Pro-choice?
by Kathy Brown on July 24th, 2009 | 0 comments
Several years ago, a peculiar circumstance presented itself when public school parents were trying to get an abstinence-based sex education program into the curriculum as a choice. On the committee in charge of granting or denying the request was a pastor who led a Bible-believing church. Ironically, he was not supportive of this option.
This situation offers an illustration of how important it is for Christians to understand worldview. Privately, this pastor agreed that sex should be reserved for marriage. However, his contention was that he did not want to impose his perspective on others. He argued that teenagers will be sexually active, so the best course would be to give them the “tools” to be safe. There was, it must be added, quite a bit of peer pressure on this man to not be “religious” or “narrow-minded.”
Aside from frustration, what would the proper response to this minister of the gospel be? The scenario was not as complicated as it could have been, since the proposal was for parents to choose one of two options: abstinence based or not so much. Looking through these two types of sex education eventually leads to deeper considerations than whether or not to promote birth control. There are gigantic differences in the fundamental presuppositions of each one. (Foundational Presupposition Chart) Please take a moment to compare these two and consider the ramifications for each.
It is imperative that the religious perspective of both worldviews be acknowledged. Ultimately, there is not just one way to arrive at moral decisions. Currently, the tax supported educational system funds the secular humanist agenda, which has not only fueled the sexual activity of teenagers, but has also undercut and diluted the instruction of many parents.
What is our responsibility to stand up in the public arena and articulate the basis for ethics? What keeps us from doing that? What would you like to have said to the pastor? By the way, those parents who courageously presented their case for an ideology reflecting Biblical truth . . . were denied.
Next entry: Doors that Open to a Better Future
Previous entry: Toasting the Frog
back to Blog Archive