3 Key Reasons Why Religious Right Leaders Are So Angry

3 Key Reasons Why Religious Right Leaders Are So Angry June 27, 2014

If you’ve sat down and watched an interview with any one of the outspoken conservative religious leaders recently, you’ve probably noticed something: they’re aging and angry. In fact, with each interview we see, it’s almost as if we watch them get angrier and angrier.

Gone are the days of compassionate conservatism where they at least appeared to seek middle ground on various issues or where they were careful with tone. These leaders of yesteryear are are in full panic mode, and it’s showing. As a result, the aging and angry epidemic among conservative religious leaders has become the elephant in the room of many parts of Christian culture.

When we try to break open the question as to why they seem so angry, the various answers all seem to point to one root cause: they’ve lost power and control.

During the height of the “religious right” these men were figures of power and control. Presidential candidates could not advance without their support, whether public or in secret, giving them tremendous influence over the direction of some political arms. They sold thousands of books, packed stadiums, and commanded massive influence over audiences of thirsty church goers ready to do their political bidding. They were quite literally Christian heroes to thousands.

For a leader in the religious right, the last three decades weren’t so bad.

Today however, they are approaching their twilight years. During a time when many would think of retirement and the opportunity to sit back and admire their accomplishments, these religious leaders are left to simply look over their shoulders at a building that is crumbling and beginning to catch fire.

This is precisely what has them so angry: they’ve lost most of the power and control they once had, and what’s left, is quickly slipping through their fingers. Here are what I think are the three key areas:

1. They lost a culture war they spent 30+ years fighting.

Religious right leaders have fought all these years on two key issues and lost: abortion and stopping the advancement of gay rights. On the abortion front, they’re no closer to seeing Roe v. Wade overturned than  when this all began. On the front of gay rights, they not only lost but saw something happen they never seriously thought was possible: the legality of same sex marriage. They now understand this is a train that has left the station, and same sex marriage is eventually coming to all 50 states– a scenario far worse than they ever anticipated.

2. Culture advanced without them, and they’ve realized they are no longer relevant.

If you haven’t noticed, it’s not 1984 anymore. For these religious right leaders however, those were the glory days they never left. While the rest of us transitioned through the grunge rock of the 90’s, rang in a new millennium, and then woke up one day to flat screen televisions, these folks never advanced. Instead of sticking to teaching their congregations the timeless message of Jesus, they got caught up into the distracting quest of seeking political power and influence– one that became so addicting they failed to realize 30 years just flew by without them. Today, they look in the mirror at a greying scalp, and realize they are complete aliens to the new culture they’ve found themselves in. Whereas in the 80’s they were the movers and shakers, today they realize that they’re basically irrelevant– a realization that on one hand must be sad, but apparently is also quite infuriating.

3. They lost the generation that was supposed to replenish their ranks.

This is perhaps the single most anger producing realization these religious right leaders are facing: they lost their “next generation” and Ralph Reed is the only person wanting to start this cycle all over again. Being so focused on political power, and being so oblivious to cultural shifts around them, they lost their only ability for long-term sustainability. The children they once thought would carry the religious right forward are now adults, but have no desire to join the movement their parents found so wonderful back in the days of ballads and hair bands.

What’s worse from their perspective, is the situation is more than just the fact these “kids” aren’t interested in leading the next generation of the religious right, but that they’ve actually switched sides. While conservative leaders were stuck in the old culture wars, progressive/emergent Christianity happily welcomed these kids into our fold (and gave them a few books to read). Today, these “kids” now make up a core block of the opposition to the very movement they were once destined to lead.

And this is where we get to the heart of why they’re so angry: they realize they lost the culture war, they realize they are fleeting in power and relevance, but most infuriating of all, they realize that the children once destined to run the religious right are now among the biggest force opposing them.

I guess I’d be pretty angry too.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • They still have Matt Walsh and his edgy tattoos. I’m not sure I can resist the appeal.

  • It seems that they have made “progress” on the abortion issue. Reproductive rights have been restricted across the country. But it seems like they realize that this won’t really change the fact that abortion is still available and it doesn’t seem to affect the rate much. Also, and maybe this is the real problem, it doesn’t actually stop people from holding a sexual ethic they disagree with. I wonder if this is also the source of so many of the repugnant comments regarding rape.

  • If you look at the way the conservative right tries to regulate reproductive rights it seems that they could be more interested in seeing people face the consequences of their choices than they are in protecting the unborn or in caring for those at risk. What I mean is that they oppose providing birth control, which can help prevent abortions by helping people who are concerned about their ability to provide for a child avoid pregnancy. (I understand the argument that some forms of birth control _cause_ abortions, but I disagree with it.) They also oppose providing access to health care and other services that could make people in difficult financial situations more confident about their ability to provide. Actually, they oppose measures like equal pay for women and good provision of maternity leave which also make it harder for single moms or households where both parents need to work.

    So basically the ethic is “only have sex with someone you’re married to.” I actually think this is a great idea. But if we use laws to try to enforce this – by punishing people who don’t follow it…. It just starts to look like protecting life is not actually the main motivation.

    So the rape issue is maybe more of a stretch, but it seems to me to come from the tendency to blame victims and to see them as part of a promiscuous and immoral sexual climate. Although societal trends across the world DO NOT bear this out, I think that the assumption is that if more “traditional” sexual standards were upheld then women would not be raped.

  • Leanne Zeck

    “What’s worse from their perspective, is the situation is more than just the fact these “kids” aren’t interested in leading the next generation of the religious right, but that they’ve actually switched sides”
    I think this may be the biggest reason for all of the anger. It would be easier to swallow if the next generation simply apathetically left. But instead many let their passions loose for the “other side.”

    The sad thing is as long as they continue to make the abortion and homosexual issues the defining standard and battle cry, the more they will turn people away. Their message is no longer the Gospel.

  • gimpi1

    One thing I regard as virtually eternally true is that everything dominant group can only dominate for a time. Culture, belief, fashion, you name it, what’s hot today will be cold tomorrow. Religious conservatism was all the rage thirty years ago. Fashions change. Now the Nones are on the rise. Most likely, that will change too, in time.

    Every belief-system has weaknesses. Perhaps people fall out of love with any dominant belief-system because it’s very dominance puts its weaknesses on display. We’ve seen the bigotry, legalism, worship of authority and general meanness of the religious right for years now. They can’t claim any sort of moral high-ground.

    Hopefully, whatever group takes their place center-stage will be more interested in principles such as justice and kindness than they have been.

  • Lbj

    Are you angry that the culture is winning on abortion?

  • You’ve framed it wrong. Overturning Rowe v. Wade won’t end abortion. As such, the religious right has wasted 30 years trying to end it by abolition (doesn’t work) instead of addressing the root causes. Addressing serious issues like healthcare, poverty, livable minimum wages, etc., would cause them to seem a bit too socialistic for their flavor.

    But, thankfully, “culture” as you’ve framed it, didn’t win– abortion rates between 2008-2011 dropped by 13% even though the number of abortion clinics only declined by 1%. Looks like life is winning to me, and it’s being done without the fake victory of legal abolition.

  • Guest

    I’m sure I can…

  • True. Abortion has always been here, in some fashion or another for as long as women have been giving birth. Making a medical procedure legal, has served the purpose of significantly dropping the death rate of women seeking to end pregnancies, for all reasons. Making contraceptives, available has further dropped abortion rates as well as pregnancy related deaths, as women have been given the option to prevent pregnancies to begin with.

    For the religious right to rail against abortion and to take a near militant stance against it, without recognizing viable solutions, instead taking a stance, as in recent years against prevention, is part of why people are overwhelmingly rejecting the mindset started by the unholy Moral Majority.

  • I don’t know who he is. Should I be glad?

  • Timothy Weston

    You hit the issue where it belongs. The Religious Right knows they are losing and they are desperate to hold on to what they have. I have been questioning my own views on abortion and gay rights over the past couple of years and realized that even if you ban abortion, it will not stop. You also cannot stop the unwed couple from having sex and cannot stop a same sex couple from doing the same. I also wondered what threat to the state same sex marriage poses. To this day, that question remains unanswered. The demise of the Religious Right is also an opportunity for Christians to look inside themselves and see what they can do to better link Heaven and Earth.

  • Lbj

    Never said it would. It would however diminish it. 1 million babies are killed a year. That is staggering.

    Any time something is lawful most people think is not immoral. That’s why we must continue to work to overturn Rowe even if it takes a thousand years. Rowe legalized murder.

    How can you claim we are “winning” when so many are killed yearly?

  • 2.6 million children die a year because of hunger. That averages to four kids every minute starving to death. I think THAT is where immorality lies. Not preventing birth.

  • Meredith Indermaur

    I agree. And addressing serious issues – with hunger being the most serious – is getting at the root cause. My children attend inner-city schools where poverty is a HUGE concern. Many of these kids are so hungry that they don’t have the energy to learn, and the only meal they’ll get all day is the lunch provided by our school system. There is NO excuse for this horror. None. Why can’t we get people fed, learning, and caring about their lives first instead of hammering them for getting abortions? Do we continue to care for those babies after we’ve saved them from being aborted? If we’re truly pro-life, then we need to be pro-life from the cradle to the grave. First things first.

  • RustbeltRick

    I’ve speculated that it revolves around one thing — conservatives lose their minds when a Democrat is president. They were beside themselves when Clinton was in office, and actually impeached him, and they’re aghast that Obama is in office, rather than a good corporate soldier like Mitt. All of the “America is going downhill” stuff ramps up the moment they aren’t in control.

  • Jeff Preuss

    From his blog: “-I don’t think all liberals are Satan. There can only be one Satan. And he’s a liberal.”
    “There is no such thing as a ‘pro-choice’ Christian”

    http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/28/abortion/
    “Gay “marriage”, etc.”

  • HappyCat

    The problem with the religious right is their narrow approach to sexuality. What they fail to realize is that people who are in no position to support a child are going to have sex. Better birth control and access to it will prevent more abortions than closing abortion clinics and abstinence only education.

  • Cory N Jamie Gilliam

    This is the burden that the pastor of our church has and the unyielding stubbornness of the Far Right is squarely to blame. The next generation are not just leaving fundamentalism but any moral center whatsoever, religious or otherwise. I am not saying atheist have no morals but atheism has transpired for the millennial generation into relativistic nihilism. The popularity of extreme Libertarianism and even Anarchy is on the rise and I really do not want to see “the hell on earth” scenario that will eventually arise. If you read Lord Of The Flies or Fahrenheit 451 you see what the death of belief and hope eventually leads to. We need a LOT more “Heaven on Earth” or the apocalyptic results will be here before we know it. Question is: Can we repair the link before it is to late?

  • Wolf

    There’s a problem with that on multiple levels, Justas.

    First, I’ll reiterate what Allegro said: millions of children die from starvation because they’re forced to be born into a system that won’t support them.

    Second, there is no scientific (OR BIBLICAL) consensus on whether life begins at conception or birth, so to say “Rowe legalized murder” is a shallow, emotional appeal to the crowd. It’ll stir up emotions, but can’t be logically supported.

  • Cory N Jamie Gilliam

    They even do it when a republican don’t tow the party line at local and state levels. If you don’t strut like John Wayne and make your wife where prissy dresses then you just aren’t in the clubhouse. yuk

  • Cory N Jamie Gilliam

    Yes and this is where progressive Christianity is the rubber that meets the road. Churches need and can progress to influence the greater good and instead of going out the way to beat individuals up for making desperate, life saving choices that might be out of the accepted “church culture” norm.

  • Mind you, Jesus never called the religious right to a culture war, nor to political activism. So, they were doomed from the beginning, IMO.

  • Lbj

    How many woman died due to illegal abortions before Rowe? Do you think it was at least a million a year like we have for the number of babies being killed?

    What we need to reject is the unholy pro-abort movement.

  • Lbj

    is that worldwide?

    I agree there are no good reasons this should be happening given that there is enough food to go around. However, abortion is a separate issue.

  • Lbj

    When a woman is pregnant she should get the support she needs to bring the child to term and help to support it. The father of the child should be the first line of support.

    Human life does begin at conception because at that point that zygote has all the genetic material to create a human being. After all, we were all zygotes at time in our lives.

  • Morris V. Fleischer

    Excellent essay. I think you could also bring in a 4th point. White males are losing power in general as our nation becomes more racially diverse and women have a greater voice. I think much of what drives the Tea Party rhetoric–and the source of this anger–is fear. Underlying all the talk about “taking our nation back,” there is this desire to return to the pre-civil rights/Eisenhower era when American white males rendered most of the important decisions. Waxing nostalgic never gets anyone anywhere–and, if you talk to some of the folks growing up in that time (especially African-Americans and others who were marginalized), things weren’t nearly as “perfect” as some remember them to be. They also forget that the world has changed incredibly since those times. The U.S. was the only first-world nation whose infrastructure wasn’t destroyed by WW2. It’s interesting how quickly, however, that the rest of the world was able to catch up with us (i.e. Japan–remember the steel industry going bust in the 1970s with cheaper imported Japanese steel driving down steel prices). The leaders of the American Religious Right pine for the days when things were “better” (and African Americans couldn’t drink from the same water fountain, and women were “under control,” etc.). Their portrayal of America as the great savior of the nations in two world wars is now tainted by our failure in Vietnam and additional bloodshed in other parts of the world (ie. Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, etc). The more clear-cut boundaries of our former “mortal enemies” of the Communist bloc are much grayer as we now contend with terrorist cells who are able to blend in quickly with the rest of the crowd. Instead of using their energy to lift up the downtrodden and feed the poor and bring hope to the world, it seems the leaders of the Religious Right are more interested in protecting their turf–what little of it they have left–by building walls with bricks of dogma and rejecting the more challenging and relevant questions of being a Christian disciple in our world.

  • I think there is a strong argument that the religious right’s war against abortion isn’t as focused on saving the lives of “babies” as they say, but rather a way of regulating the sex lives of women by making them wholly responsible for an unwanted pregnancy. That’s why they don’t support anything beyond criminalizing (and driving underground) the procedure, like supporting measures (contraception, sex education, etc.) that prevent unwanted pregnancy from occurring in the first place. Doing so would allow women to have sex “without consequence” which goes against their other agenda – maintaining sexual “purity”.

  • How many women is too much? Does a zygote have more value than a woman?

  • BT

    In fairness to Justas, it’s not that it’s a shallow argument. It’s just an unprovable one.

    When an embryo qualifies as a human life is a matter of philosophy and faith, not science. He’s not necessarily, then, being shallow. Just convinced of a certain set of different assumptions.

    That’s what makes the whole conversation difficult.

  • Jakeithus

    Well, there is really only one “scientific” answer on when life begins. Unfortunately, because of the nature of what is being discussed, science ends up having very little to do with it.

  • No. There is no scientific answer on when life begins. It is essentially a philosophical question, not a scientific one.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    It has to be something of a smack in the face to realize that the children raised in your religious systems now have support groups to help them recover from the experience. Say what you will about “liberal” denominations, but I’ve never heard of a support group for those who were traumatized by being raised Episcopalian.

    While it’s painful, the truth is that there were faithful Christians calling them to repent the entire time the Christian right was playing with the powers of this world. When you refuse to respond to calls to repentance, sometimes God has to smack you across the face with your own failure and the damage you have caused in order to bring you to your senses. The longer these old men resist accepting their correction, the angrier and more miserable they are going to be.

  • nadineharris

    Extremely well-said, Morris and well-argued.

  • Jakeithus

    Technically, you may be correct. If we’re able to come up with an ultimately philosophical definition of what life is, the best science can do is tell us whether a particular subject fits within that definition or not.

    I’d argue that given the way the vast majority of people understand life, science tells us that it begins at conception. However, this tells us nothing about how we need to treat that life.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    Having some experience with this issue, I think that the hostility towards rape victims is driven by the fact that from the outside it is pretty much impossible to tell the difference between a woman who is pregnant by rape and a woman who is pregnant because she’s a whore. (Not that women who get pregnant in difficult circumstances are whores, just that this is how the right sees them.)

    The only real answer to this conundrum is to extend grace and care to all women facing difficult pregnancies, lest you inadvertently harm someone who is innocent. (And because we’ve all been declared innocent by the cross. And it’s how Jesus teaches us to deal with people. But those things don’t really matter much to the right.) The moral police find it intolerable that we would extend loving care to the innocent and the guilty without even knowing which is which. In their minds, such behavior would be tantamount to hosting orgies for teens in your basement. Therefor, they try to explain and define the rape victim away.

    Consider how unworkable making exceptions to abortion laws for rape victims actually is. Very few women report their rapes to the police. Many of them don’t even allow themselves to call what happened to them rape until some time has passed. A woman who does file a police report is exposing herself to all sorts of indignities and to having her honesty and morality called into question by both authorities and those watching who are quick to suggest that women falsely claim to be raped in order to obtain that special “coveted status” George Will so helpfully told us about. So how exactly would the average rape victim prove that she has been raped in order to obtain an abortion? It can’t work. But these right wingers don’t care in the least because they are so caught up in all their ideologies and principles that they can’t be bothered to care about actual human beings.

  • I would argue that the vast majority of people who “understand life” (whatever that means) would have all kinds of opinions about when it begins. It can begin at a zygote; when it is viable; when it has sentience; or when it is born. So far, the courts have agreed that life begins at viability.

  • jdriesen

    I am proud to say that I’m one of those in opposition to the Christian-Right (which I was raised as), and to be a Progressive Christian.

  • Al Cruise

    After 40 years of street ministry, with some of that time spent in right wing fundie Churches, what they have never really understood is the power of unconditional love and compassion. They feel that the “unconditional” part would lead to more immorality and a anything goes culture. The opposite is true, love moves people forward and into a desire for wholeness, this happens outside of our human authority. The young of today can see that in much greater numbers than the previous generations.

  • Jakeithus

    If a person has the ability to determine if something is alive, while something else is not, they hold an understanding of what life is. Can you look at an amoeba and determine that it is alive? I’d say that is generally understood by the vast majority of people. If so, you’ll have to explain to me how determining that a single celled human is not alive works given this generally agreed on consensus.

    What the courts say in this case is irrelevant.

  • journey

    What if a woman doesn’t want to be pregnant at all, ever? She just is forced to go through that burden because a zygote has genetic material. hmmm….

  • Rebecca Trotter

    Do you know why so many women are killing their unborn? It’s because of what survivor girl explains above; because we have so many women living in such desperation that they simply cannot face bringing a child to term under those conditions. Fully 60% of women who get abortions live below the poverty line. A majority of the rest are not far from it. It’s actually relatively uncommon for a woman in good financial circumstances to obtain an abortion. You sit here and lament the loss of life caused by abortions, but what do you propose to do about the conditions leading to this tragedy? You’re like someone lamenting that people are stealing food in the middle of a war zone.

  • No, Abortion is not a seperate issue. A woman’s reproductive choices should be hers. She should be able to access what she needs to prevent getting pregnant, She should be able to have healthy children in a healthy environment. She should be able to terminate a pregnancy if her health is in danger, if she was raped, if birthing a child means that it will only live in abject misery and never make it to puberty.

    In nations with high rates of infant and child mortality, women have little or no access to health care, to contraceptives or to safe means of terminating pregnancy. Many of these women also suffer serious complications, do to lack of health care that are left untreatable, and can, and often does shorten their own lives. 800 women die daily of pregnancy related complications. 99% of those are in developed nations,http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs348/en/ like Chad, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Afghanistan. That’s 800 women that could be alive if contraceptives or pregnancy termination were available to them.

  • Exactly. There is a lack of compassion in Justas’s stance, one not uncommon in the hard right, when it comes to such issues. And they wonder why we reject such views.

  • JenellYB

    From both my personal life experiences with and observations of others involving abusive, controlling people in relationships, and then study in psychology of abusive personalities and behavioral tactics, it has been clear to me for some time that what is is happening in this wide-scale trends, as well as many of us may have encountered in churches and church communities that are traditionally “authoritarian” in nature, is exactly the same thing. As the authoritarian, controlling person or entity realizes control is slipping away, that they are losing their hold and influence over the target (victim), and the target (victim) about to bolt, leave, they response is always to ramp up the abuse, the intimidation. The same phenomenon going on that makes the decision and action toward leaving an abusive partner in a marriage or other relationship the triggering factor in unprecedented violence, even murder.

  • JenellYB

    Even worse, more and more CHRISTIANS have no real morals, or compassion for other people. For many religious, “morals” is reduced to sets of “do and don’t do” rules of things others offend, but not themselves. It is psychologically easy to “condemn” others for things one does not him or herself do, or see themselves likely to do.

  • Guy Norred
  • JenellYB

    So true! “Forcing” a girl/woman to have a baby whether by with holding access to birth control, or abortion, has always seemed to me more out of an attitude of vindictiveness, punishment, DESIRE to see her punished, to suffer. No child deserves to be seen as a “punishment” against its parent!

  • journey

    I agree. I really don’t like the idea that rape is the only circumstance when women are able to control what is going on in their own body. All that needs to be required is, the woman doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth. That is it.

  • Andy

    Probably. Whereas people like Sarah Palin have terrible ideas but are bad at expressing them without sounding like an idiot, he’s pretty well-written, from what I gathered from perusing a couple of entries that were linked to me by people whose politics I don’t agree with.

  • Guy Norred

    I agree–too many confuse morality with etiquette (not that there can’t be moral layers to etiquette, but they are hardly the same)

  • Lbj

    The zygote is the first stage of a human being so that means it does have equal value.

  • Ok, then put your money where you mouth is. Don’t get pregnant. If you are male, then either shut up, or be proactive in you yourself using pregnancy prevention.

  • Lbj

    Feeding children is not the same issue as abortion. No one should have the right to kill another human being unless there is true justification for it such as saving the life of the mother. There is no way that the 1 million babies that are killed are because the life of the woman is in danger. Here is a mind-boggling stat on how many abortions there are every year worldwide:
    “The World Wide abortion counters uses one of the more conservative estimates on the number of abortions world-wide since 1980 (40 Million per year for 30years) and this equals 1,200,000 Billion (from Lifesitenews.com: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09101604.html )
    Since Rowe there have been 56,939,000,265 abortions. And we call ourselves civilized?????

    There is no such thing as a ” safe means of terminating pregnancy”. Its not safe for the baby.

  • Morris V. Fleischer

    Al, I think you are definitely on to something there. It seems incongruent that those who are so ready to accept God’s grace are the same folks who are so unwilling to extend that same grace to others (i.e. the parable of the unforgiving servant–Matthew 18:21-35). Simply look at some of the wedge issues–many conservatives I’ve spoken with (not all) who say they are pro-life also support the death penalty. So who gets to decide when the sanctity of life ends and how is it our right to end it? How can we honor the image of God in whom the perpetrator was created without condoning or honoring his/her behavior? And are we really pro-life if we reject the opportunity to feed the hungry–unless they live up to the moral standards we place upon them? That’s not unconditional. I don’t seem to remember Jesus setting up preconditions on the lepers, the lame, the hungry, or any of the people he healed or fed. I’m not suggesting that morality isn’t important–what I am suggesting is that our generous and compassionate acts are, in my opinion, the best witness to the unconditional love of God. Let’s not forget that the early church grew because people saw and responded to their generosity and their love of God and neighbor–they were drawn towards new life in Christ because the community of Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit, reflected his light (see the Book of Acts). As St. Francis of Assisi (or it was at least attributed to him) said: “Preach often, if necessary, use words.” And they’ll know we are Christians by our love…

  • Andy

    Exactly.

  • Lbj

    What do you think of this”

    “”Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote.”[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]

    “Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
    “Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.”
    [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]”

  • Jakeithus

    Preventing birth…what a nice and tidy choice of words for ending human life. Maybe starving to death should be called the prevention of digestion, so as not to offend any delicate sensibilities.

    I was going to leave this alone, as it felt overly hostile, but your accusation above that those who disagrees with you on this “lacks compassion” is too much. Only one position on this issue shows compassion towards the two lives that are involved, and it certainly isn’t yours. You imply that others don’t care as much as you do about starving children, or women in poverty; I call that nothing more than a flagrant attempt to demonize your opponents and claim the moral high ground as your own.

    I’m not under the illusion that making abortion illegal will end it, I understand it will hurt women without the appropriate supports in place, but I understand politics and know that as long as the status-quo is allowed to exist those supports will never get put in place. I have my own problems with the pro-life movement and how they have conducted themselves, so I won’t say criticism isn’t warranted.

    I look forward to the day when the Church, the West, and the entire world gets on the right side of history in extending value and compassion to all human beings, regardless of their stage of development or how much of an imposition they might be.

  • Andy

    I’m not sure I agree with “vast majority” here, but I do agree with your other points.

  • Lbj

    Right. When you look at the idea of so called “safe sex” what do we get? There are countless cases of STD’s and unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

    If people did practice abstinence only, we would not be seeing these high number of bad things that scar people the rest of their lives.

  • Guy Norred

    Those last words (and the song associated with them I don’t think I have actually heard or sung since my childhood) have been going through my head the last few days. I wish that was what we were known for.

  • Andy

    “If people did practice abstinence only, we would not be seeing these high number of bad things that scar people the rest of their lives.”

    If people did practice abstinence only, there would be a lot more angry and bad people. Sex makes people happy. In some cases, like if you’re very poor and working 2 jobs and still barely making ends meet, it might be the only thing you get any happiness from. For some people, it might be the only thing keeping them from going off the deep end, just being able to be happy for a few minutes at night before you have to go to sleep, wake up, and do the same shit all over again the next day.

    The problem is more socioeconomic than you might think.

  • Andy

    Let me guess, you think that if abortions are outlawed, there will be fewer of them? Good luck proving that.

  • Kerry Thomas

    I am in Texas and the majority of the whites now vote GOP even if it hurts them. It is racial, anti-gay, and anti-government….in 10-15 years Texas will be purple, going blue. The whites will be outvoted by the bloc that runs along IH-10 that runs Beaumont to Houston, to San Antonio to El Paso to the South.
    This is where the real growth in Texas will be.
    Protestant religious groups at one time made inroads into this area, but stopped. I seriously think they are afraid of Latinos in their denomination. They are afraid that that they might ” take over ” the thinking of well, especially the SBC….
    If I live another 15 years Texas will be a totally different place than any of us ever dreamed….

  • Andy

    Find me one sane person in the world that is pro-abortion. Just one. One person that actually wants abortion to happen. One person that doesn’t view it as a last resort. One person that loses no sleep over this decision.

    I’m sick of the “pro-abortion” straw man. That’s bullshit. No one is pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is not the same thing at all.

  • Jakeithus

    I personally don’t know a single person who, presented with a single celled organism that contains everything that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter (ability to develop, grow, reproduce, obtain nutrients), would deny that such a thing is alive. Such people may exist, I haven’t seen enough to change my calling them a “vast majority”.

  • Andy

    Yes! I hope so!

  • Andy

    I see your point, and I’m not going to argue whether or not “vast majority” is an appropriate description any more because neither do I have the numbers to back it up. But I will say that I don’t think it’s as cut-and-dried as the situation you’re presenting.

  • BT

    I think it supports my point.
    The language here deals with the biological development from fertilized egg to fully formed human. To you, that’s the same as personhood (or “human life” or “ensoulment” or pick any word that’s not biologically determined.)

    To another, that’s a biological process that’s separate from when personhood or ensoulment occurs.

    For many years, protestants frequently thought of ensoulment as occurring at birth rather than fertilization. There was in fact a variety of opinion on the issue right up until the late 1970’s.

    As long as the two sides are speaking two different languages based on two different sets of assumptions but fail to recognize the situation as such, discussions like this are just always going to be difficult.

  • Guy Norred

    And as I found out recently when I came across this post

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/10/how-i-lost-faith-in-the-pro-life-movement.html

    (which I have done a little checking on and it doesn’t seem to be negated) the opposition is considerably less pro-life than they would have you believe. Honestly, this was an eye opener for me.

  • notmike64

    the power of the internet…..

  • Have you ever had to face an unexpected pregnancy? Have you ever had pregnancy complications? Have you ever been put into an impossible situation thanks to being pregnant, being denied work, resources? I have. I know what it is like to walk in the shoes of women faced with very difficult choices. I know what its like to know, that no matter what decision I make, my life is forever altered.

    I am compassionate, because of that, for every woman who’s walked a minute in similar shoes, millions of us who judge us harshly if we continue with our pregnancies or if we don’t. To attempt to dictate our lives, our choices, our bodies because of religious based idealism is cruel and unjust

  • I think in those scenarios there is a cognitive dissonance that most people are unable to recognize, and so it gets classified as “alive” in one scenario and becomes a “zygote” in a different scenario to lessen the tension.

  • exactly BT.

  • Guy Norred

    This did all start with a post about who seems all angry these days, didn’t it?

  • Lbj

    No. But many women have been in your situation and did not abort their child,
    This is not just about religious idealism but what is right morally. The law always dictates.

  • So true. Reminds me that while I’m definitely not on the right anymore, I’m not at home on the left either.

  • Andy

    Yes. They have co-opted the term “pro-life” because it sounds good. It sounds like they care about everything. But many of them do not. Many of them basically say that once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, every one of you. And if you can’t, well, tough. Whatever happens to you happens.

    What these people actually are is pro-birth. Not pro-life.*

    Ironically, as Libby’s article points out, many pro-choice people support measures that actually decrease abortion rates (like improved education and access to contraception) because they also dislike the idea of abortion. If those “pro-life” people were really against abortion, they’d support these measures, too.

    * Just to clarify, I’m not saying everyone who calls themselves pro-life is like this. Some of them, including a lot of politicians, but not all of them.

  • CroneEver

    What they refuse to recognize is that it all fell apart because all they sought was power and control. Claiming to pursue and reflect Christian family values, they sold out each and every Christian virtue (love, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) in pursuit of political influence and power. Claiming to be saints, they judged the country and divided into saints and sinners, constantly presented any government but theirs as evil, and consciously made compromise anathema. Claiming to be Christians, they rejected the rights of almost everyone except white males, i.e., themselves. They are angry because they did it to themselves, and they cannot live with that knowledge, and they are spewing blame everywhere they look.

  • Jakeithus

    Allegro, believe me when I say I am sorry for any situations and experience that you may have faced in your past, and for any tough decisions that you or others have had to make. Our society, and unfortunately the church as well, has often not been supportive enough of women and babies.

    If I implied you and others holding your position lack any sort of compassion, I am sorry. However, I still take great offense at your implication about your opponents lack of compassion. For many on the pro-life side, we cannot help but feel great compassion towards those who are not yet born, and to ignore them in favour of the mother is simply impossible. This is not to say that mother’s should not be shown as much compassion as possible, but it cannot be done in isolation. It is just as much of an injustice to ignore those not yet born as it is to ignore women.

  • Andy

    Heh.

    At the risk of turning this comment thread into something NSFW, it seems like a lot of them just don’t like sex. They’re against abortion. They’re against contraception. Perhaps they think sex is only for procreation. And that’s no way to run a government. Just because you aren’t getting any, or enough, doesn’t mean you should be able to decide how often anyone else gets to do it, or for what reasons. That’s nobody else’s business.

  • Andy

    No. No no no. No it doesn’t. Outlawing abortion will not prevent abortions from happening. Making the determination that abortions are morally reprehensible will not prevent them from happening. What will prevent them from happening is education and easy access to contraception. Believe it or not, most women don’t want to have abortions and consider them a last result, and even then probably endure a great personal battle before doing so.

  • Andy

    I clicked the up vote button many times, but it doesn’t seem to be working. Much like we might be saying if some of those angry old men had their way, I could only do it once.

  • Guy Norred

    I find that I tend to fall quite far left, except when I fall quite far right. I also try to hold myself to a much higher standard than I expect of others. (Try that is– I know I do not always succeed at either my own standards or the avoidance of hypocrisy–working on that) In some ways, I think this may have been the big failing of the right. They rarely seem to be holding themselves to a higher standard than they demand of others–even without the scandals associated with egregious failures.

  • Asemodeus

    You are all giving these fundamentalists way too much credit. You are subscribing them a level of self awareness that we never see from them in reality. Back in reality, these people will happily self delude themselves into any position they want, so their level of angry has nothing intrinsic to emerging demographics. They can just lie to themselves that the current youth that hates them with a passion will eventually join them when they get old and “wise” up.

    Their anger comes from Authoritarianism. They are angry because it is easier to lead angry stupid people around by their established authorities. So these established authorities keep telling these people that they are the true Christian Americans and reward their hostility to ‘The Other’ with political power and exposure.

    When you convince angry stupid people that they are the true Holy warriors of Christian America, you can get them to believe and do anything you want. Mostly around making them vote for you and give you money, something the religious right has elevated to a higher art form. When you can convince yourself that you are just and holy for your anger, that is constantly being validated by authorities, then you are just one shotgun away from shooting people in the face and thinking you did right.

  • Andy

    …which is quite funny, because they still control the House, and they’ve managed to stymie a lot of the President’s initiatives as they planned. The power the President has, compared to what Congress has, is pretty minuscule.

    If Mitt Romney were president right now, we’d still have 535 people that can’t get along and do anything productive, whom we are paying quite handsomely to mostly sit around and bitch and rant — when they aren’t trying to look good for the cameras.

  • Guy Norred

    And to clarify, I agree. I think I would say overall I always felt mostly this way, but when I saw some of the statistics…well, it made it much less of an agonizing thing for me.

  • Guy Norred

    And to clarify further–I suspect succumbing to the temptation to connect some dots was probably a failure to live up to those standards I try to keep. I apologize.

  • Al Cruise

    Amen Brother.

  • Kerry Thomas

    Tim, I changed about 5 years ago on my entire view on gays and gay marriage.
    I had a long discussion with an ex-student of mine who said that ” he’d do anything not to be gay….” And he’d tried everything from Christian counseling, psychologists, even hormone treatment some doctor suggested…he was gay and society told him, he was worthless….
    I am convinced some people are just born gay, just like some people have red hair, some people are left handed, some people have no ear lobes.
    Why should a person be miserable because our society sayings being gay is somehow wrong?
    In Medieval Europe, being left handed was looked at as being devil possessed.
    This is the same attitude gays are looked at today…we got to change….

  • HappyCat

    That’s a pretty big if. It doesn’t correlate in the world we actually live in. People will have sex. Not everyone is a practicing Christian and even Christians fall. In fact the highest demographic of teen pregnancy is Evangelical christian girls receiving abstinence only education like Sarah Palin’s daughter.

  • B real

    And even more than that, to control women by “keeping them in their so-called ‘God ordained’ place”in the kitchen, barefoot, and constantly pregnant and taking care of children. How can any woman work in the workplace, much less in a position of influence and authority, if she’s too busy with home? Thusly, men stay in total control and power.

  • Gary Lane Brooks

    Excellent points. I love reading your thoughts. What we have been witnessing is a decades long, slow-motion coup.Led by the wealthy and powerful, against the middle-class, the poor and all other un-worthies who have deigned to asked for a place at the table. The religious right banded together with the super-wealthy to throw out the usurpers who were infringing on their manifest-destinied rights to, well, everything. They seized the opinion makers in the media, the government and religion and thought they had it all covered. It’s not over yet though, even a dying snake can still bite.

  • B real

    Thanks for keeping it real….sex is also used as a release from tension!

  • Asemodeus

    The religious right lost a lot of power once their chosen savior, Bush, turned out to be a colossal failure of the basic human being. Which is, in part, why today’s republican party is so dysfunctional. They got everything they wanted out of Bush in terms of a savior king, and he still managed to screw it up.

    And ever since the religious right has constantly failed to come up with a proper Bush clone. A right wing politician with just that right amount of religious gibberish and establishment credentials that makes him electable. You have to remember that the religious right initially HATED HATE HATE SPIT HATE John McCain. Several leaders flat out said that they would never vote for him, but eventually did, when it became obvious that he was the only electable candidate in 2008. But he was no savior king, which hurt the get out to vote drives on the right.

    Same thing with Romney. A 100 years ago a Mormon trying to get elected president would have been lynched by the same people that went on television 2 years ago to champion him as a true Christian. But he was still a Mormon, which hurt the cause since there was no Bush Clone available.

  • Andy

    Yes! Without that, people might go insane in the brain.

  • Asemodeus

    It has more to do with how misogynists view women on a more general level than just religion.

    To misogynists, women fall into three groups:
    1. Mothers.

    2. Daughters
    3. Sluts.

    In their warped worldview, the only women who want/use contraception is group 3. Since everyone in group 3 is a slut, therefore every woman that uses contraception is a slut.

  • Lbj

    Yes. I suspect before Row-Wade there were fewer abortions. When the something is legalized it takes away the moral impact and increases the use.

  • Andy

    Oh, the irony. It burns.

  • Lbj

    Why the reluctance for abortion? If its not a human life then why be reluctant? If that is the case it should be just like going to the dentist.

  • Lbj

    Abortion involves both sexes. When a man gets a woman pregnant then he should support her. If he doesn’t, throw him in jail until he does.
    This is why having sex outside of marriage is playing with fire. It can have grave consequences when its not in the right relationship.

  • Andy

    Care to look up those numbers for me? Because there is plenty of reason to believe that banning abortion does not decrease abortion rates.

  • Lbj

    What the “safe sex” crowd is communicating is that people are really animals who can’t control the sexual impulses. You don’t have to be a Christian to practice and commit to abstinence. Its the smartest move to make since it avoids all kinds of problems.

  • Andy

    You’re very idealistic. Reality often falls short of ideal.

  • Lbj

    Wow. Think about sex. It lasts for a few minutes for the most part and can have life long negative consequences. People need to think about the consequences of their actions. People need to find another way to find happiness that won’t causes such problems for themselves.

  • Andy

    It also solves all kinds of problems. Or at least allows people to get by day-to-day when they otherwise might go crazy. How do you propose such people keep from falling off the edge?

    You completely missed the point. The entire world is not going to practice abstinence.

  • Jld33

    It’s all well and good to say that. Pregnancy and birth can be difficult and dangerous and sometimes deadly. I nearly died multiple times and spent *six months* on complete bed rest. Even with health insurance we had to declare bankruptcy to bring a baby into the world. Your platitudes about women needing “support” are just that. They don’t deal with the very real implications of forced birthing on real women and their lives.

  • Andy

    There are plenty of ways to be all but certain of not getting pregnant during sex. Abstinence isn’t realistic for most people. Or do you have another suggestion for them?

  • Lbj

    I agree that “The entire world is not going to practice abstinence.” The data shows that and that those who don’t bring untold misery into their lives by not practicing abstinence.

    If someone is going crazy because they don’t have sex then that shows its some kind of addiction or lack of self-control. They need help.

  • Lbj

    Why isn’t “Abstinence isn’t realistic for most people”?

  • Ignatz

    They chose to replace Jesus Christ with a “culture war.” How foolish.

    They bear an astonishing resemblance to the New Testament Pharisees.

  • Lbj

    Get serious. It is not a platitude about women needing “support” . Both parties have a responsibility to bring that child into the world and support it.

  • Jld33

    You have NO clue what it is like to be seriously deathly ill from pregnancy, to be unable, to work, to face homelessness. Women have real lives that you have decided have less value than a zygote. Because you can make that determination based on your cozy uncomplicated view of women as incubators and nothing else. You want to think that a father in the picture is the solution to everything. You don’t even vaguely live in the real world where people are poor and have health issues and have very complicated lives and already have children to take care of and feed and keep a roof over their heads. Your platitudes and one dimensional viewpoints are what is wrong with the Pro-zygotes. If you had real compassion you would at least admit that getting pregnant can be the *worst* thing to happen and birth control can fail and there is NO support from the pro-zygotes when a woman needs it.

  • BT

    In his wording and approach there is a lack of compassion (or understanding), but his overall stance makes perfect sense given his assumptions. If you assume that a zygote is a real human life, then you’d move heaven and earth to save that child and damn the torpedoes.

    Likewise, it does no good for him to call abortion murder. If pro-choice people really thought that fetus was a full human life, we wouldn’t be arguing over a right to choose. Everyone would view abortion as abhorrent. However, pro choice folks don’t see the fetus as a person, therefore they don’t see it as murder.

    Thus, depending on the assumptions used, the pro-life position is not uncompassionate, and the pro choice position can be similarly moral and rational.

    Edit to add: the pro life position given their assumptions isn’t necessarily uncompassionate. I agree that much of the rhetoric, however, is.

  • Beth Rich

    I agree, I think they’re getting what I call for myself a “two-by-four from God”

  • Beth Rich

    Don’t forget the white women in Texas who are also marginalized. I haven’t even considered a conservative candidate in years. I simply cannot reconcile the Tea Party/conservative rhetoric and the Gospels – I simply cannot see any Christian values in their so-called Christian value platform.

  • Who said I opted for abortion?

  • Thomas K

    #1: Actually, the Christian culture war has been raging for nearly 2,000 years. From almost the moment Jesus died, his followers began breaking off into branches, often led by people who never really learned or understood the lessons Jesus taught. They focused (once again) on forcing others to pay for their sin, punishing them for being human, and threatening eternal damnation if you didn’t do what they (the preachers) demanded.

    They don’t even understand today that Jesus was murdered by preachers and politicians, while the moral majority and followers of those in power simply looked the other way.

  • Andy

    Those are some pretty baseless assertions. How about some citations?

    Also, your last sentence is a straw man, and it’s very wrong.

  • Andy

    Because people like sex. Duh.

  • No proof that there were fewer abortions, just more women dying from complications of a botched one and from pregnancy related issues. imagine how many women lived longer healthier lives, able to work, raise families, contribute to society, because safe options for their sexual was available….

  • Lbj

    Just look up STD’s at the Center of Disease Control. You’ll see a lot of stats on this.

  • Lbj

    So what. People like to go 90 mph in town. Should they do it?

  • sharon peters

    i hope it will not be filled w/ concentration camps but i fear it will.

  • Andy

    There is no parallel there. I don’t know any city where going 90 mph is legal. Sex is legal and isn’t going to be outlawed.

  • Andy

    Nope. You made the assertion, you provide the stats. That’s how the burden of proof works.

  • Lbj

    Were you ever a zygote?

  • Lbj

    The point is that its reckless. Just because like to do something does not mean you should do it. Just because something is legal does not make it right.

  • Andy

    There is no 100% guarantee of safety in any action. Safe sex isn’t reckless at all.

  • Lbj

    Where was your husband when you were pregnant? Didn’t he support you?

  • sharon peters

    DARVO
    stands for “Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.” The perpetrator or offender may Deny the behavior, Attack the
    individual doing the confronting, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender such that the
    perpetrator assumes the victim role and turns the true victim — or the whistle
    blower — into an alleged offender.
    this is from;
    JENNIFER FRYE (u of oregon professor) betrayal theory research

    http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/defineDARVO.html

  • sharon peters

    fashions change but patterns of abuse, trauma, betrayal and addiction stay the same

  • sharon peters

    Structural violence is a term commonly ascribed to Johan Galtung, which he introduced in the article “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research” in 1969. It refers to a form of violence where some social structure or social institution may harm people by preventing them from meeting their basic needs.

  • sharon peters

    you can be known for it

  • sharon peters

    …or organized crime

  • sharon peters

    “It is funny how mortals always picture us as putting things into their minds: in reality our best work is done by keeping things out.”
    ― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

  • sharon peters

    Addressing serious issues like healthcare, poverty, livable minimum wages, etc., would challenge turf that organized crime dominates. did i hear reciently that the current pope excommunicated the mafia? i am so out of touch!

  • sharon peters

    black and white thinking

  • sharon peters

    i like ‘i’ statements!

  • sharon peters

    yuh! like alcohol and tobaco

  • What does a husband have to do with being pregnant? Is he going to take a turn being physically attached to the fetus?

  • sharon peters

    also its a thought stopping cultic technique
    just saying!

  • Lbj

    No. But he can do a lot to comfort and support her. Its his baby to.

  • Because, its an invasive medical procedure, more like having a vasectomy, or a biopsy, or getting impacted wisdom teeth removed. All involve risks. We go to physicians for these things, because we know they will make things go as smoothly as possible for us.

  • Guest

    Nobody’s going to build concentration camps. I really wish people would stop with this concentration camp paranoia. They cannot back up these claims and they’re just saying that there are people being sent to them as we speak to scare people while they are not able to name one person who has been sent to said camp. This garbage is getting old.

  • sharon peters

    “What are you looking at? You never seen a kid in a bubble before?”- Donald the bubble boy, in “The Bubble Boy”~Seinfeld

  • Lbj
  • Yeah right. I vividly remember standing on a twelve foot ladder while seven months pregnant, painting a house, to help my shit head of a…thankfully ex- husband put food on the table.

    In a perfect, idealistic world, pregnant moms are pampered, and coddled and well cared for. But that’s not reality for most women. Many women in the world are working, often physical labor, right up till they go into labor, with little or no assistance from the men in their lives.

  • Allison the Great

    This is an excellent point. I would like to point out that in their anger and frustration over losing control over American culture, they’ve lost their humanity as well, if they ever had any to begin with. Their desperation to retain power has made them say and do some pretty despicable things, and sink to new lows.

  • Lbj

    So there should be not guilty feelings for having an abortion. After all no one feels guilty about getting their wisdom teeth pulled. Right?

  • Allison the Great

    Exactly. The huge problem with The Right is that they can’t mind their own business. They seek to control everything and everyone around them and so they feel that they should have a say in the health decisions that are private.

    They also seek to control women. It is always the woman that needs to be punished with having a child, the men who fathered it are never mentioned once. The women are the ones being told to “keep her legs closed” and other nasty things.

  • Lbj

    It is sad that happens, But it should not be. More men need to man up and take responsibility. To many wimp men around.

  • Andy

    SDTs are far from ubiquitous. If you’re being safe, you shouldn’t be deterred by them.

  • Lbj

    There is no such thing as “safe sex”. Sex is not only physical but emotionally bonds people together.

  • Jeff Preuss

    I’ve been to the computer three separate times now, trying to find a way to properly articulate my thoughts on the whole abortion debate, and cannot find a way to adequately spell out the perspective I have without somehow possibly hurting someone due to lack of clarity, so I’m just gonna up-click this post and continue reading.

  • jan

    The pursuit of political dominance will ultimately undermine the morality of any religious group. These far-right Christians are blind to their own sins of pride and self-righteousness. If you need to control others behavior instead of improving your own, not only will your children turn their backs on you, but so will your Savior.

  • Lbj

    There are all kinds of things that could be done. One is to hold the man responsible financially via a number of ways. Why are these poor women getting pregnant? Do you know? What part should adoptions play in this? How about families helping? I know a number of churches and organizations that are willing to help.

  • Lbj

    Some good points here. If the zygote-fetus is not human then I don’t have a leg to stand on. But if it is, then everything I have said is well supported. It’s not uncompassitionate to speak the truth when a human life is at stake.

  • Lbj

    The head of planned parenthood and the woman who recently filmed her abortion so other woman would not be afraid of it. I think it’s on utube.

  • Lbj

    Do think the man who gets a woman pregnant should be forced to support her and the baby for the next 20 years ?

  • NCHammer

    Alarming, but not surprising, that progressives (both in the political and church worlds) are so willing to play God with an unborn child. Read through the comments here and you see lots of references to wanting to prevent kids from being born into bad or even horrific situations. While that seems laudable on the surface, some further thought leads you to the inescapable conclusion that you are basically saying some lives are more important, more desirable, more worthy than others, all in the name of “women’s reproductive rights”. Sound Biblical at all? How can Christians on one hand, preach teach and live that God loves and values everyone, and then on the other be okay with unborn children being murdered simply for economic or social or even career expedience?

    It’s not a stretch to conclude that in today’s American culture, Mary and Joseph would have been encourage by some professing Christians to abort the Son of God.

    Make zero mistake about it, the abortion industry (and it is an industry) exists for 3 reasons: 1) profit 2) as an attempt to extinguish undesirable, {ie poor or non-white, life} and 3) as an escape from the responsibility of sinful choices.

    And spare the “but millions of women might die if it’s outlawed” nonsense. We, as a rational, moral society should not be held hostage to what some people may or may not do if we don’t allow them to murder an unborn baby. It’s a false choice practically and politically and it’s certainly not an argument Christians can make on Scriptural grounds.

    I am continually amazed that the progressives are so loathe to have conservatives utilize political, legal and other means to achieve desired goals, yet feel so comfortable with using the State to impose their own brand of morality (social justice, living wage, approval of the homosexual agenda, “free” healthcare) on those who don’t share the same views. The hypocrisy runs very deep indeed.

  • Bill Wolpert

    An interesting aspect to this…. The steady change to a liberal and as they see it more promiscious and sinful world, is something they have long “prophesied” would eventually happen. So as their ranks shrink, their convictions will become ever more congieled.

  • NCHammer

    If you think there aren’t people cheering every single abortion as a victory you are a fool. Planned Parenthood exists to perform abortions and will fight any attempt to render their business model inoperable. People make money on every unborn child that is murdered, regardless of the circumstances, and you think that many of them do not look at a tally sheet at the end of every day/week/month/quarter/year and celebrate every last abortion?

  • Vincent

    I have to say I disagree that the war against abortion is lost. To me some pther aspects of the culture wars are based on misconceptions. But abortion is different. Those who are pro-life seek to protect the most vulnerable among us and I believe God supports a view that seeks to protect children. Even if they lost in culture, justice will always prevail at the end. Regarding other issues like LGBT issues I’m sure many “right wing” Christians will catch up soon enough.

  • AtalantaBethulia

    STDs happen by having unprotected sex. (There’s also a correlation with drug use and prostitution.)

    I’m all for abstaining from promiscuity and unsafe sexual practices. But it is untruthful to conflate promiscuity with “safe sex” and call safe sex unsafe when what you are really talking about is promiscuity.

  • sharon peters

    Flannery O’Connor—a writer whose works are rife with warning label-worthy violence—famously said that sentimentality always leads to the gas chamber.

  • Cynthia Brown Christ

    Thanks for sharing that. I am definitely going to check out Jennifer Frye and the link you provided!

  • sharon peters

    Anyone, i include myself, who has a control issue is ‘under the influence’ & in danger of losing their humanity to
    an Addiction to power. It’s a progressive illness that makes ppl do desperate & despicable things that, ultimately will destroy all love relationships. (casting them in outer darkness, there will be weeping & wailing & gnashing of teeth.) Since I am as susceptible as anyone I want grace to recover from what I will suffer for not having any empathy for others.

  • Tlynn

    Abortion clinics are like any other medical field. They provide a service. You pay doctors, enough said. It sounds like you feel that forcing ( because that is what you want to happen) a woman to have a child as a form of punishment for her lifestyle you don’t agree with. There is something offputting about that statement. If that is not what you meant, please clarify. Number two is false, if you feel it isn’t, please provide factual proof. Also social justice started in the church, so how is it immoral? Lastly, if you would like to see more women keep their children, backing a living wage and affordable healthcare would be a good place to start.

  • Tlynn

    The homosexual agenda seems to be like my own. To be able to have the same rights and equal protection under the law that I am granted.

  • sharon peters

    inside the ‘box’ thinking about sex,
    everyone agreeing w/you = safety.
    its not about sex, abortion, or anything
    it’s about control and feeling safe inside your ‘box’
    where everyone agrees w/ you.
    cultic thought stopping techniques are
    ment to end discussion among the ‘saved’!

  • NCHammer

    Abortion clinics kill unborn children for profit.

    Who is forcing women to have children? No one is advocating forced impregnation. And it’s a false choice, anyway. Murdering the baby is not the only option available to women in a case of unwanted pregnancy.

    This is a blog based, at least in part, in Christian teaching and there is no Biblical, Scriptural ground for aborting babies as a convenience to sexual freedom. The vast (and it isn’t even debatable as a statistical fact) majority of abortions (especially in the US) are for birth control purposes for sexual sin outside of marriage.

    But for discussion sake, I’ll even remove the moral element and just talk about practical, political implications. The abortion industry isn’t happy with just legal access to murdering unwanted children, they want taxpayers to pay for it, either directly through funding of such entities as Planned Parenthood, or indirectly through forcing employers to pay for abortion services as part of now government imposed healthcare plans. Some freedom you’re allowing for those who find abortion repugnant and want no part in it.

    Secondly, statistically most aborted babies are from minority women in lower income strata. Doesn’t it stand to reason that those all too happy to push the abortion agenda relish less non-white, poor children being born? Negative eugenics is certainly a driving factor in the abortion industry.

    And nice try being put-off by a statement I did not make, either implicitly nor explicitly. Children are never a punishment. They are, however, a responsibility. A certainly, as a civilized society, personal responsibility for actions we freely take should be encouraged.

  • sharon peters

    the ppl in my ‘box’ should get together w/ the ppl in your ‘box’ & do lunch!

  • jimfromcanada

    I think the concentration camps are those filled with mostly black people.

  • Andy

    Yes to the second one, no to the first. “Safe” != 100%.

  • sharon peters

    Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.

    HAL: I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.

    Dave Bowman: What’s the problem?

    HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.

    Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?

    HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.

    Dave Bowman: I don’t know what you’re talking about, HAL.

    HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I’m afraid that’s something I cannot allow to happen.

  • Andy

    This is rarely black and white, but in general, I think he should have to do his fair share. I know that’s vague, but the particulars of every situation are different.

  • Andy

    You didn’t actually find me a person, you just babbled in generalities about something you don’t know enough about. Abortions make up about 3% of the services offered by Planned Parenthood.

  • Andy

    George Carlin nailed it about abortion. (Obviously NSFW words)

  • sharon peters

    And when the sand was gone and the time arrived
    In the naked dawn only a few survived
    And in attempts to understand a thing so simple and so huge
    Believed that they were meant to live after the deluge
    ~jackson browne

  • sharon peters

    ghettos & prisons

  • Getreal

    I guess you’ve never watched MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Church Schumer, Jeremiah Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton et al. The term anal retentive comes to mind. An entertaining piece of psychologizing though, along with the minions comedic two cents worth of subjective drivel.

  • Terri

    YOU want to practice abstinence, don’t expect to force your ideas on others. Get a life buddy, people have sex, it’s fun, relaxing and enjoyable. Maybe you shoudl try it, if you can find a willing partner.

  • Anthony Brancato

    But where is this “progressive/emergent Christianity” you speak of? All I see is secular humanism, if not, indeed, atheism. And you may be stuck in the Germany of 1929, which is a lot more pathetic than being stuck in the America of 1984. I don’t think you have any idea of what is coming. I do – and have coined a term to denote our present situation: Weimar America. Come to the cabaret – while you still can.

  • Michael Bean

    I’ve always believed that haters die. I don’t mean the individuals themselves, but the concepts behind them die. It’s taking time, but I truly believe eventually the last hater will look around and realize that they are the only one in the room who’s listening when they speak

  • lindylou

    In the 50s and 60s, if a girl were raped, her reputation was trashed, the family had to move out of town. Who would want to return to that?

  • lindylou

    At least we won’t have Cantor photobombing every picture!

  • David Mabury

    The article here is interesting, but this thoughtful and compassionate comment thread is the real eye-opener. I grew up gay and Southern Baptist a generation ago. I watched dozens of my friends die slow painful deaths in the AIDS holocaust while their Christian families and communities treated them like sh*t. I realized Christianity itself was the whited sepulchre spoken of in Matthew 23:27, and I left the church. I will never be Christian again myself, but all of you in this comment thread give me hope that Christianity is changing for the better. Thank you.

  • CroneEver

    And, of course, the Right completely ignores the fact that under “traditional” sexual standards, the reason women would not be raped is that a man owned his wife’s body and could do anything he wanted to it. Her consent was completely irrelevant. From comments I’ve heard about of some of the extreme right, they still believe this – and this is the source for many of their repugnant statements about rape.

    Personally, I’ve been pro-choice ever since I was in junior high in the 1960’s, when a 14 year old classmate was knocked up by her father (something the Right refuses to accept ever happens) and was taken – by her parents – to (probably) Mexico for an illegal abortion… and died.

    Since then, I’ve worked in the judicial system, and seen all too many incest victims pressured by their own families to recant, to deny, to blame someone else – and be taken off for abortions – and all by supposedly hard-core “family values” people, because protecting their family’s reputation is always more important than protecting the child. And besides, see above, there is no such thing as rape. The child asked for it.

    Sorry, got off on a rant, but… Excellent response, Rachel.

  • WonkishGuy

    The real question is not whether those who are pro-life are right in an objective sense, but whether they are any closer to convincing people that they are. The pro-life movement has largely been a failure, managing at best to introduce slightly more burdensome requirements. People are not any more consistently pro-life than they were in the 1970s and public support for the legality of abortion has been virtually flat over that period of time, which was the heyday of evangelicalism. You can sustain the cultural stigma associated with abortion for one more generation as kids raised to be pro-life walk away from evangelicalism but retain some of the moral prohibitions that they were taught. But will the next generation also be pro-life? I doubt it. This is the pattern that we saw in European countries: in the 1970s, people were walking away from Christianity but still retained some of its taboos (only 48% of French people were in favor of abortion on-demand). The next generation jettisoned these taboos and now 75% are in favor. I’m predicting that America will go the same way: millennial are walking from religion, but their children will turn out much more pro-choice than they are.

  • NCHammer

    So, you’d prefer I list the names of every abortion doctor, building their economic success on the murder of unborn babies? I babbled the truth about an abortion factory, only one of them, but perhaps the best known.

    You babbled out a 3% statistic this is easily manipulated, easily refuted (some estimates actually have the number at 9-12%) and irrelevant to my assertion even if it were stone-cold truth (which, again, it isn’t). No matter what statistics you trot out, people profit from from abortion and build business models on it. And when people profit, they want more to happen. It’s an inescapable economic law.

    Feel free to defend that all you want.

  • WonkishGuy

    There is also no scriptural basis for *not* aborting an embryo or fetus, so this is something that Christians can disagree about depending on whether they think that embryos and fetuses are worthy of protection. That’s really a question for philosophers rather than theologians.

    My own view is that there is a good prima facie case against abortion since it involves depriving potential people of a potential future like ours (this is Don Marquis’s argument, which too few pro-choice people are familiar with).

    However, there are also potent objections: statistically speaking, both contraception and abstinence also lead to fewer people than would occur naturally. In a way, these potential people are as robbed of their future as aborted fetuses. Yet, it seems absurd to suggest that we have a duty to have as many children as possible. But there are also counter-arguments to this contraception objection, so the debate is far from settled. I think the contraception argument is successful and that, additionally, in the earliest stage of pregnancy, a fetus is too remote from an actual person to warrant protection: their potential future is not any more real than the potential people who would be born if contraception were not used.

    As for funding it, I’d say that, as long as it is a legal medical procedure, I have no objection with it being funded by taxpayers. People can for instance object to military spending or the war on drugs, but are still required to pay their taxes in full.

  • WonkishGuy

    Do you have any proof of this? Cheating on my wife is legal, but most people recognize that it is immoral. Getting drunk on a regular basis is legal, but most people still think it is immoral. Lying is generally legal, but still widely seen as immoral. If we legalized the murder of adult people, I don’t expect that people would suddenly think that murder is acceptable. The opposite is also true since there are many illegal activities that people don’t consider immoral (file sharing?).

    I’d say the causality is reversed: when people already consider that something is not immoral, it will tend to be legalized. Any increase in prevelence is more likely to be due to people not fearing getting caught than shifts in opinion regarding the morality of the action.

  • Al Cruise

    What you are describing so well is what the Kingdom of God is to be like here and now on earth. What we should be doing in the present day, and leaving the heavy lifting to Christ/Holy Spirit. Withholding grace can never find a place to rest or be satisfied and leads down a path where Angels fear to tread.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    Lord, give me patience. And tolerance. And forgiveness.

    Seriously? You’re messing with me, right? So, we have a serious problem with poverty and lack of opportunity in the wealthiest country in the world, but that’s not an issue to be dealt with. Oh no, we can’t possibly do something to help change that!

    Now, this may come as a shock, but poor women usually have – I know this sounds crazy, but just consider the possibility – poor families. No really. They do. And their boyfriends and husbands are – get this – poor as well. It’s crazy, I know!

    And I had to depend on those lovely churches and charities for help at the time and you know what? They suck ass! There’s no magic pot of money just waiting for people. It can help keep you from starving and maybe give you $20 for gas a few times a year, but that’s about it.

    Do you know what softened my pro life stance? The experience of watching a family member who had been raped and become pregnant kicked into the streets by her family because “there are people who can help you.” And you know what? That’s a myth. It’s evil bullshit.. The poor girl came to regret not having an abortion, despite loving her son because her life is unbearably hard due to money.

    But hey – let’s just go back to the days of telling poor women that they can’t raise their own kids because they’re poor! Because that’s not evil or anything! Seriously, this level of callous disregard for the women who are suffering and delusional thinking does not reflect well on you as a person, much less a Christian.

  • Lbj

    Ok. Let’s start at the beginning. How we answer this one question will determine how we will address other issues of abortion. That question is this:
    WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE UNBORN?
    If the zygote-fetus is not a human being then abortion is not wrong. Its like getting a tooth pulled. There should no guilt associated with it. We should look at abortion as another form of birth control.
    If the zygote-fetus is a human being, then it must be protected at all costs. No reason (except to save the life of the mother) for killing it could be justified.

    If you support abortion, then on what scientific, philosophical and theological grounds can you present that shows the zygote-fetus is not a human being?

    The same question must be answered by the pro-lifer.

    What do you think?

  • Buford T. Pepper

    My epiphany came a few years ago when I realized that Christianity was about love and unconditionally accepting each other. I started to feel kinship with all the people in the world. I saw that we are all in this together. I knew about ‘globalization,’ but I always thought about it as a corporation or business thing. Now I see it as a species thing. We are all the human species, and the Earth is what God has given us. It actually made me feel good to think about things in this way. Call it Christianity or secular humanism or any other religion you want, it is the feeling that we are one species, and we are all in this together.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    K I was mean and swore in my first response because I am so furiously angry at your response. I want to go destroy something after reading it. You have no idea what this sort of denial and callous disregard for women’s suffering does to people in the real world where.this is not theory and suppositions. You’re like the Roman soldier nailing Jesus to the cross mindlessly before going to have dinner with their family with no real understanding of their role in making this an unbearably evil world of suffering for many people. This is an issue for you. You have ideas about how it could work or should work. But it’s not real to you. You’ve never had to depend on charity to survive. You live in a world where.poor women come.from rich families and.have.rich boyfriends and husbands. Where it’s no big thing to say that poor women shouldn’t expect to raise their own children. You live in a world where babies that can’t be seen or held are more important than women who can. As a women, I feel like less than nothing when my real world and real problems are so irrelevant that a church food shelf and the occasional gas card are supposed to satisfy me. I hate this brand of “pro life” thinking. It’s evil. It’s an affront to God. If you cared about babies, you would care about mothers. But you don’t. Not mother’s as they exist in the real world. Those babies are nothing more than tribal markers to you. You defend them the way a tribal man wears his tribe’s identifying garments. And you have no regard for all the actual people – including living, breathing children, are hurt in your little tribal wars. Way to be the face of Christ in a suffering world. No wonder your brand of Christianity is dying. I can hardly wait for the funeral.

  • Lbj

    Now can you answer the question what the nature of the unborn is?

  • Giauz Ragnarock

    “… some lives are more important, more desirable, more worthy than others…”

    According to the Bible, Jesus, God of the Bible, says that this is an objective and unchanging moral, so what is your problem with such a view (I don’t agree with this reasoning, but I am pro-choice)? There is no scarcity of Jesus, God of the Bible, ordering everything that breaths killed without mercy or pity, all the virgin girls take for yourselves, and do make sure to rip open pregnant women and stab the prospective children to death. Also, if you are a rich king, feel free to kill a woman’s husband and take advantage of her because Jesus can’t stand sin (the wages of sin for a rich man is the death of a baby that happens to be his son… yay pro-life?).

  • Rebecca Trotter

    The nature of the unborn is one whose survival depends on the woman carrying it. If you don’t care about the woman who the unborn depends on for its existence, then you don’t care about the unborn. It’s that simple. Show me that you would move heaven and earth to care for the mother and father throughout their lives and I will believe you when you say you care about the unborn. Try to separate the unborn from the woman it lives in and you’re a spiritual abortionist who is simply using the unborn as a marker of tribal power and control. (You know what happens physically when you separate the unborn from the mother, right?)

  • Rebecca Trotter

    I don’t know what happened to my response. I didn’t swear or say anything mean, but it’s not here. Hmmmm

    Well forgive me if this is a repeat.

    The nature of the unborn is one whose survival depends on the woman carrying it. If you don’t care about the woman who the unborn depends on for its existence, then you don’t care about the unborn. It’s that simple. Show me that you would move heaven and earth to care for the mother and father throughout their lives and I will believe you when you say you care about the unborn. Try to separate the unborn from the woman it lives in and you’re a spiritual abortionist who is simply using the unborn as a marker of tribal power and control. (You know what happens physically when you separate the unborn from the mother, right?)

  • OmegaPoint

    Yes in Texas we have a prison industry. The corporations that fun the for profit prisons are lobbyists against liberalized drug laws and contributors to judicial candidates.
    Texas should turn blue, but the conservatives are hedging their bets by restricting voting rights and aggressively gerrymandering themselves into permanent office. Oh yes, and by strong the voting rights of the unfortunate individuals the feed into that prison industry. I don’t see concentration camps per se, but the old guard here isn’t giving up without a fight. Remember, it’s not just Texas that hangs in the balance, but the entire electoral college. The gop’s lady stand. It will be dirty, if not bloody.

  • NCHammer

    I don’t get the sense that you truly care what the Bible says or why, so I’m not going to engage in a debate on why God allowed what He allowed in the OT. It shouldn’t be surprising that on a blog written by a professing Christian that you would find arguments based in Bibilcal reasoning. Mock all you want…it doesn’t change the truth.

  • Tlynn

    No one political party owns subjective drivel.

  • Toni

    You are so right about that, I have been saying that the Religious Right were modern day Pharisees for quite a few years now, and as every week goes by they just keep reinforcing that.

  • Lbj

    I’m not talking about the how the unborn survive but is the unborn a human being or not? What is your foundation for saying what it is?

    A newborn baby cannot survive outside the womb without the help of another human being. Would you allow the killing of this baby because it cannot survive without help?

  • Lbj

    Peter Singer (Decamp Professor of Bio-Ethics at Princeton University )In 1979 he wrote, “Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons”; therefore, “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.” Peter Singer, Practical Ethics, 1st ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 122–23.

    Do you agree with this?

  • sharon peters

    apparently it is already filled w/ “concentration camps”

    re;OMEGA POINT (see below);
    Yes in Texas we have a prison industry. The corporations that fun the for profit prisons are lobbyists against liberalized drug laws and contributors to judicial candidates.Texas should turn blue, but the conservatives are hedging their bets by restricting voting rights and aggressively gerrymandering themselves into permanent office. Oh yes, and by strong the voting rights of the unfortunate individuals the feed into that prison industry. I don’t see concentration camps per se, but the old guard here isn’t giving up without a fight. Remember, it’s not just Texas that hangs in the balance, but the entire electoral college. The gop’s lady stand. It will be dirty, if not bloody.

    So is it only a matter of time before the revelation of Texas equivalent to gas chambers & ‘final solution’; becomes an issue of public awareness?

  • Tlynn

    Ok. You are for forcing a woman to carry a child in her body for nine months(a child she does want), forcing her to have
    labor (labor hurts and goes on for many hours. Mine lasted 13) and then you say there are alternatives to this. What alternatives? If you haven’t noticed. The first thing religious right politicians do when they come to office is cut government funding for the poor. The vast majority of people on welfare are children. There has been no extra money set aside for adoption programs nor any talk of doing so. If Roe vs Wade were to end tomorrow, a lot of these children would starve. The sad truth is that these children will be unwanted even by the. people who say every life is precious.

  • Lbj

    So abortion solves the poverty problem and lessens welfare?

  • Snooterpoot

    That is totally unrealistic and also is void of compassion. People have an innate need for intimacy. To suggest that people refrain from intimacy because your interpretation of someone else’s interpretation of yet another person’s interpretation, for centuries upon centuries, of an anthology of books written by ancient men who wrote what they knew and called it the word of God in order to control their tribes and clans (and especially to control their women) says they should, says more about the need for control that evangelical and fundamentalist Christians so self righteously demonstrate than it says about the society you so soundly condemn.

    Your comment is a really good example of the reasons why right ring Christians and churches are being marginalized and rejected by so many.

    I think that if you nattering busybodies would stop thinking about the intimate activities of strangers you, and everyone else, would be a lot happier.

  • Lbj

    Having sex is not always connected with intimacy. Also, people are not animals who cannot control their impulses. It would be far better if they did not engage in sexual activity given the serious health problems associated with it. I don’t need to make my case from the Bible for this. The health problems should be enough to dissuade people. If its not, then there is some insanity going on.

  • Snooterpoot

    You need to stop thinking about and trying to control the sexual activities of strangers. Your proclamation about taking responsibility for ones actions is nauseating and self righteous in assuming that others do not take responsibility for their actions.

    Other people’s sex lives are none of your business.

    Ultimately, I think the basis of this belief is to punish women for enjoying sex. Now that you people see that you’ve lost that battle you are angry. Boo-frigging-hoo.

  • Lbj

    No way I can control anyone. However, what other people affects us.
    When a gay man gets HIV on his own do you think that affects his family?
    When a women gets abortion do you think that affects her parents when their grandchild will not see the light of day?
    Do you think your health insurance costs go up because others need expensive drugs to stay alive because of their sexual activities?

  • Snooterpoot

    Bull shit. What we are communicating is we are sexual beings and that taking precautions to avoid STDs and unplanned pregnancies is the responsible thing to do.

    It is you and your ilk who hold that vulgar opinion. You’re disgusting.

  • Snooterpoot

    Prove it. Give us some links to unbiased sources that support your assertion that everyone who doesn’t practice abstinence is doomed to these horrible consequences.

    I won’t hold my breath.

  • Lbj

    Right. How is speaking the truth vulgar?

  • sharon peters

    tune in
    turn on!

  • sharon peters

    “Well, isn’t that special?”

    “We like ourselves, don’t we?”

    ~CHURCH LADY

  • Snooterpoot

    Pro-lifers don’t give a damn about those “murdered babies,” or about women who died from back alley abortions pre Rowe v. Wade.

    After birth you people fight against basic assistance to keep mothers and their infants from having a half way decent life. You have cheered making food assistance more difficult. You have loudly protested having health care reform that makes it easy for everyone to have affordable access to quality health care.

    You aren’t pro-life at all. You are pro-birth and pro keeping women’s sexual activities shameful.

    If you truly cared about women you would be advocating for easily obtainable contraceptives to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies and to make abortions safe.

    People like you seem to think that deciding to end a pregnancy is easy and that women have abortions only for selfish reasons. Your assumptions are self serving; they allow you to feel so righteous about your loathsome attitudes and interference with women who have made the decision to abort.

    I don’t think God is on your side. I think you are playing God yourselves and you should stop.

    Finally, it’s none of your damned business if a woman chooses to end a pregnancy.

  • Snooterpoot

    That is merely your opinion. And the “we were all zygotes” argument is specious.

  • Snooterpoot

    It is none of your business. Period.

    Safe sex reduces STD infections and helps to reduce unplanned pregnancies. The rest of your comment is nothing but emotional pablum.

  • Snooterpoot

    Well, that’s a helpful comment. /end snark

  • Chip

    Scripturally, I think Psalm 139 really does provide strong indication that abortion is against God’s will. If God is intimately creating each one of us while we’re in the womb, then abortion cannot be countenanced. This really is a theological issue involving more Scripture passages than the one I just cited.

    You also have to grapple with the fact that the early Christians were deemed barbaric by the Romans for their opposition to abortion. The weight of Church history is against abortion.

  • NCHammer

    Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:31; Luke 2:21.

    While not explicitly about abortion, these verses lend considerable weight to the position that God knows us, even prior to birth. Not sure how progressives get from there to believing pro-abortion is an acceptable position for a professing Christian to hold.

  • Lbj

    So the idea that “The father of the child should be the first line of support.” is just mere opinion?

    Were you a zygote or not at one time in your existence?

  • Lbj

    I don’t think so. Its my business when it affects my insurance premiums.

    Don’t use the term “safe sex”. It does not exist given that health problems and abortions it causes it creates. Its not safe.

  • sharon peters

    this is from;
    When You Grow Up In a Dysfunctional Family
    by George A. Boyd © 1992
    http://www.mudrashram.com/dysfunctionalfamily2.html

    i am putting it here b/c
    the ‘hero’ is a caricature of twisted, stunted humanity & the result of growing up in an alcoholic home or a home
    that is ruled by a religious cult or other addictions.
    ‘Inwardly the Hero is suffering from painful feelings of
    inadequacy and guilt, as nothing he or she does is good enough. the Hero feels isolated, unable to express his or her true feelings or to experience intimate relationship, and is often out of touch with his or her own sources of spirituality.’

  • Lbj

    How about some facts to support your assertions that “After birth you people fight against basic assistance to keep mothers and their infants from having a half way decent life. or have cheered making food assistance more difficult. You have loudly protested having health care reform that makes it easy for everyone to have affordable access to quality health care.”???
    Congress is not pro-life. They are the ones making these laws and not pro-lifers.

    It is my business when a human being is murdered. Its everyone’s business.

  • sharon peters

    Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?
    john 18;38

  • sharon peters

    whaduzumean; “/end snark?”

  • jm2

    and… they are afraid. what if what they ‘preached’ really isn’t true? what if there is no ‘hellfire & brimstone’? what if the view they have of their Jesus is wrong?

    the last just may be the worst for them, because it’s true. if he were alive today and saw what they have done the last thing Jesus would ever be is a christian!

  • Of course not.

    Yet in a society, such as exists in the world where the poor find themselves priced out of higher education, transportation travel to better paying jobs, or health care, where governments or religions make it difficult for women to obtain contraceptives, where an unwanted pregnancy means yet another future mouth to feed in a household where there’s already too many people and not enough food, and for women, reduced mean to support oneself, because daycare is also too expensive, much less trying to keep a roof over one’s head….abortion is to them the only sensible solution.

    For them its survival, much like when some nomadic tribes used to expose new babies or the sick or elderly to the elements as caring for them would mean a greater risk of survival in environment where survival was already difficult.

    Abortion is an imperfect solution, a bandaid to a greater problem, a woman’s ability to choose whether or not she want to be a mother and having the means to make that decision freely. To solve poverty, we need to ensure everyone gets a decent education, access to safe health care options, has the means to be self sufficient, even if it means giving some assistance to that end. We should be willing to care for our sick our elderly, our poor

  • Exactly. To allow the LGBT community to have the same freedoms we ourselves take for granted is just, fair and compassionate.

  • I like much of Singer’s philosophy. He really makes one think. He does make a point, although I disagree with his devaluation of newborns. They do not understand the concept of time or self-awareness. It takes their brains some time to develop both concepts. They are completely dependent on others for survival as are most mammals.

    Humans, just like other species recognize their newborns as one of them.

  • Since no one here was quoting Peter Singer I’m not sure why you would bring an atheist philosopher’s writings into this discussion. Especially, when there is no context for your quote or was it merely a setup for asking a loaded question he asked ironically?

  • Vincent

    It is true that the current generation is more “pro-choice” than anything, but that doesn’t make it a good thing, does it? My point is, that although great moves have been done for social justice, others continue to exist that are the opposite of justice. Perhaps the current pro-life generation has not been able to convince the newer generation, but many in my generation are starting to realize by themselves the true value of life, and have decided to fight for it, even if they don’t share the conservative ideals of other pro-life generations. The truth is, that God’s justice will prevail over injustice, all the time. Even is we are loosing that battle, He has promised to fight for us and win. It happened before, it will happen again. God will never leave us in our battle to fight for the innocent.

  • This is a story that is as old as time. In every generation there is a religious establishment and in every generation there are those that oppose it. Ever so often it is necessary to pull down our temples until not one stone is left upon another and rebuild anew. The old temples of the religious right are being torn down and a new temples will rise in their place. In time these new temples will also need to be pulled down.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    The very nature of the unborn is that they rely on the body of another for survival. Your reductionist attempts to seperate the life of the mother from the life of the unborn are immoral, illogical and in practice, cruel. A born baby can be cared for by a variety of other people. But the unborn cannot be seperated from the woman in whose body it resides. Anyone who claims to care about the unborn without caring about the mother is a liar. If society hurts the mother, if society sees fit to leave her with no way to support herself and a child, if we are punative to her, and she decides that in order to survive, she cannot allow the baby to live, then we have created a situation where we are forcing mothers to decide between her life and the unborn’s. That women are finding themselves making that choice at an alarming rate shows that we are a corrupt, evil society which cares for neither the born or the unborn. The rest is just rhetoric meant to cover up our collective guilt and failure and force it onto the bodies of the most vulnerable women. We should be ashamed to discuss this issue in terms of an isolated unborn life and its worth. It’s a horrific slight of hand that does nothing but allow us to crush other human beings without taking any responsibility. But hey, so long as you have your tribal marker to defend, who cares about the lives of actual people, right?

  • Moe Sizlak

    Religion or faith don’t dictate morals. Please don’t insult my atheist friends who hold morality to a much higher standard than many churches where I’ve attended before. Again, morality has nothing to do with religion or faith.

  • Moe Sizlak

    Episcopals aren’t that bad by comparison. Just attend a baptist revival and you will see. Taking a child to a baptist revival is child abuse.

  • Moe Sizlak

    Authoritarianism has given birth to ‘robotism’ and the blind ‘follow the leader’ mentality. Basically the fundamentalists have cornered themselves into a cult status. I love making fun of them though.

  • Lbj

    Lets test your logic i.e. ” attempts to seperate the life of the mother from the life of the unborn are immoral, illogical and in practice, cruel.”

    Is the unborn a separate entity from the mother? Yes. The unborn not only can be a separate gender from the mother but can also differ in other respects.

    Abortion is “immoral, illogical and in practice, cruel.” because it destroys another human being.

  • Timothy Weston

    To adopt those verses as evidence against abortion shows that God’s Will is easily overridden by man.

    If God knows who will be born, does He also know who will be aborted?

  • Lbj

    They already have the same rights based on being a man or a woman. A person’s sexual preferences or any other kinds of preferences should have nothing to do with rights.

  • NCHammer

    Free will. God knows everything, but allows humanity to make choices…even destructive ones (see Eden, Garden; Tree of Knowledge).

  • Lbj

    Atheists have no grounds for morality. Its impossible to ground morality in atheism. Morality in atheism is only an opinion. There is no such thing as an atheist holding “to a much higher standard than many churches”. Its all opinion for the atheist.

  • Rebecca Trotter

    This is very simple; the unborn cannot exist separately from the woman whose body it resides in. If you don’t care about the woman (as you are desperately determined not to) then your claim to care about the unborn is a power ploy and nothing more. I love how you will go to any rhetorical absurdity to separate the unborn from its mother. It’s a bizarrely clear demonstration of how your morality ends right when it might require anything from you yourself – even such a small thing as compassion. But when it comes to other people’s very lives, your “morality” knows no bounds.

    As it happens, I am pro life and have walked that walk with my body and my life. I have walked this walk with other women who have chosen life in this cruel, inhuman society that people like you are busy thrusting on us. Unlike you, this isn’t a tribal game I play with other people’s lives. But my opinions, tested and proven though they are, haven’t turned me into the sort of monster who engages in spiritual abortion, tearing the unborn and its mother apart when the matter is considered. People like you disgust me. There’s nothing pro life about the anti choice movement. It’s an abomination. It casually disregards women and thinks nothing of heaping suffering on top of suffering, so long as nothing but anger and condemnation is required from its own vile tribe. I know the women you view as irrelevant to the issue and love them enough to walk compassionately with them, regardless of which terrible choice they make when facing a crisis pregnancy. I would rather go to battle for a woman walking into an abortion clinic before I’d stand with the unholy filth who stand outside those clinics screaming at a woman in her most vulnerable moment.

    If you care about ending abortion, then you move heaven and earth to take care of the living. Short of that commitment, you are an enemy of the unborn. A wolf in sheep’s clothing. I pray you will repent of your callous disregard for God’s daughters before you dare to open your mouth on the subject again.

  • Lbj

    What nonsense. How can you be pro life when at the same time you are for abortion? That is a contradiction.

    A just born child cannot live on its own either. By your logic should be destroyed if it cannot sustain itself. You need to be consistent. Either be pro-abort or pro-life but don’t think you can be both.

  • humblydefiant

    As the son of a hellfire/brimstone Baptist preacher, I have lived much of what you talk about. But I’d take it one step further. As an adult, looking back, I can tell you that my family has always been angry – even during their “heyday.” America has always been in crisis and it only gets worse, year after year. Fellowships after church, family get-togethers – even in the classrooms of the Christian school I attended – talk has been about Christianity being under incessant attack. As a gay man, I know what being an outsider is truly like and so I look back at the culture I grew up in, one rich in cultural power that claimed itself poor, and I wonder. What the hell? I believe that the answer lies in the belief that one must be persecuted to be a true Christian. Jesus taught his disciples that they would be hated and persecuted by the world just as Jesus was. So, how are Christians who live in a Christian nation and wield influence over its political trajectory supposed to feel dejected and persecuted? How can the powerful feel trampled upon? Well, never underestimate the power of self-delusion. Granted, I do believe that you are right: the fire that burns so intensely now is being fueled by all of the things you mention, but it’s spark was lit much earlier. The language they speak was already well established. Americans in particular are ones for exceptionalism and American Christians must therefore be exceptionally tried and tested – singularly sought out by the devil for the exceptional example of Christianity they bring to the world. My parents are still trying to figure out why American isn’t mentioned in the book of Revleations, an oversight they noticed far back in the days of Reagan. Just my observations, though.

  • Lbj

    What do you think the context was? Its quite clear what Singer is talking about.

  • Lbj

    Is it self-awareness that makes one human?

    Everyone today is completely dependent on others for survival.

  • smrnda

    Maybe not that far, but Texas politicians seem very approving of the death penalty. Part of this is possibly just that being pro death penalty fits in with some kind of tough, macho image that they want to live up to.

  • smrnda

    Could part of this be the more conservative denominations take a very ‘you’re with us or against us’ line when it comes to loyalty? Young people in an environment like that know that if they ever question the party line (which can end up being rather absurd – Young Earth Creationism is a mandatory belief in some circles) they’ll be kicked out and shunned and rejected. You can’t freely associate with members of other groups without suspicion.

  • smrnda

    Actually, you get more STDs and more unplanned pregnancies when people don’t practice safe sex, because the vast majority of people who decide to *choose abstinence* aren’t really going to do it. They will end up having sex and won’t take any precautions because taking the precautions will make it look like they’re okay with having sex, which is shameful in their subculture. Additionally, many if not most people who don’t follow the abstinence only plan will end up just fine.

    Plans have to take into account what’s reasonable to expect from people. It’s like unrealistic diet, exercise or educational plans – on paper the plan *works* but it just doesn’t work in real life.

  • smrnda

    No, that’s not it at all.

    There are many activities which entail some level of risk. People are interested in them to varying degrees. You have sex, riding motorcycles, drinking alcohol, skateboarding, martial arts – the list goes on and on. When people choose to do an activity, they aren’t acting on out of control impulses but making a sensible cost benefit analysis and applying risk assessment. Sex is the same way.

  • smrnda

    Actually, plenty of people don’t like that. Even people into auto racing can understand that they should confine that type of driving to a proper course.

  • smrnda

    So, if you don’t want to have to subsidize other people’s sexual behavior, how about we all get to decide what we don’t like about your lifestyle? My right to criticize YOUR behavior is equal to your right to criticize anyone else’s.

  • smrnda

    Actually, I’m sure that eating fast food and drinking soda is affecting health care costs a lot more. Maybe I should ask you for a list of everything you eat and drink – your unhealthy lifestyle is costing me $$$.

    On the woman getting the abortion, nobody has a right to be a grandparent since you can’t force your kids to reproduce. It’s not an entitlement.

  • smrnda

    ” If he doesn’t, throw him in jail until he does.”

    Wow, because he’s going to make lots of money in prison.

  • You are once again isolating a single quote from its context.

  • Lbj

    What is the context? How would that change the meaning of what he wrote?

  • What she wrote speaks for itself. Your quoting Rebecca out of context proves my point that a single quotation proves nothing and that it is necessary to consider context when using a brief quote to prove your point.

  • Lbj

    I didn’t quote her out of context but used her own reasoning as a test and showed that it fails when we apply it to abortion.

  • sharon peters

    i ain’t skeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrd!

  • Huh???

  • Being a woman shouldn’t deny us rights afforded to men, like equal pay, equal employment or education opportunities, equal access to health care and medications, equal voice in government, equal protection against violence. Try telling that drivel to most of the women in the world, and they will tell you that you don’t know what you are talking about. IF you are so wrong about gender equality, how can you hope to be right about sexual orientation equality?

  • Guest

    I’m a pacifist, but this is handy.

  • Hmm.
    why did it show me as guest?

  • Lbj

    I am for equality in the workplace for each sex. Are you for women fighting on the front lines in a war?

    “Sexual orientation equality” is nonsense. How would a person in public even prove such a thing? Where does the Constitution have anything specifically to say about sexual orientation equality ?

  • It is not up to you or to me, or to anyone to tell a woman how to feel is she has an abortion. Right now people are made to feel guilty, because people like you demand it, without considering for a single moment what is going on in her life, or why she is making such a decision that is none of our business. Yet people like you insist on heaping guilt on someone who doesn’t deserve it.

    So the answer is no, she shouldn’t feel guilty. Some may, but that would be their emotional state, where they are in life, their personal beliefs….Again it is not for us to judge, condemn or pile on an emotional response that is all about us.

  • Women have been on the front lines of war ever since there has been war. I happen to be a pacifist, anti war, yet if a woman wants to pick up a weapon to fight, I believe it is her right. I do know that women die, are raped and assaulted with every war, in fact civilian death and injuries is the norm, and the greater casualty of such human made tragedy. It is only one of the reasons I am against war.

    As for sexual orientation. Believe whatever fantasy you choose to, while denying reality. No one is stopping you.
    As for the rest of us, we will be moving forward to help grant equality to all God’s children.

  • Lbj

    I don’t make anyone feel guilty. They feel guilty because they know they did something very wrong.

  • Lbj

    Where in the Constitution are rights given based on sexual orientation?

    So you would be for all women of age to be drafted just as all men of age are drafted and serve equally on the front lines?

  • You are attempting to convey the idea of guilt, by projecting your views on others, and insisting that your views are correct. You as a man, have no idea what it is like to walk in the shoes of any woman, YOu don’t know our daily struggles, you don’t know what women have to do every day, things that men haven’t a clue because they enjoy a privilege based on gender.

    There are wonderful, caring compassionate, thoughtful and helpful men in the world. They honestly seek to have the world view us as equals and to allow us every freedom they themselves already enjoy. They recognize that our bodies are ours, not theirs, and that we women should be allowed what to do what we feel best with our own bodies, just as men are allowed to do whatever they want with theirs. They understand that their contribution to birthing children is minimal, so they give us full autonomy to make decisions on whether or not we wish to go through the process to bring new life to the world.

    We need more men like that. Hopefully one day you will be.

  • The US currently does not have a draft, and yet there are women serving in combat positions. I see no problem with it.

    When the constitution was drafted, women were not mentioned. In fact the only men who could vote were people who held at least a minimum amount of property. Our nation was built with the mindset of white male dominance. It has evolved in our 238 year history, with more and more people groups being recognized and given full equality. We granted them to the former slave population and eventually to women, and as a result minority groups have been added to those freedoms. It is only within the past couple of decades where the US government has sought to begin reversing minority rights, and it is wrong. For the record abortion is a minority right, because a minority of women in the US get one.

  • Lbj

    You have no idea what its like to be aborted either. Just think what that must feel like for the baby to be torn apart and sucked up by some machine.

  • Lbj

    Its time for a change don’t you think? Young women should also be drafted just as men are and they should serve in the front lines like men do. If we have a draft again they must be treated equally as men.

    No one should have the right to kill their babies.

  • We don’t have a draft, so that is irrelevant.

    No one is advocating the murder of children. When a fetus becomes a child is the debate, of which we have differing views.

    When viability begins, for many determines when a fetus turns into a child, still women have pregnancies fail past that viability point (third trimester) die prior to birth all the time due to a health complication.

    There are some state legislatures who seek to charge women with homicide if they miscarry, at any state of her pregnancy, saying a failure to report automatically means she’s guilty of something. Do you agree? I happen to think its a horrific, unjust idea.

    When a fertilized egg become a human is purely a philosophical question, and you will have different views depending whom you ask. You see that’s the thing with philosophy, there is no exact answer, no absolute truth, just ways of seeing things.

  • You have no idea what you are talking about….as usual, just trying again to convey a feeling of guilt and shame. It is an arrogant, prideful uncompassionate ploy, which I am well familiar with.

  • mykelb

    Actually it is not just opinon but looking at the result of behaviour and asking “Was anyone harmed by that behavior?”. Period. One doesn’t need dogma in order to know right from wrong or to have EMPATHY for one’s fellows.

  • Lbj

    Of course its just an opinion. Lots of people don’ care if what they do harms another person. No atheist can say that is wrong. All he can say is that he doesn’t like it.

  • Chip

    NC, you meant to reply to Damien, not me (either that, or you misread me entirely).

  • It’s a reference to the Weimar Republic which was the government in Germany after WW1. In 1930 President Hindenburg assumed emergency powers and the liberal democracy that was in place ended. Come to the cabaret is a reference to the musical Cabaret which takes place in the early 1930’s as the Nazis where rising to power. That said I have no idea what he is trying to say either.

  • CS Caviness

    “Instead of sticking to teaching their congregations the timeless message of Jesus, they got caught up into the distracting quest of seeking political power and influence …” This is the crux of the issue and why they lost “the next generation.” Who wants to follow a bunch of angry power hungry politicians?

  • Lbj

    True, we don’t have a draft but when we do we should include women for equality sake.

    Why should viability be the determining criteria for what a human being is?

    It is one thing for a pregnancy to fail for natural causes and another to have an abortion that does not threaten the life of the mother.

    If a miscarriage is due to something beyond her control I don’t think that should be a crime. Do you think a person who murderers a pregnant woman should be charged with a double homicide?

    If a person is unsure about something should we assume that its not something important? In other words, when it comes to human life, should we assume the fertilized egg is not a human being or should we make sure by studying it with our knowledge and err on the side of caution? Given the implications and ramifications of this we need to know both sides well.
    The science of what the zygote is points to it being human. Ultrasounds show a human growing in the womb. Philosophically it also does by implication (we were all a zygote and went through all the stages of being a human in the womb). Many think that the principle of Row-Wade is grounded on faulty legal principles. Finally, I think that the regret that many woman have when they have an abortion shows in their consciousness that this is a human being.
    If someone can make the case this is not a human being then let’s examine it and see if its stronger than it being human. If its not human then I have no case and I’m just blowing smoke.

    I do agree that no woman should be alone in her pregnancy and help in raising the child. The man who got the woman pregnant should be the first one to provide. If he doesn’t legal action should be taken against him.Other members of the community should also help.

  • Chris Larosa

    “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father consists of this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. James 1:17
    Where did the fundamentalists completely miss this? Thank you Benjamin. I couldn’t have summarized it better. As a gay man who has walked with the Lord for over 30 years, I have been utterly befuddled by the RR’s complete obsession with suppressing sexual minorities and pushing some twisted Christian version of Sharia Law. To hell with the orphans. Nuts to the widows! Down with the poor! And those damned Mexicans desperately seeking refuge on our borders. And let’s not worry about keeping ourselves from sinning – instead let’s spend our lifetime on pointing our loaded doctrine guns at “the sinners” and putting them in their place. Lastly, let’s pick and choose which sins we like and don’t like in the bible (divorce? gluttony? bearing false witness, perhaps?) so we will look like complete hypocrites to our next generation of sign-bearers at Mall gatherings.
    I think when these supposed “Christian” leaders stand one day before YHWH, they’re in for a big surprise.

  • NCHammer

    Actually, you have no idea about conservative viewpoints, as you perfectly outline a key thought of Constitutionally limited government conservatives. The more the government provides in the form our entitlements, the more you become a slave to what a bureaucrat thinks you should or shouldn’t be doing. The more “assistance” someone receives from the State, the more the State has the right to assert how that “assistance” should be used, since the “assistance” isn’t the State’s in the first place. It’s the taxpayer’s money.

    As you so succinctly put in your other misinformed comment below, the State is already trying to tell people how to eat and drink, see Bloomberg’s NY soda ban, CA’s attempts to ban certain types of restaurants from certain areas. If you think it’s conservatives pushing those types of plans, then you are truly blind to reality.

  • NCHammer

    50 years and billions of dollars have shown you cannot legislate and tax away poverty. The logical end of your point is that any woman who cannot provide a 1st world life for her child should have an abortion.

  • Snooterpoot

    It means that I was being sarcastic.

  • Snooterpoot

    Conservatives are cutting safety net programs, not liberals.

    Conservatives have tried more than 40 times to repeal the ACA.

    Conservative governors have refused to accept federal Medicaid dollars to ensure the poor get quality health care.

    Need I say more?

    “It is my business when a human being is murdered.” That is simply your opinion. There is large and continuing disagreement over when a fertilized egg becomes a human being.

    Finally, are you protesting the genocide in Africa? If not you are a hypocrite and just another conservative that wants the government to interfere with a private decision, which is, Justas399, none of your damned business.

  • Snooterpoot

    So, like most conservatives, it boils down to greed. No surprise there.

    You can deny there is safe sex all you want to, Justas399. You are just trying to justify your seemingly lack of ability to control the intimate activity of others.

  • Snooterpoot

    I was specifically referring to your inane comment about zygotes. It’s just appeal to emotion, like most of the arguments you pro-birthers offer.

  • NCHammer

    Is it your contention that the religious left does not “play with the powers of this world?”

    It is clear that progressives in both the political and spiritual sense love using the power of the State to advance their favored beliefs. Are you calling them to repent?

  • Snooterpoot

    You are not speaking the truth. You are offering opinion as truth.

    The vulgarity is your comment about your accusation of liberals comparing our sexual activity to animals. That is vulgar and disgusting.

  • Snooterpoot

    When a person (your antipathy toward gay men is obvious) becomes infected with HIV they should be treated with all available medical resources and with kindness.

    I don’t give a damn if my health insurance costs go up to treat diseases. Unlike you, my concern is not how much money it’ll cost me (which is likely a very small part of your insurance premium), my concern is treating people with compassion.

    You really make me want to vomit with your self righteousness and greed.

  • NCHammer

    The logical conclusion of your rationale for abortion is that women should be allowed to abort a child they don’t feel they can care for. Yet, that is such a subjective standard that invariably will lead you to supporting abortion for women who could.

    What economic criteria would you like to use to be a cutoff for allowing a woman to abort a baby due to financial reasons?

    Biblically we are not asked or permitted to accommodate sin, regardless of the circumstances. Certainly Christians can and should have grace and show love. Those don’t require accommodation.

  • NCHammer

    I did, but I was concurring with your thoughts. Added a couple of other verses.

  • sharon peters

    respectfully;
    what triggered that response?

  • KnowOrKnowNotThereIsNoGuess

    These guys are not promoting “Christian” ideals or values. They have their own agendas which have absolutely nothing to do with Christ.

  • I’ll also give you a corollary to #1 that I think is about to bite back big time on liberals: 56 million murders of unwanted and unplanned human beings.

    Generation X’s angst and drug abuse in the 1990s was born in a lot of siblings that weren’t, and a general feeling that our baby boomer parents cared more about getting high and partying than about being parents.

    Generation X’s failures to correct this for Generation Y and the Millennial generation will mean that the next generation may well be putting us on trial for genocide.

  • we_are_theBorg

    Simply claiming to be a Christian doesn’t give you a moral center, and cleaving to somebodies interpretation of the writings of bronze-age desert tribesmen isn’t going to usefully inform a modern sense of morality. Being kind and respecting others right to be happy in their own way makes you a moral person. Really thinking about the issues of our times and basing your decisions on available information and reason, to most effectively spread happiness, education, enlightenment and equality to the world makes you a moral person. I know plenty of religious and non-religious people who are deeply moral, and I know plenty of both who aren’t particularly so. In my experience the truth is that the vast majority of us are quite near the center of that gray area in between. Ironically there is such religious diversity and freedom in the USA because of its founding principles of separating religion and government. Broadly secular society is in a position to tolerate the broadest spectrum of beliefs. Don’t freak out. Anarchy is self defeating in the presence of organizational systems (it’s about as politically advanced as it was 100 years ago), and the satanists just want a statue here and there :-)

  • Lbj

    Actually its not true that “Broadly secular society is in a position to tolerate the broadest spectrum of beliefs.” Look what happens to those who speak out either against homosexuality. They get brow beaten very quickly. This proves how intolerant many are on this issue. Its disgusting.

  • NCHammer

    It is my hypothesis that Pilate at this very moment, fully understands what Truth is.

  • we_are_theBorg

    Yep, and those who speak out against inter-racial marriage are brow beaten as well, because they’re ignorant and intolerant, but they are allowed to speak out. Being brow-beaten is not the same thing as being *actually* beaten, or imprisoned for your beliefs. Those beliefs are *tolerated*, and the society moves its laws forward as the broad diversity of its citizens reach a consensus about our shared national stance. I’m proud to say that we generally move it in the direction of acceptance, mutual respect and equality, with some shameful historical exceptions.

  • Franklin Bacon

    Ever the optimist, eh? Nice…there may be hope for the future.

  • Franklin Bacon

    I really don’t think the moderate religious left concerns itself much with politics. The two ends of the spectrum do, but average people want peace and prosperity…not political upheaval in their lives.

  • NCHammer

    “And are we really pro-life if we reject the opportunity to feed the
    hungry–unless they live up to the moral standards we place upon them?”

    False argument and conclusion. Where are conservatives (political or spiritual) rejecting the opportunity to feed anyone?

    Speaking for myself, what I do reject is progressives telling me how generous to be with my resources. And, I reject the reflex to assign all actions of good as requirements to be managed by the State.

    Once again, the side trying to force their morals on everyone is the progressive side. Living wages? Free healthcare? Marriage equity? Abortion on demand funded by taxes?

    All of those causes are rooted in a desire to compel, through the power of the State if necessary, me to approve and fund your standard of morals.

  • NCHammer

    Anecdotally, the spiritual progressives I am around are very much supportive of “free” healthcare, homosexual marriage, and living wage requirements, as well as onerous environmental regulations. I would venture the guess that most of the bloggers on this channel and most of the readers/respondents vote liberal if they vote.

  • Franklin Bacon

    I know of mission houses which require the homeless to sit through a church service, in order to receive assistance. Tax supported assistance is prohibited from imposing such things.

  • NCHammer

    So, why not go to every third world nation, forcibly sterilize every female, regardless of age or ability to function, and euthanize every child under 15 since you’ll be saving them from so much suffering?

    You type with so much passion and emotion and so little logic.

  • DC Rambler

    Spot on piece..Their reaction to these factors has been to turn inward and create a strong distrust and hostility towards the ” other ” when they should have been building bridges and some good old love, compassion, inclusion, and most of all, humility. Peace

  • Snooterpoot

    Your “tune in, turn on” comment seemed a little flippant to me. I don’t see how it adds to the discussion. Care to elaborate?

  • Rene’

    I have watched this cancer destroy my family. In the last 10 years I have seen people who had never had an issue with the fact that my parents reverted to Judaism suddenly turned their back on us because they could not deal with having liberal Jews in the family. You have to wonder if when this is all over whether they will wake from the nightmare and understand all the harm that they did in the name of the Tea Party and conservative Christianity.

  • Rene’

    They wish to control others because it is so much easier than spending the time and effort to work on their own personal relationship with G-d. Looking inward and making changes if hard. Criticizing others and feeling superior is so much easier.

  • sharon peters

    yes, thx for asking

    regarding My comment to David Mabury;

    ‘tune in turn on!’ I meant to encourage him to look for more ‘thread[s that] give..hope that Christianity is changing for the better.’

    ‘I left the church. I will never be Christian again myself, but all of you in this comment thread give me hope that Christianity is changing for the better. Thank you.’

    from wikipedia;
    “Turn on, tune in, drop out” is a counterculture-era phrase popularized by Timothy Leary in 1966. Leary stated:
    ‘Like every great religion of the past we seek to find the divinity within and to express this revelation in a life of glorification and the worship of God. These ancient goals we define in the metaphor of the present — turn on, tune
    in, drop out.’

    At the time lsd, other drug substances & wild behaviors were promoted as a way to be free of the ‘establishments’ hold on culture.

  • Yonah

    I am Jewish. I do not favor abortion, but oppose laws that would criminalize women who choose abortion. I favor gay rights.

    But, to say that “culture advanced” on account of the two issues…this I cannot morally understand. There is much more going on (wrong) with the culture…mainly, economic oppression. The culture is regressing…it is accepting a permanent erosion of the middle class and a new huge underclass.

  • Wasn’t saying culture advanced on those two issues, just that culture has changed and that they do not know how to communicate their message within the new changes that exist.

  • Yonah

    Thank you for the clarification. There are many who do rise or fall on those two issues alone.

    As to the two issues, I would agree that gay rights is a true advancement. But, the advance in terms of orientations has yet far to go for bi, transgendered, and intersex persons. On abortion, I cannot count it as advance in any respect. There, I will put on my Marxist analysis hat and assert that among the working class, the single most compelling factor in abortion is economic oppression. IF the resources to support keeping pregnancies in difficult circumstances were there, most working class people would choose not to abort. It is upper class liberals who imagine that abortion is such a reasonable solution for all concerned…they have a economic interest in it as well…along with their own libertarian notions which they need generally to rationalize their lifestyles….which actually do very very little for the poor….even as the right makes war on the poor. What astounds me is that abortion as a talking point sport is kept constrained by both sides of its typical sparring partners within the bounds of argument and concern as to what a fetus is and is not…and what is being done to the fetus. While I have high concern over what is being done to the fetus, equally I have high concern as to what is being done to the human species writ large in abortion…it changes the essense of the species for the worse. Everything and everyone is becoming disposable.

    There is no advancement currently.

  • jamieson Hall

    I see no evidence of this article in the real world and I see and talk with literally thousands of people every day. Civil rights and religious rights are two very different concepts of human interaction and survival. The only war that is happening is in the minds of those who perceive the world as such. The professing Christians that I know as well as for myself are basking in the Joy of the Lord. Amen! lol

  • Snooterpoot

    Bull scat. That’s as big a false analogy as I have ever seen.

    Let me ask you some questions.

    Do you support the recent changes to the food stamp program that makes it more difficult for poor people to feed their families?

    Do you support the Affordable Care Act which allows people to obtain quality health care at a reasonable price?

    Do you support reducing funding for Section 8 housing?

    Quit making ridiculous comments and start addressing the issue if you are pro-birth or pro-life. There is a difference. One says you’re on your own after you’re born. The other says we will guarantee a social safety net that provides you with adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter.

    When I was 22 years old I was raped by a childhood friend when I came out to him as a lesbian. I won’t get into the graphic details, but I honestly thought I was going to die that day as he kept saying “I should just kill you now.”

    I was impregnated by my rapist. If I had been forced to carry that pregnancy to term by uncaring people like you I might very well have taken my own life.

    You can make your own guess about what I chose. It’s none of your goddamned business. The reasons why other women make their reproductive choices is also none of your goddamned business.

    You people are evil. You don’t give a rat’s ass about the women who are bearing this burden. You are loathsome and disgusting.

    Mind your own business. If you are so deeply concerned about zygotes then I want to hear every damned one of you loudly advocating for not only restoring, but increasing the safety net that makes abortion necessary for some women.

    Finally, don’t you dare start with the “they can give up their babies for adoption” bullshit. Look at how many children are in foster care now. If a baby is white and healthy it has a reasonable chance at adoption. If otherwise, well, good luck.

  • Snooterpoot

    My experience with evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity is that their view of morals is confined to sexual activity. They’re real big on condemning the sex other people are having while having a wonderful time themselves.

  • Snooterpoot

    I generally refrain from personal attacks, Justas, but from what I’ve read of your statements here you appear to be one uncompassionate, self-righteous, bullying man.

    My atheist friends have a firmer foundation of morality and ethics than you will ever be able to have. You make me sick.

  • Snooterpoot

    People who speak out against homosexuality are bigots. Period.

  • Snooterpoot

    Oh, the horror! People want others to have quality and affordable health care, and want everyone to be treated equally under the law, and want people to be able to live on the wages they make without having to turn to government assistance.

    From Matthew 23:

    34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

    35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

    36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

    37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

    38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

    39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

    40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    So, liberal Christians seem to me to be following Jesus when He gave this example of how we are to treat others.

    Again; oh, the horror!

  • Snooterpoot

    Show me one charity that says it has sufficient funds to meet the needs of the people it serves. Just one.

    What I am reading here is that you don’t want your taxes spent to help people. Very Christian of you there, NC.

  • NCHammer

    Show me a Scriptural basis for using the power of the State to enforce tithing and giving. This is exactly the point and you made it perfectly, because you do not perceive I’m giving enough, you want me to be forced to give more.

    How very progressive of you.

  • Snooterpoot

    You fundies just cannot help yourselves for punishing women for enjoying sex.

  • NCHammer

    You left out part where Christ said, “And if you don’t give enough on your own, or do these other things I’m going to use the power of the State to force you to.”

    It’s statistically proven by multiple studies that conservatives in general, and Christian conservatives specifically, give more to charities than liberals.

    I would love for everyone to be more charitable. I believe Christians should lead by example. But I also cringe at progressives reflexive habit of forcing their morality on everyone else in the name of freedom and compassion, by using the tax and legislative power of the government.

    Specific to the “living wage” portion of your comment you are either completely ignorant of the fundamentals economic law or you just don’t care. But, I’ll play along. I just made a job offer to a nanny for my children. How much should I offer to pay based on your “living wage” assessment?

  • Snooterpoot

    Pure bull scat. That’s along the lines of argument made by the Commonwealth of Virginia when they were fighting to keep their odious law against interracial marriage intact. Their argument was that since the law applied to all races equally there was not discrimination.

    The Supreme Court soundly refuted that argument.

    Besides that, would you want to marry someone of the opposite sex who could never love you with their whole heart? Would you want that to happen to your son or daughter? No?

    Then why would you advocate for gay men and lesbians to enter into marriages that would be shams? Because, Justas, that’s exactly what they would be.

    I haven’t seen a single person who is opposed to same-sex marriage provide a logical reason for their opinions. Usually it boils down to you thinking that gay sex is icky, in which case you should stop thinking about it, or you think there is some mystical way that our marriages will harm opposite sex marriages. You people seem to be obsessed with the intimate activities of strangers. It’s downright creepy.

    I think your attitude is cruel, and does not comport to Christ’s commandments to love God with all our beings and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.

  • Guest

    This is an incredible overreaction.

  • Snooterpoot

    In the 14th Amendment.

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    It’s the due process of law and equal protection of the laws that includes us. It has been cited at least twice by the Supreme Court in decisions supporting our rights.

    Deal with it.

  • Snooterpoot

    You’re going to be shocked. I agree with you about the draft, if it is ever reinstated.

    I have voiced my opinion on the rest of your appeal to emotion previously. Should be and are often conflict. You keep talking about fathers providing for families, but that simply isn’t reality.

  • Snooterpoot

    “Murdering the baby” is rhetorical hyperbole. Nothing more.

  • Snooterpoot

    So, your position is that it’s perfectly okay to use the power and assets of the government to force people who don’t share your religious beliefs to conform to them.

    That goes against the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of religion. I cannot force you to conform to my beliefs and you cannot force me to conform to your beliefs.

    That, gentlemen, is the bottom line. If you want your rights respected you have to offer the same respect to those who disagree with you.

  • Snooterpoot

    You are the king of straw man arguments. She said no such thing.

  • Snooterpoot

    There is no scriptural basis, and there doesn’t have to be. We are a secular government, not a theocratic one. Your beliefs about scripture as pertaining to law are irrelevant.

    Also, I noticed you failed to name even one charity that says it is sufficiently funded. Nice try at diversion.

  • Snooterpoot

    Apparently you are the ignorant one. Tickle down economics doesn’t work. When people make a living wage they purchase more goods and services and contribute to a thriving economy.

    It doesn’t matter who gives more. What matters is that charities are underfunded. I’d like to see your “statistically proven” report. Does it come from an unbiased source?

    You have a lot of nerve accusing liberals of using the government to control others. That’s just an outright lie.

  • Snooterpoot

    She said no such thing. Another straw man argument.

    The reasons why women make their reproductive choices are none of your damned business.

  • Snooterpoot

    You have no answer so you deflect. Typical.

  • Snooterpoot

    Yep. Fear is all you have to offer. No thank you.

  • Snooterpoot

    Thanks for your reply. I see now how it contributes to the discussion. I grew up in the 1950s and 60s. I remember the mantra very well.

  • Lbj

    When the state gives out marriage licenses it does not require one to be in love.
    There are good reasons to be against same sex marriage:
    1-they are unnatural. They cannot produce children naturally.
    2- A man cannot be a mom and woman cannot be a dad. They cannot role model each parent.
    3- Major health issues. Life spans of male homosexuals are significantly lower than heterosexual men.
    4- we already see a far higher divorce rate among homosexuals. Especially among Lesbians.

    Jesus said that if you love Him you will keep His commandments. His commandments include the commandments found in the OT which says that homosexual practices are condemned.
    So do you love Christ by keeping His commandments?

  • Lbj

    This has nothing to do with same sex marriages. Preferences are not rights.

  • Snooterpoot

    Wow! You think marriage is not about love? Does your wife (presuming you have one) know about that?

    Now to your so-called reasons.

    1. There is not one state in this country that requires the ability or intent to procreate as a prerequisite to issue a marriage license. Your “unnatural” argument is nothing but your opinion. What is unnatural to you is quite natural for others. And, there you go again, peeking into the bedrooms of strangers.

    There are many opposite-sex couples who cannot reproduce “naturally.” Would you deny them a marriage license? How about opposite-sex couples who have no interest in procreation?

    2. Irrelevant. Children require a home that is safe, loving and stable. The sex of the parents does not predict successful parenting. And you seem to assume that gay men have no women in their lives and that lesbians have no men. How foolish of you!

    3. Your claim about the life expectancy of gay men has been soundly refuted. Nice try, though.

    4. Bull shit. There aren’t enough same-sex married couples to even arrive anywhere near a statistical norm. You are entitle to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

    Jesus commanded us to love God with all our being and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. He issued no others. Your claim that his commandments include all that are in the Old Testament are simply your opinion. I try to live by the two commandments he gave us. Sometimes I fail; sometimes I succeed. People like you love to point out six or seven verses in the entire Bible and use them to condemn people who are homosexual. If you demand that we follow every law in the Old Testament, then you have to be willing to do that, too. I’ll bet a year’s salary that you don’t even try.

    I can tell you one thing for sure, Justas. When I see self righteous, arrogant and hateful words like you have written here, I don’t see any love in them at all. I don’t see any reflection of a loving God or of the life that Jesus led. All I see is bitterness, hatred and judgement. You can take that up with God when you stand before her on the day of reckoning.

  • Snooterpoot

    It has everything to do with legal same-sex marriages. Try as much as you want to deny it, but we are citizens of this country who fulfill all of the obligations of citizenship. There is simply no reason to deny us our rights to due process and equal protection. It doesn’t matter if you approve of us or not. In fact, I don’t give a damn if you do. I do give a damn if my government refuses to recognize my rights due to me as a citizen.

    My preference is for dark skinned, brown-eyed women with curves. That has changed from time to time during my life.

    My inborn sexual orientation is homosexual. That means I am attracted to and fall in love with other women. That has never changed.

    You really need to be educated, Justas. The arguments you make come from superstition and ignorance. It won’t be long until your prejudice against people who are homosexual will be as reviled as racism is now.

  • Lbj

    Would you be for 3 or more people marrying each other as a group? How about a father marrying his adult daughter or son? They should have the right to marry also. Right?

  • Snooterpoot

    Ah, here we go into the slippery slope argument. First, there is no evidence that anything in your parade of imaginary horribles will ever happen.

    Second, there are good reasons to prevent incestual marriages, not the least of which is the risk of fetal abnormality. There is also the problem of an authority figure coercing his subordinates into a relationship they do not want. If you think this is baloney, take a look at the number of men who sexually abuse their daughters and step-daughters.

    Third, I don’t have a problem with plural marriage as long as all parties involved are well informed consenting adults. I’m not going to start a movement for that, but I won’t stand in the way if other people want to do that. There are already polygamous families in the USA. They’re just composed of one legally married opposite-sex couple and other women (because it’s a male dominance role) whom the man chooses.

    You got anything that pertains to the real world, or are you getting tired of repeating the same, stale arguments I’ve been hearing for decades?

  • Snooterpoot

    I think you’re asking the wrong question. It’s not about whether a zygote or embryo is alive. It’s about when does it become a person who is able to sustain life outside the mother’s womb.

    You guys like to hammer on both questions, but you will never, ever, have to be the woman who has to decide whether or not to continue a pregnancy.

    You want to use the power and assets of the federal government to force people to conform to the requirements of your religious beliefs regardless of whether we agree with them or not.

    Ours is a secular government, not sectarian or theocratic. Some of you people would like to change that, but if you want to see a real revolution in this country, go ahead and try to make it a theocracy.

    When men can become pregnant and be subject to all the risks and potential heartbreak from that, I’ll listen to you. Until then I will just write you off as misogynists who cannot stand the thought of not controlling women.

  • Snooterpoot

    We are not a theocracy. Our government is secular. It doesn’t matter what the Bible says.

  • Snooterpoot

    What’s funny about your statement? Where did the lol come from? Were you not serious about what you wrote?

    I have serious doubts that you see and talk with literally thousands of people every day. That’s either a huge exaggeration, an outright lie, or a misuse of the word literally.

    Civil rights and religious rights are not necessarily separate. The right to freedom of religion is a civil right.

    The chaos we see in the world today is the result of hatred and greed.

  • Snooterpoot

    Yonah, I would add one other thought to your statement about abortion, If patriarchal societies would stop shaming women for becoming pregnant out of wedlock, or here in the USA for being poor, the number of abortions would drop dramatically.

    It is my strongly held opinion that most (but not all) people who claim to be pro-life are actually pro-birth, and pro shaming women for enjoying sex. There is no other reason why they are rejoicing in the evil reduction of the social safety net so that people are assured of at least a modicum of help for food, clothing, shelter and access to health care.

    Republicans in the USA have voted more than 40 times to repeal affordable health insurance for people who otherwise have been uninsured. That is a callous and malicious action. There is no way people who think that the ACA should be repealed are pro-life.

  • Snooterpoot

    “Murders of unwanted children” is nothing but rhetorical hyperbole. I’ll bet you think a zygote can be murdered. If you do, I think you are ignorant.

    No one supports killing fetuses that are viable unless there is a danger to the mother’s life or something horribly wrong that would lead only to suffering if the pregnancy was carried to its natural conclusion.

    You people have lied for long enough. Fewer and fewer people believe anything you say, and that’s a very good thing. In my opinion Christianity shouldn’t be about controlling others, which is exactly what fundamentalists want to do. It should be about living a life that is reflective of a loving and merciful God. Screaming at pregnant women who are going into women’s health clinics and at people who are homosexual is not loving. It’s hate.

  • NCHammer

    Actually, you might try reading some of the comments. Many posts in this thread say women choose abortion due to economic hardship. So, I am engaging that part of their posts.

    Many of the posts that favor allowing abortion read something like, “if these kids are born, they will have nothing but a life of suffering, hunger, disease, etc”. These comments are implicitly making the argument that the mother who cannot afford a to care for a child properly is saving herself and the baby from a terrible existence, which should be allowed and can actually be a compassionate and a wise choice.

    While I understand that impulse (it is horrible to see children living in destitute circumstances) the fact is, as Christians, the Bible does not grant us permission or authority to make such choices and remain in line with God’s Word.

    When you justify an abortion for economic reasons, the logical progression leads to the conclusion that only well off women should bring children into the world.

  • Snooterpoot

    Other angry power hungry people want to follow them. They’re losing their base.

  • Snooterpoot

    Part of their problem is their belief that this is a Christian nation. Tell them otherwise and watch their brains explode.

  • Snooterpoot

    I have seen the AIDS quilt a few time. Every time I was rendered to sobs. There are too many names of men whom I love on that quilt. Thank God we now have treatment for HIV so it’s no longer a death sentence.

    Jerry Falwell said AIDS was God’s retribution on gay men. How anyone could follow that loathsome bigot is a mystery to me.

  • Snooterpoot

    And aren’t they just giddy at the prospect of their angry God casting people into eternal torment!

  • Snooterpoot

    You’re not even close. Abortion for economic reasons would be unnecessary if we eliminated poverty by paying workers a living wage and by providing quality health care.

    I haven’t read a single post that “favors abortion.” The comments I have read favor an unfettered right of a woman to choose how or if to carry her pregnancy.

    You pro-birthers don’t have much to offer except hyperbole. You don’t win anyone to your side with that.

  • “”Murders of unwanted children” is nothing but rhetorical hyperbole. I’ll bet you think a zygote can be murdered. If you do, I think you are ignorant.”

    And I think you are a hateful bigot who just wants to deny humanity to a class of human beings by classifying them as zygotes.

    Which leaves you in the place of just about every other genocidal maniac that has ever lived, and far more controlling than any fundamentalist Christian.

    “No one supports killing fetuses that are viable unless there is a danger to the mother’s life or something horribly wrong that would lead only to suffering if the pregnancy was carried to its natural conclusion.”

    Suffering is no reason for murder. Ever. And you’re also wrong- I live in a state that confiscates my taxes precisely to kill viable fetuses.

  • are you going to argue the same points on every single article? You’re not helping and your approach is not convincing anyone.

  • NCHammer

    You seem to have a real problem with basic reading comprehension. This is a blog by a self-professed, progressive Christian. He and many of the readers here often advocate for things like living wage, free healthcare, social justice, etc. based on their understanding of Jesus and the Bible. They promote these things, in part, by using political and legal means to advance their morals, but are offended, shocked, and infuriated when conservatives do the same.

    Your comment is an excellent example, as you put me in my place regarding how my beliefs about Scripture are irrelevant as pertaining to the law. Yet, you are not and have not done the same with those who are working towards goals you believe in, even when they are using Scripture as a basis for their points, because, wait for it, THIS IS A BLOG WRITTEN BY A CHRISTIAN VIEWING ISSUES THROUGH A CHRISTIAN LENS.

    As for charities being sufficiently funded, use your own logic. It doesn’t matter if they are or aren’t. It wouldn’t matter if every charity in America received zero dollars for the next year and shut down. That is not justification for having the State enforce charitable giving, either Biblical or politically in a free country.

  • NCHammer

    Who wants to force businesses to pay a “living wage” (which you cannot define)?
    Who forced a “free” healthcare law on 50% of the population that strongly opposed such a bill?
    Who wants to force us to accept and amnesty millions of people who came here illegally?
    Who wants to force businesses opposed to homosexual marriage to participate in them, even against their own religious objections?
    Who wants to force gun owners to give up their Constitutional rights?
    Who wants to force taxpayers to support abortion through funding of abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood?
    Who wants to force Hobby Lobby to provide abortifacients as part of a compensation plan?
    Who forces universities to withdraw speaking invitations to anyone who remotely resembles a conservative?
    Who forces politically correct speech as a prerequisite for owning or running a business?

    When progressives talk about rights, the rights they define always, always, require everyone else to do something.

  • Lbj

    Each person that I come across that supports same sex marriage should be asked these questions.

  • NCHammer

    Irrelevant what would be our could be. It’s a reason given now and that’s what I address.

    And I specifically typed “favor allowing abortion”. Pretty clear if you read.

    Having said that, I am quite willing to say there are many who favor abortion, not just the right to have one. They make business models based on providing abortions. That, evil profit motive doesn’t go away, even for saintly abortion doctors.

  • Yonah

    The patriarchal attitude you allude to exists, but again, I think the first issue that drives people to abortion is the very attack on the poor you cite by Republicans et al. If people cannot feed themselves/family currently…adding to that is an immense pressure.

    Then, consider disabled folk. There’s a symbiotic relationship between the culture’s lack of investment in services for the disabled and decisions to abort disabled fetuses. My daughter works with profoundly mentally challenged adults in a system always under attack financially…even in the context of workers like herself who do extremely difficult work getting paid $9.00 an hour.

    Abortion is a moral economic issue.

    As to ACA…I am a Michael Moore socialist…as such, you know I’m not happy with ACA because it’s not Single Payer. ACA doesn’t do enough. It helps some. But, the math of the current and future plutocracy leaves many in the dirt, literally. My wife is a health insurance broker…a Democrat…and everyday she works with people that ACA is not helping. And MSNBC ain’t gonna tell that story.

  • jamieson Hall

    It’s called laughter lol, have you not heard of it? FYI.. Civil rights was born out of religious freedom. Sorry but I’m not interested in convincing you of even the most infinitesimal amount of doubt you may have otherwise about anything.

  • sharon peters

    i was briefly involved w/ Quakers and exposed to sayings of George Fox
    “Walk cheerfully over the world answering that of God in every one.”, 1656
    ‘that of God in every one’ has come to mean to me something that belongs to no one else in me and you and all of ‘them’. it is sad and it hurts when your whole family and relationships disappears inside a pattern of addiction. it’s happened to me and i haven’t gotten over the abandonment and betrayal i feel. i hope ‘that of god’ surfaces in them in your lifetime & a way found to reconnect in loving relationship.
    i found this quote helpful to my sorrow today;

    “The strategic adversary is fascism… the fascism in us all, in our heads and in our everyday behavior, the fascism that causes us to love power, to desire the very thing that dominates and exploits us.”
    ― Michel Foucault

  • Anthony Brancato

    But fear is the key word here; were I a right-winger myself I would be welcoming this prospect, when I most emphatically am not welcoming it; yet at the same time, this is what can happen when the proverbial envelope gets pushed too far. If not a redux of Germany in 1932, we are, at the absolute least, headed for a redux of what happened here in 1968 or 1980.

  • Snooterpoot

    So, you have to use ad hominem attacks now. That doesn’t do your argument any good at all.

    You asked me, specifically, to show a scriptural basis for using the state to provide for those in need. I responded with my opinion. If you don’t like that answer it’s too bad.

    I have not said you or anyone else has to tithe to the government. That’s a pretty good attempt at a straw man, but it fails.

    Conservatives always say that the government should not be providing safety net support for the least among us, that charities should take care of that. The charities are under funded; that is why the government has to step in to take this role so that does matter. It matters tremendously.

    I think your opinion on the issue of the government assisting the poor is based on greed, and greed alone. Seems to me that Jesus wasn’t too keen on that.

    It makes me ashamed to see people who call themselves Christians to advocate for leaving the poor to fend for themselves. That is not the message Christ left. Check Matthew chapter 23 if you don’t agree with me.

  • NCHammer

    “I have not said you or anyone else has to tithe to the government. That’s a pretty good attempt at a straw man, but it fails.”

    How would you like to pay for free healthcare, living wage raises, safety nets, etc? The government has no money of it’s own, it takes money from citizens to give to other citizens.

    Again, you are incapable of reading anything clearly. Christ advocated helping the poor, which I am in favor of. He did not rely on the State to do so. I am not in favor of you or anyone else telling me or the public in general if, when and how we must support others. That’s not a Biblical approach. It’s totalitarian.

    You can quote every Scripture in the Bible on giving and helping and I will agree when they are in context. However, none of these will advocate the State forcing me to through taking my income and redistributing it as the State sees fit.

    That is the point of all of this. You cannot get people to agree to your desire to give their income away to those causes you deem moral and right, so you’re quite comfortable letting the State force us to.

  • Snooterpoot

    Who wants to show compassion for people who are struggling? It damned sure isn’t you.

    Stop telling conservative’s lies about taking away Second Amendment rights. The Constitution doesn’t say you can own a friggin’ cannon. No one is trying to take away your guns. We want background checks so that guns aren’t legally available to people who shouldn’t have them, such as Alan Landza, for Christ’s sake!

    All you have is lies. That’s all.

  • Snooterpoot

    Okay, NC. Here’s my argument, and the last time I am going to engage you.

    Doctors who perform abortions are simply performing a medical procedure that the patient has decided is necessary for herself, no matter what the reason.

    The reproductive choices made by women are none of your damned business.

    I think it is cruel beyond belief to bring child into this world knowing it is going to suffer. That is not concern for a baby, NC. It simply is not pro-life; it’s pro-birth and you’re on your own after you’ve passed through the birth canal.

    Many people who read the Bible disagree with your interpretation. Of course you have the right to interpret the scriptures in any way you choose. What you do not have the right to do is use the power and assets of the government to force women to conform to your interpretation.

    It really is that simple. Stop trying to control others. Take a look at your own shortcomings and address those.

  • Snooterpoot

    Nice ad hominem there, jamieson. You didn’t answer my question, though. I wanted to know what you found funny about your comment.

    Your comment about civil rights supports my statement that civil rights and religious rights are not necessarily separate. Thank you for that.

  • I think there’s some wisdom in this. If what they’re preaching really is the (big T) Truth, it would be self-evident and readily accepted by the masses. The fact that people aren’t buying what they’re selling may be casting doubt. When you’re faith is grounded rigid dogma and moral certitude, doubt is deadly.

  • Lamont Cranston

    Really? Thousands of people every day would be at least two thousand people. Liars burn in hell. See you there!

  • Jakeithus

    And you’re nothing more than a misandrist who judges and marginalizes 50% of the population based on nothing more than their genitals. I’ll continue to speak out for the victims of abortions that constitute both sexes, rather than limit my mind like you seem to have done.

    I think you’re asking the wrong question as well, what does sustaining life outside of the mother’s womb have anything to do with being a person?

    I have no desire to impose religious beliefs on anyone. I simply believe that human life is valuable and is deserving of protection no matter what stage of development it happens to be in. There is nothing inherently religious about that sort of belief, and it is perfectly within the realm of a secular government to make the determination that individuals should not kill other individuals outside of exceptional circumstances.

  • NCHammer

    “The reproductive choices made by women are none of your damned business.”

    When you attempt to force employers and tax payers to pay for your abortions and abortifacients, then it is my business.

    “I think it is cruel beyond belief to bring child into this world knowing it is going to suffer.”

    Once again, the logical conclusion of this thinking is that any baby not born into first world wealth should not be born. No baby ever rises from a destitute beginning of suffering to become a person of value.

    I am not pro-birth. What a ridiculous term. I have not, do not and will not encourage anyone to get pregnant outside of a sound marriage relationship. However, if/when they do, I will encourage and promote and advocate for protection of that pregnancy…even from the mother, if necessary.

  • sharon peters

    just itchin’ 4 a fight!

  • sharon peters

    republicans will not defetus!
    hoes befo embryos!

  • Monala

    Who forced a “free” healthcare law on 50% of the population that strongly opposed such a bill?

    It’s called living in a democracy. Laws are passed all the time that a significant number of people object to. You don’t like it, try to get the law changed.

    Who wants to force us to accept and amnesty millions of people who came here illegally?

    Ronald Reagan, for one. There have been a number of conservatives in the past who supported this position.

    Who wants to force businesses opposed to homosexual marriage to participate in them, even against their own religious objections?

    Businesses in this country cannot discriminate. Again, this is part of living in our democracy. Furthermore, do these same businesses consider themselves to be participating in something they object to if they provide a service to heterosexual couples who lived together before marriage, or who had prior divorces? If not, why not?

    Who wants to force gun owners to give up their Constitutional rights?

    Wanting sensible gun laws such as background checks is not forcing gun owners to give up their rights.

    Who wants to force taxpayers to support abortion through funding of abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood?

    Federal law has for several decades prohibited funding for abortions.

    Who wants to force Hobby Lobby to provide abortifacients as part of a compensation plan?

    A) the drugs in question are not abortifacents; b) Hobby Lobby provided them before, and invests in companies that make them; c) Hobby Lobby has no right to force its employees to follow their moral dictates (beyond what is needed to do their jobs). What if your boss decided s/he wouldn’t allow an insurance plan to pay for your cancer surgery or diabetes medicine because your smoking or eating habits contributed to your condition (and they believe strongly that the body is a temple of the Lord)? Hobby Lobby employees earn their compensation whether in wages or benefits, and the boss has no right to dictate how its used once they earn it.

    Who forces universities to withdraw speaking invitations to anyone who remotely resembles a conservative?
    Who forces politically correct speech as a prerequisite for owning or running a business?

    Conservatives have protested and boycotted plenty of liberals and forced them out of jobs and opportunities. Who forces ….? People on both sides of the aisle.

  • paganheart

    Hate to dredge up a thread here, but I read that comment and almost cried. I’ve been there. So true. Thank you.

  • Andy

    No worries as far as I’m concerned. Glad I could help. Have a nice day!

  • Andy

    Bahahahahahahahahaha!

  • Andy

    Exactly. As I said in another comment, the problem is more socioeconomic than some of us think it is.

  • D Rizdek

    And, do you have any opinions? Can you say any more than “you do not like something?”

  • Frankly

    Very excellent points. I also want to add another: in some ways, the religious right always has an undercurrent of anger. They need a war, they need an enemy, they something to fight against. It creates the tension that fuels that kind of movement. The reason? Conservatism is very tribal, in the less enlightened sense of the term…. you’re either in the tribe or you’re not. For example, Southern hospitality is wonderful…. if you’re white, straight and Christian. Different rules apply when you’re not in the tribe. And the tribe has to have enemy tribes… us vs. them.

  • Frankly

    Very excellent points. I also want to add another: in some ways, the religious right always has an undercurrent of anger. They need a war, they need an enemy, they something to fight against. It creates the tension that fuels that kind of movement. The reason? Conservatism is very tribal, in the less enlightened sense of the term…. you’re either in the tribe or you’re not. For example, Southern hospitality is wonderful…. if you’re white, straight and Christian. Different rules apply when you’re not in the tribe. And the tribe has to have enemy tribes… us vs. them.

  • Neon

    You give me some hope, Kerry. :) I’ve been that kid a long long time ago when things weren’t open for discussion.

  • Beth Rich

    Where in the Bible does it say we get to judge what is “very wrong” in another person? Because I haven’t been able to find that verse, only that it is NOT OUR PLACE to judge one another. Only love…

  • Ellen Polzien

    And “broadly secular society” also browbeats racists, sexists, xenophobes and and anti-science/anti-education know-nothings. As it should, because such opinions keep society from flourishing. What’s your point? “My ignorance is as good as your knowledge”?

  • Robespierre0753

    What’s wrong with putting all Republicans in concentration camps?

  • kkb

    “I see and talk with literally thousands of people every day.”

    Lol.

  • kkb

    Yeah, thanks for sharing, THEODORE. In the meantime, we will carry on as necessary.

  • kkb

    If you were so hepped up on saving lives, your motto would not be: Love the Preliving and HATE THE LIVING.

    You have continuously shown your hate and wishes to oppress women and children and everyone who represents “Those People.” You and yours are no longer relevant, in my opinion, and when your mouths open, evil always comes out. The world will know what is right by doing the opposite of what religion (read: cult) wishes. . . . 100%, 24/7. Religion is the voice and the face of true evil.

  • kkb

    Christian persecution has ALWAYS BEEN the persecution by Christians of EVERYONE ELSE.

  • kkb

    The church, selling nothing for $$ and power for over 2,000 years. The biggest con ever perpetuated on the human race. Vile and criminal.

  • kkb

    You must think the 700 club is just wonderful, then. Indoctrinate.

  • kkb

    Lol: “God will never leave us in our battle to fight for the innocent.”

  • Snooterpoot

    ad hominem attack is all you have? Which state do you live in that “confiscates” your taxes to “kill viable fetuses?”

    I don’t believe anything you’ve written is based on love; you seethe with hatred.

  • Oregon

  • Snooterpoot

    Let’s see your proof that your taxes are used to “kill viable fetuses” in circumstances other than the life or health of the mother, or because of severe birth defects that would only lead to intense suffering.

    You can’t, because there isn’t any. “Suffering is no reason for murder,” belies your complete lack of compassion for those babies and their families. I’m glad I don’t know you.

  • Why are you bigoted against those with birth defects? Why are you bigoted against suffering?

    http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2013/sep/24/oregon-2014/does-oregon-health-plan-pay-about-4000-abortions-y/

  • I love the living. That’s why my pro-life charitable giving goes to Mother and Child Education Center, which provides financial support and training for mothers.

  • Snooterpoot

    Again with the ad hominem attack. You do your cause much harm by engaging is such inflammatory rhetoric. I won’t dignify your questions with an answer.

    Do you think a woman’s life is less important than that of a fetus? Why do you think it is okay to impose suffering on an innocent? Do you support torture? Because that is what you are advocating, Theodore. Nothing more and nothing less.

  • You are the one claiming that birth defects are deserving of the death penalty. I place *equal* importance between mother and child. Avoiding suffering by committing murder makes the suffering irrelevant, and is just based on your own bigotry against people who suffer.

  • Snooterpoot

    Another ad hominem attack.

    You, Theodore, advocate torture. That is despicable. I am through with you.

  • I advocate suffering with people rather than killing them to alleviate my suffering. That is demonic.

  • Funny how you claim about ad hominem in the same post as committing ad hominem. But that’s to be expected from somebody who thinks the best way to end suffering is to deny the suffering human being life itself.

  • OhSoGood

    1. Great!
    2. Better!!
    3. Best!!!

    Most wonderful! I like good news on the first day back to work!

  • Nimblewill

    For so long the god I worshiped was angry. Why wouldn’t his followers be?

  • Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg

    These are the Calvinists who teach, “Once saved, always saved,” and “Saved by Grace, behavior doesn’t count.” These are the same people accused of behavioral hypocrisy who fight in wars, protest loudly, practice consumerism and gravitate to sectarian and political polarities. Never mind, behavior, is their motto; and so they get the fruits of blowback and vice, back at them. What we must remind people is, You’ve got to reap what you sow.”

  • Southernfriedyankee

    If Benjamin F. Corry really means what he just wrote, then it seems to me that he would also have major problems with the prophets of the Old Testament in the Bible. From what I read they railed against the unrighteous rulers of the day and usually were killed by them. Jewish tradition says that the king so disliked Isaiah that he put him inside a hollowed out log and then sawed both into two pieces.

    That does not suggest to me that they were misguided, but rather following the ‘true star” Jehovah they decided to let the chips “fall where they might”. The prophets are NOT remembered today for “being right” or persuading the political realm of the day, to their side, but only delivering God’s message and warnings faithfully.
    I only can think of one prophet who had a modicum of “success” and was the prophet Jonah, and he had a bad attitude. God had told him to preach to the Ninevites. Jonah HATED the Nivevites, so he went in the other direction ! The story ends by telling us that after he finally preached repentance TO THEM, THEY repented, IN MASS. And then he fought a huge bout of depression, (because he had hoped God would rain down death and destruction and destroy all of them)

  • superindy

    Is it not true that ACA was a compromise? The government of the time wanted to go much further but the Repbublican party would not allow it? You should not be happy with ACA but rather than criticizing it maybe work to improve and build on what it started. You should all have access to medical care – period. One should not try to walk in pain to a hospital because they cannot afford an ambulance ride which is utterly and grossly over priced. A sudden illness or accident should not cause you to lose your home. You should not put funding your bloated military and handing useless CEO’s millions above funding a basic living wage, available health care for anyone who needs it, an education system that actually educates, and so on. It seems that Democrats have at least one person running for president who isn’t afraid to tax the rich to serve the many.

  • Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg

    “Progressives” are physical hominids IN DRAG. They have no concept of “Spirit consequences of behavior.” “Progressivism” has NO CONCEPT OF the human soul, of ACTUAL MIND-CONTACT with “GOD,” of the concept of Covenant with God, of the COHERENCE of Laws of Causes and Effects, the Unity of Mind with Physicality, Soul with Soul. Progressives operate from a construct devoid of the entire concept of SPIRIT, but they want to control everyone but themselves. https://youtu.be/n-NdxPIFHTI … The REAL DEAL.