That’s what Ann Graham Lotz, daughter of Billy Graham, said in response to the National Day of Prayer on March 15 called for by President Trump. I encourage everyone to read her prayer. Her sentiments align exactly with why I wrote Broken Land. I am convinced that the message God put on my heart for that book is manifesting itself through the coronavirus pandemic sweeping the globe and particularly the United States today.
 
And what is that message? Why is our land so broken? it is because we have forgotten God. As depicted on the cover of my book, we have thrown Him, and everything He teaches us, in the garbage. So now, just as we put our children in a time-out when they don’t listen to our instruction, our nation, indeed the whole world, has been put in a historic time-out. 
 
But will we listen? 
 
2 Chronicles 7:13-14 undergirds Broken Land: “When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, if my people, who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” 
 
The operative word is “If.”

​I know that to some, I’m going to sound like a dinosaur for saying what I’m about to. But because I’ve lived to see and understand the truth of it, and because today is Sanctity of Human Life Sunday, it’s important.

There are a gazillion choices we confront in our lives, at every stage. When I was a young woman, I did not even think about the choice not to have sex before I was married. Although I knew my parents wouldn’t approve, and it never really did feel right, I was never taught why it was wrong to give myself away. I just knew that if I did get pregnant, I could have an abortion. And that’s what happened…more than once.

Abstinence sounds archaic, but it is a valid choice. One that removes ever having to even consider abortion.

But if abstinence is not practiced and an unplanned pregnancy does occur, abortion is not the only choice. Not today. There are scores of pregnancy centers that exist across the country that come alongside women (and men, if they choose to be involved) to help them make their decision. Soundview Pregnancy Services is an example, offering free counseling, medical services and aid. One of their services is providing ultrasounds. And when women see the truth of the baby living in their womb and hear their tiny heartbeat, most women choose not to abort. Some choose (with the centers’ help and support) to become parents. Others choose to give the baby up for adoption.

If these choices had been available to me way back when, I might now have two more people to love. I can't help but wonder.

​Holy Cross College in Worcester, Massachusetts describes itself as a private undergraduate Roman Catholic/Jesuit liberal arts college. Yet their current Chair in New Testament Studies, Professor Tat-Siong Benny Liew, “believes Christ could be considered a “drag king” or cross-dresser.” Professor Liew teaches “New Testament,” the College’s primary New Testament class. I wonder if parents who are paying over $60,000 a year to send their sons and daughters to a “Catholic” college know what their children are being taught.
 
In an article in The Fenwick Review, an opinion journal at the College, more of Professor Liew’s blasphemous (referred to in the article as “unconventional”) views are revealed. In their March issue, Elinor Reilly references a publication that Professor Liew edited and contributed to, quoting him in part: 
 
“… what we have in John’s Jesus is not only a “king of Israel” (1:49; 12:13– 15) or “king of the Ioudaioi” (18:33, 39; 19:3, 14– 15, 19– 22), but also a drag king (6:15; 18:37; 19:12)…Christ ends up appearing as a drag-kingly bride in his passion…in addition, we find Jesus disrobing and rerobing in the episode that marks Jesus’ focus on the disciples with the coming of his ‘hour’ (13:3– 5, 12). This disrobing… does not disclose anything about Jesus’ anatomy. Instead, it describes Jesus washing his disciples’ feet. As more than one commentator has pointed out, foot-washing was generally only done by Jewish women or non-Jewish slaves. 12 John is clear that Jesus is an Ioudaios (4:9, 22; 18:33– 35; 19:40); what John is less clear about is whether Jesus is a biological male. Like a literary striptease, this episode is suggestive, even seductive; it shows and withholds at the same time.”
 
It gets worse. Here’s how Professor Liew describes Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross:
 
“…What I am suggesting is that, when Jesus’ body is being penetrated, his thoughts are on his Father. He is, in other words, imagining his passion experience as a (masochistic?) sexual relation with his own Father.”
 
Ms. Reilly ends the article like this:

“Professor Liew’s unconventional readings of Scripture has brought a new theological perspective to Holy Cross. The position and prestige which accompany an endowed chair in Religious Studies testify to the esteem in which his work is held by the College’s administration and academic community. He continues to be held up as an example and a bold successor to the learned and discerning tradition of our Catholic and Jesuit College of the Holy Cross.”
 
My mind explodes trying to reconcile how a “Roman Catholic” and “Jesuit” college can not only allow, but laud, this sacrilege. It confirms, beyond a reasonable doubt, not only the brokenness of our land, but the even more dangerous darkening of our hearts.
 
To read the full article, click here.

"No woman wants to have to make that difficult decision."

I hear this a lot from women who say they are pro-choice. But my question is: If there isn't a life inside, why is that decision so difficult? It's not a difficult decision to have a gall bladder or appendix removed. 

When I was in my twenties and about ten weeks pregnant, I had an abortion. At that time, I thought it was the only choice I had. Plus, I was led to believe that there was not a baby growing inside of me, rather, an inanimate "fetus" that was just a blob of tissue. Time and again, I was told that what was inside of me was not "alive."

Not too long ago, I saw a picture of a 10-week-old fetus. It was a perfectly formed baby, just really, really tiny, like about two inches from head to feet. Yes, it had feet. And hands, and was capable of sucking its thumb. It had eyes, and a heart that had been beating for six weeks. And then I saw another picture of that baby, torn apart after an abortion. Dismembered feet, hands and arms. Still tiny, but still feet, hands and arms.

If I had known in 1975 what I know today about life in the womb, and if I were presented with the many alternatives to abortion that exist today, I wonder if I would have made the same decision. But that was then, and this is now. Now my purpose is not to take away a woman's right to choose, but to inform women about that choice. To make women aware that there is a living, growing baby inside of them. That that baby is an individual with unique DNA, and abortion takes the life of that individual in the most gruesome way. Abortion stops that tiny beating heart and tears that living baby apart. It is a fact that I hope and pray will prick the conscience of this nation.

If you are reading this, you are among my Facebook "friends," so whether you lean left, right, center or diagonal, I believe you are a moral person. Although the meaning of "moral" is obviously in question, because I just almost threw up reading a Teen Vogue article aimed at teaching 11 to 17-year-old children how to have anal sex. I found out about this through a Facebook post of a video with a woman called "Activist Mommy" burning the magazine. Horray for her.

I urge you to read this article (as hard as it is to get through), so that you will understand just how sick, dangerous and broken our culture has become as the result of turning our backs to God and His moral standards. When did promoting anal sex among children become acceptable? If an adult sent any part of this article to a 12-year-old in an email, text or private message, they would undoubtedly be arrested. This is so horrific on so many levels, my insides feel like they're exploding. And the article does not use the terms "boys/girls" or "men/women" or "male/female," but rather "vagina/prostate owners."

I recently wrote a Facebook post about Ariana Grande targeting her sexually-explicit lyrics and videos (please watch this one) to young girls. I was exploding then, too, as I have granddaughters whose ages fall within her target audience. Please, we cannot hide our heads in the sand when it comes to protecting our children. 

I visited a local grocery store today and, thank God, did not find Teen Vogue on the magazine rack. But if and when I do find it in any other store, I am going to bring it to the attention of the manager so that they are aware that their store is supporting the sale of material that is inappropriate and harmful to children. I hope you will do the same.

Looks like I'm becoming an Activist Grandma. And kudos to the Activist Mommy for pulling me out of the closet.