Author Ed

Love is War

Ed

I was at Oktoberfest at my church earlier this month and a small, insignificant disagreement arose between my wife and I. Immediately one of our friends asked, “Is there anything you two don’t argue about?” Firstly, I’d like to point out that a disagreement between two people doesn’t automatically mean that they are arguing. Secondly, the word “argument” is not rightly understood because in no definition of the word is there any hint of malice or anger, just a debate, difference of opinion, or rationale.

But here’s something that most people don’t seem to understand: all marriages will come with arguments (as in disagreements, not the angry kind). That’s because we are all individuals with opinions, likes, dislikes, and whatnot. It’s when those disagreements become angry and hate-filled that we have a problem (and yes, every marriage will have experienced a slamming door at one point). The real question is how do you handle those situations and how do you move past them?

Do you hold on to grudges or do you forgive each other? Do you want to mold your spouse into your vision of him/her or do you accept him/her for who she is? Do you work at the marriage or do you just give up? Sometimes there is no hope because the other person doesn’t want to listen or change, but do you have no patience and move on too quickly?

I wanted to share this song with an interesting theme: love is war, but it’s worth fighting for.

Chivalry, vulnerability and a woman’s heart

Ed

Claims that Lutheran World Relief Supports Abortion Funding are Erroneous

Ed

Recently, there has been a lot being reported and commented upon on Facebook and Twitter regarding a rumor that Lutheran World Relief (LWR) support abortion funding. LCMS Life Ministries wanted to share information regarding this situation and to clarify that these reports are erroneous. Below is a statement from LCMS Life Ministries, please share this with anyone who may be concerned.

Thank you.

###
Statement by LCMS Life Ministries
(September 26, 2013)

Claims that Lutheran World Relief Supports Abortion Funding are Erroneous

Recent claims by some media outlets that Lutheran World Relief has lobbied for government support of abortion funding are incorrect and misrepresent the work of the independent relief agency which works in partnership with the LCMS. To better understand why the claims are wrong, please know these facts about U.S. international humanitarian policy regarding abortion.

Although current U.S. international policy on funding for international abortions can be confusing, it is important to note the difference between the “Mexico City Policy” and the 1973 “Helms Amendment” to the Foreign Assistance Act. The Mexico City Policy, a U. S. policy that required all non-governmental organizations (NGOs) receiving federal funding to refrain from performing or promoting abortion services as a method of family planning, was rescinded by President Barack Obama two days after he took office in 2009.

Fortunately, USAID—the federal agency primarily responsible for administering civilian foreign humanitarian aid—is still governed by the Foreign Assistance Act, which includes the 1973 Helms Amendment ruling. The Helms Amendment bans the use of federal funds for abortion as a method of family planning anywhere in the world.

Lutheran World Relief is a member of InterAction, an alliance of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in international humanitarian work. InterAction recently crafted a letter signed by 142 organizations, including Lutheran World Relief, which calls Congress to support strong funding through USAID for international development and humanitarian assistance accounts in fiscal year 2014. This multi-signature letter is not a plea for increased abortion funding – something USAID is prohibited from doing – but simply a measure of advocacy directed to the current administration for continued humanitarian funding and support of USAID during a time of congressional budget decision-making.

Because USAID operates under the Helms Amendment, it is untrue to say that Lutheran World Relief has lobbied for abortion funding or supports abortion in any way.
# # #

SCOTUS, DOMA, and Prop 8

Ed 2 Comments

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), handed out opinions on two very important cases: one regarding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the other regarding California’s Proposition 8 (Prop 8). Once again, SCOTUS got it wrong; however, that doesn’t mean same-sex marriage is now legal in all the nation.

Here’s what happened:
SCOTUS struck down Section 3 of DOMA, the section that stated that the federal government has the right define marriage for the purposes of federal benefits and laws. SCOTUS said that Section 3 was unconstitutional because it discriminated against people who were granted rights under states’ laws and the federal government does not have the right to overrule the states’ definitions of marriage. SCOTUS got it wrong on DOMA because, just as the state has the right to define how state benefits are applied, the federal government has the right to define how federal benefits are applied.

Prop 8 was a referendum to amend the California constitution to define marriage as only one man/one woman. It was passed, therefore, the California constitution would, by definition, forbid same-sex marriage. Elected officials of California were sued in District Court but the elected officials did not defend themselves.  The District Court allowed the supporters of Prop 8 (citizens of California) to defend the case.

The judge in the District Court opined that Prop 8 was unconstitutional and ordered the elected officials not to enforce Prop 8. The elected officials did not appeal the ruling and order, but the District Court allowed the supporters of Prop 8 to file an appeal. The Ninth Circuit Court and the California Supreme Court agreed that the supporters were allowed to file the appeal.

What SCOTUS said was that the supporters of Prop 8 had no legal standing to file the appeal in a federal court. In fact, SCOTUS vacated the Ninth Circuit Court’s answer to this question the case was remanded to the District Court. SCOTUS got it wrong on Prop 8 because the people of California should have the right to defend a properly voted upon state constitution amendment if the elected officials will not uphold their constituency’s rights.

Here’s what SCOTUS didn’t do:
SCOTUS did not rule that Prop 8 was unconstitutional
SCOTUS did not strike down the entirety of DOMA
SCOTUS did not legalize same-sex marriage in all fifty states

Why is this important? Because traditional marriage, defined as one man/one woman, is the only type of relationship that can bring forth children, and in the best interest of the children, traditional marriage should be the only legal definition of marriage our nation has.

For more information on DOMA, see the Alliance Defending Freedom’s webpage on DOMA.

For more information on Prop 8, see the Alliance Defending Freedom’s webpage on Prop 8.

Plan B for 15-year-olds

Ed

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: if you need a prescription for the regular hormonal birth control pills, why doesn’t a higher dose of hormonal birth control pill–marketed as Plan B–need a prescription?

Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has lifted the restriction on girls younger than 17 requiring a prescription to purchase Plan B over the counter. You can read here my objections to Plan B.

Teresa A. Donovan, MPH, writing for Charlotte Lozier Institute, the education and research arm of the Susan B. Anthony List, posted an interesting cli_logocommentary about the possible health risks from using Plan B. However, before listing some of the risks from taking a high dose of hormonal birth control, Donovan notes:

Various studies demonstrate that after a single act of intercourse, without contraception, 7.2 to 8 percent of women may be expected to become pregnant.  In contrast, pregnancy rates among women using “emergency contraception” (Yuzpe method, Plan B, Preven, etc.) are “reduced” to 1.9 percent.

In other words, out of 100 women who participate in  unprotected sex, 92 will not get pregnant. And if all 100 women used emergency contraception, 2 will still get pregnant. So, the push for Plan B to be sold over the counter and to be sold to minors is a great marketing scheme because 94 percent of the women who have unprotected sex and use emergency contraception will derive no benefit from the drug. It makes you wonder why a federal judge would want the FDA to approve the sale of a drug to all girls, regardless of age, which does not benefit them (click here to read article).

On top of that, no one talks about the potential health risks from ingesting high doses of synthetic hormones that target the women’s brain. Donovan writes about how harmful large doses of synthetic hormonal steroids (of which many types of emergency contraception are made) to the person ingesting it. She concludes by writing:

Plan B and other forms of “emergency contraception” are designed to thwart the normal functioning of the female endocrine and reproductive systems, beginning with – and, indeed, targeting — the brain.

Folks, wake up and smell the coffee, please. Emergency contraception is not women’s healthcare, on the contrary, it is likely to contributes to more health problems in the women who use it. It’s bad enough that it is now available to 15-year-olds with no medical supervision what-so-ever, but some people want girls of any age to have access to these potentially harmful drugs with no medical supervision.

You can read the entire blog post by clicking here.