Compelling Pro-Choice Story

This article doesn't directly say anything about Christianity, but it is related through the controversy of abortion. Sometimes there are gray areas in the argument or exceptions to abortion, like when the pregnancy is a result of rape, or when the pregnancy is life-threatening the mother. This is an interesting situation, where a pregnant woman named Danielle Deaver was having a premature baby, twenty weeks into the pregnancy, and she was told that her baby was going to die no matter what steps were taken. She decided to "terminate the pregnancy, rather than waiting for their daughter to be born naturally and suffer." However, "Nebraska recently enacted a new, stricter law that prevents abortions after the 20th week of gestation except in very specific situations where the mother's life is immediately in danger. Deaver's situation was outside the law, and there was nothing doctors could do to help her." The baby was born at only 1 lb. 10 oz. and "was physically perfect, but born too early to survive, even with medical help." The parents held her for fifteen minutes and watched her die.

What would be more painful? To watch the baby die in your arms or to know that your are the one who killed your baby (through abortion)? What is the correct moral action?

In the article's conclusion it reads: "She [Deaver] believes that no family should have to go through what they went through. The new law is based on research that shows that babies past 20 weeks' gestation can feel pain because their nerves are developed enough. But Deaver thinks that it doesn't take into account unusual and heart-wrenching situations like her own."

If the baby can feel pain during the abortion, how would you know as a mother that you would be saving it from suffering? How would you know which pain, that of the abortion or that of the natural death, would be worse? If it is only to lessen the mother's own pain, does that make her selfish?
Her argument is that abortion is the answer to all of the pain in the story. Is supporting medical research and development for premature babies instead of supporting abortion a realistic alternative?

Link to Article:  Nebraska Couple Watches Their Baby Die Because of New Law

Why Are They Called Blue Laws?

Apparently there is one theory that the strict laws were originally written on blue paper, but that claim is beaten down by all of the sources. Instead, "A more probable derivation is based on an 18th-century usage of the word blue meaning 'rigidly moral” in a disparaging sense" (Britannica)  . . .  "(a 'bluenose' for example is one who advocates a rigorous moral code" (Snopes).
The laws were "strictest in Puritan, Bible-oriented communities" (Britannica) and the first recorded use of the term blue laws was by a reverend named Samuel Peters, in his book titled General History of Connecticut published in 1781, in which he lists "45 blue laws [. . . ] that were wholly or substantially true" (Britannica).

Blue Law Examples From Peters' Work:
-regular work on Sunday, plus any buying, selling, traveling, public entertainment, or sports is forbidden
-“The judges shall determine controversies without a jury”
-“married persons must live together or be imprisoned”
-“a wife shall be good evidence against her husband”
-“the selectmen, on finding children ignorant, may take them away from their parents and put them into better hands, at the expense of their parents.”

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/70275/blue-law
http://www.snopes.com/language/colors/bluelaws.asp

Catholic Governors Supporting Gays in 5 States

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/01/catholic-governors-and-ga_n_1294944.html?ref=christianity

Five different Catholic governors (Maryland, Maine, New York, Washington, New Hampshire) have signed legislation giving people the rights of gay marriage. The political issues seem to split the religion in many ways. The given example from this article is that: "In the recent contraception controversy it was revealed that 98% of Catholic women have used contraception at sometime in their lives, even as the Catholic Bishops maintain the position that contraception goes against Catholic teaching."
Whether your opinion is that this is progress or it is trouble, these signings are sure to be controversial within the Church, and the result is yet to be seen.

Non-Jews using a Jewish Wedding Contract

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/nonjewish-couples-embrace_n_1399984.html

In the wedding industry it's becoming trendy to sign a Jewish ketubah, (the traditional Jewish marriage contract) even for those who are not Jewish or Christian.. or religious at all. Many are even adapting to other customs: "More non-Jewish couples have embraced Jewish marriage rituals over the last decade. Some stomp a glass – or a lightbulb [sic] as a popular substitute. Others recite vows under a canopy, called a chuppah."
There is an increase demand for non-Jewish ketubahs because "a ketubah is more than just fancy calligraphy. It's often poster-size and ornate, suitable for framing later with artwork either as backdrop or accompaniment." People seem to like it mostly for aesthetic and sentimental reasons.

One Ketubah creator says, "I always felt it was something that everybody could have . . . I didn't see why it should just be for Jews. It can be the thing that reflects the spirit of the day, more than those 50,000 photographs you took at your wedding. It's just a nice energy."
The article concludes that many Jewish traditions are becoming mainstream without their religious associations, and this is one example proving the claim.

Queer Christ ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kittredge-cherry/queer-christ-arises-to-li_b_1374286.html

We have looked at different depictions of God and Jesus...
Now some people of the LGBT group have made their own image of Jesus, claiming their own right to religion and freedom of speech.
The idea behind these pictures is explained as this: "Whenever anyone commits violence against another, Christ is crucified -- including when LGBT people are attacked or killed for loving someone of the same sex. The crucifixion remains the most common queer Christian theme. Many LGBT people can relate to the hurt and humiliation that Jesus experienced on the cross. Traditional iconography such as the Passion and the Stations of the Cross has been adapted to address queer suffering."
The article writer says these ideas are revelations in the church.

The Use of the Same Scripture to Stop Abortions AND Support Gays

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/psalm-139-two-causes-two-meanings_n_1386492.html

Apparently Psalm 139:13-14 which reads: "For it was you who formed my inward parts. You knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made" is used to argue both pro-life stances and gay rights stances. Pro-life, to not abort the fearfully and wonderfully made babies, and pro-gay since the children are, "born this way." This split is caused by different purposes of each group of activists, and the different interpretations of the Bible come into play here as well. Those who use this to support gay rights are not including all the other biblical scriptures which denounce same-sex relations as a sin and even an abomination. Psalms is largely a collection of prayers and praises, not the instruction that God lays out in other books, so it's fallacy to omit the other scriptures. However, like we read from the Mennonite writer in the beginning of the semester, some think that the Bible does not discuss loving types of same-sex relationships and therefore it is unclear on the whether that would be sinful or permitted in the eyes of God. If people think of the Bible this way (which I think is a more uncommon view), than the pro-gay uses of this scripture do make sense. Agreement with either side here depends on one's personal interpretations, beliefs, and purposes.