.@KirstenPowers: Women’s March undermined by exclusion of pro-life women https://t.co/F0nDDOWycB — Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) January 22, 2017 Kirsten Powers had a tense exchange on CNN the other night as she was trying to point out that the Womens March over the weekend excluded some women (see above). One of the other panelists chuckled at her for pointing this out, although it is not clear why. In advance of the march, the organizers published a doctrinal statement titled “Unity Principles.” Anyone who departed from the doctrinal statement was not allowed to “partner” with the march. Among other things required of “partners” is explicit affirmation of unrestricted abortion rights and gay…
-
-
President Reagan’s stunning statement of pro-life conviction
Sanctity of Human Life Sunday is an annual observance held on the Sunday closest to anniversary of the Supreme Court’s infamous Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion (January 22). The tradition started in 1984 on the eleventh anniversary of Roe. President Reagan issued a proclamation marking the day, which was held on January 22, 1984. Since then, Democrat presidents have tended not to mark the day with official proclamations, while Republicans have. Nevertheless, the observance has gone on in churches across the country every year with or without the proclamation. I will be marking the day in my sermon tomorrow at our church. Tomorrow’s observance happens to fall on the…
-
Did President Trump just eliminate the contraceptive mandate on the first day?
Readers of this blog know that I have written extensively about Obamacare’s controversial contraceptive mandate. In fact, the most viral post I have ever written on this site was about this issue. The mandate has been controversial because it forces employers to provide coverage for contraceptives and abortifacients–even if those employers object to buying such coverage on religious grounds. The Christian owners of Hobby Lobby fought this all the way to the Supreme Court and won. But the problematic mandate still stands, and other cases are pending. President Trump signed an executive order that effectively overturns the contraceptive mandate. The order authorizes the HHS Secretary to eliminate administrative rules related…
-
Mike Pence did not sign a law allowing businesses to refuse service to gay people
If Vice-President Mike Pence thought that his public scolding from the cast of Hamilton would be the last he’d hear on the subject, he knows better now. And so do all of his neighbors. The Washington Post reports that about 200 protestors marched through Pence’s new D.C. neighborhood in order “to protest what they consider his anti-gay views.” The protestors didn’t just carry signs. They marched through Pence’s neighborhood with speakers blaring music and with some of the protestors performing obscenities in the middle of the street (there’s a video in the Post‘s coverage). The Post‘s report describes an ugly spectacle brimming with animus towards Pence and anyone else who…
-
Should we avoid praying for Donald Trump by name in public worship?
Mike Kinman (rector of All Saints Church in Pasadena, CA) explains why his church will not pray for Donald Trump by name in their public services, even though they prayed for President Obama by name. He writes: We are in a unique situation in my lifetime where we have a president elect whose name is literally a trauma trigger to some people – particularly women and people who, because of his words and actions, he represents an active danger to health and safety. This presents a challenge. We are rightly charged with praying for our leaders … but we are also charged with keeping the worshipping community, while certainly not…
-
Understanding shifting attitudes among “evangelicals” on same-sex marriage
Justin Taylor links today to a long-read from Alastair Roberts. I would say that this is a must-read piece if you want to understand shifting attitudes among “evangelicals” on the issue of same-sex marriage. It’s from November but still highly relevant–especially today. Here is a slice from the conclusion:
-
“I Got Gay Married. I Got Gay Divorced. I Regret Both.”
Meredith Maran had an interesting essay in The New York Times over the weekend: “I Got Gay Married. I Got Gay Divorced. I Regret Both.” In it, she describes her “marriage” to her lesbian partner in 2008 and the subsequent dissolution of their relationship in 2013. She regrets her gay marriage and divorce, but it is not because she is against gay marriage in principle. Rather she says this:
-
Celebrities and Citizens share their “Obama moment”
The White House produced a video of celebrites and citizens sharing their most memorable moment of President Obama’s presidency. Each one relates their “Obama moment” as a final farewell in these last days of his administration. I won’t offer much commentary on this. It is precisely what we would all expect. Still, I can’t help but notice that about half the country would mourn some of the things being celebrated as “progress” in this video. It’s a striking reminder of how divided our country remains over fundamental issues of justice and truth. And that is not likely to change anytime soon.
-
Should Churches Discipline Gay-Affirming Members?
Earlier today, I participated in a debate for a radio program about homosexuality and church discipline. The program is “Up for Debate with Julie Roys,” and three of us were debating this question: “Should Churches Discipline Gay-Affirming Members?” I argued that they should. The other two guys argued that they shouldn’t. Here’s the description of the show from the website: With same-sex marriage becoming increasingly common, more church-going Christians are affirming same-sex relationships. Should churches discipline, and even excommunicate, these believers – or overlook the offense? This Saturday on Up For Debate, Julie Roys will discuss this issue with Denny Burk, president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,…
-
When the “gender revolution” claims the children
Many of you have likely seen the special issue of National Geographic dealing with transgenderism. The entire issue—and indeed the feature article—is a case study in one-sided propaganda. It celebrates transgender identities as healthy expressions of human diversity. And it shows little to no familiarity with the contested nature of their claims or with scientific evidence that contradicts transgender ideology. The entire issue simply assumes the truthfulness of claims made by some of the most ardent transgender ideologues. Andrew Walker and I have written a response to this at The Public Discourse, and you can read our entire argument there. I simply want to highlight one item for your consideration.…