We have a lot of babies at Living Word. We're a prolific group, dedicated to biological church growth.

One more precious eternal human soul came into Living Word's world this week, and some medical concerns surrounding her birth have reminded us how precious- and how tenuous-the miracle of life is.

In order to procure the speaking services of Lutherans for Life president Dr. James Lamb we are observing Sanctity of Human LIfe Sunday on March 11. But last week was "the" date, being the 39th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on January 22, 1973 (I remember that as Michele's birthdate and my birth year). Note: If you haven't read the decision, do so. It is haunting. And legal experts tell me that the following case that year- Doe v. Bolton- actually did more to solidify "abortion rights" than Roe v. Wade. Since then about 53 million babies have been killed in the womb in the United States, and abortion has become one of our country's greatest exports through UN poverty (population control) policy and now military base policy under the current administration.

I want to share some tidbits with you for your own perusal:

• One minute pro-life apologist (copyright Steven Wagner)- If "it" is growing "it" is alive. If "it" has human parents "it" is a human life. And human life is precious, isn't it?
• If an unborn child is not a human life then no justification for abortion is necessary (copyright Greg Koukl). If an unborn child is a human life then no justification for abortion is possible. Note: The exceedingly and exceptionally rare case when the mother's life is endangered does not violate this principle but rather strengthens it. Why is that such a sobering case? Because any decision where the continuation of two human lives is truly mutually excclusive is tragic.
• Someone from Living Word exercised their Ambassadorship particularly well recently after posting an article on the shoddy legal standing of Roe (something about which scholars on both sides agree) and how it allows for unrestricted abortion for reasons like gender selection:

Contrary response #1- I read the article and while it was very well written it was written from an anti-abortion perspective. I will not start a pro-choice debate though! But one thing that sticks out is that being pro-choice doesn't really have anything to do with sex selection which they tried to use as a point in the story.

Contrary response #2- I would agree that it is very one-sided and very skewed towards the anti-abortion perspective. I would like to see an author acknowledge that adoption and surragacey laws as well as education and other laws that protect child need to be radically changed. I really want people to follow through the after birth of aborted children...it's not enough to create laws to force them to be born - laws then must be made to protect these children and create government aide. Otherwise a good debater could argue you are doing a disservice to the children by not protecting them after birth.

Excellent ambassador reply- Yes, you are both correct. But what of the implications for a judicial system that upholds something that is unconstitutional? But the real point is this: If abortion doesn't end a human life, no justification is necessary. If abortion does end a human life, then no justification is possible.

• And World Magazine- if you don't know it you need to- does an UNBELIEVABLE Sanctity of Human Life issue every year. Here is a particularly compelling article about the state of the Pro-Life position in the United States. It's winning, hands down. It is very rare to find someone who actually supports abortion law as it stands today. They just think they do.

Value life, delight in Christ, and go serve your King,
Pastor Wade Mobley