Two Horrible Sins in The Balance


Two Horrible Sins in the Balance

Richard Hollerman

Although as a Christian I refuse to be political or nationalistic, it is altogether right to denounce sin wherever it may be found.  Whether it is in the realm of entertainment, education, business, or political government, it is right to point out the good and the bad.

Unfortunately, we are living in an age when people confuse the right and the wrong.  They take a humanistic approach—saying that man is the measure of all things.  They would contend that your view is just as good as your neighbor’s and your neighbor’s view is as good as yours. There is no absolute standard of right and wrong.  

This is the attitude referred to in the prophet Isaiah: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.  Wow to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight” (Isaiah 5:20-21).  There are millions today who are calling evil good—and this is just what we need to look at today.  What is the “evil” that some are calling “good”?

It is hard to imagine that two horrible sins are in the balance in the political realm today.  These sins have traditionally been seen as clearly, unequivocally and plainly a matter of right and wrong, of black and white.  I refer to sins so black and perverse that it is difficult to overestimate their importance.

At one time in America nearly everyone would concur that these two sins were clearly wrong and should be opposed by law.  Society at large condemned these sins even when many didn’t know Scripture well enough to substantiate their views.  Nature itself testified that these sins were despicable and terribly wrong!

I refer to the sins of child-murder and the perversion of sodomy.  These sins are not in the same category as shoplifting a pack of chewing gum, or speeding at 65 miles per hour in a 60 mile per hour zone, or returning a book to the library two weeks late. While those may be sinful and require our confession to God (and others), the two sins about which I write are horribly wrong in the eyes of God. They formerly were utterly wrong in the eyes of society and even today many oppose them.  Both of them are in the balance during the political arena.


We are aware that this goes by the label of abortion, but let’s call it what it is.  When Mary, a virgin, was betrothed to Joseph, she became pregnant with Jesus before these two righteous people came together.  This is why this miracle is called the “virgin birth.” More properly, it was a virginal conception.  But was this unborn child (Jesus) called an embryo or a fetus?  No, Matthew tells us, “Before they came together [in marital intimacy] she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18). Notice that Jesus was called a “child” before He was born!

Before a baby is born, he is a child. He is a person made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 9:6; cf. James 3:9). Today there is a procedure called “partial birth abortion.” This means that when a baby is in the process of being born and is partially inside of the mother and partially outside of the mother, a doctor [who has vowed to protect life!] kills the baby. The baby dies at the hands of a doctor who should protect life. A murder takes place!

Politicians have different ideas about this procedure and abortion in general. Some respect life as a gift from God while others go to the opposite extreme and allow babies to die in the above manner when they are partially born.  One prominent political leader has favored this form of child-murder for many years.

Notice this report:

Obama and his party this fall are waging a political culture war, tagging Mitt Romney and his party as scary radicals on abortion and women’s issues. But for more than a decade in public office, Obama has fought a legislative culture war, holding abortion in higher regard than freedom of conscience or even basic respect for human dignity.

Obama’s abortion record and views are far outside the American mainstream.

In the Illinois state senate, Obama repeatedly opposed efforts to require hospitals to care for babies who survived abortions. The bill explicitly and repeatedly stated that it in no way pertained to babies still in utero. These assurances, in an identical bill in the U.S. Senate in 2001, were enough to win the vote of every pro-choice senator.

But what was good enough for California liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer was not good enough for Sen. Barack Obama. He steadfastly opposed the born-alive protection measure in Springfield, arguing that the bill — because it established that babies who survived abortion are people once they are born — might in the future be used to restrict “abortion rights.”

In Obama’s America, the rights of a fully born human baby end when they pose a theoretical future threat to legal abortion.

In his 2004 U.S. Senate race, Obama also showed his cards. His campaign sent out a fundraising email in Michelle Obama’s name. The issue it used to rally his supporters: partial-birth abortion. The email railed against a federal law that repeatedly passed the U.S. Senate with more than 60 votes, which banned what Michelle called “a legitimate medical procedure.”

The “legitimate medical procedure” involves delivering a viable baby part way, then killing her before the rest of her body emerges. Former Democratic Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan called it “close to infanticide.” Moynihan was close to the truth.

Not only does Obama think partial-birth abortion deserves legal protection, he’s passionate enough about the procedure that he raises money off of it.

Obama is an abortion absolutist. He opposes all restriction on abortion. ( who-is-the-real-extremist -on-abortion/article/ 2511927).

This is not merely a political issue; it is a moral and spiritual issue.  If it were only political in nature, I wouldn’t wish to pursue it. The Christian seeks to be neutral on various policies of the government. But the Christian does have a right to speak out on sins of such magnitude that murder is involved!

Unnatural Sexual Relations

We know that fornication between an unmarried boy and girl is sinful. We know that adultery between a man and woman, one of whom is married or bound to a spouse is sinful.  We know that polygamy, bigamy, incest, and pedophilia are all sinful activities and relationships (cf. Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21; 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8; Ephesians 5:3-7; Colossians 3:5-7; Hebrews 13:4; Revelation 21:8). But the sexual aberration to which I now refer is homosexuality or sodomy (in its various forms).

God says in His Word that homosexuality is unnatural and a perversion of God’s wonderful gift of natural sexuality (Romans 1:26-27).  It is a sin worthy of spiritual death (v. 32).  Sodomy will prevent one from entering the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:10).  The Bible often uses the Greek term porneia, which means “all sexual activity that violates the will of God.”  Thus, all of the places that condemn fornication or sexual immorality would include homosexuality (cf. Galatians 5:19-21; Revelation 21:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8; etc.).  So serious is this that in the past, sodomy (formerly sometimes called buggery) was punishable by death!

Sadly, our esteemed President Obama has voiced his approval of sodomite relationships!  He calls these relationships “marriages” but obviously this is a lie. A marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman—not between two men or two women. It is impossible for two of the same sex to marry regardless of what term some people use to describe this immoral sexual relationship.  But President Obama openly approves the utter perversion of homosexual relationships.

Notice this news quotation:

I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married. (ABC News interview, May 9, 2012). ( /2012/05/09/obama- quotes-on-same-sex- marriage/#ixzz2AjMbu0gp

The president has gone so far as to seek to repeal the national Defense of Marriage Act. Instead of promoting a moral and ethical standard for the United States, one that shines to other counties and portrays the country as a moral and upstanding place that upholds God’s principles, this policy is a way of corrupting the very society that helped to make America great.

I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country. I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples. I’ve required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as the current law allows. And I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act. (Human Rights Campaign, Oct. 11, 2009). ( 2012/05/09/obama- quotes-on-same-sex- marriage/#ixzz2AjZfnANF).

What do other countries of the world—in South America, in Africa, in the Middle East, and elsewhere—think of a country that would countenance public sexual immorality that carries no outward shame?  How many people two generations ago could have imagined that this situation would befall a country that one time claimed to be a “Christian” nation?  (We don’t believe that it was in any measure “Christian” but at least this was the popular sentiment in years gone by.)

While I wouldn’t want to make political pronouncements on various policies of the United States government, the follower of Christ should be willing to speak out as did John the baptizer and condemn the sins of those in public office.  You may remember that King Herod had “married” Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip.  John the immerser (the baptizer) openly condemned this immoral relationship (consisting of adultery and incest): “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife” (Mark 6:17-18).  If it was proper for John to condemn adultery in public places, it would seem right for us to condemn child murder and sodomy in the public political sphere as well.

Will you condemn these two sins yourself?  Will you live a transparent life of sexual immorality?  Will you defend God’s view of tender and innocent unborn babies?  And will you defend God’s view on marriage?  Now is the time to do so when these sins are openly practiced in American society!







Comments are closed.