Jus Me Bloggin'

Responding to Kevorkian's Death

2011-06-06T19:52:00.000-07:00

Jack Kevorkian, aka 'Dr. Death', died last week, and I feel like there should be a Christion response. While I wait to hear from our leaders, I am wondering what that response should be.

Jack Kevorkian was not a good man. He assisted in the suicides of 130 people, lethally injecting two of him himself. Most believe that he was simply helping the terminally ill have a say over how they would die. Many even consider him a hero for this. However, at least 70 percent of the people he helped commit suicide did not have a terminal illness, and, according to their autopsies, at least five were not sick at all. He was very much into macabre experimentation. He leaves a legacy of pro suicide and pro death ideology; he taught us that death could be the answer for suffering. No, Dr. Kevorkian was not a good man.

Truth be told, there's no such thing as a good man or woman. Romans says none are righteous, not one. We've all sinned. Consequently, we will all taste death, save for those who will be living at Christ's return. But even those who will be alive on that Day have experienced the sting of death, in there own physical and spiritual suffering. In losing loved ones to death. Death and sin and pain and suffering are as braided together as my hair used to be in the mornings before school. Kevorkian would have us believe that one (death) is the answer for the others (pain and suffering). However, the Good News of the Gospel is that Christ makes an end to suffering by conquering death. In HIS death and resurrection, he not only conquered death and Satan, He reconciled us to the Father Who forgives our sin through Christ's work and will bring us to His side, free of suffering, when our tired, sinful, old bodies wear out.

As Christians, we must not agree with the hopelessness of suicide. We see suffering all around us. We long to relieve it. Instead of agreeing with the hopeless- because in the hopeless mind, weary from pain, thinking is not clear- we must bring the suffering and the hurting to the Savior, Who gives eternal LIFE.

Kevorkian was no worse of a sinner than I. Without the grace of God, I very much could be spouting the same twisted logic. This is why we do not turn internally into our wicked human hearts for answers to human suffering. Now, answer we must- but it must be from our ultimate Authority- the Word of God, Who is Christ Himself.

Oklahoma House Bill Bans Embryonic Stem Cell Research

2011-03-18T12:48:00.000-07:00

From the Daily Oklahoman article:

With just a handful of Democrats opposing, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a measure Thursday that would prohibit embryonic stem cell research in Oklahoma.

We value life here in Oklahoma," said the bill's author, Rep. George Faught, R-Muskogee. "While we in no way dispute the fact that the ability to treat or heal suffering persons is a great good, we also recognize that not all methods of achieving a desired good are morally or legally justifiable."

House Bill 1442 would make it a misdemeanor to conduct embryonic stem cell research. It also would prohibit buying, selling or transferring an embryo for research. It would exclude certain procedures such as in vitro fertilization.

The measure passed 86-8. It now goes to the Senate.

Thank you, Oklahoma Representatives!

Rep. Jeannie McDaniel, D-Tulsa, who worries about the measure's effect of medical research facilities in Oklahoma City, asks, "Why would we say Oklahoma is closed to this type of research? Why put roadblocks up?"

Because, Representative, there are far too many Oklahomans who believe either life begins at conception or think that there's a possibility that it at least MIGHT do so. Whatever one's belief, no doubt embryonic research is very controversial. As Faught mentions in the article, the research field of embryonic stem cell has generated zero results (though to be honest, this may be due to lack of funding). And, Representative, there is so much promise in ADULT or CORD BLOOD stem cell research. No human life- or potential human life, as they may say in your 'camp'- is destroyed in that process.

Listen to your constituents, Representative, and put our tax dollars into ADULT stem cell research.

Also from the article:

Dr. Stephen Prescott, a medical researcher and president of the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, said earlier that passage of the measure would send a negative message to patients about Oklahoma.

"It sends a message that we're not forward-looking about how we view issues," he said.

Heaven forbid, Dr. Prescott, that people wouldn't think we're 'forward-looking'. Besides, Dr. Prescott, have you looked forward, to the consequences that will ensue from a culture treating human life- or even potential human life- like something to be used and destroyed in the name of science? Of something that would destroy one life in the name of bettering another's? Perhaps we should look back at the 'forward-thinking' of eugenics...

As Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, D-Oklahoma City stated in the article , "It's always a very dangerous and slippery thing when you take any group of people and say that you can do to them what ever you want."

The Ashley Treatment- Four Years Later

2010-12-15T23:00:00.000-08:00

Four years ago, the story broke about a nine year old girl who, three years earlier, had undergone growth attenuation surgery and had had her uterus removed. This was not done for any medical purpose, but rather it was done to intentionally keep the girl from reaching puberty and to keep her from growing to be more than 75 pounds. Ashley has a profound developmental and cognitive disability. Deemed the "Ashley Treatment", this surgery was performed so that her parents could care for her easier. It was later found that Ashely's rights were violated by sterilizing her without a court order.

So, Ashley, you're what, about 13 years old now? And you've been denied puberty. I know it's not this surgery that has denied you the social aspects of adolesence. I know it's your disability that keeps you fom school dances and middle-school-hallway-"who's that cute boy?"-gossip. And I know it's your parents and others referring to you as 'pillow angel' and seeing you as some sort of mental infant that keeps people from understanding that, chronologically, you are not an infant and, theologically, you are not an 'angel'. And I know that because 'ethically confused', to put it politely, doctors decided to remove your uterus, your body will never mature, a deception in that you ARE 13 years old.

I know how difficult it is to provide physical care to a fully grown adult who has no ability to assist in any part in his own care. However caring for such individuals can be and is done all the time. And, with technology progressing, it's getting easier. I fear this surgery was performed on you, not because it makes caring for you easier, though, that was probably your parents sincere intention. Rather, I fear society allowed this surgery because of our ignorance about and prejudice towards people with disabililities as profound as yours.

You are not an infant, you are not any kind of angel (nor demon), and your needs are not any more 'special' than anyone else's. You are not a 13-year-old with the mind of a baby- you are a 13-year-old with a profound disability. You are not to be laid on a pillow to be cooed at or gazed at like we do with a newborn. You have the life experience of a 13-year-old girl, which should be respected, with a wisdom about life that is uniquely yours, whether you can ever express that wisdom or not.

You're called a 'pillow angel', but you are neither an angel nor a demon; you are a human being. You have been created in God's image just like every other human. You are no more of a sinner nor any less of one, no more nor any less in need of a Savior.

Your needs- to eat, to breathe, to love and to be loved- your need for Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins and for hope- are just like anyone else's. You may need more assistance than others in having those needs met, but your needs are the same as my needs. They're just not that special- and we don't have to keep you small and attempt to deny your sexuaility to better meet your needs any more than we do mine.

Ashley, because of your disability I know that you may never understand the indignity that was done to you. But, I know- and it really hurts my heart. I just wanted you to know that I see you- you- as a young woman. You are female. You are one of us, one of the gang. Women with profound cognitive disabilities are created to reflect God's image in their femininity as much as women without them.

And femininity is not all in the body- it's in the soul, in the spirit God gave you. You can still reflect beauty, mercy, and grace. THAT no doctor or hospital ethics committee can take away from you.

Bioethicist Teaches Doctor to "Think Bioethcially"

2010-11-06T23:10:00.000-07:00

A creative way to demonstrate this potential conversation at Secondhand Smoke, blog of Wesley J. Smith.

Bioethicist Teaches Doctor to "Think Bioethically"

If you're wondering who the Peter Singer is spoken of in this video, I'd encourage you to 'google' him.

For more on terms like 'personhood' and 'speciesism' see this link.

A Pastor Who Struggles

2010-08-04T14:53:00.000-07:00

From Yahoo News:

MINNEAPOLIS – A Lutheran pastor in Minneapolis who opposes homosexuals being allowed to lead congregations said Monday he is attracted to men, but that he's not a hypocrite because he never acted on his urges.
The Rev. Tom Brock told The Associated Press he has known for years he is sexually attracted to men, but doesn't consider himself gay because he never acted on it.
In June, the Minnesota gay magazine Lavender reported that Brock was a member of a support group for Christians who struggle with same-sex attraction. Brock's church, the Hope Lutheran Church, placed him on leave while a task force looked into the matter. The Rev. Tom Parrish, the church's executive pastor, said the investigation determined Brock's story checked out.

This reporter from Lavender magazine tried to create a scandal. Likely angry that this pastor opposes gay marriage, gays pastoring churches, and homosexual activity, he has attempted to expose the 'hypocrisy' of a pastor whom he considers to be gay himself.

But this pastor is not gay. He admits to struggling with same sex attractions, but a homosexual struggle does not a gay identity make. Feelings and attractions make up what we as Christians once were. But as Christians our identity is now with Christ.

If the world understood that the Church is where people who have acted out in sexual immorality and/or struggle with the temptation to do so exist, then the fact that there is a man who struggles with same-sex attractions pastoring a congregation would not be a story to them. If the Church understood its true make-up- that it is filled with forgiven sinners- then this would not be a big deal to us, either.

And, Church, this man is you, this man is I. This man represents all of us- for such were we!

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor the idolators, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. AND SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU. BUT YOU WERE WASHED, YOU WERE SANCTIFIED, YOU WERE JUSTIFIED IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND BY THE SPIRIT OF OUR GOD. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (emphasis mine)

If this pastor were indeed acting out on his same sex attractions that would be a problem. But, apparently, he's not. Apparently, he's living the life of any Christian- forgiven and justified, though still of the flesh. still tempted and weak, he, like all of us, remains completely dependent on Christ for salvation, repentance, and holiness.

That this Lutheran pastor struggles with the temptation to sin is not the scandal the Church should be fascinated with. What Christian hasn't 'made the list' mentioned in the above passage? What Christian hasn't sinned and, like Paul talks about in Romans 7:7-25, still gets tempted to sin? Instead, our fixation should be on the the scandal of the Cross.

God looked forward to the filth and destruction that Adam's sin would cause and placed His one and only Holy Son right into the middle of it. Condemned man was and condemned we should have remained. But Christ came to save us, and in doing so, placed the wrath of His Father that was upon us and put it on Himself. He was beaten, scorned, tortured, and killed for our transgression. God demanded atonement for man's sin- and then atoned for man's sin Himself. THAT is a scandal! (John 3:17, Ephesians 2:1-10, Hebrews 2:17, Romans 3:21-26, Isaiah 53)

In atoning for this pastor's sins, Christ restored this man's relationship with the Father, and made this pastor a chosen son of God (John 1:12, Ephesians 1:3-8), made him his friend (John 15:15), made him a member of the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27), and in Christ this pastor is complete (Colossians 2:9-10). Because of Christ's work, this pastor is a new creation; the old is gone and the new has come. (2 Corinthians 5:17). Because of Christ's work this pastor "[does] not have a high priest who is not unable to sympathize with [his] weakness, but one who in every respect has been tempted as [he is], yet without sin". Therefore, this pastor can "with confidence can draw near to the throne of grace, that [he] may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need." (Hebrews 4:15-16)

This pastor is not gay. This pastor is a Christian. There is a difference- for as a new creation, he does not identify with his sin or with his sinful temptations. He identifies with Christ.

Declaring an Entire Class of Patients "Worthless"?

2010-07-05T00:13:00.000-07:00

From the article, Withholding Care from Vegetative Patients: Financial Savings and Social Costs by L. Syd M. Johnson
In a recent column in the Huffington Post, Jacob M. Appel argues for “rational rationing” of health care resources by withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment from patients in a permanent vegetative state.

...when patients can no longer decide for themselves, or when they have not left instructions for their future care, the best way to protect their interests is to allow those who know them best to make decisions for them. Such decisions cannot come from a court in a one-size-fits-all statement about the value of a class of patients...

...It is unknown how many patients there are with chronic disorders of consciousness, in part because most of them are not in acute care facilities like Trinitas, but rather in long-term custodial care facilities. Many of these patients get very little care beyond artificial nutrition and hydration, although they can live for decades. Indeed, one of the tragedies for these patients is that they are neglected both clinically and socially...

...There are substantial social costs to declaring an entire class of patients “worthless.” Allowing health care providers, including institutions like acute care hospitals, to unilaterally decide, against the wishes of patients or their legal guardians, to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment invites abuse and diminishes transparency and due process...

...There are substantial social costs to declaring an entire class of patients “worthless.” Allowing health care providers, including institutions like acute care hospitals, to unilaterally decide, against the wishes of patients or their legal guardians, to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment invites abuse and diminishes transparency and due process...

What makes a person a person- is it that he can feel, think, do? Or is it that he is created in the image of God, able to feel, think, and do only because of God's mercy is upon him?

What of one who can no longer do- and likely think, and perhaps even feel- such as one in a persistent state of unconsciousness? Does he no longer bear God's image? What does he have to bring to the table, that is the table spoken of in Luke 14?

He has nothing to bring, as do you nor do I. He and we share equal footing at the Cross. We are all simply receivers of grace, mercy, faith, and repentance. However, the man, woman, or child in a persistent state of unconsciousness, in addition to being at the mercy of God is also at the mercy of us.

Will we not love him, as Christ loved us, helpless and vulnerable as we were before He rescued us? Will we not defend his life- or will we join the world and call his 'kind' worthless, allowing monetary resources to go to the more 'worthy'? Who are the 'worthy'? Those who can 'contribute'?

Human worth is not contingent on what humans 'contribute', but, rather, on what God gives to us, what He has contributed through His Son. Once enemies and haters of God, now we are the Bride of Christ, a royal priesthood, sons and daughters of the Living God, bought and paid for by our Savior Christ Himself.

Don't look at a human being and expect him to 'earn' his worth. We, none of us, can. But, rather is was earned for us- and for the, perhaps for the rest of his life, unconscious.

For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. Romans 5:6 NASB

Christians, Respect People with Developmental Disabilities

2010-06-30T14:21:00.000-07:00

New York's Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities will now become the State Office for People with Developmental Disabilities, leaving Rhode Island with the only state agency that still uses the word 'retardation' in its title. Using 'People with Developmental Disabilities' in the title is an example of People First Language, and it is hoped that the services offered will reflect the idea of putting the person (with the disability receiving services) first.

Though they are political in that they are used by state agencies to describe who receives certain state services, the terms 'developmental disability' and 'intellectual disability' are not simply the new politically correct terms for 'mental retardation'. For one, the term 'developmental disability' describes an array of disabilities. But, even more so, I think I could pretty much say as fact they exist because of the slanderous and hurtful way people began using the words 'retardation' and 'retarded'.

However, the term 'retardation' may have a similar history. Remember, the terms 'idiot', 'moron', and 'feebleminded' were once valid medical terms to describe what the still medical term of 'mental retardation' is today. But what we've done to those words, we've done to the word 'retarded'. They've become terms to describe something we despise and see as the lowest form of human characteristic- low intelligence. Gasp! Heaven forbid, we be seen as 'stupid', 'moronic', or 'retarded'!

So, I suspect, rather strongly, that once the terms 'developmental disability' and 'intellectual disability' become commonplace, it will be a common theme to hear 'developmentally disabled' or 'intellectually disabled' thrown at one another on the playground, imported into the stand up comic routines, or cursed at our remote controls when we can't get them to work. I'll use these new terms, but I don't think another term is what we need. What we need is respect for people with this particular disability- then we won't need to keep changing the words used to describe it every 30 years.

Respect people with developmental disabilities. Am I just moralizing? Expecting the world to follow my opinion of what is 'right' and 'wrong'?

I don't expect the world to follow anything 'right'- though sometimes they do, as is evident in the State of New York's attempt to be respectful of people with developmental disabilities. The Law of God (the 'right') is written on man's heart (Romans 2:13-15), and sometimes the unregenerate human follows it. But, by nature, man is also a sinner who can be expected to do what sinners do- sin or the 'wrong'.

But, Christians, those who've, by God's grace, repented of sin and trusted in Christ for forgiveness, have a new nature, and can now be expected to do what Christians do- 'right'. It is right to respect those with developmental disabilities. Love thy neighbor. Take care of the weak. Defend the cause of the poor and the needy. You know the verses. Christians are expected to do these things- not for our salvation, but as evidence that we've been made new creatures.

Who are these people to be respected, these people with developmental disabilities? Out of what theme are they to be respected? People with developmental and intellectual disabilities are men, women, and children who've been created in the image of God, who've been separated from their Creator by sin, who've been purchased back by Christ at the Cross, who, when called to repentance and the forgiveness of sin are justified and have the hope of eternal life free of sin, sickness, disability, and death through Christ's resurrection, and have the same new nature as and belong to the exact same Body as every other Christian. Sound familiar? Sound like you?

Who are these people to be respected? Your brothers and sisters. Out of what theme? The Gospel.

By nature, the Law of God is written on our hearts. Through the work of Christ at the cross and the regeneration and sanctification of the Holy Spirit, Christians can now do this Law naturally.

Christians, respect people with developmental disabilities.

Sigh

2010-03-28T16:59:00.000-07:00

I appreciated the irony tonight while watching 20/20. No, 'appreciate' is not the correct word. I noticed irony. Or incongruency, rather.

I remember a movie called Twillight of the Golds about a family with a pregnant daughter whose baby tests positive for the 'gay gene'. Abortion is considered and recommended for this pregnancy by her family and husband, and, of course, we the audience come to understand how immoral that idea would be. (And, of course, it would be quite immoral to end an unborn life because it may be carrying the so-called 'gay gene'.)

I was thinking of that movie while watching this 20/20 segment and then watched the next story on this same episode tonight about a man who surprised his parents by being born with no limbs.

I was thinking about the irony (or incongruency) that the popular, pc public wouldn't think twice if this man's parents had known he would be born with this kind of disability and chosen to terminate that pregnency. And how silent that public remains about the fact that the idea of euthenasia for such infants is creeping upon us here the US as it has in Europe. And how that same public would cry out if abortion, etc. were to be considered for pregnancies where the 'gay gene' was detected- as they should cry out, of course. But they remain silent for other 'kinds' of pregnancies being terminated.

Ironic, or incongruent.

Coming Out As an IHOP Skeptic

2010-02-21T14:57:00.000-08:00

Updated, 3/14/10

I've added sources for some of the revivalists I mentioned to be false teachers.

Updated, 2/23/10: I was rightfully encouraged to include a source regarding my concerns with Bickle's using allegory to create new doctrine. I was reluctant to do so because the author of this source is anti-charismatic, and I am not. I didn't want any more offense thrown at IHOPpers than needed. So, read with discernment.

Still, as promised, working on sources for the revivalists I mentioned to be false.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

I have a confession. I am an IHOP skeptic, IHOP being the International House of Prayer in Kansas City. I am leery of its doctrines, its practices, and its history. Becoming somewhat familiar with the teachings of IHOP leader Mike Bickle, I feel pretty safe in my decision to stay away.

With shaky hands, a knot in my stomach, and very clumsy words, I explain my mistrust.

One of Bickle's more well known teachings is that of the Bridal Paradigm. Not by far the first person to interpret Song of Solomon as a description of the relationship between Jesus and His Bride, Bickle goes further to make it about Jesus and us individually. This is new revelation of the Bridal Paradigm is central at IHOP; it is imperative, they believe, for individual growth of Christians to understand their bridal identity.

The problem with this new revelation is that it is only found by allegorizing Scripture. No where in Scripture is there any implication that the Song of Solomon is about Jesus and His Bride, individually or corporately.

Bickle allegorizes again the parable of the 10 virgins in Matthew 25:1-13. Christians who have always read this literally understand that it is about being prepared for Christ's return- the 5 who were prepared 5 were His, the other 5 not prepared were not His- He didn't know them. Bickle assumes that all 10 were His.

He gives allegorical meaning to the lamps of the virgins- that they were all a functioning ministry. He gives allegorical meaning to the oil in the lamps, calling it "the heart connect with the Holy Spirit. As we cultivate our secret life in God, did you know that everyone one of us in this room have a secret life with God... It's the reach of your heart for God. Everyone of us are developing a secret history in God- that's the oil, the connection with the Holy Spirit," Bickle says in his audio message #2 given March 6, 2008. So the five virgins prepared were Christians who had a more intimate relationship with Christ, while the five virgins were Christians who didn't understand their 'bridal identity' or have as much intimacy with Christ.

This teaching gives way to pietism. The 'work' of intimacy is required to be a more elite Christian than other kinds of Christians. I have seen my friends who go to IHOP beat themselves up for not being 'intimate' enough- a work not even found in Scripture.

This idea of a 'reach of your heart for God' contrasts the God of the Bible Who reaches out His heart toward us. Intimacy is a natural result of having been forgiven of our sins, being freed from the yolk of the law, and being adopted heirs of the Father. Intimacy is a joy, a reward- not a work.

Bickle is of former Kansas City Prophet fame, men who were rebuked for and who repented of heretical doctrines. However the heretical doctrines of the KC prophets, specifically Joel's Army and The Latter Rain Movement, seem to heavily influence the teachings at IHOP. In his teaching from 2008, "Being Prepared to Fully Embrace the Move of the Holy Spirit", Bickle briefly discusses how "God releases grace for moves of God (small 'm') that work together to prepare the body of Christ for the great final global End Time Move of God (capital 'M') that surpasses the Book of Acts and results in Jesus' return".

Bickle in the teaching given March 6, 2008 says that:

We're not absent for the great tribulation, now listen carefully, the church causes the great tribulation. What I mean by that- it's the church, it's the praying church under Jesus' leadership that's loosing the judgment in the great tribulation in the way that Moses stretched forth his rod and prayed and loosed the judgements upon Pharaoh. The church in the tribulation is in the position that Moses was before Pharaoh but it won't be a Pharaoh and Egypt, it'll be the great end time Pharaoh called the antichrist and the book of Revelation is a book about the judgments of God on the antichrist loosed by the praying church.

The Latter Rain eschatology claims that a company of prophets and apostles will defeat Satan. Bickle claims the Church will, using a special type of prayer as the key. In both eschatologies, an elite end-time church defeats God's enemies and Jesus is 'held in the heavens' until it happens.

Bickle emphasizes in the March 6 teaching that the greatest revival lies ahead and will occur at the same time as the Great Tribulation. "There's so many principles in the [parable of the virgins] parable. It is an end time parable, I tell you it is. It is for the people and when the crisis and the revival of the great Matthew 24 is unfolding." "We're still in Matthew 24, it's all about the end times- Matthew 24 and then the three parables. Jesus is preparing the church through these three parables to walk in victory in the hour of the greatest revival in history and the greatest time of trouble in history- it's called the Great Tribulation."

Matthew 24 teaches no such thing- unless Scripture is allegorized. Now, the Latter Rain movement has a teaching about a Great End Times Revival that comes from allegorizing some Old Testament passages about the agricultural seasons in Israel. But Matthew 24 does not.

I am bothered by Bickle's end times teachings not because they are different than mine, but because they allegorize Scripture and arrogantly say that human beings have such a big part- that we somehow usher it through some special kind of praying.

Bickle describes his doctrine that Christians must adopt a certain version of prayer before Christ can return:

Right now the prayer movement is growing fast... really fast! But when I say it's growing fast instead of one percent of the Body of Christ taking hold of it, maybe 10 percent. It's... you know it's like 10 times bigger than it was a generation ago, but beloved, as fast as the prayer movement is growing, where people are getting hold of it, still for 90 percent of the Body of Christ, it's not even on their mind. Jesus is not coming until the Body of Christ globally is crying out, "Come Lord Jesus, Come Lord Jesus, Come Lord Jesus" and they don't just say "come and forgive me" they are crying out in the understanding of who they are as the one that is cherished by Jesus in the bridal identity.

So, in order for Christ to come, Christians must adopt Bickle's allegorical interpretation of the Song of Solomon and Matthew 25, and cry out "Come, Lord Jesus" in their bridal identity? This is a bold claim.

Christians have been praying for Christ's return ever since John penned "And the Spirit and the Bride say come" in the Book of Revelation. Christians proclaim the "Lord's death until He comes" every time we take communion (1 Corinthians 11:26) in faith as we wait for the marriage supper of the Lamb. Does Bickle really have the authority to claim that Christians have had an inadequate prayer life all this time until his revelation- a revelation for which there is no Scriptural support?

Because of his frequent allegorization of Scripture which brings out the elitist, legalist in myself, I cannot put myself under the teaching of Mr. Bickle. In addition, any confidence I had in Mr. Bickle's ability to discern, let alone to lead people in, a 'move' of God waned strongly after reading his teaching notes and listening to the previously linked audio of his teaching on being prepared to embrace a move of the Holy Spirit.

Bickle claims that there are obvious signs of the increasing move of the Holy Spirit in our nation, "strategic installments" of the move of God since Azusa in 1904, the Spirit 'flowing' in revival and 'ebbing' in His activity to give the body of Christ time to digest what He has imparted. Of course, Bickle fails to give any Scriptural evidence for such a claim of installments, ebbings and flowings. And, while, to his credit, Bickle gives much exhortation to use discernment, he fails to use it himself when it comes to past 'moves' of the Holy Spirit.

For instance, the examples Bickle gives of such 'moves' in this teaching are as follows:

John Alexander Dowie healing revival (1890’s); Wales revival (1904); Azusa Street revival (Los Angeles in 1906); John G. Lake healing revival (1910-30); Aimee Simple McPherson healing revival (1920’s); Voice of Healing revival with Oral Roberts, William Branham, Kenneth Hagin, etc. (1940-50’s); Charismatic Renewal with the Catholics then main line denominations (1967); Jesus Movement Chuck Smith/Lonnie Frisbee in Southern California (1970’s); Vineyard healing revival with John Wimber (1980’s); International renewal center in Lakeland Florida with Rodney Howard-Browne reaching Pentecostals (1993); International renewal center in Toronto with John Arnott reaching main line denominations (1994) in conjunction with the HTB renewal; Pasadena renewal center with Lou Engle and Che Ahn. The Pensacola revival with Steve Hill (1995); Regional renewal in Smithton with Steve Gray (1995); Regional healing revival in Redding with Bill Johnson (2000), Todd Bentley national healing revival in Lakeland (2008 ) and Rick Joyner with a regional healing revival.

How were these examples ‘moves of God’? Bickle doesn’t explain here. I'm assuming because there were reports of the kind of manifestations he examples to be the Spirit's manifestations he talks about here and here in the above paragraphs made regarding these ministries and revivals. However, consider these men behind the ministries and revivals.

John G Lake:

http://www.letusreason.org/Popteac40.htm

http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/john-g-lake-exploits-and-exploitation/

William Branham:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Branham

http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain4.htm

http://www.forgottenword.org/branham.html

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b05.html

Kenneth Hagin

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hagin/general.htm

http://www.forgottenword.org/hagin.html

Todd Bentley/Lakeland

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/15373

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2009/05/i-guess-that-if-you-die-and-go-to-heaven-thats-a-healing-of-sorts.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJD_7LLixz4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2Rw6TCiUO8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhpFbjfmK6E&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW2kaRP3EtI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LJICxXnvlw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqJaJzHdGaI&feature=related

Let's say the miracles and so forth of the other above false teachers were real- difficult to prove all these years later- but let’s say that people really were healed of diseases and disabilities through their ministries and the 'manifest presence' of some sort of spirit really did show up in their meetings. The Bible speaks of false signs and wonders (Matthew 24: 23-25, Mark 13:21-23). Hebrews 2: 1-4 tells us that God bore witness to His salvation through signs and wonders. Signs and wonders are to point to something. In 2 Thessalonians 2:8-10, we see false signs and wonders pointing to the false christ, the lawless one.

If indeed the miracles and manifestations experienced through the ministry of these false teachers and preachers were real, who and what are they pointing to? They point to false teachings, false doctrines, and a false christ!

Bickle says, "God uses weak and broken vessels of clay so that no one glories or boasts in man" and that we are not mandated to point out what lacks excellence in each vessel, if they are minor, 'gnat-issues'. (Bickle takes Matthew 23:23-24- "You pay tithe of mint and anise... and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!"- out of context, to mean that we are to swallow minor issues while concentrating on bigger 'camel' issues. Matthew 23:23-24 is about the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, not about discernment.

Paul says the same thing, that God uses the weak to shame the wise. Paul was a very weak man- but Paul did not teach false doctrine. Weak, broken vessels' does not mean 'false teachers'. Nor do weak, broken people stay weak. They grow in wisdom, understanding, and right doctrine. This did not happen with the men and women in Bickles above revival/ministry examples. Instead of growing in His Word, sanctification, and holiness, their doctrines grew worse and scandal followed their personal lives. God uses weak people- but He doesn't leave us weak!

"Love covers a multitude of sin (1 Peter 4:8)," Bickle reminds us regarding these broken vessels. But, love doesn't mean we excuse or ignore the sin. "I 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, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and will wander off into myths." 2 Timothy 4: 1-4

In this teaching, Mr. Bickle shares this infamous word he received in 1982: I will change the understanding and expression of Christianity in the earth in one generation. He then says 'changing the expression' speaks of the way the Church expresses its life together under the leadership of the Holy Spirit.

But, I ponder, the Bible gives clear directions for how the Church is to express its life together under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. What Scriptural evidence supports this word from God that the expression will change? How, Mr. Bickle, did you test it?

And what, Mr. Bickle, do you do with your prophets like this? Who prophetically dreams things that don't happen, who says that the prophetic is never a guarantee, but an invitation to join the Great Intercessor? Poor God. Wanted an end to abortion, apparently, but not enough people musta joined His Intercession. I didn't know we had that much power.

So, I do not trust Bickle's teachings nor his idea of what a move of the Spirit is. So, no attending the current Student Awakening- especially since phrases are being used reflecting the same kinds of doctrines proclaimed at Lakeland.

Oh, but the Spirit is manifesting. I'm sure some spirit is manifesting. I hope it is God's. But signs and wonders point so something. IHOP has false doctrines and teachings. Are they then pointing to a false christ?

But people are repenting. Awesome. Really- it is a good thing to repent. And I'm not surprised folks at IHOP are repenting. IHOP is very good at giving its students and visitors the law.

The videos I watched had the leaders calling the audience to repentance to receive refreshing, and so they could raise the dead, and cast out demons. Only very briefly was the cross mentioned, and it was not the emphasis.

The people from Westboro Baptist Church call people to repentance. When calling people to repentance, you must break them with the Law of God; IHOP, and Westboro, you've got it right. But, you must offer them the good news of the forgiveness of sins in Jesus name when you have broken them. This cross is for Christians, too. We can't be good for goodness sake even if we wanted to. Through forgiveness and walking in the Spirit we are enabled to 'be good'. Because we've a new heart. But since our righteousness doesn't count anyway, for when God looks at us, He sees the righteousness of Christ, shouldn't Christ and His cross be what is focused on at repentance?

So, these are my thoughts.

Ending Suffering by Ending the Person Suffering?

2010-02-14T14:28:00.000-08:00

The prevention of suffering is Aleksandr Nikonov's main argument in his article, "Finish Them Off, So They Don't Suffer" for a Russian tabloid magazine. Using a most derogative Russian term 'debil' to describe people with developmental disabilities, he makes a case for what he calls 'postnatal abortion', and what everyone else calls infanticide, for children born with them.

From the article:

"Let me introduce myself: I am Adolf Hitler. This is the way people want to portray me," Nikonov says. "But the real bastards are those who tell me, 'Yes, it is good and fair that people are in pain. We'll look on and say people can suffer, as long as our scholarly conception of humaneness is not affected.' To hell with you. People shouldn't suffer. This is my opinion, and you won't shut me up."

Wow. "People shouldn't suffer." What a humanitarian. As if those who would prefer the murder of children remain illegal are in favor of human suffering?

No parent watching the torment caused by Hunter syndrome rack her child with pain is in favor of suffering. No fellow church member of a child born with NKH whose heart breaks with her parents' at hearing the news that the little girl is having multiple daily seizures is in favor of suffering. And no friend of a man with Down syndrome who hears him being called 'retard' within ear shot at the mall or reads that a Russian journalist chooses the most offensive word possible to describe those whom he deems suffering, causing hurt and suffering, while decrying they shouldn't suffer is in favor of suffering.

We all want to end suffering. That's why scientists work on cures for diseases. That's why people become doctors and nurses. That's why ABC banks on the tv series Extreme Home Makeover. No human with any kind of sympathy or empathy can bear to watch another suffer. We have an instinct about us, we humans, to react to ease another's suffering and to end it when we can. But to end the person suffering?

Wouldn't, Mr. Nikonov, instead of jumping on the killing bandwagon, your time be better spent advocating for disability rights, better health care for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses, and better support systems for those with disabilities and their caregivers, as these things are of very poor quality in your country? Surely the suffering you deem of those with developmental disabilities would be greatly reduced. (Suffering both real and imagined, I might add, as many people with developmental disabilities do not necessarily see themselves as suffering anymore than anyone else.)

But, no, of course it wouldn't end. Human suffering will have no complete end until Christ returns, and oh, how we groan inwardly waiting for the redemption of our bodies waiting for that time. (Romans 8:23)

And, my how we suffer. We all suffer. People with and without disabilities suffer.

Oh, but what is our answer? Who shall free us from a lifetime of pain, from the entire human history of struggle, strife, and sorrow?

My friend, the answer is always Christ and His cross. It was there that this holy God-man, this One of whom no one suffered more, bore our sorrows and carried our griefs, this man, this God, took upon Himself our sin, absorbing the wrath of God that was upon us, this Jesus, this son of God who agonized in the garden over His Father's will to crush Him, suffered and died an atoning death for our sin.

We look at the Cross of Christ and we understand love: "This is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and gave his son as atoning sacrifice for our sin." (1 John 4:10) We look to the Cross and we find our salvation, our forgiveness, our reconciliation with our Creator. We look to His suffering and know that by His stripes we are healed. The hope we have in Christ and His empty tomb give us more hope than we can ever comprehend.

In Christ we have love. In His death we have forgiveness of sin. In His resurrection, we have the promise of our resurrection from pain, suffering, and death into life and freedom from sin and struggle.

Finishing 1 John 4:10, 1 John 4:11 says, "Beloved if God so loved us, we ought to love one another." 1 John 4:19 says, "We love because he [God] first loved us."

We are not to do harm to those suffering. But because God loved us, because Christ became poor so that we could become rich, because Christ humbled Himself and made Himself a servant, because we who are His are new creations enabled by the Holy Spirit to do so, we are to care for those suffering! To grieve with those grieving and to rejoice with those rejoicing. To clothe the naked, feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, and to visit those in jail.

So, we respect human life. Nay, we revere it, for humans reflect the very image of our Creator. Because we revere human life, we strive to end the suffering of it we are able to end, to ease what we can ease. And we give the world our fellow human beings, our fellow sufferers, the hope of the Gospel- the forgiveness of sins in Jesus' name and the promise of a new life and an end to suffering at God's appointed time.

Meanwhile, "we know that for those who love God, all things work for good who have been called according to his purposes. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his son, that he might be the firstborn of many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called he also justified; those he justified he also glorified." (Romans 8:28-30) And we "consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us." (Romans 8:18)

How Do People With Profound Cognitive Disabilities Get Saved?

2010-02-14T14:27:00.000-08:00

A friend and I had a conversation about people with severe and profound cognitive disabilities, such as those in the latter stages of Alzheimer's, and their salvation. The question arose, how do those who do not understand, who cannot seek God, get saved?

I must answer, who can seek God? Romans 3:10-12, Psalm 14:1-3, and Psalm 53:1-3 says that no one seeks God and that no one understands (emphasis mine). If indeed, we are enemies of God (Romans 5:10), children of wrath by nature (Ephesians 2:3), and sinners at our very conception (Psalm 51:5) how could we seek God? Salvation, you see, is not about us seeking after God- but God seeking after us!

Jesus says that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws Him (John 6:44). Jesus says that those who are taught by the Father come to Him (John 6:45). We do not lean on our own understanding.

I worked with a man once, 'Kevin', who was born with a profound developmental disability. He had the lowest IQ of anyone I've ever known. He had no mobility, no bowel and bladder control, and received nutrients from a feeding tube; the man couldn't even eat. He responded with a smile to soft vocalizations spoken closely in his ear; whether or not he understood what was being said to him, I'll never know, though it was obvious he enjoyed that human interaction. But that smile is all he had to give to the caregivers around him who provided him his every need. This man was utterly helpless and completely dependent.

This is how we ALL are regarding our salvation. Utterly helpless and completely dependent on someone else to save us. We try and we strive under the Law of God to meet His demands and to prove ourselves righteous, but it is to no avail. We all fall short of the glory of God. We all sin. (Romans 3:23) And none can save ourselves.

Even for Kevin, though no outward sign of him sinning was ever seen by me, his heart is what God searches to judge his deeds, and his heart is deceitful and desperately sick. (Jeremiah 17:9-10)

But this is what God did for the hearts of Israel in Ezekiel 36:25-27- He gave them a new heart and a new spirit. He took their heart of stone and gave them a heart of flesh. He put His Spirit in them and caused them to walk in His statutes and obey His rules.

This is how God works. "While we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly... God demonstrated His own love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:6, 8) Weak and helpless all of us, God saves us. "In this is love, not that we loved God but that He loved us and sent His son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:10, emphasis mine)

This propitiation, Christ absorbing the wrath of God that was upon us, is what saves us. This is what our salvation is dependent upon. Not on us seeking God or understanding Him on with our own deceitful minds and sick hearts.

God calls us to repentance and faith in this work. By grace we're saved through faith (Ephesians 2:8). Faith- "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1), being sure and convinced of the promises of God regarding the Cross and the Gospel, comes to us by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17). It is given to us in a measure (Romans 12:3). His kindness leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4) which He grants (Acts 5:31, Acts 11:18, 2 Timothy 2:25).

For Kevin and for us, Christ is our Savior, our Seeker Who came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10). God has mercy on whom He wills and hardens whom He wills (Romans 9:18). Should He will, the God Who sent His Son to die for the sins of Kevin will have mercy on him, as He has me, and grant him faith, repentance, understanding, salvation, and a heart of flesh. That is how Kevin, a man with a profound cognitive disability will get saved.

Kevin may never be able to stand on a street corner and proclaim the Gospel. He may never in his earthly body be able to give words to his faith. But the fruits of Kevin's salvation would certainly be evident in ways that would point those around Him to His Savior. Maybe that's what his smile was all about... Speculation. Sorry.

Now, for those of us who are in Christ, including men, women, and children like Kevin, because we have been loved, pursued, given mercy, saved, and regenerated with new hearts, now we are free to seek God. Now we can understand Him. Because He loves us, we can now love Him.

Better Dead Than Disabled???

2009-11-04T12:53:00.000-08:00

A one year old boy, who could have a tracheotomy, be taken home from the hospital and live his life, may have his ventilator removed at the wishes of his mother and the HOSPITAL TRUST PAYING FOR HIS CARE, because his severe physical disability has been deemed 'intolerable suffering'. His father disagrees and is fighting for his son's life.

See UK Court to Rule Whether Baby Better Off Dead Than Disabled from the blog Secondhand Smoke by Wesley J. Smith.

Reformation Day and Luke 14

2009-10-31T10:50:00.001-07:00

In honor of Reformation Day, the anniversary of when, in 1517 Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenberg University’s Castle Church door, boldly declaring where the Church needed reform, I'm writing my own thoughts about the Church and some places where we still need reformation. Of course, this post will lead to inclusion of people with disabilities, because, well, that seems to be what I do.

There are two religions in this world. One is based on works, the other on grace. The religion based on works requires its disciples to work through law, rite, or service to make that disciple in right standing with the god of this religion. The God of the second religion, that based on grace, demands perfection unto His Law; however, when man failed and fails, this God has given mankind His own righteousness through His Son, the Second Person in the Trinity that calls Itself God, a righteousness contingent only on faith in this Holy Son and His atoning work on the Cross.

The disciples of this second God- of this One True God- the adopted sons and heirs, join together according to the Word of this God, as one Body, and we call ourselves the Church, with Christ as our Head. Like the followers of the first religion, the Church has a law, the Law of God, though our Law has been fulfilled by this Christ, and we members of the Body now walk by faith in our Savior, Christ Jesus', work and in the Spirit, Who is the Third Person of this Triune God. We perform rituals in our church gatherings as does the first religion, though our rituals, rituals of baptism and the communion of the saints, focus not on our attempts to gain righteousness but rather on the One Who obtained righteousness for us.

And, as do followers of the first religion, Christians, those of the Body, of the Church, we perform acts of service. As is the Law, Christians, attempt to love God and love our neighbors by serving our community and serve others.

However, unlike those following the first religion, Christians are not attempting to earn our place in our God’s Kingdom through this service, though serving God and serving others is part of God’s Kingdom. In fact, daily lawbreakers, we could never serve enough to enter that Kingdom.

Nor are we serving God through our own power or our own nature. We are serving God because we have a new nature, and a new Power- the Holy Spirit, given to us through the work of the Cross, upon our belief in Christ, this work, and the repentance of our sins. We are serving humanity- offering grace and mercy to one another- in response to how we were shown grace and mercy, in response to how we were invited into that Kingdom based solely on the death and resurrection of our King. We love because we have been loved.

Based upon this motivation for service and community within our own Body, we take seriously our Savior’s teachings on service and community. The fourteenth chapter of Luke’s gospel, verses 7 through 24, includes one such teaching. Through instruction and parable, Jesus shares His Father’s desire that, oh, may His house be full! He teaches us that His Father wants those at His table those who cannot repay His kindness- ‘the poor and the crippled and the blind and the lame' (vs 13) (as if people who are not poor or who do not have a disability could pay Him back). In fact, He says to compel them to come, revealing the earnestness of His heart toward the least in this world, those same ‘least’ who will become great in His Kingdom.

How does this teaching apply to Christ’s Church 2,000 years after its original exhortation? It applies the same way. There are still those who are ‘great’ in this world, and those who are poor or who have disabilities are still regarded as ‘the least’. Sadly the world’s view of who is great and who is the least is often paralleled in the Church.

Thankfully, the Spirit of God is working in the same way that He has for 2,000 years. He still convicts the Church, both the individual member and the entire of Body, of sin, and He is convicting me of my exclusionary practices of the ‘least of these’ in my church’s gatherings.

So, what do inclusionary practices of the ‘least of these’ look like? Inclusionary practices begin by being reminded of how all inclusion to the Body begins. It begins with the Cross and how Christ, forgiving us of our sin, reconciles us with God, making us His child and a member of Christ’s Body. We must be reminded that God never needed our able bodies or cognitive awareness or our large bank accounts to forgive us our sin, to give us faith, and to make us one with Him and His community. In that regard, we become aware that we are no different than our poor and/or disabled brother and sister.

When we become aware of the absolute equality with ‘the least’, community- koinonia- the Greek word used 20 times in Scripture for 'fellowship, sharing in common, communion'- makes sense! We are equally created in the image of God, we are equal in our human depravity, and we are equal in that any grace anyone has received has been from God. We are one Body.

Therefore, as one Body, if one member suffers, we all suffer. When one rejoices, we all do. When one holds a banquet, all are invited.

Whether through formal programming, or just meeting an individual or family where he or they are suffering or struggling, any church can do ‘disability ministry’. The call is for all, for all of the Body, to invite, to compel, ‘the poor and the crippled and the blind and the lame’ into the Kingdom of God and sharing a meal- that is, offering them repentance and the forgiveness of sin through Jesus' name, and truly becoming one Body- for the grace of God is for them, too!- in loving response to how the Father first invited us. This is how we reveal the religion of grace to the world.

'Rational' Suicide?

2009-10-25T18:46:00.000-07:00

"'Rational' Suicide Advocates Push Assisted Suicide in Mental Health Journals"- A podcast edition of bioethicist Wesley J. Smith's 'What It Means to be Human'.

John Shelby Spong is Not My Liberator

2009-10-21T15:54:00.000-07:00

John Shelby Spong is not my liberator.

An advocate for the rights of those living homosexually for quite some time, in a recent manifesto, Bishop Spong declares that he will no longer debate nor pay any heed to those who would deny 'justice' to those who identify as gay or lesbian by calling homosexuality sinful.

Justice. God is a God of justice. He demands it for the sin of man. God cannot overlook sin- or He wouldn't be just.

But God is also a God of mercy. In His mercy, God met His demand for justice Himself. He gave His own Son as a propitiation of His wrath to save people from it.

Romans 3:23-26 says, "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation" [propitiation is the absorption or the appeasement of the wrath of God] "by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

This is God's justice. I sinned homosexually. Jesus suffered and died for that sin, removing the wrath of God from me.

This is God's mercy. God drew me to His Son and to His work on the Cross. He called me to repentance, gave me faith, and freely forgave me from that sin.

This is God's freedom. Having been washed, sanctified, and justified, in the name of Jesus and by the Spirit of God (2 Corinthians 6:11), I now boldly approach the throne of grace, receiving the mercy and grace in time of need of a sympathetic High Priest who has been tempted in every way I have been and yet did not sin (Hebrews 4:14-16), enabling me to walk by His Spirit so that I may no longer gratify the desires of my flesh (Galatians 5:16).

Bishop Spong has been denying people the Gospel of Jesus Christ for decades. This leaves us enslaved to sin. (Romans 6:6). In addition, we are enslaved to what overpowers us (2 Peter 2:19)- and homosexuality is very overpowering.

John Shelby Spong is no liberator; he is an enslaver. He boldly stands for my right to remain in my sin. Jesus Christ sets me free from it.

'Quality of Life'

2009-09-27T08:50:00.000-07:00

'Quality of life'. Brothers and sisters, can we think about that phrase for a moment? Can we think about what we are saying when we are using it? Can we, as Christians, really use that phrase?

Consider the way we use it:

"Ma'am, your child will be born with Down syndrome. I cannot guarantee his quality of life. Here are your options."

"Sir, your father is in the middle stages of Alzheimer's. His quality of life is decreasing more and more. We need to discuss end of life care."

"What do you mean I'll never move my arms or legs again? You mean I'll probably have to stay on this vent as well? This isn't much of a quality of life! I can't live like this!"

It would seem to me, that we have replaced the idea of 'not suffering too much' with 'quality of life'. As though quality somehow correlates to suffering. My friends, suffering is very much a part of the human condition. We all suffer. When is 'too much'?

'Quality of life', though, what does that phrase really mean? Does it mean that we humans have become like packages of meat? Some of us have Grade A quality lives, while others, Grade B, C, or D? What decides quality of life? Who decides?

In Scripture, the quality of human life is this: man was created in the image of God. Human life, in all its stages and ages, is worthy of dignity and existence for this reason alone.

From another Scriptural standpoint, while man is also created in the image of God, men also are the sons and daughters of Adam. Therefore, we were all created perfect- but we are all perfect no more. Sinners, all of us, sick and not sick, disabled and not disabled, find our equal worth and equal value in the same source- the Cross of Christ.

If we want to say that a man is suffering very much, that he has acquired a severe disability, he is in much pain, he cannot work, his family is stressed to the max, and he is very depressed, say those things. But don't try to determine the quality of his life based upon his suffering. His life is still of equal quality (equality)- of equal value- to anyone else's. It is as deserving of protection and preservation- even from his own very depressed mind- as is all of ours.

'Quality of life' is a dangerous phrase. It threatens equality, human dignity, and judges human life as 'worthy' or 'not worthy'. 'Quality of life', in this day and age of 'options', and perhaps even 'duty', can turn all too quickly into 'qualified to live'

Down Syndrome, Suffering, and Grace

2009-09-22T17:09:00.000-07:00

A recent study says that ninety-two percent of women who discover they are carrying a child with Down syndrome opt to abort the pregnancy.

I am not a parent, much less a parent of a child who will have a lifelong disability. I can only imagine the feelings and thoughts that contribute to this 'choice'. I imagine that fear of the unknown plays a role, for many of these parents who make this choice do not know people with Down syndrome. I imagine that people are fearful of financial strain and the extra challenges that families with Down syndrome face. I imagine, though, mostly a fear of suffering is involved.

For what parent wants to have his or her child suffer? And, truth be told, men, women, and children with Down syndrome do suffer. Oh, not to the terrible degree that doctors have described to parents since before Down syndrome even had a name, while convincing them to institutionalize their children in the past or abort them nowadays. In fact, even while sharing with me their painful struggles related to their disability and the hurt and pain caused by mistreatment and abuse inflicted by others upon them, often, the men and women I have known with Down syndrome do not view themselves as having suffered any more than anyone else. But it is a myth that people with Down syndrome are happier than other people.

It's interesting. From the world's view, while the purpose of suffering is debatable and the origin often ignored, the answer to suffering always seems to be to end it- even if the way to end it involves ending the life of the one that is suffering.

Suffering seems to be a potent force in the lives of believers, as well. For some, suffering seems to turn them away from God, from even the very idea of God, in frustration and mistrust. While for others, suffering seems to be the cause for hoping in God for answers and comfort.

I do not have all the answers for suffering nor all the answers for those who will soon parent a child with Down syndrome. God gives many answers in Scripture, but I haven't found them all. But I have found some.

I am convinced that suffering exists, for instance, because it is a natural consequence to sin having entered the world. But I am also convinced that God is a God of redemption, Who not only forgives sinners, but redeems the suffering sin has inflicted upon us. Romans 8:28 says that God works all things for good for those who love God and who are called according to His purpose.

This includes Down syndrome. For those who are saved, God works Down syndrome for good.

It is very, very true that people with Down syndrome and their families will face hardships unique to that particular developmental disability. But it is also true that for those families and people with Down syndrome, God's grace will be made perfect in that weakness. (2 Corinthians 12:9) It is easy to see the lows and the struggles that Down syndrome will bring. But soon to be parents have no idea the grace and mercy that God will bring to them through their child.

Nor do we, the Church, realize what we are missing when we are missing children and adults with Down syndrome in our congregations. People with Down syndrome have unique gifts and callings that the Church needs- many that have nothing to do with their Down syndrome, for people with Down syndrome are so much more than their disability! And we are certainly missing the way God brings redemption to Down syndrome and the good He causes through it.

So, this second to last paragraph is more an exhortation to myself, since I have been lacking in this area, but feel free to receive it for yourself, also. Instead of simply condemning parents who are considering the choice to terminate the life of their unborn child who has Down syndrome, embrace those parents before the choice has been made and make room for them and their child in the Church. And for those parents who have already made that tragic, sinful choice to abort, as God calls them to repentance, offer them the grace and mercy of the Cross that has been offered to you. Forgive them and love them.

Down syndrome is in itself not a gift. But, as all 'syndromes', sicknesses, and disabilities, when redeemed by the Redeemer, Down syndrome becomes a way that the very glory of God is revealed.

Weakness and the Glory of God

2009-09-21T18:13:00.000-07:00

Early in Scripture we read a seemingly disheartening command of God. None of the offspring of Aaron, the priests of Israel, who had a disability could go through the veil and approach God’s altar, ‘lest he profane God’s sanctuaries’. (Leviticus 21:23) In addition, for sacrifice, God only accepted ‘perfect’ animals, those without blemish or illness. Yet, even men in ‘perfect’ bodies sacrificing ‘perfect’ animals were not perfect enough to purify us once for all time- as was the perfect sacrifice made by Jesus Christ (Hebrews 7:26-28).

The animals sacrificed were a foreshadow and type of this perfect sacrifice to come. The sacrificed animals and the men entering into God’s holiest place on Earth had to be as perfect as they could be to mimic the Christ. However, neither were really perfect.

All priests had to offer sacrifices for themselves before offering sacrifices for the people, for these priests sinned. Because of this sin, their bodies wouldn’t remain perfect forever. They would with age begin to wither, fail, and die. Had they not been sacrificed the bodies of these perfect animals, also, would also have grown old and died because sin was in the world.

God considered, for the Old Testament system of sacrifice, disability ‘profane’. God always considers sin profane. Could disability be profane because it is a result of sin in the world?

Yet, God doesn’t shun the person with the disability. He still refers to Himself as their God, as the God Who sanctifies them. (Leviticus 21:21, 23) In His same grace and mercy, God doesn’t shun His sin-drenched people.

God is a God of both justice and love. God hates sin. Sin must be atoned for. However, God loves His people, and for His Holy namesake, forgives His people for their sin, sending His own Son as atonement. For we His people cannot atone for ourselves.

We are not saved by our own righteousness. Our righteousness is like filthy rags. The only righteousness we have to offer God is that which was imputed to us by Christ at His sacrifice. The only sacrifices we have to offer God are a broken spirit and a contrite heart. God draws near to the humble. God knows we are weak, that we are only dust. He takes pity on the weak, and, while He demands us to do so, also, as Job found out, caring for the weak- the blind and the lame- did not even make him righteous ‘enough’. (Job 29:15)

There is hardly a greater a symbol of weakness than disability or illness, and these people to whom God seems most drawn. While they were forbidden to enter the holy of holies, God comes to them. To people like Paul who know that because God’s grace is made perfect in our weakness, when we are weak they are strong. The only strength that is to be relied upon is God’s, as the only righteousness that is to be counted is Christ’s. It is God Who opens the eyes of the blind and the deaf, makes the lame man leap, and the tongue of the mute sin for joy (Isaiah 35:5-6), and in His justice, Jesus came to open the eyes of the Spiritually blind. (John 9:39)

Interestingly, God calls people to weakness- before He calls us to stand and to run. He calls us to repentance, to a time of contriteness and humility at salvation, making us His. When we are God’s we rely on God’s strength, and, therefore, must die to our own.

In our weaknesses, God glorifies Himself. It was because of a bodily ailment that Paul first preached the Gospel to the Galatians. (Galatians 4:13) God is just as glorified by leaving Paul with his ‘thorn’ in 2 Corinthians 12, as when Jesus gives glory to Him through the healing of a man born blind in John 9.

God receives glory in His compassion for the suffering and the hurting. Jesus, for instance, Who only did the work that He saw His Father doing first, (John 5:19) ministered to and healed people with disabilities, illnesses, and sin. He was filled with compassion for the widow whose only son had passed away. After raising the son from the dead, He returned him to His mother. This most compassionate act caused the people to cry, “God has visited His people!” (Luke 7:11-18)

In the resurrection of Christ, those of us called by God unto salvation, having had our spiritual eyes opened, have hope of an end to suffering. Our physical weaknesses will have an ending. We will not always be disabled, old, and emotionally vulnerable. Most excitedly, in our new bodies we will no longer battle with sin. One day, we will be perfect (1 Corinthians 15).

However, even in our perfect bodies in our perfect Home, human beings, once being imperfect, children of wrath and enemies of God, we will always remain dependent on Christ and His perfect sacrifice. Upon Christ, who embraced weakness by putting human flesh and dying our death (Philippians 2:5-11) , to bring us to God (1 Peter 3:18), to give us eternal life (John 3:16), which is knowing God (John 17:3), forever in perfect harmony with our Creator.

Bioethical Decisions in a Fallen World

2009-09-11T22:35:00.000-07:00

As both a Christian and a caregiver for the elderly and those with disabilities, I'm struck with this Biblical view point- sin obstructs our decision making process. In our fallen state, we often make choices, including medical choices, for the wrong reasons- often for motives that appeal to the flesh or mere human reasoning. While paitents should remain a crucial part of the decision making process regarding their medical treatment and doctors should have the freedome to discern the best care for his/her patient, both patients and doctors would be wise to remember that human reasoning does not always lead us to the right choices.

Bioethics is attempting to set standards for the conduct of medicine and healthcare in an age of new knowledge and changing science. However, bioethicists are setting these standards from a fallen state of mind. Truth is subjective to them, as are ethics, dependent on such things as a person’s worldview, religion, and philosophy. “There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.” (Proverbs 14:12, 16:25) If this proverb has ever been relevant, it is so with bioethics.

When we, as Christians, set standards for how we care for the sick and needy, we must remember that truth is not relative. The truth- the Biblical truth- about who God is and who man is plays a critical role in regard to medical decisions that affect the lives of the weak and the needy. All of those we care for in the hospital bed, teach life skills to in the group home, or 'produce' in the laboratory are deserving of dignity and respect for the sole reason that "In the image of God, made He man." (Genesis 9:6) So, while scientists can manipulate genes and clone embryos, we can never engineer the image of God out of a human being. This truth alone could set the tone for any medical ethic.

However, likewise, in our attempts to manipulate genes and clone embryos to eradicate diseases and eliminate disabilities, we can never create a person who will not inherit the struggle with sin. As much as we are created in the image of God, we are also sons of Adam; therefore, there will never be a perfect person. Our only hope remains, as it always has, in Christ and Him crucified. In His work on the cross- the great exchange, the righteous for the unrighteous, the suffering for our sins so He could save us from them and bring us to God. This is incredible mercy and incredible love.

Despite the uniqueness of each created person, in these two things- our common created image and our common depravity- man can be considered virtually identical to one another. Our worth could not be contingent upon any work or ability. To say that a person is too weak or does not contribute enough is laughable compared to the greatness and splendor and perfection that is in God! All men fall short of that Glory. We are all too weak and no one ‘contributes’ enough! For all of us, our worth is dependent only on who we are through the work of Christ at the cross.

With new life in Christ through the cross, we are given new nature and the told to renew our minds. In both this new nature and in our renewed minds, we view suffering, ethics, and caring for the weak and the vulnerable differently. We now consider those weaker than we are, and we realize that it is a sin to not show them the same grace and mercy we were given, even if one is so weak that he or she is not even cognitively aware of it.

Suffering is horrible. It is no light thing. We are better off dead and at peace with our Maker than alive on this dead earth! But in our renewed minds, we know, also, that we cannot take suffering into our own hands, as those in bioethics seem to do. We can never consider breaking God’s commandment to not murder, for instance, through abortion and euthanasia because we deem someone to be suffering too much. We cooperate with nature and conform to the way God created it. For when we attempt to manipulate nature (think of the undignified 'Ashley Treatment') and destroy that which we judge undesirable- destroy whom we judge undesirable because of the sufferings they are given- we question God’s goodness and wisdom leaving us rebuked as Job was- “Where was man when God laid the foundation of the earth?”

As we painfully watch those around us suffer, doing all we can to ease their suffering, we are to suffer with those suffering. We are not to cooperate with the hopelessness that suffering brings by manipulating the death one suffering or who we assume will suffer after birth. Instead we offer them and their loved ones the hope of Christ found in His Gospel, that those who call upon His name will be saved from their sin soaked hearts, from the wrath of God, and from hell. And that those who call upon His name will be saved to new life in Christ, to a perfect and holy body in eternity, and the unimaginable joy of eternity in the presence of the Creator.

Because of the unity we have with Christ (because of the great love and mercy shown to us at the cross), we, in humility, count others more significant than ourselves. We look not only to our own interests, but also to the interests of others. We have this mind among ourselves, which is ours in Christ Jesus Who, though He was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (Philippians 2:1-8)

And so we humble ourselves to one another, using our freedom to serve one another in love (Galatians 5:13), taking tender care of the weak (1 Thessalonians 5:14), seeking justice and encouraging the oppressed (Isaiah 1:17), and becoming disabled to the disabled (1 Corinthians 9:22) in order to share the Gospel to all people, in hopes that all people will be saved from, among other things, their fallen states of minds, having their minds aligned with Christ and His purposes for all things- including suffering and caring for those suffering.

Genetic Testing and Family Planning

2009-08-22T22:44:00.000-07:00

A video on genetic testing.

Listen carefully to what Devin's mother says. Had she known she were a carrier for Fragile X Syndrome, she would have had her eggs fertilized outside of her womb, tested, and implanted only healthy eggs. This son whom she obviously loves and adores would not have been born. She would rather have his just forming life destroyed than let him be born with a disability.

This is what we are doing with the gift of genetic testing? Reverting to eugenics- from which the science of genetics evolved? What kind of people can reason like this?

Oh, that's right. All of us.

The human heart is deceitful and desperately sick. (Jeremiah 17:9) We live in sin and obey the devil, the one at work in the sons of disobedience. We've all lived that way, following the inclinations of our sinful nature. By our very nature, we are subject to God's wrath. (Ephesians 2:1-3)

God says to take tender care of the weak. (1 Thessalonias 5:14) He commands we learn to do good, seek justice, correct oppression, and plead the widow's cause. (Isaiah 1:17)

But we don't do it, and so God's justice demands consequences. The wages of sin is death. (Romans 6:23) But, God in His great mercy, sent His Son as a propitiation, to absorb the wrath of God and to suffer our consequences. The good news is that, God showed His love for us in that while we were still sinning Christ died for us. And now all who repent and believe in Christ and his work on the cross will be saved. (Romans 3:21-26, Mark 1:15)

We're then given a new nature. No longer children of wrath, we are children of God. (Romans 8:15, Titus 3:7), heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17), given His righteousness (1 Corinthinas 1:30). And, now, we're told to renew our minds (Ephesians 2:23).

So, we don't reason like Devin's mom anymore. With our renewed minds, we know that as God knit Devin in his mother's womb, Devin's form was not hidden from God. God knew Devin had Fragile X Syndrome. And, yet, Devin was fearfully and wonderfully made, a wonderful work. How precious are God's thoughts toward Devin! And Devin's mother. (Psalm 139:13-16)

And also with our renewed minds, as we now seek God and His ways, we do as He commands. We stand up for the weak, needy, poor, oppressed, and the very, very tiny. We love justice. We show the hope of God to Devin's mom and to Devin.

We don't let murder in the name of genetic testing just happen. We do something about it.

There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death. (Proverbs 14:12)

Why Can't a Person in a Committed Homosexual Relationship Wholeheartedly Follow Christ?

2009-08-12T17:13:00.000-07:00

From the blog post of Tony Jones.

If you are one who thinks that homosexual sex is sinful, can you please explain to me WHY a gay or lesbian person who is in a long-term, monogamous relationship would not be able to wholeheartedly follow Christ?

My only stipulation is this: You may not quote one of the six verses in scripture that mentions homosexuality. Instead, you must use theological and/or philosophical arguments to attempt to convince me that when you have genital contact with someone of your own gender, it somehow inhibits your relationship with Christ.

Yes, Mr. Jones, I have an answer for you. Why can't a person in a committed homosexual relationship wholeheartedly follow Christ? Because no one can wholeheartedly follow Christ! No one seeks God. (Romans 3:10-12)

Wholeheartedly following Christ (obeying God, loving God with all your heart, mind, and strength) is a law. The Law of God demands perfection. But, instead, all have sinned- we are all under it (Romans 3:23, Romans 3:9). We are children of wrath by nature (Ephesians 2:1-3) and enemies of God (Colossians 1:21). We are sons of Adam, born in sin, and sinful from conception (Romans 5:12-13, Psalm 51:5).

Mr. Jones, have you wholeheartedly followed Christ all your life? Do you obey the Law- always? Again, the Law demands perfection. And we can't do it. So, therein enters the cross.

Jesus didn't come to teach us new laws or even how to follow the already established one. He didn't come to teach us a 'better way to live' (which is a law). He came to fulfill the Law. (Matthew 5:17) Sent by His Father (John 8:42), Jesus came to call sinners (Matthew 9:12-13), 'that those who do not see may see and those who see may become blind' (John 9:39), and to die for them (John 12:23-29).

In doing so, Jesus doesn't abolish the Law (Matthew 5:17), but He sets us free from the yolk of the Law (We are no longer slaves to it.) (Galatians 4- Galatians 5:1)

What does this mean? For mankind, who has had the Law of God written on our hearts (Romans 2:14-16), we are invited to enter the rest that Jesus Christ provides from the pain and conflict of striving through works (such as wholeheartedly following Christ) (Matthew 25:30, Hebrew 4:10).

How do we enter that rest?

Well, the Law demands perfection, and it demands justice when it is not obeyed. However, for His name's sake, for His glory John 12:28), and for His love of the world (John 3:16) God sent His One and Only Son to meet that demand for justice.

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although, the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it- the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who had faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:21-26)

We enter into that rest through faith- faith in Christ and His atoning work on the Cross. For even Abraham, his righteousness was a result of faith. (Galatians 3:5-9) "A person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law,because by works of the law no one will be justified." Galatians 2:16 (emphasis mine) We are no longer imprisoned to sin, but are justified by faith in Christ. (Galatians 3:23-26)

And, now, I would point out, Mr. Jones, that you have asked two distinct questions. You asked why can one living in a committed homosexual relationship would not be able to wholeheartedly follow Christ. The answer would be because no one can do that. No one can follow the law.

And you ask for thoughts on why practicing homosexuality inhibits one's relationship with Christ. Yet, you ask me not to use the Scriptures that reference homosexuality, only philosophical and theological arguments.

When one understands that one's relationship with Christ is dependent on Christ and His work on the Cross, not on our work of wholeheartedly following Him, we understand that through faith in Him, the Spirit is given to us, and through the Spirit, we are given santicfication. "...Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law or by hearing with faith?... Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" (Galatians 3:2-3) If we are led by the Spirit, we are not under the law, yet when we walk by the Spirit, we will not gratify the desires of our flesh. (Galatians 5:16-18)

If you remember, while Jesus has fulfilled and freed us from the Yolk of the Law, He has not abolished it. He has set, clearly, His desire and commands for our sexuality. When Scripture is read in context, we see clearly in Genesis 1 and 3 that man and woman are created in the image of God and together reflect that image. We also see that it is not good for man to be alone, so God gives Him woman. We see that the people that God loves, Israel in the Old Testament and the Church in the New Testament, are represented as a feminine Bride that our masculine Bridegroom pursues, changes (calls to repentance), saves, and loves like a jealous lover.

That being said, I cannot completely respect your stipulation to ignore Scripture pertaining to homosexuality. For the Bible must be read in whole and in context. (It's interesting that you imply that a committed homosexual relationship would be more acceptable- more Biblical?- than homosexual promiscuity. Is that assumption part of Scriptural references to sexuality taken out of context?) As it says in 2 Timothy 3:15-17, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work."

Homosexuality inhibits one's relationship with Christ because it is sin. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11, 1 Timothy 1:9-11, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Romans 1:18-27). "If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." 1 John 1:6- 10

And, yes, my answer ultimately is- because the Bible says so.

Oh, but there's good news! Christ died even for the sin of homosexuality. The Spirit makes us new! (1 Corinthians 6:11) We still struggle with our sin, as we will until we die. But forgiveness is promised for those who put their trust in Christ and there is hope in the change that comes from sanctification through the Spirit.

Thouhts on Seven Pounds

2009-04-25T19:02:00.001-07:00

Spoiler Warning!

I just saw the movie Seven Pounds, and I found it disturbing. In an age where support for euthanasia and assisted suicide is on the rise, any movie that portrays suicide as a good thing raises my suspicion. But as a Christian, I found the reasoning behind main character choosing death, as denying the hope we have from the sacrificial death of Christ.

Superbly acted, Will Smith plays a man named Ben Thomas who seeks to right the terrible wrong of accidentally killing seven people. He does so by donating some of his own organs to people he judges to be 'good people' in need of transplants.

Some organs he is able to give as a 'live donor', such as a kidney, a lung, part of a liver. But in order to donate other organs, such as his heart, he must die. And so, he commits suicide, enabling him to give away those organs.

When Jesus said, "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13), I think He was talking about Himself, foreshadowing the redemption that would come when He would give His life at the cross.

Ben Thomas will find no redemption in his own death.

Ben Thomas was a terribly depressed man, filled with guilt and grief- one of those people he killed was his own wife. Ben was a man desperately in need of the Truth- that there is a God and He is willing to forgive (Romans 3:30, 1 John 1:9). He needed to know that by giving away his organs, sacrificing his own life so that others may live, he would NOT make up for the terrible tragedy for which he was responsible. No one can pay for his own sins. (Romans 3:23). We need a Savior. Thankfully, Jesus died for the sins of Ben Thomas'- so that Ben wouldn't have to.

There is only one sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 10:10). There is only one justification (God can justify Ben Thomas), one way of redemption (God can redeem Ben Thomas), one propitiation (the wrath of God that was on Ben was placed onto Christ)- it is the death and the resurrection of the Perfect One (Hebrews 4:15)- the only 'good man' to ever live, by the way (Romans 3:10)- the only begotten Son of God, the God Man Christ Jesus. (Roman 3:21-26).

It is He Who makes all things new (Revelation 21:5). It is the Father, in Whom "we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:28) All things will work together for good- even a tragedy such as the one Ben faced.

Ben Thomas needed to be told of the new life found in Christ. He needed to be told of the LOVE of GOD and that "God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8) Ben needed to be given this hope from his friends- the hope we have from Christ's death- not help in causing his own death.

Do You Doubt My Puberty?

2009-04-15T18:19:00.000-07:00

This is an excellent article on a father's perspective regarding the right of his son, who has autism, to sexuality and to sex.

Because this is not a Christian article, it made me think, what would a Christian perspective be on the subject of sex for people with developmental disabilities?

Legally and ethically, an adult with a developmental disability has the same rights and responsibilities to sexual activity as does anyone else. The only way this right can be interfered with is through proper legal channels due to concern that the person may not be able to consent to sex or because the person's sexual behavior may be predatory toward others.

Please understand. A man or woman with a development's disability is not a child. He or she has passed puberty and is a sexual being. As do the rest of us, a man or woman with a developmental disability has the right to choose what he or she does with his or her sexuality. To choose his or her own morals and to act on them. Our responsibility as caregivers and loved ones is to educate and protect- but we cannot, nor should not, forbid sexual activity, unless someone is immediately being harmed.

What about the Christian man or woman with a developmental disability? How do we, who have been given permission by this person, mentor his or her sexuality?

I haven't had the opportunity to do this yet. My experience in the sexuality of those with developmental disabilities has been in a secular setting, where all I had to offer the person were his or her legal rights, counsel on choosing his or her own morals, and counsel on the physical and emotional consequences of sexual activity. (The nurse was supposed to explain the, um, 'mechanics'.)

I look forward to walking this out with someone one day, not just from a 'Christian perspective', but from a relational perspective, based on the personal relationship between God and the woman I would mentor. I look forward to affirming her personhood by affirming and protecting her sexuality and inviting her to surrender her sexuality to God. And I look forward to the good things God will do through her sexuality.

I look forward the woman making her own decisions about sexual activity as much as she is able, based on what God has taught her through His Word. I look forward to her deciding for herself to choose God and His laws and deny her flesh unless married, as all of us single women must do, through the power of the Holy Spirit, through which is our only ability to do such a difficult thing.

I look foward to offering her grace and assuring her of God's grace and forgiveness should she fall.

One day soon, I hope...

Dr. Oz on the Stem Cell Debate

2009-04-06T16:54:00.000-07:00

Dr. Oz to Oprah and Michael J Fox: "The stem cell debate is dead."

No So Cohesive Thoughts on Terri Schiavo and Word of Faith Teachers

2009-03-31T19:14:00.000-07:00

Today is the fourth anniversary of the death of Terri Schiavo. I don't really know what to say about it, except that I guess I just wanted to acknowledge it.

I miss her, this stranger. I miss praying for her.

Four years ago, a real woman's life was taken from her under guise of compassion and alleged choice. She was not brain dead. Though living with a profound cognitive disability, she was not completely void of cognitive awareness (a 'vegetable' being the derogatory term), although, that would not have made her any less of a person nor any less worthy of care had she been.

We have a terrible fear of acquiring a severe disability, and we have a terrible fear of those with severe and profound disabilities. Until that fear is resolved, the prejudice that leads to institutionalization and this kind of murder will not end.

Before we blame the secular bioethicists and the 'liberal media', though, perhaps we who call ourselves Christians should look at our own ungodly reactions to people like Terri Schiavo, that is to people who are experiencing pain and suffering.

Frederick K.C. Price of Crenshaw Christian Center:

We don't allow sickness in our home." (Frederick K.C. Price, Is Healing for All? (Tulsa: Harrison House, 1979), 20

... how can you glorify God in your body, when it doesn't function right? How can you glorify God? How can He get glory when your body doesn't even work? ... What makes you think the Holy Ghost wants to live inside a body where He can't see out through the windows and He can't hear with the ears? What makes you think the Holy Spirit wants to live inside of a physical body where the limbs and the organs and the cells do not function right? ... And what makes you think He wants to live in a temple where He can't see out of the eyes, and He can't walk with the feet, and He can't move with the hand? ... The only eyes that he has that are in the earth realm are the eyes that are in the body. If He can't see out of them then God's gonna be limited he's not going to be helped...” applause (Frederick K.C. Price, “Is God Glorified Through Sickness?” (Los Angeles: Crenshaw Christian Center, n.d.), audiotape #FP605)

In John 5 we read about a man who had been sick for 38 years sitting by the pool of Bethesda for the opportunity to climb into the pool after an angel had stirred it and be healed. When Jesus asked him, "Do you want to be healed?" vs 6), the man replied, ""Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me." (vs 7) After that, verses 8-9 say, Jesus said to him, "Get up, take up your bed, and walk." And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked.

That's basically all these verses say about this man's healing. However, both Joel Osteen, who often makes claim to the idea that being healed is one's own responsibility by believing a certain way, in his book, Your Best Life Now and Joyce Meyer in her book, Eight Ways to Keep the Devil Under Your Feet claim that this man lay around the pool feeling sorry for himself and making excuses. Says Osteen:

If you're serious about being well, if you really want to be made physically and emotionally whole, you must get up and get moving with your life. No more lying around feeling sorry for yourself."

Says Meyer:

I would think that after thirty-eight years, a diligent, determined person could have crawled over to the edge of that pool. Even if that man had only moved an inch a year, it seems that in thirty-eight years, he ought to have been able to get close enough to the edge to just roll over into the water when it was stirred up."

And here is where fear and prejudice of disability seem to come through in Meyer's words:

Thirty eight years is a long time to lie somewhere, waiting for somebody to do something for you. I would have been on the edge of the that pool, and next year when the angel came around, when that water started bubbling, I would have fallen in and said, 'Either I'm going to get healed or I'm going to die, but I'm not staying like this'" (emphasis mine)"

And dare we forget Todd Bentley? Bentley spent the summer parading people with illnesses and disabilities on stage, either physically assaulting them or telling stories about how he had physically assaulted people at other times, mocking them, and proclaiming miracles for them, though not one single miracle could be verified by the secular media. (Go to YouTube, search for Todd Bentley, and watch the videos for yourself.)

These are just a very few examples of well known Christians' 'appreciation' for suffering. This is sad.

Thankfully, they do not represent all of us.

I read these words today in Andrew Comisky's book, Pursuing Sexual Wholeness:

In this lifetime Jesus does not intend to satisfy very craving of the soul, to remove every weakness. For our deep longings are for Him above all else. That longing within us is not merely the result of personal brokenness or the influence of family and friends: it's intrinsic to our status as the created, as children disposed to grow upward to the Creator, through His love. Our fallenness highlights the folly of attempting to secure ourselves on the earth, through the creature. The Father employs the aches and longings that remain to keep us focused on Himself.

But His purposes don't end there. He desires to employ that which has yet to be healed as an avenue of His grace. Through the wounds and deprivations that He indwells, God creates in us a deep wellsring of compassion- His heart- toward others who are broken. He graces us and intends to use us to grace others."

Though Comisky is speaking to those who struggle with sexual brokeness, the same can be said for all Christians who want their best life now and expect bodily perfection and wordly prosperity. We are all broken. This brokeness forces us to find our strengh and sufficiency in Him. We then, in turn, offer the same undeserved mercy and grace God offers to us to others, to people like Terri Schiavo, caring for and protecting their life.

It's the way of the Cross. It's the way of Christ

Four Arrested in Two States in Assisted-Suicide Probe

2009-02-27T16:27:00.000-08:00

From the story:

Four people in two states have been arrested as part of an investigation into the Final Exit Network, an organization that police believe helped a Georgia man end his life in June, authorities said Thursday.

John Celmer, 58, lived in Cumming, north of Atlanta. Cumming police, the Forsyth County coroner and the man's relatives all had suspicions that his death was an assisted suicide, and
the Georgia Bureau of Investigation launched an investigation, the agency said in a news release.

The GBI on Wednesday set up a sting operation at a
residence in adjoining Dawson County, using an undercover agent who had posed as a terminally ill man seeking assistance with his suicide, the statement said.

Four people were arrested and charged with "assisted suicide, tampering with evidence and violation of the Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act".

The Final Exit Network, based in the north Atlanta suburb of Marietta, identifies itself on its Web site as "an all-volunteer organization dedicated to serving people who are suffering from an intolerable condition. Network volunteers offer you counseling, support and even guidance to self-deliverance
at a time and place of your choosing, but you always do the choosing. We will never encourage you to hasten your death."

An 'intolerable condition'. What could that mean? Certainly not just a terminal illness, as this group, FEN, has been linked by police to the death of a woman with mental illness and depression.

They claim on their website that they will never encourage someone seeking their assistance to hasten his death. However, read on.

Goodwin [one of the men arrested] allegedly walked the undercover agent through the steps and demonstrated how he would hold the agent's hands to stop him from removing the exit bag...

My concern with murders like these is that this will lead to the continued legalization of assisted suicide. Using the same argument that many do with abortion, some will claim that assisted suicide must be legal, arguing that these 'back alley' assisted suicides are just not safe.

Top Ten Pro Abortion Moments of 2008

2009-01-17T20:00:00.000-08:00

From American Life League

Red Faced and Red Handed: Top Ten Pro-Abortion Moments of 2008

by Katie Walker
Released January 7, 2009

Washington, D.C. (7 January 2009) – 2008 was a down year for the pro-abortion movement's talking heads. As you read the quotes below, despite the seriousness of the subject - after all, we are talking about matters of life and death - it's hard not to laugh at their ridiculous attempts to justify their position.

1) NOT THAT! ANYTHING BUT THAT!

Dear leader, President-elect Barack Obama at a town-hall meeting in Johnstown, Pennsylvania in March:

“Look, I got two daughters – 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a
baby.”

Comment: President-elect Obama demonstrates his disdain for the sanctity of preborn babies by stating that children are “punishments” instead of miracles and blessings.

2) HOLDING OUT FOR A RAISE?

President-elect Barack Obama answers Pastor Rick
Warren’s question “At what point does a baby get human rights?” at a Saddleback Church interview:

“Answering that question with specificity is above my pay
grade.”

Comment: The future president will swear to uphold and defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights - hard to do when you can’t decide who gets rights and who doesn’t because it’s above your “pay grade.”

3) DATE-NIGHT OPTIONS: DINNER? DANCING? ABORTION?

Justin Timberlake/Jessica Biel

“Nobody should be able to say what you can do with your body,” Biel told cheering crowds at Last Chance for Change, a rally endorsing presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama. "I give Jess the right to choose where we go to eat all the time," Timberlake added.

Comment: Just when we start to have a sliver of respect for our Hollywood elite, they say something like this. Justin sees no difference between choosing where to eat or which child to kill.

4) KILLING BLACK BABIES – 'UNDERSTANDABLE, UNDERSTANDABLE'

Planned Parenthood of Idaho – A Live Action Films exposé video exposed Planned Parenthood’s deep-rooted racism. A caller posed as a potential donor and
the following conversation ensued:

Actor: I want to specify that abortion to help a minority group, would that be possible?

Planned Parenthood employee: Absolutely.
Actor: Like the black community for example?

Planned Parenthood employee: Certainly.

Actor: The abortion – I can give money specifically for a black baby, that would be the purpose?

Planned Parenthood employee: Absolutely. If you wanted to designate that your gift be used to help an African-American woman in need, then we would certainly make sure that the gift was earmarked for that purpose.

Actor: Great, because I really faced trouble with affirmative action, and I don’t want my kids to be disadvantaged
against black kids. I just had a baby; I want to put it in his name.

Planned Parenthood employee: Yes, absolutely.

Actor: And we don’t, you know we just think, the less black kids out there the better.

Planned Parenthood employee (laughing): Understandable, understandable.

Comment – The apple doesn’t fall far. Planned Parenthood hasn’t strayed much since the days of its racist founder
Margaret Sanger, who once spoke to a Ku Klux Klan group and was a member of the American Eugenics Society.

5) HEY LOOK, MOM, HERESY!

Ca. Rep. Nancy Pelosi in a television interview with NBC’s
Tom Brokaw:

Tom Brokaw: Madame speaker, when does life begin?

Rep. Pelosi: As an ardent, practicing Catholic, …I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins.

Comment: That’s like saying, “As a vegan, I would
like my steak medium rare.”

6) BEING 'PRO-CURE' IS BEING PRO-LIFE! ... EVEN IF WE HAVE TO CANNIBALIZE PREBORN CHILDREN FOR IT

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm in support of
Proposition 2, a bill that now allows embryonic stem cell research:

“As a Catholic, I can say to be pro-cure is to be pro-life.”

Comment: What about this statement is Catholic? Not a thing.

7) FIVE-FINGERED DISCOUNT FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD C.E.O.

PP C.E.O. Miriam Inocencio

Despite a six-digit salary drawn from Planned Parenthood’s tax- and abortion-gorged pockets, Planned Parenthood of Rhode Island CEO Miriam Inocencio must have really liked that Macy’s blouse!

Comment: Clearly her day job – helping to kill preborn babies – has affected her moral judgment. If Miriam is hurting for cash, perhaps we can redirect some of Planned Parenthood's extra Title X taxpayer funding her way?

8) MODERN CHIVALRY

Comedian Doug Stanhope

These are not empty words. I, Doug Stanhope, am offering you, Bristol Palin, the sum of $25,000 so that you can abort your child and move out of that draconian home. I have also set up a
PayPal link so that others around the world can help increase this amount to ease the burden of starting out on your own at such an early age.

Comment: We love it when pro-abortion radicals show their true colors. Stanhope can’t fathom why a young couple would actually want their baby. Nope. Clearly, Bristol
doesn’t need love and compassion – she needs $25,000!

9) MORE THAN WE CAN SAY FOR SOME POLITICIANS

South Carolina Democrat chair Carol Fowler

Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s “primary qualification
seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

Comment: South Carolinians overwhelmingly voted for the Palin ticket. That’s got to hurt, Fowler.

10) KEEP IT CLASSY, OLD BOY

Comedian Bill Maher

Refers to Sarah Palin’s Down syndrome baby as “it” three times in a monologue citing why she isn’t qualified to be vice president ::: the rest of quote deleted by me, Julie :::

Comment: What can we say, really? We’ll just let Maher condemn himself.

Of Rights, Law, and Grace

2008-12-15T19:01:00.000-08:00

Ecuador has recently elected to give nature rights, the consequences of which will be enormous. For more info, listen here http://albertmohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2008-10-06 .

We've heard the term 'animal rights' for years. There's a whole 'animal rights movement' going on. And I'm asking the question, do animals have rights? For that matter, do humans have rights?

See, I'm not so sure that, according to God's law, it's about 'animal rights' so much as it is about 'human responsibility'. Responsibility to take care of nature? Not so much 'take care of'- after all, tearing up the ground to farm is not 'taking care of' the earth.

According to the Bible our responsibility is to steward the earth, for stewardship affords us authority to use its resources. In Genesis 1, God says to fill the earth, subdue it, and have dominion over every living thing. God gave green plants to humans and beasts for food.

So, do animals have rights? Does nature? No. But humans have responsibility to steward the earth well.

What about humans? Do we have rights?

According to the Constitution of the United States, we have many rights, inalienable rights, to boot, that are endowed to us by our Creator. And, while I stand by the Constitution, affirming with my vote and meager little blog voice that all humans are created equal and have equal rights when it comes to the law and justice of the land of the US, looking at God's law, I have to wonder about something.

I haven't found in the Bible that any human being has inalienable 'rights'. Thinking about that, do you have to treat me well because it's my right to be treated well? No, you have to treat me well because it's your responsibility to God's law to do so. It's not really about me. It's about God's law.

Speaking of God's law, how're we doing on keeping it? Anybody able to? I am NOT.

Therefore, it is certainly not my right to be 'okay' with God. It was not because of my rights that Jesus came to Earth, as fully God and fully man, died a horrific, atoning death, was raised bodily from the dead, and now sits at the right hand of God interceding for me allowing me to come boldly to Him in time of need. It was not because of my rights- it was because of my sin.

This humbles me. Everything I have in Christ- salvation, victory over sin, the inheritance of an adopted child, a new life, and a new identity- is a gift. The very fact that I have faith to believe in Him and walk a repentant lifestyle is of Him- even those are not of my power, and I've no right to them!

I have no rights- yet am given so much.

I cannot repay God for these gifts. Are treating well my fellow man, stewarding well the earth paying God back? No, any heeding I pay to the law of God is but a fruit of His sanctification in me. Any ability I have to obey His law is His power in me.

Just random thoughts I've had throughout the day.

Court Ruling Makes Assisted Suicide Legal in Montana

2008-12-06T22:07:00.000-08:00

From the story:

Montana judge: Man has right to assisted suicide

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana judge has ruled that doctor-assisted suicides are legal in the state, a decision likely to be appealed as the state argues that the Legislature, not the court, should decide whether terminally ill patients have the right to take their own life.

Judge Dorothy McCarter issued the ruling late Friday in the case of a Billings man with terminal cancer, who had sued the state with four physicians that treat terminally ill patients and a
nonprofit patients' rights group.

"The Montana constitutional rights of individual privacy and human dignity, taken together, encompass the right of a
competent terminally (ill) patient to die with dignity," McCarter said in the ruling.

It also said that those patients had the right to obtain
self-administered medications to hasten death if they find their suffering to be unbearable, and that physicians can prescribe such medication without fear of prosecution.

"The patient's right to die with dignity includes protection of
the patient's physician from liability under the state's homicide statutes," the judge wrote.

Attorney General Mike McGrath said Saturday that attorneys in
his office would discuss the ruling next week and expected the state will appeal the ruling...
...The state attorney general's office had argued that intentionally taking a life was illegal, and that the issue was the responsibility of the state Legislature.

Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Anders had argued the state has no evaluation process, safeguards or regulations to provide guidance or oversight for doctor-assisted suicide. The state also said it was premature to declare constitutional rights for a competent, terminally ill patient because the terms
"competent" or "terminally ill" had yet to be defined.

The ruling noted that doctors are often asked to "determine the
competency of their patients for the purposes of guardianship and other legal proceedings."

"Whether a patient is terminally ill can also be determined by the physician as an integral component of the physician-patient relationship," McCarter wrote.

McCarter's ruling makes Montana the third state after Oregon and Washington to allow doctor-assisted suicides. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that terminally ill patients have no constitutional right to doctor-assisted suicide but did nothing to prevent states from legalizing the process.

So, apparently, a judge can go a make a decision like this all by herself... How? It's unbelievable.

The Media's Love for Suicide Outlaws

2008-12-06T13:36:00.000-08:00

The Media's Love for Suicide Outlaws

On this episode of What It Means to Be Human, Wesley J. Smith takes a look at the media’s fawning treatment of suicide advocates. What does a reporter see when he visits the home of a suicide facilitator? Strangely and sadly, he often sees a hero.

Listen in as bioethicist Wesley J. Smith shows how journalism has become a prime mover in the culture of death, to the point that its terminal nonjudgmentalism cannot be trusted.

Texas and Its Institutions

2008-12-03T17:23:00.000-08:00

These are some of my thoughts while reading this article. My thoughts, while not expert, are those of one who has both worked in the 'system' that cares for those with developmental disabilities and was shortly in the system as one receiving psychiatric care in large facilities.

Texas lambasted over care of mentally disabled
Justice Department accuses state of violating patients’ constitutional rights

DENTON, Texas - For more than a century, thousands of mentally disabled Americans were isolated from society, sometimes for life, by being confined to huge public hospitals.

In at least one place, they still are.

Texas has more mentally disabled patients in institutions than any other state, and the federal government has concluded that the state’s care system is stubbornly out of step with modern mental health practices.

For the third time in three years, the criticism has attracted the attention of the Justice Department, which on Tuesday accused Texas of violating residents’ constitutional rights to proper care.

Investigators found that dozens of patients died in the last year from preventable conditions, and officials declared that the number of injuries was “disturbingly high.”

In addition, hundreds of documents reviewed by The Associated Press show that some patients have been neglected, beaten, sexually abused or even killed by caretakers. Inspection reports also describe filthy rooms and unsanitary kitchens.

I wisht that I could say this sounds like a huge exaggeration, but... And these are the incidents that were reported. So much goes unreported.

The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities says large care facilities — usually those with at least 16 residents — “enforce an unnatural, isolated, and regimented lifestyle that is not appropriate or necessary.”

This is true. Can you imagine living your life with 16, 45, 100, 300 other people? These kinds of facilities create a class system, perhaps better described as a caste system, with the staff being known as higher and better than, while those residing in facilities are lower and 'less than'. This (false) difference gets imprinted on both the soul of a resident and a staff member, which only the redemptive truth of God regarding one's true identity can remove.

Federal law requires the mentally disabled to be treated in “the most integrated setting” possible — a factor that led to the Justice Department rebuke of Texas.

Integrated, meaning community integrated, and least restrictive. This is a right of those receiving developmental disability services. There are, or can be created, community-based programs for those even with the worst behavioral issues and the most profound medical concerncs.

...critics allege that “warehousing” patients in large institutions invites abuse. Patients are isolated from their families and communities, making regular contact with loved ones more difficult. And caretakers often get overwhelmed by the large numbers of patients, Garrison-Tate said.

This is true. Even the person who loves those s/he is caring for and believes s/he is doing his or her life's work, can become frustrated and succumb to abusive behavior.

In Texas, officials verified 465 incidents of abuse or neglect against mentally disabled people in state care in fiscal year 2007. Over a three-month period this summer, the state opened at least 500 new cases with similar allegations, according to federal investigators.

An AP investigation earlier this year revealed that more than 800 state employees have been fired or suspended since the summer of 2003 because they abused, neglected or exploited mentally disabled residents.

A side note- did ya notice this artcile says that the employeew who abused those in their care were fired or suspended? Why no mention of criminal charges?

And in the one-year period ending in September, as many as 53 deaths in the facilities were due to potentially avoidable conditions such as pneumonia, bowel obstructions or sepsis, the Justice Department said.

53 people- real people.

Some families tell horror stories of their loved ones in the state facilities. For instance, Michelle Dooley said her son spent three months in the Austin State School, which she described as a place of “dingy yellow floors and patients running around without any clothes on.”

During his time there, he refused to leave his bed and often languished in his own excrement, she said.

Dooley eventually moved her son into a group home in Denton where treatment costs average about $50,000 per year — roughly half as much as the costs at state schools, Garrison-Tate said. Medicaid often picks up most of those costs.

“It was just horrible,” Dooley said. “If he goes back to a state facility, he will shut down and die.”

Speaks for itself.

Other families say they are happy with the state care.

Neil Davidson said his daughter Susan, who has cerebral palsy and is mentally retarded, has flourished during her 10 years at the Lubbock State School.

“I’m very impressed with the level of care she has received,” Davidson said. “As far as I am concerned, it’s Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood. Everybody is looking out for everybody else.”

I have no doubt that some of these facilities may provide some amount of good care. However, even the best institution or large facility is no comparrison to home. And if a home-like environment, such as one's own apartment or a group home is an option- why the heck not?

A visit to the Denton State School, the largest in Texas, reveals a sprawling campus spread across well-kept lawns. Superintendent Randy Spence described the place as a “happy, homelike atmosphere.”

Ha! 'Homelike'- whose home?

“The vast majority of our employees love the people they work with,” said Cecilia Fedorov, another spokeswoman for the Department of Aging and Disability Services. “They think of them as extended family.”

But Denton is also the site of Texas’ most notorious case of state school abuse.

In 2002, a care worker repeatedly kicked and punched a resident in the stomach and groin. Haseeb Chishty nearly died after that beating. He is now confined to a wheelchair and unable to feed himself or use the bathroom.

“It got to the point where it was fun beating him, torturing him,” said former care worker Kevin Miller, who is now serving 15 years for aggravated assault.

In a statement videotaped by Chishty’s lawyer, Miller said he and many of his fellow care workers used methamphetamines, cocaine and Oxycontin on the job.

Brokeness attracts brokeness. Many, if not most who are drawn to care for people with disabilities, have themselves struggled with 'issues' that virtually all with disabilities have struggled with- abuse, rejection, feeling 'different'. Unfortunately, many of those employees have not resolved their 'issues', and therefore, this case of assault and torture is a result.

Many of the institutions are large employers in small towns, and they often pay more than other jobs in rural areas. Lawmakers fear taking action that would lead to layoffs, Garrison-Tate said.

"I'm sorry, we have to keep the system of institutionalization of some so others can have a job." Is that it? I'd imagine, if these facilities close, these empolyess could get a job in the comminty programs. These people would still need care, after all, and, thus, need caregivers? Am I being too simplistic?

“Even if we said we wanted to close all state schools, the community resources aren’t there at this time,” said state Rep. Larry Phillips, chairman of a legislative committee studying the facilities.

So, what are you doing about that?

Kelly Reddell, the lawyer whose client’s son was beaten nearly to death, said the state is not doing right by its mentally disabled.

“The very nature of the institutional setting, I think, creates the environment for the abuse to take place,” she said. “How in the world can you think this system is the best and it makes sense?”

Time for change is a long time comin'.

Pictured at right, Haseeb Chishty, the man severely beaten by his caregiver at Denton State School, with his mother

What We Are Becoming With the Culture of Death

2008-11-29T19:11:00.000-08:00

What We Are Becoming With the Culture of Death

On this episode of What It Means to Be Human, bioethicist and Discovery Institute senior fellow Wesley J. Smith takes a look at our culture’s "terminal nonjudgmentalism." How far have we come as a society when we lose the will to save suicidal people's lives? Smith examines two outrageous cases from the UK,
one where doctors refused to save a dying girl and another where a disabled man’s parents helped took him to Switzerland to commit suicide. What does the advocacy of death culture turn us into? Tune in and find out.

In this episode, Smith quotes a study that says after 5 years, the depression of those who've acquired a severe disability later in life levels to the same as those without disabilities. Something to think about STRONGLY when it comes to the debate over assisted suicide

Why We Call Them Human Rights

2008-11-25T19:09:00.000-08:00

Wesley J Smith's new edition of "What It Means To Be Human" podcast.

Why We Call Them Human Rights

On this episode of What It Means to Be Human, Wesley J. Smith examines a new extreme environmentalism that seeks to grant equal rights to . . . Nature. Yes, Nature. "Nature rights" have just been embodied as the highest law of the land in Ecuador's newly ratified constitution. Rather than establishing environmental
protections as a human duty, there is now a self-demotion of humankind to merely one among the billions of life forms on Earth, no more worthy of protection than any other part of the natural world. What is the potential harm to human welfare? Listen in as Wesley J. Smith explains how the establishment of "Nature rights" is the culmination of 2008 as one of the most radical anti-human exceptionalism years in recent history.

In the UK More Mothers Reject Abortion to Have Babies with Down Syndrome

2008-11-24T18:14:00.000-08:00

More mothers reject abortion to have babies with Down's syndrome

MORE babies are being born with Down's syndrome than before pre-natal screening for the disorder was introduced at the end of the 1980s, it was revealed yesterday.

Parents appear more willing to bring a Down's child into the world than they used to be, research shows.

Many are taking the decision because those affected by the syndrome are more accepted in society today and their quality of life has improved, according to a new survey.

After the widespread introduction of screening for Down's syndrome in 1989, the number of babies born with the condition in the UK fell from 717 to 594 at the start of this decade.

But since 2000, the birthrate has increased, reaching 749 in 2006, the latest year for which figures are available.

Figures from a national Down's syndrome register show that the proportion of newborn children with Down's rose by around 15 per cent between 2000 and 2006.

The Down's Syndrome Association, in conjunction with the BBC, conducted a survey of 1,000 of its members to find out why so many were choosing to have Down's children despite the availability of pre-natal screening.

The findings show that while religious or pro-life beliefs counted in about a third of cases, many parents felt that life and society had improved for people affected by Down's. Others said their decision was influenced by the fact that they knew people with Down's or other disabilities.

Carol Boys, chief executive of the Down's Syndrome Association, said: "We are all very surprised by this. It wasn't what any of us working in the field would have anticipated and it seems to show more parents are thinking more carefully before opting for pre-natal screening and termination – that being born with Down's syndrome is being seen in a different light today."
When I and others had our babies, it was a very different world – those with Down's syndrome were treated very differently. Now, there is much greater inclusion and acceptance, with mainstream education having a huge role. "We think this plays a part in the decisions parents make – there's even been a baby with Down's syndrome on EastEnders."
Pandora Summerfield, director of Down's Syndrome Scotland, said: "We applaud these women who go ahead with their pregnancies. "It is very heartening to hear that women are making a positive choice because society is more accepting."

Read whole article here.

I especially appreciate that many made the decision to have their child because they knew people with Down Syndrome or other disabilities. Acquaintanceship, but especially relationship, with people with disabilities makes all the difference in how we view them and their lives. When we are in relationship with people with disabilities, we value them and their lives and come to understand the common personhood in all of us.

For so many years, those with disabilities, especially developmental disabilities have been isolated, left to their 'own kind' and to the care of 'others' in some unknown facility. What has happned as a result is the ignorance of society regarding disability and people with disabilities. It takes real relationship between people with and without disabilities for destigmazation and understanding to occur.

Unfortunately, relationship isn't happening fast enough. Technology is fast advancing and those who still hold on to beliefs that those with disabilities have a low quality of life and are a burden to society are eager to use technology to end lives.

So, go make a friend. Start here, perhaps. "e-Buddies is an e-mail pen pal program that pairs persons with an intellectual disability in a one-to-one e-mail friendship with a peer volunteer who does not have an intellectual disability."

Germany to compile roll of Nazi euthanasia victims

2008-11-23T09:40:00.000-08:00

Germany to compile roll of Nazi euthanasia victims

BERLIN (Reuters) - German historians have started compiling a central register of 9,000 mentally ill people murdered as part of the Nazis' euthanasia policy, most of whom were previously unidentified.

More than 100,000 people are believed to have been killed during a drive inspired by Hitler that was carried out in six extermination centres in Germany between 1940 and 1945.

The idea of a Nazi euthanasia campaign, backed by propaganda films portraying the mentally handicapped and incurably ill as "useless mouths to feed", was first outlined in Hitler's 1924 book "Mein Kampf" and became known as Operation T4.

Read rest of article here

One correction needed as Wesley J Smith points out on his blog. "Hitler didn't inspire it, he was inspired by the pre-existing eugenics movement to boost it. Indeed, in Mein Kamph Hitler discussed these ideas, which he did not generate, but that were already in the public discourse raging in Germany, the USA, and the UK."

The Teri Schiavo Story

2008-11-16T19:20:00.000-08:00

Here are part one and part two of the Terri Schiavo Story from the Joni and Friends Television Series. I hope you watch it. I hope it makes you sick. I hope it horrifies you. I hope it drives you to your knees in desperate prayer for life, and may your only peace be found in the will of the Father. In the Sovereignty of God.

I hope you are affected by Mrs. Schiavo's story. Because if not, as Joni Eareckson Tada states, "If the rights of the weak and the most vulnerable among us are eroded, please remeber the rights of all of us are in jeapordy."

TAKE THE PLEDGE!

2008-11-14T18:04:00.000-08:00

A campaign has launched in oppositon to assisted suicide. If you oppose assisted suicide, take the pledge as either a physician, medical caregiver, or concerned citizen not to participate in this practice. Please feel free to come back here and tell me about it.

Medical Providers Say They Won't Assist with Suicides

2008-11-08T12:02:00.000-08:00

A glimmer of hope

From SpokesmanReview.com:

Medical providers say they won't assist with suicides

While Washington voters made it legal for doctors to help terminally ill residents end their lives, opponents of the assisted suicide measure indicated Wednesday they will continue to resist the practice.

Initiative 1000 won with strong support Tuesday, but doctors don't have to help their patients make that final act, says the Washington State Medical Association.
Furthermore, Eastern Washington's largest hospital system, Providence Health and Services, will forbid physicians from helping patients die at its hospitals, nursing homes and assisted care centers.

"Providence will not support physician-assisted suicide within its ministries," the owner of Sacred Heart Medical Center and Holy Family Hospital said in a prepared statement. "This position is grounded in our basic values of respect for the sacredness of life, compassionate care of dying and vulnerable persons, and respect for the integrity of medical, nursing and allied health professions. We do not believe health care providers should ever be put in a position of aiding a patient in taking his or her own life."

The new Washington law is set to take effect in July 2009 after state regulators write rules to guide the practice.

Read the rest of the article here.

Washington Becomes Second State to Legalize Assisted Suicide in Election Vote

2008-11-05T15:04:00.000-08:00

From LifeNews.com:

Olympia, WA (LifeNews.com) -- The state of Washington has joined Oregon to
become the second state in the nation to legalize the grisly practice of
assisted suicide. Voters in the northwestern state approved I-1000 despite
strong opposition from pro-life groups, doctors organizations, disability rights
activists and Catholic voters.

With 42 percent of the vote counted in
the state, I-1000 carried with the support of 58 percent of voters compared with
42 percent who opposed assisted suicide.

Opponents of assisted suicide
had a hard time competing with the money thrown at them from the pro-euthanasia
groups that outspent them as
much as 12-1 thanks to out-of-state money.

Read rest of story here

From Wesley J Smith's blog Secondhand Smoke:

Anyone who still says "it can't happen here," isn't paying attention. It is
happening here, and it will happen here increasingly unless there is a greater
commitment shown by those with means who oppose these agendas to reversing the
current course.

I just don't know that I can finish this post today.

Abortion and Black Genocide

2008-11-02T17:40:00.000-08:00

Wesley J Smith on Alber Mohler

2008-10-07T19:06:00.000-07:00

Bioethicist expert Wesley J Smith was on Monday's Albert Mohler radio program discussing "troubling new developments in the world of bioethics. From movements to dismantle human exceptionalism, granting rights to apes and even 'nature', to the spread of the so-called "right to die" crusade..."

It's worth listening to.

Problems with Some of Us Conservatives

2008-09-11T11:44:00.000-07:00

As a Christian, I am passionate about the sanctity of life. In addition, as one with generally conservative political beliefs, the idea of a right to life for all in whatever state of life one finds oneself, fits those beliefs. However, what do we, we Christians and/or we with conservative political beliefs do for those who have been spared from abortion or euthanasia and their families?

In an ideal America, I'd like to see the government involved as little a possible in its citizens' individual affairs. This includes things like health care and caring for the poor. In a republic, it is not the government's job to be the sole provider for both. However, it has become so for those with disabilities, especially developmental disabilities.

We conservatives say we want fewer taxes so that we can give to charity directly through our churches or through other private organizations. But will we really do it? 'Cause, we're not doing it now, at least not for those with developmental disabilities.

Every organization and agency that provides living and vocational services to people with developmental disabilities, including faith based organizations, in my state that I know of is dependent on Medicaid. Medicaid has a LONG waiting list for those waiting to receive such services. And, without adequate funding and cookie cutter programs, Medicaid often lacks in quality of those services. Even so, faith based and other private organizations aren't stepping up to meet even the basic needs of those with developmental disabilities and their families.

Is the answer to increase Medicaid funding to better improve its services? Only if we with conservative political beliefs or we who follow Christ don't step up and do our part. Do as we believe.

Most people with developmental disabilities over the age of 18 use Medicaid services. This means that the state is heavily involved with their lives. For instance, to ensure that quality care is given and Medicaid money is spent wisely, their caregivers turn in reports about their clients' daily activities, medical concerns, the kind of treatment given, behavioral issues, bowel movements... You name it, the state knows everything about anyone with a developmental disability receiving Medicaid services, which is almost everyone with a developmental disability. In addition, the state must approve the kind of treatment given for those with developmental disabilities. (Such would be the case for all citizens in the case of National Health Care, btw; don't think it wouldn't.)

This seems so wrong to me. But there is no other option.
What did Sarah Palin mean when she said that parents of children with disabilities would have an advocate in the White House? As her son grows, she will learn the headache of trying to receive enough of the right kind of education, health care, etc., for him, and when her son turns 18, she will become quite familiar with virtually the only option for him that is Medicaid.

Okay, fellow Christians and conservatives, if we really want less taxes and less government involvement, wake up! We've got to start meeting the needs of those with developmental disabilities in other ways than just paying our taxes.

I hope that Sarah Palin will become an advocate for life in Washington. I hope that she'll bring Conservatives awareness, real awareness, of the needs for those with developmental disabilities before and after they turn 18.

Natural Instinct

2008-09-10T17:33:00.000-07:00

My mother chose not to abort me. She could have, for I was born after 1973, the year abortions became legal.

Had she known that 32 years after my birth, I would have a LOT of needs, that I would have struggled with obesity, identity issues, depression, obsessive compulsive disorder, going to school, fighting with my sisters, and not making my bed in the morning, should she have considered abortion? Is she a hero for not? Is she a fool for not?

It's a natural instinct for a mother to protect her child from the womb on. It's sad when doctors, society, and fear keep a mother from doing what's natural. Palin did what was natural for a mother to do when she was pregnant with her son. 'Special' needs and all. It's not heroic. It's what a mother does. My mother taught me this.

Doctor Worries Abortions May Be Reduced

2008-09-10T17:19:00.000-07:00

No, this is not from the Onion (the satirical 'newsite').

From LifeNews.com:

Sarah Palin's Keeping Disabled Baby May Reduce Abortions Doctor Worries

A leading Canadian doctor is drawing gasps from people across the world
with a comment that he worries abortions will go down because of Sarah Palin's
story. The number two doctor at the national Canadian physicians group worries
Palin's decision to keep her disabled baby will reduce abortions.

Palin's story of deciding to give birth to her disabled son Trig
despite knowing he would be afflicted with Down syndrome, has been an
encouragement to families with special needs children.

But it's bad news to André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the
Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

"The worry is that this will have an implication for abortion issues in
Canada," he told the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper Tuesday.
According to
the paper, Lalonde said that, "above all else, women must be free to choose" and
that positive messages like the one from Palin "could have detrimental effects
on women and their families."

Still, LaLone claimed his group doesn't encourage doctors to promote
abortions to parents of Down syndrome babies -- even though statistics show
about 90 percent of babies diagnosed with the condition become victims of
abortion.

"We offer the woman the choice. We try to be as unbiased as possible,"
he said. "We're coming down to a moral decision and we all know moral decisions
are personal decisions."

But Krista Flint, director of the Canadian Down Syndrome Society, also
talked with the Toronto paper and said families feel doctors encourage abortions
by stressing the drawbacks to a baby with special needs.
"It's very dark,"
she said. "They hear a lot about the medical conditions that are sometimes
associated with Down syndrome."

Story continued at LifeNews.com.

I'm Not Connecting with this Book of Connection

2008-09-06T17:59:00.000-07:00

I was skimming Rob Bell's book Sex God at the library one day, when I came across this paragraph on page 46.

You can't be connected with God until you're at peace with who you are. If
you're still upset that God gave you this body or this life or this family or
these circumstances, you will never be able to connect with God in a healthy,
thriving, sustainable sort of way. You'll be at odds with your maker. And if you
can't come to terms with who you are and the life you've been given, you'll
never be able to accept others and how they were made and the lives they've been
given. And until you're at peace with God and those around you, you will
continue to struggle with your role on the planet, your part to play in the
ongoing creation of the universe. You will continue to struggle and resist and
fail to connect.

Notice he starts the paragraph, a paragraph which may or may not hold some truth, with "You can't be connected with God until you're at peace with who you are."

"No! No! No! No! No!", I screamed in my head at the time. My thoughts were, "The opposite is true. You can't be at peace with yourself until you are connected with God. You cannot really know who you are until you know Who God is and who you are in Him." If I'm created in the image of God, to know myself, I must know Him first. If I am to become at peace with who I am before connecting with God, I would have to create this God in my image. For, if I am at peace with who I think I am in my flesh, then the only way to connect with God is to make Him agree with who I want to be or feel I am.

Furthermore, connecting with God, in that first connection, is contingent upon God's law of grace and His act of atonement. Connection with God is His action, not mine, an action of Him reaching down to me, drawing me to Christ, kindly leading me to repentance and acceptance and faith in His work of the Cross. That is how I connect to God.

To really connect with God, in our first connection, I must not be at peace with myself. I must be frustrated with my sin and in recognition of my complete inability to save myself.

So, I've begun reading the whole book to understand what he was saying in context, because reading anything in the correct context is crucial to actual understanding. And it's only fair to the author. I need to know what led up to Bell's conclusion that one must be at peace with himself first to connect with God. However, I've got to tell ya, reading this book- I have a lot of questions. His writing is at the same time seems very deep and very vague to me.

As one who has struggled with her sexuality and discovered that indeed sexuality is about relationships and identity, not just sex, I agree with Bell's premise of the book, Sex God, that sexuality and spirituality are connected. Bell contends that sexuality is actually about connecting with God, others, and the earth. (He had me until 'the earth'.) I can see there is some truth in what Bell says. He talks about how empty and unsexual sex is when there's no connection. Deep stuff.

But I am bothered that in the first chapter, he appears to change the meaning of Jesus' words in Matthew 5:27-30, which reads,

27 You have heard the commandment that says, ‘You must not commit adultery.’ 28
But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed
adultery with her in his heart. 29 So if your eye—even your good eye—causes you
to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part
of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your
hand—even your stronger hand—causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It
is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be
thrown into hell.

That's pretty straightforward to me. Looking at a woman with lust is the same thing as committing adultery. It's better to lose your eye if lusting through it continues to be a problem, because it's better to lose an eye than to go to hell. In simpler form, sinning in your heart is sin as much as sinning in your actions. Don't sin. Hell is a consequence of sin.

However, in the context of men and women being created in the image of God, Bell twists this Bible passage to mean that when we do not treat one with respect to their image bearing selves (by lusting after a woman), "[Jesus's] point is that something serious- something hellish- happens when people are treated as objects, and we should resist it at all costs." (pg 22)

Bell makes this teaching after he redefines Heaven to mean, "where things are as God wants them, under the rule and reign of God" and Hell to mean, "a realm where things are not as God wants them to be. Where things aren't according to God's will. Where people aren't treated as fully human." (pg 21)

Redefining Biblical terms and Biblical meanings. I sense trouble.

Bell goes on to write that, based on the fact that the early Christian have all been united through the resurrected Jesus Christ, "this new commonality is simply bigger than all of the things" (like race) "that had previously kept them apart." He says the first Christians called this the "new humanity", but gives no reference for this term. (pg 24) Bell says, "The new humanity is about seeing people as God sees them." (pg 25)

I like this idea very much, "seeing others as God sees them" being a new humanity, the new standard by which we treat each other. But Bell seems to miss a couple of crucial steps here. Salvation and regeneration. How are we going to become a part of this new humanity that treats others well without becoming a new human being, one changed out of our selfish fleshly state? More thoughts on that idea, here.

In chapter two, on the subject of connection, remembering that sexuality is about connection, Bell writes about our connection the earth. He writes that from the fall, in addition to disconnection from God and each other, we are also disconnected from the earth. (pg 40) He talks about nature and how the words we use to describe moments like an experience he had with his sons swimming with dolphins "are about nearness and connection, sometimes even intimacy." (pg 41)

Until this point, I was understanding Bell's use of the word 'connection' to be about relationship. But relationship with the earth? Is that what he means?

I understand that we are to be good stewards of our planet. But connected to it? I don't understand what he means by this.

When I went to Colorado a couple of years ago with my mom, there came a point where the beauty of the mountains became so overwhelming that I had to close my eyes. I don't think that was me connecting to the mountains, though. I think it was being overwhelmed by beauty. And, perhaps, by the glory that is revealed in of our Creator in His creation.

Seeing Him revealed in His creation, I understand. Connection to nature itself, though... what does that mean?

At the end of this chapter, chapter 2, Bell makes the statement, "You can't be connected with God until you're at peace with who you are." That is as far as I've gotten so far. I hope in the next chapters Bell explains this statement and all the other ones that have left me confused and asking questions. I'm really not connecting with this book.

Jesus' Message

2008-08-26T22:39:00.000-07:00

But what gives us the motivation to do good? They say that Jesus' message was the kingdom of God. They then explain that the kingdom of God is a just society where the poor are fed and everyone is equal. Some say that the Cross is almost a distraction from that. That we need to get back to doing all the good that Jesus talked about.

But why would we, as humans, decide to do good, even after a really good teaching about doing good? And could we on our own, do all this good?

Are we going to do good even if Jesus Christ Himself appeared on our doorstep and said, 'Feed the poor'? No. I wouldn't. I may try for a while, but I'd give up eventually, after a bout with selfishness, slothfulness, or when I'm too absorbed in seeking my own pleasure. When I'm too busy trying to meet my own needs through addictions to consider the needs of others.

Jesus came with a message that His kingdom, one that was not of this world, is at hand. I don't know if He's talking about Heaven. I don't know if He's talking about the new earth He'll create sometime after His return. I don't know if He's talking about the way to live the Christian life. Nor do I know what He means by His kingdom being 'at hand'. Does that mean it's coming soon or it's here for the taking? God hasn't given me a clear answer yet of what His kingdom actually is in my studies of the Bible.

But I do know, that there is no way that I'm going to do the good Jesus speaks of as being a part of His kingdom on my own. The message Jesus gave me a few years ago was that I needed to be saved. That I was lost in sin. I was a slave to it. I couldn't do any good even if I wanted to. I had to obey my sin and selfish desire over any desire I may have had to help others.

He kindly and mercifully, though intensely, left me in the kind of desperation that led me to repentance and agreement with Him that I needed Him. He pointed me to the work of the Cross through which He then saved me. He is changing me and making me someone brand new. He is giving me His grace and His power to do the good He has called me to. I do good not because doing good is the Gospel. I do good because I've been transformed by the Gospel into someone who can and wants to do good.

Jesus' message is that we need to be saved. (John 3:17) We need to be set free. (Galatians 3:22) It is for freedom that God has set us free. (Galatians 5:1) And we are to use that freedom to serve one another in love. (Galatians 5:13) How else could we do it, serve one another, other than through the freedom of the Cross? "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have nailed the passions and desires of their sinful nature to his cross and crucified them there." (Galatians 5:24)

Gay Rights

2008-08-21T21:19:00.000-07:00

No, not really. More on Washington's assisted suicide initiative. But, gay rights seem to capture more attention.

From Fox News, Dying Wish

Physician Assisted Suicide

2008-08-21T11:24:00.000-07:00

"No person who is suffering is a problem to be solved. They're a person to be loved." -Rev Paul R. Smith

I-1000 is a proposed initiative to legalize physician assisted suicide in the state of Washington.

Part One Death with Dignity: A Dangerous Deception

Part Two Death with Dignity: A Dangerous Deception

Assisted suicide. It would be hard to argue with the fact that anyone receiving the news that s/he had a terminal illness would be depressed. One cannot deny that depression would play a major role in one's choice to commit suicide. When doctors begin setting a precedent of assisted depressed people in committing suicide, can you imagine the consequences for depressed people everywhere?

Looking at assisted suicide, we can see how such a legalized action would create a feeling of a duty to die for those with illnesses, as well as the feeling by the rest of us that those with terminal illnesses have a duty to die. In Oregon's first years with legalized physician assisted suicide, a large number of people who committed suicide did so out of fear of becoming a burden to their family. With limited financial resources, or at least claims of limited financial resources, the rest of us might indeed feel that those who were 'dying anyway' had a duty to die, especially if the person is old or poor or has a severe cognitive disability. The kind of people who have 'used their share' of public or private health care, the kind of people we deem to have a 'low quality of life', after all.

Another factor in a person choosing suicide is a fear of disability. In the first two years of Oregon's assisted suicide law, those who committed suicide did so out of fear of being unable to pursue enjoyable life activities, fear of needing personal assistance with daily living, and worries about being a burden on their families. Disability Rights activist Paul Longmore spoke about this aspect of Oregon's experience:

Fear of disability typically underlies assisted suicide... The advocates play on that horror of "dependency." ...If needing help is undignified and death is better than dependency, there is no reason to deny assisted suicide to people who will have to put up with it for six or sixteen years, rather than just six months. Not that we favor assisted suicide if it is limited to terminally ill people. We simply want to ask, has this country gotten to the point that we will abet suicide because people can't wipe their own behinds?

Lastly, physician assisted suicide will lead to euthanasia. After all, what about those with disabilities who can't take their lethal prescription on their own? Isn't that discrimination? They'll need someone to feed the pills to them. Once we become accustomed to the idea of physicians practicing death, we will begin to tolerate more extreme versions, more extreme that a doctor 'simply' assisting a person who is dying, more than a physician who is providing a 'good death' to people who can't do it themselves. How far could this go?

From the Coalation Against Assisted Suicide's website:

"Pressure for improved palliative care appears to have evaporated [in the Netherlands]," according to Herbert Hendin, M.D. Dr. Hendin is a Director of Suicide Prevention International and was formerly the Medical Director of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

"Over the past two decades," Hendin continued, "the Netherlands has moved from assisted suicide to euthanasia, from euthanasia for the terminally ill to euthanasia for the chronically ill, from euthanasia for physical illness to euthanasia for psychological distress and from voluntary euthanasia to nonvoluntary and involuntary euthanasia.

"Once the Dutch accepted assisted suicide it was not possible legally or morally to deny more active medical (assistance to die), i.e. euthanasia, to those who could not effect their own deaths. Nor could they deny assisted suicide or euthanasia to the chronically ill who have longer to suffer than the terminally ill or to those who have psychological pain not associated with physical disease. To do so would be a form of discrimination.

Involuntary euthanasia has been justified as necessitated by the need to make decisions for patients not [medically] competent to choose for themselves."

Doctors can help people in severe pain due to a terminal illness with palliative care. The rest of can meet the need of someone alone with the fear of being abandoned in their illness, in their fear of being a 'burden'. Though we don't do it well, right now. How else could something like physician assisted suicide gain so much popularity?

There are other options besides sanctioning the suicide of people dying.

For more information, visit the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide at http://noassistedsuicide.com/.

Respect

2008-08-14T17:21:00.000-07:00

Africa

2008-08-10T16:01:00.000-07:00

My uncle is in Africa right now on a short term missions trip. He's gone a couple of times before, and he always comes home with stories of how hungry the people of Tanzenia and the other places he goes are for the Word of God. A man from his team came home a little early and told of the experience the team is having now.

The team meets in a central location with the purpose to train native pastors and others in the Word and how to teach it. The men aand women of the country come from up to 180 miles away, walking or biking. When they get there, usually a two day journey, they sleep on the floor. They don't eat because they have no food with them. The team teaches for 3 hours at a time, and when they stop the people beg them to continue. They want to hear more.

Many missionaries come to their area, give them the Gospel, and go home. The people are left without the opportunity to mature out of spiritual infancy. They don't own Bibles; they have to share them. They love the teaching of the Word.

The man from my uncle's team who came home early told that on this trip, the leader of the particular area they are in wanted to meet them. She told my uncle's team that not long ago another white preacher like them was in their area. That preacher told the people that to be saved, they must sell all their worldy possessions and give the profits to him. Then, they were to go to a particular location to wait for Jesus' return. 10 people did as the preacher told them. The area's leader wanted to make sure that my uncle's team was not going to do what this preacher had done.

This story breaks my heart. In the name of Jesus, this man came to the poorest of the poor and stole what little material worth they had. More importantly, he taught them a false gospel, he blasphemed God, no doubt doing great harm to their faith and abusing their souls.

How can we do that to people?

I've been praying for my uncle and for the entire continent of Africa. My prayerr is that the Word of God will permeate so deeply into people's hearts that change will happen. When they know the Word, those committing genocide will stop the killing. When they know the Word, the spread of AIDS will cease because people will stop the behavior that is leading to it. When they know the Word, perhaps they can come and teach it to the West. We seem to have forgotten it.

Thoughts On a Couple of Books

2008-08-09T16:07:00.000-07:00

I've been reading again. Not very fast and not very much, but I am very much enjoying having this gift of reading back.

I've read two very different books this past month and a half, Vintage Jesus by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears andCulture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America by Wesley J. Smith.

Book One

Vintage Jesus: Timeless Answers to Timely Questions (Relit Theology)

I chose Vintage Jesus because it promised to give a sort of 'theology lesson' in response to today's lack of basic Bible knowledge. I've been acquiring a taste for theology and doctrine again. The prospect of studying those things has been scary for me considering how much spiritual abuse I endured as a child in the name of both.

In addition, God spent about two years knocking out most of the legalism in me disguised as theology and doctrine to get to the 'heart' stuff and to establish a relationship between the two of us and His community. So, I have a worry that studying theology and doctrine will take me back into legalism.

But the book Vintage Jesus seemed 'light' enough according to various reviews I read of it. More importantly, after watching Mark Driscoll's teachings online, he seemed truthful enough. In addition, Mark Driscoll is a Reformed pastor, and I was curious about Reformed theology. However, the book didn't get too much into Reformedtheology as much as it did basic theology.

Still, it felt very good to read basic theology again. I had not really done so, except where it pertained to areas of inner healing, since I was in elementary school. I loved theology as a kid, the real, truthful theology, because it felt like history and the reasons for the history. I loved history and true stories as a kid, as well as, 'the reason for it all'. Still do.

However, this book didn't go beyond much of the basics, and I was left asking a lot of questions. The book, I think, addressed of lot of 'Who', 'what', 'where', and 'when' questions, like Who was/is Jesus?, what did/does He do?, and when/where did/will it all take place?, but I found myself asking a lot of why and how questions. Not a bad thing, I guess. Just leaves me curious for more theology.

I was put off at first by author Mark Driscoll's sophomoric humor and his sureness in making rude, and even crude, comments. He makes a lot of off color remarks (such as referring to 'liberals' as 'limp wristed') and made a lot of 'he's crazy' and 'he needs to take his medication' jokes, doing what a lot of us do, using 'crazy' and 'sinful' interchangeably.

But beyond the offensive jokes, his love of Jesus shone brightly and the glimpses he gave of his own testimony gave a lot of glory to God. So, I stuck out reading the book, and I'd recommend it, but with caution because of the rude and crude humor.

Book Two

The Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America

Wesley J. Smith

Wesley J. Smith's book Culture of Death, though, I recommend even though I'm sure any reader with any kind of heart will be offended. As in the the subtitle, the book addresses the assault on medical ethics.

The relatively new field of bioethics is on its way to taking over the medical field and is becoming an ideology in itself. "Where medical ethics deals with the behavior of doctors in their professional lives vis-a-vis their patients, bioethics... focuses on the relationship between medicine, health, and society", pages 4-5. This means that the Hippocratic method of doctors doing what is best for their patients first (in fact many, if not most, doctors do not even take the Hippocratic oath anymore) is being abandoned for the bioethical ideals of what is 'best for society'.

The implications of this leads to things like legalized assisted suicide and euthanasia (for reasons such as easing the burden of family members who have a very sick family member or a family member with a severe cognitive disability). In addition, Futile Care Theory, where medicine is rationed, leaving the most sick and vulnerable medically neglected, is being practiced so that 'limited' resources can go to those with the best possibility for the greatest 'quality of life'.

The book addresses that society is abandoning the 'equality of life' ethic and actually valuing some lives as unworthy of life. Those designated 'unfit' in eugenics theory and 'useless eaters' during the Third Reich are now being termed 'nonpersons' in contemporary bioethics.

Smith sums us this book with this paragraph:

Whatever our moral future- whether based on life's inherent equality or upon subjective judgments of quality- that which we sow through our public policies and ethics protocols, we surely shall reap in the way in which we and those we love are treated in our individual lives. We all age. We fall ill. We grow weak. We become disabled. A day comes when our need to receive from our fellows adds up to far more than our ability to give in return. When we reach that stage of life, will we still be cherished, cared for, valued? Will we still be deemed persons, entitled to equal protection under the law? These are the questions that hang in the balance as we enter the new century.

This is a must read, or even a must 'skim through', not just for those in the field of medicine or healthcare, but for all of us. These are society's responsibilities. We need to know these things to be informed voters. More importantly, though, as Christians (this was not a Christian book) we need to informed pray-ers.

That's it?

So, that's it for my summer reading... But, I think I'd like to read something else. Any suggestions?

Tod Bentley and the Use of Words

2008-08-06T20:25:00.000-07:00

Crippled People

As I watch the revival unfold on various video clips, I am continuously awestruck by Mr. Bentley's mockery and overall disrespect of people with disabilities. This disrespect is evidenced not only by his physical assaults on those with illnesses and disabilities or the way he has people do dangerous things to their bodies (having people with back problems twist and turn) by also by his use of the phrase, 'crippled people'.

I do not expect every church leader to keep up with the ever changing list of words used to describe disabilities and how to refer to people who have them. However, I would appreciate it if they at least understood the some of the words they do use in the context of the word's history and how much it has offended and hurt people with disabilities. I asked my mother, who has a physical disability, how she would feel is someone referred to her as a crippled person, and just the question hurt her feelings.

The word 'crippled' is not necessarily a bad word. However, it is an old word, one that connotes past images of how we used to see those with disabilities- helpless, useless, and a drain on society. Yet, many in the Church have been throwing it around a lot, including Todd Bentley, his followers, and the media covering this revival. Why? Who is not aware that referring to people with disabilities as 'crippled people' offensive to many with disabilities these days?

My own thoughts is that it is evidence that much of the Church, not just those who are a part of this revival, has ignored the struggles of those with disabilities. Their whole struggles, struggles of not just physical pain, but the emotional toll of having a disability, the loneliness associated with it, the abuse and rejection many with disabilities face.

Paul wrote about being all things to all people, including becoming weak with those who are weak for the sake of the Gospel, to share the blessing of it (1 Corinthians 9:22-23). To be disabled with those who are disabled means to understand that referring to people as 'crippled people' these days means that those with disabilities will not want to hear the message of the Gospel if they those preaching it to them are hurting their feelings.

For more information on language and disability, visit Disability is Natural's webpage on People FirstLanguage. Also, for a personal perspective on society and disability, read Degree of Disability from the blog Wheelie Catholic.

The Evangelical Sensation at the Moment

2008-07-29T21:25:00.000-07:00

In April Todd Bentley of Fresh Fire Ministries in Canada began leading a revival in Lakeland, Florida. Intended to last just a few days, he has extended these revival meetings well into this summer, taking a small break after this ABC Nightline interview, but returning not long afterward. Very concerned about what is happening in Lakeland, I'd like to write about this Nightline interview.

'Just him and God'

In this interview, we learn that Bentley "defiantly steers clear of any organized denomination, any chain of accountability. As he sees it, it is just him and God." The idea of 'just him and God' sends off alarm bells in me. I am not so much bothered that he is not connected with any denomination, for I myself attend a nondenominational church. But the fact that he is not connected to any denomination for accountability and is not accountable to anyone in what he is doing in these revivals- again, alarm bells.

A person of Mr. Bentley's growing fame needs the accountability of counselors. (Actually, all believers need accountability.) That person can get lost in his own thoughts and ideas, believing he is walking in the way of God, yet, without the wise counsel of of othrs, can err in doctrine and even in conduct. He can be caught up in secret sin, as well-known men and women of God can be more tempted than other believers in areas of pride, self-righeousness, greed, and other sins, only to eventually fall loudly and disgracefully.

I can understand the idea of 'just me and God', I really can, having spent spent most of my Christian living that way. However, I can also attest to the freedom I found from secret sins and in incresing faulty ideas about God born of my own fallen mind and introspection when I began adding other believers into the 'just God and me' formula.

As Psalm 37:30 says, "The godly offer good counsel; they teach right from wrong." Proverbs 11:14 says, "Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety." Proverbs 19:20 says, "Listen to counsel and accept discipline, that you may be wise the rest of your days." Colossians 3:16 says, "Teach and counsel each other with all the wisdom he (Christ) gives."

'I believe miracles happen in their own time'

June Cochran (sp?) interviewed in this piece says Bently's followers pressure her to come to the revival and be cured. "They're not hearing what they're saying," Cochran feels. "They're saying something's wrong with us, and if we don't already have our self esteem already built up, then it just tears us down even more. Like we're not even worthy to be here."

I have to wonder. How many of Christ's followers would notice a woman like June Cochran, a woman who gets around town in an electric wheelchair, were it not for the idea that 'revival' is happening and the belief that people like 'that' are getting healed? How many of Christ's followers really see Ms. Cochran, beyond the disability to the woman, instead of a broken body needing to be mended.

How many of Christ's followers have seen Ms. Cochran and invited her to church, just as she is, no strings attactched, no expectation of healing, just invited her to be a part of the community of God, encouraging her toward repentence and faith in Christ and in growing fully in that relationship? How many respect her belief of, "I believe miracles happen in their own time", understanding that the timing of physical and other kinds of healing in a person are up to God?

How many followers will go back to ignoring the June Cochrans when the sensation of the healing revival dies down?

'Not a single miricle claim of Bentley's could be verrified.'

And how about those healings?

When asked by Nightline for verifiable information of just three people who've been healed (we just want three people, they said), Bentley offers a them a 'media package' with incomplete contact inormation and a few pages of incomplete mediacl records with doctors names crossed out.

Nightline was given the name of a woman whose cancerous tumor had shrunk upon returning to the doctor after she saw Bentley. However, her husband stated that this could just be a coincidence because she is still receiving medical treatment. He did send Nightline some of his wife's medical information, but with doctors names and clinics named obscured. Not a single miricle claim of Bentley's could be verrified.

I am concerned that the ministry of Todd Bentley is clearly spiritualy abusing and deceiving many. More on that later.

Pt. 1

Pt. 2

Update of Janet Rivera

2008-07-29T11:22:00.000-07:00

Update of Janet Rivera

From the Fresno Bee:

Rivera cousin granted temporary conservatorship

The cousin of Janet Rivera, a comatose Sanger woman, was granted temporary conservatorship of Rivera this morning, which means she will be kept on life support for now.

see full article

I Am a Hypocritical Christian

2008-07-28T18:03:00.000-07:00

I think there's a bit of hypocrisy in the post I just wrote. As a Christian it is much easier to speak out against the errors of the secular world. The secular world almost by definition is errant. Without the redemptive viewpoint of Christ, its morals and ideology are fallen.

But what about when those in the Church are erring? What about when, in the name of God, pastors spew false theology, thus blaspheming God, and in grandiose manner, claiming the gift of healing and prophesy, mock, abuse, and financially exploit their followers, hurting most those who are hurting most- those struggling with disabilities illnesses, and other painful life issues? Who holds them accountable?

What about those who claim a secret message of Jesus, where Christianity becomes a life of good works and relativism, where the mystery of the faith morphs into mysticism, the Word of God is questioned as the actual Word of God, and the sacrificial atonement of the cross becomes, rather, more of a generalized sacrifice for suffering?
All kinds of Christians come together to march for life, but it feels to me that we are reluctant to come together to speak for truth.

Gerri McGhee of Abiding Life Ministries wrote, "Beware that now in many churches self-appointed prophets, pretending to be sheep, are working at redefining Biblical Christianity; treating the Word of God as if it were irrelevant."

And I've been becoming aware. I don't know what to do with my awareness. Who am I to speak out against my brothers and sisters, or at least what they are doing? Who am I not to?

What, as Christians, do we do in light of false teaching in the name of our God and our faith? In this church of billions, how do we, as Biblicaly mandated, go to them in first in private, and then, if they do not respond, let the church deal with them? Who are the elders of these elders who will love them back into the faith?

We can't just stay mostly silent as we have been- can we?

A Waste of Life?

2008-07-28T17:57:00.000-07:00

In Fresno County lies a woman, Janet Rivera, in a coma. Not able to eat, she uses a feeding tube for nutrients. Not long ago, some court case somewhere decided that feeding tubes constitute life support. Of course, I disagree.

Either way, the county, her legal guardian, wants this piece of 'life support' removed, and had it removed for a little while. However, Mrs. Rivera lived longer than expected, so they reinstated her feeding tube to get a judge's opinion.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Rivera's family wishes to keep her alive. So, apparently, the county of Fresno can decide over her families wishes to take Mrs. Rivera's life.

The medical ethicist and legal experts interviewed for this article, continue to refer to end of life issues, calling this an end of life issue. However, Mrs. Rivera would not be at the end of her life had the county and these medical and legal folks not stepped in.

A person could live a long time with a feeding tube. Mrs. Rivera is alive. She is breathing on her own and she is not close to death. What is at issue here, is a judgment of her quality of life. The county deems it (her life) a waste.

A waste of what- money?

Her family feels that if she had more money or better health care coverage. While those involved in this situation say that financial considerations play no role in the decision to remove her feeding tube, some bioethicists say,

that regardless of whether money is an issue in Rivera's case, her situation raises a question that's impossible to ignore in the end-of-life debate: how to decide whether it's worth spending limited resources to maintain life support in an apparently hopeless case.

"The stewardship of scarce resources does require us to take resources into account," said Ben Rich, a University of
California at Davis bioethics professor. "But it has to be done
carefully."

from the article

Gotta love that bioethics field. I am currently reading Wesley J. Smith's book, Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America. This is what he has to say in that book about bioethics:

Medical ethics deals with the behavior of doctors in their professional lives vis-a`-vis their patients. Bioethics, as it has developed over the last few decades, focuses on the relationship between medicine, health, and society. This last element allows bioethicists to espouse values higher than the well-being of the individual and to perform the philosophical equivalent of triage.

...bioethics seeks to create a new morality of medicine that will define the meaning of health, determine when life loses its
value, and forge the public policies that will promote a new medical and moral order. More than a set of tenuous speculations, bioethics in recent years has ossified into an ideology.

So, bioethicists work to change our morals, people debate or blog in response, and Mrs. Rivera lies in a coma, her fate in the hands of her county, apparently. Should she be allowed to suffer in this way? Not really our call. She's alive, and we aren't supposed to end a life. We are supposed to care for the person suffering, and for Mrs. Rivera's family.

Harming the Hidden

2008-07-23T21:10:00.000-07:00

From Daily News Brooklyn

A shocking video shows a woman dying on the floor in the psych ward at Kings
County Hospital, while people around her, including a security guard, did
nothing to help.

After an hour, another mental patient finally got the
attention of the indifferent hospital workers, according to the tape, obtained
by the Daily News.

Worse still, the surveillance tape suggests hospital
staff may have falsified medical charts to cover the utter lack of treatment
provided Esmin Green before she died.

"Thank God for the videotape
because no one would have believed this could have happened," saidDonna
Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

This is for real. This is what is happening in our hospitals and institutions for those with mental illnesses, developmental and other disabilities, and the elderly. This is not an isolated case.

This kind of mistreatment and abuse did not start with our generation or with the one before ours. It has been so since, I imagine, the beginning of the existence of such disabilites. Since the beginning of human weakness and false human strength.

I have lots of ideas about solutions, but I am no expert and really haven't the energy right now to cover them.

Some day I'll share my experience as a patient in various psych hospitals. The one thing I will say now, is that sometimes people in attempt to be sympathetic will show horror that I had to be in there with 'those' kinds of people, meaning of course my fellow patients. And I try as best as I can, without getting into much detail with them, to explain that the patients were not a source of fear or terror for me. It was the staff, well, to be fair some of the the staff, not all of them. More than them personally, though, it was the 'system'.

Years later, I became a 'staff' working in care facilities and group homes for those with developmental disabilities. Their stories and long term experiences in care facilities and institutions were mild compared to my short time spent in psych hospitals. The first facility I worked in was so bad and my experience in the psych hosptitals was still so fresh in my mind that I quit working there only a couple of weeks after I started and steered clear of that kind of work for many years. But I went back because something in my heart pulled me back there.

Thankfully, all of my other jobs, working with those with developmental disabilities have been in small care failities and group homes. Those places weren't perfect by far, believe me, they had their share of problems, but even a small care facility of three to sixteen beds makes all the difference in comparrison to large institutions and nursing home sized facilities.

While working for a six bed care facility, a nursing home sized facility in a town nearby us for men and women with developmental disabilities was shut down. After two deaths and untold amount of abuses.

Several of the former residents came to our facility with such emotional scars that my heart won't let me write anymore.

But here's an old news article about the facility: Choctaw Had Legacy of Abuse

This says much. From the above article, "The things that go on out there, while they are not excusable, they are somewhat tolerable because of the alternative," then-Deputy Health Commissioner Brent VanMeter said after the body of the resident who had been dead for six days was discovered. "What are you going to do with these people if you don't keep them there and hope that that facility is doing the best that it can?"

Here's a related news article: Care Center Bear History of Abuse

It's hard to blog through tears.

Competent Enough to Live

2008-06-16T17:55:00.000-07:00

Competent Enough to Live
By Bobby Schindler

Recently, yet another situation similar to that of my sister Terri Schiavo has made headlines. In West Palm Beach, Florida, Raymond Weber is asking the court to dehydrate his disabled wife, Karen, to death.

If you have read any of the reports in mainstream media, it’s just another case of a husband looking out for the “best interest” of his spouse. And just as in Terri’s case, Raymond Weber is asking the government to deliberately kill his wife who is not dying and is guilty of nothing more than having difficulty swallowing and therefore needing help, in the form of a feeding tube, to eat.

Not surprisingly, in a story by the AP, was a quote from the husband’s attorney who so touchingly referred to his client’s brain-injured wife as a “vegetable,” thus offending the tens of thousands of people and their families who do live with a profound brain injury.

The reporter also wrote that the decision whether Karen should live or die will depend upon whether or not a committee finds her “competent” to go on living. Yes, that is correct, competent enough to live. I guess passing an IQ test will be next.

Factors such as what is being taught in our medical schools, the breakdown of our health care system, the powerful influence of assisted suicide organizations, and the propaganda of our mainstream media have taken their toll.

As a result, the physically and mentally “inferior” are being denied the most basic care—food and water—in our nation’s medical facilities every day. (Thank goodness we have laws making it a felony if we do the same to an animal, although I would expect there would be a greater outcry if it were the family pets at risk.)

Equally as disturbing is the fact that our politicians, including our two presidential candidates, ignore this issue and because of it are failing in one of the most important responsibilities they have as leaders—to protect our most vulnerable citizens.

continued

Obama's Pro Choice Record, More Than Just Pro Abortion

2008-06-15T08:25:00.000-07:00

The Audacity of Death from the Wall Street Journal

As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama twice opposed legislation to define
as "persons" babies who survive late-term abortions... Mr. Obama said in a
speech on the Illinois Senate floor that he could not accept that babies wholly
emerged from their mother's wombs are "persons," and thus deserving of equal
protection under the Constitution's 14th Amendment...

...Mr. Obama has
compiled a 100% lifetime "pro-choice" voting record, including votes against any
and all restrictions on late-term abortions and parental involvement in
teenagers' abortions
To Mr. Obama, abortion, or "reproductive justice," is
"one of the most fundamental rights we possess." And he promises, "the first
thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act," which would
overturn hundreds of federal and state laws limiting abortion, including the
federal ban on partial-birth abortion and bans on public funding of
abortion."

Then there's Mr. Obama's...opposition to laws that protect
babies born-alive during botched abortions. If partial-birth abortion is, as
Democratic icon Daniel Patrick Moynihan labeled it, "too close to infanticide,"
then what is killing fully-birthed babies?

On the campaign trail, Mr.
Obama seldom speaks about abortion and its related issues. But his few moments
of candor are illuminative. When speaking extemporaneously, Mr. Obama will admit
things like "I don't want [my daughters] punished with a baby." Or he'll say
that voting for legislation allowing Terri Schiavo's family to take its case
from state courts to federal courts in an effort to stop her euthanasia was his
"biggest mistake" in the Senate. Biggest mistake?
...He recently compared his
relationship with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers, a member of a
group responsible for bombing government buildings, to his friendship with
stalwart pro-life physician and senator Tom Coburn...

...In "The Audacity
of Hope," Mr. Obama denounces abortion absolutism on both ends of the
ideological spectrum. That is audacious indeed considering Obama's record, which
epitomizes the very radicalism and extremism he denounces.

(Thank you, Ron.)

Redeemer

2008-06-13T16:15:00.000-07:00

Redeem: to buy or pay off; clear by payment
to buy back
to recover (something pledged or mortgaged) by payment or other satisfaction
to discharge or fulfill (a pledge, promise, etc.)
to obtain the release or restoration of, as from captivity, by paying a ransom.
Theology. to deliver from sin and its consequences by means of a sacrifice offered for the sinner
to set free; rescue or ransom
to save from a state of sinfulness and its consequences
to restore the honor, worth, or reputation of
to repurchase by right
to receive or adopt
excepted from the operation or burden of some law; released; free; clear; privileged

Meditating on the idea of redemption, I am having a hard time with the thought that it is because I am so valuable that God would seek me out and then save me. I knew what a wretched state I was in before He redeemed me, even in very midst of that state. I wasn't worthy of love- I wasn't. But God loved me anyway, right back into Himself. Still, I find no comfort in my own value, for I know that apart from God, I have no value.

I am much more comforted by the sovereignty of the One Who sought me out in my state of wretchedness, to redeem, to buy back what was always supposed to be His. That the fact that God loves me and redeemed me has nothing to do with how great I am but, rather, how Great He is.

I have been so focused these past few years on finding out who I am, and gratefully have found security in who I am in Christ.

But I now want to know more of Who He is. Who is He as Redeemer?

A Pastoral Statement on Euthanasia

2008-06-08T16:49:00.000-07:00

"Human suffering is a reminder of our need of the Savior Jesus Christ and the eternal life that comes through His atoning death and resurrection." Gary Knapp from his pastoral statement on euthanasia from his site The Undershepherd.

The statement (full post here):

A Pastoral Statement on Euthanasia and Imposing Death by Starvation and
Dehydration

Believing that human life at all stages from conception until
natural death and in every condition regardless of disability or cognitive
ability bears the image of God, we, the undersigned offer our voice in support
of life and in opposition to imposing death on the ill and disabled, in
particular through starvation and dehydration.

Those of us who minister in Delaware have a special concern at the potential imposed death by starvation of one of our citizens, Lauren Richardson. We urge those who have influence over Lauren’s life, her guardian and the Delaware court system, to act on the basis of hope which comes from faith and reverence for human life, of which God is the author and finisher (Deuteronomy 32:39).

Acknowledging the tragedy and difficulty of human suffering we ask our fellow citizens to consider the following:

1. Euthanasia is an act of hopelessness. Human suffering
humbles us as we see our inability to heal suffering despite our many medical
advancements. But by imposing death on the ill and disabled, society is
declaring that there is no purpose in suffering. This is contrary to the message
of Scripture as seen in the lives of many people, most notably Job, and
ultimately our Lord Jesus Christ.

2. God has told us clearly that He is
the author and finisher of our existence. Fear of God should prevent us from
ever seeking to end our own life or the life of another prematurely, especially
by depriving them of the sustenance that is essential to human existence.

3. We express our concern that nutrition and hydration have been classified as
medical treatment by many medical authorities and in the legal system. Food and
water are now referred to in some legal documents as “life support”. This
classification then becomes the basis for interpreting unguarded or uninformed
comments from individuals about life support as an expressed declaration of
their intent. The result is a deceptive vehicle by which many people are starved
to death.

4. We urge our citizens to reject the claim that euthanasia is a private act. Even if one’s wishes to have his life ended prematurely were documented (Lauren Richardson left no such written documentation), society must live its approval to euthanize, which it has not done. Euthanasia advocates demand that society validate the so called private decision and make provision for the practice of imposing death. By depicting euthanasia as a purely private act, euthanasia advocates hide the reality that if Lauren is starved to death, we will all share in the decision to do this to her.

5. New Jersey recently ceased capital punishment calling death by injection “cruel and unusual punishment”. If imposing death by injection is cruel, how much more so death by starvation, which can be a two week process!

6. Faith leads to hope. We readily acknowledge that suffering is tragic and painful, both for the one suffering and for their loved ones. But because God is real and active, the end of our life is not certain until He makes it so. Often doctors using their best judgment declare that there is no hope; often they are wrong. Faith believes
that God can heal, and that if He doesn’t, He is with us and has a purpose for
our suffering.

7. Human suffering is ultimately a result of the fall by which our first parents Adam and Eve turned away from God and brought death (physical and spiritual) upon themselves and their offspring. Human suffering is a reminder of our need of the Savior Jesus Christ and the eternal life that comes through His atoning death and resurrection. We call our fellow citizens to acknowledge God’s prerogative in beginning and ending life.

We encourage prayer to God in Jesus’ name on behalf of those who suffer.
We call on the medical profession and government to turn from their irreverence for
God demonstrated in the sinful act of starving and dehydrating the ill and
disabled.
We remind us all that because mankind bears God’s image our
treatment of life is taken as our attitude toward God Himself (Genesis 9:6).
Finally, we remind us that God sees our actions and will render to each one
of us according to our deeds (Jeremiah 17:10

Now, I Have Some Questions

2008-06-04T18:02:00.000-07:00

From West Palm Beach Florida:

Family's Fight Over Feeding Tube Reminiscent Of Schiavo Case
Husband, Mom At Odds Over Tube

A Florida woman put on a
feeding tube after she had a stroke is at the center of a court case similar to
the dispute over whether Terri Schiavo should be kept alive.

Karen
Weber's husband wants to have her feeding tube removed and have her transferred
to a hospital ward, where she would likely die. He claims that his 57-year-old
wife is in a vegetative state, but Weber's family is fighting to keep her alive,
arguing she's alert and responsive...

...A judge in Weber's case has
issued an injunction prohibiting the feeding tube's removal while a committee
determines the woman's competency. She does not have a living will and can not
talk.
Her husband, Raymond Weber, said he doesn't want this to become a
media event, but her mother, Martha Tatro, said she refuses to let her daughter
die.

Read complete story here.

Now, I have some questions. For one, is this woman alert and responsive or not? If so then she is not in a so-called 'vegetative state'. I understand that due to privacy laws, Mrs. Weber's doctors may not explain her condition to the media. But either she is or she isn't.

(I use the word 'so-called' because the terminology of vegetative state is ridiculous and undignified. An individual in such a state is not a plant in the corner being kept watered occasionally. He or she is someone who has lost cognitive neurological function and awareness of the environment but retains noncognitive function and a preserved sleep-wake cycle. In other words, he or she is still a person, one with profound cognitive disabilities.)

Second question, since there many cases of misdiagnosis of and treatment for this state, such as the sleeping pill Zolpidem which can temporarily revive people in a so-called permanent vegetative state, or one similar, to the point where they can have conversations, have these treatments been attempted?

Thirdly, why is removing her feeding tube even an option. Mrs. Weber is alive, with brain function and breathing on her own. A feeding tube has technically legally been deemed life support lately, but unlike removing a breathing tube of someone with absolutely no brain activity who will instantly die when that breathing tube is removed because he or she is already dead, pulling out the feeding tube of Mrs. Weber is not 'letting her die'. It is refusing to feed a woman who needs help eating; it is willful neglect. It is death by neglect. It is murder.

Lastly, what difference does it make whether she is in a 'vegetative state' or not? What if Mrs. Weber never regains awareness of her surroundings or even of her very existence? What if she remains totally and completely dependent on others the rest of her life for every aspect of her life?

I wonder if a life like hers is testimony that a person's worth to us and to God is not at all dependent on abilities, but on simply the fact that she is a fellow human being. Now is our chance to show we believe that idea when we tell our children, "God loves you for who you are, not for what you can do" by protesting this woman's murder, caring for those most in need of caring around us, and caring for their families.

Some say that it would be undignified to 'allow' Mrs. Weber to remain alive in such an event. However, is it not more undignified to refer to her as a vegetable, rescind her status of personhood, and starve her to death?

Assisted Suicide Initiative Being Promoted in Washington State

2008-06-02T12:08:00.000-07:00

From their website, "In Washington, the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide has formed to combat I-1000, the assisted suicide initiative that is being promoted for the 2008 ballot."
With the passing of this law assisted suicide would be legal in Washington State, allowing doctors to prescribe lethal drugs to patients with terminal illnesses to kill themselves. This law would be modeled after Oregon's Law.

In the Netherlands, where assisted suicide and euthanasia have been practiced for the last 20 years, since both have become less of a rare occurance and more of a standard practive, improvements in pain management and palliative care have slown down. "Pressure for improved pallitive care seems to have evaporated," according to Herbert Hendin, M.D., a Director of Suicide Prevention International.

From the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide website, we see what a slippery slope the acceptance of assisted suicide is:

"Once the Dutch accepted assisted suicide it was not possible legally or morally
to deny more active medical (assistance to die), i.e. euthanasia, to those who
could not effect their own deaths. Nor could they deny assisted suicide or
euthanasia to the chronically ill who have longer to suffer than the terminally
ill or to those who have psychological pain not associated with physical
disease. To do so would be a form of discrimination.

Involuntary
euthanasia has been justified as necessitated by the need to make decisions for
patients not [medically] competent to choose for themselves."

Research shows that, for one thousand people a year in the
Netherlands, physicians have ended their patients' lives without any request
from or consultation with the patients.

This would be our future. Go to the website and offer support now.

Please Continue to Pray

2008-06-01T17:58:00.000-07:00

From Christian Examiner Online (emphasis mine):

California Assembly approves legislation promoting euthanasia of terminally ill patients
Christian Examiner staff report

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — An end-of-life bill that would require doctors
to tell their terminal patients about options to hasten their deaths, including
starving themselves, passed the Assembly May 28 and will be heard on the Senate
floor.

According to an analysis by Concerned Women for America,
the bill undercuts established medical advances to ease dying for terminal
patients and, in some cases, would allow end-of-life medical care to be passed
on to less qualified health-care providers such as nurse practitioners and
physician assistants.

“While careful pain management and palliative care
at the end of a truly terminal illness are extremely important and support must
be given to dying patients and their families, this bill, as
written, is a step down a very slippery slope toward the assisted suicide bill
we fought in last year’s session,” the CWA analysis reads.

Opponents of the bill say that it paves the way for a shift in pallative
care that goes beyond pain relief to unconscious dehydration and starvation
through the use of strong sedatives.

Further, they argue that the
one-year-left-to-live diagnosis is arbitrary and often wrong, and
requiring doctors to offer end-of-life options hits patients when they are most
vulnerable. Some medical experts also believe that forcing doctors to
even discuss those issues constitutes endorsement of the practices.

Finally, opponents are concerned those without health
insurance and who are poor, might feel pressured into end-of-life decisions
because of burdensome financial legacies for their families.

But
Patty Berg, a Santa Rosa Democrat, who sponsored the bill with Lloyd Levine,
D-Van Nuys, said the legislation is merely promoting “honest talk” about medical
options. Berg, who was unsuccessful in three previous attempts to legislate
physician-assisted suicide, decided this year to try a different approach.

Her latest bill is supported by Compassion and Choices, a
pro-euthanasia group that was formerly called the Hemlock Society.

“Unlike my previous end-of-life bill, which was rejected and which I no
longer am pursuing, my new bill doesn’t give anyone any new options,” Berg wrote
in a May 15 opinion piece for Capitol Weekly. Everything that is illegal now—and
that most notably includes physician-aided dying—would remain illegal. AB 2747
changes none of that. Instead, it provides a precious commodity— information.

“Most people in the Capitol understand the difference. Some, however,
are still fighting last year’s battle and are trying to convince the gullible
that my new bill is a Trojan horse, designed somehow to legalize aid-in-dying.
That is simply not the case.”

But Marilyn Golden, a policy analyst at
the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, disagrees and in a May 22
rebuttal in Capitol Weekly.

“The real ‘honest talk’ about AB 2747 is
that it has very little to do with improving care,” Golden wrote. “For this
bill, the devil is really in the details. Close inspection reveals it to be a
vehicle for Compassion and Choices’ long-term agenda: facilitating assisted
suicide. Let’s not forget that this is the organization formerly
known as the Hemlock Society and one of the primary sponsors of this
legislation. The bill includes many elements that would significantly
undermine end-of-life care in service of this goal.”

The Assembly vote
was 42-34. The bill will now be heard in the Senate Judiciary committee.For more
information on AB 2747, the end-of-life bill visit these links:
• Assembly bill text and history
• Concerned Women for America
• California ProLife Council
• Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund

Click
here to see- How
the Calif. assembly members voted on the end-of-life bill

Chimps Are People, Too... Yeah, Whatever

2008-05-24T15:27:00.000-07:00

From the article "European Court agrees to hear chimp's plea for human rights":

His name is Matthew, he is 26 years old, and his supporters hope to take his
case to the European Court of Human Rights.

But he won't be able to give
evidence on his own behalf - since he is a chimpanzee. Animal rights activists
led by British teacher Paula Stibbe are fighting to have Matthew legally
declared a 'person' so she can be appointed as his guardian if the bankrupt
animal sanctuary where he lives in Vienna is forced to close...

...Miss Stibbe, who is from Brighton but has lived in Vienna for several years, says she is not trying to get the chimp declared a human, just a person.

A seemingly good idea, if not rather comical, for a seemingly good cause. I hate to see animals used and abused. But the attempt to declare an animal a person- not a good idea, not comical, and, in fact, it's quite ominous.

It is becoming an accepted idea, as evidenced by those who believe that even animals can be people, that there is a difference between a person and a human. So, with this reasoning, 'human being' doesn't automatically mean 'person', and, therefore, not every human being is afforded automatic human rights for simply being human, unlike 'persons', including the right to life.

This is what some animal rights activist such as Peter Singer want, for animals to be acknowledged as persons, while at the same time denying the existence of personhood for some people, such as the fetus, infants, and children and adults with profound cognitive disabilities.
Here's an example of his thinking from the story "An Ethical Man":

"'HIV research using chimps has not been very helpful as they don't seem to get
the disease in the same way humans do,' Singer explains. 'So I don't think it's
right and it's causing a lot of suffering and distress to beings who are
sensitive animals--social animals who should be living in social groups and who
suffer being in isolation and confined and that's wrong. If we need beings very
like us to do this on, we should perhaps [turn to] the families of people who
tragically have been brain-damaged and have no hope of recovery from persistent
vegetative state who are totally beyond suffering because they are beyond
consciousness."

Sex Change Treatment for 7 Year-Olds

2008-05-20T16:28:00.000-07:00

From the blog Secondhand Smoke:

This seems to me to be unethical human experimentation: A doctor in Boston gives hormones to children who believe themselves to be transgendered to help prevent puberty and move them toward a sex change. From the story:
Boston's Children's Hospital bills itself as the hospital for children--and now it's also the hospital for children who want a sex change, a procedure some critics are calling "barbaric." Dr. Norman Spack, a pediatric specialist at the hospital, has launched a clinic for transgendered kids--boys who feel like girls, girls who want to be boys-- and he's opening his doors to patients as young as 7. Spack offers his younger patients counseling and drugs that delay the onset of puberty.

The drugs stop the natural flood of hormones that would make it difficult to have a sex alteration later in life, allowing patients more time to decide whether they want to make the change.
Spack also offers some teenagers hormone therapy, a drastic step that changes the way they grow and develop. While the effects of drug treatments can be stopped, long-term hormone therapy can be irreversible, causing permanent infertility in both sexes.
We have no true understanding of the causes of transexualism. We don't know that a kid who is seven and thinks he is a girl will still feel that way when he is 20. He might. Some transexuals report having those feelings very early. But we don't know how many people there might be who felt that way at 7 but don't at 20.

Worse, to medically intervene with strong hormones--the long term impact on the child's body and mental state we cannot know--when there is no underlying physical disease requiring the treatment, is to me, abuse. What if it causes cancer in 20 years? What if it impacts on the children of these children? What if the hormones impact their emotional and mental states, perhaps influencing their transexuality? We can't know the answers. All of this is just too new.

I am reminded of "Ashley's treatment," in which a profoundly disabled girl's normal physical development was interfered with through surgery and hormones to allow better ease of care. Caring motives notwithstanding, that was wrong, at least without a court order, as the hospital so admitted.

And now this: According to the story the Europeans are already traveling this path. And of course, NPR has come out with a properly nonjudgmental feature story:

The hormone blockers are the first stage of the treatment, but there's a second stage that's possible. Once children have postponed puberty for three or four years, at around age 16 they can choose to begin maturing sexually into the opposite gender, the gender they want to become. To do this, they begin taking the hormones of the opposite sex. For males, taking estrogen at this point will bring on breast and hip growth--and all the attributes physical and emotional of females. The reverse will happen for girls who take testosterone. Spack says this treatment can help make an adult transgender male almost indistinguishable from a biological male in terms of physical appearance. "We can make it possible that they can fit in in the way they want to. It is really quite amazing," he says.
This is unconscionable and reflects how sick our culture is becoming--and I am not referring to transgendered people. The inability or unwillingness by a growing number of us to make any judgments that might be criticized as moralism--lest one be denigrated as a bigot, premodern, or a hypocrite--has created a moral vacuum in which very little remains out of bounds. And the worst part is that the greatest victims in the ongoing and utter collapse of norms are our children.

While Worshiping

2008-05-12T14:59:00.000-07:00

I often refer to the reality of those with disabilities not fully exercising themselves as the necessary members of the body that they are. Who aren't being welcomed by their fellow members, i.e., the rest of us. I see them fully as part of the body of Christ.

However, at this moment, during this opportunity for praise, I saw them as His bride! His beautiful bride. There's a difference in the love of a man's body, you see, and the love for his bride. And, oh, how Jesus loves His bride! Intimately and passionately He loves those hidden in the deepest, most secret of crevices known as nursing homes and institutions. He sees them, and He longs to stretch out His hand to reach them and capture them. For they are most lovely to Him.

And I wondered what has happened to His bride? To this part of His Bride, that they are hidden away and suffering so under the oppression of indifference.

We can be His hands. We can stretch out on His behalf to bring the hidden ones into His body, where Jesus longs to make them His bride! And we will all be ready and waiting for His return.

PRAY: California Legislature Expected To Vote This Week On Bill Promoting Euthanasia

2008-05-06T20:02:00.000-07:00

From Life News:

Undaunted by their repeated failure to get the California legislature to approve
a bill legalizing assisted suicide, the sponsors of the bill are moving forward
with a new measure that promotes euthanasia in limited circumstances. Pro-life
groups are asking for phone calls to defeat the bill.

Last Tuesday, on a straight party line vote, the Assembly Judiciary Committee sent AB 2747 to the Assembly floor.

Assemblymembers Patty Berg and Lloyd Levine, the authors of the pro-assisted suicide bill, are behind the bill.

Brian Johnston, the head of the California Pro-Life Council and the author of a seminal book on assisted suicide, talked with LifeNews.com about the measure's problems.

"On the surface, AB 2747 seems like a simple bill benefiting the hospice care industry," he said. "However, it contains a sneaky loophole that will permit doctors and health care providers to transform the rarely used practice of 'palliative
sedation' into a vehicle permitting assisted suicide."

Palliative sedation, otherwise known as deep sedation, is the sedation of a suffering and imminently dying patient to the point of unconsciousness and the bill changes the standards surrounding its use.

Johnston says AB 2747 has a host of other problems -- including defining terminal illness as having one year or less to live.

"We believe this is very arbitrary and subjective because predicting a patient’s
time from death is merely a lifespan forecast," he says.

He says the bill also would create situations where cost considerations could affect treatment options, as assisted suicide options are generally cheaper than treatment.

Ultimately, Johnston told LifeNews.com that "AB 2747 promotes practices
which may hasten death, overlooking what should be the primary focus of
counseling to a patient approaching the end of life, chiefly excellent
palliative care and hospice referral."

Pro-life groups fear that deep sedation, once introduced and promoted in California, will become a frequent occurrence as it has been in the Netherlands, one of the few nations to approve assisted suicide and euthanasia.

An April study finds the number of patients killed via deep sedation is on the rise.Researchers at the Erasmus University Medical Centre in Rotterdam found 1,800 people -- or 7.1 percent of all deaths in the Netherlands in 2005 -- involved deep sedation.

That percentage rose from 5.6 percent of all deaths involving deep sedation in 2001
while, during the same time period, euthanasia death fell from 2.6 percent of
all deaths to 1.7 percent.

Judith Rietjens of Erasmus University told Reuters, “The increased use of continuous deep sedation for patients nearing death in the Netherlands and the limited use of palliative consultation suggests that this practice is increasingly considered as part of a regular medical practice.”

American author and attorney Wesley J. Smith commented on the recent research.
“Demonstrating the subversive nature of the euthanasia/assisted suicide movement on proper medical care, Dutch doctors are switching from lethally injecting patients to sedating them into a permanent coma so they die by dehydration over a period of days or weeks,” he said.

Smith said he thinks physicians are changing the way they kill patients
so they don't have to be present during the actual death and can assuage their
consciences.

ACTION: Please contact your member of the California Assembly
immediately and urge strong opposition to AB 2747 because it promotes
euthanasia. You can find contact information at http://www.assembly.ca.gov/.

Doctors vs. Parents: Who Decides Right to Life?

2008-05-06T16:43:00.000-07:00

From Houston Press:

Following surgery, Sabrina Martin's condition went south. And then, her family
says, Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital set about arranging for her
demise.
...The doctor told us that Sabrina'd had two strokes and because of
them, she was in a coma that they didn't think she was going to come out of. And
if she did, she would be a vegetable."
As shocking as the devastating news of their daughter's condition was, Lopez and Murray say it would not compare to what happened next.
Within about three days of the second surgery, Lopez says, doctors "started talking about our options. And we started getting scared, because the options were not good."
Lopez and Murray say that doctors and hospital staff began pressuring them to withhold treatment and feeding, which would ultimately starve Sabrina to death. To the parents, this was unacceptable. They wanted their daughter to live.
"I was very disappointed with the way Memorial Hermann handled things," Lopez says. "They put it out on the table that we were being selfish."
Murray and Lopez accuse the hospital staff, doctors and nurses of doing everything they could to try to end Sabrina's life during the ensuing six weeks, including:
• Refusing to implement simple procedures such as giving Sabrina feeding and breathing tubes that would have enabled the parents to take their daughter home and care for her themselves,
• Attempting to turn relatives and friends against Lopez and Murray by encouraging
them to persuade the parents to withhold treatment, all the while violating
federal privacy laws by discussing Sabrina's healthcare information,
• Entering two separate do-not-resuscitate orders against her parents'
wishes, and

• Threatening the family with convening the hospital's ethics committee, which under Texas law can overrule the family's wishes and withhold life-support treatment from a patient.

As Lopez and Murray saw it, the hospital and physicians that caused their daughter's condition were now trying to end her life. And it seemed like there was nothing they could do to stop it.

Terrified, Sabrina's parents called the nonprofit organization Texas Right
to Life, which referred Lopez and Murray to an attorney. The parents were able
to transfer Sabrina to Texas Children's Hospital, where Lopez says Martin
received treatment that doctors at Memorial Hermann had refused to give,
treatment that saved her life...

...When asked for comment about Sabrina's case, Memorial Hermann spokeswoman Beth Sartori issued a statement saying, "Sabrina Martin's story is a sad one, and everyone associated with her care at Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital is deeply sympathetic to her and her family. However, because of the lawsuit against the hospital and the physicians that cared for her, we are not at liberty to comment further."...

...Memorial Hermann was one of a host of hospitals across the state that along with doctors and right-to-life groups endorsed the Texas Advance Directives Act, which the Legislature passed in 1999 and which was signed into law by then-Governor George W. Bush. (The right-to-life groups have now backed off their support of the
Advance Directives Act and say the law is unfair and gives too much power to
doctors.)

In essence, the law gives doctors the ability to eithercontinue or withhold life-sustaining treatment against the wishes of the patient or the patient's legal guardian. To do so, the doctor presents his case before the family and an ethics committee, and if the committee agrees with the doctor's decision, the family is given ten days to find another facility that will comply with their wishes before treatment is either continued or withdrawn. Families are given a list of lawyers and organizations to help facilitate a transfer.

Texas and Virginia are the only two states in the country that have a time limit as part of such laws, Virginia's being 14 days for the family to find a transfer.

In Texas, the law has come under fire over the past several years. Families, their lawyers and right-to-life groups have battled doctors and health care facilities in the media and in court to try to prevent them from employing the act. In 2007, an attempt to lengthen the ten-day time period died in the Texas House of Representatives.

In general, opponents — ranging from rightwing, right-to-life groups all the way to the American Civil Liberties Union — say the law gives too much power to the
hospitals and doctors and takes away individuals' civil rights to determine
their own fate...

...Graham says another disturbing pattern she sees at Memorial Hermann is doctors entering orders not to resuscitate patients without first checking with or gaining consent from the families.

"It's a totally separate mechanism that accomplishes the same goal," says Graham, "but much quicker."

In Sabrina's case, doctors entered two orders not to resuscitate the teen, according to Sabrina's medical records...

...Three days after Sabrina's second surgery, one of her doctors entered an order not to resuscitate her, says Painter. Lopez and Murray had no idea he had done so. They say they did not want the order put in. According to hospital records, the same day that the instruction was entered, a social worker documented that it "appeared (Lopez and Murray) did not agree with the recommendations for DNR as of yet."

Then, two days later, a different doctor issued a second order not to resuscitate
Sabrina, the very day that hospital records show Lopez had requested a second
opinion from another neurologist.

"I felt so violated," says Lopez. "I couldn't believe they would do this. I mean, we're talking about a hospital; they're supposed to have the patient's best interest, and this was way too soon to be giving up."

Lopez was further dumbfounded when doctors refused to insert a feeding pipe, called a G-Tube, or perform a simple tracheotomy, placing a breathing tube into Sabrina's neck, allowing her to leave the hospital so that Lopez could care for her daughter at home.
"They never proposed the G-Tube and trach," says Lopez. "I researched the options and said we wanted that. But Memorial Hermann wouldn't do it, saying she wouldn't have a high quality of life. And I was very disappointed because I was like, 'How do you define quality of life?' She doesn't need to play basketball as long as she can understand what we're saying."...
...Shortly after transferring to Texas Children's Hospital,
Sabrina began to improve so dramatically that doctors recommended she not go
home but rather be moved to a rehabilitation facility in San Antonio. There, at
Kindred Hospital, Sabrina emerged from her coma. Doctors were able to remove her
breathing tube and Sabrina began getting better, even advancing to the point
where she was able to help her younger sister do math homework by counting on
her fingers. Doctors now say Sabrina should have a full life expectancy.
"The people at Memorial Hermann said this would never happen," says
Lopez...

..."I'm so glad we did what we did," says Murray. "It's a lot of
work. But it's better now than it was at first. Some days I just want to go up
to those doctors and say, "See, look at her now."

Why A wheelchair Is Not Purgatory

2008-05-05T18:21:00.000-07:00

By Ruth at her blog, Wheelie Catholic:

WHEELIE CATHOLIC: Why my wheelchair is not my purgatory

I awoke this morning to an
MSNBC article about the efforts of one man to walk again after acquiring a
spinal cord injury.

The article began with the words "It was only a chair, but it became his
purgatory".

Make no mistake about this: I applaud the efforts and hard work of the
individual in question. That's not at issue here, of course.

But to write an article saying that this man could have no life until he
walked again is inaccurate. To write that a wheelchair is someone's purgatory
(not a quote from the interviewed person) needs to be addressed. Why?

Because more damage is done to the perception of disability over bowls of
Cheerio due to media coverage than anywhere else. Not only that, but this
article ignores several facts that are well known in the spinal cord
community.
Read the rest over at Wheelie Catholic.