The public presence of little Trig Palin is a powerful witness to the sanctity of human life, and the knowledge that this little infant with Down syndrome is bringing such joy to his family is upsetting those who believe that babies such as Trig should never be born.
The facts are daunting. It is now estimated that between 80 and 90 percent of all unborn babies diagnosed as likely to have Down syndrome are aborted. The availability of prenatal testing presents parents with the possibility of aborting the baby and starting over. The statistics now speak for themselves - the vast majority of parents are choosing to abort under these circumstances.
But the visible presence of Trig Palin in the arms of his parents or one of his sisters is resetting that equation, at least in terms of the public's emotions. The sight of little Piper Palin licking her hand and flattening Trig's hair during their mom's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention is likely to stick in the public mind years after Trig's hair is again unstuck. It's hard for even the most ardent abortion defenders to insert an argument against Trig's precious life at that point. Or, at least we would think so.
At least one highly-placed source objects to the whole picture. Writing in The Globe and Mail [Toronto], Dr. André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, explained his worry that other parents might feel pressure to follow the Palins' example.
As the paper explains:
Dr. Lalonde said that above all else, women must be free to choose, and that popular messages to the contrary could have detrimental effects on women and their families.
"The worry is that this will have an implication for abortion issues in Canada," he said.
Taken at face value, the paper seems to be suggesting that a decision to keep the baby contradicts the doctor's assertion that "women must be free to choose." In other words, the only "right" choice would be to abort the baby.
Given the relatively few words quoted from Dr. Lalonde, it is possible that his quote is not fully representative of his position. If this is true, he should certainly make this clear. A look at the Web site of the SOGC indicates that this statement might well be representative of his position.
The group has announced its clear opposition to a proposed Unborn Victims of Crime Act - an act that would allow courts to consider an unborn baby as a victim in assault or murder cases. Such laws are not uncommon in the United States, but the SOGC has taken the position that, once an unborn baby is recognized to have a legal existence and right to live, the entire question of abortion and "reproductive rights" takes on a new frame.
The descent into the Culture of Death is fueled by language such as found here - that a woman might be "pressured to keep the baby" in light of Trig Palin's visibility. At the same time, the inherent evil of such abortions and the slander against humanity represented by the abortion of these babies comes to bright light in Trig Palin's little face.
Maybe Dr. Lalonde and his colleagues are right to be worried. The entire question has been reset by one precious little infant.
___________________________________________________
R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. For more articles and resources by Dr. Mohler, and for information on The Albert Mohler Program, a daily national radio program broadcast on the Salem Radio Network, go to www.albertmohler.com. For information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to www.sbts.edu. Send feedback to mail@albertmohler.com. Original Source: www.albertmohler.com.
RSS
elbib, I heartily agree with you that a Christian married women's highest priorities next to obedience to the Great Commandment and joining God in fulfilling His Great Commission should be to her husband and her family which in some ways is a relection of their obedience to the Great Commandment and Great Commission. Once again I think we may differ somewhat in how that looks. And I also agree that as a result of some Christian women ignoring or minimizing those priorities we have many of the problems we do today in both our churches and homes.
DiaryofCross: You say Scripture is pretty clear about homosexuality and I agree, but they say it is clear in their favor. Go to Amazon.com and look for the book "The Children are Free: Reexamining the Biblical Evidence on Same Sex Relationsips. The Scripture is not comprised of rules. It is a culture - God's culture - established for the righteous to live within, regardless of age or worldly culture. When we apply our worldly cultural concepts or situations in the context of Scripture for ourselves (you did this when saying, "back in the days of Paul and Godly women of the time"), we open the door for those who are not sincere about being holy and in the will of God to manipulate Scripture to their liking. Only a literal adherence of God's Word, which will always distinguish itself from the present worldly culture, will hinder the manipulation of a lie. I'm sorry! So much more to say!!!!
believer: I'm a man. Remember the questions star2 commanded me answer? I'm not saying that your wife cannot work in the church with you. That's excellent! The problem is when women leave home to pursue a career and/or abide in the company of other men w/o their husband present, whether working at church or another job. Or other women working at your church with you w/o your wife present. I know of many instances of affairs that have transpired between Christians, whether they were professional singers, ministers, helpers, teachers, whatever. If women would understand there place is in the home, first and foremost, and learn how to dwell there happily, many of the sins that occur in the church or workplace would be eliminated. I believe, God's culture, literally lived, keeps us in righteousness, absent from temptations, wives under submission to their husband or other male relative, and diminishes any false ideas, reproach, or blesphamy from occuring. I will reiterate again. Look at what is happening to marriages and the family in the church, let alone the world.
diary, I don't know what you did but I had no problem reading your last post as I did with the earlier ones with all those marks in it, be blessed as you serve Him, believer
I pretty much agree with believer. Scripture is pretty clear on what is right and wrong, such as homosexuality and such, but there's a danger that we can get so caught up in rules that we lose sight of the real reason we're Christians, and that's by the saving blood of Jesus Christ. That's why I added the last verse. It's as if Jesus was asking us which is better, to do good or to follow the rules and sacrifice good? I'm not a wife yet, but if the time comes and I need to support my future husband, I rather go out and get a job to balance my home jobs.
I also wish to know how I took the Scripture's meaning away, please elaborate. ):
elbib, I don't think anyone is defining away the literalness of the role of married women as stated in the Bible. What I think is in question is the parameters of the married woman's role in the home. I don't know if you are a woman or a man, but my wife would still fall in the category of a stay at home wife. While I was a Pastor she went with me when I visited, I constantly called on her in situations where a Christ-like woman's approach and view was defintely needed to include counseling with women, and she served as the church secretary on a part-time basis. However, she still managed our home well. But without her help in those roles and several others roles she held such as Sunday School teacher and AWANA Leader my effectiveness in the pastorate would have been severely limited. In my perception you and I agree on the priorities of the role of married women in the home, but disagree on what that looks like. From what you shared it appears you see it as one size fits all and I and others see it as one size does not fit all.
I find it interesting how the arguements presented here, to logically define away the literalness of Scripture concerning women, are so uncannily similar to how homosexuals attempt to define away the literalness of Romans Chapter 1 and marriage, to justify their ends. It's imperative that the Word of God fit with our feelings, evolved situations, and culture. It can't be any other way. Surely, God couldn't, wouldn't, can't expect......
D: I used Microsoft Word to type that up because CP refreshes the page and *BAM* there goes my text. Plus I copied and pasted the scripture references from El's post.
Hmm...coding issues with Word and CP? I have to remember that next time. -_-
Tallguy, that's no way to talk about people. As I said about someone else, correct people with scripture, pray for them, but dont shut them down.
DiaryOfCross, those marks show up when we use the apostrophe and the dash from MS Word, or from cut-and-paste from other sites.
And...I have these funny little boxes on my post...D:
1Tim. 5:14,15: â
Iâ
All the same, Tallguy, I don't like cursing. I go to a college where I have to put up with it and I don't like to see it on a Christian site even if it's blanked out. Please watch the language, many thanks! :D
I'm surprised Tallguy didn't get flagged. I mean, those were really uncalled for comments. :/ Reminds me of a opinion blog where the "conversations" are no more than cursing matches. :/
elbib, thanks for your last post with regards to star2 or myself not being apostates. Plus, I was sincerely disappointed you left the discussion as I know there are many Christian women who are struggling with their role in the home.