One thing I know

As I was posting my last blog entry, I caught sight on what I'd written in my sidebar:

One thing I know...

In the end, the very end, Jesus wins.

He's the Victor.

And His grip on me is way, way stronger and more sure than my grip on Him.

In the end, He wins. And His victory will be final and everlasting and good and righteous and just and merciful. My hope is that, because of His grace and His grace alone, I will be there to celebrate that final victory. That is real hope. And, on that glorious day, we will all be changed...in the twinkling of an eye.

And I...even I...shall be utterly and forever transformed by His presence.

May Jesus, tonight and at this very moment, work His transforming power in my life. May my hope rest in Him and in Him alone. May what breaks His heart break mine.

To share in His sufferings...even though the thought frightens me...

To be found in Him...

To be like Him...

To be obedient, even unto death...

Thank God that His grip on me is so much stronger than my weak and feeble grip on Him.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Will he keep his promise?

Obama, in his own words, about his stance on abortion, and the first thing he will do as president:



I have a question for my friends who are celebrating tonight because their man won. Are you also celebrating the change that he will bring when he keeps his promise to you about signing the Freedom of Choice Act? Or is this a promise you hope he won't keep?

To those who have tried to persuade me that Obama is really pro-life, I can only say...huh? Do you mean you don't believe his own words or his own voting record? Will this, from Obama's own website, convince you?

"Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America."

What is the Freedom of Choice Act Obama has promised to sign?

David Freddoso (The Case Against Barack Obama) elaborates on what this bill entails:

This bill would effectively cancel every state, federal, and local regulation of abortion, no matter how modest or reasonable. It would even, according to the National Organization of Women, abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions. If Obama becomes president and lives up to this promise, then everyone who pays income tax will be paying an abortionist to perform an abortion.

In making this promise, Freddoso writes, Obama is promising:

• to abolish state laws that protect doctors and nurses from losing their jobs if they refuse to participate in abortions
• to abolish requirements for parental notification and informed consent for mothers who consider the procedure

Freddoso also notes:

Obama is one of the very few pro-choice advocates who accepts no restrictions on late-term abortions, or any kind of abortions. I could find no instance in his entire career in which he voted for any regulation or restriction on the practice of abortion. [Read more here.]

More information on FOCA can be found here.

To my friends who are celebrating Obama's victory: is this what you are celebrating? Please forgive me for not joining in your joy. Frankly, I find this a sad day for our country. A very sad day. This is change we could do without. May God have mercy on us all. May those of us who are pro-life be emboldened to speak out now, and to work while there is still day...for I fear that night is rapidly approaching.

For those who would like to put Obama's promise in context, here is the entire speech as posted to Obama's campaign channel on YouTube.



This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

What can I say

Sigh. This says it all much better than I possibly could.

None of this has taken God by surprise. He is still on His throne. May He have mercy on us all.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Domestic partners, homosexual "marriage", and more

They call us haters. They claim that a vote of California's Proposition 8 is a vote for bigotry and discrimination.

Well, their domestic partnership regulations discriminated against me. How? My brother and I shared an apartment, and we pooled our resources together. We were dependent on each other financially. We were also extremely dedicated to one another; in fact, our relationship had only grown stronger since that first glimpse my brother had taken of me when I was just a few days old, and he had decided I was both cute and fascinating.

But, unlike the homosexual and heterosexual couples where my brother worked, we were not allowed access to any domestic partner benefits. Why the discrimination? Because we were siblings. The only way to earn the right to domestic partner benefits is by being in a sexual relationship with someone. Talk about discrimination! Talk about legislating morality and imposing values on other people!

Just try getting any sort of domestic benefits without having a sexual relationship. It's impossible. It doesn't matter if you've lived together for years, even decades. If you are siblings, or cousins, or just friends --- it doesn't matter. The law discriminates against those who refuse to have a sexual relationship with their domestic partner.

I can just hear everyone now: Don't be silly, Rebecca! What do you think domestic partners are? You can't just redefine the term to mean siblings and roommates!

Ah, but a lot of people think they should be able to redefine marriage. And, if you are reluctant to do so, supposedly that makes you intolerant and hateful.

But, in all this hue and cry about religious people trying to define marriage, few people seem to think we should remove all restrictions to marriage. Few people seem to think that it is hateful or intolerant or bigotry to restrict marriage to adults who are not closely related, or to outlaw bigamy. Do we hate children? Hate people who would prefer to be married to several people at once? Hate relatives? Are we discriminating against them? robbing them of their civil rights? guilty of hate crimes by not raising a big hue and cry to redefine marriage as being anything that anyone wants it to be?

No. I have yet to meet the person who believes in removing all legal restriction to marriage and allowing anyone to define it as they wish.

Apparently that privilege belongs only to those who believe marriage should be redefined as not necessarily being between a man and a woman. They have no qualms about imposing their values on our society and about plunging us all into some bizarre social experiment. They claim it is a civil rights issue, but they seem unconcerned about the civil rights of children, polygamists, those who favor "group marriage", and those who think first cousins should be free to marry in every state.

If marriage is a civil right, who gets to choose whose "civil rights" get to redefine marriage for the rest of society?

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

On a more serious note

Just in case I have one pro-Obama reader left, please read the potential consequences of voting him into office: Side Effect of FOCA. Remember that Obama has promised that his first priority as President will be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act. Make sure you are comfortable, before voting for him, with all that this entails.

I know. I know. Obama supporters have told me that FOCA "will not mean that many more abortions", and they seem untroubled by the thought of more infants dying in the womb. But I'm not ready to see the demise of Catholic hospitals, and I hope this would matter even to those who are pro-choice. One of my sons owes his life to the grace of God and the wonderful staff of a Catholic hospital. I know of towns whose only hospitals are Catholic. I don't think Obama, persuasive as he may be, will be able to convince the Pope and the Catholic Church that it is their duty to provide abortions as a fundamental right that cannot be infringed.

If you truly care for the poor, many of whom rely on Catholic hospitals and charities, please do not elect a president who is so adamant about making FOCA the law of our land. Even if you are anti-Catholic to an extreme, and welcome this as a blow against the Catholic Church, please put aside your own prejudices for the sake of the weak, the poor, the sick, and those without a voice.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Voting for the future

One of the somewhat odd side effects of training in the martial arts is that I started watching movies and TV shows I would have previously avoided. So it was that "Walker, Texas Ranger" became regular fare for my husband and me, despite the fact that I thought Chuck Norris wasn't much of an actor, and I found the plots repetitive and predictable. But the good guys were good, and the bad guys were very bad, and my instructor was known to call people in the middle of the show and quiz them along the lines of, "Did you see what Chuck Norris did to that guy? Do you think he stole that technique from us?" To which I was always tempted to reply, "He certainly didn't steal the put-away-your-gun-so-you-can-do-a-jumping-spinning-flying-kick technique from us."

But I digress.

I have yet more connections with Chuck Norris, besides watching his TV show and having an instructor who has met him on more than one occasion:

1. Once upon a time, while working a summer job at a car dealership, I saw Chuck Norris walk away from the cashier's window on the way to pick up the car he had just had serviced.

2. Chuck Norris and I shared a pastor. Of course, Chuck Norris knew Pastor Kuester quite a number of years before I did, and I had no idea of this connection until I read Against All Odds.

3. We're both martial artists.

So, we're practically best buds. Despite that, I hardly keep up with what he says and writes. So someone else had to draw the following to my attention: "I'm Voting for Those Not Yet Born".

Whether or not you're a Chuck Norris fan, you should read the article. There's a lot more to Mr. Norris than just punching and kicking. A lot more.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Putting things in perspective

Yes, it's another political post...

For any stray visitors who may have stumbled across my blog: I am not Roman Catholic. There is much with Roman Catholicism and its theology that I find problematic. But there is much that I believe, despite its flaws, the Catholic Church has gotten right.

I am old enough to remember the Roe v. Wade decision, and to remember the deafening silence, apathy, and ignorance within Protestantism. I am old enough to remember going to pro-life events and having my Catholic brothers and sisters greet me warmly, sometimes tearfully, and say, "We have praying for years that Protestants would finally join us in concern for the sanctity of life."

I remember Catholic acquaintances who were shocked when I was happy about my third pregnancy. One blurted out, "But I didn't think Protestants liked children!" She went on to say, "It's really difficult to get Protestants interested in pro-life issues and, besides, most of you don't even allow children and babies in your church services. Plus, you're the first Protestant I've ever met who wanted more than one or two kids."

Our actions --- and lack of actions --- and our silence have spoken volumes. No matter how opposed to Catholicism you might be, I would urge you to set aside those differences, if you are a follower of Jesus, and prayerfully consider what part of the following message might apply to you:



Yesterday I received an email containing a link to The Judeo-Christian View. Some of what they write might seem alarmist, disturbing, and a bit over the top. But please do not discount it out of hand. Read it prayerfully:

Our nation faces a fork, a divergence between the high road and the low road -- and you and your congregation could very well determine the direction we take. The high road upholds America's peaceful tradition of Judeo-Christian tolerance and morality. The low road marches us toward militant secular-paganism, militant Islam, or both.

The high road upholds traditional marriage between one man and one woman, and the sanctity of innocent human life that springs from such unions. The low road favors homosexual "marriage" and child sacrifice (we're not referring to familiar abortion here – see below).

The high road upholds the rights of pastors, priests and rabbis to "speak truth to power" in the tradition of Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, (and for Christians) John the Baptist, Peter, Paul, Stephen and Jesus. The low road would officially censor the Judeo-Christian view from the public square.

[To read more, click here.]


There are those who accuse people who speak out against Obama of fear-mongering. I will agree: there is some of that. There is also fear-mongering among those who become somewhat hysterical at the thought of another four years of a Republican in the White House. But that doesn't mean that there is no cause for fear, or that we should plug our eyes and ears and refuse to think about the fact that Obama stands for much that we, as followers of Jesus, should oppose.

Some of us are accused of being ignorant and narrow-minded one-issue voters. We are told that the abortion issue doesn't really matter as much as we claim. We are told not to worry about the fact that Obama has publicly promised that, as his very first act as President, he will sign the Freedom of Choice Act. We are told, as if this will assure us, that this will not result in that many more abortions. We are also told that same-sex marriage is not that big of a deal either. After all, does it really impact, in a negative way, our own marriage? If not, what's the big fuss?

What really matters is the economy, and Obama's plans to redistribute the wealth, and the fact that he talks about hope and change. And isn't hope oh so Christian? Isn't that what really matters?

My grandfather was a bold voice in a time when many thought he was alarmist, over the top, concerned about peripheral issues rather than about a nation's economic survival. People thought he was a fear-mongerer when he attempted to warn them. They saw no danger. They saw only hope...and change. Eloquent words, which my grandfather did not possess, persuaded them. Some...way too many... paid with their lives. They thought they were safe. They were not.

We may be safe. Today. We may feel completely unthreatened. We have grown callous to the abortion issue. We have watched so many movies and TV programs, and perhaps even laughed along with Will and Grace, that we are jaded about homosexual unions, just as we are jaded about adultery and pornography and pre-marital sex. We don't see how far our nation has drifted away from what is right and decent. We don't even see how far we ourselves have drifted away. Do we have the mind of Christ? Are we truly concerned about the least of these? Do we even care about rescuing those who are being led away to slaughter? Has holiness become just a religious word to us?

There is no candidate that I can enthusiastically support in this race. But there is one who stands, openly and unashamedly, for things that I simply cannot accept. I fear --- and I believe there is good reason for fear --- that the change that Obama will bring is not a change that the followers of Jesus should find acceptable or pleasing. But it may be the change we, as a sleeping and disobedient Church, fully deserve. May God have mercy.

Please pray. My daughter is planning to join with many others, in California and across the country, to intercede earnestly on behalf of our nation. She has been fasting and praying. Some may just think this is just youthful zeal. Please do not despise it. Please pray for some of that zeal for yourself.

My father has been praying that God might show us mercy...yet again. Mercy is, by definition, undeserved. Please join him in that prayer.

Pray that we might all be awakened, that the change and hope we seek may come from Christ, rather than from those who oppose His Words, and that God might make our hearts tender towards Him and towards the least among us.

May God have mercy.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Still not sure how to vote?

Well documented and a must-read before heading to the polls: over 100 hundred reasons to vote against Obama.

One example out of many:

Barack Obama supports the extreme Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). If enacted, FOCA would obliterate hundreds of state laws that protect women, parents, children, and health care workers, while forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for millions of abortions. It would overturn commonsense laws like parental notification, conscience protections, abortion waiting periods, informed consent, and regulations for women's health: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4056.html
Estimates are that if Obama becomes President and signs FOCA it will lead to 125,000 more abortions each year: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4359.html

As many of us have read repeatedly by now, in his July 17, 2007 speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Obama said,

We know that a woman's right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when — without government interference — is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country. . . . I have worked on this issue for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught constitutional law. . . So, you know where I stand. . . The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do.

Is that who you want for President? A man who is so dedicated to abortion being without restrictions or safeguards, a man who is so adamantly opposed to states' rights, a man who is so opposed to any attempts to protect unborn children, that his promised first order of business as your President would be to sign the radical Freedom of Choice Act?

As a mother, I simply cannot vote for this man, for this reason alone. Then there are, of course, many other reasons. Please follow the link I've posted and consider these matters carefully and prayerfully.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Still thinking of voting for Obama?

If you are not 100% pro-abortion (as opposed to pro-life or undecided...or genuinely pro-choice...) you may want to consider this before casting your vote.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Why I can't vote for Obama

Even if our politics were in agreement (which they are not) my mother's heart would simply not allow me to vote for him.



More from Gianna Jessen:



On Fox News:



What can you do about it? Begin by visiting the Born Alive Truth website.

Updated to add:

Testimony from the nurse who was behind the Illinois bill. This also includes Obama in his own words defending his stance on abortion. A must see before you vote in November.





This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Why I won't run for President of the United States

This tongue-in-cheek post, another silly attempt at humor, was inspired by a young girl's explanation of why she would refuse the vice-presidential nomination. Until I read her post, I had no idea that she was even up for consideration.

Yes, my dear three readers, you are reading it here first. I will never seek to be elected as President of these United States. Shocking news, I'm sure. Just so that I will not be inundated with three emails all beseeching me But why not? let me give my reasons now:

1. If I were to become president, that would force me to begin ordering my husband around and usurping his authority. Because, of course, we live in a dictatorship, where the president is able to exercise direct and unlimited authority over every single person in our country. Checks and balances? Hah! No, being president is like being the complete boss over everyone. Since I don't think I should be in authority over my husband, I simply will have to refuse any position that would force such authority upon me. (Hey, and quit quoting that verse about wives having authority over their husbands' bodies. Read the whole thing. Husbands have authority over their wives' bodies, so there! Besides, everyone knows that wives really have no authority, not even some sort of mutual sexual authority. Quit being such a feminist. Sheesh.)

2. If I were to become president, I'd have to go on TV and be photographed. A lot. And, frankly, I think that's immodest. It's wrong to be the center of attention. Next thing you know, I'd be worrying about my hair and make-up and clothing, instead of my adornment not being external.

3. If I were to become president, I'd have to speak. In public. And everyone knows that the Bible says, "Let the women be silent" and "I do not permit a woman to speak." (What? You claim that's only about church? Oh, so now you're into some sort of situational ethics where you only have to obey God when you are in a church service? How convenient!)

4. If I were to become president, I'd have to travel. And everyone knows that travel is a sin for women. Proverbs 31 does not say anything about going. It is all about staying --- staying home. The field that woman bought? How do we know it wasn't already in her own backyard? How do we know she didn't send a trusted servant to conduct the business transaction for her? I'm sure she could have sent a man...no, oops, she couldn't have, because that would mean she was exercising authority over him! She could have sent a single woman to buy the field, providing she could find some rebellious woman who worked outside her father's home, and yet could be trusted with real estate transactions. OK, let's go back to the buying the backyard field theory...

5. If I were to become president, no one would know what to call my husband. The first gentleman? The first spouse? The first dude?

6. If I were to become president, it would be really like my husband, the elders in my church, my pastor, and every Christian man becoming president instead of me, because I'd have to submit to them in every decision. That's just too confusing. It's a lot easier to submit to all of them when it comes to raising children.

7. If I were to become president, I'd have to select a vice-president. And that would be wrong, immoral, and adulterous. Because everyone knows that the vice-president is really a help meet for the president --- a role that only a wife should fulfill. So, whether I picked a man or a woman, it would be...icky and wrong. I couldn't even pick my own husband, because I'm supposed to be his suitable helper, not the other way around. This just proves that only men are to be presidents, because they are the only ones who are allowed to have help meets. And only their own wives are supposed to be their vice-presidents.

8. If I were to become president, my children would have to appear with me in public. Or not. And either option would be wrong.

9. If I were to become president, I'd have to have state dinners. And that would pose all sorts of quandaries. Would I, as the hostess, be sinning if I didn't cook for my guests? Would I be sinning if we had a dance after dinner? If I danced with other heads of state, would that be sinning? Who would lead?

10. If I were to become president, I'd have to fire the White House cook. And I really don't like firing people. But everyone knows that if a wife doesn't cook for her own family, she is not providing for them, and that makes her worse than an infidel.

11. If I were to become president, I'd be in the horrible position of having to serve all sorts of masters --- my husband, the elders in my church, my pastor, every Christian man (see #6 above) along with everyone who voted me into office, the members of my political party, the House, the Senate, the entire country and everyone else I promised to serve and/or be accountable to. And that's just wrong. I'm only supposed to serve one master --- my husband. Jesus said so himself. (What do you mean, He was talking about serving God and mammon/money/materialism? What sort of post-modern feminist are you? I suppose that next you'll be saying that you don't believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God!)

12. If I were to become president, that would make me the Commander in Chief of our military. And that would make me a soldier. I'm opposed to women in combat, so how could I serve in this capacity?

13. If I were to become president, I'd have to meet with other heads of state. Since most of them are men, that would be wrong. I shouldn't be running around meeting other men and having long conversations with them. Plus, what if we were trying to negotiate something? It would be wrong for me to exercise authority over a man, so I'd have to submit to him. And that could be bad for our country. So maybe I should only meet with female heads of state. Except then, I'd be asking them to submit to me instead of to their husbands. And that's wrong.

14. If I were to become president, I'd be expected to give important speeches. And that would be very wrong. See #3 above. Plus, some man might accidentally learn something from one of my speeches. And then I'd be teaching him --- something the Bible forbids. (What do you mean, the Bible is only talking about authoritative teaching roles in the church? What kind of feminist claptrap is that? Didn't you read #3?!)

So...not matter how my country may beg and plead me to reconsider....I'm sorry, but I simply cannot serve as your president.

Pssst...it's a joke! A parody! But yes, you may recognize some of my reasoning from other places on the internet...don't worry, it's only the the extreme fringe that would agree with such arguments; most Christians have a far better understanding of God's Word.

Slight edits for additional clarity and humor.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

In the public eye

Ack! Someday this blog will be less about politics, I promise!

Yesterday I made another trip around the blogosphere, to see what people were writing about Governor Palin. I also read some of the articles in the media, both mainstream and otherwise.

And you know what? I got really excited. Not so much about the politics, but about the tremendous opportunity we, as Christians, have been given to be salt and light before a watching world. Governor Palin has suddenly brought all sorts of issues out in the open, issues that are now being discussed widely, in a more public way than I can ever recall, issues such as:

1. Outside of the pro-life movement, it is shocking news that 80-90% of babies known to have Down syndrome are aborted. The response has been interesting --- I've been amazed to read how many of those who are not opposed to abortion are still very troubled by this.

2. Suddenly the pro-life movement has a different public face. It's not just a bunch of white males who want to keep all women barefoot and in the kitchen.

3. The hypocrisy of many liberals is being exposed. It's not really about choice, after all --- people are more than willing to attack Palin for her choices.

4. We're all forced to face reality: not every women is liberal. Even more shocking, not every feminist is liberal and pro-abortion. You can be feminine, articulate, intelligent and politically conservative.

5. Having a baby with Down syndrome is not a horrible, life-consuming tragedy. It will not ruin your life or your family. Even if angry bloggers refer to your child disdainfully as "that child", and suggest it is unseemly for him to be seen in public, you and your family will love and unashamedly enjoy your special child --- at least that is the testimony that the Palin family lives out, loud and clear. (Other families live this testimony too, of course, but they don't get to do so on TV, in front of the entire nation.)

6. There is nothing shameful or degrading about being an involved mother. You don't have to be a crunch granola Birkenstock earth mama to wear your baby in a sling. Nor does wearing your baby in a sling turn your brain to mush or turn you into a primitivistic marsupial mother. You can be bright, successful, charming, and attractive --- and mother your baby right out there in the open, without apology or shame.

7. Not everyone who has five children is some sort of cross between Ma Kettle and a faceless, downtrodden cult member. Having more than the socially acceptable number of children does not rob you of brain cells, turn you into a boring drudge, or make you spend the rest of your life in shapeless dresses and/or frumpy sweatpants.

Many of us who are conservative Christians, pro-life, and who have dared to have more than 1.8 children could never have dared hope that we would ever have a "poster child for our cause" capture the national attention like Governor Palin has. Whether or not we agree with her politics, whether or not we think women should be vice presidents, we have to agree that she has been a remarkable public advocate and shining testimony on a scale that none of us could ever hope to be.

But there is more. I saved the best for last...

8. Over the past two to three days, I've had the amazing experience of reading in newspapers and hearing on the radio people trying to explain why evangelical Christians are not suddenly dropping Governor Palin like a hot potato after hearing that her teenage daughter is pregnant out of wedlock. And do you know how some of these journalists and commentators --- a number of whom I have no reason to believe are Christians --- are explaining it? With the gospel. Suddenly, people are feeling a need to explain why evangelicals are not shocked about sin, why we take sin so seriously, and why we are so forgiving! It is both deeply moving and, at the same time, amusing, to read/hear people in the secular world actually defending and explaining our beliefs (e.g., "Few people seem to understand what the Christian faith is all about...")

Do you realize what a tremendous opportunity Governor Palin has given us? The opportunity that I believe God has given us through her?

The world is watching. They are watching her. But they are also watching those of us who they believe she represents.

Think of this, fellow bloggers. What is our message to the watching world? Will we join many of them in condemning Governor Palin? Will they discover that our main message to them is angry words about what women can't and shouldn't do? Or will they discover that, as followers of Jesus, as recipients of His saving grace, we are known for being serious about sin and yet forgiving and gracious...the people who rejoice in that truth, "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus". Will we be known as those who make love their rule? Will we be known as those who stand for truth? Will our words be so seasoned with grace as to be able to be used of God to win hearts for Him?

Or will we be known as being harsh, strident, judgmental, hateful? Much of the world already thinks that about us. Now, perhaps, we can, prayerfully, try to become better ambassadors and representatives of Jesus Christ.

I write this as much for me as for my fellow bloggers. And yes, I know I fail in this. Constantly.

Most of us cannot capture the attention of a nation. Most of us will never walk in the corridors of power, or have the ear of our nation's leaders --- or even be one of those leaders ourselves. But we can pray for those leaders and for those potential leaders. And we can rejoice in this wonderful window of opportunity, in our much smaller worlds, to echo the messages of grace, forgiveness, the sanctity of life, and the blessings of motherhood.

And we can thank God for the powerful and unexpected way in which He is using Governor Palin's life and testimony. May we be faithful in the little things, in our small arenas, and pray for Palin to be faithful in the big things, in her big arena.

Updated to add:

Here is Governor Palin's testimony of her faith in Christ.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

We don't lose our minds when we become pregnant

Really, we don't. Even when we sometimes feel that way or possibly even act that way.

Having more than the socially acceptable number of children, contrary to what many might think, did not reduce my IQ to below room temperature.

But you'd never guess that from the way people have treated me and other mothers, especially in light of the ridiculous questions I've been asked. When I announced my pregnancy with Child #4, guess what question I was asked more than any other: "Have you even thought about where you will put this child?"

Come on, our house was small, but not that small. Another mom, much in the same sort of situation, gave me her answer. She would gasp, open her eyes wide in shock, and exclaim as dramatically as possible, "Oh, no! We never even thought of that! Whatever will we do? I guess we'll just have to stick the baby...on the back porch!"

Other questions/statements I've had to endure:

"I suppose you've never given any thought to what you will do if you are ever in an accident or incapacitated."

"Have you considered what you will do if your husband dies?"

"You might want to think about how you and your husband will manage to pay for all these children."

"Have you even thought about finding someone to deliver this baby?" (I kid you not --- I was about two weeks away from my due date, and as hugely pregnant as could be, when I was asked this question.) Despite the fact that I'd chosen the birth attendants long before conception, and was more than fully prepared to have the baby right that minute, I was tempted to give my blankest look and ask, "Huh? Deliver this baby? What do you mean?"

"What are you going to do with your other children after this baby is born? Have you even thought about how you're going to take care of them?"

"I don't think you have any idea of what it's like to try to handle six children." (Said by a father of two, who seemed oblivious to the fact that I had two years of full-time experience handling five children, and about 12 years of full-time mothering experience to his three years of part-time fathering!)

"Have you and your husband ever thought to discuss whether or not a large family is a good idea?"

"Have you even considered, for a moment, whether it's fair to your older children to keep bringing more children into the family?"

"I suppose you've never thought about what it will be like when all these children are teenagers."

Newsflash: Women are not stupid. Mothers are not stupid. We do think about these things. In fact, we tend to think about them far more than our husbands do. We lose sleep over such questions. We spend the "night watch hours" in prayer. We read; we study; we research; we consult trusted advisers; we plan. If anything, we spend too much time on these questions, not too little.

"Does she have any idea what she's going to do with her children once she's vice-president?"

I'm sure she does. After all, she's had a workable plan in place while being governor. Yes, handling six children was more of a challenge than handling five. Yes, being vice president will be more of a challenge than being governor. But I doubt that Governor Palin is a fool or an idiot. I doubt that you know more about combining family with governmental responsibilities than she does. I certainly doubt that you have given more thought to the issue than she has.

She has a husband, a man who is obviously no stranger to holding and tending his baby. That doesn't make him a "mom"; that makes him an involved father. She has experience working with babies in her office --- probably far more experience than you do.

I'm sure she answered that question, with much careful consideration, long before you even knew she was being considered for vice president. In fact, this is what her answer looks like.

Another friend of mine came up with a standard answer to what she termed "I know you're an idiot so I need to ask you" questions: "Don't worry. We already have all sorts of plans and contingency plans in place. I know the idea of this is new and overwhelming for you, but it's old hat for us. Thanks for your concern."

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Where are the tears for the Obama children?

If I read one more blog commenter going on and on about how he/she weeps for the Palin children, I'm going to be awfully tempted to begin spamming the internet with the following reply:

Have you also been weeping for the Obama children? They have been dragged into the public spotlight. They have had to deal with an absentee father and a mother on the campaign trail. There are no hundreds of heartwarming pictures showing the parents working with their daughters at their sides and in their arms --- because the Obama family does not live this way. These little girls have had to hear that babies are a "punishment" and will no doubt some day wonder if their parents regarded them as punishments as well.

Where were your posts about weeping for them? And, since you haven't been weeping for them, what am I to assume?

1. You don't concern yourself with the children of those who are democrats.
2. You don't concern yourself with the children of those of other races than your own.
3. You don't concern yourself with the children of men who are running for office.
4. You don't concern yourself with the children of those you don't particularly like.
   
5. It's really not about the children. It's about a woman doing something you don't think women should do.
   

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

More silliness on the campaign trail

On this the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals agree: bashing mothers is always fair game, even if one has to be illogical and hypocritical to do so.

On this the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals also agree: no one really cares if a father is a "bad father" or not. Fatherhood is, for the most part, usually not even worth thinking or talking about, especially in light of more "serious concerns".

So today I've learned, from both the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals, that Governor Palin is a bad mom for bringing her family up on the stage with her after her speech. Supposedly she should have left her children at home --- or, at least, she should have left her 17 year old daughter and her youngest child at home.

She did nothing different from what all other candidates for political office have been doing ever since I can remember. Where was the criticism for all these men? Why are they not being accused of being bad dads? You would think the patriarchal crowd, who do like to go on about superior upper body strength making men naturally suitable to be leaders and protectors, would at least wonder aloud why all the male candidates are not protecting their families from the grave harm of appearing on stage at conventions! But, no...it is only mothers who are expected to protect their children and who fail by not doing so.

This "it's harmful for children to receive national attention" idea must be some kind of odd, new-fangled notion. Or maybe the patriarchal crowd was simply too young (or not alive yet?) to raise their strident protests against Jackie Kennedy when she exposed her grieving tots to national scrutiny at her husband's funeral. No one seemed to think that abusive. Can any of us who watched it on TV ever forget the sight of tiny John, in his short suit, saluting his father's casket? I don't recall, then or since, anyone castigating Mrs. Kennedy for being a bad mom that day.

So...why not have at it now? And why stop there? Why not attack all the wives of politicians for being bad moms and allowing their children to be dragged on stage? Why not attack all the pastor's wives for not protecting their children from being used as sermon illustrations or, worse, having to stand at the door of the church and shake everyone's hand in the dreaded pastoral family reception line Sunday after Sunday? (I think I'm seriously dating myself here!) Why not attack all wives of public figures whose children are not being protected from having to appear at public functions, pose for the obligatory family pictures, and serve as props to further their father's professional image?

And the fathers who insist on these things? Why, they get a free ride, of course. Because they are only fathers. And what they do doesn't impact their children as much. What they do as fathers interests us less than their all-important careers and professions.

But let a mother get on our bad side! Why, it's open season!

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

What kind of feminist is THAT?!

Normally politics is not my thing. But the Palin nomination, and the response to it, has been so interesting, and so revealing as to attitudes about women, children, families, etc. I just can't help but write about it.

A lot of ultra-conservatives are extremely uncomfortable with Governor Palin. It's bad enough that she is a woman governor. Some of them could almost bring themselves to overlook that. But her real crime is that she is a member of Feminists for Life. Feminists. Yet, it's hard to savage and vilify her for that because...well...she puts to lie their favorite whipping-girl stereotype of feminist.

I'm reminded of the t-shirt, "This is what a feminist looks like".

The angry anti-feminists would rather not admit that a feminist can look like Governor Palin. She's not a man-hating lesbian with short hair stridently shouting about abortion rights. Instead, she is, as one reporter noticed, "pro-baby, pro-guns, and pro-Jesus". She is married. She has five children. She has been widely photographed going about her business with her baby in a sling. She is not shrill or angry. She actually has a sense of humor. And she's feminine, to the point that a popular bumper slogan in her state says "Alaska. Coldest State. Hottest Governor".

Other than working outside the home, she is that fantasy ideal wife for many of the ultra-conservative men. If she were a housewife at a homeschooling convention with Trig in her sling, men would be falling over themselves to hold her up as an example for their wives, and they would be commenting with envy, "Man, her husband is one lucky dude. She's not only pretty and feminine and having babies in her 40's, but she even goes moose hunting. She's the perfect wife."

Those same men simply don't want to admit that this sort of woman could possibly be a feminist. It makes it harder when a feminist looks so much the way you wished your wife did. It makes it harder to scream that all feminists are angry, bitter, ugly women that men would never want anyway, and who now hate all men and want to murder all babies.

"Real women" can be feminists too. I'm reminded of a woman I read about, a self-proclaimed feminist. She may have also been a member of Feminists for Life; I'm not sure, but I do know she was involved in pro-life ministry. She was also pretty and feminine with a fairly large family. In addition, she was a stay-at-home homeschooling mom who loved to cook, sew, and involve herself in stereotypically feminine pursuits. Men liked to argue with her and tell her that she was not a feminist, that she didn't understand what it meant to be a feminist, etc. She had her degree in Feminist Studies and could, of course, argue circles around these men, since she had actually studied feminist literature and was not relying on some pastor's ill-informed anti-feminist rhetoric or on silly stereotypes. She tended to baffle these men.

But it's not just the ultra-conservative men who don't know what to do with someone like Governor Palin. It's the ultra-left as well.

You see, Governor Palin is committing the crime of "doing it all". Worse yet, she's doing it all while wearning Trig in a sling. She's not insisting on the necessity of abortions and child care. She's simply doing what mothers without a socialistic agenda have always done --- working at one's calling while tending one's babies.

No one --- at least not the ultra-conservatives or the ultra-left --- want to admit that this is possible. It makes them angry. It puts to lie their hostile rhetoric. Mothers must stay home! Children get in the way of a woman's career! Babies have no place in the working world! Babies should be rarely seen and certainly not heard! Having a baby with an extra chromosone is a tragedy that will ruin your life or, at the very least, make it impossible for you to do anything else but spend 24 exhausting hours a day completely consumed by your special-needs child! Real women don't work! Real women don't go moose hunting! Real women don't have babies in their 40's! Real women are pro-abortion! Real women don't seek to rule over men! Real women need child care in order to live their lives! Real women never need any household help! Real women...!

Very few want to admit that, yes, Governor Palin is what a feminist looks like. And it's ridiculous to try to claim that she's not a real woman.

Many are much more comfortable with the idea that Hillary Clinton is what a feminist looks like.

The truth of the matter is that feminists are sort of like Baptists in that when you get two together, you have at least three opinions. Unlike Baptists, feminist embrace a much wider variety of beliefs and practices.

So...she may not be the sort of feminist you like to throw darts at. She may not be the sort of feminist that fits your stereotype. She may not be the sort of feminist you are. But she's a feminist. In fact, there are more just like her. Get used to it. Maybe every feminist is not your enemy...or not just like you. Or maybe some are more like you than you're comfortable admitting...it all depends on your perspective.

Time to face the truth, uncomfortable though it may be. Time to let go of the sterotypes...to argue ideas rather than straw women!

Updated to add:

This picture, taken --- to the best of my knowledge --- right before Governor Palin's speech accepting the vice presidential nomination, has been circulating on the internet, sometimes with the caption, "This is what a feminist looks like".


And why are so many uncomfortable with this picture? What does it tell us about what we really think about feminists and, more importantly, what we really think about women, especially mothers?

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Why do "conservatives" sound so much like feminists?

It's really starting to both annoy and amuse me. In all the hooplah about the Palin nomination (and now the teen pregnancy) coming from the conservative side, I'm noticing something startling: they sound a lot like feminists. Oh, of course, they wouldn't admit it. And they certainly don't sound like feminists when they are saying that Governor Palin should stay home full time, and/or that her daughter's pregnancy is a result of the mother being outside of the home.

How do they sound like feminists?

They really don't act as if the role of the father is at all important. They ignore Governor Palin's husband entirely, unless it is to feel sorry for him for having an "unsubmissive" wife. His presence in the home, or his absence from it, seems to have --- at least based on what they are writing --- no influence on the children at all. Or at least it's not even significant enough to mention. He's not even significant enough to mention.

No one asks, where was the father? No one asks, should he have been more involved in his daughter's life? Could her pregnancy be a sign that he has failed her in some way?

No one asks these questions because...well, despite giving the rare lip service to the contrary, no one really thinks the role of the father is that important in the home. Most complementarians and patriarchalists really don't think that marriage and the raising of children is that tremendously important. Oh, sure, it is very important for women --- for them, it is their highest (and should be only) calling. But men have far more important work, dominion work, grand vision work. Being a husband and father is not a calling. It is something to be done as a sideline, almost like a hobby. Of course, the husband/father had better make sure he is "in charge", but no one really expects a father to make all that significant of a difference. Oh, sure, they'll tell women that they need to get married and that children need fathers, and that everyone needs to submit to the husband/father, but when they place blame for things wrong in the family, it's the wife/mother who gets blamed. That's where the buck almost always seems to stop. The husband/father escapes their notice.

And that's very telling.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Let's be honest...and humble...

Edited to add this introduction to my post:

Yes, this is my response --- as a conservative, Christian mother --- to the announcement that the single, teenage daughter of Governor Palin (McCain's choice for vice president) is currently pregnant and planning to marry the father of her child.

I am open to suggestions that a Christian response should be something different...and Biblical reasons as to why.

I'd also like to hear from those, especially conservative Christian mothers, who either agree or disagree with the substance of my "confession". Do you relate? Why or why not?

I am freely confessing the following to my half-a-dozen or so readers, and urging that other mothers join me in being both honest and humble. Let us not rush to judgment. Let us not hold other mothers to impossible standards. Let us realize how much we all need Jesus, how much we all benefit from His grace.

So, on to the confessions:

1. I am not a better parent than God. Beginning with Adam and Eve, all of His children have sinned. Every single one, except for Jesus. So have mine. While at times I wish we didn't have free choice and sinful natures, I am so thankful for the remedy for sin that God provided through His Son Jesus. I stand in desperate need of that remedy. So do my children.

2. Like every mother of many who has neither been born to privilege, nor been able to afford household help, nor has had a husband who enjoyed paternity leave, nor has had the luxury of extended family/church members with no other responsibilities, I have had to return to work fairly soon after the births of my babies. Meals needed preparing, children needed tending, raising, and feeding, babies and toddlers needed changing, the house needed cleaning, and my host of responsibilities to my husband and children didn't abruptly end just because I had a newborn. That's life, especially for the middle-class and working class. Sitting in an office doing paperwork and answering phones, with my baby in a sling, would have seemed like a welcome break on many days. But envy should not make me attack a mother who ventures to her office, just like it should not make me attack mothers whose husbands are able to wait on them hand and foot for six weeks post-partum. God chose my path for me. It's one I don't regret.

3. I have ignored doctors' advice and even direct orders. I willingly, no eagerly, got pregnant with my first child. I have refused pre-natal testing. I have had more than two children. I have breastfed my children. I have given birth in my late 30's. I have not hired a nanny. Etc., etc. While many viewed me reckless and irresponsible for these choices, they were made after much prayerful research. I don't regret any of them. In fact, they all turned out to be, even more so in hindsight, the best choices in our particular situation.

4. I have sinned. Yes, even today. Without the grace of God, I am ruined. Utterly without hope. Not only am I a sinner but, even when I mean well, I am not all wise. I don't have perfect understanding. I make mistakes. I fail. I fall down. But...God still loves me. Someday, when I get to Heaven, it will not be because my theology was correct, or because I wasn't a feminist, or because I stayed home with my babies. It will not be because of my own efforts. It will not be because I meant well or was sincere. It will not be because my good deeds outweighed my bad. It will not be because I am basically a good person, because I'm really not. It will be only because of Jesus.

5. And the few good things about me? The few good things I may accomplish along the way? Jesus deserves all the credit for that as well. I am weak; He is strong. The right things I do are only through Him Who strengthens me.

What about you?

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

At the risk of turning this into a political blog...

I'm posting a few links:

From someone who has known Governor Palin for years and worked on her last campaign

Why McCain picked Palin

10 Facts about Sarah Palin

Defending Against the First Attacks on Sarah Palin

Barbara Curtis addresses some of the Christian opposition to Governor Palin

A joke. Really. It's not true.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

And while we're on the subject...

This is such a great picture:


It reminds me of something that I learned, as a new mom, from a far more experienced mom who acted as a mentor to many younger women. Often we'd gather for an assortment of different work/fellowship activities, all of us younger moms with babies (and sometimes toddlers and other children). While tending to our children, encouraging each other, and attacking the task at hand, we would often be encouraged by this older mother, "Isn't it amazing what a determined mother can accomplish with a baby in her arms or in a sling?"

Yes, it is.

And it was a welcome, much needed message for me. It seemed that, outside of that group of mothers, almost everyone else was trying to convince me that babies and children just got in the way, and were a great impediment to any sort of meaningful activity. From this group of mothers, I learned that the world didn't come to a horrible, screeching halt unless I hired babysitters so that I could get on with the real purpose of living. As this experienced mom would remind us, mothers with babies have always worked. Well, except for the wealthy, privileged ones who were of the leisure class...

"Do you work?" people used to ask me. I was tempted to say, "No, I sit on the couch and eat bon-bons all day while my servants do all the work." The cure to that question? Going out in public with a stair-step brigade of young children. Suddenly it made the question seem silly.

Some of us have the luxury of working with our little ones in tow. Some of us don't. Some of us have the luxury of being self-righteous about our work choices. Some of us forego that luxury. But the real women among us, especially the mothers --- we all work. And often it's with a baby in a sling.

That picture of Governor Palin really resonates with me. I know that some of my fellow Christians believe it depicts an abomination and curse upon the state of Alaska, and possibly our nation. I believe it depicts a beautiful public testimony of motherhood.

Edited to add:

It seems that those who most decry the way mothers are demeaned in our society should be most pleased with pictures like this. In too many of life's arenas, especially the professional world (although some feminists are working to change that) mothers with babies are most unwelcome. Oh, it's OK to be a mother, as long as you usually keep your baby hidden away. And it's most unprofessional to attempt to conduct business with your baby in a sling! It's as if motherhood is best kept under wraps. It's just to be done at home, hidden away, almost like a shameful secret.

Governor Palin is exposing the lie to all that. She is completely, unashamedly, unapologetically, a mother. I found another picture of her online, in her office, with Trig in a sling, while signing some sort of important-looking document, acting as if this was the most common-place thing in the world.

How wonderful to bring a dedication to mother-baby togetherness, such bold living out of Christian motherhood, to the nation's attention in such a powerful way. This picture speaks volumes. Governor Palin, as vice president, might just elevate motherhood in the eyes of our nation. It's about time.

Wow. She even has more than the socially acceptable number of children. And McCain doesn't think any of that is a political liability.

Gives me hope for our country, it does.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.