Archive | Politics

I Have a Dream

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
Continue Reading →


Which god?

A court in Malaysia recently overturned a government ban on the use of the word “Allah” to denote the Christian God. As a result, several Christian churches have been firebombed. Pray for Christian brothers and sisters in Malaysia. They need it now.

Perhaps you are aware that western theologians and missiologists have long debated whether or not the Christian God and the Muslim “Allah” are the same God. It is a contentious debate with profound missiological implications. Have you considered, however, how that question has been answered on the Muslim side? According to the New York Times , the strife in Malaysia owes to the deeply held conviction among Muslims that the two are not the same.

“Though that usage is common in many countries, where Arabic- and Malay-language Bibles describe Jesus as the ‘son of Allah,’ many Muslims here insist that the word belongs exclusively to them and say that its use by other faiths could confuse Muslim worshipers.”

In other words, these Muslims want to make sure that the God of the Bible and the god of Islam are distinguished. Read about it here, and pray for the believers in Malaysia.


California’s Same-Sex-Marriage Trial

This case could end up being the Roe v. Wade of the same-sex “marriage” debate in our culture, the Baptist Press reports. Two homosexual couples are challenging the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, which bans gay “marriage” and which Californians passed with a majority vote in 2008. The plaintiffs argue that their 14th amendment right to “equal protection under the law” is being violated by Proposition 8.

The New York Times reports about the first day of the trial, and a Baptist Press report implies that the California judge is likely to rule in favor of the plaintiffs. The case is likely to go all the way to the Supreme Court, which could declare unconstitutional all state laws banning gay “marriage.” Sound familiar? That’s why the case is billed as the Roe v. Wade of gay “marriage.” This will be one to watch.


Gay “Marriage” Fails in NJ Senate

This is good breaking news from New Jersey. Governor Corzine had promised to sign a bill legalizing gay “marriage,” but the bill failed in the Senate before it reached his desk.

“The state Senate rejected a same-sex marriage bill today, a major victory for opponents who contend that the measure would damage religious freedom and is not needed because the state already permits civil unions.”

New Jersey’s Star-Ledger has the rest of the story here.


Stupak Fighting the Good Fight

Democratic Representative Bart Stupak is fighting the good fight to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortions. According to the New York Times, he is prepared to vote against final passage if the bill gets abortion coverage wrong. Here’s an excerpt:

‘With final negotiations on a health care overhaul beginning this week, complaints about “the evil Stupak amendment,” as the congressman dryly called it over dinner here recently, are likely to grow even louder. The amendment prevents women who receive federal insurance subsidies from buying abortion coverage — but critics assert it could cause women who buy their own insurance difficulty in obtaining coverage.

‘Mr. Stupak insists that the final bill include his terms, which he says merely reflect current law. If he prevails, he will have won an audacious, counterintuitive victory, forcing a Democratic-controlled Congress to pass a measure that will be hailed as an anti-abortion triumph. If party members do not accept his terms — and many vow they will not — Mr. Stupak is prepared to block passage of the health care overhaul.’

The rest of the article chronicles how Stupak has become somewhat of a pariah in the Democrat party for his stand. Good for him. This is the kind of courage I wish we saw more of from politicians. Read the rest here.


Are Humans the Problem?

More abortions. More birth-control. That’s how we can fix the “global warming” problem being discussed at the U.N.’s climate change conference in Copenhagen. At least that’s what Diane Francis argues in her column for Financial Post titled “The real inconvenient truth.” She writes,

‘The “inconvenient truth” overhanging the UN’s Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world.

‘A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days. Continue Reading →


Ross Douthat on Obama’s Speech

In a nutshell, Douthat thinks Bush was better:

“I think it’s worth comparing tonight’s speech, unfavorably, to George W. Bush’s address announcing the Iraqi surge. . . Obama was more comprehensive; Bush was much, much better. And now we have to hope that the President’s strategy is more successful than his speech.”


Render Not to Caesar What Is God’s

I just finished reading and signing The Manhattan Declaration (MD), and I urge you to do the same. The Manhattan Declaration is a document affirming the sanctity of human life, the sanctity of marriage, and the rights of conscience and religious liberty. All three of these items are under siege in our culture today, so a group of Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians have drafted this statement and call upon others to defend life, marriage, and religious liberty.

You need to read the entire document, but I would like to highlight the end. It commits signatories to civil disobedience under certain conditions. It’s punchy and dead-on:

“Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”


Democratic Virtues of the Christian Right

The New Yorker recently published a must-read interview with Jon Shields, the author of The Democratic Virtues of the Christian Right, about the history of the organized opposition to abortion and its evolving relationship with American politics. Among other things, Shields says this:

“The pro-life cause has indeed resonated in a liberal, rights-oriented culture far more than other “culture-war” issues. Even as attitudes toward gay marriage and gender roles have rapidly liberalized, abortion opinion has been remarkably stable since the early nineteen-seventies. The remarkable spread of social liberalism, therefore, has not left our nation any more pro-choice than it was in 1973, when Roe v. Wade was decided. There is even some evidence that opinion might now be moving slightly in a pro-life direction. Young Americans, for example, are suddenly less pro-choice than older Americans, even though they strongly favor gay marriage and are less religious.”

This is a fascinating interview that will make you want to buy the book. Read the rest here.


Pro-death Feminist Propaganda

Don’t believe everything you read. Especially the obfuscations of Kate Michelman and Frances Kissling in today’s New York Times. Their OP-ED is more of the tired, old, feminist propaganda that entirely misses the point of the abortion debate.

They pillory congressional Democrats who supported the pro-life Stupak amendment to the healthcare bill passed last week. They charge pro-life Democrats with risking the “well-being of millions of women” and with undermining “reproductive rights.” Once again, the pro-death feminists show not one scintilla of concern for the unborn. They even complain that Democrat leaders are now using the term “pro-life” instead of the pejorative “anti-choice.”

Here’s the bottom line. It is wrong to kill innocent human beings. Unborn babies are innocent human beings. Therefore, we should not kill or ask our government to subsidize the killing of unborn babies. That’s the elephant in the room that Michelman and Kissling don’t want to talk about. Indeed, they can’t talk about it. If they did, they know that they will have lost the debate.


Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes