This is clearly criminal activity. Continue reading “Planned Parenthood – Selling Human Tissues from Abortion Clinics”
Shane Claiborne reflects on the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade | Red Letter Christians.
Claiborn explains in this text what it means for him to be pro-life:
‘I want to be pro-life like Mother Teresa was pro-life. She didn’t just wear an “Abortion is murder shirt” and protest outside a clinic. For her, being pro-life was more than being anti-abortion… it meant coming alongside teenage parents, helping raise kids that no one wanted, and taking in families who had no place to go. That’s the kind of pro-life movement we’re talking about. Pro-life from the womb to the tomb.’
Do you, as a Christian, not only believe in the dignity of human life before birth, but also after the foetus is born. Most pro-lifers, it seems, at least in the American Religious Right, could not care less about the dignity of Human life after birth. They religion (and politics with it) is a perverted ‘gospel’, used to smash those who think differently than they do, not to love and serve them, as Christ did, in the most sacrificial manner.
May God have mercy on us, his followers!
Filmul Strigatul mut a stirnit multe controverse in Statele Unite, unde organizatia Planned Parenthood, care militeaza pentru controlul nasterilor prin intermediul avortutilor, a acuzat autorii filmului de manipulare si de abordare nestiintifica. Iata aici raspunsul la aceste acuzatii, oferit de insusi doctorul care efectuase avortul filmat in Strigatul mut.
Iata si o descriere a acestui film, facuta de Asociatia ProVita:
Imediat după lansarea în 1985, filmul „Strigatul mut” (vezi aici cu traducere în română: http://www.strigatulmut.ro ) a fost atacat virulent de lobby-ul pro-avort care acuza că pelicula a fost manipulată, că fătul avea mai mult de 12 săptămâni și chiar că dr. Bernard N Nathanson ar fi fost medicul care a făcut acel avort.
Aici puteți vedea „Răspunsul” – inclusiv mărturia personală a medicului care a întrerupt sarcina din „Strigătul mut” [Jay Kelinson].
* * *
„The Silent Scream” was released in 1985 to a storm of controversy and attacks by the pro-abortion movement, claiming that the film was manipulated and misinterpreted, that the fetus was older than 12-weeks, even that Dr. Nathanson participated in the abortion. Here is the response – including the actual testimony of the doctor that performed the abortion.
Baptist historian Rchard Pierard suggest in a recent article in Religious Dispatches, four changes that American evangelicals need to make in order to restore their credibility after their desperate attampt to remove Obama from office and replace him with Romney.
Here they are:
1) The Southern Baptists need to get rid of the discredited Dr. Richard Land immediately, not wait for his announced retirement as President of the denomination’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, which won’t be effective until October 2013. Dr. Frank Page, the President and CEO of the Executive Committee, needs to act summarily and forcefully. He certainly must understand that Land’s (and by implication the Southern Baptist Convention’s) endorsement of Mitt Romney undermined the Southern Baptist witness. He and his office are an embarrassment to the convention, attract unnecessary criticism, and contribute to the public image problem that hinders the ministry of the SBC.
The convention could channel the money expended on its tarnished reputation to the International Mission Board where it could do some real good in reaching men and women for Christ. Proclaiming a political gospel will never achieve this noble goal. Also, there’s no need to jump aboard the “religious freedom” bandwagon when Southern Baptists could contribute funds to aid in the task of fostering religious freedom around the world through the respected and well-managed Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty. Continue reading “Richard Pierard – Four Changes Evangelicals Must Make (in the United States)”
The foolish statement of a Republican candidate, who argued, in the context of the fight against abortion on any conceivable grounds, that victims of ‘legitimate rape’ are rarely, if ever, getting pregnant, stired up heated debates in the US and beyond. And rightly so, as such statements are just another horrible expression of the misogyny that dominates American conservative circles.
Read below an analysis of this matter , by Justin and Lindsey Holcomb, published recently by Christianity Today.
* * *
The controversy over the Missouri congressman’s comments gives Christians a chance to understand sexual assault with wisdom and theological depth.
ited States Representative Todd Akin and U.S Senate candidates started a national discussion about sexual assault this week after Akin’s unwise choice of words in an interview Sunday night.
The Missouri Congressman who attends a PCA church said to a St. Louis TV anchor that a woman’s body is capable of preventing pregnancy in cases of “legitimate rape.” He claimed a woman’s body can typically fend off pregnancy during such rape, as he argued against allowing abortions in cases of rape, claiming such pregnancies are uncommon in the first place.
Rep. Akin’s statement is as follows: Continue reading “– Todd Akin, ‘Legitimate Rape,’ and Gospel Healing for Victims of Sexual Assault”
An interesting point of view, arguing against the legitimacy off infanticide, even without appeal to a higher moral instance (God, etc).
Point taken (on ethics being more about feelings than about rationality, even if it can lead easily to ethical relativism). Yet, I can’t help but think that, rationally, the Melbourne philosophers mentioned in the text seem to make a logical conclusion when they say:
‘it wasn’t any MORE wrong to kill newborn babies than to kill foetuses in the womb, and that sometimes, it might actually be the right thing to do. Logically, they argued, what’s the difference?’
And apologies in advance for the controversial subject…
Two Melbourne philosophy professors recently caused an uproar when they said that it wasn’t any MORE wrong to kill newborn babies than to kill foetuses in the womb, and that sometimes, it might actually be the right thing to do. Logically, they argued, what’s the difference?
Ok I know some people think it’s wrong to kill babies OR foetuses (and some of these people think it’s alright to kill adults if they break the wrong law, live in the wrong country or perform the wrong medical procedures).
I’m not weighing in on this. Really. It’s a minefield. See below.
But professional ethicists usually miss the point. Ethics isn’t about rationality. Ethics is about how we feel. We have evolved to feel bad about things that don’t help us survive, and good about things that do. We don’t like killing babies, because as…
View original post 279 more words
Mobile Euthanasia Units Launched In Netherlands.
This is really scary, a real assault of the ”culture of death’, as Pope John Paul II used to call it, especially as it comes after the recent case for killing new born babies – since secularists consider that unborn babies can be killed by abortion, is it not logical to do the same with newly born ones? after all, what is the difference? and what will be next? the killing of people with special needs, because they are not productive enough?
As Dostoevsky used to say, ‘if God does not exist, anything is possible’.
Associated Baptist Press – Pro-life, pro-choice speakers urge common ground on abortion.
‘ After nearly 40 years of polarization over abortion, two speakers at a Mercer University event said Jan. 24 it is time for people who are pro-choice and pro-life to seek common ground to reduce the current number of 1.2 million abortions a year.’
Abortion is a very hot topic, and rightly so, because it is about life and death. However, the way this issues was politicised by both liberals and conservatives has clearly not led to a reduction of the number of abortions in the US.
The search for common ground between the proponents of the two opposed positions on abortion is a must if this social problem is going to be addressed in an adequate way.
Dr Bernard Nathanson, whose funeral was held last week, was once a prominent figure in the abortion industry, yet ended up as one of its greatest opponents. In the 1960s, the contraceptive pill permitted sexual relationships to be separated from the responsibility of parenthood, and helped usher in the sexual revolution. At this time Nathanson was a leading campaigner for abortion rights in USA, which led to the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision legalising abortion on demand. Continue reading “Bernard Nathanson, Author of ‘The Silent Scream’, Dies”
The debate in the US around the so-called ‘abortion reduction bill, more precisely the Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion, and Supporting Parents Act (H.R. 3312, referred to as the Ryan-DeLauro Bill), has the potential of inflamating again the two ‘armies’ involved in the ‘American culture war’, leading to the same fierce (and false) accusations, lies and verbal violence, on both sides. Continue reading “Fact and fiction on the abortion-reduction bill”
Persona 