Category: abortion

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/5/2019: Rebekah Valerius

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

January is here and now it’s time to talk about abortion again. It’s the topic that puts to death thousands of babies every year and this in the name of women’s rights. Generally, it’s thought that if you’re a woman, you should obviously support this movement. Shouldn’t you be free to express your own autonomy and reproductive rights? Didn’t former president Obama say once that he didn’t want his daughters to be punished with a baby?

What if this isn’t always the case? What if sometimes women actually don’t want to jump on the abortion bandwagon? How are they to be seen? Are they traitors to the cause? Could it be that they’re actually the true feminists out there? Could it be that maybe having an abortion is not something that a woman should do, but something that a woman should resist?

My guest is an apologist who speaks on the issues of women and abortion. She is definitely of the opinion that women should not be in support of abortion. She is also living this out as a homeschooling mother of two and a wife. She will be with us this Saturday to talk about issues relating to women and abortion. Her name is Rebekah Valerius.

So who is she?

According to her bio:

Rebekah Valerius is a student in the MA Cultural Apologetics program at Houston Baptist University and has a BS in Biochemistry. She is a wife and homeschooling mother of two.

So why would a woman supposedly be going against her tribe and saying that women should not seek abortion? Does this mean that she wants women to be the slaves of men? Isn’t this really a very anti-woman position to take and is this just joining in and supporting the patriarchy as it’s called?

Or are there instead good reasons why women should really not be for abortion? Does it really have anything to do with women per se? Is the issue not so much the nature of woman as it is the nature of abortion? What is it about abortion that has Rebekah saying that women should not have them?

And then what if they have? We hear stories about women living in judgment and depression because they did have an abortion. Is an abortion a game over for a woman? Should she live the rest of her life with a cloud hanging over her head? What grace can be given to a woman who has had an abortion? (Let’s keep in mind also that not just women live with this. I have known men in my lifetime who have regret over the issue of abortion and helping to pay for one.)

I hope you’ll be joining me for this episode of the Deeper Waters Podcast. I really am working on getting back into the regular shows after so much that has been going on over here. Please be patient with any delay in bringing the best in Christian apologetics to you.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

The Agenda Project’s Ad

What does a baby deserve? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

So Agenda Project has an ad that has been making rounds lately. It has a cute little baby smiling and giggling as babies do. All along words regularly pop up on the screen. I could tell you more, but hey, why not take less than a minute and watch the ad yourself?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL-5ICEfj24

At the start when watching, I was wondering what the point of this ad was. We are told the baby deserves to be wanted. The baby deserves to be loved. Yes. Who would dispute that? Then the third one, at least for me, gives a chill. She deserves to be a choice.

To deserve according to the dictionary means to be worthy of. With that, then we can say with the meme on the internet at the three things this baby deserves, one of them is not like the other. Something in the list just really doesn’t belong.

Is the ad saying that if the baby is not loved and not wanted supposedly, she should be a choice? But then that doesn’t fit. If she is not loved and not wanted, why change the last one then to “She is a choice.”? If she is loved and she is wanted, why should she be a choice?

Let’s also acknowledge something. Abortion activists have been telling us that this is not a baby for so long. What is in the womb is a fetus. This ad dispels the myth. Now some abortion advocates are, at last, acknowledging that these are babies. Good on them at least for that! It’s still wicked and evil, but hopefully, confession is the path to recovery.

Sadly, I’m skeptical of that. I think groups like Planned Parenthood know very well that these are babies. They just don’t care. The problem with these babies is that they may deserve to be loved and wanted, and they are, but they also get in the way of our sex lives and our careers and well, we can’t have that now can we?

This ad is also unclear. This is a baby that is not in the womb. Does this mean that infanticide is now okay? Is the baby always a choice? Can she be a choice when she is outside of the womb?

I have no intention of holding back. Abortion is just an evil practice. When we read our Old Testaments and read about the Canaanites that Israel drove out, we need to realize we are worse than they were. They sacrificed their children to be sure, but usually, they did it for something like the good of the harvest for the community. When we do it, we do it at the altar of convenience.

Years ago I was at an apologetics conference where Chuck Colson was speaking and he said that if you are a Christian who supports abortion, you really need to check on the status of your faith. He got a standing ovation and sadly that surprised him because usually, that statement was quite controversial. Perhaps it is, but I agree with it.

Perhaps in the future, more abortions activists might be even more straightforward. We can hope. My fear is that if they are, our society would have reached such a place of immorality that they still won’t care.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Should Babies With Disabilities Be Aborted?

Who gets to live? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Yesterday I saw on the Unbelievable forum on Facebook a post about abortion and if children with disabilities should be aborted. Naturally, autism showed up on the list. Seeing that, I knew I had to say something.

Wanted to comment here. I’m a devout Christian, an apologist with my own ministry and podcast, a college graduate, and a moderator here. I don’t say this in my capacity as a moderator but just to point out that I do what I can to contribute to the world.

And oh yes. I’m on the autism spectrum. I have Aspergers. Not only am I on it, but my wife is on it as well. My wife of eight years that is.

I am so thankful both of us were raised by Christian parents that never saw abortion as an option. I enjoy my life and I consider it a gift that I get to live life everyday. I realize we are high-functioning compared to others, but no one else really gets to determine if I will have joy in my life but me and no one else should decide for me if my life is or isn’t worth living.

I also don’t really like the term birth defect. It’s like those of us with a disability had something go wrong in manufacturing. Honestly, if a cure for Aspergers came out tomorrow, I wouldn’t take it. My differences do cause me some handicaps, but they also give me an advantage in how I think many times. I happily accept who I am and enjoy it.

I was told that wouldn’t some be better if they didn’t have a condition like spina bifida? In some ways, no doubt yes, but isn’t this a slippery slope to be going down? We are the ones who will determine who can enjoy their life and who cannot? Do we think it’s good to treat life in such a cheap way?

Now of course, there are ways that you can live your life that are bad. No one is denying that. There is most anything wrong you can do with something that is good. Sadly, the very good news of the Gospel has often been used for evil.

But if you want to see if something is good, you start with the something itself. Is life a good? Is it any wonder we have so many cases of suicide and such today when life is described in these terms? You can’t be happy unless you have perfect health or look perfect or have the best career or have so much money in the bank?

Nothing wrong with having any of those things. If you have them, give thanks. I know my wife gives thanks that she married a man who has such great good looks for example. (Yes. I know. If she reads this she will be rolling her eyes) Yet even if we have any of these things, if something happens to them at any time, does our life automatically become not worth living?

It’s interesting to me that so many people that have this position are atheists. Don’t tell me there are no moral implications that can follow from atheism. To be fair, many atheists are staunchly pro-life. I am thankful for them. However, you can be a consistent atheist and be staunchly pro-abortion and that is a concern for me. I do not see how you can be a devout Christian and be pro-abortion or if you will, pro-choice. Sorry Chelsea Clinton, but your position is the one that is entirely out of lines with Christianity.

From the womb to the tomb, life is sacred. Every human being regardless of power or money or fame has as much value to their life as the child just conceived in the womb. All of them equally partake of the Image of God. All of them are meant to reflect Him in some way and show who He is.

Abortion is an evil. Let’s stomp it out the best we can.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

Lysistrata 2018

What can we learn about a sex strike? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

As a historian of the New Testament, I think it’s important to learn about what was going on in the Greek word. One play in Greek history I enjoyed was Lysistrata. In it, the women of the communities are upset that their men are going to war and leaving them at home. They decide to work together and have a sex strike. The men wind up going berserk due to the lack of sex with their wives. It is a hilarious work to read.

Apparently, some people today are thinking this is a good idea with the possibility that Trump could place a conservative judge on the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade could be in danger. There is a movement with the hashtag of Lysistrata2018. The idea is to not have sex with any man that would support the undoing of Roe v. Wade.

There you have it! Feminists are now encouraging abstinence! It’s about time!

It’s really also an exercise in futility. For one thing, Trump has not really been one to keel over and bow to the desires of his critics. When I hear a protest going on, I really have to ask “Do they think they’re accomplishing anything?” It’s the idea that if you get a mob together, the mob should have the power to make sure that they get what they want. Most of us watching aren’t swayed. Well, that’s not accurate. We are. We’re more swayed to agree with our current opinion.

Also, keep in mind that a large number of evangelicals voted for Trump. Many of those evangelicals are also pro-life. Pro-life people are not likely to be in a serious relationship with someone who is pro-choice and even if they are, if we’re Christians, we’re supposed to be waiting until we’re married to have sex anyway.

And Christian men, do you seriously want to date a girl who is open to abortion? This is a woman who could kill the children the two of you conceive together and yes, she can do it without your consent. There are a number of fathers out there who never got to see their children because the mothers had an abortion behind their back.

So what does this mean? It means that the women are holding back from the men who are not willing to make commitments to them in marriage and who will have sex with them without it. In other words, they are holding back from men who are already willing to use them for sex. These are the very men that the feminist movement has railed against. Feminism has often said that women should be loved for more than sex, which is entirely true, but many feminists defend the very actions that allow them to be used for sex and the very people that will use them for sex.

If you really want to be a true feminist, be pro-life. If anything is feminine, it is what makes a woman unique from a man. A woman is unique because she is the only one who can give birth. This doesn’t mean that a woman has to be a mother to be a woman, but it does mean that this is a unique difference. There are many more, but this one is true without exception. Women have babies. Men do not. (I know about the transgender claims. I do not consider someone to be a woman just because they alter their body.)

If anything, right now the Lysistrata movement is showing why these people are not taken seriously. Now of course in marriage, the situation is different. Between a married husband and wife, I do not think withholding is a good policy. The marriage bed is meant to build up intimacy and the relationship. There are some exceptions that I could be open to, such as a spouse having a porn habit that they refuse to repent of or seek help for or a spouse who is abusive.

As for me, I just plan on sitting back and watching this kind of thing happen more and more. It is almost as if the left is becoming a parody of itself, if it hasn’t reached that point already. A bunch of women having a sex strike will not put a liberal on the court. If anything, it will make Trump want to pick the most conservative judge he can find.

We’re entering an interesting time in our history. We’ll just watch and see what happens. Either way, the church needs to keep being the church.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

Book Plunge: The Bible Doesn’t Say That!

What do I think of Joel Hoffman’s book published by Thomas Dunne? Let’s Plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out!

Someone sent me an email about this book wanting me to look through it and shred it. I ordered it at the library and went through and really, there is some stuff in here that is pretty good. The author is right that the Bible does not condone slavery for instance, which is a breath of fresh air to hear since so many people get that one wrong. Some passages are quite interesting and there is much to learn from this.

One obvious downside from the book unfortunately is the lack of notes. There are none whatsoever. Other scholars are not referenced. There is no way of knowing where exactly Dr. Hoffman gets his information from. Sure, he holds a Ph.D., but that doesn’t stand alone. One is not infallible for having one.

So if there were any sections I would want to comment on, most notably would be the one on the Bible and homosexuality. Does the Bible say homosexual practice is a sin? According to Hoffman, no. One wishes we could have moved past the arguments by now such as mixed fabrics and such. Hoffman realizes the passages in Leviticus are sandwiched between bestiality and incest, but that doesn’t seem to matter.

Hoffman also looks at Romans 1 and says Paul doesn’t say the behavior that the people were doing was wrong. It was just the result of what happened. God punished people with unnatural sex, but we don’t know what the term unnatural actually means.

In reality, we do. Paul uses language from Genesis 1 quite regularly such as speaking of the creator and using terms male and female. This is all a way of saying Paul has Genesis 1 in mind without explicitly saying such. Paul says that from what is seen, everyone knows that there is a God. It is a denial of the vertical reality to instead worship idols and the creation. The best example of a denial of reality on the horizontal level Paul can come up with is homosexual behavior. Male and female go together and belong together.

Nowhere in this does Hoffman interact with Matthew 19 and Jesus talking about marriage Himself. Note that Jesus does not just go to Genesis 2:24, but He also goes to Genesis 1:26-27 where it talks about mankind being created male and female. That is the foundation.

Hoffman does say elsewhere in the book that the Bible never condemns polygamy. Explicitly, this is so, but it warns of the danger of it and when polygamy takes place, it leads to problems. Polygamy was a borderline practice that was allowed for the time being, but did not represent the ideal. Genesis 1 and 2 have the ideal. One man and one woman for life.

Hoffman then says we should consider that there are people who could only find companionship with the same sex and they didn’t know about homosexuality like we do today. I highly question both. The latter is quite simple. They knew about homosexual behavior. Just read the Symposium and see that some people are paired up with the same sex. This isn’t new.

For the former, we have this strange idea that the only way you can find love is through sex. Yet even between men and women, this is not so. I love my mother, my sister, my aunt, and my mother-in-law. There is no thought of sex there at all. I share a special love with my wife and that is the relationship that my sexual thought is supposed to go to.

The idea is that to have true companionship, one must have sex, and this is false. Who is the homosexual supposed to love? The same person as everyone else. His neighbor. That does not have to be sexualized. There are plenty of people who live fine and happy lives without having sex. Those of us who are married should realize the Bible’s prescription that we do have regular sex, but those who are not if they are submitting to Christ will accept a lifestyle of celibacy until they get married.

I also want to look at abortion. The passage used is Exodus 21. Nowhere does he go to Psalm 139. Nowhere does he go to Jeremiah 1:5. Nowhere does he go to Luke 1 with John the Baptist leaping in the womb.

Even still at Exodus 21, the passage doesn’t work. The man is not trying to kill the child. He is doing something on accident and the death penalty is not there for accidental death. Even in the cases of it happening, the man could always go to a city of refuge and stay there.

Hoffman also concludes the whole book saying there are no miracles in the Bible. Miracles are extra-scientific after all. It is true that they have wonders, but Hoffman describes wonders as freedom from slavery or a sense of the divine or beauty or family or anything like that. These are wondrous things, but not acts of God directly every time.

It also doesn’t mean we have to give up miracles as they are understood. We can have both. Can I not appreciate the former things while still holding that God acts in the world? I see no reason I cannot.

Hoffman’s book again is a hit and a miss. Some things are good, but some things are not. A reader could gain some wheat and let the chaff go its own way.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

 

 

Book Plunge: Love Thy Body

What do I think of Nancy Pearcey’s book published by Baker Books? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Nancy Pearcey’s book is a must-read. It is a nuclear missile of sorts going into secularism and a powerful argument that needs to be dealt with. At the same time, it’s a simple argument. It starts with a basic premise that all of us can immediately see and goes from there.

That premise is your body is something that shows who you are. If you want to know how you look publicly to the world, all of it comes through your body. We might say we live in a world that values the body. After all, you can find fitness videos to no end at the video store and there are TV programs about weight loss and everything else related to the body.

It can still be that we don’t really value the body that much. We can idolize it without really understanding it. Do we really care about the body itself or about the image we portray with the body? Is the body something truly good in its own right?

Pearcey uses this claim to get to arguments about numerous areas. You will find the hook-up culture, living together before marriage, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, and transgenderism addressed in this. All of this leads to giving more power to the state. If only she had written about something that people are talking about today….

Pearcey says that in each of these items, we are making a false statement about the body. Sex is a powerful expression two people make with their bodies for one another. It is really giving all that you can to another person. We speak about it as a grand finale. We go all the way. We hit a home run. We score.

Instead, our culture often reduces sex to just a hobby. We have this idea that you can have sex with no strings attached, but you can’t. Your body knows what you’re doing and that’s why bonding chemicals are released during the act of sex, including chemicals for a man. Your body is forming a bond with this other person in the act of sex.

Porn does the same kind of thing training your body to respond to a lie. The body you see on the other end is not a real body, but it is more fake. It is the result of a lot of make-up and such made for just that occasion. The person on the other side of that camera doesn’t care about you. They don’t even know that you exist. You will not get the joy of undressing them before your eyes and getting to run your hands over their body yourself. There’s a reason why many men today are in their 20’s and having to take Viagra. A real woman can’t get them to respond any more because porn makes them need more and more.

Women struggle enough as it is with self-image in the area of physical beauty. It doesn’t help them that they now think they have to struggle with countless women seen in porn. I say this also realizing that women today will also watch porn and will face similar struggles though different in some ways I’m sure to the men.

Abortion shows this struggle as well. Abortion downplays the body in that science is not the decider of whether that is truly a human. An artificial category is made up so that something is human, but it is not a person. There is no scientific test for such a thing. It is an ad hoc claim made to justify the killing of the innocent human person in the womb.

Homosexuality is also such a case of lying with one’s body. It is saying that one has the body of a man or a woman, but they will deny this. They will instead treat their body like it is that of a woman or a man. Again, the problem is a downplaying of the body and it is because feelings take precedence. One feels a certain way so forget what the body says. It is overruled by the emotions.

Transgenderism really demonstrates this. One believes a lie so much that one is willing to have one’s own body mutilated rather than work on changing the feelings. We live in an age where one can deny the body so much that one will undergo surgery to make it subservient to the feelings.

All of this also gives more power to the state. The state has to step in and change things. Marriage is no longer about a physical union, but it is about the feelings the people have for one another. Under many a secular definition, two roommates living together can be married even though they have no romantic feelings towards one another and will never have sex together.

The state will step in and redefine terms and then it will have to defend those terms and those who resist are enemies of the state. The ultimate target is the family. The family is a threat to the government since the family does not depend on the government for its existence. It’s a pre-political reality. The charges are serious and the cause is serious.

Get Pearcey’s book. Read it. Learn it. Open your eyes to what is going on around you. Pearcey’s book is a must-read for anyone interested in debating in any of these areas.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/20/2018: Scott Henderson

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Usually we will all visit a government office sometime and get asked if we want to be an organ donor. For most of us, it seems like a simple decision. When I’m dead, what do I need my organs for? They might as well go to someone else who can use them. That’s not a bad way to think, but while we can support organ donation, could we be inconsistent with how we do it at times?

If we are pro-life does that mean that we only value the life in the womb, or does it mean we value life outside the womb? Should any life be used for some utilitarian purpose? Could it be that perhaps sometimes people could say the line of “I’m not dead yet!” and mean it? Maybe they’re not capable, but maybe they would want to. Could some people be allowed to die early and without a clear criterion of death just for the sake of their organs?

It might seem like a strange question to ask, but questions are worth exploring. To discuss this question, I have decided to bring on someone who did his dissertation on the topic of organ donation. While he does support organ donation, he does have some concerns about the methods that we use to get the organs and maybe by our practices, we are not being consistently pro-life. His name is Scott Henderson.

So who is he?

Apologetics Program Coordinator, Associate Professor of Philosophy and Apologetics, Luther Rice College & Seminar

B.A., Florida Bible College; M.A.A., Southern Evangelical Seminary; M.A., Franciscan University of Steubenville; Ph.D., Duquesne University

Scott Henderson joined the Luther Rice faculty in the fall of 2008. He teaches courses in apologetics, philosophy and ethics. Henderson has spoken on numerous topics in apologetics and bioethics at various venues and was a contributor to Norman Geisler’s Baker’s Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics and Josh McDowell’s The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Moreover, Henderson has served in hospitals in Ohio and Pennsylvania as an in-service lecturer and policy writer and was an adviser and research assistant for the start of Franciscan University’s Institute of Bioethics in Steubenville, OH. He has also lectured at LCC International University in Klaipeda, Lithuania and at the Ewangelikalna Wyzsza Szkola Teologiczna in Wroclaw, Poland.

Henderson holds degrees in Biblical Education, Apologetics, Philosophy, and Bioethics as well as professional memberships with the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity and the Evangelical Philosophical Society, each at which he has presented conference papers. His research interests include issues in apologetics, ethical issues with the end-of-life, defining death, and organ transplantation.  He, his wife Kathy, and their four children currently reside in Cumming, GA.

Organ donation is something rarely talked about in pro-life circles and I hope you’ll be listening to this show. We will be discussing how it is that organ donation relates to pro-life and the criterion of death. I also hope you’ll go on iTunes and leave a positive review of the Deeper Waters Podcast. It’s always a joy to see!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/13/2018: Dr. George Delgado

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Choice is awesome! Right? We’ve all been granted supposedly the freedom of choice. We have abortionists marching down the street talking about a woman’s right to choose. Now we have come so far that there is even an abortion pill. Who needs to go to a Planned Parenthood? Just be at home and pop the pill and boom, problem solved.

But what if you have regrets?

For instance, if you talk to people who have survived a suicide attempt, many of them have regretted the move immediately after they made the attempt. By then, it’s too late and measures must be taken to save them. What if you take the pill and down it and then think, “Oh my. What have I done?” Can there be anything done to help you?

Fortunately, Dr. George Delgado has a technique to reverse the effects of the abortion pill for those in need. That way, a child can be saved. Naturally, we know the pro-choice crowd has been thrilled with this because choice is such a wonderful thing and…

Wait.

You say they’re not?

That’s interesting.

Anyway, Dr. Delgado will be talking about his work and his organization this Saturday with me. We will have a one-hour podcast where we will discuss what we can do to further stop abortion. Of course, for that, we need to know more about who Dr. Delgado is. So who is he?

                                                                                   

According to his bio:

Dr. George Delgado is the medical director of APR and Culture of Life Services (COLFS) in San Diego County. He received his medical degree from the University of California, Davis and completed his residency at Santa Monica Hospital/UCLA. He is board certified in family medicine, hospice and palliative medicine, health care ethics, NaProTECHNOLOGY, and the Creighton Model for Natural Family Planning (NFP). He has been practicing family medicine since 1988.

Be warned since we’re talking about the abortion pill and such that this could contain some graphic information so if you have children around, you might want to hold off on this podcast until later.

We’ll be talking about what the pill is and what it does. Then we’ll be talking about Delgado’s plan to reverse the effects of the pill. What does it do and how does it work and are there any side-effects? Are we seeing healthy babies that survive the pill as a result of what Dr. Delgado is doing? What can be done to further help this project and why is it that the people on the left are upset about this? Are they not the people who are always saying that they support a woman’s right to choose? Why be upset if a woman decides to choose to reverse the effects of the abortion pill?

I hope you’ll be watching for the next episode of the Deeper Waters Podcast and please considering going on iTunes and leaving a positive review of the show. I really delight in seeing what you think of the program. Hope you enjoy it!

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Deeper Waters Podcast 1/6/2018: Clinton Wilcox

What’s coming up? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

First off, for those wondering where the show has been, we had to reschedule our interview with Rosaria Butterfield again because of an illness on her part. As for Michael Heiser, he had power outages which I’m guessing were due to the snow. Again, we are rescheduling.

Now to get back to what’s coming up. January is a month I dedicate to the topic of abortion. For many of us, we tend to think abortion and Christianity don’t mix, and I agree. I don’t see how you can support abortion and be a Christian. Years ago at the National Conference on Christian Apologetics, Chuck Colson was a speaker and said that if anyone calls themselves a Christian and supports abortion, they need to check their faith at the door. At this, he got a standing ovation to which he was quite surprised seeing as he seems to usually get the opposite.

But sometimes you do meet that person who says they are a follower of Jesus and supports abortion.

Kira Shlesinger is the author of “Pro-Choice and Christian.” My wife found the book while she was surfing on Facebook one day. I immediately got in touch with Clinton Wilcox to see if he would like to read it. He promptly ordered it and wrote a review of it. We then discussed having him come on the show again to talk about it. In the interest of fairness, let it be known that I reached out to Shlesinger’s church to see if she’d be willing to come on and talk about her position with Clinton. I never received a reply.

Therefore, my guest this Saturday will be just Clinton Wilcox. I should also let it be known that I have not got to read the book yet myself. Our resources are limited and due to it being a new book, I could not order it at the library via interlibrary loan.

But let’s get to Clinton Wilcox. Who is he?

According to his bio:

Clinton Wilcox is a staff apologist with Life Training Institute and a certified speaker and mentor with Justice for All. Clinton specializes in training pro-life people to make the pro-life case more effectively and persuasively. Clinton is also a prolific writer. He has had two articles published with Christian Research Journal, with one forrthcoming, as well as having a forthcoming article published in Bioethics, one of the top five leading bioethics journals in the world, with co-authors Daniel Rodger and Bruce Blackshaw.

Can one be a Christian and support abortion? We often know how to respond to those outside the church who support abortion, but how do you respond to those inside? If one claims to follow Christ, is there anything different that can be said that would not normally be said?

This will be an interesting kick-off to our month on abortion and I hope that you will be a part of it. Again, I apologize for all the problems we’ve had with new shows. I hope nothing happens this time. Please consider going on iTunes also and leaving a positive review of the Deeper Waters Podcast.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

On Sexual Harassment

What are we to make of this modern outbreak? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Odds are that before the day is through, a new sexual harassment charge will be brought forward against Roy Moore, Al Franken, or someone else in a position of power. This leaves Christians wondering what is going on exactly. How is it that we respond to this? Why is this such an issue today?

The first thing to say about this is innocent until proven guilty. That’s the American system. If someone does apologize or agree to the charges, then yes, take that as an admission of guilt. I don’t care for the comedy of Louis CK, but when the charges were brought against him, I withheld judgment until he came forward and said that they were true.

Yet there is no doubt some of this happening today and the question is why. Why in our day and age do so many men seem to be accused of this? Please note that a woman can just as much sexually harass a man, but usually, men seem to be the main offenders. It could be because either a man doesn’t want to admit it, or because a man would not consider it harassment if a woman started really coming on to him and doing sexual things to him.

Some of this I think is due to modern feminism. It was this idea that men and women are absolutely equal. Reality check. They’re not. Men and women are vastly different. This does not mean that one is superior to the other. It does not mean that one is more human than the other. It just means that they are different from one another.

Feminism sought to make them all equal and one of the great ways to do this was abortion. After all, once a woman gets pregnant, it could really dampen her career and her sex life. Can’t have that! The oddity is that women who were promoting this were also allowing themselves to be used by men. After all, men have this desire for sex without consequences and if you can remove the consequences even if the woman gets pregnant, then hey, no worries! Sadly, many will happily kill their own children if it means they can get more sex.

I wish I was exaggerating on this point, but I am not. Consider how a few years ago when Texas was passing a bill to limit abortion. Here you have man-child Ben Sherman writing about why this bill should be opposed.

Your sex life is at stake. Can you think of anything that kills the vibe faster than a woman fearing a back-alley abortion? Making abortion essentially inaccessible in Texas will add an anxiety to sex that will drastically undercut its joys. And don’t be surprised if casual sex outside of relationships becomes far more difficult to come by.

Note that part. Casual sex outside of relationships. After all, who cares about a relationship with the woman? That takes so much work and such. You might actually have to get to know her, spend time with her, invest in her, and learn to treat her with love and honor. Nah. It’s far easier to just “hit it and quit it.”

You see, if sex is the end and the women don’t matter for a relationship, then the women will be used. Sadly, it’s not because these people have a high view of sex. They actually have a low view of sex. They take one aspect of sex, the physical joy, and remove all the other aspects of it.

One of the great joys of sex in marriage is the bonding it gives with one’s spouse. That happens in relationship. Before I got married, a former pastoral counselor gave me a notecard with some pieces of advice for marriage. One statement on there I remember was “Sex is the thermometer that measures the temperature of the relationship.” That can apply to many men today. If you want to ask a man how his marriage is doing, he could very well base it off of what goes on in the bedroom.

Sex is indeed a physical act, but it is not just physical. It is spiritual. It is emotional. It is relational. If you take the physical, then you’re really just cheapening sex. Now, something that’s incredibly good and cheapened can still be incredibly good. A Corvette can be a great car even if it has a dent in it. It just won’t have the same value.

To get back then to what was being said, a man won’t value a woman as a woman, but see her as just a body. Often times, this will mean that he thinks the same thing that works on him should work on her. The woman should be that if you do X, then Y happens. Do this and you get sex back. Ask any married man and they will tell you the truth about this.

I often think part of the problem in marriages is that men expect women to think like men and vice-versa. It doesn’t work that way. The way men and women think about things is extremely different. The sad thing is many of those things we think should be appreciated. A man thinks his romantic physical gestures should be appreciated. A wife thinks her helpful tips on how to do the dishes should be appreciated.

To get back to harassment, what happens then is that men can make advances they think should be appreciated, but get turned into harassment. They can also treat women as if they were just bodies and nothing more than objects of pleasure for them. It’s quite interesting to think that Mike Pence got a lot of pushback for his rule about relationships with women other than his wife, but a lot of people today would be in a lot less trouble if they followed that rule.

What does it take to change this? It takes a higher view of sex and a higher view of people. Sex has to be more than just a physical activity, though certainly not less. It has to be a spiritual and emotional and relational connection to be saved for the sacred bonds of marriage. Men and women have to be seen as persons in their own right and their very beings are not just means to an end.

As for the current charges, we can discuss, but let us always remember innocent until proven guilty. See what evidence all sides have. I have not looked at any of the cases sufficiently in order to make a judgment, but it is easy to ruin someone over just a claim today and that is something we need to move past. This is not to excuse sexual harassment at all either. It’s a wrong that should not be done, but it does not mean that we decide on a case before the evidence comes forward.

In Christ,
Nick Peters