Open Letter to Dr. James Dobson
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Steve Wetzel
New member
Is it the best way? Yes. It is the only way? No.
CPC's (Crisis Pregnancy Centers) do tremendous work. There are those who do it online at forums such as this. There are many ways of doing prolife work.
There is the Life Chain, but I have never been a fan of that. To me, this is the one time a year when Christians gather to hold a sign to assuage the rest of the year they do nothing.
One can do web sites and reach the world. I have one web page called the "Abortion Gallery." This one page gets over 1 million hits per week. Still - to me - that was a one time build, and I want to do more.
I keep myself hungry by not looking at what I have done in the past, rather, "what have I done lately." And I always want to keep it that way - ever pressing forward, always challenging myself to kick it up a notch.
Does this make any sense?
Occasionally, people (like on this forum) will question what I do for the unborn, or call me apathetic. In those cases - when they question my resolve - I will drop a hammer on them, and shoo them back from whence they came. That is the Christian and the Marine in me. The two are not always compatible.
Steve
mttu.com
Steve Wetzel
New member
Give us the link - I can't find it!
BTW - love blackgenocide.org - I though i had it linked already.
Steve
(Nevermind - I did have it linked)
CRASH
TOL Subscriber
CRASH
TOL Subscriber
Bravo on all that!
If Christians were able to pass a law outlawing abortion with strong punishment and it was upheld, that would be pro-life work right? And likely, the most effective pro-life work, saving the most lives, right?
ApologeticJedi
New member
I agree in that of the men in Christianity today he is the most influential, which is why I think Christianity is in real trouble. I don't mean that just as a knock on Dr. Dobson, but on Christianity as a whole.
It is obvious that the world has stepped up it's attack on Christianity, both abroad and in particular in America where Christianity is openly persecuted in an almost anti-Semitic-type of manner.
It’s true Christians underwent tougher persecution in the ten persecutions of the Roman Empire or the various persecutions Christians suffered throughout history, but those were days when Christianity had better and more pure leadership. She, as a whole, was more prepared for persecution in early history.
Today’s church faces extinction, not because of the level of persecution (no amount of persecution can continue to keep the truth down forever) but because of lack of preparedness.
I predict the church nearly gets destroyed in the next few decades as the open bigotry against God, Christ, and Christians grows. I have faith that God will preserve a few, but it will get tougher and tougher as the days go on.
Steve Wetzel said:
If that were all this was, then it would be at best a hollow victory. But sadly, no method has been taken “out of the way” for this ruling certifies partial birth abortion up to the navel. Further, if you go past the navel, no crime has been committed. Further, the reason that aborting past the navel is outlawed is that other methods can be used, thus cementing a precedence of “alternative methods” that must be found to abort a baby before one method can be disposed (even in a small manner). Thus this court has set the possibility of overturning Roe back yet another decade.
Thank you for what you do Bob in this.
I just listened to one of your shows. I can’t tell the name (I often get behind, download about ten and the listen to all at once while I’m doing a project) but in it and another you argued against the abortion statistics being thrown around that certain so-called “pro-life” abortion regulation laws; that they didn’t, necessarily, lower abortion rates. Yet, in the entire show you never gave the more important and pressing point. I think you must have figured you mentioned it, but through a couple of shows now I’ve heard you speak on this and never mentioned that it is irrelevant when you do wrong whether it has a good end. You’ve been very focused on whether the end really was successful, but I think you must always bring that point to the forefront.
Ultimately whether it worked to lower abortions is secondary … perhaps people who bomb clinics lower abortion rates too – it doesn’t make it right. The end never justifies the means. Please mention that in every show that you argue these statistics.
God bless, and keep up the fight.
Steve Wetzel
New member
In a perfect world yes. The trouble is the *IF* is it upheld - and that has always been the boondoggle in the past. We have godless judges in place, which grovel at the feet of liberalism and the proaborts.
The PBA ban had three different judges overturn it before it ever reached the Supreme Court. This is why I highly doubt a political solution to modern day child sacrifice is even possible. It falls upon us - the bride of Christ - to end it. It's not gonna happen any other way.
I'm just saying ...
Steve
mttu.com
CRASH
TOL Subscriber
The world does not need to be perfect for outlawing abortion to be the best pro-life work. You are right. It seems a political solution would be impossible based on the past, but IT WOULD BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE.
When you say it falls on the bride of Christ, you mean Israel?
If the Body of Christ (The Church) is going to make the change do you mean by millions of Christians getting involved and protesting? That would be great but even more unlikely than a political solution. So what does the "church ending abortion" look like?
Just askin...
GuySmiley
Well-known member
Speaking of staying on topic, so far in this thread I've seen you defend Dobson, but I don't recall you commenting on the PBA 'ban' itself. What do you think the Supreme court ruling accomplished for the pro-life side? I see in this post you refer to it as the PBA Ban, so I am assuming you actually believe it bans PBA's. It does no such thing. This ruling was useless. I know you like Dobson, but what about the meat of the open letter?
I agree we should let the political candidates know that we will only support them if they work for a constitutional amendment declaring the personhood of the unborn! Even though this is not likely to happen.
One judge short?
We don't have a single Supreme Court Justice who is willing to declare that an unborn baby is a person!
ApologeticJedi
New member
One judge short of what? As far as I know there isn't a true pro-life judge on the Supreme Court. Only two judges would even be willing to entertain overturning Roe, and those two only for process reasons. I don't know what you mean by "one judge short" but I think you've been drinking too much of the NRTL propaganda kool-aid.
QueenAtHome
New member
Steve,
It appears that I am not they only one who has noticed you dodge the question of how this Act saves babies.
To answer your latest motto....
The answer is found in Delmar's posts
Crash's posts & ApologeticJedi's post.
I have, like you, have fought on the front lines.
But unlike you, I don't get an adrenaline rush from the battle itself. I will save my dancing for the day when abortion is once again illegal.
And that day you will have a bit of sorrow because the battle is over and you have nothing to fight for any longer. :sigh:
It appears that I am not they only one who has noticed you dodge the question of how this Act saves babies.
To answer your latest motto....
The answer is found in Delmar's posts
Crash's posts & ApologeticJedi's post.
I have, like you, have fought on the front lines.
But unlike you, I don't get an adrenaline rush from the battle itself. I will save my dancing for the day when abortion is once again illegal.
And that day you will have a bit of sorrow because the battle is over and you have nothing to fight for any longer. :sigh:
This ruling will not save the life of one single child.
:up: You are exactly right. I approached Bob Enyart years ago and told him that some people were going to be depressed in Heaven. He asked why. I told him that it was because they enjoyed the protest and the fight so much that it became more important than the cause. In Heaven, there will be nothing to protest.
Adam
Steve Wetzel
New member
You make some assumptions here. I get no "adrenaline rush" from the battle itself. I find it extremely taxing. I will have joy in seeing an end to abortion. When that day comes, I will simply take on the next pit of sorrow that the Lord calls me to. Believe me, do think I enjoy the 5-10 daily email virus attacks from the pro-aborts???
I do know the people that you are talking about, and they drive me nuts as well. They are the 24/7 prolifers that just can't turn it off. I want to have a life outside of prolife work. I enjoy my family, and family talk and do family stuff. I refuse to be one of those who feel they need to constantly harp on prolife 24/7 - shoving LifeTalk video tapes into the VCR.
You rarely see me on these forums because I rarely do this. After a while, these threads will end, and I will be gone as well.
Steve
mttu.com
Mustard Seed
New member
A house long divided? Or just recently divided? Did BEL ever support the pbab?
A house long divided? Or just recently divided? Did BEL ever support the pbab?
I'm kind of befuddled with Knight posting this and the likes of BEL now coming out on this.
You see the court ruling is doing no more than elaborating what was said in the initial partial birth abortion ban legislation.
Take, for example, the following post from Knight that was put up some time back--
I bring this up in hopes to point out that if Dobson is out of line THEN SO TO WERE ANY OF THE CREATORS AND SIGNERS OF THIS LETTER WHO SUPPORTED THE partial birth abortion ban WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD.
You see if it's bad to endorse something that provides outlets for other forms of abortion then the court ruling is simply the full manifestation of what's been pushed, and acquiesced to, by any and all in the religious community who either supported, or passively allowed the partial birth abortion ban to proceed.
So I'm curious as to whether or not this realization will occur.
You see if Dobson is derelict and out of line with Christ and the Gospel on this point THEN SO TO WAS EVERYONE in the Christian community who either passively allowed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban to get signed into law OR any of those who did anything to promote or show support for that measure.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
You can't go off on someone for supporting a half-measure that you now see as insidious if YOU YOURSELF didn't see the long-time-coming advance to such.
So the 'egregious' occurance was simply capped at the ruling by the Supreme Court. Anyone who voted for any 'pro life' candidate who supported that measure is just as damned as Dobson is claimed to be now, provided he doesn't 'repent.'
A house long divided? Or just recently divided? Did BEL ever support the pbab?
I'm kind of befuddled with Knight posting this and the likes of BEL now coming out on this.
You see the court ruling is doing no more than elaborating what was said in the initial partial birth abortion ban legislation.
Take, for example, the following post from Knight that was put up some time back--
I bring this up in hopes to point out that if Dobson is out of line THEN SO TO WERE ANY OF THE CREATORS AND SIGNERS OF THIS LETTER WHO SUPPORTED THE partial birth abortion ban WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD.
You see if it's bad to endorse something that provides outlets for other forms of abortion then the court ruling is simply the full manifestation of what's been pushed, and acquiesced to, by any and all in the religious community who either supported, or passively allowed the partial birth abortion ban to proceed.
So I'm curious as to whether or not this realization will occur.
You see if Dobson is derelict and out of line with Christ and the Gospel on this point THEN SO TO WAS EVERYONE in the Christian community who either passively allowed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban to get signed into law OR any of those who did anything to promote or show support for that measure.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
You can't go off on someone for supporting a half-measure that you now see as insidious if YOU YOURSELF didn't see the long-time-coming advance to such.
So the 'egregious' occurance was simply capped at the ruling by the Supreme Court. Anyone who voted for any 'pro life' candidate who supported that measure is just as damned as Dobson is claimed to be now, provided he doesn't 'repent.'
Mustard Seed
New member
Then neither would have the partial birth abortion ban-for the one is simply the culmination of the other.
Mustard Seed
New member
btw.
This is a link to the thread I quoted
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=637614&highlight=partial+birth
This is a link to the thread I quoted
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=637614&highlight=partial+birth
ApologeticJedi
New member
I agree ... it is a wasted effort. The blood of those babies is being poorly mishandled.
I too think some people get too carried away, but I’d rather have those people than those that do nothing.
When they were running Jews out of Germany I’m sure a few were depressed when Germany was eventually defeated because they had the same enjoyment of the fight rather than the cause. Never-the-less, by their hands Jews were saved. That danger is miniscule compared to those that have apathy. I'm sure heaven will have many things to delight all of us.