I wasn’t frightened. Nobody I knew was frightened. Yes, pro-abortion women were frightened (funny, she only says women were frightened). Cited were two cases, the 1994 Pensacola incident and an incident in 1997. I’m not terribly surprised that Amanpour barely touched on this issue. There’s a reason: most of the arrests involving pro-lifers have to do with arrests of peaceful protestors.
According to religioustolerance.com, between 1989 and 2004, there were 24 reported murders/attempted murders and 154 bombings/attempted bombings. Compare that to over 12,000 arrests at blockades in 1989 alone (the arrests were made, not because they participants were violent, but because the participants were there).
Laws allowing picketing within a certain parameter have lessened the number blockade arrests. In fact, from 2000 to 2004, there were NO blockade arrests.
In general, the incidents resulting in deaths were minimal. And, in general, these actions were condemned by most pro-life leaders. Interestingly enough, it was who was not interviewed for the segment on abortion that makes one wonder if Amanpour was trying to paint a slant linking the few radicals to the many pro-lifers who, like Falwell and myself, seek judicial and legal social change.
Neither did Amanpour mention the Liberty Godparent Foundation which provides support for unwed mothers. Putting money where one’s pro-life mouth is apparently didn’t impress Amanpour. Or maybe it was more convenient to try and link Falwell to things he was NOT involved in rather than mention the good things he has done?
SOUTHERN BAPTIST RADICALS
I have to say I was surprised to see Christian women, in particular Evangelical Christian women, compared to women who are forced into wearing the hijjab in places like Iran. Especially when that comparison included the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest protestant organization in the United States.
I was also surprised that Amanpour’s expert on doctrine was Jimmy Carter. Not that he isn’t a Christian. Not that he isn’t born again. But he let her slide on something that atheists have misrepresented about Christian women for decades: women’s rights in the modern world of Christianity.
There’s always new things to be learned and I was amazed to find out that the Southern Baptist Convention was hijacked away from Jimmy Carter. I didn’t even know he had been a delegate let alone a member of the governing body.
In any event, the criticisms of this “fanatical” group was that a) they voted (a vote which included female representatives from member congregations) that women could not be pastors; 2) that women could not teach men; and 3) that women should be submissive to their husbands.
Say what?
As far as I know, and I have been Southern Baptist since 1987, the SBC has never voted on whether or not women could teach men. Nor have they voted on women being submissive to their husbands. What they DID vote to accept are the cannon of scripture known as the New Testament as the Word of God.
Gee, imagine doing such a radical thing!
What does the SBC believe about the role of women?
“A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.”
This isn’t talking about forced submission as spoken of in Islam wherein a husband can make demands on his wife or punish her if she “rebels” (Sura 4:34). But in case you think the husband has no obligations:
“The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God's image. The marriage relationship models the way God relates to His people. A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church.”
Both of these statements come from scripture. And in case you’re wondering: Christ loved the church sacrificially- even to giving up His life for what would later become the Church or body of believers.
In other words: we wives are only to obey our husbands as they are obedient to God. If they go outside of that parameter, we don’t have to follow. And it’s a willful act. Husbands have to love their wives no matter what! So who has it tough here?
SOCIAL DROP-OUTS and HOME SCHOOLERS
Having grown up in the 60’s and 70’s I knew what social drop-outs were about. They were stoned most of the time, wore funky clothing, strange hair-do’s and generally acted like they had impulse control disorder.
So when Amanpour introduced the next segment about homeschooler drop-outs, I really expected to see some commune-like back woodsy family, barefooted, out in the middle of Podunk nowhere, tending chickens and maybe a little polygamous.
Instead the Navarr’s live in a nice home in suburbia. I would kill (pardon the use of the word) for her kitchen! And with their five children, all neatly dressed and still very normal acting, I was surprised that Amanpour labeled them as societal drop-outs merely because they opted to home-school.
Then again, Amanpour didn’t want to go into the home-schooling data, which shows that the choice to home-school isn’t always about religion. She would have noted that home-schooling, while it began as an “alternative” education, is now legal in all 50 States.
Writing for BOSTONIA, the Alumni Quarterly of Boston University, Cynthia Buccini noted:
“Parents choose to homeschool for academic, family, and religious reasons: they object to what the schools teach, they believe they can give their children a better education at home, or they think regular schools offer a poor learning environment or fail to challenge their kids.”
A Wikipedia article notes that home schooling isn’t only an American phenomenon. It’s worldwide. And while noting that most home schooling in the U.S. involves Evangelical Christians, homeschoolers…
“…run the gamut from politically left
to right, from deeply religious to agnostic or atheist. ”
Oh well, in Amanpour’s world anyone, including atheists and agnostics, liberals and conservatives, are all social drop-outs if we home school our children. And the latest data seems to show that there’s over 2 million children in the U.S. who are being home schooled today. That’s a whole lot of craziness going on!
Or could it be that parents realize they’re not getting a bang for their buck in the “public” (or as someone else called it, “secular”) school system? I remember my oldest grandchild one year bringing home a list of items they needed to buy for the classroom. Pencils, pens, that’s expected. But paper bags, Kleenex tissue, toilet paper, and items that I don’t recall ever having to provide for the school when I was growing up.
But it’s more than supplies, competitive clothes, and who has the coolest cellphone and backpack. A lot of parents are concerned that the schools have overstepped their boundaries in the past twenty years. We have people like Jocelyn Elders and Barak Obama calling for “age appropriate sex education” starting in Kindergarten. Pray tell, what about sex is age-appropriate for a five year old?
Years ago I ended up in front of a school board, on the news and finally at the state Capitol testifying against the infusion into the schools of a so-called “anti-drug” program. One would think an anti-drug program would warn children that using pot and other illegal substances is a violation of the law and that was a good reason NOT to imbibe. This program told the kids to “clarify THEIR values” about drug use, and not let the world around them guide their decisions.
Um. Gee. Wonder why parents opposed the program? Wonder why law enforcement did as well?
Think about this for a moment. Columbine isn’t the only school where there’s been violence. And while most public schools are fairly safe, there’s mounting evidence that they may not be safe enough. In a report entitled Violence In United States Public Schools, the conclusion:
“During the 1999-2000 school year, 71 percent of U.S. public schools reported experiencing at least one violent incident, and the total number of incidents reported was 1,466,395. With respect to serious violence, 20 percent reported at least one incident, and a total of 60,719 incidents were reported. Correspondingly, 36 percent of schools reported at least one violent incident to the police and a total of 256,876 incidents, whereas 15 percent of schools reported at least one incident of serious violence to police and a total of 34,281 incidents.”
Maybe it won’t be the Navarr children’s local school which would become the next Columbine, and certainly Columbine like incidents are the rarity. But to claim they’re dropping out of society for trying to raise their children in a less hostile environment, one where the parents’ have some control (and a say-so about the curriculum) doesn’t seem like a “warrior” to me. To me it sounds like common sense.
SOUND THE BATTLE CRY.
Amanpour would be very uncomfortable at a Carman concert. He sings songs with lyrics like:
“The only hope, for America, is Jesus. The only hope, for our country, is Him. If we repent, of our ways, stand firm and say, 'We need God in America, again.”
Usually there’s one heck of a light show, lot’s of drumbeat, shouting, excitement, and commitment. I guess that’s not allowed for Christians, right?
BATTLECRY is a reaction. It’s a reaction to what many parents, and the group leaders see, as a ruining of our youth in an increasingly secular society. If one listened to Amanpour’s report, one would think that the group was out there trying to recruit for Al Queda. In fact, she claims that the founder, Ron Luce, has “declared war on the American lifestyle.”
I wasn’t aware that homosexuality, pornography, drug abuse, alcoholism, and child sexualization constituted the “American lifestyle.” Apparently this is her view of the “American lifestyle.” And that offends me.
At one point in the CNN special a counter protestor was heard saying that Luce’s group was “anti-gay, anti-woman, pro-war and pro-obedience.” He was also accused of “imposing his conservative values on the rest of society.”
I would ask this:
1) Which group, in the past fifty years, has been responsible for getting abortion legalized on a national scale?
2) Which group, in the past fifty years, has sought to deny state’s rights and overturn laws in order to make homosexuality more accepted?
3) Which group, in the past fifty years, has fought to remove religion from the public forum, including schools, monuments, etc.
4) Which group has presented Christians, Christ and Christianity in the worst possible light in television, movies, theatre, and music?
I’m guessing it isn’t the Evangelical Christians.
All law is based on someone’s view of what is and is not moral. Someone’s morals will win out. And everyone (including the very liberals) seek to impose their “brand” of morality on everyone else via the law.
So let’s look at the things Luce and his group oppose, shall we?
>Every second - $3,075.64 is being spent on pornography
>Every second - 372 Internet users are typing adult search terms into search engines
>Every 39 minutes: a new pornographic video is being created in the United States
>Average age of first Internet exposure to pornography 11 years old
>15-17 year olds having multiple hard-core exposures 80%
>Children's character names linked to thousands of porn links 26 (Including Pokemon and Action Man)
I can’t imagine why Luce would be a little upset, can you?
On the other hand, even the Guttmacher Institute recognizes that abstinence teaching (combined with birth control use) has reduced the numbers of unplanned teen pregnancy. When it comes to abortion, there has been a marked DECREASE in abortion over the past four years, according to combined data and estimates.
I am curious as to why it’s considered “radical” to oppose things that hurt our kids? Let’s see, if a girl gets pregnant at fourteen and gets an abortion, is she better off than if she didn’t? Are kids better off with the proliferation of unchecked porn, including kiddie porn? And what about the issue of homosexuality?
When two parents decided to film a pro-homosexual presentation at the school where their children attend, they were told to leave the campus or be charged with trespassing:
“A distraught Kim Cariani told the Boston Herald she believes the school's ‘To BGLAD: Transgender, Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Awareness Day’ has no place in the curriculum.”
It’s important to note that the school did not notify parents. So who is pushing what on to whom? And what about the kids’ right not to be exposed to the onslaught in an academic institution?
It’s this kind of thing that has the parents and kids involved in Luce’s group in an uproar. While it hardly represents ALL of America (Amanpour has us believing that this is America’s lifestyle) abortion, homosexuality, pornography, etc., DO concern America’s youth. If some of those youth happen to oppose these things, is it wrong for them to have a voice?
Eventually we were led to believe these kids were put into some cult like trance. One young girl, with her back to the camera, was walking down a breezeway singing to herself. Amanpour pronounced that she was “in a trance” (maybe her butt was in a trance- her face wasn’t caught on camera at that point). The young girl gave an emotional testimony on camera. Had she been crying about meeting a hot rock star instead of Jesus, I guess Amanpour could have found that a tad more acceptable.
CONCLUSION.
There is so much more I could say and point out that was flawed in this report. I suppose Ms. Amanpour felt it was balanced. I contend it was not. But the one thing that stuck out in my mind was her constant reference to this person or that person as having “found God.”
I guess nobody ever told her that it isn’t God who is lost, rather, it's man who is lost in sin. And woman, too.
Jesus elevated women to a status they had never known before His coming. And Paul, in spite of feminist misinterpretations, recognized the importance of women before the Lord. Women played an important role in the New Testament, as witnesses, disciples and teachers.
Abortion:
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html see also:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/AbortionStatistics.htm