The 3 - July 16, 2010

3 - Pro-family groups respond to possible taxpayer funding of abortion in new health care law

Remember the countdown to the health care reform bill vote - would pro-life Democrats stand against the Senate version of the bill, which contained no protection against taxpayer funding of abortion? Well, an 11th-hour "executive order" by the President won Bart Stupak's and other pro-life representatives' votes. That order presumably prevent taxpayer funds being used for abortion.

Pro-family and Christian groups said that the order was not enforceable and really would not prevent public funding of abortion. Interestingly enough, this week, it was revealed that a "high risk" insurance plan in the state of Pennsylvania contains taxpayer funding. Also, according to this piece at LifeNews.com, 2 other states have planned to include abortion in certain health care insurance plans.

Unfortunately, this is an example of the manipulation of verbage that we find so often in the political sphere. Too many promises have been made to pro-abortion groups to cause us to think that abortion will not be included in health care plans. It's a reminder of the presence of an agenda that does not regard the sanctity of human life that is prevalent in our land today.

2 - Another Lutheran denomination weighs in on gay marriage

Last year, I reported the vote by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), which recognized the validity of same-sex unions and authorized the ordination of gay individuals. This action on homosexuality set off a negative reaction in congregations across the U.S., and caused great concern within the denomination and within Lutheranism. This week, at its National Convention, another Lutheran denominations, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, issued a response to the actions of the ELCA. It reaffirmed that homosexual practice was contrary to Biblical teaching, and did strike a conciliatory tone with the ELCA. Here is a press release from the LCMS.

The list of denominations that are wrestling with this gender issue continues. I believe that the Bible is very clear on the issue of homosexuality, but in these morally relativistic times, there are well-meaning people who are attempting to alter clear Biblical teaching in order to justify behavior that is contrary to Scripture. This type of justification can be easily applied to a number of areas of behavior, and it's important that we are sensitive to instances where we incorrectly rationalize our actions.

1 - TV obscenity policy struck down

Claiming that the FCC's policy on offensive language is vague and constitutionally unsound, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the FCC's broadcast indecency policy, perhaps effectively paving the way for more offensive language to be used on broadcast television.

Fox had been found in violation of the FCC's policy after the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards, during which so-called "fleeting expletives" were used by participants.

Pro-family groups such as the Parents Television Council were quite alarmed by the ruling. Here is the link to a piece by Baptist Press' Michael Foust, published in the Christian Examiner.

Kagan's role in crafting medical associations' statements on partial-birth abortion examined

Helena, MT considers teaching sex ed to kindergarteners

NC pastor silenced from praying at state's House of Representatives