While Roe bred apathy and conservatism in pro-choice ranks, it energized many pro-lifers. With the Supreme Court having removed abortion from the political process and deprived pro-lifers of normal avenues of political influence, some decided to blockade abortion clinics instead. Between 1977 and 1993, pro-life radicals orchestrated some six hundred blockades, leading to more than 33,000 arrests.
Most pro-life activists, however, dedicated their lives to changing the hearts and minds of their fellow citizens, rather than simply obstructing them from procuring abortions. The more Americans who opposed abortion on moral grounds or were offered practical alternatives to abortion, such activists reasoned, the fewer abortions, whatever the laws of the land. These pro-life advocates quietly began countless conversations with ordinary citizens and continue to do so in great numbers.
At Public Discourse, Melissa Moschella discusses recent decisions on the HHS Mandate and the attempt of some judges to play theologians.
In the HHS mandate cases brought by Frank O'Brien and the Green family, however, the judges found no reason to doubt either the plaintiffs' sincerity or the religious nature of their beliefs. To remain within the limits of their competence, their investigation into the applicability of RFRA—and therefore of the need for the government to defend the mandate as narrowly tailored to the achievement of a compelling state interest—should have stopped there.
Unfortunately, it did not. Instead, the judges crossed the line by denying the substantive correctness of the plaintiffs' belief that providing insurance coverage for contraceptives and/or abortifacients is morally wrong. As Judge Jackson put it, despite the plaintiffs' sincere claims to the contrary, "the challenged regulations do not … prevent plaintiffs from acting in accordance with their religious beliefs."
In effect, Judges Jackson and Heaton are telling the Greens and Frank O'Brien—and by extension the 108 other plaintiffs challenging the mandate as well—that they, and the religious authorities who support them, simply have their theology wrong.
Christianity Today interviews Russell Moore about adoption.
What's the greatest benefit of being an adoptive parent?
The adopting of our two sons demonstrated to us something of the love of God for us and gave us a relationship that we never would have found on our own. We love our sons and they've brought so much to our family that we never could have planned out ahead of time.
And the greatest challenge?
The greatest challenge is confronting the idea that there's somehow a difference between adopted children and biological children in terms of affection, in terms of the structure of the family, which is not true. There's no such thing as adopted children. There are only children who were adopted. In a biblical understanding, "adopted" is a past-tense verb, not an adjective. So once someone has been adopted into the family, that person is part of the family with everything that that means.
Christopher Kenyon Simpson has pled not guilty after being accused of killing Ka'Loni Marie Flynn and her unborn child.
Prosecutors allege Simpson shot Flynn after she told him she was pregnant. Lawyers for Simpson don't want prosecutors to be able to use phone records that allegedly place Simpson in the area of the slaying on grounds that authorities obtained them without a warrant.