veto of a controversial abortion bill.” … “The vote to override was 37 to 11. It takes 32 votes in the Senate to override the veto. Efforts to override the bill, Senate Bill 1878, now go to the House.”

Sen. Todd Lamb, the bill’s author, promised the public quick action in overriding the veto. I guess he wasn’t kidding around.

Oklahomans for Life, one of the pro-life lobby groups for the Sooner State, had this to say about the Governor’s veto. When the BGCO’s Ray Sanders returns back to earth from (rightly) being sent into orbit by Henry’s veto, I plan to try find and post his remarks, as well.

Meanwhile, Gov. Henry issued the following statement: “This is to advise you that on this date, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 11 and 12 of Article VI of the Oklahoma Constitution to approve or object to legislation presented to me, I have VETOED Senate Bill 1878. While I support reasonable restrictions on abortion, this legislation does not provide an essential exemption for victims of rape and incest. By forcing the victims of such horrific acts to undergo and view ultrasounds after they have made such a difficult and heartbreaking decision, the state victimizes the victim for a second time. It would be unconscionable to subject victims of rape and incest to such treatment. Because of this critical flaw, I cannot in good conscience sign this legislation.”

Me: I seem to recall reading in the Scriptures that we should not punish the child for the sins of the father, so to use the oldest play in the pro-choice playbook (i.e. playing the rape card) is probably lazy, not to mention simplistic, muddled-thinking. That aside, read the reaction from the bill’s author and other voices in the debate here.

“Gov. Brad Henry tonight vetoed a bill that would have required health care providers to give a woman an ultrasound of her unborn child before an abortion,” reported The Oklahoman. “The measure, Senate Bill 1878, also was intended to protect health care providers’ right to refuse to participate in abortions and to decide whether to dispense a pill to end early pregnancies.”

Read the rest here.

That is the title of the cover story in Newsweek. The piece follows the story of “Grant High School’s class of ’82…” who “were raised on ‘The Brady Bunch’—while their own families were falling apart.” The piece contains this shocking fact, “… divorce rates had soared to their highest level ever, with 5.3 per 1,000 people getting divorced each year, more than double the rate in the 1950s.”

You know family breakdown is getting bad when such secular sources recognize the problem. A prescription for Oklahoma is found in this op-ed Mike Jestes and I co-authored that recently appeared in The Oklahoman.

‘New Abortion Bill Headed to Governor’s Desk,’ a NewsOk.com headline reads.

The story says, “State senators overwhelmingly passed an anti-abortion bill today that protects health-care providers’ rights to refuse to take part in abortions, regulates the so-called morning after pill and provides a woman with an ultrasound of her unborn child prior to her abortion.”

“Senators accepted the House’s amendments to Senate Bill 1878 by Sen. Todd Lamb and then gave final passage to the measure 38-10.”

You may recall me mentioning this bill before. Since that time, I have spoken to a few pro-life medical professionals, including a pharmacist and an OBGYN, who say this would be a huge step. The story added, “Lamb said the bill is sound, strong, good family policy.” I quite agree.

Note: The last time pro-life legislation went to the Governor’s desk, he did not sign in but allowed it to become law by letting the allotted time to veto it pass.

Last night in Norman, I attended a banquet featuring pro-life warrior Star Parker. You may be aware that Parker is “an African American woman, [who] spent her formative years as an unemployed mother receiving welfare; she was arrested in her teens for shoplifting and has disclosed that she had four abortions. Parker converted to Christianity and subsequently became a spokeswoman for conservative Christian political issues.”

This redeemed woman told her powerful story at a benefit for the Eden Clinic (formerly Care Net Pregnancy Center of Norman), a crisis pregnancy center doing the important work of saving lives and sharing Christ. Parker asked the attendees to financially contribute to the center, and invest in their good work.

If for no other reason, pro-lifers should invest because of how much funding the opposition gets. In an e-mail this week from the Family Research Council, new reports show “Planned Parenthood has surpassed the $1 billion mark in annual income, a milestone made possible by $336 million of your tax dollars.”

In 2007, the courageous Congressman Mike Pence, R-Indiana, offered an amendment to prohibit taxpayer dollars from being used to fund Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately, it “failed on a 189-to-231 roll call vote.” Pro-Choice America said at the time, “Rep. Mike Pence (RIN) and other anti-choice representatives tried to defund Planned Parenthood – the nation’s largest network of reproductive health providers – by banning the organization from participating in the Title X family-planning program.” The group then boasted, “Thankfully, the effort failed.”

At the banquet, Eden officials reported of the positive and professional services they offer women in a crisis pregnancy, such as STD testing, an ultra-sound, counseling, and materials goods. They do not charge for most of their services, and subsist on private donations from those who believe in their work. Clinics like Eden do not receive federal funds.

In this epic struggle for life, I would encourage each of us to ponder where our dollars are going. For where your treasure is ….

The Learning Channel is currently running the third season of Jon & Kate Plus 8. I have recently been introduced to this reality show, but I am quite fascinated with the group dynamics of this young couple and their family of twins and sextuplets.

It’s an interesting experience in my house on Monday nights now. My wife and I have been married for 10 months, and it seems like she and I each carry an opposite gene.

I want to watch Jon & Kate, and she prefers to watch CSI:Miami. How odd is it that the husband is interested in a reality show about a couple with a bunch of kids and the wife prefers to watch a crime show? Fortunately, both shows don’t come on at the same time, so I have my preference at 8 p.m., and she gets to watch Horatio speak his overdramatic lines at 9 p.m.

So what is it about this show that appeals to me?

It could be that as an inexperienced husband I find it educational to watch another couple whose lives are on display to the world, observing how they relate to each other, how they fight yet work out situations.

It could be that I like making my wife paranoid with the thought I could actually consider wanting a set of multiple kids and will have us rush out to meet with a fertility doctor. Fear not, though. Jon & Kate have no bearing on when we decide to have children.

What I do find appealing about the show is some of the things TLC does not emphasize. Jon and Kate Gosselin are committed Christians, and they do have pro-life convictions.

When discovering Kate was pregnant with six, her doctor attempted to provide comfort with the suggestion of reduction. Kate emphatically said on the show that her response was “we will NOT discuss reduction.” That sound byte was a major selling point for me.

I found the Gosselins’ website, and reading their story was priceless.

“I have learned that I am not at all in control of my own life—God is,” Kate writes. ”He owns every facet of my very being! What great relief to know that all that stress does not have to sit on my shoulders anymore! I give it to God and he takes care of it for me! I have learned to be grateful for everything I have.”

Of all the multitude of reality shows that have been aired and are currently airing, I don’t know if there ever could be one with a greater impact of planting seeds of the gospel as well as providing a positive pro-life message than Jon & Kate Plus 8.  

In honor of our Lord, I wanted to post some of the words from one of the best hymns in the Baptist Hymnal, “The Old Rugged Cross.”

Verse 1
On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross, The emblem of suffring and shame; And I love that old cross where the dearest and best For a world of lost sinners was slain.

Verse 4
To the old rugged cross, I will ever be true, Its shame and reproach gladly bear; Then He’ll call me some day to my home far away, Where His glory forever I’ll share.

Chorus
So I’ll cherish the old rugged cross, Till my trophies at last I lay down; I will cling to the old rugged cross, And exchange it some day for a crown.

Now ponder the words from “Alas, and Did My Savior Bleed”:

Verse 1
Alas, and did my Savior bleed And did my Sov’reign die? Would He devote that sacred head For sinners such as I?

Verse 2
Was it for crimes that I had done He groaned upon the tree? Amazing pity, grace unknown, And love beyond degree!

Verse 4
But drops of grief can ne’er repay The debt of love I owe; Here, Lord, I give myself away, ‘Tis all that I can do.

A Christian leader I greatly admire has a new book out. Chuck Colson has penned The Faith: What Christians Believe, Why They Believe it, and Why it Matters. I have not yet read it, but after coming across two interviews with him about the book, one with Newsweek and one on the Bible Answer Man Program, I just had to order it.

Of course, I cannot say until I actually read it through, but the book appears to closely parallel my favorite of the early Church’s creeds, The Nicene Creed.

Here is the teaser: “The word ‘Christianity’ conjures up many pictures, depending on who defines it. But Chuck Colson asserts that the faith ‘given once for all’ is an invitation to a wonderful vision of life, open to all who will come. The Faith invites all who will — whether believers or skeptics — to explore the basic doctrines of Christianity and find out for themselves what it really means to be called a disciple of Christ — and how to live as a disciple.”

In an age in which doctrine is becoming increasingly unfashionable within Christian circles (and increasingly more necessary to combat error), this sounds like just the book that was needing to be written. So thanks, Chuck!

I once drove by a billboard with that profound message. It now appears that the prestigious Royal College of Psychiatrists agrees, at least with the latter portion.

A friend passed along a news story from The Times, “Women may be at risk of mental health breakdowns if they have abortions, a medical royal college has warned. The Royal College of Psychiatrists says women should not be allowed to have an abortion until they are counselled on the possible risk to their mental health.” Read more here.

This piece is one small part of the larger raging debate going on in Britain whether to limit “abortions… from 24 weeks to 20 weeks.”If you are an avid reader of this blog, you would know that Britain along with almost every other nation in the world has more restrictive abortion laws than do we.

It’s going to take more than slogans and billboards to change this. What can you do?

Recently, a proclamation was made by leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention regarding the issue of the environment and climate change.

I haven’t come to a definite conclusion on what to make of this. I did notice BGCO executive director/treasurer Dr. Anthony Jordan was listed among the signatories of the declaration.

Christians should be good stewards of the land and not hold a reputation of being irresponsible with natural resources. I have no difficulty in recycling and having a “green-friendly” approach to living.

I also believe that Christians should have the proper perspective of living obediently and remembering God alone is responsible for providing all things for us to enjoy (I Tim. 6:17) and His plans cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2), even by an interpreted climate change.

Father Jonathan has a regular column on the Fox News website. Of course, he and I will differ on certain theological issues, but he regularly gives a perspective that will cause me to ponder.

He gave his commentary on the SBC leaders’ environment proclamation, and there’s a passage that provoked my usual pondering.

“I think we can learn a great deal from this environmental debate,” he said. ”Being ‘green’ is the newest semi-spiritual movement to sweep American culture. Part of its success can be attributed to the hollow and thirsty hearts of millions of Americans who long for spirituality and want to take part in the adventure of doing good for others, but who are fed-up with what they consider harsh and senseless demands of religion and its hypocritical leaders. They have found in environmental activism a moral cause.”

He is correct. There are many “hollow and thirsty hearts” in our country. However, I do question what he means by “harsh and senseless demands.” If such demands are biblical, then it doesn’t matter if someone interprets them as harsh, and they certainly wouldn’t be senseless.

But here’s what I can appreciate from both the SBC leaders and Father Jonathan. The sanctity of life is a greater cause.

“Any policy that puts the defense of the earth above the interests of human life is unacceptable,” the priest said.

“We are proud of our deep and lasting commitments to moral issues like the sanctity of human life and biblical definitions of marriage. We will never compromise our convictions nor attenuate our advocacy on these matters, which constitute the most pressing moral issues of our day,” the SBC proclamation states.

The concern of raising the banner of environmental issues is holding it higher than what the Bible emphasizes. Let’s pray it will never fly above the pro-life standard.

According to a news source, “Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a prominent United States advocate for the right-to-die for terminally ill patients via physician-assisted suicide, stated on Wednesday that he intends to run for a seat in the United States House of Representatives.”

“‘We need some honesty and sincerity instead of corrupt government in Washington,’ Dr. Kevorkian said while announcing his bid to represent Michigan‘s 9th congressional district.” In an age in which we need more right-to-life candidates, we get this.

The piece added, “He was released [from prison] in June of 2007 on parole due to good behavior.” I am persuaded by the argument that we should give criminals more time for bad behavior, not less for so-called good behavior. But I digress, as this news story is twisted enough.

According to a new Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission e-mail update: “The state Senate will vote this week on pro-life SB 1878, The Freedom of Conscience Act, which would protect health care professionals’ right to refuse to participate in the taking of an innocent human life.”

“In addition, the Oklahoma House of Representatives will vote this week on pro-life HB 3144, providing a woman an ultrasound of her unborn child which she may view prior to undergoing an abortion.”

I consider myself a conservative and 100% pro-life, but I am always excited to see groups and leaders who are of various political stripes speak out for life.

For starters, consider this rousing speech by Australian politician Christopher Pyne, a Liberal (capital ‘L’) member of the Australian House of Representatives since March 1993. [Click here and look for his "Speech to Right to Life Convention].

In other parts of the Anglosphere, our friends across the pond have an interesting petition drive: http://www.aliveandkickingcampaign.org/.

Then at home, there is the 95-10 Initiative launched by ‘Democrats for Life’ that is: “a comprehensive package of federal legislation and policy proposals that will reduce the number of abortions by 95% in the next 10 years.” Of course, that initiative was launched three years ago, so I guess it should be called the 95-7 initiative.

“Are you pro-life?” is often a question you hear. However, it usually inquires as to what one thinks, not does. I recently read a pamphlet, though, that is asking its readers to turn their beliefs into to action. “52 Simple Things You can Do to Be Pro-Life,” by Anne Pierson, is well worth the time.

It lists simple actions we can take, such as:

[ ] wearing the “feet pin,” the universal symbol for life

[ ] marching in a parade for life

[ ] babysitting for a single mother

[ ] writing a letter to the editor

[ ] giving financially to crisis pregnancy centers

[ ] volunteering your time for a crisis pregnancy center

[ ] holding a baby shower for a crisis pregnancy center

[ ] and most importantly prayer.

Many of the 52 action items listed I had already done, yet a majority I have yet to do. Some actions were in between. For instance, I have prayed for the pro-life cause, but have I truly prayed with enough fervor? Finally, the document listed a handful of not-so-easy pro-life actions, such as adoption, running for office or embarking on a new career within the pro-life movement.

At any rate, this publication provides a good opportunity to pause and take note of whether we simply believe pro-life, or are actually doing something about it.

The Europeans seem to be admired by many Americans.

We drool over their fashion savvy and gawk at their expensive automobiles. We enjoy listening to their musicians and viewing their actors on the screen.

Have you noticed how our friends in the U.K. value life of the unborn? I just finished reading this article about a man who was sentenced after he “tried to kill his unborn child by feeding his wife abortion pills he bought over the Internet.”

The English media doesn’t cover up or overlook issues regarding the value of all human life. In past, I’ve read articles how the medical profession in England frowns upon the practice of abortion.  The majority of British doctors wouldn’t dare perform an abortion, and those who do are shunned.

The convicted man in the article is Gil Magira, a millionaire businessman. His defense was he has an obsessive compulsive disorder which gave him a series of bizarre habits.

In America, there would be many who would run to Magira’s side and demand he be aquitted. Judge Oliver Sells saw it differently.

“You knew the risks in using those drugs without the proper medical conditions being in place,” he said when sentencing Magira to four years in jail. “Those risks were serious. There were real risks, both to the mother and to the unborn child.”

The Daily Mail article also features remarks from the victimized pregnant mother, Anat Abraham. She shared how shocked she was and how inhumane Magira’s actions were when her pregnancy was 11 weeks.

“What made it worse was how determined he seemed to be to get rid of the baby I could feel moving … Every day that passed I thought I had bought the baby another day to live,” Abraham said.

Keep in mind, Magira’s actions were not intending to harm Abraham’s life. Yet this article portrays him as inhumane for doing something that is practiced regularly in the United States.

I wonder if the English could be influential in another aspect of American society. 

Earlier this week, I read a news story that the oldest pro-life action group, Americans United for Life, did a state-by-state ranking in terms of pro-life friendly climates. I was discouraged to find Oklahoma not near the top (and confused to find our neighbors, Kansas and Texas).

My jealously was relieved a bit, however, when I heard of some pro-life progress at 23^rd and Lincoln. Another respected pro-life group, Oklahomans for Life, sent a release today that said in part: “Following approval by the Senate Rules Committee, the full Senate will vote soon on Senator Todd Lamb’s pro-life SB 1878. The Freedom of Conscience Act would protect health care professionals’ right to refuse to participate in the taking of an innocent human life.”

That was an important first hurdle to clear for the Wilberforcean Sen. Lamb. Stay tuned for more good news, and for why I used the word “jealously” not “envy” in the headline.