Exploits

A couple of  nights ago,  I had a strange experience.  It was late at night and I was asleep.  Now, first to tell you where my bed is. The door to my bedroom sits across the hall from the bathroom.  But, not directly across, it is offset and perhaps 10 inches of the doors are across from each other.  When the girls take their bath, I can sit at the end of my bed and watch the tv in my room, and keep an eye on them playing in the tub.   On the far end of the bathroom sits the tub, and high above it is a long, narrow window.

That night, I was asleep and the next thing I knew I was awakened by a sound, maybe like  "whoosh", as I felt a power come into the room and come over me.  The next thing I know I was in the air and I can't describe the speed, it was so spectacular.  As I was leaving the bed, though, a confusion flashed through my mind, as to who was it.  As I "flew" above the bathroom I could see up and beyond, but the image of the girls in their beds flashed through my mind (or did I see them, as they were on the other side of the wall and asleep there in their beds),  and I resisted, I couldn't leave them.  The next thing I knew, I was in bed, awake, and all was quiet.  I know it wasn't physical, it was spiritual.  

Tonight, I turned on the tv and was just in time to watch the End of the Age show.  I was busy with Facebook and half listening, until I heard Rev Baxter talk about people knowing their God and carrying out great exploits.  I have been waiting for God to use us in the end times and  I can see how He can use a lot of people.   They are scholarly, pious, humble, of good character, and diligent in their walk with the Lord.   What can the Lord do with me, though? Here is Rev. Baxter talking about exploits, so I jumped onto Biblegateway.com and clicked.   The search for keywords link came up with the word "exploit" already in the box for the key word.  It is totally possible that I looked it up before, but I have absolutely no recollection of it.  

Here is the passage in Daniel 11:  

“So he shall return and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant. 31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation. 32 Those who do wickedly against the covenant he shall corrupt with flattery; but the people who know their God shall be strong, and carry out great exploits. 33 And those of the people who understand shall instruct many; yet for many days they shall fall by sword and flame, by captivity and plundering. 34 Now when they fall, they shall be aided with a little help; but many shall join with them by intrigue. 35 And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, until the time of the end; because it is still for the appointed time."

 Well, I still don't know anything, except that God is in control and we wait on Him.

Plea to the Senate Judiciary Committee on PERSONHOOD

The following is the latest plea to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Take time and search the information, to see where you stand on the issue, and email your legislator.   This is written to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is meeting tomorrow:

HB 425 is an amendment about human life.    It does not give qualifications or markers that are impossible for a child to reach before the child’s natural developmental timeline.  It does not discriminate against the sex of a child, or its abilities, or lack of abilities.  The amendment does not give extra rights, but rather gives this one little life the same chance to live, and to have life, that all Montanans have. 

A woman’s right to choose, concerns her body.   The unborn child is a separate person, with a body of his/her own, and is independent of the mother, although it relies on Mom for nourishment and shelter.  And, in all likelihood, remains reliant on the mother for usually the next 18 years.  

Will this amendment result in a travesty of justice, where women are questioned by the State for miscarriages and still births, or, will guardians ad litem be appointed to monitor a woman’s actions?  There will be no more of an overreach, by the State, of the mother now, as there was before abortion was “legalized”.    If a mother is abusing her unborn child by giving it  drugs or alcohol, or abusing it in some other way,  she should answer for it, and be given help.  Consequences should not be different than that of a mother of an abused child that has already been born.

The argument that “abortion would stop violence against women” is a rather two edged sword.  Violence may have come to the woman and it may have resulted in a child, but turning around and killing the child does not erase the violence.  That child is also a victim, and has now become an unprotected victim.   If the married woman and her husband, or unmarried and with a partner, have children, and the partner or husband is abusive, we don’t kill the children that are already born, why, then, are we discriminating against the one that is in the womb?  The children should not pay for the mistakes of the parent, or parents.   Montana already has too many families with continuing cycles of violence that need help.   The violence will not stop; it will just leave one more trauma that they must now deal with-- the taking of the life of their own child.

The decision for an abortion is made under varying degrees of stress and duress.   The mother will be forced to make the decision immediately, or within a very short time period.   The woman’s focus will be on how her life just fell to pieces.  She may be overwhelmed by the idea of motherhood and the necessity to give up part of her life for a child, and have no idea of how she will provide and care for it.  The child, however, cannot be erased by abortion, and life does not go on as before.  The child is a reality, not an inconvenience that can be ripped, burned or mutilated and thrown away.   The abortion would not be the end.  Grief will come, along with the overwhelming trauma of suffering and regret, as the mother relives the pain she just put her little one through.   Reality sets in as the mother realizes how fragile life is – that when taken, it cannot be replaced, nor can it be given back.  An aborted child will never know his or her mother’s love, or touch, or even know human kindness, and the mother will long to comfort that child.     Post-Traumatic Stress is a condition that our soldiers suffer after the taking of lives on the battle fields, or witnessing it.  We have learned how it affects the lives of the soldiers.   Now put yourself in the shoes of a young woman, not trained at all in killing, and have her kill her own child. 

The amendment does not establish a ban on contraceptives, unless they would take a life.  The most popular form of contraceptive, the pill, has been argued to be both a contraceptive and an abortifacient, and until hard facts come in proving otherwise, it should be viewed as a contraceptive.   Science and life experiences have shown that the pill ends in pregnancy 1% of the time and the percentage goes up with the misuse of the pill.    Studies show that abortifacient properties are not proven, see:  http://www.aaplog.org/position-and-papers/oral-contraceptive-controversy/hormone-contraceptives-controversies-and-clarifications/    We see, that when taking the pill, that if conception has not been prevented—pregnancy results.

Stem cell research would be changed with this amendment.   See https://cbhd.org/stem-cell-research/overview     The unethical practice of taking a human life to harvest stem cells would not be available.  Embryonic stem cell research, while always giving the false hope of promise, has run into many obstacles in being able to produce benefits.  Non-embryonic stem cell research has given many benefits to patients, and is the hope for healing.

The life of a child should not be a political ball game.   It is not a republican, democratic, libertarian, or Independent issue.  We are talking about a human life that is completely independent of mother, but yet dependent on her.  It is not her body, but the body of her child.   Either we have the freedom that grants us a right to life, and a right to live, or we have no freedom for “all.”  Moving the marker on a life timeline, does not make the baby on the far side of it less human.  It just makes us less human.

 

We are not asking you to decide whether a child is a human life from beginning to end, but, rather, that the evidence is there to show that the amendment has merit and should go before the people of Montana for a vote.

Personhood Amendment in the Montana Legislature - 2015

Tomorrow, our legislative House members will have the final reading on whether or not to put a personhood constitutional amendment on the ballot in the next election.  It has passed the house and is on its way to the Senate.  

20 weeks Pre-born
(Life Institute picture)

Hopefully, the People of Montana will have  a chance to vote on the issue.   In our society, we all have the same standard, whether it is secular or Biblical, and that is that we are not allowed to murder.  Yet, many in our society go, to great lengths, and draw lines as to when life begins in order to take a life.  Lines that destroy life right up until the moment before baby takes his/her first breath.   We need to take away those lines.   God doesn't give us the gift of life with the intention that it is only a gift if baby breathes, or can feel pain, or whatever threshold is used to mark that line between human being and "non person."

Google describes life as having “the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.”  When the zygote (beginnings of a human baby) is formed, it fulfills this definition.  This little baby, at the beginning of his/her life, is complete.  Baby has everything that is needed to develop and grow.  Even the road map for their eye color and hair color is there.   Like all life, it only needs nourishment.

 

Is the beginnings of a person considered a “Homo sapiens” being?  Merriam-Webster describes Homo sapiens as “the species of human beings that exist today.”   When baby continues through the many stages of development  (which development continues on that developmental road map long after baby is born) is there a point when he/she is less human, or  non-human?  Are there degrees of humanity?

When does the soul enter the baby?  Is the awareness of the soul already with the little one at its beginnings? If baby is a human being, at any stage of development, can we deny the  child the hope and promises that has been given to all mankind?  If baby is a "person", he/she should have the protection of, and be able to possess, the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that is protected by our Government.

In the months ahead, hopefully, the People of Montana will be allowed to discuss and look into what their values are in Montana and then vote on them.