This page has moved to a new address.

Think Christianly

Think Christianly

Monday, March 12, 2012

Every Life Is Beautiful

This is a story that needs to be told. My wife and I recently watched an advance copy of October Baby and we were really impressed. This is a powerful film that is both honest and redemptive. I encourage you to take your youth groups to go see it and spread the word on Facebook and Twitter. It opens friday March 23rd.

Find where it is playing near you...

Official Movie Website


Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Do Social Issues Matter Anymore in Politics?

Jay Richards and James Robison argue yes, they do.

"We're told that the 2012 election is all about jobs and the economy. So-called social issues such as marriage, abortion, and religious freedom have been moved to the back burner.

Don't count on it. Social issues will also figure prominently in the coming months. President Obama has made sure of that.

The most obvious example involves the recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services rule mandating that religious organizations provide health insurance that covers sterilization, contraception and drugs that induce abortion. Only the most zealous pro-choicers think people should be forced to fund abortions, even when they have moral objections to them. Not surprisingly, the mandate has sparked uproar.

In response, the president has now offered a "compromise." Instead of employers paying directly for services to which they are morally opposed, HHS will mandate that their insurance carriers provide them "free of charge."

Birth control pills, IUDS, and abortion-inducing drugs aren't free, however, so the insurance companies will offset these costs with higher premiums (even though the mandate will supposedly prohibit this). This accounting gimmick does nothing to resolve the moral problem. The New York Times admitted as much in its headline, "Rule Shift is Concession to Obama Allies," not, in other words, to opponents.

The President may have provided cover for a few allies on the religious left, such as Sister Carol Keehan,
but the US Bishops aren't buying it. In fact, rather than divide Christians over contraception, Mr. Obama has helped unify orthodox Catholics, evangelicals, and even many civil libertarians. They rightly see the HHS mandate as an attack on religious freedom. ObamaCare was already an affront to freedom itself. Now it has a sharp anti-religious edge to boot.

Forced coverage for abortion drugs? Check. Attack on religious freedom? Check. For the culture war trifecta, all we need is an attack on marriage.

In 1996, President Clinton signed the bipartisan Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). It protects states from being forced to recognize same sex "marriages" performed in other states. President Obama claimed before he was elected that, as a Christian, he believed marriage was between a man and a woman. As soon as he took office, though, we learned that his view is "constantly evolving." It evolved fast, since the Justice Department..." (read the rest of this article)



Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, February 6, 2012

The Media’s Abortion Blinders and the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation Controversy

Ross Douthat's Op-Ed yesterday in the New York Times is worth a read. Here is an excerpt from the article in which he mentions several uncomfortable truths you won't hear reported on in the media.
"In the most recent Gallup poll on abortion, as many Americans described themselves as pro-life as called themselves pro-choice. A combined 58 percent of Americans stated that abortion should either be “illegal in all circumstances” or “legal in only a few circumstances.” These results do not vary appreciably by gender: in the first Gallup poll to show a slight pro-life majority, conducted in May 2009, half of American women described themselves as pro-life. But if you’ve followed the media frenzy surrounding the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation’s decision — which it backpedaled from, with an apology, after a wave of frankly brutal coverage — to discontinue about $700,000 in funding for Planned Parenthood, you would think all these millions of anti-abortion Americans simply do not exist. From the nightly news shows to print and online media, the coverage’s tone alternated between wonder and outrage — wonder that anyone could possibly find Planned Parenthood even remotely controversial and outrage that the Komen foundation had “politicized” the cause of women’s health....." (more)

Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, January 15, 2012

An Inspiring Video Story of Two Brothers Made In the Image of God

This is pretty amazing...



Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Do All Human Beings Have A Right To Life?

Where do human rights come from? What makes you the same person from conception to natural death? In this video, Jay Watts of www.prolifetraining.com makes the case that all human beings have a right to life using critical thinking, logic, and philosophy. For more on the philosophical case click here for more on the scientific case for life click here.

 


Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, December 1, 2011

The Central Issue in the Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice Debate (Video)

When it comes to the issue of abortion, there is only one question we need to answer. Watch this short video as Jay Watts of The Life Training Institute teaches you how to simplify this debate.



Think Christianly with Jonathan Morrow

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, November 28, 2011

Mindless Accident or Wonderfully Designed? Conception to Birth Visualized (Video)

Alexander Tsiaras has invited us to witness the wonder and complexity of a developing human being like you have never seen it before. Wow...



Psalm 139 in action.

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Pro-Life Youth Are Turning the Tide for Universal Human Rights

According to Fred Barnes' article:
"Three pro-life trends have spiked in 2011. The first is the rise in opposition to abortion among young people. The under-30 cohort was the most pro-choice in the 1970s, second most in the 1980s and 1990s. Now they’re “markedly less pro-choice” than any other age group, scholars Clyde Wilcox and Patrick Carr have written. “Clearly, something is distinctive about the abortion attitudes of the Millennial Generation of Americans. Indeed there is. Millennials haven’t grown more religious, politically conservative, or queasy about gay rights. Nor do they go out of their way to vote for pro-life candidates. But they tend to see abortion as a human rights violation. Thus their resistance to abortion is gradually increasing..."
This is an important and hopeful trend. See more helpful analysis at the STR blog, here.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

I am the 10%

90% of babies who are diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted (or the more clinical phrase is "terminated pregnancy"). This is barbaric and unthinkable and needs to stop.

This little guy is one of the brave ones who is telling a different story. He is one of the 10%.



















Here is another story by Gabe Lyons.



This is an excellent booklet - Understanding a Down Syndrome Diagnosis

Train to make the case for the pro life position.

"I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made"-Ps. 139:14

These are ALL the kinds of things we do as we engage culture as everyday ambassadors. For more ideas, see my new book Think Christianly.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, February 3, 2011

The paradox of America’s unborn

"This is the paradox of America’s unborn. No life is so desperately sought after, so hungrily desired, so carefully nurtured. And yet no life is so legally unprotected, and so frequently destroyed."

Ross Douthat of the New York Times has written a perceptive article about the tension that exists in our culture surrounding the unborn. If numbers mean anything, then protecting the unborn is still the number one human rights issue we face as a nation. May we have the courage and compassion to do stand in the gap as we have opportunity.

For as Scott Klusendorf reminds us, "the abortion controversy is not a debate between those who are pro-choice and those who are anti-choice. It's not about privacy or trusting women. To the contrary, the debate turns on one key question. What is the Unborn?"

"Pro-life advocates contend that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. This simplifies the abortion controversy by focusing on just one question: Is the unborn a member of the human family? If so, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong. It treats the distinct human being, with his or her own intrinsic worth, as nothing more than a disposable instrument. Conversely, if the unborn are not human, elective abortion requires no more justification than having a tooth pulled. As Gregory Koukl points out, "If the unborn are not human, no justification for elective abortion in necessary. But if the unborn are human, no justification for elective abortion is adequate...." (more)

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Becoming a Pro-Life Statesman

Pro-life expert Scott Klusendorf lays out a really helpful framework for how to grow as an ambassador for life whatever your context may be (by the way, wouldn't it be great if the next time Anderson Cooper or Bill O'Reilly did segment on abortion choice / pro-life issues that Scott was asked to be an expert on the show?)

A colleague of mine asked what adjustments pro-life advocates should make to better position themselves for 2011 and beyond.

That's a loaded question that's best left to brighter minds, but my general reply was as follows: Pro-life Christians should bring God glory. At the practical level, that means they must not only state their case persuasively, but transform themselves into winsome statesmen without sacrificing the intellectual content of their ideas.

I then sketched out a rough (and very incomplete) outline of what that transformation might look like, including those principles that I strive to live by as a pro-life apologist.

Thesis: The pro-life statesman completes five key tasks:

I) The pro-life statesman presents a persuasive case for life in forums where our message most needs a hearing:
A. in Catholic and Protestant high schools
B. in presentations to clergy
C. in debates at high schools and universities
D. in training seminars for lay people
E. in talks to elementary age children
F. in worldview courses for high school students

II) The pro-life statesman engages the debate in the academy:
A. in philosophy:
1. He defends the substance view of human persons
2. He challenges naturalism as a foundation for human rights and ethics
B. in Law: refutation of moral and legal neutrality
C. in Ethics: He helps Christians think biblically about medical technology related to the edges of life (beginning and end of life)

III) The pro-life statesman clarifies theological misconceptions
A. in Evangelical theology: He challenges the mistaken belief that we should only preach the gospel and never do politics--but he does so without sacrificing fidelity to the gospel or Scripture
B. in Catholic theology: He confronts the mistaken belief that social justice requires that all moral issues carry equal moral weight
C. in Pastoral theology: He engages clergy who mistakenly think the gospel of grace means ignoring sin
D. in personal theology: He challenges the mistaken view that individuals must get a personal assignment from God to do pro-life work
E. in youth ministry theology: He challenges the claim that today's twitter generation can't handle serious pro-life content

IV) The pro-life statesman connects the dots
A. in churches: He helps pastors win connecting biblical truth to abortion
B. in politics: He graciously explains why all political parties are not equal in their defense of human life
C. in pregnancy center ministry: He inspires staff and volunteers to minister to women AND impact culture

See his excellent book: The Case for Life.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Abortion Doctor Charged in Newborns’ Killings

The New York Times has posted an article that I hope will begin to awaken America's conscience on this issue. The brutality that is abortion must be seen for what it is and sometimes only shocking details like these will have any impact. Moral facts--when we can clearly get them before us--are obvious to us because we are all made in the image of God. I hope and pray that the exposure of this story saves at least some precious unborn human persons.


"A 69-year-old Philadelphia doctor who performed abortions was charged by prosecutors on Wednesday with the murder of seven newborns who were killed with scissors and of a female patient who died of an overdose of anesthetics.

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office said Dr. Kermit Gosnell, a family practitioner who had not been certified in obstetrics or gynecology, oversaw a medical practice that regularly performed late-term abortions.

On at least seven occasions, babies born alive during the sixth, seventh and eighth month of pregnancies were killed by having their spinal cords severed with a pair of scissors, District Attorney Seth Williams said in a statement.

A grand jury investigation found that although complaints about Dr. Gosnell and his Women Medical Society clinic in west Philadelphia had been made to a variety of government health and medical licensing officials for more than 20 years — including about the deaths of women during routine abortions — the doctor was never officially sanctioned.

Most of Dr. Gosnell’s patients were low-income immigrant and minority women" (more)


Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Why I am Pro-life: A Short, Nonsectarian Argument by Doug Groothuis

Here is a very helpful article by philosopher Doug Groothuis:

Abortion is the intentional killing of a human fetus by chemical and/or surgical means. It should not be confused with miscarriage (which involves no human intention) or contraception (which uses various technologies to prohibit sperm and egg from producing a fertilized ovum after sexual intercourse). Miscarriages are natural (if sad) occurrences, which raise no deep moral issues regarding human conduct—unless the woman was careless in her pregnancy. Contraception is officially opposed by Roman Catholics and some other Christians, but I take it to be in a moral category entirely separate from abortion (since it does not involve the killing of a fetus); therefore, it will not be addressed here.[1]

Rather than taking up the legal reasoning and history of abortion in America (especially concerning Roe vs. Wade), this essay makes a simple, straightforward moral argument against abortion. Sadly, real arguments (reasoned defenses of a thesis or claim) are too rarely made on this issue. Instead, propaganda is exchanged. Given that the Obama administration is the most pro-abortion administration in the history of the United States, some clear moral reasoning is called for at this time.

The first premise of the argument is that human beings have unique and incomparable value in the world. Christians and Jews believe this is the case because we are made in God’s image and likeness. But anyone who holds that humans are special and worthy of unique moral consideration can grant this thesis (even if their worldview does not ultimately support it). Of course, those like Peter Singer who do not grant humans any special status will not be moved by this.[2] We cannot help that. Many true and justified beliefs (concerning human beings and other matters) are denied by otherwise intelligent people.

Second, the burden of proof should always be on the one taking a human life and the benefit of doubt should always be given to the human life. This is not to say that human life should never be taken. In an often cruel and unfair world, sometimes life-taking is necessary, as many people will grant. Cases include self-defense, the prosecution of a just war, and capital punishment. Yet all unnecessary and intentional life-taking is murder, a deeply evil and repugnant offense against human beings. (This would also be acknowledged by those, such as absolute pacifists, who believe that it is never justifiable to take a human life.)

Third, abortion nearly always takes a human life intentionally and gratuitously and is, therefore, morally unjustified, deeply evil, and repugnant—given what we have said about human beings. The fetus is, without question, a human being. Biologically, an entity joins its parents’ species at conception. Like produces like: apes procreate apes, rabbits procreate rabbits, and humans procreate humans. If the fetus is not human, what else could it possibly be? Could it be an ape or a rabbit? Of course not.

Some philosophers, such as Mary Anne Warren, have tried to drive a wedge between personhood and humanity. That is, there may be persons who are not human (such as God, angels, ETs—if they exist), and there may be humans that are not persons (fetuses or those who lose certain functions after having possessed them). While it is true that there may be persons who are not humans, it does not logically follow that there are humans who are not persons. The fetus is best regarded as a person with potential, not a potential person or nonperson.[3]

When we separate personhood from humanity, we make personhood an achievement based on the possession of certain qualities. But what are these person-constituting qualities? Some say a basic level of consciousness; others assert viability outside the womb; still others say a sense of self-interest (which probably does not obtain until after birth). All of these criteria would take away humanity from those in comas or other physically compromised situations.[4] Humans can lose levels of consciousness through injuries, and even infants are not viable without intense and sustained human support. Moreover, who are we to say just what qualities make for membership in the moral community of persons?[5] The stakes are very high in this question. If we are wrong in our identification (Read the rest)


Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Embryonic Stem Cell Research back in the News

Here is a helpful blog post by stand to reason...check it out

The facts of science are clear: From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. (more on the scientific case)

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, June 18, 2010

Valuing Life When It Is Not Easy - A Pro Life Example

Monday, February 8, 2010

Of Superbowl Ads, Tim Tebow's Story, and Freedom of Speech

Well the most watched TV event ever is over--106 million I think--and what have we learned? The Colts are really good. The Saints were better last night.

But what have we learned from all of the hype regarding the Pro-life Tim Tebow ad. A very important lesson in our media savvy culture. Less is more.



here are some summary thoughts and commentary...

See the Full Video of Tebow's Story. (well worth watching!)

Tebow Super Bowl Ad Leads Viewers to 'God Story'


"Nicely played, Focus on the Family. Having gotten the entire country to talk for weeks about the group's antiabortion stance with this controversial Tim Tebow spot, the ad itself ends up with only the phrase "miracle baby," a website referral and the tagline, "Celebrate family. Celebrate life," to clue us in on the ad's subtext." (from CNN)

"Dr. Darrell Bock, research professor of New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary, said there is a push back on the ability of someone to tell a personal story, or the right to free speech.

“Some people use the word hate speech [to describe the ad] and they haven’t even seen it,” Bock told The Christian Post Friday. “This is particularly odd in a society where all kinds of free speech that would be uncomfortable for a lot of people [are aired]. But someone tells a personal story and they try to cut that off.”--Darrell Bock (for more)



Tim Tebow Foundation from Tim Tebow on Vimeo.


NOW is outraged....seriously? (read below)

John McCormack writes:

The LA Times reports that the president of the National Organization for Women is still outrageously outraged over the incredibly tame Focus on the Family/Tebow ad last night:

NOW president Terry O’Neill said [the Tebow ad] glorified violence against women. “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it,” she said. “That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.

The “violence against women” O’Neill refers to occurs when Tim Tebow tackles his mom Pam in an attempt at slapstick.

"No word yet on whether or not NOW is equally outraged by the hyper-sexualized objectification of women in many of the other Super Bowl ads. Or whether or not they are bothered by the actual violence that is done to women who are just being born."--Justin Taylor (HT - Between Two Worlds)

Finally, would you be able to make a powerful case for the human rights of the unborn in 5 minutes or less? You can if you read this...

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Tim Tebow and his controversial pro-life super bowl ad?

From LTI Blog... "Tim Tebow and his mother Pam in conjunction with private donors and Focus on the Family have legally purchased commercial air time during the Super Bowl to tell the story of how his mother was advised to abort him over medical concerns. Specifically, Pam had taken a high dose of antibiotics as part of treatment for amoebic dysentery and she was advised to terminate his life. The content of the ad has been reviewed and approved by the network as acceptable. The theme of the brief spot is “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.” And according to abortion supporters, supposedly obsessed with freedom and choice, you should not be allowed to see this spot.

Odd isn't it? Freedom, they cry! Liberty and equality for all and don't you attempt to force your view of morality on others. And yet it is that very same group that is now demanding that CBS not allow this perfectly legal and approved spot to air...." (More)


"CBS Tuesday (Jan. 26) stood behind its decision to take a Super Bowl ad from Focus on the Family that has drawn fire from reproductive choice organizations...." (more)

Only one issue in the pro life / pro choice debate. The abortion controversy is not a debate between those who are pro-choice and those who are anti-choice. It's not about privacy or trusting women. To the contrary, the debate turns on one key question. What is the Unborn? (Great Article)

The Case for Life by Scott Klusendorf



Labels: , , ,

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Only One Issue in the Pro-Life Debate

If you want to make a clear and compelling philosophical and scientific case for the pro-life position, then look no further than the website case fore life. Here is a brief sampling of what you can expect from Scott Klusendorf...

"The abortion controversy is not a debate between those who are pro-choice and those who are anti-choice. It's not about privacy or trusting women. To the contrary, the debate turns on one key question.

What is the Unborn?
Pro-life advocates contend that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. This simplifies the abortion controversy by focusing on just one question: Is the unborn a member of the human family? If so, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong. It treats the distinct human being, with his or her own intrinsic worth, as nothing more than a disposable instrument. Conversely, if the unborn are not human, elective abortion requires no more justification than having a tooth pulled. As Gregory Koukl points out, "If the unborn are not human, no justification for elective abortion in necessary. But if the unborn are human, no justification for elective abortion is adequate." (Koukl, Precious Unborn Human Persons, p. 7)

This is not to say that abortion is easy for most women. To the contrary, a decision to have one may be psychologically complex and perhaps even agonizing for some. But the topic today is not psychology, but morality: Can we know what's right even if our emotions are conflicted?

Everyone agrees that abortion kills something that's alive. After all, dead things don't grow! But whether it's right to take the life of any living being depends entirely on the question: What kind of being is it?" (for more click here)

This is the best book on the topic.


For other think Christianly Posts on this topic, click here.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, October 26, 2009

Only One Issue and Making the Case for Life

If you want to make a clear and compelling philosophical and scientific case for the pro-life position, then look no further than the website case fore life. Here is a brief sampling of what you can expect from Scott Klusendorf...

"The abortion controversy is not a debate between those who are pro-choice and those who are anti-choice. It's not about privacy or trusting women. To the contrary, the debate turns on one key question.

What is the Unborn?
Pro-life advocates contend that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. This simplifies the abortion controversy by focusing on just one question: Is the unborn a member of the human family? If so, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong. It treats the distinct human being, with his or her own intrinsic worth, as nothing more than a disposable instrument. Conversely, if the unborn are not human, elective abortion requires no more justification than having a tooth pulled. As Gregory Koukl points out, "If the unborn are not human, no justification for elective abortion in necessary. But if the unborn are human, no justification for elective abortion is adequate." (Koukl, Precious Unborn Human Persons, p. 7)

This is not to say that abortion is easy for most women. To the contrary, a decision to have one may be psychologically complex and perhaps even agonizing for some. But the topic today is not psychology, but morality: Can we know what's right even if our emotions are conflicted?

Everyone agrees that abortion kills something that's alive. After all, dead things don't grow! But whether it's right to take the life of any living being depends entirely on the question: What kind of being is it?" (for more click here)

This is the best book on the topic.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Ethics has fallen on hard times these days...Moral Choices by Scott Rae can help us recover our moral foundation

How does a Christian think about ethics? How can we make thoughtful, biblically informed decisions about:
  • Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research
  • Reproductive Technologies
  • Biotechnology, Genetics, and Human Cloning
  • Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
  • Capital Punishment
  • Sexual Ethics
  • The Morality of War
  • Ethics and Economics
  • The Environment
If you are not sure how to answer these questions or are not convinced that the Bible has / should have anything to say about, then you need to have this book on your shelf.

On a personal note, Dr. Scott Rae was one of my professors in graduate school and he is the real deal. I have huge respect for him. Also, this book is very accessible. There is no better introduction to Christian ethics out there.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,