Why I’m Against Home-Owners Having Guns and Alarm Systems

I got a call from ADT the other day. They wanted me to buy an alarm system to protect my family from would-be intruders. I declined.

You see I’m totally against alarm systems. This includes the alarm system used by most of my friends back in Missouri, also known as the Smith & Wesson alarm system. (For those uninformed, that means that you protect your home with firearms).

I’m against both. Let me explain…

I think we really need to consider those that are forced to steal. For someone to break into my home and kidnap my children—they have to have had some bad stuff happen to them. Maybe they have made bad decisions in the past and it is now forcing them to do things that they don’t want—like kidnap kids or steal my television. It could even be possible that someone is forcing them to engage in this horrible act.

Now what happens if I have an alarm system or I use a gun to protect my family and property? When the alarm goes off this guy is going to get spooked. He might botch this and wind up hurting himself in the process. I don’t want to be responsible for that. Nor do I want to further perpetuate the effects of his bad decisions by having him be punished with jail time.

I want to take this a step further. I also think it is wrong for us to punish people who steal and kidnap children. Think of all the would-be-perpetrators that have died in prison. Or worse yet think of those that have died at the hands of someone they were trying to steal from. It’s not fair for them to lose their lives over a television set. Whether they lose their life in prison or at the hands of a gun-owner protecting his property. Think of what it must feel like to have to give up your freedoms because of one bad choice you made in the heat of the moment. It just doesn’t seem right.

Therefore, I believe that we should outlaw alarm systems and guns for home-owners. Furthermore, we should no longer make it illegal for people to kidnap our children or steal our stuff. It’s much safer that way.*

Why My Argument Doesn’t Work

The argument that I’ve just made is pretty ludicrous isn’t it? It’s silly because during the entire argument I’m not thinking about the safety of my children. I’m putting an emphasis upon the “suffering” of an adult that happens to get injured while attempting to harm my family. That’s foolishness. Certainly, we should protect our little ones over the guy that is trying to kidnap them.

So why do we still make the argument that abortion should be legal because women will die in bathtubs trying to perform their own abortions?

Not only is that statically dishonest it doesn’t make sense. Take this quote:

"One woman," Reagan writes, "described taking ergotrate, then castor oil, then squatting in scalding hot water, then drinking Everclear alcohol. When these methods failed, she hammered at her stomach with a meat pulverizer before going to an illegal abortionist."

We are supposed to respond to this by feeling sympathy for the woman. Which, might I add, is a correct response. But it’s not a sufficient response. We should also be upset that she has decided—yes, even in the case of rape—to resort to terminating the life of her child. Victim, yes. But she is also making herself a perpetrator. In the case of rape she has, sadly, chosen to perpetuate the violence done to her.

If we shift our eyes from the poor woman in the bathtub (and again it really ought to make us weep) to the unborn child in her stomach, then it doesn’t make sense to put the rights of the perpetrator (the pregnant mother) over that of the victim (her child).

Wait, you say…

Some that make the coat-hanger argument are saying, “Listen, I don’t want to see children aborted. But I also don’t want to see women die. If she is going to abort her child in a backstreet somewhere, I’d rather her do it in the hospital where it is safe. Why lose two lives instead of one?”

Even the most liberal statistics have the deaths for mothers at 5-10,000 deaths per year. That is horrendous. Each of these should cause us to weep. Consider this, though: Since 1973 there have been over 56 million legal abortions. If 10,000 mothers had died from 1973 to 2013 in back-street abortion attempts that would have been 400,000 would-be mothers.

So that means we have performed 56 million “safe” abortions to protect 400,000 mothers. That’s not 2-1. That is 140-1. For every mother that we have “saved” we have sacrificed 140 children. So my response to the “why lose two lives instead of one” is to say, “why lose 140 lives instead of one?”

If it’s a child in the mothers womb (and it is) then the coat-hanger argument simply doesn’t work…

--

*This entire section is not true. If you try to harm my wife or children I’m going Liam Neeson on you. I do have two cats that you are more than welcome to take, however.

Why I’m Not a Fan of Abortion and Gun Control Memes

My Facebook page has been exploding with pictures like that above. They are usually connected with some statistics about abortion killing 1.2 million per year whereas guns kill only around 2,000. The post then ends with challenging Congress or President Obama to fight the real war on women (or assault weapons).

I agree with the logic. I further understand the hypocrisy of turning a blind eye to the 55 million children legally aborted since 1973 while making it a mission to control guns which kill far less children per year. I get that.

But I’m not a big fan of these memes.

Mostly because I fear that by conflating these two issues we are minimizing both the atrocity of abortion and the tragedy of events like Sandy Hook. We are politicizing pain. It is using one horrible act to make a point about another. Regardless of which of the points you intend to make you are minimizing the other.

Abortion isn’t a statistic to be used to make a point about the lack of childhood death by guns. It’s an abominable practice that deserves its own hearing. It doesn’t need to have gun control as it’s bedmate. In fact it’s distracting to do so.

Furthermore, it is insensitive and unfair to minimize the 2,000 deaths that are by guns by comparing them to another evil. It communicates that the tragedy of Sandy Hook isn’t that big of a deal compared to the tragedy of abortion. Numerically, that might be true. But every human life is valuable. To turn people into statistics is practically becoming guilty of the necessary dehumanizing of children in the womb that one must do to agree with abortion.

Let’s mourn the loss of every human life and not use these tragedies to make a political point. The end result of these memes is to say, “your gun laws are dumb”. The heinousness of abortion deserves far more than that. And the victims of gun violence deserve far more grace and compassion.

5 Reasons Why Supporting Abortion Reflects An Unchanged Heart

Earlier I mentioned why I’m no longer indifferent to the issue of abortion.  I also mentioned that it’s a gospel issue and said that I’d explain why.  Before I give you those five reasons (and I could have given more), I want to give you a disclaimer.  I am not saying that if you are not pro-life that you are not a Christian.  I believe that I was not pro-life (not sure I was pro-choice either) for the first couple of years after coming to Christ.  God had changed my heart but He had not yet changed my worldview.  So, I do believe that one can still have faith in Christ and be mistaken on this issue.

Though I could probably give more than five reasons why supporting abortion reflects and unchanged heart here are five:

1. It places my freedom as ultimate.  The way of Christ is to place others before Himself.  It is to lay down personal freedoms for the good of the lesser. While the woman’s choice is very important—and could have been violated, as in cases of rape—the choice and freedom of the lesser needs to hold more weight.  In other words, the Christian way of doing things is to surrender your own personal freedoms and comforts for the good of those that are “weaker”.  You don’t get any “weaker” than an unborn baby. 
2. It preaches that life is found in stuff.  Some argue that abortion should be legal because the child’s quality of life will be terrible.  Often what is meant by that is what I will address in point 3, but some actually refer to opportunities.  At times it is a reference to the opportunity of a teenage girl that finds herself pregnant that will be surrendering many chances in life.  As our President said, “I don’t want my daughters to be punished with a baby”.  Life isn’t found in “stuff” and in “opportunities”.  Christ proclaims that life is found elsewhere.  To believe otherwise reflects a heart that is still infatuated with worldly pleasures.
3. It proclaims that the answer to suffering is death.  Many who support abortion do so while adopting an Ecclesiastes 4:2-3 mentality, which basically says that for some death is far better than life.  But the mentality of Solomon in Ecclesiastes 4 is that of a despairing man that is devoid of Christ.  The gospel gives hope in the midst of suffering.  The gospel proclaims a good purpose of God even in the midst of suffering.  An Ecclesiastes 4 proclaims death as the solution to suffering.  Whereas Scripture says that death is part of suffering and not a solution to it.  The solution that Christ provides for death and suffering is found in His redemptive acts. Abortion on the grounds of an Ecclesiastes 4 mentality denies the power of the gospel.
4. It teaches that it is okay to return evil for evil.  Pregnancy because of rape and incest is horrendous.  It should be mourned and fought against.  Those committing such crimes should indeed be punished, and punished severely.  But arguing (even as many Republicans now do) that it’s okay to abort a child that results from such evil is morally acceptable is backwards.  Scripture proclaims that we should not overcome evil with evil but to overcome evil with good.  You aren’t punishing the perpetrator by aborting your child.  You are punishing the child and even yourself.  A gospel changed heart overcomes evil with good.
5. It looks more like Rome and less like the early church.  Rome paid little regard to children.  As one letter from a husband to his delivering wife shows, “"I ask and beg you to take good care of our baby son, and as soon as I received payment I shall send it up to you. If you are delivered (before I come home), if it is a boy keep it, if a girl, discard it."  The early church fought against infanticide from a very early point.  They were the ones finding discarded babies and taking them into their communities of faith.  They were the ones that eventually ended the practice.  Those that were closest to the time of Christ reflected the heart of Christ to “let the little children come to me”.  They understood that the gospel is a message of life and should foster a community of life and not one of death. 

Those are only five reasons why supporting abortion reflects and unchanged heart.  In saying that my point is not to say, “therefore, you had better vote Republican”.  Personally, I don’t think the solution is solely political.  Perhaps that will be one means that the Lord will use to end abortion.  But it is not the only way.  What I am saying is that as believers we ought to be involved in fighting this social injustice. 

Check out Abort 73 and get involved.  (Warning: The videos on that site are graphic)

Why I’m No Longer Indifferent Concerning Abortion

That title might be a little misleading.  It would be more accurate to say why about ten years ago I stopped being indifferent on the issue of abortion.  But that was too long. 

About ten years ago I was having a discussion with a woman that I highly respect and care very deeply for.  For some reason we started talking about abortion.  I gave my opinion (as a relatively new believer) that I did not really see the point in people arguing about it.  Why even bother trying to convince someone that abortion is wrong?  I was trying to make the point that it’s really not a gospel issue.  Therefore, we are just alienating people by entering into this debate when we should just share the gospel with them.  No sense even talking about abortion. 

Then she hit me with a 2 x 4 across the face.  Not literally but the words that came out of her mouth floored me. 

“You know, I was almost aborted”. 

Immediately it wasn’t just debating talking points.  Though I would not have ever supported an abortion for someone in my own life, I was still largely indifferent.  Why not just give women the right to choose.  Honestly, I was probably very close to what Joe Biden said last night.  Personally, and because of religious convictions, I am not for abortion.  But I just don’t see the reason to legislate this. 

Then I thought about my dear friend having been aborted.  She wouldn’t be here right now.  Nor would her children.  For the first time I really began to understand what it means that life begins at conception.  Of course at the time it just seems like you are aborting something like a bean.  But here I was staring at one of those “beans” that was full of life, and hopes, and dreams.  Those would not be in existence had her mother not being talked out of an abortion. 

This is why what I believed 10 years ago and what Joe Biden said last night is backwards thinking.  You cannot say, “I believe that it is life, I personally agree with the stance of the Roman Catholic Church, but I do not believe that should be legislated”.  If it’s really “life” why is it not okay to abort your child when he/she is 2 years old instead of still in the womb?  I mean how dare we infringe upon the rights of parents to “abort” their children.  Especially, the way this economy goes.  If we lose our jobs and we are starving, what kind of parent am I to allow my child to suffer?  What kind of parent am I to allow my child to live in a world where he/she does not have a bunch of options to be successful?  Why am I not loving just to “abort” them when they are 2 or 4 or 7 or 11? 

The reason why we can defend a woman’s freedom while letting another little woman’s or little man’s freedom not be protected is because we do not see them as people.  On that day when my friend said, “I was almost aborted”, I realized that this isn’t merely about words.  This is about life.  This is about real people.  That is why I mourn the legality of abortion and every instance of it.  I mourn those 50 million deaths in the same way as I mourn with those that have a miscarriage, or lose a child to SIDS, or even lose a child later in life.  Every case of abortion isn’t a political win for a woman’s choice.  Every abortion is a death of a child.  That is why I am no longer indifferent to the issue of abortion. 

And it is a real gospel issue.  Come back later today and I’ll explain why this is a gospel issue…

I Agree with Obama on Abortion

I agree with President Obama on abortion:

And on this anniversary, I hope that we will recommit ourselves more broadly to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

Of course when I say that I agree, I mean that I pray our nation will be passionate about the rights of every daughter and every son…even those still in the womb. 

So, yeah.  I guess I really don’t agree with President Obama on abortion because it’s near-sighted and meaningless.  The same freedom and opportunities should be given to ALL our daughters and ALL our sons, especially those who are the weakest. 

This is somebodies son or daughter.  Ask yourself, is this being committed to their rights?  WARNING:  THIS VIDEO IS VERY GRAPHIC AND NOT FOR EVERYONE!  VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED.

From Abort73.com

---

I would also like to say that if you have ever had an abortion, gospel healing is still available.  Yes, abortion is atrocious.  Yes, abortion is wrong.  But so is my pride, anger, and all sorts of other sins.  Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners—no matter what that sin is. 

This isn’t a political issue—it’s a heart issue.  And Christ Jesus is still powerful enough to change any heart of stone and melt it to a heart of flesh.  May you find peace in Christ.

Monday’s Ministry Musing: Should We Serve Our Own First?

Yeah I know it’s Wednesday but I just could not let this go until next Monday.  So pretend that I wrote this on Monday and it got stuck in some cyber filter, wound up in a parallel world, and somehow just posted today. 
I am beginning to see rumblings of people frustrated with the American government providing relief to the Haitian people, “when we have hurting people over here.”  I’ve even seen this little jewel pop up on several people’s Facebook status:

Shame on you America: the only country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed without eating, elderly going without needed meds, and mentally ill without treatment - yet we have a benefit for the people of Haiti on 12 TV stations. 99% of people won't have the guts to copy and and paste this...

First of all that is one of the most uninformed and narrow minded statements I have ever read.  If you are my friend on Facebook and you thought this would be cool to cut and paste—then I am sorry if I offend you, but this statement is just plain wrong and outright irresponsible.  Do a little fact checking.  Are we really THE ONLY COUNTRY where homeless are without shelter, children go to bed without eating, etc.  Seriously?  Have you seen Africa?  Do you know about North Korea? 
There are numerous places in much worse shape than we are.  But that is not my main issue.  Let’s just pretend for a moment that this statement IS true.  Should we “serve our own” before we serve the needs of others? 
This way of thinking within Christian circles I just do not understand.  Yesterday morning on a Christian radio station I heard an advertisement for some spa/resort business that said something like this, “In 2010 you should finally do something for yourself…come in to blah blah blah and we’ll give you the care that you deserve.”  These advertisers are not stupid.  They are appealing to something within us that wants to say…”Yeah, you’re right, I’ve been always giving—it’s about time I start taking.” 
The  principle is the same as the Haiti response.  Why should I take care of someone else when I myself am hurting? 
As a side note I do understand there are times when you are absolutely burnt out and you have nothing more to give anyone.  You do need to get away for a little while and retreat.  Even Jesus did this (Matt. 14:23).  But notice that Jesus “went up on a mountainside to pray”.  He got His refreshment by spending time with the Father.  He did not get his refreshment by going to a health resort, or calling up his disciples and saying, “hey guys why don’t you serve me for awhile.” 
So, why should you take care of someone else when you are hurting yourself?  Why should our nation send relief to Haiti when we have homeless people and orphans here?  Because that is exactly what Jesus would do.  Jesus would not refuse to serve a Samaritan because the Jews were under Roman oppression.  You look at the Cross and compare that to this “I need to care of my own needs first”, New-Age, Oprah-driven, egocentric junk.  I do not see my bleeding Savior climbing down off the cross and saying, “someone else will have to serve for awhile…I have my own needs”.  You find me one explicit place in Scripture where Jesus put His humanly needs above other people and I will delete this post and copy and paste that silly little shame on you America thing myself. 
Now if you want to point out American duplicity I’ll show you were it is found.  It is not in America helping Haiti.  I fully support our nation in supporting the people of Haiti.  Where you can see American duplicity has its roots in this “serve my needs first attitude”; and we see the fruit in this attitude in the atrocity that is abortion. 
Shame on you America for fighting the genocide of other nations while neglecting to address your own infanticide.  Shame on you America for waving a flag that says we fight for freedom but refusing to fight for the freedom of the unborn.  Shame on you America for exalting a woman’s right to choose while neglecting the much smaller and less developed woman’s right to choose.  Shame on you America for exemplifying an attitude that says, “me first and then I’ll serve you.” 

This Week in Blogworld 5/15

Today my wife and I are celebrating our 5 year anniversary!!!

Very passionate plea from John Piper to President Obama concerning abortion:

(HT: DG)

 

Kevin DeYoung shares why he is a Calvinist.

Dr. Moore writes an amazing article about the devil’s voting record.  (HT: JT)

Thabiti points out a bleak statistic that 60% of baptisms within the SBC are “re-baptisms”.

Gregg Harris writes a letter to parents.

That does it…these videos should keep you busy.

This guy is everything I dream to be as a youth pastor.

(HT: CPC)

Today in Blogworld 1/30 & 31

Jonathan Leeman continues blogging through Willow Creek's REVEAL. Today he gives us Part 9.

Denny Burk responds to Rick Warren on The Colbert Report. So do I.

There is also a very good disussion on praise songs at Old Truth. There is some very good information on the history of praise songs. It would be interesting to contrast this with the history of hymns. I find it quite funny that sometimes our arguments over praise songs are the same as they were 250 years ago with hymns. Nonetheless, the point is really good that our music should be heady and hearty.

Steve Camp has a great article on the Sinfulness of Original Sin, along with a song [poem] in the post.

Mark Driscoll offers help to preachers setting a preaching schedule. (HT: Micah)

I think you are going to be seeing quite a bit of discussion coming out of Bethlehem in the coming days concerning interacting with Muslims. Piper offers answers to "How shall we love our Muslim neighbors". As always Christ is at the center.

Something that is pretty cool is the 9Marks report card. Very interesting stuff. Much can be learned in the first couple of pages as well. (HT: JT)

In other 9Marks news I can't help but wonder how Dever's statement, here,will fly in the SBC. Apparently Dever will continue cooperating with Acts29. His statement is excellent.

Dr. Mohler discusses an often ignored voice in the abortion debate, it is the voice they do not want to hear, the dad's.

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 01/25

This would perhaps be better titled Today and Yesterday in Blogworld. Business did not allow me to do as much posting yesterday.

Steve Camp has an excellent, though somewhat lengthy, article on holiness. I love how Steve introduces this: "They say when Leonardo Davinci painted his famous Last Supper he had little difficulty with any of it except the faces. Then he painted the faces in without too much trouble except one. He did not feel himself worthy to paint the face of Jesus. He held off and kept holding off, unwilling to approach it but knowing he must. Then in the impulsive carelessness of despair, he just painted it quickly and let it go. “There is no use,” he said. “I can’t paint Him.”I feel very much the same way about explaining the holiness of God. I think that same sense of despair is on my heart. There isn’t any use for anybody to try to explain holiness. The greatest speakers on this subject can play their oratorical harps, but it sounds tinny and unreal, and when they are through you’ve listened to music but you haven’t seen God."

Thabiti has a couple of good posts. One is on Jerry Bridges Four Ways to Live. The other discusses Carefulness in Treating Sin.

Jonathan Leeman continues blogging through REVEAL. Today we are treated to Part 7 and Part 8.

Scott Lee discusses the Task of a Faithful Shepherd and John MacArthur discusses the pastor's job as More Than Just a Preacher.

Here are a couple of good quotes one by MLJ the other by Thomas Brooks. Martyn Lloyd-Jones quote hits me pretty hard. "You can be so interested in great theological and intellectual and philosophical problems that you tend to forget that you are going to die." (HT: DG)Brooks tells us the mark of true humility. “Remember this—all the sighing, mourning, sobbing, and complaining in the world, does not so undeniably evidence a man to be humble, as his overlooking his own righteousness, and living really and purely upon the righteousness of Christ.” (HT: Of First Importance)

Jimmy, actually a guy I went to college with, has a great post on lessons from The Young Physician. No, not Jesus. He is referring to a Resident Doctor that had learning unconnected with real life. Jimmy uses this experience to give sound advice to us young ministers.

Terry Rayburn asks whether or not we have two natures. His answer is no. This keeps coming up I am sensing that the Lord is prodding me to study this in depth.

And lastly, Denny Burk absolutely disgusts me. OK, not actually him, he is pretty cool. What disgusts me is the truth of his latest article: Yale Students Celebrate Abortion Rights. Apparently they celebrated with comedy skits and mock abortions. Truly disgusting.

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 01/22

Today is a sad day in history. 35 years ago today Roe v. Wade was passed, setting way for the slaughter of numerous "innocent" babies. There are several articles and challenges addressing this issue today. Justin Taylor uses an excerpt from Piper's book A Hunger for God to challenge us to fast for the little ones. JT also provides a graphic that helps us visualize what 46 million looks like. He has also recently interviewed Robert George on abortion and politics. There is also a graphic video that shows actual abortions. I could hardly bare to watch. You can access that video here: (Warning: This is Very Very Graphic!)

(HT: Denny Burk)

John Ensor does offer some encouragement and challenges us to pray for the Third Wave in the fight to end abortion. Denny Burk also provides a sunday school lesson on the Sanctity of Life. After experiencing the birth of our child, I just do not get it (and even before). I can have sympathy with the teenage girl struggling with making a decision. She is only a child herself. I can sympathize (but of course not agree) with her decision. I can sympathize with the rape victims. I can sympathize but not agree. But what baffles my mind is the politicians and the entire movement itself. How in the world can we hold to such a ridiculous practice and allow it to be legal?

Dan Phillips has posted the third part to his "Preaching the Good News"? Earlier he gave us a snippet of an "evangelism" tract left at his door step. He asked what we could tell about the group that left it. Then he told us it was the Mormons. Today he considers some of the implications of this discussion.

I have been reading about the life of Charles Spurgeon. The fuel that drove his ministry was laboring in prayer. So I believe it is not a coincidence that the MacArthur article today is on Praying Without Ceasing.

Jonathan Leeman continues to blog through Willow Creek's REVEAL. Today he considers mutli-campus churches.

Finally, the IMonk has created an interesting discussion about 12 Churches and 12 Calvinists. What would happen? This lends itself to being a great discussion.