Nikki Haley Destroys The Notion That Being Pro-Life Is Anti-Women

The abortion debate in this country is at a fever pitch. While both pro-choice and pro-life advocates passionately defend their causes, civility flies out the window. In the midst of this political firestorm, one voice of reason recently emerged.

Speaking at an event for the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List on June 3, 2019, former United Nations Ambassador and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley gave a poignant pro-life speech without ruthlessly attacking the other side. While destroying the notion that being pro-life is anti-woman, Haley said, “That Is Not Real Feminism.”

According to the Washington Examiner’s Madeline Fry, the former South Carolina Governor stated, “Women are expected to support choice simply because we’re women. That’s just wrong. We all have to be true to ourselves and to others. Unfortunately, many on the Left use the abortion debate to divide women and demand conformity. They do this in the name of feminism. But that is not real feminism.”

In her speech, Haley challenged the demand by pro-choice supporters that all females toe the line with a certain set of values. The former United Nations Ambassador remarked, “The idea that women must adhere to a particular set of values is one of the most anti-women ideas in today’s culture. It is a rejection of the ideas of equality and tolerance that the women’s movement is supposed to be about” according to TheBlaze.

At the Susan B. Anthony List gala, Haley also reinforced the truth that the pro-life movement isn’t mainly about women. It mostly consists of acknowledging the right of an innocent unborn baby to live.

The former South Carolina Governor commented, “As a pro-life, female governor, I was blessed with a unique platform, and I made every effort to use it appropriately. Not to lob attacks at people who disagreed with me, not to diminish the other side, but to re-frame the debate. To explain that being pro-life is not about being for or against women. It is about being for a baby’s right to live — the most basic right there is.”

Fry wrote, “If more people involved in the abortion debate could understand where the other side is coming from — pro-lifers believe the unborn deserve the rights of any other human, and pro-choicers believe unwanted pregnancies will hurt women or hold them back — they might have constructive conversations about the issue.”

While Haley attempted to begin a constructive dialog about abortion, she was quickly and vehemently shot down by Whoopi Goldberg on a broadcast of the left-leaning “The View.” Goldberg quipped, “So let me get this straight, so giving a woman a choice about what to do with her body is anti-feminist? To me, you taking the choice from people is anti-human.”

In the Washington Examiner piece, Fry argued, “And this is why the abortion debate in America is going nowhere. Among U.S. adults, abortion opinions are split about 50/50, according to Gallup, which reports that 48% are pro-choice and 48% are pro-life.”

Fry went on to add, “But when Haley defends a view held by half of Americans, she’s ‘anti-human.’ When pro-abortion activists talk about the other side ‘trying to police’ women’s bodies and anti-abortion activists call people who’ve had abortions ‘murderers,’ something is wrong. No mind was ever changed through sheer contempt.”

In the Liberal Democratic Party, merely having pro-life views is grounds to get you isolated at best and ousted at worse. According to Fox News, “While the party once tolerated both pro-life and pro-choice Democrats inside the tent, those with pro-life views are being told they aren’t welcome anymore.”

Recently, 2020 Democratic presidential contender U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat – New York, told the Washington Post, “As a party, we should be 100 percent pro-choice, and it should be non-negotiable.”

When Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, dared to sign a bill last week that would ban abortions in his state after a fetal heartbeat is detected, he received blow-back from his own party. In a statement, Nicole Brener-Schmitz, NARAL Pro-Choice America political director, stated, “Governor Edwards, and any other elected official attempting to use political overreach to roll back our rights, is mistaken to think our fundamental freedoms are up for debate. We are the majority, and if you’re not fighting alongside us, you don’t deserve to represent the American people.”

Brener-Schmitz said that the Louisiana Governor “won’t get a pass just because he is a Democrat.”

The hyper-polarized abortion divide in America highlights just how important the 2020 elections are for advocates on both sides of the fence.

Expect things to get even more heated in the coming days, weeks, and months.

Original here

Advertisements

No, God Doesn’t Love Abortion, And If You Say So You’re Not A Real Pastor

The Atlantic’s headline writers must have envisioned people concluding abortion might not be so bad if a pastor thinks it’s moral. There is no other reason for the story. It’s certainly not newsworthy.

No, God Doesn’t Love Abortion, And If You Say So You’re Not A Real Pastor

May 31, 2019 By Glenn T. Stanton

The left has been on a frantic jag the last few weeks to get us all to remember just how wonderful and important abortion is. One of the most despicably desperate efforts was a recent New York Times editorial by a particularly infamous late-term abortionist explaining (and this is not a typo) “Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”

Pregnancy: Very bad. Abortion: Very good. But of course, 100 percent of everyone who has ever existed does so because a pregnancy did what it naturally does and an abortion didn’t. The craziness of this editorial is a dramatic demonstration of just how paralyzed with fear these folks are about losing their cherished right to be free of children.

The Atlantic recently published a less dramatic, but equally desperate, article entitled “A Pastor’s Case for the Morality of Abortion.” Three trigger words here are supposed to create a confused dissonance: Pastor. Morality. Abortion. A case for the morality of abortion by a pastor. We imagine The Atlantic’s headline writers envisioned so many of us concluding abortion might not be so bad if a pastor thinks it’s moral. There is no other reason for the story. It’s certainly not newsworthy.

This pastor, Jes Kast, is not well-known. She is extremely fringe and not particularly influential. She didn’t recently change her position on the issue through dramatic soul-searching. And she’s a United Church of Christ pastor, a denomination that never saw an abortion it couldn’t celebrate. She also describes herself as a femme queer lesbianwho wants us to “queer this sh-t” we call our lives.

She serves on Planned Parenthood’s national Clergy Advocacy Board and talks endlessly about the need to protect “reproductive rights,” as if she’s pro-fertility. She’s not. She’s a woman who’s proudly political even in her choice of lipstick.

Every day I put my lipstick on, it is a form of protest. When Hitler took over and the war was going on women who were fighting back against the Nazi infiltration would wear red lipstick. Hitler apparently hated it when women wore red lipstick. So for me, it’s an act of protest to put red lipstick on.

This is the person The Atlantic chose to make the moral case for abortion. On top of all this, she doesn’t even make a decent case, as if there is one, much less from a Christian perspective. But let’s give her the respect of taking seriously what she says.

Abortion For Any Reason Is Totally Moral

First, she is very clear that she is all-in on abortion. When asked if she perceives any instance under which abortion is immoral, she says definitively, “I don’t. I really don’t.” These are the words of a fanatic. That’s not an accusation, but a fact. She believes that snuffing out the life of a pre-born child is such an inherent good in and of itself that nothing should override it.

Not the abortion of a girl because a boy was desired, which happens by the millions around the world. How does a feminist square that? Not because one has a cruise coming up in six months. Not because the mother just wants to. These and any other reason are more weighty than the life of the child. That is pure fanaticism.

If Kast thinks the above are extremist examples, then she shouldn’t justify abortion by bringing up the rationale of the 12-year-old rape victim, which she does. It’s the reddest of herrings. Tragic as this would be, the extremely abortion-friendly Guttmacher Institute tells us that only 1 percent of women who get abortions do so because of rape and less than 0.5 percent do so because of incest.

But these make up perhaps 98 percent or so of the reasons folks give for why abortion should be legal. According to Guttmacher, 74 percent say they had their abortion because having a baby would dramatically change their lives or because they think they can’t afford a baby right now.

The Jesus Who Allows Whatever I Want

So what is Kast’s theological case?

Most anyone would agree she’s quite creative with scripture. In her rationale, she quotes Jesus saying, “I have come that they might have life and have it abundantly.” It’s a wonderful statement from the savior, but you should sit down for her commentary on how this makes abortion moral.

What Jesus means here, she explains, is that “God’s plan for our lives is to actually have a meaningful life with loving contentment and satisfaction.” She continues, “Because of that—because I value life, and I believe Jesus values life—I value the choices that give us the type of life we need.” Claiming that access to abortion is a part of why Jesus came and the abundant life he offers is abhorrent and blasphemous. Has she no shame?

But she’s not done; “When people talk about, ‘Our body is a temple of God, and holy,’ I see that as, I have the right to choices over my body, and the freedom to make the decisions that are right for me.” Apparently she thinks this is compelling. That is the fullness of her case for the morality of abortion. Basically, she is giving the precise rationale for abortion that prosperity preachers give for why God wants you rich.

The True Christian Story Starts in the Womb

What this pastor misses is that which is at the very center of Christianity—Christ Himself. She must know where His story starts.

The Christian story begins with God becoming fully human, not in the Christmas manger, but nine months earlier as a human zygote in the womb of a teenage girl who was not yet married. This is quite a dramatic introduction to Christianity, and it says everything about the morality of abortion for the Christian.

If God enters the world as the smallest of unborn human life, the smallest of unborn human life is very significant indeed. Christianity’s savior grew every day from that moment of his divine conception in Mary’s fallopian tubes, nestling and growing in her womb, never becoming anything more than what he was at that moment—fully God and fully man. Thus, Christianity has always taken an extremely high and unique view of the unborn, more so than any other religion or philosophy. This cannot be overstated.

Our pastor misses that this is precisely why the earliest official collection of Christian ethics and morality—found in the “Didache,” or “Teaching of the Apostles”—clearly states that no one “shall murder a child by abortion, nor kill them when born.” This is in the same list that prohibits adultery, fornication, stealing, murder, lying or speaking evil. (Chapter 2:2) Abortion is immoral.

The First Worshippers of Christ Understood This

Our pastor also fails to appreciate who the first recorded worshipers of Jesus were, and where this all took place. It happens in a very wonderful and intimate place—another woman’s womb. Early in her pregnancy, Mary, Jesus’s mother, goes to visit Elizabeth, her close family member who is also with child. The moment Mary walks through the door of Elizabeth’s home, something remarkable happens in utero.

The child growing inside of Elizabeth, none other than Jesus’s cousin, John the Baptist, leaps with joy at the arrival of his savior. Likewise, Elizabeth reveres the one who is in Mary’s womb. The first worshipers of Jesus are a pregnant woman and her unborn son. The womb and its natural bounty are very sacred and fundamental parts of the Christian tale.

Thus, no pastor can remain faithful to the belief system he has supposedly dedicated himself to serve, teach, and proclaim, yet dismiss the inestimable value of life in the womb from the moment of conception. A life exists there because God delighted in creating and sending that wholly unique life into the world as a gift and blessing. A life that bears God’s very image and likeness.

People who contend that ending life in the womb is moral have made themselves God, telling Him they reject His gift and know best. They have denied who Christ was and became. It is to dismiss the wonder of His own history and essence. Any pastor who teaches this has denied the center of his own faith.

This pastor says she follows “this guy named Jesus who said, above all … love your neighbor as yourself.” She believes protecting so-called “reproductive freedom” and “women’s health” does this. She refuses to appreciate that the unborn is the most vulnerable of neighbors that lives right under a mother’s heart.

There is no moral, Christian case for abortion. And there’s no space in Christianity for pastors, in direct violation of the Lord’s apostles , who teach that there is.

Glenn T. Stanton is a Federalist senior contributor who writes and speaks about family, gender, and art, is the director of family formation studies at Focus on the Family, and is the author of the brand new “The Myth of the Dying Church” (Worthy, 2019). He blogs at glenntstanton.com.

Photo keskieve / YouTube

Original here

A Virginia pastor prayed for Trump — Here’s what the backlash tells us about the church

June 7, 2019 By Daniel Ritchie

By now, many of us have seen and heard about what played out during the 1 p.m. worship service at McLean Bible Church in Washington, D.C. last Sunday.

For those who may be unfamiliar, here’s the short of it: President Trump played a round of golf at Trump National Golf Course in Sterling, VA. After finishing his golf outing, the president decided to stop by Mclean Bible Church — one of the largest evangelical churches in the D.C. Metro area — to visit with Pastor David Platt and to pray for the victims and community of Virginia Beach.

CHRISTIANS ACROSS THE COUNTRY CALL ON FAITH LEADERS TO PRAY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP

McLean Bible Church and Platt had little notice of the visit. In fact, Platt had just finished his sermon and had stepped backstage for a few moments to prepare for the church to take the Lord’s Supper.

It was in those quiet few moments that he found out that the president of the United States was just minutes away from being at the church.

Dr. Platt was faced with a tough decision. He in no way wanted to endorse the president, his party or his policies as a man who is responsible to shepherd God’s church. Yet, he also did not want to bypass an opportunity to pray for one of the most prominent men on the planet.

In those moments of internal wrestling, a passage from 2 Timothy 1 came to his mind:

“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.”

As he reflected on this text, Platt knew the best thing to do was to pray for the president, which is exactly what he did. He clearly presented the Gospel to the president both backstage and in the prayer.

He prayed that God would give Mr. Trump wisdom, grace, and mercy. He prayed that the president would know of God’s promised love for him. He prayed that President Trump would lead and make decisions with justice and equity for all in mind.

With that, the prayer ended and Mr. Trump stepped off the stage without making any public remarks.

And with that, the backlash began.

Many people were hurt because he brought a public official into the pulpit of his church. The criticism was strong enough that he penned a letter to his church in which he explained the Gospel-centered “why” behind his decision to bring the President on stage.

There were others, like Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr., who criticized Platt for writing that letter; Falwell deemed it as a cowardly apology and attacked Platt’s male fortitude.

The backlash has left one apparent truth in its wake: there’s a worldview problem in the church.

Scripture describes that when someone trusts Jesus as Lord, they are a new person. They begin to have new tastes, new affections and a new way to see the world. They do not view things as they always have; they now view everything that they take in on a daily basis through the lens of Scripture. Through the lens of God’s grace-giving Gospel.

There are some, plainly evidenced in this situation, that view Gospel truths through a political lens first. But that is not how the church needs to view the world. We have to view every situation through a Gospel lens.

As we begin to process realities like Platt’s prayer or the pro-life debate or even voting itself through a political lens first and foremost, then we lack a true biblical worldview.

If our first response to political deliberation and conversation is, “How would my political party perceive this?” then we have a functional political idol.

For the Christian, politics as the fundamental way to view the world is destined for failure and strife. The Gospel and Scripture ought to be the funnel that we pour everything through. The things we learn, what we talk about, how we vote and even how we parent are meant to be seen through the lens of the Gospel. We see everything through a Scripture-shaped lens first and that is what a Christian worldview looks like.

As we view the world through a Gospel lens, we begin to see where our allegiance needs to be: God first in all things. Much as was the heart of Platt’s prayer that we would: “aim for God’s glory, align with God’s purpose, and yield to God’s sovereignty.”

In every thought. In every conversation. In every debate. Let that be the way we see the world.

 

Moral Madness in the Mad City

May 30, 2019 By Bill Muehlenberg

I can fully understand any couples today who are seriously questioning whether they should have children. Not for some of the poorer reasons (the world is overpopulated; we just want to live for ourselves and not be encumbered with the burden of kids; etc) but because they are so alarmed at the spiritual and moral meltdown of the West.

Things are degenerating at an alarming rate, and it is our children especially who bear the brunt of this social and cultural cataclysm. Concerned parents really do fear – and justifiably so – that this world is lurching toward oblivion, and why should they inflict all this on any children they might have.

I am not saying all parents who worry about this should not have kids. I am simply saying I fully understand their thinking here. And there are some places in the world that are worse than others when it comes to the war on faith, family and freedom, and other values so many people hold near and dear.

Just a week ago I was in one of them. Don’t get me wrong – it is a beautiful city, built on four lakes, and it has many fine people. But it has long been known as a hotbed of radical leftism. I refer to the college town, Madison, Wisconsin.

During the radical 60s the University of Wisconsin, Madison campus was right up there with all the student rioting and Marxist revolution, along with places like the University of California, Berkeley and Columbia University in New York.

I would often hitchhike there from my smaller conservative hometown during the days of my wild, non-Christian youth to be a part of the action. Of course since then I have had a conversion to Christianity and a move away from leftist radicalism.

But Madison is still much the same today. Now it is filled with a lot of ageing hippies and still tends to vote for leftist candidates and political parties. As my wife and I walked along the pretty streets of Madison just recently we noticed many homes had various signs proudly displayed in their front yards. One of them said this:

IN THIS HOUSE, WE BELIEVE:
BLACK LIVES MATTER
WOMEN’S RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS
NO HUMAN IS ILLEGAL
SCIENCE IS REAL
LOVE IS LOVE
NO MATTER YOUR FAITH OR ABILITY
KINDNESS IF EVERYTHING

Hmm, that in itself is worth an entire article! Plenty of rather vacuous leftist rhetoric and clichés there, along with all the usual identity politics and hot-button causes of the left. But I write all this to provide some background to something I just received in an email.

It provides the perfect illustration of what I have been talking about, and would confirm the fears of every concerned parent in America in general, and Madison in particular. It has to do with an elementary school teacher who has decided he is no longer a he.

As Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of the Liberty Counsel explains:

If you want to see where HR 5, the so-called “Equality Act,” will take America, let me show you. What I’m about to share reveals why it’s so crucial that you and I oppose HR 5. In Madison County, Wisconsin, an elementary school teacher formerly known as Mark “Vince” Busenbark made a startling “transgender coming out” video that was shown to K-5th grade children at his school two weeks ago.

Busenbark, an authority figure, told these young, innocent and highly impressionable grade schoolers he is now neither male nor female but “transgender” and/or “non-binary.” And he made a “request.” He asked that students now call him “Mix” or “Mx. Steel” instead of “Mr. B.” or “Mr. Busenbark” (or even “Mr. Steel”). He did so in order to have the children endorse his claim that he is neither wholly male, nor wholly female, but a “mix” or “non-binary.”

Busenbark is effectively asking young children to endorse his sexual confusion (at best) or his sexual fetish (at worst). And Busenbark’s manipulation has already had an effect, based on a single video showing. One teacher emailed him that a kindergartner said, “I feel the same way at times” as “Mx. Steel.” Another teacher said that as a result of the video, other children “just accepted” a girl’s claim that “she is a boy now.”

Not only that, but Busenbark prejudiced these youngsters against people who respectfully disagree with him on transgenderism. Busenbark informed the grade schoolers that such people are motivated “fear” and “hate.” This is outrageous! Busenbark has no legal authority to force students to call him “Mx.,” nor to manipulate them with the idea that they must obey him or be seen as “disrespectful” or “hateful” or “not loving.”

Liberty Counsel is pursuing this situation. Last Friday, we sent a detailed public records request to the Madison school district. But here’s the thing. Busenbark will have the legal wind at his back if HR 5, the dangerous “Equality Act” becomes law.

That’s because this radical law directs K-12 schools and daycare centers to force children to obey adults who show up at work one day as a man and the next day as a woman. These children are at a highly impressionable age. When kindergarteners have seen such events in the past, many have gone home shaking and crying, worried that they could wake up with a different gender!

One more thing. There is no religious exemption to this bill. Busenbark–or someone like him–could do the exact same thing at any religious school under HR 5. That’s how extreme and revolutionary this law is. It will unleash unconstitutional chaos in America.
lc.org/newsroom/details/20190528mxd-up-in-madisonhr-5-preview

Let me make two quick qualifying remarks. There is no Madison County, only the city of Madison city in Dane County. And HR 5, or the “Equality Act,” most certainly is a terribly bad piece of legislation. I have written earlier about how very dangerous it is: billmuehlenberg.com/2019/04/01/on-the-ominous-us-equality-act/

But everything that Mat has shared is shocking indeed. Pity the poor school children at this school, and others around the West who are being deliberately targeted by the radical trans revolutionaries. I have already written 177 articles on how bad this is, especially for our vulnerable and innocent children.

No wonder parents are having second thoughts about bringing children into this kind of world. Far too many adult activists have declared war on our children, and we are living in some of the darkest times of modern history. Lord have mercy on our children.

As seen here at Culture Watch. Posted here with permission.

 

Original here

How Western Career Women Create Motherless Villages At Home And Abroad

While leftist women in the West push for less family structure and more centralized child support, they disrupt not only their own families but also families around the world.

How Western Career Women Create Motherless Villages At Home And Abroad

May 25, 2019

There are motherless villages in Indonesia where so many women have entered domestic service overseas that their whole communities of children grow up unmothered. Living with relatives, or old enough to take care of their own siblings, these children receive remittances from distant mothers. The women are hired as domestic help and, in doing the work for other families, they can’t afford to personally take care of their own.

Mothers who work for wealthy families in countries far from their own are an international underclass of women without whom the world’s upper-class women who strive to have it all could not even attempt it. The only way wealthy mothers can unburden themselves of motherhood and pursue their economic value in the workforce is if there is an underclass of women who do the work of mothering, for which their families pay a high price.

While leftist women in the West push for less family structure and more centralized child support, they disrupt not only their own families but also families around the world.

International Disruption of Families

The story on motherless villages, reported by Haryo Bangun Wirawan for the BBC, is captivating due to its contrast with the policies and practices of wealthy motherhood. Wirawan documents the kids and families left behind when mothers leave for work, and the painful reunions when mothers come home and their children barely recognize them.

These mothers feel they have no choice but to set off for foreign work, and Indonesia is not the only country where this happens consistently. In China, women leave their children with their parents in rural areas and go to work in cities, sending money home and rarely returning. Mothers from Central and South America routinely venture north without their children to find work and send money home, in hopes of eventually sending for their children.

I’ve seen the effects of this firsthand. A young man I once knew was new to the area. He and his younger brother had only joined his mother and father in the United States within the past two years. His English was spotty, but he was smart, and a strong learner. He longed for his grandmother in South America, who had raised him since he was five.

When I spent time with him and his mother, it was so clear how much his mother loved him, adored him, and wanted to be close to him, yet how difficult it was to bridge the gulf between them. She reached out, her smile full and welcoming, but he was wary. He wanted to be close to her, but he was afraid to trust. She had not wanted to break up the family for the sake of wages, but she’d done what was best for them given the selection of bad options.

It is understandable that these mothers sacrifice so much for their children, even their relationships with them, to provide for them. Mothers will do whatever it takes, even to their own personal detriment. That is what it is to mother. If going into domestic service overseas were the best chance for our children, it would be hard to look at them every day knowing there was something you could do to better their lives.

Those Who Outsource Mothering Are Complicit

But what about the women and families these international domestic workers serve? The women and families that take on these workers facilitate motherless villages. Mothers and families who also aspire for even more could not reach out for that high-hanging fruit without a steady influx of cheap labor.

The stigma against working mothers that was prevalent in the 20th century has switched over to a prejudice against the moms who mother full-time. Many people think that full-time mothers are not fulfilling their economic potential. They are depicted as wine-swilling MILFs who resent their responsibilities and neglect housework.

Social media posts from full-time mom friends often belabor the real work they do in service to home and family, just as they speak about how much they’d like to get out and take some classes or worry about their prospects of obtaining work after their children are grown. The prevalence of divorce, its uncertainty within the marriage promise, helps to fuel the insecurity of a woman’s role in the home. If a woman can’t trust that her work within the home will be valued in the marketplace into which she may again find herself, it becomes that much harder to dedicate herself fully to family and home.

Lately, there has been a push for government-subsidized child care options in the United States. While women advocate for others to pay for their child care so they can attend to their economic potential, other mothers fill the gaps, leaving their own children in the care of still someone else. As a working mom myself, and the child of a mom who worked, I am in favor of women pursuing their potential, but it’s not acceptable to do so on the backs of mothers who can’t make any other choice.

Liberation Can’t Mean Oppressing Others

This effort to liberate women to pursue their economic value is in the name of equality. But women don’t end up liberated; they end up more like international oppressors. One group of women is liberated at the expense of another.

African-American women have spoken out about this trend for decades, since they have historically taken on the role of mothering for many American families, and the evidence of their accuracy is splashed all over American film, television, fiction, and of course, backed up in history. Now, those same jobs are being outsourced internationally.

These women are not only taking care of children as nannies, but they’re also being employed as surrogates. With western women being liberated from motherhood from the womb through high school graduation, one wonders why they’d even want to engage in the practice at all. And many of them don’t. Birth rates are down, abortion is shouted as a social good, and women have fully embraced their role as hard-working cogs in the capitalist machine.

American women protest in costumes from “The Handmaid’s Tale” because abortion rights are being curtailed by voters, but the real handmaids are those in the developing world bearing and then raising the children Western women won’t. In the advocacy for more freedom for women to enter the workforce without worry for their children, the trend of women not raising their own children trickles down globally.

If American women want equality, it must be global equality. We can’t gain our freedom by exploiting those who are willing to trade it for their children’s future. A better answer than increasing outsourced child care is to make it more possible for women to mother their own children. Women should stop demanding liberation from motherhood, and everyone should acknowledge motherhood’s importance to society.

Libby Emmons is a writer and theatre maker in Brooklyn, New York. She is co-founder of the Sticky short play series, and blogs the story of her life at li88yinc.com.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/23/western-career-women-create-motherless-villages-home-abroad/

He Wants Men To Stand With Women On Abortion. Alright, Let’s Do That

Don’t let pro-choicers convince you it’s wrong to speak out. Offer your money, time, community, and resources to mothers who choose life.

Cory Booker Wants Men To Stand With Women On Abortion. Alright, Let’s Do That

 

May 25, 2019

Presidential contender Cory Booker (D–N.J.) says women need men to stand with them. I couldn’t agree more. His open letter to all men in GQ calls on all of us in the masculine sex “to listen, to speak out, and to take action.” Let’s do it.

Start by watching and listening to an ultrasound. You can find them all over YouTube. It will change your life.

When we were both 21, my young bride suspected God might have blessed our marriage with a new life. She made an appointment, and we went together to the physician. He confirmed what her womanly knowledge had told her: she was nine weeks pregnant. He also immediately prepared an ultrasound and we were able to see our first son, barely the size of a grape, with his vulnerable little heart firing off 153 beats per minute.

I do not have any experience in the baby-carrying portion of pregnancy. I do, however, have plenty of experience at listening to the rapid beat of a human heart that is smaller than the tip of my pinky.

I also have experience with the pain of silence. My wife has conceived six children. The second was never born alive. We sat together at her second ultrasound listening, desperately straining our ears to detect the slightest hint of a heartbeat. There was none, and we wept.

We did not mourn, and we do not continue to mourn, because our dreams were dashed. We mourned for the life that never reached its potential. A human being, a person, died in his mother’s womb. We carry the tragedy of it with us to this day, even after the successful births of four more babies.

I challenge you, men, to listen to and watch an ultrasound of an unborn child. Don’t just hit the play button on YouTube while you perform some menial task. Really focus in on the sight of that fetus grabbing her toes. Listen to the beat of the human heart as it pumps blood through a living person.

Do not talk about abortion until you have done this. But once you have, it is time to speak out. Once you have heard and seen the truth of an ultrasound, there is no keeping silent.

Abortion is often not a topic men like to talk about. I will never have an abortion; I don’t know what that is like. Our lack of experience can make us timid.

Abraham Lincoln and William Wilberforce had no idea what it was like to be a slave. That did not make them timid. Their freedom and the bondage of others made them bold to speak—to declare the evils of slavery openly in the public square.

So it should be with living men today. Open your mouths, not because you have no idea what it is like to be pregnant, but because you know what it is like to live. You know the joy of living, moving, and breathing the free air of this world. Let that make you bold to speak out on behalf of those who might have that knowledge stripped from them by the callousness of an abortion doctor, the timidity of an inexperienced father, or the fear of a young mother.

Then take action. Find a pregnancy clinic that cares for mothers and children, and donate or volunteer. Stand in the bitter cold or scorching heat outside the local abortion facility to let women considering this action know there is hope and there are people willing to help. Don’t just hold a sign, but be ready to give real aid to anyone in need.

Start mentoring the young men you know, especially those who have strained relationships with their fathers. They need a sturdy example to learn what it means to be a man. Show them the meaning of sacrifice, duty, and respect. Help them to see the unspeakable cowardice of abandoning a woman with whom one has conceived a child, or worse, encouraging her to get an abortion and kill the child you helped create.

Be ready to take action that supports pregnant women, especially those who have no network of family, church, or friends. Any father can tell you how difficult a pregnancy (not to mention the ongoing work of raising a child to adulthood) is when a woman has the full support of her husband and their extended families. A woman who finds herself pregnant and alone needs even more help.

Be that help. Recruit the women you know to help with the more sensitive parts of going to the prenatal appointments and dealing with the physical aspects of pregnancy. Volunteer to assemble furniture and toys for the newborn. Provide financially for the needs of mother and child.

Booker has hit the nail on the head. It is time for men to listen, speak, and take action. Do not simply aim for making abortion illegal; make it unthinkable and unnecessary. Work to fashion a world where ending the life of an unborn child is a fossil that, 10,000 years from now, archeologists will look back upon with shame and contempt that their ancestors could have been so brutal.

Joshua Theilen is a husband of one wife, father of five children, and pastor of one Lutheran congregation. He and his family reside in southern Illinois.Photo Martin Kirigua / Pexels.com

https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/24/men-the-fact-that-you-cant-ever-be-pregnant-shouldnt-stop-you-from-speaking-out-against-the-evil-of-abortion/

Let’s Just Say ‘Our’ Children

If you’re a mom by adoption, you’ll be ready to fist bump Sandy, too. If you aren’t, you may want to take notes on how to properly address someone who is.

Adoptive moms generally get no respect. People are always asking about our kids’ “real moms,” as if we’re just playing house with our children temporarily until the legit parents take over again. We have to come up with clever responses for when someone comes up and asks how much we paid for our kids or expresses their sorrow that we couldn’t have “one of our own.” And a few years back, one clueless company even ran a Mother’s Day contest that separated adoptive mamas from the from-your-womb mamas, into an “other” category with overinvolved aunts and other not-quite-your-mother figures. Not cool.

That’s why I always appreciate when someone who gets it makes some wise comments that can help educate the masses on what adoptions all about. And this time around, it’s Sandra Bullock who’s schooling people, in an interview with InStyle to promote her all-girl Ocean’s 8. She gushes about her “old soul” Louis and fierce daughter Laila—just like a real mom. (Pssst. It’s because she is a real mom.)

Then she makes it clear she’s getting really tired of every article (including the InStyle one she’s being interviewed for) making it clear that her kids were adopted. “Let’s all just refer to these kids as ‘our kids.’ Don’t say ‘my adopted child.’ No one calls their kid their ‘IVF child’ or their ‘oh, shit, I went to a bar and got knocked-up child.’ Let just say, ‘our children.’”

YES. Because once a child enters a family—whether it’s in a hospital’s birthing rooms or a civil affairs office in the middle of China—they’re just family. And adoption isn’t a constant state of being—it’s a past event. So, maybe we don’t have to single out which celeb’s kids were adopted every time they’re mentioned, for years after they’ve been part of the family.

More than a decade into this grand adoption adventure, I can tell you that while adoption will always be an important part of our lives, it is no longer the main focus of our lives. We are too busy doing the same stuff that your more standard-issue moms and dads do—helping with homework, nagging them to wear a jacket or clear their dirty dishes, worrying over the state of our college savings. And we don’t deserve to feel like we’re something “other,” every time we’re confronted with the story of a fellow adoptive parent in the media.

Because just like Sandra, and just like you, I’m hoping to watch my, “…kids grow up to be hopeful, grateful, healthy, kind, and safe … and in a bubble with a chip in their head. I’ll be right behind them.”

Source: parents.com

https://azsimpsonadoptionlaw.wordpress.com/2019/02/10/lets-just-say-our-children/


Create your website at WordPress.com
Get started
%d bloggers like this: