Posted on 01/17/2008 4:37:14 PM PST by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17, /Christian Newswire/ -- Priests for Life and Anglicans for Life will again sponsor a major gathering of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign in Washington DC this Tuesday, January 22. Men and women who have lost children to abortion will gather in front of the Supreme Court at 4:00 PM and begin sharing publicly their testimonies of pain and healing. Fifty-seven people are scheduled to speak.
In 28 other locations, similar gatherings will occur.
The Campaign, which started in 2003, has sponsored some 201 events in 44 states and 6 countries.
SNMAC Co-Founder Janet Morana stated, "The campaign brings the pain of abortion out of hiding and into the open; likewise, it shows that God's people are committed to healing rather than condemning those who have abortions."
One of the Campaign members who will share her testimony in Washington is Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "Abortion didn't solve my problems," Alveda states, "It just created new ones." Georgette Forney, also a Co-Founder of the Campaign, will likewise share her abortion testimony.
For more information, visit www.SilentNoMoreAwareness.org.
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
I admit that I’m an old jacka$$, but I have a problem with “Men and women who have lost children to abortion...”
We aren’t talking about children dying of cancer or losing track of them at the mall.
These children were killed intentionally. Forgiveness is one of the greatest gifts we can give to another human being, but let’s be a bit more honest about the ‘sin’.
If you ever have the opportunity to talk to one of these women who has realized the magnitude of what she has done, you will understand that they have a sense of loss and desire for atonement that they will carry for the rest of their lives.
Sorry I didn’t make myself clearer, wagglebee.
What I meant was that I have a problem with how the article is worded. I did not mean that they don’t understand what they’ve done or that they don’t want or merit forgiveness. It’s the wording of the article that I have a problem with.
I see your point. The other side is that there are a lot of women out there who have had abortions (even accounting for repeat abortions, etc., I would say that there are at least 30 MILLION American women who have had an abortion), it might be better to demonstrate to them that they will not be judged or labeled “sinners” when the time comes for them to repent. Driving just one woman away can easily result in another slaughtered infant.
I can see your point too.
However, I fall on the other side. I consider abortion a great sin. Having said that, I believe that even that sin can be forgiven.
If we keep trying to sugar-coat what it is, we run the risk of a future where it’s just not such a big deal. Actually, I think we’re already approaching that.
My other question is: When we sugar-coat it by calling it “losing a child”, who are we trying to make feel better, the mothers or ourselves? That’s not a rhetorical question. I really am curious.
For anyone who’s interested, you can go to www.myspace.com/emmettgrayson.
A song called “A Dream A Lot Like Mine” will come up. It’s free to listen to, of course, and tells a story I find more common that I would have guessed.
I too consider it among the gravest of sins, yet even our Lord told sinners to “go and sin no more” only AFTER the sinner had convicted themselves through their own conscience.
Women who have killed their own child have fractured psyches, yet once they are shown that forgiveness and Salvation is available even for them, they can be the most powerful examples of His Love and Glory.
Good. We agree on the principles. It’s just a certain specific that we disagree on (the wording in the article).
:-)
I agree that in the context of an article on a Christian website that there is no reason to “sugarcoat” the tragic magnitude of the American abortion holocaust.
Well, it only took us 9 or so posts to figure out we agreed. Isn’t internet communication great? LOL
Yep, it does get tough at times.
The terminology is not ideal, but 'men and women who murdered their chidren' would chase away the people who really need help. I think my preferred terminology would be 'Men and women who had been duped into thinking there was nothing wrong with abortion'. People don't like to be duped, but they're often more willing to believe they've been duped than that they're simply wrong.
“I think my preferred terminology would be ‘Men and women who had been duped into thinking there was nothing wrong with abortion’.”
Words have meaning. Words have power. This is a lesson that the radical left learned long ago and that conservatives are slowly but surely picking up.
Consider the word “abortion.” I try to avoid using it. Not because I view it as politically incorrect, but because the term “infanticide” is more accurate and conveys more meaning.
Well, I’ll give you credit for creativity. :-)
Yes, I understand your sentiment, but I can see waggle’s point too. If the point of this is to help people, maybe using words like “infanticide” helps bring out our moral anger (works for me, anyway), but does it help if, by using such strong language, that we drive other women away who’ve had abortions?
Wow, this was a fantastic explanation inside my head, but on paper it’s not so intelligible. lol
I chose my words carefully. Trying to tell people flat out that abortion is murder won't work, because their defenses will shut out that idea. What's necessary instead is to start by implanting two relatively benign ideas into people's brains:
The second notion can get through defenses because it doesn't accuse anyone in particular of anything. Once through the defenses, however, it generates the new notion "I must not let myself be deceived by those who claim something that is clearly false."
I wish more conservatives understood liberals' thought processes. It would allow them to interact much more effectively.
Includes mention of Anglicans for Life
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.