Tuesday, December 12, 2017

An inspiring quote. . .

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little." 
- Edmund Burke

This quote struck me, as my mind went immediately to the issue of abortion and the seemingly impossible giant to defeat that it is. Little people with little actions we may be, but when God orchestrates and uses each one of us - there is no limit to the impact He can make. A little prayer is never in vain. A little donation to your local pregnancy center is never useless. I little sacrifice of comfort and warmth while praying on the sidewalk is never worthless. 
Whenever I pass by Planned Parenthood on my trip to the bank, I always feel led to stop and pray on the sidewalk. I always fight it, I'm always uncomfortable, but in the end the Lord has His way and I follow. It's usually only 10 minutes at best, and then I'll leave. I have not seen any impact yet, but I trust that no prayer is ever in vain, and perhaps one day I may see the fruit!
Whatever God is calling you to do for Him, no matter how small it may be - You never know how He might multiply your efforts. Just as the boy gave his little lunch to Jesus; He multiplied it to feed thousands. HE is ABLE!

Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain"
1 Corinthians 15:58

Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Legalized Abortion: Our "Winslow" Moment

40 Days For Life of Centralia Rally – Mike Spencer's Summary Notes
October 29, 2017

Winslow was the class punching bag in my middle school growing up in Detroit in 1975. I was in the 7th grade and Winslow was in the 8th grade so I didn’t get to know Winslow very well but I knew him to be an unassuming, gentle-spirited kid, but naively trusting. As a result, he spent his middle school years stuck in the crosshairs of heartless bullies. I liked Winslow and felt sorry for him.

One spring day I ambled out of the cafeteria and onto the playground to find Winslow pinned by two 8th grade boys to the cyclone fence that served as the baseball diamond backstop. They were holding him against the fence with his arms spread out in crucifixion style, while several others circled around the back of the fence and kicked it into Winslow’s back. He felt every blow and begged for mercy but received none from his torturers. Nor did he receive any from me.

This was the first time in my young life I’d witnessed such violence firsthand. A warm, sick feeling washed over me and my heart began to race. My conscience elbowed me to do something, but I was the runt of my 7th grade class. I didn’t stand a chance. I considered telling a teacher but feared retribution, and so I did nothing. Winslow took his beating alone.

In that moment I’d joined the ranks of thousands of cowards before me who’d assumed their unremarkable place in history as so-called “innocent” by-standers. To my knowledge Winslow never knew I stood by and watched as he was treated so ruthlessly. But I knew, and I was ashamed. Christ has forgiven me, but at 55, I still regret doing nothing to help Winslow that spring day.  I don’t pretend to be a man of great courage, but I wish I could travel back to 7th grade again to my middle school ball field. I’d do things differently. I don’t think I could stop those boys from hurting Winslow, but I’d love to try. I’d just like Winslow to know someone cared enough to share his beating.

Legalized abortion is our “Winslow Moment”, confronting us with the greatest moral character test of our time. And like me on my middle school ball field, scores of professing Christians have turned a blind eye to the plight of the preborn who find themselves stuck in the crosshairs of “choice”.

Most pulpits are silent when it comes to speaking up for the “least of these.” Most bible colleges and seminaries have eloquent pro-life positional statements in their student handbooks, but do absolutely nothing to equip or inspire the next generation of Christian leaders to give voice to those threatened by abortion.

This evening I want to address the question, “What Is The Duty Of The Church In An Abortion Culture?” by defending two propositions crucial to understanding and accepting our moral responsibility to the preborn targeted by abortion.

I.  Speaking up for and sacrificing for the preborn is a gospel issue.

To be clear, pro-life ministry is not the gospel, but it is a gospel issue - a “loving your neighbor as yourself” issue. There is no ambiguity in the Bible regarding our moral duty to love our fellow man. In Genesis 4 God confronts Cain for murdering his brother, Abel, with the question, “Where is your brother?” Cain retorts with, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” God never answers Cain’s question directly which speaks to just how obvious the answer is; yes, we are indeed our brother’s keeper! This truth is sprinkled generously throughout both the Old & New Testaments. Proverbs 24:11 says, “Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, ‘But we knew nothing about this,’ does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?” In John 15:13, Jesus tells us, “Greater love has no one than this; to lay down his life for his friends.” But it’s not just our friends we’re to love. The lesson of Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10 is that we have a moral duty even to strangers. The question Jesus answers in this parable is the same question at the heart of the abortion debate today: “Who is my neighbor?” The question for Christians living in an abortion culture, Is the preborn child my neighbor?”

We simplify the abortion debate by answering this question, what are the preborn? As Greg Koukl has said, "If the unborn are not human, no justification for abortion is necessary. But if the preborn are human, no justification for abortion is adequate." The science of human embryology answers this for us. From conception, the preborn is a distinct, living and whole human being. The early embryo is a distinct person from the mother, with his or her own DNA and a blood type, race & gender all potentially different than the mother’s. The embryo is also alive & growing, metabolizing food for energy, growing through cellular reproduction and responding to stimuli. The embryo is also whole: not mature, but genetically complete. Living organisms, like the embryo, have inner natures that work as an integrated, coordinated whole to order their capacities & development. As Randy Alcorn points out, “Something nonhu­man doesn’t become human by getting older & bigger; whatever is human is human from the beginning.”

A second, and crucial question pro-life ambassadors must be able to answer with clarity is, what makes humans valuable? Are we valuable because of what we can do, or simply because of the kind of thing we are? These are the only two ways of viewing or valuing human beings. The pro-life view holds that “all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”, most notably the right to life. Each individual has intrinsic moral worth independent of one’s utility or function. This view is inclusive and tolerant and serves as the only unshakable foundation for human equality. Every individual, regardless of skin color, gender or any other superficial distinction has inherent moral worth simply by virtue of being created in God’s image. This provides the only unshakable foundation for human equality.

Conversely, the so-called “pro-choice” view divorces “humanness” from “personhood”, claiming inclusion in the human community isn’t enough to merit legal protection. Instead, the preborn must meet other arbitrarily chosen “tests” established by the powerful, such as self-awareness, heartbeat, or “wantedness.” If the preborn doesn’t measure up, they’re treated like vermin.
This view is intolerant and elitist and obliterates the foundation for human equality. The minute you divide the room or the womb based on subjectively chosen “standards” to determine who lives and who dies you have destroyed the foundation for human equality. This is bigotry.

There are only 4 differences between adults and embryos. Just remember the acronym, S.L.E.D. -  size, level of development, environment (location) & degree of dependency. None of these justify killing you at your earlier stage but not now. The pro-life position is rooted in the belief that we are more than our parts or our functions - that we are defined by something inside. We have a nature or essence about us that makes us human. Same person now as then. We are not “human doings”, we are human beings.

Clinton Wilcox rightly points out that, “The question of when human life begins is not a difficult one. It only becomes difficult if you want to justify killing people.” 

Abortion is the intentional and unjust killing of innocent human beings at the most vulnerable stage of development in the most barbaric manner imaginable. Abortion dismembers, decapitates, disembowels and burns children to death in mothers’ wombs, robbing them of their most fundamental right, the right to life, & robbing them of every other right. Clearly, legalized abortion is the defining moral issue of our time! This is our Goliath!

Have you ever noticed that the world views mankind as basically good, but worth nothing? (As a result we may abort her, part her out like a junk car and sell her organs to the highest bidder) Christianity, on the other hand, views mankind as basically evil but worth everything (we are morally obligated to her)! Both a love for Christ and the love of Christ compel us to love others. We have a moral duty to rescue our neighbor, whether he’s been beaten and abandoned in a ditch, or denied legal protection and abandoned in the womb.

As we consider the plight of 2,700 children who are aborted every day in the United States we must ask ourselves, is our gospel for all people, or only those conveniently loved and protected? This leads me to the second proposition that I want to defend…

II. Speaking up for and sacrificing for the preborn presents us with a gospel opportunity.

Jesus told His followers, “go and make disciples of all nations.” For over 20 centuries the church has done just that, investing millions of dollars to send missionaries with the gospel to every corner of the earth. Yet the overwhelming majority of churches ignore the largest unreached people group living & dying under their very noses: the preborn.

When the church goes silent babies die and mothers and fathers are saddled with a lifetime of guilt and regret. Surrendering the little ones from our own churches to the abortionist’s knife without a fight calls into question the truthfulness of our gospel before a watching world. It reinforces in their minds that the preborn are indeed disposable - unworthy of our love or of our gospel. What else are non-Christians to think when those who worship the Lover of Children refuse to love the very ones He loves so tenderly?

In Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan the priest and the Levite walked by man in the ditch in order to avoid moral responsibility. And although they are fictional characters, we despise them for it. If there is one common refrain from those outside the church, it is that the church is  “filled w/hypocrites.’ This is a wildly exaggerated accusation, but one the church substantiates when it ignores the “least of these.”  

I am grateful for pastors who champion the cause of the preborn. But most shepherds have abandoned their moral duty and have become tongue-tied when it comes to speaking up for the preborn. Could the heroes of Hebrews 11 whose faith compelled them to shut the mouths of lions, to quench the fury of flames, and to “administer justice”, have imagined a day when shepherds who are called by God to protect the flock would instead surrender precious children from their own flock to the abortionist’s knife without so much as a whimper from their pulpit?

Many church leaders argue, “Speaking up for the preborn will distract from the gospel.” Notice that no one in the Body of Christ ever argues this way with respect to speaking out against sex trafficking or homelessness? Only the preborn are treated with such contempt. And only in hell could one view rescuing precious children from the abortionist’s knife a “distraction” from the gospel. Jesus rebuked his disciples for this kind of pernicious thinking when he said, “Suffer the children to come to me.” Far from a “distraction,” rescuing children from abortion is the gospel in action. 

Other church leaders spiritualize their cold indifference toward the preborn by arguing that speaking out against abortion will only inflict greater harm on those who’ve had abortions. We must approach the subject of abortion with sensitivity & grace, but as Scott Klusendorf points out, “Silence does not spare hurt from women who’ve had abortion; it spares them healing.” I’ll add, when pastors go silent they communicate one of two messages – both regrettable; either abortion is not so bad, or the gospel is not so good. We can do better than this. John 8:36, says, “If the Son sets you free you will be free indeed.” There is no sin that is so great, including the sin of abortion, that God’s grace is not greater still. How dare we hide this message!

Being bound to Jesus Christ and His gospel doesn’t provide us refuge from the conflict over abortion; it demands our engagement. Love compels us to enter the battle. If we ever hope to see an end to legalized abortion in our land we must follow the example of former slave and abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, who wrote of the evil of slavery, “For it is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be proclaimed and denounced.”


When the church’s opposition to abortion equals that of Frederick Douglass’s opposition to slavery, we will make abortion unthinkable in our churches, our communities and our nation. Then we will also lead those hurt by abortion to forgiveness and healing through Jesus Christ and will give unbelievers a reason to take our gospel seriously. 

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Local Ministry Opportunities

A few months ago the Lewis County ministerial association held a mission's fair, where I was made aware of MANY wonderful ministries in our community! These ministries are doing amazing things to meet the many needs in our community! If you feel God leading you to serve, here are a few options to consider. . .
  
Possibilities Pregnancy Center 
I've been able to meet many of the kind staff there and they do SO much to help vulnerable women and children in our community! The Possibilities team is currently in need of a dedicated volunteer to serve as Client Coordinator in Morton on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of the month from 12PM-4PM. Click this link to their website and also their newest update: 

SAFE Family Ministries
This ministry is near and dear to my heart and I've been blessed to see the transforming power of Christ in the hearts of the residents there! SAFE's mission is to offer hope and healing to women and children through a new life in Christ, and they are doing just that! 
They have needs for volunteers from lawn care, sorting donations, and doing room searches, or even being an Encourager to a resident. If God has placed this ministry on your heart, now is a good time to volunteer! 
Visit the website: Safe Family Ministiries
Lewis County Gospel Mission
The gospel mission helps meet the needs of the homeless and needy people in our community through the mission house and the Lewis County Jail. Their goal is to share the gospel of Jesus Christ, and provide for the physical and spiritual needs of homeless in our community.
Volunteers are needed for serving and food preparation and much more! Several Shoestring gals/guys volunteer there and enjoy it immensely! You'll find it a wonderful place to serve and love others for Christ's sake! Here is their website:
Lewis County Gospel Mission

An update on our local Pro-Life ministry will be written soon... so check back in!

"For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink; I was a stranger and you invited me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick and you visited me; I was in prison and you came to me."
(Mtt. 25:35 NASB)

Thursday, June 8, 2017

40 Days for Life New Video - 86 Abortion Centers Closed

What a wonderfully encouraging video and testimony of God's mercy and faithfulness to answer our prayers to end abortion. So thankful for so many dedicated believers and leaders who have made a difference in their cities and communities and led to 86 abortion facilities that have closed in 10 years. Praise the Lord! 


As an update for the Centralia 40 Days for Life campaign, the next vigil will be organized in the spring of 2018. Although, vigils will take place this fall in other areas/cities so check the National Website for a city/community near you that is taking part in it this fall! 

However, we are working on details for a prayer event in October in honor of Respect Life Month. More info and details coming soon! Also,1 hour of prayer during Life Chain will take place on a sidewalk in Centralia/Chehalis in October.  More details coming soon! 

We will also have an opportunity to spread truth and hope at a pro-life booth at the SWWA Fair Aug. 15th - 20th. Contact me if you are interested in volunteering at the booth! We're looking for two people for 3 hr. shifts who will be available to talk to passersby who stop. You will get in FREE to the fair, so after your shift you can wander around and enjoy the festivities! 

Email me at: centralia40daysforlife@gmail.com

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Harvard Law Journal Concludes Unborn Babies Have Constitutional Rights

An influential legal journal at the Harvard Law School just recently published an article affirming the personhood of unborn babies. Here it is! And here's some more info on the article below. 


Joshua Craddock may have just come up with a new approach in the fight to protect unborn life. Or perhaps more accurately – he may have breathed new life into the legal argument against Roe v. Wade.
In a submission to the most recent volume of The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Craddock makes the case that The Constitution of the United States recognizes the unborn as persons.
Though the idea is not new – proponents of the pro-life cause have long argued that the unborn should have equal protection under The Constitution – Craddock’s paper has the unique position of appearing in the most influential law journal in the nation.
Titled “Protecting Prenatal Persons: Does the Fourteenth Amendment Prohibit Abortion?”, the article questions both liberal and conservative positions on how the issue of abortion should be approached legally. Along the way it casts doubt on arguments from opposing legal stalwarts – namely, both Harry Blackmun and Antonin Scalia.
It’s not a light read – what submission to The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is? – but it is an intriguing one which any serious pro-lifer should read.
The basis of Craddock’s argument is as follows: 
The Fourteenth Amendment’s use of the word ‘person’ guarantees due process and equal protection to all members of the human species. The preborn are members of the human species from the moment of fertilization. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment protects the unborn.
Again, the argument is not new – in fact it’s the same argument used by the State of Texas in Roe. But the idea that the Constitution actually recognizes the unborn as a person runs contrary to the position taken by many conservative scholars – including Scalia, who held that the judiciary was inadequate for determining when life begins and that the state ballot box was the appropriate place to decide the abortion issue.
Craddock doesn’t mince words in his defiance of Scalia’s position:
Justice Scalia’s view that abortion should simply be put to a democratic vote is worrisomely reminiscent of Senator Stephen Douglas’s advocacy of ‘popular sovereignty’ to determine whether states could permit racial slavery in the antebellum period.
To defend his position, Craddock relies heavily on the accepted definitions of terms from the time of the Fourteenth Amendment’s writing, as well as the then-existing legal precedents at both the federal and state levels – in other words, commonly accepted legal practice which Blackmun and his consenting colleagues in Roe failed to follow.
Craddock ultimately concedes that though sound, his argument is unfortunately not likely to lead to significant inroads in the fight to end abortion and that a Constitutional life amendment “is likely necessary”. But if it spurs further thought and discussion among proponents of either side, his work will have been well worth the effort. As he points out by referencing William Blackstone in the closing to his article:
Until all human beings are recognized as legal persons, bringing science and law into consonance, ‘the dissonance between truth and fiction will increase, rather than diminish.’
Source: The Resurgent

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Social Justice - Daddy's Letter to the Editor

"The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats it's most vulnerable members" - Mahatma Gandhi 

In 2012, a young girl in Seattle was saved from an injustice that claims the lives of thousands of women every year. Her mother was homeless, drug-addicted, African-American, and could barely care for herself let alone her daughter. 
The girl had no idea who her father was. In fact, she didn't have the mental capacity to comprehend much about her life. 
Underdeveloped vocal chords made it impossible to speak in her own defense; and because she was unable to walk, it was impossible to escape those who wanted to harm her. She is arguably society's "most vulnerable member." 
But at least she was in Seattle, where the many defenders of social justice would come to the aid of a vulnerable woman like her, right?  Wrong. Unfortunately, she had the one deficiency that placed her outside the protection of social justice activists: She was unborn. 
It didn't matter that her natural eye-hair-skin colors, height, sex and adorable laugh were decided the moment she was conceived. Nor that all her vital organs, including her brain, had been functioning perfectly for many months. It didn't matter that scientific fact had declared her both human and alive at conception. 
Because she had not made the trip down the birth canal, nearly all of society had condemned her as unwanted, unloved and sentenced to death. All but one, that is.  Her mother: homeless, drug-addicted, African-America hero of my daughter's story. 
Her self-sacrifice on behalf of one of society's most-vulnerable women speaks volumes. 
Her message to all of us is summed up in a single word, the word she spoke when doctors asked her the name of her baby: "Marvelous." My adopted daughter is truly marvelous.
Hardly a day goes by where she has not brought joy, smiles and laughter to complete strangers; and been fought over by a crowd of siblings!  She is one-of-a-kind, wanted and irreplaceable, just like the 60 million who have died by the tragedy called "choice." 
Like the tens of thousands of other families, we waited years for the chance to give Marvelous a home, and would gladly have done so for other abortion survivors. 
Standing outside Planned Parenthood the past 40 days, we saw and heard many things. but no one was willing to defend what we were standing against: abortion. If you consider yourself pro-choice but not pro-abortion, please recognize that pro-choice equals pro-abortion.  The choice you are defending is the choice to kill an innocent baby like Marvelous. 
This is the most deadly social injustice in America; and the multi-billion-dollar abortion industry will do anything to hide this fact with deceptive slogans and personal attacks.
If you've been on the wrong side of this issue, if you've been victimized by "pro-choice" deception, we want to help. We'll help you find truth, hope and healing, no matter what
Please contact us through: 40 Days for Life - Centralia
Ted Bowes 
Mossyrock, WA 






The day Marvelous legally became Brielle Jubilee Bowes!

Waiting for our turn at the courthouse on adoption day! :-) 

Brielle LOVES Valerie's Lab puppies! 




















(Photo credits: Bonnie's Custom Photography, Robyn and Valerie Bowes, Lydia Tevis, Evan Smythe) 

Below is a discussion that took place online after the letter was printed in the paper and posted online. 

SMH 
My husband and I are happy that you and your adopted daughter found each other. One of the primary points of your letter is that the mother made the right choice to give birth and put the child up for adoption. That is what many pro-choice people like my husband and myself want for every woman -- the right to make the best choice for her, given her specific situation. We believe a variety of birth control measures should be widely available and affordable for women and men. Additionally, young people should be educated about birth control, family planning, etc. Statistics show that the abortion rate in the US has been declining for decades, and we believe it would decline even more if our above suggestions were fully implemented. There may still be times, however, when an abortion is the preferred choice of the woman (for a variety of reasons) and we believe she should have that choice. It is her body, after all.

Mom in Mossyrock 
Dear SMH - The title the editor used for the letter might give the impression that a mother’s choice is most important. But the letter makes the case that some choices are just wrong. I do think the birth mother made the right choice; but not if right means “the best choice for her, given her specific situation”. Wouldn’t you agree that on that basis “right” would have been to abort (kill) the baby? Her choice was right because killing an innocent and defenseless human being, just because their life is inconvenient, is always wrong. All of us experience inconvenience to accommodate of the lives of others at times. Who would argue that our convenience is more important than someone else’s life? You close your comment by saying, “It is her body, after all”. In the first editorial on this subject, the question was asked, “When did you get your body?” How would you answer that? Based on the science of embryology, the baby (and you!) received the gift of her body when she was conceived. So when does a baby’s right to live outweigh a mother’s right to “make the best choice for her”? Let’s keep talking . . . 

SMH 
Thanks for your response. I disagree with your statement that the right choice for the mother was to have an abortion. The right choice for her was to give birth and have the baby adopted. There is always going to be a debate about whose rights are paramount -- the fetus's or the mother's. How would you feel about a case where the mother will die if she does not terminate her pregnancy? You address that question in your last sentence. Our laws set limits on when an abortion may be performed (when the mother's rights outweigh the fetus's and vice versa). And not every abortion is performed just because the pregnancy will be inconvenient. What about if a fetus, at around 14 weeks, is found to have anencephaly? This is a condition where the skull, scalp, and brain have not properly formed in the womb. Some or most of the brain is missing and the condition is always fatal, with babies living only hours or days after birth (assuming they are not stillborn first). Should a woman be forced to carry this baby to term? As I said, I would wish abortion to be rare but available and safe. And I believe a woman should have control over her own body. Thanks for the good discussion!

Mom in Mossyrock 
Thank you so much for continuing the discussion SMH and for sharing your thoughts and questions. As far as the right choice . . . in the case of my daughter what society would tell her mother to be the right choice would have been to abort because of her situation and the list of difficulties stacked-up against her. Is it ever right to give another human being the higher right to take the life of an innocent child? As far as the question of the mother's rights being paramount to the child's in the case of a difficult pregnancy - those cases are extremely rare and in most cases the medical professionals encourage the mother to abort, not because she is in any danger, but in order to safeguard themselves from law suits. There is a very good video that explains this and many other hard cases on the blog here: http://lclifeline.blogspot.com/p/videos.html It's the first video on the page. I personally have carried two pregnancies to term that medical professionals encouraged me to abort; a set of quadruplets and my last child. Over 900,000 abortions take place in the US every year and according to the Guttmacher Institute 74% of women had an abortion because of inconvenience. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/journals/3711005.pdf . . . and why would they think twice in doing so? If it's legal, it must not be wrong, right? There's the link and scroll to page 4 for the graph of reasons women give for abortion. I agree Anencephaly is an extremely difficult case and I'm sure painfully emotional for the parents to wrestle with. I personally have not had an Anencephaly baby so I can only imagine how hard it would be. But I do have 2 close friends who have carried Anancephaly babies and neither of them regret carrying them until it was their time to pass away. Despite the emotional difficulty, they still loved their baby as long as they could and because they did not abort they are not experiencing and having to deal with the added guilt of taking their baby's life before it was time. I agree with you that women should have control over their own body. But, the teeny body of their baby developing within the womb is not a part of the mother's body . . . it is a distinct, living human being with a completely different genetic code, in many cases different blood type, and 50% of the time with a different gender. Again, when did you get your body? When did every woman get her body . . . and when would you say it becomes wrong for someone else to take a very young woman's life? Baby girls are completely dependent on another adult(s) for a long time after they are born. Thank you for this continued discussion!

SMH 
Thanks for your comments. I disagree with your statement that a fetus is not a part of a woman's body. The fetus is attached to the woman's body and is completely dependent upon her. That certainly sounds as if it is a part of her body. Your friends who carried anencephalic babies made the best choice for them, and that is great. Not all women would want to make the same choice, however, and I want them to have that option. It appears we have reached the end of our conversation as we seem to be going in circles now. For me, it all comes down to a woman having control over her body and making decisions that are best for her. And as I have said, I want abortion to be rare but available and safe. I also want birth control readily available and affordable and I want young people properly educated. I hope you support these efforts. Thanks for the discussion! 

SMH 
After I posted my comment last night, I thought of another point I would like to make. Abortions are not a modern procedure. They have been around since ancient times. After just a quick bit of research, I found that women have been obtaining abortions (or performing them upon themselves) as far back as 400 BC. And as we know from modern times, many women were seriously injured or died as a result of unsafe abortions. Do we as a society really want to return to those dark days? Therefore, I return to my main point that we should make birth control widely available and affordable and educate young people so that abortion will be rare, but available and safe. Thanks!
Mom in Mossyrock 
Hello again SMH! Sorry for the delayed response and hope you see this! I'll keep this short as I do agree that we're covering some of the same ground . . . but I guess I'd still like to know your answer to my question "When did you get your body?" You've never responded to that, but keep talking about how important it is to respect a woman's right over her own body. The big question in abortion is not whether we should respect such a right, but when it should be granted. When does a baby "woman" receive the right to prevent someone else from ending her life prematurely? Should it be withheld until she is able to ask for it, or comprehend what it is? If so, you must agree with the man I spoke with in the conference room where "Pro-Choice" signs were being made in early April. He finally admitted that if it's morally OK to kill a baby before birth, it must be morally OK to kill a fully dependent infant after birth. At least he was thinking with logical consistency and willing to be honest . . . but are you willing to accept this logical conclusion of your "pro-Choice" position. Or will you agree with modern scientific fact that you received a unique human body at conception, and though you lacked the capacity to ask for or defend your right to keep others from killing you, you still deserved the right to live. Again, if you were not granted the right to live by your mother at that stage, what other rights would ever have mattered. The only reason any of us are able to discuss this matter today is that our right to life was protected while we were growing inside our mother's womb. How can you not see the wrong in denying that same protection to those growing inside their mother's now. Are they not the "most vulnerable" that Ghandi spoke about? And shouldn't we protect their right to life as the fundamental right of any human being? If you'll answer those questions for me, I'll gladly answer the "unsafe abortions" and "affordable birth control" questions . . . but none of that matters if you won't agree that the right to life is fundamental and should always be protected.

Response to Teen Vogue From a Pro-Life Teen

You may have heard about the article in the magazine Teen Vogue, seeking to "normalize" and "trivialize" abortion to young teen girls. The name of the article -What to get your friend Post- Abortion. It then lists 10 things to bring your friend after her abortion from a comedy show, to a F U-terus Pin, to an "angry uterus heating pad" and more. It even encourages young girls to become escorts for abortion clinics to make it "less scary" for the next teen girl. I haven't read the article and frankly I don't even want to. How horrible that this kind of material is being fed to vulnerable young teen girls. And how insensitive it is to the terrible trauma and pain abortion causes women. Behind this article is the abortion giant Planned Parenthood whose billion dollar corporation will do anything to normalize abortion and encourage young girls to have them. 

Autumn, a brave young 16 yr old girl from Students for Life responded to Teen Vogue in a YouTube video now gone viral. I encourage you to watch it and hear the truth she so eloquently exposes. 


We must de-fund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood and send that million-dollars-a-day of tax payer funding to expand access to affordable healthcare through non-abortion Federally Qualified Community Healthcare Clinics.  


If you haven't signed the petition to defund Planned Parenthood please do!