« Problems with ESCR | Main | Christianity & Postmodernism »

October 24, 2006


This is so true..

Great post Melinda!
When you said: Don't tell me about your angst, it doesn't matter. Tell me what informs your conscience.
A smashing conclusion!

They used to call it "pandering" in the old days when someone was tempting another into an immoral act to satisfy or get relief from some felt need. I think this directly relates to this story in that when someone offers up a simple solution to your "problem" to relieve your angst over having gotten pregnant, it ought to be called pandering--an illegal act. These types of helpers make it easier to let the conscience slide to a lower standard than what may have been originally held to.


Which is a more "difficult decision:" violating the conscience or violating the delicate sensibilities of the culture?

Sadly, it's pretty easy to violate the conscience these days. We need to find a way to "un-sear" our consciences.

One problem here guys: There is no difficult decision for most of the folks reading this, concerning the Colorado example. In fact most of you probably feel real good about doing your part to "protect" marriage and "save" Western Civilization.

How about another example where voting is involved? What does your conscience say when it comes to voting for your favored party when it means torture, corruption and incompetence, not to mention the needless deaths of more American military? How do the advantages of divided government weigh on the conservative Christian conscience?

Something else for ones conscience to consider: http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/10/25/iraq-accountability/#more-5147

Hi Alan,
First, I have no confidence that you will find less corruption, incompetence, and power-mongering in the Democrat party (yeah, I saw the interview with Pelosi the other night). Second, if there is torture (and that doesn't mean when they turn down the heat and wake them up at odd hours) being used, then I would oppose it. However, sometimes the word "torture" gets applied to acts that fall well short of that definition. Third, I don't like that American military lives have to be exchanged, but that doesn't mean that I must come to the same conclusion you do, that the cost is not necessary. I can't (in good conscience) help put into power leaders who are in favor of the continued destruction of more lives every business day (through abortion) than have died in the several years we have been in this war.

Paul, People have died of hypothermia while in our custody, that isn't "turning down the heat".

Extremes of temperature and sleep deprivation were among the methods used by the Soviet Union and its ideoloical fellows among the community of nations. I find it hard to understand why you aren't bothered by this.








Your willingness to sacrifice our Constitution, our Republic, our honor and the born everywhere to the hope that those who are willing to trash the Constitution, turn the Republic into a one party state, stuck in a pepetual state of war and indifferent to any sense of honor or the value of innocent life abroad will somehow abolish abortion or even really cares about the unborn strikes me as delusional.

Democratic corruption exists, of course, (William jefferson) but is and has been penny-ante compared to what the Republicans have brought us. I don't get what has happened here I only know that those running things now have completely lost their moral bearings and are incompetent to boot. A Democratic Congress will at least provide some checks and balances and restore the concept of the separation of powers and I'll settle for that.

Paul you may be interested in this:


and this:


The comments to this entry are closed.