The culture of death is rarely honest about its beliefs and values. All the more reason for those of us in the pro-life community to keep our eye on the ball. If we got rid of abortion on demand, but erected the apparatus that the elites are trying to build, I assure you, the only thing that will change is the group of people that falls under their scrutiny. Probably the old, most certainly the disabled. But also targeted: those who smoke, who drink, who eat sugar, or trans fat, or engage in ‘unhealthy lifestyles.’ I would say that tyranny is right around the corner, but that last sentence should give us the real truth: it is inside the door, and sitting at our couches… and trying to make itself at home, at our own invitation.
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? Or, What is the proper response to killing newborn children because they are a burden to a family… or society?
authors Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argue that the same arguments that justify abortion of the fetus on demand likewise apply to the newly born. Here is the abstract:
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.
In Part 5, I concluded that something very significant has happened over the last three decades: ‘politics’ has become all-encompassing. In short: everything has become political. And if everything has become political, and Christians are supposed to butt out, that means that the Christian is being asked (or told) that he can have absolutely no …
The last part ended with a question that this part shall now answer. Why? Because ‘religious’ views are just one example of a ‘world view.’ I asked earlier, “Ought not our attitudes and behaviors in political society be driven by our views about the world? If not our own views about the world, then whose …
The Walk to Walden Hill begins with tragedy: the orphaning of the protagonist, Josh Billows. His mother dead, his father jailed, Josh ends up in foster care. As just a young child he is forced to grapple with issues that are known to shipwreck adults, even if he doesn’t understand the real issues that are in play.
This ministry hosts a regular online round table discussing matters of substance and controversy. Christians and NonChristians are invited but it is not necessarily an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ debate. Past topics have included matters of controversy only amongst Christians and due to the flexibility of the discussion, topics can change on a dime. UPDATE: With …
This ministry hosts a regular online round table discussing matters of substance and controversy. Christians and NonChristians are invited but it is not necessarily an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ debate. Past topics have included matters of controversy only amongst Christians and due to the flexibility of the discussion, topics can change on a dime. The next …
Over the last three hundred years unbounded skepticism has been applied to religion and Christianity especially. Atheist philosopher David Hume was one of the prominent voices calling for stringent criteria in evaluating miracle claims, and the like. Not everyone thought very highly of this criteria. One such person was the Reverend Richard Whately, who skewers Hume’s reasoning by showing how if it were applied consistently, one could not be reasonably certain that Napoleon existed- a public figure that was said to be alive and roaming Europe even as he spoke!
This playful little book is not a treatise by any means, but it provides a glimpse into the conversations of the 1800s and challenges the ‘enlightened’ skeptics to decide: If they won’t apply their principles thoroughly and consistently, but choose only to apply them to certain claims (and how did they choose which ones?), are those principles worth their salt?
I recently had a conversation with some gents that I thought I would paraphrase for my blog. I think I’ve had the same kind of conversation a dozen times in the last three months. I have combined all the conversations into one paraphrase. Enjoy.
Them: We believe science is the only way to learn about the world and religion is just faith-mongering superstition. There is no scientific basis for believing in the existence of God. Belief is just irrationalism. I know what you’re going to say. That there had to be something that has always existed. Why not the universe?
Me: Well, science says that the universe had a beginning. So I guess the universe can’t be the thing that has always existed. Surely that means we can explore other options.
There is again a clear correlation between beliefs and the one receiving the vote. I don’t perceive this as particularly insightful: it isn’t brain surgery to deduce that one’s beliefs impact where one puts their vote. However, my proposed solution doesn’t seem as obvious to the Christian church as it does to me: if you want to transform the culture, raise up more educated, informed, passionate Christians.
A question is posed in this episode that ties in and I think is noteworthy. Nathan Petrelli wants to know who else could have bestowed all these powers except for God himself. By the end of the episode we know that mad scientists are the culprits and that his visions and sense of ‘divine purpose’ are the spinnings of another ‘hero’ that can control the mind. In this madcap universes of the heroes (and our own) the question is reasonable: just how would you know that it was God at work, that you were on the side of the angelic and not the monstrous?
At the very least, then, Mr. Curtis has faith in reason. As do I. But I understand that reason brings us always to a point of decision where the consequences of that decision might conceivably be other than we suppose. It is always possible that even after a thousand times my chair will break. Technically, it is even possible that all of the atoms will align and I’ll simply pass through it. Yet I sit. Likewise, faith in God is not simply the belief that there is a God, but rather trust in God. Whether or not that is a reasonable trust or an unreasonable one is a separate question but at least let us acknowledge that faith as the Christians present it is not only compatible with reason, but essential when it comes to acting on reason.
At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, …