The abortion argument is a boring, but crucial argument. When engaging in debate with the pro-abortion side, they usually have three responses. The first is about moral personhood. This classic debate where the pro-abort argues that the unborn are not human. The second response is the classic feminist bumper sticker logic. Basically, unless you’re a woman (or identify as one), you don’t have a say.
This fallacious logic’s response to a pro-life woman is to say that’s their choice but you can’t decide for me. Lately, the pro-abortion side has come to the understanding that unless the pro-life side supports expanding entitlement programs, their logic is invalid. To me, they employ the “pro-birth” argument because the other arguments have failed the test of time, so if they can detract the conversation to other topics, they can put the pro-life side on defense. John Pavlovitz is unique in that he is attacking the pro-life side using Response #3 while claiming to be a Christian.
If you are unfamiliar, John Pavlovitz is a heretical pastor who delves in universalism and the ever so present “social justice gospel” heresy. To him, Islam worships the same God, homosexuality is not a sin, hell?, support for entitlement programs is a direct reflection of one’s compassion, and Christianity’s biggest enemy, in America, are those who are conservative theologically and politically. As a result, he’s the left’s shining religious star in their Resistance.
The best-case scenario right now for you, is an eventual overturning of Roe V Wade, and the criminalizing of abortion. That’s really always been the end game here, and I imagine that prospect propels you now.Yet you and I both know that this reality won’t save any lives, that it will actually endanger more.
This point is made and conveniently abandoned to avoid scrutiny. Pavlovitz didn’t want the reader focus on his miscalculation. But alas, I can’t help but do the math. Let’s say there are 300000 abortions every year in America, a low estimate but a round number for this exercise. We overturn Roe v Wade and criminalize abortion just as he says. That’s 300000 lives saved right? Not quite. I think we would all agree that the criminalizing and punishing of an act serves as a deterrence to some degree. So it’s not like these 300000 would be illegally getting an abortion. The thing is: criminals don’t follow the law; they break the law. Like the Purge movies when murder is made legally permissible, murder becomes rampant. Such is the case in America where we have some of the most permissible abortion laws in the world. So if 300000 were to be the rampant number, might I suggest 3000, 1%, would be the number of criminal abortions. 297000 lives saved right? Not quite. The pro abortion side loves to (ironically) emphasized the safety involved with abortion. If we are to presume these black market facilities to be unsafe, as they so strongly suggest, then there is the additional loss of life. Let’s say complications from mob abortionists kill 1/6 women. We could total our calculations at 300000 lives lost with abortion and 3500 lives lost with abortion outlawed. With no other metric, especially subjective ones regarding quality of life, being equal to the value of human life, a scenario without abortion has a preferable outcome. This proves John Pavlovitz point to be incredibly wrong.
The professed Christian then attacks biblical sexuality, specifically, sex is for marriage. Because this letter is addressed to actual Christians, this argument is especially secular as well as feminist.
We know this because of the Evangelical Christian teen purity culture built around abstinence has failed miserably. Its hardline stance, vilifying of sexual activity, and rejection of birth control have never prevented young people from having sex—only ensured that when they do, they will be unprepared, uneducated, and unprotected.
Forced abstinence and outlawing have only yielded more unintentional pregnancies (despite you claiming God wants them), created more parents ill-equipped to raise children, put more stress on already overwhelmed social systems, and birthed more vulnerable people who you’ve already shown you have little or no desire to care for.
I would agree that many in the Church struggle with sexual immorality. It’s disturbing and disheartening to those who follow God’s word, in their relationships, to see so many in the church who do not and furthermore remain unrepentant in their sin. The solution, to this, is not to change God’s word, which is a hardlined stance. Sex outside of marriage isn’t new and has existed far too long, and with consistency, to be considered an epidemic. Perhaps the church should change it’s approach to positively recognize the utility in following God’s word in the bedroom. Yes, we should all be anatomically informed. However, giving young girls birth control, for no medicinal purpose other than promiscuity, is unbiblical. Birth control is widely known to fail, especially with imperfect use. But as a church we should not be educating our daughters in how to properly use birth control in the event they have sex outside of marriage. We are not called to teach our children, teens, how to sin smart.
John Pavlovitz does want to save face and act as though abortions are bad, though doesn’t go so far as to say sinful. He first wants to establish that no one on the left celebrates abortion which is untrue. The argument he makes is just as ironic as that of Planned Parenthood prevents abortion.
No group of progressives or women’s rights activists or secular humanists stand around high-fiving one another when anyone chooses to terminate a pregnancy…
We all want fewer abortions too, but we also believe responsible sex education and birth control are the best way to ensure this.
If Planned Parenthood didn’t push for abortions, let alone celebrate them, I would reckon their adoption referrals would be much higher than 1 adoption for 82 abortions. The “pro-choice” organization isn’t fairly rendering options to the susceptible woman they’ve prospected (through clinics and birth control). This 82-1 is more like a final closing rate for their abortion racket. Furthermore, the most efficient means to reduce abortion is to criminalize it, as the thought exercise above shows.
Millions of people exposed to poverty, sickness, instability, adversity, and violence by and through this President—all so you can keep telling yourself this America is moving pro-life.
Pavlovitz moves to a classic and tragic case of TDS, which is a primary focus of his website. By no means is violence being promoted by the president. On the contrary Maxine Waters can be credited with an increasingly adversarial society. Trump isn’t increasing poverty in America, quite the opposite, or sickness. Instability is subjective, and while Trump isn’t a unifying figure, he doesn’t champion a pseudo-insurrectionist hashtag, like Pavlovitz. By no means is there data that shows that “life” is losing by John Pavlovitz’s own inferior metrics.
Identity Politics and Heretics
As Christians, our identity is in Jesus Christ. It is not in Trump, for or against. John Pavlovitz has his identity in (opposing) Trump. But his opposition to Trump is not due to his faith but rather a desire to maintain popularity in spite of being ousted by churches. He was a heretic before Trump, seeing as with decades of pastoral experience, he has a wavering belief in hell nor does he believe in the accuracy and authority of the bible. It’s unfortunate, but unavoidable, for Trump to be a ladder for heretics to ascend to internet fame. The left calls him the “digital pastor of the resistance” which is a slight aimed at the definitive doctrines of faith. The fellowship of Christ allows for disagreement among nonessential, like politics. But there should be unity in Christ and in essential doctrines. Christians who are not conservative in their politics need to find a different pastor to champion, one who actually knows Christ. John Pavlovitz will only mislead you.
I’ll conclude with 2 Timothy 4:1-5 NASB
I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
Ken Ham on how science confirms the Bible
One of my biggest pet peeves is the attempt by atheists to use “science” to disprove the Bible. It’s unfortunate on many levels, not the least of which being Pascal’s Wager, but the strangest part is how much of science must be ignored in order to make the claim a Biblical worldview runs counter to modern science.
Some may object to this topic being part of mostly political news site, but it’s been more widely covered in recent years by liberal sites attempting to paint the Biblical worldview in a negative light, so it’s good to give equal time to the counterarguments.
There are better videos than Ken Ham’s discussion on the topic, but few are more easily understood. It’s well worth the hour.
Bettie Cook Scott is a racist politician. And she’s a Democrat.
Racism is owned by the Republican Party. That’s the narrative the press and their handlers, the Democratic Party, wants America to believe. Someone forgot to get that memo to Michigan state representative Bettie Cook Scott.
More than a dozen community groups have called on Rep. Bettie Cook Scott (D-Detroit) to apologize for a series of racial slurs sources say she used to describe her primary election opponent, Rep. Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit).
Scott is alleged to have referred to Chang as “ching-chang” and “the ching-chong” to multiple voters outside polling precincts during last Tuesday’s election. She’s also said to have called one of Chang’s campaign volunteers an “immigrant,” saying “you don’t belong here” and “I want you out of my country.”
There are two important takeaways here. First is the hypocrisy surrounding Scott, a (formerly) rising star in the Michigan Democratic Party. If the comments she made were spoken by anyone other than a Democrat, the calls wouldn’t be for an apology. The press and social groups would be calling for her to step down and jump into a hole somewhere.
The second point is that in the real world, the one not seen through the lens of liberals and the media, racism exists everywhere. It is not owned by Republicans, conservatives, old people, white people, or any other classification. One can even make a valid argument that it’s no more prominent in the Republican Party than it is in the Democratic Party that supports groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter.
Racism must be eliminated from society. That will never happen as long as so many people naively believe it only exists in the minds of certain people on the political right. It exists everywhere. Accept that and we can work to make it stop.
Our List of Demands for the Conservation of Liberty – Part II
Leftists incessantly issue lists of demands for the restriction of Liberty, It’s time to reverse the trend towards freedom.
This is our second part of our series of what we on the Pro-Liberty Right want for the preservation of Liberty. Part I is here.
6. The Left needs to stop trying to control private property with Intergalactic Background Checks. [aka ‘enhanced’ or ‘Universal’]
If there is one constant in the Liberty grabber universe, it’s that half of them are incessantly calling for gun confiscation while the rest deny they are calling for gun confiscation. They also love to parrot the line that it would be impossible to round-up everyone’s guns as a way of deflecting the issue. Except that those on the Pro-liberty side thought the same thing in the UK and Australia. Their Liberty grabber nightmare began with gun registration, under the solemn promise that it wouldn’t lead to gun confiscation. [Sound familiar?] Then of course at the next occasion of a serious crisis, this registration data was used for gun confiscation.
The fact is gun confiscation takes several precursor steps, the most critical being the assertion of government control over private property with Intergalactic Background Checks. Curiously enough, the Liberty grabbers tend to want language inserted into these laws mandating the reportage of lost or stolen firearms. Those types of rules are of primary importance only if the point of these measures is to turn them into a registration scheme.
7. The Liberty Grabber Left needs to stop pushing for even more controls on freedom.
It is also axiomatic that Leftists will exploit any opportunity to start ever-expansive controls over Liberty. The Left is a virtual fountainhead of new and more creative ways of clamping down on freedom. Having run out of new and improved ways of making it difficult, embarrassing and expensive to buy a firearm [While also lying about it at the same time] the Left has moved on to imposing controls over the purchase of ammunition. Then of course they also are making demands on how these are stored.
8. Stop attacking those who only wish to defend themselves.
There is nothing more loathsome than Leftists who excel at hurling insults at the country’s estimated 150 Million innocent gun owners. We’ve been labelled with almost everything from being Terrorists to baby killers for wanting nothing more than to be able to defend our families and ourselves.
Those who incessantly work overtime to demonize the innocent should keep one word in mind: Deterrence. The widespread ownership of weapons in most areas deters criminals since they don’t know who can fight back. This also explains why places with tight controls on Liberty tend to have higher crime rates. Curiously enough, for people who love the term ‘Commonsense’ they certainly don’t seem to well versed in it.
9. The Left needs to become educated about that which they want to control.
Granted, it might be too much to expect the Liberty Grabbers from knowing the difference between a direct impingement and gas piston actuation, but they should at least know the difference between a semi-auto and select fire. Nothing screams uninformed more than someone who confuses a clip with a magazine or some who uses them interchangeably in a claim that one can fire off 30 rounds in half a second.
Lack of knowedge is usually a negative in most cases, but in the realm of Liberty Control, the Leftists wear it as a badge of honour.
10. The Left needs to stop lying about guns.
We made these two separate items to prove a point. While some gaffes of the Liberty grabber elite are relatively harmless, there are those that are a danger to Liberty. It should go without saying that we live in an age in which the knowledge of the world is literally at one’s fingertips. There is no rational excuse for a lack of knowledge on the most rudimentary aspects of certain subjects. By the same token, there is no excuse for the propagation of deliberate false impressions and Lies particularly on the subject of self-defense.
One of the most infamous examples stems from the creation the phrase “Assault Weapon”:
The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.
The nation’s Left has gone on for years demanding compromises on the part of the Pro-Liberty Right. It is time that they step up to the plate and show they can be ‘bi-partisan’ for once. These steps aren’t really that extraordinary, in fact they merely bolster Liberty. Some Leftists still purport to be Liberal, supporting these items would go a long way in showing that is truly the case.