September 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

Subscribe

« No Thoughts, Just Feelings | Main | Failed Family Values? »

September 01, 2008

Comments

Amen! Couldn't agree more.

I posted this to another thread, but it seems timely here:

How many families have sacrificed so that the mom could stay home with the kids? Is there a greater chance that unmarried teen pregnancy can occur when mom is working rather than supervising? Thank God they don't believe in abortion. How does it look to American youth when the top office in the world is staffed by someone who was quite openly promiscuous and divorced to remarry? Or a mom who trades her kids for career?

Amen.

Nothing ever goes smoothly.

"Pro Life" (Obama Supporter):

"Is there a greater chance that unmarried teen pregnancy can occur when mom is working rather than supervising?"

I don't know. Why don't you tell us? Is 17 too young for dating?

As for your not-so-veiled reference to Senator McCain, I assume that you wouldn't vote for President Clinton, Senator Kennedy, Senator Edwards et al. Senator McCain has now been married to Cindy since 1980. I believe in repentance and forgiveness. Do you?

Palin was like: "I think it's great that the father is going to marry my daughter and take care of his child."

And the father was like: "Huh?! ... I mean 'Yes, Sir'."

O.o

RE:I don't know. Why don't you tell us? Is 17 too young for dating?

>Fornication is wrong at any age.


RE:Senator McCain has now been married to Cindy since 1980. I believe in repentance and forgiveness. Do you?

>Repentance would require them breaking off this adulterous relationship.

RE:As for your not-so-veiled reference to Senator McCain, I assume that you wouldn't vote for President Clinton, Senator Kennedy, Senator Edwards et al.

>I would not.

Pro-Life
On what scripture do you base your judgment that repentance for McCain would require breaking off his current marriage, and how does it apply to this situation. Does the Samaritan woman at the well in any way help to reach that conclusion?

Was and is McCain a Christian? When did that change? Does this bear on your judgment?

How would McCain walking away from his marriage now not constitute further sin?

PL has already stated that he/she will vote for the adulterer Bob Barr.

Gentle warning to my Christian brothers and sister:

Be very careful not to let any judgment into your heart for Gov. Palin's daughter and family.

If you see judgment, kindly remind people to guard against this prideful sin.

http://tinyurl.com/564che

RE: Pro-Life
On what scripture do you base your judgment that repentance for McCain would require breaking off his current marriage, and how does it apply to this situation. Does the Samaritan woman at the well in any way help to reach that conclusion?

Was and is McCain a Christian? When did that change? Does this bear on your judgment?

How would McCain walking away from his marriage now not constitute further sin?
_______________________________

In the Law we are told Do Not Steal. We define stealing as taking things that do not belong to us. We are also told Do Not Commit Adultery. We define Adultery as divorce and remarriage. We define fornication as sex between unmarried people.

If I robbed banks and became a Christian, to repent and receive forgiveness I would:

(A)Continue robbing banks but ask forgiveness
(B)Break off robbing banks and seek to make restitution

If I had an adulterous marriage and became a Christian, to repent and receive forgiveness I would:

(A)continue my adulterous relationship asking forgiveness
(B)Break off my adulterous relationship asking forgiveness

The woman at the well had 5 husbands. The person she was currently with was not her husband. To repent she would:

(A)marry the person she is presently fornicating with, making yet another adulterous relationship
(B)Break off the sinful relationship and remain single until all of her previous husbands die, thereby dissolving the marriage bond.

When Jesus refused to condemn the woman taken in adultery, he said go and sin no more. This is repentance coupled with forgiveness.

Pro Life

Adultery is legitimate grounds for divorce. The original marriage is dissolved and whether or not McCain repented of that is not relevant to the discussion as to whether or not he is presently committing adultery. If the original marriage was legitimately dissolved according to scripture, then he is not in sin, and may be forgiven. But you are drawing conclusions that go against scripture, as I understand it at those points. I could be wrong and am open to evidence convincing of the same.

I do not think it a good mark on John McCain's record by the way. But I do not accept judgment against any sin for which I have been forgiven and was reconciled to the one I sinned against. The question seems to go to the state of blamelessness in this case. And you may be condemning one that bears no condemnation in the Lord's eyes.

Where do you consider my understanding to be in error?

Patrick, for some reason, I can't read your comments. Perhaps it is the plank I have in my eye. :-)

RE: Adultery is legitimate grounds for divorce. The original marriage is dissolved.
____________________________________________________________________

The following verses show that only death dissolves the marriage.

Romans 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

V3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

1 Corinthians 7:39 ¶ The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

Matthew 19:9And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication (which then resulted in death at the hands of the state), and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

V10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

Why did the disciples react this way? Did they see something most pass over?

I really may be wrong here, but I thought that when Obama talked of his daughters hypothetically getting pregnant (and talked of being punished with a baby), he was defending a certain type of sex education, not abortion.

If he was defending abortion when he made that comment, can anyone point me to a transcript of what he said? (I've googled a bit, but I haven't been able to find a full transcript, and nothing that I have found includes a reference to abortion).

Anon,

See Michelle Malkin's website for a post dated March 30, 2008, "Sunday meditation: Obama and the punishment of unborn life." Obama was responding to a woman who pleaded for him to "stop these abortions." He was also speaking about comprehensive sex education. It is not a full transcript, but I don't know where you can find one.

I'm frankly shocked that anyone would criticize Gov. Palin for her daughter being pregnant and choosing to marry the father. How do Bristol's premarital sexual relations and subsequent choice to marry in any way remotely impugn Mrs. Palin's character? The daughter messed up, and is taking a very serious, responsible step to handle the consequences. But this is no smirch on Mrs. Palin's record.

The sins of the daughters will not be visited on the mothers for the thousandth generation, until such time that they be selected for the VP candidacy. The daughter made a noble step out of her situation. Shame on the ravening wolves who turn this PRIVATE matter against a VP candidate.

>>”I'm frankly shocked that anyone would criticize Gov. Palin for her daughter being pregnant and choosing to marry the father.”

Yep. Shocked….but not shocked.

Pro Life
RE: The following verses show that only death dissolves the marriage.
____________________________________

1 Cor. 7

12But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her.

13And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.

14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.

15Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.

So there is the case of dissolving a marriage without death. Also, are you suggesting that the death penalty for fornication maintains in a non-theocratic culture as that which was Israel in the time of Jesus?

Also, observe the following from Paul's letter to the Corinthian's:

1 Cor 5
1It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife

Did Paul recommend stoning or death? He did "turn him over to Satan for destruction of the flesh", though that is not a euphemism for the formal death sentence, is it? Indeed, in a later letter Paul said of that same man:


2 Cor 2
4For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears; not so that you would be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you.

5But if any has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree--in order not to say too much--to all of you.
6Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority,
7so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, otherwise such a one might be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.
8Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.

I just do not think that your point about assuming that fornication results in death = Jesus statement about fornication dissolving a marriage with the death penalty implied. Though there are reputable scholars that share your opinion (i.e. John Piper).

But I appreciate the debate!

Thanks, KS.

I checked out the Malkin blog. I still don't find sufficient reason for thinking that Obama was giving a defense of abortion in that statement.

It's a common belief that one way to reduce abortions is to make unitended pregnancies less common in the first place, and that you do that by offering comprehensive sex education. In fact, there are a couple of movements that seek to get pro-choicers and pro-lifers together to reduce unwanted pregnancies in just that way.
I'm not saying that they're right, just that I think it's more plausible that Obama, in that statement, was defending (a certain sort of) sex-ed than that he was defending abortion.

Of course, on my interpretation of Obama, he also never satisfied the plea to stop the abortions--he just offered a way that (he thinks) will reduce the number of them.

Obama didn’t feel it necessary to provide babies who survived abortions life saving treatment and care.

That’s called defending abortion and infanticide – it really doesn’t matter what that particular statement meant.

Anon,

Do you seriously doubt that Obama, with a 100 percent NARAL rating, defends abortion? In July 2007, he told a Planned Parenthood Action Fund group that the first thing he would do as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (which would make partial-birth abortions legal).

I have no doubts that Obama believes abortion to be legal and would oppose legislation making it illigal.

However, the claim that he was defending abortion in that statement is, as far as I can see, false.

As lovers of the Truth, we should care about speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It really bothers me if someone doesn't care about whether or not we get our facts straight when we spread stories about candidates (of either party) so long as SOME upshot of the stories (e.g., the upshot that Obama believes abortion should be legal) is true.

You might think that I am splitting hairs, but here is why I'm not:

The way the above story reads, you would think that a key difference between Palin and Obama is that, while Palin supports her pregnant daughter, if Obama's daughter were to get pregnant, he would encourage her to get an abortion. Palin thinks that teenagers should have their babies; Obama thinks they're better off aborting them. I see no reason to think that Obama holds this view. And while it grieves me that Obama supports abortion rights, it would grieve me even more if his first thought when his own daughter got pregnant were "thank goodness for abortion."

Make that "abortion should be legal."

OK, I'll say this before anyone else does: I have some serious problems with typos.

Anon, I do not infer from the Obama quote that he would hypothetically encourage his pregnant daughter to get an abortion. Who is saying that? I do infer that he would want her to have the option of aborting the unborn child. You write, "I have no doubts that Obama believes abortion to be legal ...." Well, it is generally legal at this time. That is just a fact.

My correction applied to what I said about what Obama thinks. So, that line should have read, "I have no doubts that Obama believes abortion should be legal." Unfortunately, even my correction was unclear.

My point isn't that everyone would infer (from the above story--and I am talking about the entire story as presented by STR, not just the quote) that Obama would encourage his daughter to have an abortion, it's that what the story says is misleading, and (as far as I can tell) it's natural to think that many people would draw the conclusion about his behavior with respect to his daughter. At the least, it's natural to draw the conclusion that one of the first things Obama would think if his daughter were to get pregnant is "Well, this is terrible, but I'm glad that at least she has the abortion option." But the facts of the case simply do not give us reason to think this, while the STR story, if true, would.
And if the story was not intended to make us draw a conclusion of that sort, why contrast what Obama said about his own daughter with the fact that Palin's daughter chose life? Why not, instead, simply contrast Obama's extreme pro-choice stance on the legality of abortion with Palin's daughter's commitment to life?

Educated, intelligent teenagers who don't feel horribly guilty as they furtively have sex in the family TV room or an SUV parked in the woods might maintain enough rationality to be honest with themselves & each other & use condoms.

"Why contrast what Obama said about his own daughter with the fact that Palin's daughter chose life?"

Because it illustrates the value they each ascribe to human life; Palin sees every human being as sacred, Obama regards some humans as "punishment." Whatever terms we use to describe that punishment, and whatever it is a punishment FOR ("unprotected" sex, restricted abortion access, or the inconvenient consequences of immoral actions), the fact remains that for Obama, a woman (his teenage daughter) having to carry a baby to full term would constitute a punishment. I assume he means that society would be inflicting the punishment - or perhaps he includes God and biology.

Anyway, the fact that a human being equates to a curse in his ideological framework is exactly opposite to the value that Sarah Palin demonstrates through her own challenging pregnancy - that every child is a blessing from God.

The obvious fact is that, in spite of her daughter's sinful behavior, Mrs. Palin has succeeded in transferring her value of human life to her daughter Bristol.

Les McFall has an interesting way to deal with the exception clause in Matthew 19:9. He has written a 43 page paper that reviews the changes in the Greek made by Erasmus that effect the way Matthew 19:9 has been translated. I reviewed McFall's paper at Except For Fornication Clause of Matthew 19:9. I would love to hear some feedback on this position.

The comments to this entry are closed.