Evangelicals: Abortion, Moral Relativism Top Moral Issues List

Evangelical leaders have identified the greatest moral issues facing America today and topping the list is abortion. Moral relativism and mistreatment of others followed closely behind.

Evangelical leaders have identified the greatest moral issues facing America today and topping the list is abortion.

"The moral scandal of abortion tops my list…not because murder is worse than other moral evils, but because of the massive numbers of this killing field and intentionality of so many to put self-gratification, greed and political advantage above life itself," said Jeff Farmer of the Open Bible Churches in Des Moines, Iowa.

Abortion, moral relativism and mistreatment of others almost came in a three-way tie as the top concerns among America's evangelical leaders, according to the survey released Monday by the National Association of Evangelicals.

While abortion has traditionally remained a major moral concern, the recent push by Congress for health care reform and the possible coverage of abortions with federal dollars have prompted new opposing efforts and louder voices among prominent evangelical leaders.

Pastors such as Joel C. Hunter from Florida and groups like the Evangelical Church Alliance have released statements urging members of Congress not to violate the sanctity of human life in allowing abortion to be funded by tax dollars.

Following abortion, moral relativism was listed as the second greatest moral issue facing America. NAE board member Ron Carpenter said the problem is "a non-belief in Absolute Truth which permeates every other arena of our society.”

Many of the surveyed evangelical leaders cited the Old Testament passage Judges 17:6 (“every man did that which was right in his own eyes”) as they identified moral relativism as a major concern.

Mistreatment of others was third on the list.

"The greatest moral issue in America today is our blindness and silence to injustices here and around the world," said Sammy Mah, president of World Relief, according to the report on the survey. "Social ills like poverty, malnutrition, homelessness, human trafficking, and so many more are rooted in injustices that must be fought."

Other moral issues named by evangelical leaders included secularization, homosexuality and pornography.

The Evangelical Leaders Survey is a monthly poll of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Evangelicals. They include the CEOs of denominations and representatives of a broad array of evangelical organizations including missions, universities, publishers and churches.

Audrey Barrick Christian Post Reporter FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://bit.ly/5UNrJP

Becoming Completely Pro Life

My goal is to lead Christians in becoming completely pro-life (John 10:10), protecting the vulnerable inside and outside the womb and sharing eternal life with them. We must protect the vulnerable from harm, starting with the baby in the womb (Matthew 18:10). To do this, we must offer a full range of approaches: from personal to legal, from prevention of unintended pregnancies to medical, financial, personal and spiritual support, including options for adoptions in our support for pregnant women. Our ultimate goal encompasses both the eventual elimination of abortion and the demonstration of Christ’s love through our care for mothers and babies (Psalm 127:3). We must also work to protect the vulnerable outside the womb, protecting the most vulnerable (the poor and least insulated) by reducing the disease, displacement and death that comes from pollution (Psalm 72:13). Christians are, also, given the charge of caring for the sick and promoting the full range of healing in this world (John 14:12). From epidemics such as AIDS, to individual sicknesses, to physical, mental, emotional and spiritual disabilities, we are to be agents of His healing and love.

Furthermore, our treatment of all people must take into consideration that they are made in the image of God. Therefore they are to be treated with respect and dignity. Jesus summarized this in what we now refer to as the “Golden Rule” (Matthew 7:12). We should not use or oppress anyone (Luke 4:18). All people are created equal and can choose their religion (Joshua 24:15), and the way they will live their lives. We must work for human rights and religious freedom for all people.

Because God loves justice, and because we are commanded to live a simple lifestyle of doing justice (Micah 6:8), we must stand against different forms of exploitation, systems of advantage for only particular groups, and discrimination based upon circumstances beyond one’s control. We are blessed in order to help the disadvantaged to advance to the place where they help others (Luke 12:48b).

We are to give to those who cannot help themselves as a matter of immediate compassion and eternal reward (Luke 16:19-25).

As we expand the agenda into other areas of moral importance—caring for vulnerable people outside the womb as well as inside it—we will motivate and mobilize many, like never before. More importantly, we will be obeying God's Word and putting it into practice.

VIDEO: Pastor Joel Testifies Before the Senate

Dr. Hunter was a witness at a hearing on “Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2009, Can We Do It and How?”, scheduled by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Refugees, which was presided over by Sen. Charles Schumer.

Dr. Hunter's Testimony on Immigration to the Senate

On April 30, 2009, Northland's senior pastor, Dr. Joel C. Hunter, was a witness at a hearing on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2009, Can We Do It and How?", scheduled by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Refugees. Sen. Charles Schumer, who presided over the hearing, personally extended the invitation to participate to Dr. Hunter, who is a member of President Obama's Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Following is the testimony offered by Dr. Hunter.

Thank you, Chairman Schumer, distinguished members of the subcommittee, esteemed colleagues on this panel, and other guests, for providing me an opportunity to speak on the moral and religious reasons for immigration reform.

I am a one of hundreds of thousands of local religious leaders in this country. I have been a pastor for almost 40 years and that is what I want to be in all my years remaining. Even though I am also in leadership positions of national and international groups that are dealing with immigration, it is at the local level that I am continually reminded that policy truly does hurt or help people.

In my faith tradition we all start as strangers and aliens, outsiders to the commonwealth of God. But because we have a God who was willing to do what it took to include us (at great personal cost), we "are no longer strangers and aliens, but [we] are fellow citizens..." (Ephesians 2:18-19a)

So I find it a high honor to speak to those in power as an advocate for those who have no power. In a verse that would be echoed in many religions, Proverbs 31:8 commands us to "Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves."

"You will make known to me the path of life..." (Psalm 16:11) The hope of any religion is that those who have been on the wrong path can be set upon the right path. The need for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is to create a path that will help people do the right thing. A broken system produces a dysfunctional society, fractured families, and it increases the vulnerability of both legal and illegal residents. It helps criminals who thrive in the shadows and it harms decent people, consigning them to a life of insecurity, hiding, and minimal contribution to the general welfare.

A broken system produces both broken and crooked people. The cost to our nation in terms of productivity, national unity, and national security is depressing. But it does not compare to the damage being done to individuals and families.

A broken system tempts many to predatory practices. I cannot count the stories I have heard about attorneys taking the entire life savings of undocumented workers, producing no results, then abandoning those workers when the money was gone. Is that typical of the profession? We would not believe so. But "lead me not into temptation." It is a mighty temptation to de-prioritize those who are desperate and too intimidated to raise their voices to complain. And what about employers that take advantage of the powerless because there is no system of accountability? Or the bureaucrats that have no incentive to produce results (or even to keep track of the paperwork) because, who will know? Or the talk show hosts that increase their fame and fortune by picturing those without the proper papers only as conniving and dangerous parasites instead of persons made in the image of God, deserving both respect and help to do the right thing?

We are producing cottage industries of exploitation. We are also hearing millions of stories that are the opposite of the American dream.

My friend Rev. Silas Pintos tells of a family in his Hispanic congregation that came from England. Both the husband and wife were successful business people, and they hoped that in the U.S. their children would be immersed in a better environment for family values. So they came to start an alternative energy company.

After a two-year ordeal with the immigration system and absurd legal fees, the immigration department could not even clearly explain to them why their residency application had not gone through. They returned to England emotionally and financially devastated.

My friend Imam Mohammed Musri told me the wife of a 60 year old man in his congregation was very sick. The man had papers but when the attorney handling his case took a judgeship, the man was not told he needed to re-register. He was deported even though his wife was too sick to go with him. She was hospitalized and died without him because he could not get back into the country to be by her side.

Pastor Augustine Davies is on the staff at my church. He and his wife are from Sierra Leone and have just completed the long and arduous task of becoming citizens, but they have special relationships with many of the Africans inside and outside our congregation who are caught in the system. One of them is George.

George is from Liberia, West Africa. He is married and has four adult children who live in poverty back in his home country. When George arrived, INS approved the refugee for TPS. George completed a nursing program and got a job. He was turned down for TPS renewal, but now George feels the almost crushing pressure of providing for his family and other countrymen who need the money he can send them because of his job. He stays in the shadows for now. I do not agree with what he is doing, but I know his present life is because he loves his family, not because he is out for himself.

Our immigration system can also intimidate congregations as well as individuals and families. My friend Rabbi Steven Engel told me that his congregation had sponsored a family from Argentina to come to the U.S. The INS lost the paperwork many times, and they made regular visits to the synagogue, suspicious that the congregation might be doing something wrong. The whole process was so stressful and unwelcoming that when Sergio died from a heart attack at the age of 43 the remaining family returned to Argentina.

These stories and many others don't live up to the ideals of our country. We can do better, and we know it. Everyone is frustrated with the present system. Our immigration system in many cases has us echoing the words of the despairing saint who proclaimed, "I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate." (Romans 7:15)

The urgency for immigration reform that yields efficiency and compassion cannot be overstated because it is so overdue.

The moral principles for a better system Some of the central principles that comprise most major religions are also woven into our country's history and can be used as a standard for immigration reform:

These principles deem each person as valuable, "endowed by their Creator" with a dignity that transcends earthly circumstance. Therefore, our system must treat each person respectfully.

They acknowledge the family as the bedrock of personal and social development, and the support of the family as the foundation of a strong society. Therefore, our system should prioritize the family.

They see law as not only necessary for restraining evil, but as needed for structuring healthy relationships. It is right that wrongdoers are restrained and/or punished, but it is a better justice when the laws yield correction and the redemption of bad circumstances. Therefore, our system should have ways to choose to live upright lives after the penalties for wrong decisions.

So most people of faith are hoping for policies that will prioritize family togetherness, respect for the law, personal productivity, and compassion for those who are most helpless.

Conclusion We do not envy you your charge. Immigration reform is a morally complex as well as a politically explosive challenge. But many of us are praying earnestly for you and for God's wisdom in this matter.

Including the stranger is not just a matter of compassion but a necessity for greatness. Loving your neighbor as you love yourself is not only a moral commandment but a path to national nobility, if we can build a nation of families and support networks that not only help the marginalized to be successful, but help the successful to be helpful, then we can better live up to our potential as a people.

In the end, I believe our nation will be not be judged by the productivity of our budgets, or the genius of our laws, or even the earnestness of our faith communities. We will be judged, both by history and by God, by the way we treated people, especially those who needed our help.

Faith-Based Office To Expand Its Reach: Goals Will Include Reducing Abortion

By Michelle Boorstein and Kimberly Kindy, Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, February 6, 2009 - President Obama yesterday announced the creation of his faith-based outreach office, expanding its agenda beyond funding social programs to work on policies aimed at strengthening family life and reducing abortion.

Obama's office leaves in place rules that allow faith-based groups receiving federal funding to hire only people of their own faith, but White House aides said the hiring rules would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis when there are complaints and that the Justice Department will provide legal assistance.

Obama's move more fully formalizes the partnerships between the federal government and faith groups that first began under President Bill Clinton and was expanded by President George W. Bush. But where Bush used the faith office primarily for funding programs -- drawing criticism that he was mainly assisting his political supporters -- Obama said he wants to use the office for policy guidance, as well.

Speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast at the Hilton Washington yesterday, Obama said the goal of the initiative "will not be to favor one religious group over another -- or even religious groups over secular groups. It will simply be to work on behalf of those organizations that want to work on behalf of our communities, and to do so without blurring the line our Founders wisely drew between church and state."

The president created a 25-member advisory council and named 15 of its members yesterday, including several high-profile evangelicals -- the Rev. Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of a Florida megachurch, and the Rev. Frank S. Page, president emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention -- as well as representatives from secular nonprofits, which largely had little association with Bush's faith-based initiative. The council members are to advise the faith office on policy but will not play a direct role in allocating federal grants. The office will be headed by Joshua DuBois, a 26-year-old Pentecostal who worked on religious issues for Obama's campaign.

The office will be more involved in policy planning than it was during the Bush years, White House aides said. They said the top priorities for the office will be interfaith relations, strengthening the role of fathers in society and reducing poverty. The office also will help develop policies aimed at reducing the number of abortions, though no specifics were offered.

Obama kept in place, however, much of the legal structure for the office created through executive orders by Bush. The 11 faith-based offices Bush established in different agencies and a faith liaison in the public outreach office will continue. Paul Monteiro will be the religious liaison in the Office of Public Liaison, the White House said yesterday.

DuBois said the faith-based office will employ about 50 people. Despite speaking on the campaign trail against the Bush administration's approach -- including on hiring and proselytizing -- Obama wants "to create a process to look at this in a way that can withstand scrutiny and takes into account views on all sides," DuBois said in an interview yesterday.

Three members of the advisory council -- Page, the Rev. Jim Wallis and World Vision President Richard Stearns -- have heightened concerns among church-state separatists. The Southern Baptist Convention, which Page led, says that it is discriminatory for the government to prevent its members from sharing their faith with others. And Stearns's organization received funding in the Bush years while saying it should not be forced to hire non-Christians.

Faith-based nonprofits received federal grants totaling more than $10.6 billion during the Bush administration, said members of the former White House staff.

Some religious groups argued at the time that they could use taxpayer-funded program to help people out of poverty and addiction by teaching them about God and salvation. And yesterday, some advocates of church-state separation said Obama should not have left the Bush legal structure in place.

"He is expanding the Bush administration's faith-based initiative without putting the most important safeguards in place. The president has created a more powerful office with a greater ability to shovel federal taxpayer dollars to religious groups, but civil rights protections are being deferred for later study and decisions," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Ira C. Lupu, a George Washington University law professor who has written on White House faith-based initiatives, said it was wise for Obama not to move too fast. As a candidate, Obama "hadn't looked at the issue carefully," Lupu said. "I think as a first move, handing it to lawyers is good. But it doesn't avoid that he'll have to deal with this eventually."

Staff writer Jacqueline L. Salmon contributed to this report.

Find this article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/05/AR2009020500834.html?sub=AR