Jun 1, 2012
May 31, 2012
The Need for Creeds [Backpack Radio]
Labels:
AUDIO,
Back Pack Radio,
CHURCH HISTORY
J. Warner Wallace is a cold case detective in Cali and an apologist. This program is based on a few of his articles about creeds (The Need for Creeds and The Early Use of Creeds).
DOWNLOAD THE MP3 HERE:
http://backpack.podbean.com/mf/web/cak9vw/BPR-2012-0527.mp3
http://backpack.podbean.com/mf/web/cak9vw/BPR-2012-0527.mp3
May 30, 2012
Some Planned Parenthood Stats
Labels:
ABORTION
PP specializes in helping people plan to become UN-parents.
A 2011 PP report shows there was a 59% drop in adoption referrals since 2008! In 2009, PP reported 1 adoption referral for every 340 abortions. Between 2007-8, abortions increased 6%. 97% of women who go to PP choose to empty the contents of their uterus.
A 2011 PP report shows there was a 59% drop in adoption referrals since 2008! In 2009, PP reported 1 adoption referral for every 340 abortions. Between 2007-8, abortions increased 6%. 97% of women who go to PP choose to empty the contents of their uterus.
I have a question for you: guess which one PP makes more money off of: abortions or adoption referrals? I bet you can guess!
SOURCES
http://
http://www.lifenews.com/
NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXCERPT (I DID NOT WRITE IT) - THE SOURCE IS LISTED AFTER:
When compared with previous annual reports, the latest one shows an almost steady increase in the number of abortions performed at its clinics: In 2006, Planned Parenthood did 289,750 abortions; in 2007, it did 305,310; in 2009, it did 331,796; and, in 2010, it did 329,445–a small decrease from the previous year.
The annual report for fiscal year 2008-2009 does not include abortion or adoption figures, but a PPFA Fact Sheet posted on its Web site and said to be current as of September 2010, states that 324,008 abortions were performed at Planned Parenthood clinics around the country in 2008.
According to PPFA’s annual report for fiscal year 2007-2008, in 2007 Planned Parenthood’s “adoption referrals to other agencies” totaled 4,912. In Fiscal Year 2010 that number was 841, a decrease of 82.8 percent.
The PPFA Fact Sheet states that adoption is included in 1 percent of services in 2008 (primary care and “other services” are included in that 1 percent), or 2,405 adoption referrals.
The latest annual report claims that abortion services make up 3 percent of “medical services,” but PPFA states it served 3 million people and performed 329,445 abortions – numbers that show 11 percent of customers received an abortion.
Source: http://cnsnews.com/news/
What are your thoughts on this? SEE THIS LINK!
http://townhall.com/
May 29, 2012
Abortion and its Aftermath
Labels:
ABORTION
Did you guys see this statement by the President on Roe v. Wade Anniversary:
"As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams."
Let me draw out one part:
"And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams." ... by killing both our sons and our daughters!? Does these rights suddenly become less urgent if the human beings in question are unborn?
If you are pro-choice and yet if you both like where the Pres. said we should 'promote adoption', then I would like to ask you this: do you agree? If so, what are you doing to help promote it? Or is telling anyone who is pro-life they need to adopt children as far as it goes for you?
Here's the interesting thing: abortion advocates SAY they are pro-CHOICE, as in they support the mom's right to either terminate or allow the pregnancy. If this is true, that means you are also responsible for the children who have been born, not just pro-lifers. It me incenses me to no end when abortion advocates act if only pro-lifers have a responsibility to those that have been born.
Furthermore, the veracity of the pro-life case does not rest on any pro-lifers activity or lack thereof. Either tiny human beings are persons with a right to life or not. If the former, we must protect them, if they latter, we can do with them as we will.
It is sad to see how abortion advocates are so beholden to the status quo of dehumanizing the unborn. I think this lack of moral clarity in their own minds makes them think that everyone should be just as confused as they are - this is why they are indignant when pro-lifers are so adamant that the unborn are persons and should have the right to life. Moral fog and a constant concern on material things and economic comfort did not serve us well in the debates about slavery and they do not serve us well here. Just imagine this argument: "If it is unclear whether or not a black man is a full person or not, then we should exercise great caution when considering enslaving one."
I currently know many single mothers. We do everything we can to help them - especially being their true friends. I and some of my friends have been involved with helping women think through their real options before they have an abortion - it is not easy but all I see Planned Parenthood and 'friends' do is offer one option -abortion- this is why they do not allow women to see ultrasound images or aborted babies (from the FIRST trimester).
I also know many women who have had an abortion - I have even seen them go through a healing process and even been part of it. I don't know why you keep saying pro-lifers forsake women who have abortions - on the contrary, we counsel them and help them deal with all the mental, spiritual, and sometimes physical turmoil they go through. This is yet one more area where the abortion lobby fails - pro-aborts do little to nothing to help post-abort women. They may say they and give lip service but the reality is that it is not a priority for them. In fact, nightmares and the like are an embarrassment to the pro-abort crowd. We believe in helping. We believe in forgiveness and restoration. What does the pro-abort crowd offer?
My point: we clean up the pro-abort crowd's bloody mess!
I also know many women who have had an abortion - I have even seen them go through a healing process and even been part of it. I don't know why you keep saying pro-lifers forsake women who have abortions - on the contrary, we counsel them and help them deal with all the mental, spiritual, and sometimes physical turmoil they go through. This is yet one more area where the abortion lobby fails - pro-aborts do little to nothing to help post-abort women. They may say they and give lip service but the reality is that it is not a priority for them. In fact, nightmares and the like are an embarrassment to the pro-abort crowd. We believe in helping. We believe in forgiveness and restoration. What does the pro-abort crowd offer?
My point: we clean up the pro-abort crowd's bloody mess!
May 28, 2012
Empathy and Change in Regards to Homosexuality
Labels:
Homosexuality
I currently have and have had a number of friends who either self-identify as homosexual or at least struggle with related issues. I have done my best to be a faithful and loving friend regardless of where they were at in their journey.I will not name names. But there are people who could vouch for me on this who are my friends on Facebook. I say that to say that out of all people we as Christians should be loving, understanding and most helpful towards those in struggles with sin regardless of how it manifests itself.
I am not just talking about Christians who say they struggle with same-sex attraction. I also speak of those who see nothing wrong with it and openly embrace it as their preference. Yet, in many instances, we have still been able to be friends. I was exposed to this at a relatively young age. I had two of my friends make homosexual passes at me in middle school. One subtly; one very direct. I was able to remain friends with them after that just fine and even into the high school years. I still can be friends with people who are homosexual to this day. So as far as empathy, I hope I can say that I have the love of Christ in my heart for those who feel trapped in these situations.
I do not think there is a one-size-fits-all explanation why people find themselves struggling or embracing same-sex attraction. The causes in one sense seem to be multifaceted. However, in another sense I would say they have the same root cause as all sinful desires and that is total depravity. The fact that all humans are sinful in every area of their being, including their sexual desires. Certain environmental factors can contribute to these things no doubt but at the and I believe that as creatures made in the image of God we are able to be morally accountable for our actions regardless of what has happened prior. But again as Christians who recognize the sin nature and and do not write it off as biology or merely environmental or something like that, we should be able to understand the very real issue that plagues us all, namely sin.
So my heart goes out to those people who are trapped in the homosexual fog regardless of if they say they love it or hate it; either way they need Jesus to redeem them and the Holy Spirit to be able to have victory over sin. This is the promise of Scripture that God gives us a new nature and we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves to righteousness and love and indeed even Christ's servant.
So if you want to know my "emotional aspect", as in do I have empathy, the answer is "yes!"
One other interesting facet about all this is that in the realm of what's called reparative psychology that more and more secular psychologists are not willing to help someone struggling with same-sex attraction even if they say they want it to stop because they tell the person that is how they should be and that it is okay even if the patient wants to change. There is information about this readily available as far as the trend in psychology to not help even those wanting to be helped because of political correctness in the behavioral sciences.
This abstract seems to be an example of what I am saying:
"A need for empirical data on the potentially harmful effects of such treatments is established. Ethical considerations relative to the ongoing stigmatizing effects of conversion therapies are presented. The need to develop more complex models for conceptualizing sexual orientation is discussed, as well as the need to provide treatments to gay men and lesbians that are consonant with psychology's stance on homosexuality." - http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/
And it may not be long before these ideas become law: this is a PDF of a bill making its way through the California State Senate which makes reparative therapy for teens illegal.
http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/
However, Christians are willing to walk through the struggles with people who request that they can have some success in overcoming desires that they say they do not want. To me that seems immensely more empathetic.
I am not just talking about Christians who say they struggle with same-sex attraction. I also speak of those who see nothing wrong with it and openly embrace it as their preference. Yet, in many instances, we have still been able to be friends. I was exposed to this at a relatively young age. I had two of my friends make homosexual passes at me in middle school. One subtly; one very direct. I was able to remain friends with them after that just fine and even into the high school years. I still can be friends with people who are homosexual to this day. So as far as empathy, I hope I can say that I have the love of Christ in my heart for those who feel trapped in these situations.
I do not think there is a one-size-fits-all explanation why people find themselves struggling or embracing same-sex attraction. The causes in one sense seem to be multifaceted. However, in another sense I would say they have the same root cause as all sinful desires and that is total depravity. The fact that all humans are sinful in every area of their being, including their sexual desires. Certain environmental factors can contribute to these things no doubt but at the and I believe that as creatures made in the image of God we are able to be morally accountable for our actions regardless of what has happened prior. But again as Christians who recognize the sin nature and and do not write it off as biology or merely environmental or something like that, we should be able to understand the very real issue that plagues us all, namely sin.
So my heart goes out to those people who are trapped in the homosexual fog regardless of if they say they love it or hate it; either way they need Jesus to redeem them and the Holy Spirit to be able to have victory over sin. This is the promise of Scripture that God gives us a new nature and we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves to righteousness and love and indeed even Christ's servant.
So if you want to know my "emotional aspect", as in do I have empathy, the answer is "yes!"
One other interesting facet about all this is that in the realm of what's called reparative psychology that more and more secular psychologists are not willing to help someone struggling with same-sex attraction even if they say they want it to stop because they tell the person that is how they should be and that it is okay even if the patient wants to change. There is information about this readily available as far as the trend in psychology to not help even those wanting to be helped because of political correctness in the behavioral sciences.
This abstract seems to be an example of what I am saying:
"A need for empirical data on the potentially harmful effects of such treatments is established. Ethical considerations relative to the ongoing stigmatizing effects of conversion therapies are presented. The need to develop more complex models for conceptualizing sexual orientation is discussed, as well as the need to provide treatments to gay men and lesbians that are consonant with psychology's stance on homosexuality." - http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/
And it may not be long before these ideas become law: this is a PDF of a bill making its way through the California State Senate which makes reparative therapy for teens illegal.
http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/
However, Christians are willing to walk through the struggles with people who request that they can have some success in overcoming desires that they say they do not want. To me that seems immensely more empathetic.
May 27, 2012
QUESTIONS for Advocates of Homosexuality (or whoever)
Labels:
Homosexuality
… if you want, these are voluntary!
-What do you think the purpose or function of a man’s penis is?
-What do you think the purpose or function of a man’s anus is?
-Do you think because something *is* a certain way, that it *should* be the way?
-Do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle which produces positive and healthy benefits for the individual? For society? If so, why?
-What sources do you think we should draw our sexual ethics from? -Why do you think those sources are worthy to be considered authoritative?
-What do you think the best thing about homosexuality is?
-What do you think is the worst thing about homosexuality is?
PS - My recent convos from this came from an article I linked to on my FaceBook wall (Q High, a school that recently opened in downtown Phoenix for gay and lesbian students). It received 93 comments! Here are some of the things I'd want to say in relation to these comments:
1. Why have many commenters on here assumed Q began because of bullying?
2. Do we really think its appropriate to have a separate school based upon the way people have sex?
3. What should the goal of education be and how does Q fit in with this goal?
It seems to me part of the problem is our ed system as well as our culture over sexualizing our children way too early - this school certainly only fosters more of that!
May 26, 2012
Is Homosexuality Healthy?
Labels:
Homosexuality
Every statistic I've ever seen in regards to people who practice homosexuality militates against the thesis that homosexuality helps contribute to human flourishing. For example, in the areas of disease prevention, life expectancy, substance abuse, suicide rates, and the long term benefits or lack thereof in regards to families, every area I am aware of goes against the idea that homosexuality contributes in a positive way towards human flourishing. Please explain to me in what way does homosexuality contribute to human flourishing.
Many secular folks will give a definition of love that'ss very poetic and heartfelt. But it seems that they would need to provide us some kind of objective basis for accepting your definition. For example, scientific research or biological reasons would suffice to help us except an atheistic definition of love.
I think we all should look at the facts objectively here. The stats on what homosexual sex produces are clear. Why is it some people become very emotional or agitated about that? Here are some examples:
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/
http://www.cdc.gov/
It seems if we really do love homosexuals, we would warn them of the risks and potential harm they face, not affirm their dangerous behaviors! Don't you agree?
It is good to recognize the legitimate health concerns that homosexuality produces. Does it lessen the effectiveness of my argument because I first and foremost hold to biblical authority? This does not seem logical to me. What I mean is this: in what way does any one person's underlying motivations or epistemological presuppositions have a bearing on specific points in their argument? It is either valid or it is not.
Further, I use this type of data to show that general revelation i.e. the sciences confirms special revelation i.e. the Bible. Meaning, the two cannot be at odds and will always confirm each other if the general revelation is interpreted properly. In this case the task of the discerning person is fortunately rather easy, however grim. And I do not think it helps matters to bring in anecdotal examples of frat boys or other groups of people when the actual data on the ground is overwhelmingly in favor of the thesis that homosexuality produces health problems. And it does so in a disproportionate way over and against other lifestyles
Look at the scientific data on the subject - much of it is provided by the CDC. People must stop emoting and instead research the truth.. However you define homosexuality, the fact is that anal sex produces negative health results. As do other MSM activities, such as postillionage, plugs, rimming and fisting.
And I think it is a cop out not to utilize your metaphysical presuppositions when defining love. To not do so shows an inconsistentcy on your underlying world view.
I again do not see how a materialistic outlook gives you the necessary tools to define them as wrong in any meaningful way.
PS - Many of these conversations I have with atheists about homosexuality strike me as bit ironic on many levels. While Christians are linking articles to statistical data by government agencies and concerned with the objective aspects of the case, on the other side we have people who are defining terms from their emotional experiences and asking the other person to elaborate on how they feel on the matter. Besides, I'm not sure about how I feel about a particular matter helps determine its wrongness or rightness or healthiness or unhealthiness.
Many secular folks will give a definition of love that'ss very poetic and heartfelt. But it seems that they would need to provide us some kind of objective basis for accepting your definition. For example, scientific research or biological reasons would suffice to help us except an atheistic definition of love.
I think we all should look at the facts objectively here. The stats on what homosexual sex produces are clear. Why is it some people become very emotional or agitated about that? Here are some examples:
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/
http://www.cdc.gov/
It seems if we really do love homosexuals, we would warn them of the risks and potential harm they face, not affirm their dangerous behaviors! Don't you agree?
It is good to recognize the legitimate health concerns that homosexuality produces. Does it lessen the effectiveness of my argument because I first and foremost hold to biblical authority? This does not seem logical to me. What I mean is this: in what way does any one person's underlying motivations or epistemological presuppositions have a bearing on specific points in their argument? It is either valid or it is not.
Further, I use this type of data to show that general revelation i.e. the sciences confirms special revelation i.e. the Bible. Meaning, the two cannot be at odds and will always confirm each other if the general revelation is interpreted properly. In this case the task of the discerning person is fortunately rather easy, however grim. And I do not think it helps matters to bring in anecdotal examples of frat boys or other groups of people when the actual data on the ground is overwhelmingly in favor of the thesis that homosexuality produces health problems. And it does so in a disproportionate way over and against other lifestyles
Look at the scientific data on the subject - much of it is provided by the CDC. People must stop emoting and instead research the truth.. However you define homosexuality, the fact is that anal sex produces negative health results. As do other MSM activities, such as postillionage, plugs, rimming and fisting.
And I think it is a cop out not to utilize your metaphysical presuppositions when defining love. To not do so shows an inconsistentcy on your underlying world view.
I again do not see how a materialistic outlook gives you the necessary tools to define them as wrong in any meaningful way.
PS - Many of these conversations I have with atheists about homosexuality strike me as bit ironic on many levels. While Christians are linking articles to statistical data by government agencies and concerned with the objective aspects of the case, on the other side we have people who are defining terms from their emotional experiences and asking the other person to elaborate on how they feel on the matter. Besides, I'm not sure about how I feel about a particular matter helps determine its wrongness or rightness or healthiness or unhealthiness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
