Newsbites 5/18/14

May 18, 2014 at 9:20 pm | Posted in Newslinks | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

‘I’m Not Ready to Have Children’: Activist Films Her Own Abortion to Show Women It Can Be a ‘Positive’ Experience

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/05/im-not-ready-to-have-children-activist-films-her-own-abortion-to-show-women-it-can-be-a-positive-experience

Emily Letts, a 25-year-old abortion counselor, decided that she would film herself going through an abortion to “show women that there is a such thing as a positive abortion story”. She found out that she was pregnant and decided that she wasn’t ready to have children. The video posted on Youtube mainly focuses on Letts’ face and also includes her thoughts about a month after having the abortion. She says in the video that she is “in awe of the fact that she can make a baby” and that she “can make life”. In an article to Cosmo, Letts gives more reason as to why she did the video:

“We talk about abortion so much and yet no one really knows what it actually looks like. A first trimester abortion takes three to five minutes,” she writes. “It is safer than giving birth. There is no cutting, and risk of infertility is less than one percent. Yet women come into the clinic all the time terrified that they are going to be cut open, convinced that they won’t be able to have kids after the abortion.”

This really doesn’t surprise me at all. The fact that this woman could actually try and present the murder of her unborn child as a positive thing just shows the depths of depravity that man has fallen. The idea that she thinks that the life that was in her was worthless and was obviously just an inconvenience instead of an actual human being is telling. For a woman to be so enslaved to sin that she doesn’t consider the results of her sexual sin and then adds to that the sin of murder is saddening. The only life that has any value for Emily Letts is her own.

The ironic thing is that she really didn’t film her abortion. She filmed herself, which seems to go right in line with what she cares about most. But, it does pose a question. Why didn’t Emily post the doctors dismembering her little baby, sucking it out of her body, and putting it in a biohazard waste bag? I mean, if this was supposed to be a positive abortion story, why did she refrain from showing the actual abortion? It’s surely not because of modesty. She has no apparent moral convictions about fornication or murder, I highly doubt that she would have any about the camera revealing anything on that end of her body. I also doubt that Youtube would have censored the video seeing that it was promoting abortion and painting it in a “positive” light. Could it be that Emily’s conscience actually contradicts her jovial, nonchalant attitude? Could she possibly know that it was wrong? Was she afraid that someone watching her actually murdering her child might have second thoughts about their own abortion?

Emily Letts needs the gospel. Her sin brings with it the wrath of God and without a payment for her sins, God’s judgment stands on her like it does with every unrepentant sinner. Sadly, she doesn’t care. And in the process of Emily reveling in her sin and rebelling against the God who made her, she has taken the life of one who couldn’t defend themselves. She killed her own child…and it doesn’t pierce the darkness of her sinful heart. That’s depravity…

A Bishop’s Decision to Divorce

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/04/a-bishop-s-decision-to-divorce.html

Reverend Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Bishop of the Episcopal church, has recently announced his divorce from his partner of 25 years. He had a number of nice things to say about the man he spent 25 years with and believes that his relationship will endure even though his marriage formally ends. Robinson says that it’s a fact that it takes two people to make a marriage, and that both are at fault for a divorce. Robinson also points to the Passion of Christ when thinking about his marriage and divorce. “Bad things happen, people suffer…and then God acts in a way that brings new life, new possibility, and, yes, resurrection”.

Robinson says that he is astounded by the fact that “Jesus keeps putting one foot in front of the other, praying that it’s in the right direction, but not knowing for sure”. He says that he draws “much comfort and guidance” from the Passion story and his faith in Christ. He says that he holds on to the belief that God will have the last word, and that word is hope.

This is sad on many levels. First, it’s sad because this has nothing to do, from start to finish, with Jesus Christ or with a Christian bishop. V. Gene Robinson is not saved. That is not to say that he will not be saved. I don’t know whether he will or not. God may still save him at some time before he dies, but I can say that he has not yet been saved because he has been living in a sinful relationship for 25 years (see 1 Cor. 6: 9-10 and 1 John 3:8). The second problem with this is that it was never a real marriage. A marriage requires a man and a woman. That is the definition of a marriage. Regardless of how badly those who support the homosexual agenda want it to be marriage, it’s not. If you don’t have a man and a wife, it’s not a marriage. To have a professing Christian bishop openly rebel against God and then talk about his divorce in terms of love and using Christ as some sort of comfort is ridiculous. Whenever Jesus or the writers of scripture refer to a marriage, it’s ALWAYS a man and a woman. The marriage is also a representation of Christ and the church. The man represents Christ and the woman represents the church. It is a specific representation that is not possible with two men/women in a homosexual relationship. I rejoice in this “divorce” because it is the end of a sinful relationship that rebels against God. It is my hope that both Robinson and his former partner will repent of their sins and be saved…

Arkansas ban on same-sex marriage struck down by state judge

http://wtvr.com/2014/05/09/judge-strikes-down-arkansas-gay-marriage-ban

A state judge has determined that a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. 21 homosexual couples challenged the amendment saying that it violated their rights to equal protection and privacy. There are now 17 states that allow same-sex marriage.

This is a tragedy. There is no reason for the state judge (or any judge) to claim that a law voted on by the citizens in a state is unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment says that states shall not abridge the privileges of or immunities of the citizens of the US, nor deprive them of life, liberty, or property. The ban on same-sex marriage does no such thing. The argument that marriage is a right or even a privilege is faulty and using the 14th Amendment to uphold SSM is a twisting of the purpose and context of the 14th Amendment. What’s worse, those who came against the SSM ban said that they did so because it “violated their rights to equal protection and privacy”. It did no such thing. Homosexuals have all the rights that I, as a heterosexual Christian, have (if not more). Not only that, they cry and moan about wanting their privacy, but they constantly flaunt and promote (often aggressively and intolerantly) their sexual orientation in public arenas. This would seem to go against the whole idea of privacy…..

Gay Viking in ‘How to Train Your Dragon 2’ Revealed: ‘I Love the Idea,’ Says Director (VIDEO)

http://www.christianpost.com/news/gay-viking-in-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-revealed-i-love-the-idea-says-director-video-119910

It seems that How to Train Your Dragon 2 is not the only thing “coming out”. It has been revealed that one of the Vikings is actually gay. The openly gay director, Dean DeBlois, said that he is excited about the revelation. He sees it as “really fun and daring”. Others have criticized the decision saying that a children’s movie is not the place for this type of thing. One of the commenters said that “the way [homosexuality] is pushed down everyone’s throats now is getting out of hand”. Another parent said, “My very young kids love this franchise. However, this is not a conversation my wife and I are prepared to have yet. It’s immensely frustrating that Hollywood feels complete autonomy to force these issues on our kids.” Others argued that the fact that the revelation is subtle will cause it to go over the heads of the children watching.

This is clearly part of the gay agenda. Sure, the kids may not catch the comment, but that’s not the point. They are conditioning parents to turn a blind eye to this sort of thing based on the argument that it’s “subtle” and “unnoticeable” by children. I don’t think that’s the purpose though. They want parents to get used to the “subtle” comments now so that they can slowly open the door wider. As bad as that is, however, there is a bigger problem. This is the open promotion and celebration of sin. It is explained in Romans 1 as the evidence of a depraved mind that revels in rebellion against God and worships a “god” of its own making. Add to this the fact that many professing Christians who support homosexuality and say that it’s not wrong, and you have a slowly shrinking church that has little voice for truth. That’s sad and it’s not helping those who are living in sin at all…

Pope Francis: Without the Church, You Are Not a Christian

http://www.christianpost.com/news/pope-francis-without-the-church-you-are-not-a-christian-119827

The pope said that people cannot be Christians without the Church, saying that the Christian identity is rooted in it and believers can’t stand alone. He said that “we entered the Church through baptism”. He said that Christians cannot be understood alone any more than Jesus alone can be understood. He said that a Christian without the church is “incomprehensible”. He encouraged people to “as for the grace of memory of the journey the people of God have made”. He even theorized about alien life forms and the fact that they could be saved.

In one way I would agree with the pope, but not in any way that is lasting. It is true that Christians need the church but it is not the same Church that the pope is talking about. When the pope talks about the Church, he’s speaking of the Roman Catholic Church. When the Bible talks about the church, it is the body of believers who are trusting in Jesus Christ alone to save them from the wrath of God by erasing their sins. The RCC doesn’t teach this. The RCC teaches that one must add their works to the death of Christ in order to be saved. The RCC has anathematized the gospel and replaced it with a man-made religion. Like the Pharisees, they place undue burdens on the people following them and have made it clear that Protestants are outside the Church (meaning, according to this article, that Protestants aren’t Christians). This is funny to me because the Catechism of the Catholic Church seems to say that those practicing other religions will find their way to heaven. I’m not even going to address the alien life forms…

Advertisements

Leave a Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: