South Korea laments birthrate drop from anti-child emphasis
South Korean officials are searching for ways to reverse a decline in the country's birthrate, concluding that a policy of denouncing more than two children per couple as "unpatriotic" has had adverse effects.
The push for a higher birthrate comes as some of South Korea's doctors have asked for forgiveness for performing illegal abortions for years and are working to cut the number of the abortions in the Asian country.
With South Korea's fertility rate at 4.5 children per woman in the 1970s, the government started encouraging fewer children, even offering exemption from mandatory army reserve duty if a man underwent sterilization....
I suspected that forum guidelines would forbid detailed discussion of Written's somewhat peculiar question.
Deut. 25:5 is the text for prince charles's point. Evidently this procedure was customary before it was received at Sinai, & John Gill pointed out that this was still of interest during Jesus's earthly ministry, Matt. 22:25. Preserving the family line was *very* important to ancient Israel, to the point where the daughters of Zelophehad got a dispensation to receive his inheritance, Num. 27:7-8.
Neil wrote: Why the qualifying adjective "external?" Anticipating interest in Gen 38, what was Onan's sin, specifically? Judah gave Onan conjugal instructions in v. 8 which were disobeyed in v. 9. So what Commandment (yet to be revealed to Moses) did Onan violate? Looks like #5 to me - "Honor thy father & mother."
wasnt onan supposed to impregnate his brothers widow according to jewish law ?
The method of contraception per se was not the issue but his wilful failure to fulfil his obligation under the law.
Anticipating interest in Gen 38, what was Onan's sin, specifically? Judah gave Onan conjugal instructions in v. 8 which were disobeyed in v. 9. So what Commandment (yet to be revealed to Moses) did Onan violate? Looks like #5 to me - "Honor thy father & mother."
John Paul, all I was doing is pointing out your particular fascination with abortion, theft and drunkenness are mentioned much more often. If drinking was controlled, something that the Romish folks loath to do, there wouldn't be so many unplanned pregnancies and then planned abortions in the first place. So, solving part of what you're interested in would be helped by getting Catholics out of the Romish Church, and a better control of drinking, this of course in the USA. Since the article was about South Korea, I'm not sure what the numerous Christians could do about the problem there, though I would assume they speak out against abortion. I would also assume they have as much of a problem with religous pluralism as the US, q.v., [URL=http://www.ihcc.org/images/booklets/pdf/L201.pdf]]]Division and Diversion[/URL].
Jim, you completely misunderstood what I am trying to communicate. It is not about "pet" sins. Christ said that He came that you would not live in sin. The prophets were killed because they preached against the sins of their day.....i.e. John the Baptist. If you had a case of infidelity, you are commended to deal with it in the Body...The Body of Christ needs to hear about & deal with the issues concerning chemical birthcontrol and IUDs. Teachers of God's Word are cursed double if they lead the people into sin, or refuse to deal with it. We need Men to stand up as leaders of their homes, and say as for my house, we will serve the Lord......our walk with Christ, putting off the old man, putting on the new man, through the conviction of the Holy Spirit is part of progressive santification. Maybe some of God's people believe that if we sins more, then more grace is given....Paul condemned this sort of thinking. What is in a man's heart is what will proceed out of him. The silence from Christians on this issue is mind boggling. It is like we love the freedom (bondage) that technology has given us, and we don't want to let it go for the sake of Christ. We are like birds caught in a snare!
Christian couples have a right to be informed about the three mechanisms of the pill (as reported by the drug makers and testified to in the US Supreme Court) and the fact that liberal scientists for 30 years often define pregnancy at implantation instead of our belief that new life begins at conception.
Ah, what the Catholic position is on the "Morning After Pill" [URL=http://www.morningafterpill.org/catholic-teaching.html]]]Statement on the So-Called "Morning-After Pill" Pontifical Academy for Life, October 31, 2000[/URL]. This should answer you question since "abortifacient" comes up in the article.
It seems like everyone have their own pet sins, one for others like abortion, and then those they commit themselves, which they don't want to talk about. You may wish to talk about murderers, but what about thieves? They are mentioned quite prominently, but all too often crooks are in places of power and not thrown in jail.
I Corinthians 6 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God---[URL=http://www.lockman.org/nasb/nasbcmp.php]]]NASB[/URL].
Why not talk about stealing? However, I'm not even advocating harping on one particular sin, there are just too many sins, better to attack the idea of sin itself. Prohibition was a great idea, but just too many citizens wanted to drink, and to excess.
But, John Paul, you aren't addressing mainliners, you are preaching to the choir on SermonAudio.
When we know that the Body of Christ is engaged in sin, we have the responsibility to call people on the issue. Yes, sin is sin, and it's results are fatal. Paul and Peter preached against the sins of their day that affected the church. Why should tha be any different today. Do you think that God will bless ministry when we are using chemical and IUD birthcontrol? We don't tolerate adultery in the church; why do we tolerate murder in the pews, when we don't speak against chemical birth control. We have grown up in America, trusting the Molec's hight priest in the white uniforms (medical, allopathic doctors) to the point that we will allow them to tell us just about anything, and we will participate in the act without question. Our Lord and Paul told us to question everything of man, all ideas, all act, all phylosopy's ect. It is time for the Elect to ask the questions about chemical birth control. The reason everyone is so quite on this issue, is because everyone's hands are holding unborn fetuses in their hands. We are the abortionist. We don't even need the doctors help; we just take the little blue pills everyday or the morning after pills which are the same as the little blue pills, just a higher concentration. I pray the Holy Spirit will convict!
John Paul, sin is preached against at IHCC, there are no minor sins, there are no "celebrity" sins as the Eastburo Kansas "Church" would want people to think. Sin is sin and all of it is eternally fatal. When this Sunday's sermon gets put up on SermonAudio, you can receive that message.
So, when abortion comes up it is mentioned as a sin. in the earlier Romans series you will see that abortion did come up in sermons, [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1190414539]]]The World: Guilty Before God[/URL] and [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1804113112]]]God Gave them Over to Depravity[/URL] Of course our bookstore has the excellent Ankerberg booklet on it also, [URL=http://httpwww.ihcc.org/sw_index.php?id=book_desc&item_id=LQudiUToby2Qa5D3SEfFfNSJT]]]Abortion, The Facts on[/URL].