According to the CDC, among the women who had the 730,322 abortions that year, 85.5 percent were unmarried, and 58 percent were in their 20s.
Other findings from the report show that black women had the majority of abortions in 2011, at 30.7 percent, or 474 abortions for every 1,000 live births; 85.5 percent of abortions were performed on single women versus 14.5 percent performed on married women; and 91.4 percent of chemical and surgical abortions were performed at or before 13 weeks' gestation.
While the report notes that 10 women died in 2010 as a result of complications from legally induced abortions, according to the pro-life group Life Dynamics, over 340 women have died in the U.S. from known complications following their abortions since the procedure became legal....
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Jim --- We don't live in a vacuum, the way we handle politics is part of how we do all things to the glory of God. William Wilberforce worked within the political system of his day to put an end to slavery and slave trade in the vast British Empire, are you suggesting that was a bad idea?
Wilberforce didn't read the inadequacy of moralism, so he didn't realize he was supposed to twiddle his religious thumbs, so instead he did the right thing.
Jim, unless I am missing something here, the link to the well written article Is legislating morality Biblical is written from a perspective with which you disagree. If I am wrong my apologies.
Political action by people who attend local churches and political action by the local church is not the same thing. Look at the article you cited, how many churches are passing out rifles to their congregants? I will admit memory is not my strong point, but seems to me when articles on SA speak of direct church involvement in political activities (i.e. a rally) it gets precious little support from people on these boards.
No one is denying that there are churches that are politically active. The point is that you are posting on this forum and the vast majority of the people are what I stated in my 9:38 a.m. post. Gil Rugh's sermon or the link about community issues never states that moral laws are a bad idea. I would venture to say he didn't vote and considered it the moral high ground.
We don't live in a vacuum, the way we handle politics is part of how we do all things to the glory of God. William Wilberforce worked within the political system of his day to put an end to slavery and slave trade in the vast British Empire, are you suggesting that was a bad idea?
unprofitable servant, first, thank you for pointing out that my original URL links we're missing and item that SAvconsiders essential.
if you see many of the sermons listed on SA itself, and the articles that supports political involvementby local churches on here, and then the support these local churches get, from posters to these various threads -- see the thread on the church passing out AR 15 rifles, it is a very reasonable assumption that a significant portion of the people on here, support political action by their local churches. Apparently a lot of people in many churches discuss politics even more than football on Sunday.
I see for some unknown reason I missed the fact that I left out the preamble before both of these articles, [URL=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1622217/posts]]]The Purpose of the Local Church and Community Issues[/URL] and one I should have really caught, [URL=http://www.equip.org/articles/is-legislating-morality-biblical-2/#christian-books-3]]]Is Legislating Morality Biblical? [/URL] and that one from the Christian Research Institute only true up to a point. But I tried to put that up earlier this morning and goofed with my untrusty tablet.
But an excerpt from Gil Rugh's
Gil Rugh wrote: As believers committed to Jesus Christ, our involvement in social or cultural issues is sometimes misunderstood. The desire to concentrate on what God has called the church to do - teach the word - requires us to be selective in how we spend our time. The choice to limit our involvement comes from the desire to be obedient to God.
By the way, I still recommend you all read the one from Australia. The article from the BBC points out, in a way, not everyone agrees what abortion is. Not considering the morality of that or [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=118121637304]]]The Inadequacy of Moralism[/URL] in stopping various behavi
there is always going to be sin in the world because people are sinners. liberal tactics to manage people to get them not to sin just leads to heavy handed management of those who make good decisions! ignoring and denying sin is good for no one and abortion is taking an innocent life. I know people who want to adopt but many of the social agencies are being filled by the rainbow coalition, so to speak, who do not take kindly to Christian values, so more children suffer. There's no replacement for biblical teaching and a loving, Godly home for the health of a community.
and giving girls birth control pills is advocating fornication and breaking them from the cycle of life they were born into.... to grow up, be married, have a stable life and have children of their own. instead its chemical lobotomy, usery, and stds...liberalism robs everyone!
Jim Lincoln wrote: Apparently, many people would agree with this article,...
FIrst, your link doesn't take you to an article, just fyi.
Second, you are posting on this board in the SA forum and you have done so for a long time.
Tell me where you have seen anyone on SA board advocating for churches getting involved in politics? Tell where you see people who post here who don't think the mission of the church is to evangelize the sinner and equip the saint? Those who even advocate going to rallies in support of a political cause are few and far between, and they are normally criticized. Again, there is no need for posting your link to Gil's sermon, it was good, but it does not fit your implications and no one who regulary posts here thinks that morality is a substitute for salvation. No one who post here thinks that God will be on "our" side if we pass laws that, for instance, restrict abortion. Obviously you can do what you want, but I would say it is not necessary.
Jim Lincoln wrote: ---. I have just argued against a simplistic approach to many of these problems, and almost all those problems will only be solved by Christian ideals that will only come to fruition during the millennium. Some would say even after the millennium. Anyway, another look at abortion rate from a very recent article on the BBC: [URL=http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30275449?print=true]]]How the West is cutting teen pregnancy[/URL].
From the link: "Teen pregnancy drops in one of two ways - either teens are having less sex overall or the teens who are sexually active are using contraceptives and using them better," says Heather Boonstra from the Guttmacher Institute, a non-governmental organisation which researches sexual and reproductive health.
"What we have found looking back at just these two behaviours, is that overwhelmingly it is due to better contraceptive use."
Good to know.
"Indeed, the preliminary data for teen birth rates in 2013 suggests there has been another 22% drop in the rate of 15-to-19-year-olds giving birth since 2010."
Silly statistic. Abortion also reduces the birth rate.
Apparently, many people would agree with this article, [URL=www.equip.org/articles/is-legislating-morality-biblical-2/#christian-books-3]]]www.equip.org/articles/is-legislating-morality-biblical-2/#christian-books-3[/URL] and I would say it has some good points. But still, you saw none of the Apostles trying to reform the Roman Empire through political action. It was probably not even a secondary concern for them. I think I have pointed out this article by gil rugh several times, [URL=www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1622217/posts]]]The Purpose of the Local Church and Community Issues[/URL] the church has a body is not to be drawn into politics. Yes, Gil has always said it was up to the individual member on how he is involved in politics, with his conscience being the guide of course.
I have just argued against a simplistic approach to many of these problems, and almost all those problems will only be solved by Christian ideals that will only come to fruition during the millennium. Some would say even after the millennium. Anyway, another look at abortion rate from a very recent article on the BBC: [URL=http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30275449?print=true]]]How the West is cutting teen pregnancy[/URL].
Great admonitions gentlement. The Law of God is a delight to the weak and oppressed. It is no means of Salvation but it does suppress evil, which is something we owe to the orphans, widows and child in this world. Any good protestant worth his or her salt understands the three uses of the law.
Frank wrote: Thanks brother, although I would have preferred mine be perhaps more succinctly than succulently. But, I tried to do it with a gentle and quiet spirit which is pleasing to the Lord. I will admit to not listening to the sermon, but simply went by the title that Jim gave it and the way he used it. My wife is taking me, our son and one of our grandchildren out to dinner, so gotta go. Later Luke 17:10.
Alas, doomed by auto correct Enjoy your dinner and time with family.
Our hope is in the Lord, not man, not a party, not in elected officials. We know things will grow worse and worse. But we have brethren who ARE saved that are suffering at the hands of ungodly legislatures and the laws they passed. We have an obligation to do good to ALL men ESPECIALLY those who believe. So, we don't vote for those who bring hardship on our brethren with the policies they promote.
Nowhere in the sermon did Gil Rugh say that moral laws are bad, which is what you imply every time you post the link to the sermon. (don't take my word for it, others will say the same) He says it is important to be able to present the gospel, the people who are for the homosexual agenda are for SILENCING the witness of the gospel.
So, brother, you are misapplying the sermon to this forum. You cannot find anyone who thinks morality is a substitute for a person coming to saving faith in Christ. My suggestion to you is drop the link, it doesn't mean what you imply and it doesn't fit the beliefs of those who post here.
Here is your problem Jim. I doubt there are any who post on this forum that think that people who stand for morality in laws are the salvation of those who are lost and on their way to hell. The people who post here believe that the problem is sin and only believing the gospel is the solution to that problem. No one who regularly posts on this forum thinks that moral people make to heaven because they are moral. So in that sense the sermon DOESN'T apply.
You are missing the Biblical principle that states WHATSOEVER you do, do all to the glory of God. (including voting--Your pastor makes a common mistake when talking about voting, the Bible doesn't address it because there were no governments that allowed the people to vote and affect what laws were passed. The Bible doesn't talk about driving cars but I am sure you use one to get around} The Bible CLEARLY teaches that righteousness EXALTS a nation but sin is a REPROACH. We are told to pray that we could live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. Thus we don't elect people whose policies promote harassing of believers by the LGBT groups, or stealing from the earners to give to those who are not. We don't vote for those who promote godlessness and want to uproot righteousness from our nation.
Jim Lincoln wrote: It seems I have at least lately put this commentary up about How to Have Victory Over Sin But some of you gentlemen still think a Christian caliphate is the answer -- and it isn't. Everything is actually a bandaid even trying to outlaw abortion. The Christian Right Movement is a disaster for the mission of Christians! "The Reconstructionist movement and its allies and offshoots, by substituting political and cultural action for the proclamation of the Gospel, by substituting eschatology for soteriology, and by mangling the Gospel itself, have become tools of Romanist political action" (3/02, The Trinity Review). excerpt from, Notes on Reconstructionism Conservative Christians are overlooking The Inadequacy of Moralism
How do you keep track of so many rabbit holes, Jim? No one is following you down them. The narrow way doesn't lead there.
From the news: "According to the CDC, among the women who had the 730,322 abortions that year, 85.5 percent were unmarried, and 58 percent were in their 20s."
Would you like to suggest again that probably the biggest cause of abortion is a woman being in poverty?
Jim, you really do remind me of JohnY, giving the same old tired arguments that no one is even arguing against. All you do when it concerns morals or politics is set up strawman arguments. Most of this forum realizes that having morals or being conservative do not equate to being saved; so this inadequacy of morals argument should finally be put to bed. I have never heard anyone say on this forum that we are saved by our works or by our morals. Or even that our morals are pleasing to God outside of our relationship to Christ. The fact that morals can't save us is a certainty. But the fact that morals can't save us doesn't mean that we shouldn't have morals or obey the commands of our Lord and Savior. Your argument is a strawman one that anyone can see through, but just in case someone is confused by it, this comment.
Oh, I did read your comment from the sermon you reference. Part is below and I agree with it.
"Their corrupt heart is the disease; their behavior is just a symptom."
What you must have meant by the above is therefore our behavior doesn't matter.
I think you should read US's post again. Or am I misunderstanding you.
UPS, correct you I'd be happy to. first you can listen to the sermon a look at the summary and my comments to the sermon, [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=118121637304]]]http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=118121637304 (The Inadequacy of Moralism)[/URL]
As far as chemical induced abortions, I seriously anyone does know that, In the country that has a high percentage of Catholic/Anglican abortion is shockingly common, I would suppose this is true in the U.S. as well? "There are no statistics available for the number of chemical abortions in Australia. The â€˜morning after pillâ€™, Postinor-2 is available over the counter and accounts for an unknown number of early abortions. A combination of drugs, Methotrexate and Misoprostal, is also widely used to induce abortion before 7 weeks gestation. This is done as a general consult by doctors and the number is not recorded." [URL=http://www.lifenetwork.org.au/_blog/Abortion_in_Australia/tag/Statistics/]]]Abortion in Australia[/URL]. This from an anti-abortion org. In Australia they're giving some thought to have places where mothers can leave their unwanted babies without criminal action. Just in the last several days on baby was abandoned in the waste water drain and a body of one was found on a bea
One would think that one of the main reasons procedural abortions are down it due to the over the counter availability of RU486 that has about a 90% "success" rate. If poverty is the cause why do we not see abortion at all time highs during the 1930's?
Brother Frank, wise words again
Jim is forgetting that at the time Roe v Wade decision was made abortion was illegal in 49 states and the Supreme Court found some privacy rights that weren't there in the Constitution. Thus a branch that was not legislative made a ruling that overthrew the legislature of 49 states. So, because abortion was against the law, that shows the inadequacy of morality and how we are now much better off since it has been declared legal. The judicial branch acting unlawfully is better than having laws on the books that promote morality? If I am misreading you Jim, go ahead and correct me, I want to be wrong here about your thinking. You seem to be advocating lawlessness and that the best thing for American voters is to not express themselves at the ballot box because liberals know what is best for us. We show our own ineptness by voting conservative. Sandra Fluke for president.