President Donald Trump Overturns Obamacare Abortion Mandate in Huge Pro-Life Victory

[Revmitchell]

The Trump administration announced today that employers will now be exempt from the federal requirement to provide insurance coverage for abortion-causing drugs in their health insurance plans if it conflicts with their sincerely held religious or moral beliefs. This now limits a rule created under the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act that required that employers, including non-church religious organizations, must cover all forms of contraception, from birth control pills to abortion drugs and devices at no cost to the employees.


The Trump administration stated legal reasons for issuing two rules: one for religious and the other for moral objections. The administration acknowledges that the Affordable Care Act law did not provide protection for nonreligious, moral conscientious objections as required by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Both rules would take effect as soon as they are on display at the office of the Federal Register.

President Donald Trump Overturns Obamacare Abortion Mandate in Huge Pro-Life Victory | LifeNews.com

 

[FollowTheWay]

The abortion rate is now at its lowest level since Roe vs. Wade. I think part of the reason for that has been access to contraception. Frankly, I don't understand the recent opposition to contraception coming from Protestants. Only the Catholics used to take this stand. Removing access to contraceptives will increase the abortion rate.

 

[Revmitchell]

abortion is not a contraceptive.

 

[HankD]

The abortion rate is now at its lowest level since Roe vs. Wade. I think part of the reason for that has been access to contraception. Frankly, I don't understand the recent opposition to contraception coming from Protestants. Only the Catholics used to take this stand. Removing access to contraceptives will increase the abortion rate.

Recent? I have been married to the same woman for 52 years, we have had 11 children.
Early on in our marriage we decided against contraception.

BTW Baptists are not Protestants (At least not this one).
A proper label would be "Separatist".
As a former Catholic I do not "protest" the Catholic Church but have separated from it.

HankD

 

[FollowTheWay]

Recent? I have been married to the same woman for 52 years, we have had 11 children.
Early on in our marriage we decided against contraception.

BTW Baptists are not Protestants (At least not this one).
A proper label would be "Separatist".
As a former Catholic I do not "protest" the Catholic Church but have separated from it.

HankD

You made a personal choice and it seems to have brought you joy. I'm simply saying that when I was growing up Catholics had larger families in my neighborhood because the church was against contraception. I never heard contraception preached against the SB church I grew up in nor did I ever hear a Protestant minister speak out against it. BTW, you can choose to believe "The Trail of Blood" theory which traces the Baptist Church back to the disciples. I believe that it split off the English Congregational Church and fled to the Netherlands (both types, general and particular).

 

[HankD]

You made a personal choice and it seems to have brought you joy. I'm simply saying that when I was growing up Catholics had larger families in my neighborhood because the church was against contraception. I never heard contraception preached against the SB church I grew up in nor did I ever hear a Protestant minister speak out against it. BTW, you can choose to believe "The Trail of Blood" theory which traces the Baptist Church back to the disciples. I believe that it split off the English Congregational Church and fled to the Netherlands (both types, general and particular).

OK admittedly it is true that "Protestant" churches generally do not speak against contraception.

Neither do I take it upon my self to tell folks that it is wrong. It is a personal matter between a couple and the Lord.

My point is that the non use of contraception is not exclusive to the Catholic Church or recent to non Catholics.

BTW in answer to your BTW: Being a Christian first I'm not a Landmark Baptist and don't subscribe to apostolic succession as a Baptist Christian.

I do attribute the Baptist Church (at least the local Baptist church I attend) as being a biblical NT church to faith in the inspired testimony of the original apostles and their witness of the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ as found in the word of God.

The Baptist Distinctives and the Statement of Faith and quality of preaching at the local church of which I am a member determines my local church loyalty.

I don't know if its a false legend but supposedly Spurgeon refused ordination saying - I don't want anyone's empty hands on my empty head.

HankD

 

[agedman]

I consider the abortion issue a distraction and preaching that I have heard as hurtful to the Gospel.

Long the church of all brands has wrongfully engaged in societal change. Not that I am against the good a church may do to influence a society in their area; however, the society of that area should be changed as a result of the growth and development of believers.

The church has no business in attempting to conform heathen unredeemed to some standard, rather throughout the NT the standard of the assembly is to learn at church and go to spread the gospel.

As that gospel is spread, society will respond either by embracing a general hindrance to evil, or more likely to punish the Godly.

What hurt is thrust upon a believer who in the past made a poor decision on the matter of abortion and then is again and again shamed by the preaching that should be edifying?

A Godly adult would rather have a child in heaven as the results of abortion than to have that same child born and grow to be a shame and scourge to the faith.

 

[FollowTheWay]

I

OK admittedly it is true that "Protestant" churches generally do not speak against contraception.

Neither do I take it upon my self to tell folks that it is wrong. It is a personal matter between a couple and the Lord.

My point is that the non use of contraception is not exclusive to the Catholic Church or recent to non Catholics.

BTW in answer to your BTW: Being a Christian first I'm not a Landmark Baptist and don't subscribe to apostolic succession as a Baptist Christian.

I do attribute the Baptist Church (at least the local Baptist church I attend) as being a biblical NT church to faith in the inspired testimony of the original apostles and their witness of the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ as found in the word of God.

The Baptist Distinctives and the Statement of Faith and quality of preaching at the local church of which I am a member determines my local church loyalty.

I don't know if its a false legend but supposedly Spurgeon refused ordination saying - I don't want anyone's empty hands on my empty head.

HankD

Baptist History and Heritage Society | Baptist Beginnings

I believe that the Baptists were originally Separatists who split off the Church of England and then distanced themselves from the other Separatists (who became the Puritans). They left England to establish the Baptist church in the Netherlands and originally were generalists led by John Smyth (non-Calvinists). In 1611, Thomas Helwys led a portion of this church back to London, where they set up the first Baptist church on English soil. By 1650, there were at least forty-seven General Baptist churches in and around London. They believed in a general atonement, baptism of believers only, religious liberty, and other doctrines still associated with Baptists. The General Baptists also believed that it was possible for one to fall from grace or lose his salvation.

The Particular Baptists came into existence a generation later than General Baptists. Named for their view of particular atonement, they believed that Christ died only for a particular group, the elect. They were deeply influenced by the teachings of John Calvin.

Particular Baptists emerged out of an Independent congregation. While Separatists, as the name implies, separated totally from the Church of England, the Independents sought to maintain autonomous congregations without a radical break with the state church. Ultimately, most of the Independents were driven to more complete separation. As early as 1616, Henry Jacob was leader of a small Independent congregation in London. The next two pastors were John Lathrop and Henry Jessey.

English Baptists recovered the practice of believer’s baptism in two steps. By 1608/09, the General Baptists insisted that baptism was for believers only, and by 1638 the Particular Baptists reached the same conclusion. At first, English Baptists baptized by sprinkling or pouring. Immersion came a few years later.

Baptists rejected the name Anabaptist, not wishing to be confused with or identified with the people who bore that name

 

[HankD]

I consider the abortion issue a distraction and preaching that I have heard as hurtful to the Gospel.

Long the church of all brands has wrongfully engaged in societal change. Not that I am against the good a church may do to influence a society in their area; however, the society of that area should be changed as a result of the growth and development of believers.

The church has no business in attempting to conform heathen unredeemed to some standard, rather throughout the NT the standard of the assembly is to learn at church and go to spread the gospel.

As that gospel is spread, society will respond either by embracing a general hindrance to evil, or more likely to punish the Godly.

What hurt is thrust upon a believer who in the past made a poor decision on the matter of abortion and then is again and again shamed by the preaching that should be edifying?

A Godly adult would rather have a child in heaven as the results of abortion than to have that same child born and grow to be a shame and scourge to the faith.

But it cannot be totally ignored.

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

HankD

 

[agedman]

But it cannot be totally ignored.

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

HankD

Yes I agree, there is certainly a need to teach what is Godly and ungodly in the assembly.

However, the context is applicable to believers and there own character, not that which the unredeemed live.

7Therefore do not be partakers with them; 8for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light 9(for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth), 10trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. 11Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them; 12for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret. 13But all things become visible when they are exposed by the light, for everything that becomes visible is light.

If such things done in secret is disgraceful for believers to even speak among themselves, it seems there is no permission for even preaching openly about the matter.

Rather, the Godly ladies should instruct the young girls in private conversations.

 

[Revmitchell]

I consider the abortion issue a distraction and preaching that I have heard as hurtful to the Gospel.

Hmm the church should ignore the mass murder if unborn children....let's see......Uh I don't think so.

 

[agedman]

Hmm the church should ignore the mass murder if unborn children....let's see......Uh I don't think so.

Prove by Scripture that church is to fight against the government rather than “pray for them that have rule over you.”

Besides, did I state the church should ignore mass murder?

Not at all, but rather placed how the church assembly should respond.

 

[Revmitchell]

Prove by Scripture that church is to fight against the government rather than “pray for them that have rule over you.”

Besides, did I state the church should ignore mass murder?

Not at all, but rather placed how the church assembly should respond.

Failure to speak to it both publically through scripture and in the pulpit is no where prohibited. What you fail to understand is in this country we have the right to speak out on issues. It is what this country was founded on. Therefore it is encouraged by all to include Christians. There is no "fighting against government". No one is doing that.