American Shame

We have passed yet another grim mile-marker since the Roe v. Wade decision. This is a road of cultural degradation and shame, and we have been traveling it over forty years now. That is how long Israel spent in the wilderness, and — just as with them — God is not pleased with us. We can tell by how many bodies have been scattered in this wilderness of ours, our self-made wilderness.

But there is hope. The central sign of hope that I see is that the pro-life resistance is stronger than it has ever been, and it is better positioned than it has ever been. I am seeing, for the first time, indicators of shame from those who are still willing to defend this American atrocity. When the carnage first began, they were impudent and slick about it. Now the pro-aborts are either fearfully yelling, or refusing to look you in the eye.

It is time to lean into it. Stop killing the children.

Share on Facebook94Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+1Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, off-topic, or semi-Pelagian.

17 thoughts on “American Shame

  1. Robert, I do! I see churches run orphanages now. I see churches by the hundreds begging for the children that are being killed. I see rich Christians adopting dozens of children. I see wealthy churches building orphanages in foreign countries, and running homeless outreaches. I see poor churches building crisis pregnancy centers with their meager reserves. I see American Christian churches voluntarily doing for the poor what the secularists say they want to do with other people’s money (but not theirs!) In short, I see the Christian church putting its money where its mouth is.

  2. Now the pro-aborts are either fearfully yelling, or refusing to look you in the eye.

    And sometimes their fearful yelling is about how their worldview is morally superior to yours.

     

     

  3. Robert said: “Unless I am mistaken, there are currently no Church run orphanages in the United States or Canada, correct?”

    If this is the case, then it is most likely because of government regulations forbidding such institutions, rather than a lack of will on the part of the churches.
     
     

  4. Lifeline Children’s Services is one of the Christian groups making amazing strides in this realm. They aren’t allowed to run orphanages (yet), but in my state they are responsible for  major portions of the foster care and adoption systems in “partnership” with the state. What this looks like is that Lifeline recruits, trains, and licenses foster families through local churches.  This December, they celebrated their 1,000th domestic adoption. That’s 1,000 babies that very likely would have been killed. To my mind, they are taking back from the state the role that the Church has abdicated.

  5. Robert, There are no institutional type orphanages, if that is what you mean, left at all in the United States, at least that I am aware of, church-run or otherwise. What happened in the 60’s and 70’s was that laws were passed that placed all orphaned children under the American foster care system (not sure about Canada). So I guess you can say that they are not church run in the sense that they are under the government’s watch. Most of the barrack style orphanages were closed and the foster care system moved to group home and foster families. However, what I see all over the place, and what I was referring to in my post, are church based (especially Catholic) group homes and Christians who have huge foster families.  The foster route seems to be more the Protestant route. I personally know several foster families, and have been involved with several Christian group homes.

  6. There are mainline church-based organizations that run networks of group homes, also, but they have mostly become indistinguishable from secular organizations in their approach.

  7. It is time to lean into it.

    You think the rhetoric surrounding abortion isn’t extreme enough?  We already have mass murdering goblins vs. misogynist theocratic zealots.  How much more escalation is possible?

    Interestingly, abortion opinion among the public hasn’t changed that much over the last 20 years.  http://features.pewforum.org/abortion-slideshow/index.php  More polls from Slate: http://www.slate.com/blogs/saletan/2014/01/22/abortion_polls_2014_do_most_americans_think_most_abortions_should_be_illegal.html

    The most interesting takeaway is that most people reject both the “liberal” view (no restrictions on abortion, ever) and the “conservative” one (no abortions, ever).

  8. No. The most interesting takeaway is that, while the majority hold the “moderate” view, the actual law (according to an incomprehensible  SCOTUS decision) accords with the most extreme liberal position. 

     

  9. Does it though?  If there was enough wiggle room in the constitution that RvW could happen, then surely there is enough wiggle room in RvW to, uh, reinterpret it to allow a good deal of latitude in restricting abortion, at least enough to allow the moderate position to prevail.  But conservatives treat RvW with an almost religious reverence.  Even now, restrictions are allowed as long as they don’t place an “undue” burden on a woman seeking an abortion.  Well, it turns out that society has decided that banning e.g. third trimester abortions doesn’t place an undue burden on anyone.  RvW will probably never be overturned, but the lesson of postwar liberal success is that anything can be stretched, sometimes unrecognizably.

  10. Pastor Wilson:  Have you heard of/considered Walter Block’s “evictionism” stance regarding abortion.  If so, might you remark on that position.

  11. Yes, I would like to repeat “Ward” (January 23, 2014 at 1:16 pm) question.

    Have seen BabiesAreMurderedHere.com and will you be sharing your view on this movie?
    #BAMH
     

Comments are closed.