Posted on 10/07/2016 5:12:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Christian Post has allowed a Democrat operative to shill for Hillary Clinton, who rivals Barack Obama as the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history. I’m trying to imagine if the issue were slavery, would the Christian Post give its space to the promotion of someone so determined to violently dehumanize God’s creation? If it’s remotely Christian to support a billion-dollar business that daily destroys nearly 1,000 defenseless human lives, then Christians can support anything.
Eric Sapp authors a ridiculously dishonest piece entitled “Hillary Clinton is the Best Choice for Voters Against Abortion”. He writes: “I'll start by saying that I don't think Christians should be single-issue voters since Christ's ministry wasn't single-issue. But if your concern for the unborn determines your vote, Hillary Clinton should be your candidate.”
For starters, Christ was singularly focused on giving people (eternal) Life. Secondly, as an American who is as black as Obama, I’m grateful that abolitionists were singularly focused; I would make a terrible slave. Thirdly, what planet does Sapp live on?
“It's no coincidence that abortions go up when Republicans are in charge and down when Democrats are.”
Sapp is obviously statistically-challenged. This lazy assertion is false, easily debunked by the actual numbers (see charts here). The nation’s abortion rate hit its highest point (29.3 per 1,000 women ages 15-44) in 1980 during Carter’s administration and remained at that level in 1981 under Reagan. This also coincided with the pregnancy rate hitting an apex that same year. The abortion rate then declined during Reagan’s term, about 6.5%, ending the annual abortion rate increase during Carter’s presidency. The abortion rate then declined nearly every year thereafter with few exceptions (1988, 2003, 2006). The year he highlights, 1990, was the year of the highest total number of abortions as well as the highest pregnancy rate in decades.
In 2009 the pregnancy rate was the lowest in 12 years, according to the CDC, which could partially explain the sharper abortion rate decreases since 1990. Context matters.
“And what did Republicans [during the George W. Bush administration] do to overturn Roe or in any meaningful way limit abortion? Nothing.”
Well, here’s a whole lot of “nothing”, I guess:
And this is just on the federal level. Republican-controlled state legislatures have enacted legislation to whittle away at the egregious unconstitutional Roe decree. Constitutional foes, in the form of pro-abortion Democrats, fight every single prolife effort. Perhaps Sapp has never heard of pregnancy resource centers—you know, those thousands of facilities across the country (CareNet, Heartbeat International, NIFLA) that care for mothers and their children. Many are medical. Some even provide prenatal care. All offer their services, including parenting classes and maternal and baby supplies, at no cost to their clients. These centers are a threat to Big Abortion, rescuing mothers, fathers and their children and offering help and hope.
Sapp alludes to contraception as the answer to reducing abortions. He must have missed those statistics on how national unintended pregnancy rates only increased from 1995 to 2011 (from 49% to 51%), according to the CDC and Guttmacher, despite more access to contraception than ever before in human history.
Contraception hasn’t reduced abortions. Moral conviction has.
I’m no Donald Trump fan, but at least he surrounds himself with constitutionally-sound, pro-life, pro-family, pro-liberty staff and advisers. Pro-abortion Hillary Clinton, who voted against the gruesome Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, surrounds herself with those who want to expand abortion. She has promised to repeal the Hyde Amendment, forcing American taxpayers to fund abortion (in addition to existing forced funding through Obamacare). So, someone with a 100% NARAL “pro-choice” voting record is going to reduce abortions? Sure.
I guess 100% pro-slavery Democrats were also the source of slavery’s reduction and eventual abolition. Does Sapp really believe what he’s selling? It’s amazing how time has changed little in the Party that fought, vehemently, to protect slavery. Its leadership still believes that some humans are not equal. Been there. Done with that.
“But at least "pro-choice" politicians who believe the fetus is not a child are being morally consistent.”
So, pro-abortion politicians who deny basic biology are “morally consistent”? Pro-abortion politicians who aid and abet the killing of over 56 million human lives are “morally consistent”? Pro-abortion politicians who declare in the Democratic Party Platform that they will “stand up for Planned Parenthood”—a Medicaid defrauding, rape non-reporting, aborted-baby-parts trafficking, business of epic corruption—are “morally consistent”? I think he means immoral and inconsistent.
And that’s exactly what Hillary Clinton is. (I’m not arguing that Trump is moral, by the way. My friend Jonathon Van Maren wrote an excellent piece on this and the reasons why many Christians will reluctantly be voting for Trump over Hillary.) She decries the deaths of those killed by gun violence while being endorsed and funded by the leading killer of unarmed lives (of any hue).
As an adoptee and adoptive father who was conceived in rape, the only political hope for protection of lives like mine, or the 1.1 million aborted annually, is in a Party that believes we’re all created equal. Sapp and other liberal evangelicals can shill for the Party of Slavery, Jim Crow and Abortion. As a Christian, I’ll promote truth and freedom, instead, by illuminating the fact that every human life has irreplaceable God-given purpose.
“As an adoptee and adoptive father who was conceived in rape, the only political hope for protection of lives like mine, or the 1.1 million aborted annually, is in a Party that believes we’re all created equal. Sapp and other liberal evangelicals can shill for the Party of Slavery, Jim Crow and Abortion. As a Christian, I’ll promote truth and freedom, instead, by illuminating the fact that every human life has irreplaceable God-given purpose.”
Powerful last line that needs repeating.
“Liberal evangelicals?” Are you kidding me?
It’s a lot easier to get mired in sin than we might think.
God wants a life full of love in every way. We’re just trying to settle for looking decent.
In the name of a shallowly expressed love for the single who have trouble staying sexually continent, we’ve embraced the ghastly inhuman. The problem didn’t even come with sexual liberty as much as it did with the thing that made sexual liberty seem plausible, i.e. the family has been busted down in the name of an artificial atomized individualism and egalitarianism. With nobody there wanting these babies, the inhuman consequences followed.
I do not know how aware Trump is of the import of what he says, but when he spoke up once more for the sake of families the other day he was not just woofing a vain mantra.
It is against the 10 commandments to lie over such horrors, Mr. Sapp.
Illiberal ones. If they were more liberal there would be far less trouble.
It’s against the 10 commandments just to carry out our lives as sinners, actually.
Which was the point of them. They were the test that no mortal could pass.
He’s a liberal, and they all lie
He isn’t lying to cover up his own moral failings, he is lying on behalf of a politician who will advance an agenda of infanticide that already has cost over 50million deaths in our lifetime.
That is EVIL.
How do you have such an X-ray as to make such an infallible judgment?
A lot of people are just fooled.
“To fool the elect, [inasmuch as] it were possible.”
Pray that Mr. Sapp turns from following the father of lies and accepts Jesus as his savior (instead of Hillary).
He may have already begun to do so, and yet has much to learn.
One of the chief pastimes of the church seems to be damning one another, even sometimes couched as outward hopes of salvation.
There is no such thing as a liberal evangelical.
A friend shared that her oldest son wanted to watch the vice presidential debate. She and her husband then had to tell him what abortion is for the first time. She talked about how horrible it is to have to tell your child about it.
I remember that-the look of horror on the face of a child when they hear that some people want to allow mothers to kill their own babies that are living in their bellies.
I resent hearing that we are not to be “single issue voters”. Looking with favor at the evil carnage that is abortion is a telling issue that reveals the heart of the candidate. All I need is to hear they are pro-abortion and I know they will not serve well.
My younger kids will have to hear about it eventually and I pray that all my children never lose their horror over the thought of a woman paying someone to rip her baby piece by piece out of her womb.
The power doing the fooling... now THAT is where the evil is.
And it’s standing square behind Hillary.
She seems nice enough on the surface, but if we want to know where she is, we see how we can count on her to always sabotage any effort to what we call pro life — because the non-Judeo-Christian-family ideal comes first to her. It might be a secular state view of family (”gay marriage” anybody?), it might be an Islamic view of family. But it isn’t the bible view that undergirded the historical West, as erring as the West was in carrying it out.
Some people only see the surface and this looks like the case here.
It’s going to take a lot more than having Roe v. Wade out of the picture to put a substantial lid on abortion, that said. Trump took that bull by the horns the other day when he spoke up for family. Again, the misguided left wrecks families by tempting them into disintegration.
These false prophets will not fool God.
The term “liberal” has evolved into an oxymoron. The bible speaks well of the liberal, in its honest sense. What we see using the term today in the political scene is the faux, ostensible, soi-disant, illiberal “liberal.”
If we let language be subverted, subversion of sense follows.
The problem is that of not being liberal ENOUGH, in the original sense of the world (and no, Hillary is laughably wrong here... Trump would be more that kind of liberal person).
This is one way that pendulums swing! Trump may get quite a favorable audience with the young, those who are still so liberal (in the original sense) by heart that they would want it to apply even to the little babies.
world -> word
God may yet teach the erring, however. He arranges circumstances for it in His infallible destining power.
I know, because I see it happen to me. I make some foolish blunder attempting to figure things out, but once I stop trying to fight with God about it, He cheerfully bestows “wisdom without finding fault.” More and more my life consists simply of telling that story.
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.