Cal Thomas calls Christians to unilaterally disarm

It is disappointing when Christian conservatives who are engaged in the battle for the soul of the nation are subjected to misguided ideas of influential Christians like syndicated columnist Cal Thomas. In his latest column, Thomas pronounces a requiem for the religious right.

According to Thomas, the last election is proof that Christians' attempt to influence the future of the nation for the past thirty years was in vain. Thomas advocates a retreat from the public square and limits Christians' duty to preaching the gospel and doing good works.

Letting the culture disintegrate without a peep from Christians while we wait for a revival is, according to Thomas, the righteous thing to do. But this is contrary to our biblical duties and historical precedence.

A Lesson From History

The Great Awakening in America starting in the 1730's did bring about social transformation. But the Awakening was preceded by efforts on the part of faithful Christians to reform public policy.

James Oglethorpe sought to reform England's prisons. Due to the "gin craze," Queen Caroline passed prohibition legislation against the sale of gin. Queen Anne established free schools for indigent children. The Society for the Reformation of Manners helped to convict nearly one hundred thousand people for debauchery and profaneness.

Raising the issue of public sins like drunkenness, brought conviction of sin and helped to break up the spiritually fallow ground in England and the colonies. The revival harvest came forth from seeds planted in the spiritual soil tilled by social reformers. So God used both means; first the preaching of social righteousness and then the gospel.

Thomas minimizes the efforts of Christians who are not willing to surrender their spiritual and constitutional birthrights. He offers a false choice and a limited view of the gospel that is not worthy of the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

What's a Christian to Do?

Jesus commanded Christians to be the salt and light of the world. As salt, Christians are commanded to act as a preservative, mitigating the effects of sin decay. As salty advocates for biblical righteousness and justice, the Christian's duty is not limited to the personal, familial, or spiritual realms. Being the salt of the world extends to all of life, including the realm of public policy.

Imagine what kind of world it would be if Christians did not resist the most egregious sinful impulses of radical secularists. Why they might try to take their second grade public school students on field trips to homosexual marriages. They might take their minor daughters to get risky, surgical abortions without notifying the parents. But Thomas tells Christians they should be silent and just feed the poor.

Christians are also to shine as lights, reflecting God's character and truth. While Christians ought to reflect love and service, they must also stand boldly for biblical truth and morality. God is not just perfect love. God is also perfect truth, righteousness and justice. Christians must reflect all of the character of God, not just the parts we prefer or the world accepts.

This is not necessarily going to win friends. Jesus warned us that the world hates the light because it will expose man's evil deeds. Being the light means standing for the truth out of a loving concern for the consequences, eternal and temporal, to individuals and society. Often the only thanks you get for doing this are insults.

No one other than Jesus Christ has ever been perfect salt and light, having come from the Father in perfect grace and truth. He was reviled, slandered and killed because he bore witness to the truth.

Being salt and light is the duty of every Christian. If we refuse to be the stinging salt and blinding light we make ourselves worthless. If we lose our effect as salt, Jesus said we deserve to be trampled on. Thomas would have us abandon our duty, but for what?

Thomas thinks that if Christians will just stick to loving people in his very narrowly defined way, and lay down our duties and rights to preserve and illuminate the culture, we will have real transformational influence, not empty political influence. This is a false choice.

Being salt and light does mean preaching the gospel and seeing God change the individual. It includes doing good to the widows and orphans, the sick and the poor. Studies have shown if you want to find voluntary works of compassion and charity, religious conservatives do much more than any other group. From hurricane and tsunami relief, to pregnancy care centers, homeless shelters, and hospices, it is religious conservatives that are generally the first on the scene and the last ones to leave.

It is not a choice between preaching the gospel or doing works of mercy or standing for biblical values. We can and must do it all.

Being "salty lights" consists of displaying obedience to Jesus Christ in every aspect of life. That includes the political debate about the future of our nation. Christians believe that God really cares about matters of killing unborn babies, the institution of marriage, religious liberty, just judges, parental rights in education, etc. These concerns are based on biblical values.

Cal Thomas suggests that Christians ought to serve in obscurity and a diminution. Ironically, he uses his nationally syndicated column to advance this idea. If he were serious, he would quit writing and go work in a homeless shelter.

Thomas is unable to follow his own advice because it is fundamentally flawed. He writes because he wants to impact the market place of ideas and influence public life. Why does he object when others want to do the same? Thomas ought to applaud Christians who are attempting to do the same thing he is doing only by other means.

(Content of this post was provided by the CADC)



PO Box 1115
Vista, CA 92084
1(866)-508-2232



To contact the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission email contact@christianadc.org

Why you must vote Yes on Prop 4 !!

Some conservative folks are espousing that a yes vote on Proposition 4 may have negative unintended consequences and are urging people to vote no. While I understand their concerns, let me be clear; a no vote will murder more babies!

The (conservative) argument against proposition 4 in a nutshell goes like this:
Prop 4 (C): Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor's
Pregnancy (Sarah's Law)

Concerns: Places "emotional abuse" and broader definition of "family" into Constitution; may open door for greater government intrusion into family and weakening of nuclear family rights; California activist courts are antagonistic to parental authority in general – this may provide a legal wedge for new precedents; false abuse claims may force parents into court.

Consider: As it stands now, most sexual predators and criminal offenders are not caught; access to abortion has very little counter; increased parental involvement will save babies; however – another Prop 4 in future is uncertain; unintended consequences are difficult to clearly define; State should protect life & family.

A local attorney had this to say in favor of voting Yes on Prop 4:

"They've placed this waiting-period/parental notification initiative on the ballot three times so far, and failed each time. So they had to include a few more concessions to have a hope of getting it passed and having the courts uphold it if it is passed. That's just the political reality. These are committed pro-life activists who are pushing this initiative, and I strongly support it. It's silly to think we can have a conservative utopia, especially in California. You can either have a perfect initiative that gets 35% of the vote or a good-but-less-than-perfect one that gets 51% of the vote." Timothy White, Esquire Attorney at Law (conservative Christian)

I also called and spoke to someone over at the Yes on Prop 4 campaign headquarters and he did acknowledge this as being a concern that is being voiced by some. His response in a nutshell was that if young girls were to use the excuse that they feared emotional abuse at home, it would require both her and the doctor to actually file charges against the parents. Which he espouses will not be gone through with lightly.

So it seems that these concerns are valid however it also seems like a stretch to think that young women would go through with false accusations knowing that they would be facing charges themselves if the charges are proven to be erroneous. I also understand the concern that it leaves the definition of what constitutes "emotional abuse" up to the state, a scary notion in itself.

All in all it seems to have gained the backing of the Tony Perkins and the F.R.C. (Family Research Council) and several other major Values Voter and reform based conservative organizations who have had they're legal teams pour over all of the details. In the end they seem to be comfortable enough with it to lend their support. Consequently, I feel comfortable with my decision to continue my support for Yes on Prop 4.

The radical left gay agenda is fighting traditional marriage, DOMA, and "don't ask don't tell" at the same time and if we can learn anything from the opposition it's the fact that they're content to win little battles here and there with the end game being winning the war. For them that is the normalization and universal, compulsory acceptance of the gay lifestyle as a protected class. They've been incredibly successful thus far. Approximately two point seven percent of the population is running roughshod over the rest of the country with this strategy.

In the interest of fighting fire with "Holy" fire we must gain the ground we can now without hog-tying ourselves with endless hypotheticals. We simply notate the possible consequences, weigh them against the greater good, and plan ahead to fight those battles later, prayerfully with less dead babies in the meantime.


Remember to mail your absentee ballots in asap or go to your polling place to vote on November 4th. Additionally and most importantly, pray fervently for the election of candidates that share our Christian values and for Propositions 4 and 8 to pass.

Keep living Jesus!

He Said, She Said

Re-Post from FRC Action:

He Said, She Said

When Charlotte Preece met David Schroer for an interview in 2005, he seemed like the perfect candidate for a job with the Congressional Research Service (CRS). As a retired colonel and Special Forces commander, he'd been involved in combat missions and as a counter terrorism adviser to the Pentagon's elite. Impressed by his credentials, Preece made a job offer that Schroer accepted. Just a few weeks before his first day, Schroer admitted over lunch with Preece that he had been living as a cross-dresser and planned to start his job as a woman named Diane. The news shocked Preece, who felt he applied under false pretenses. The next day she called David and said she couldn't hire him. Angry, Schroer sued the Library of Congress, which oversees CRS, for violating the Civil Rights Act.

After three years of legal debate, U.S. District Judge James Robinson sided with Schroer, ruling Friday that he was a victim of "sex discrimination." To justify his judicial activism, Judge Robinson equated Schroer's sex change to that of a religious conversion--a poor analogy since religion is a matter of choice whereas one's sex is an inborn reality. Furthermore, how could this be sex discrimination if transsexuals aren't a protected class under the Civil Rights Act?

Unfortunately, the far Left won't need the courts to push their agenda if Congress passes ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act). It would mandate that employers check their personal beliefs at the door and hire homosexuals, whether or not they're best suited for the job. Although the current version of ENDA doesn't grant these special workplace rights to transsexuals, there's strong belief that any future version would be all-inclusive.

Additional Resources
CNN: Transsexual wins lawsuit against Library of Congress

Cardinal Egan blasts House Speaker Pelosi

Hey everyone,

Many of you may have watched the popular Sunday morning show meet the press this past week. Tom Brokaw (who has taken over as the shows host since the passing of Tim Russert) asked some very relevant questions of the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. Tom asked her about Obama's answer to the question on when life begins (this question was posed to Sen.Obama at the Saddleback Church Presidential forum last week) and whether she agreed with it or not.

Video clip of Tom Brokaw's question to Speaker Pelosi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwUSt7dfj5I

The Catholic Church's response: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13638

Please do not be fooled. This upcoming election is very important and the two Presidential Candidates could not be more different in their views on crucial issues facing the Church and Americans in general. We as Christians must develop and make decisions based on a Biblical Worldview. This means that if God says it's bad we don't say it's good and so on and so forth. In the near future and over the course of this year we will undoubtedly be offering classes and instruction regarding the Christian's role in civil society and his/her duty to God and country. This is really a must learn for all Christian Americans, which I'm pretty sure we all are.

Keep living Jesus!

Christopher White

(Please leave a comment below)

Court backs off ruling that restricted home schooling

OK I'm posting my brothers commentary here:

Court backs off ruling that restricted home schooling:
Timothy M. White, Esquire - Attorney at law
Subject: Fw: SignOnSanDiego.com News Education -- Court backs off ruling that restricted home schooling

Praise the Lord!! The Court of Appeal that in February ruled that homeschooling was illegal in California unless the parent had a teaching credential just issued a new ruling holding that parents can, indeed, homeschool their children without any type of credential, and that their rights can only be taken away if a child has been removed from his/her house for safety reasons and made a dependent of the state through a juvenile court proceeding (e.g., because of physical or sexual abuse, neglect, etc.), which was the law anyway.

I've read the 40+ page opinion from the Court of Appeal, and, in sum, it held California parents have a legal right to homeschool their children, and it recognized that parents' right to direct the upbringing and education of their children are entitled to the highest protection under law (just like freedom of speech, freedom to exercise one's religion, etc. -- meaning that if any court wants to infringe of those parental rights, it must meet the highest legal standard to do so (which makes it VERY hard for the court to ever infringe). That right can only be suspended or taken away if (as the law has always been) there has been a finding in juvenile Court that the child's safety is in serious jeopardy because of physical or sexual abuse, or severe neglect. Thus, the law is now back to where it was before the same Court issued its foolish, and now superseded, ruling back in February.

Prayer does work! And all of the homeschoolers and homeschooling organizations working together on this one really made a difference. The court relied on legal briefs of HSLDA and other Christian homeschooling groups, Jewish homeschoolers, atheists who homeschool their children for non-religious reasons, and even the very liberal CA Attorney General ("Moonbeam" Jerry Brown), the liberal CA Secretary of Education, and the (now we find out) fairly liberal governor, Arnold. Well-known law professors from the right and the far left, who never agree with one another on anything, actually CO-WROTE briefs together in favor of parents' rights to homeschool their children. God's hand controlled this the entire way. Amen!

In Christ,

Tim

JUNE 3RD ELECTION

OK it's that time again. If you are an absentee voter mail your ballot back no later than tomorrow!

Here's a link to the family values voter guide which is printable:

http://www.familyvoterinfo.org/uploads/8PJ_VG_WWW.pdf

I find it very useful. Just print out a copy and go over your sample ballot or ballot with it. Remember that non- responses speak volumes too. If a person or an organization is too afraid to list publicly where the stand on issues of importance to Christians then their motivation must be one of appeasement and the accumulation of personal power. Stand up folks put it right on the line for God and Country to see!

My state prop pics: Yes on 98, No on 99

City of San Diego prop pics: Yes on A, B & C

Thanks for doing your civic duty and being a good steward over the freedoms that God has seen fit to bless us with! Live Jesus!

Christopher White

Tolerance, Diversity and the Freedom to Choose

This is a very thought provoking article and is especially relevant right now. Please pay special attention to the highlighted statements towards the end of the article.

Tolerance, Diversity and the Freedom to Choose

by Caleb H. Price, research analyst

Homosexual activists try to redefine 'tolerance' in their search for approval, endorsement and support.

SUMMARY: Homosexual activists try to redefine 'tolerance' in their search for approval, endorsement and support.

In the ongoing cultural debate about homosexuality, I am continually amazed by the hypocrisy I see from those who loudly call for “tolerance” and unquestioned acceptance of “diversity” — but then do everything in their power to stifle all opposing views to their politically correct, pro-gay agenda.

And, even more ironically, those who chant the mantra of “tolerance” are typically the same people who believe that all people should have the “right to choose” on whatever the issue. Yet, they would deny this very right to those who want to walk away from an unwanted gay identity.

Apparently, in today’s America you can still Be Who You Want to Be — so long as it isn’t “ex-gay,” “post-gay” or formerly homosexual.

But even more troubling is the intolerant way those calling for “tolerance” lash out — either in silence or with words — against those who disagree with them or dare to consider the idea that homosexuality might actually be a changeable condition. For example, many gay activists and their allies routinely say that those who believe people can change their sexual identity are evil, dangerous, hateful and bigoted. And for those who experience unwanted same-sex attractions, the activists say they are simply “self-loathing” or “self-repressed” because they aren’t “being who they are.”

We even see evidence of this “intolerance by the tolerant” in our schools and universities. For example, Dr. Frederick W. Hill, a school administrator, said, “It is the mission of public schools not to tolerate intolerances.” And then there is Canadian Professor Leslie Armour, who said, “Our idea is that to be a virtuous citizen is to be one who tolerates everything except intolerance.”

With views like these, it seems clear that when people talk about “tolerance” today, they’re often expressing a politically correct viewpoint. However, a look at Webster’s dictionary reveals that this new definition of the word is very different from how the term has traditionally been understood. According to Webster, to “tolerate” has traditionally meant “to recognize and respect (others’ beliefs, practices, etc.) without sharing them,” and “to bear or put up with (someone or something not especially liked).”

Thus, true tolerance means respecting and protecting the legitimate rights of others — even if you disagree with them. And it means listening to and learning from people from other perspectives and backgrounds and accepting them as individuals — while not necessarily affirming their beliefs or behavior. In a nutshell, tolerance means that “everyone has a right to his or her own opinion.”

However, when it comes to the issue of homosexuality and whether or not people can change their sexual identity, the gay activists only want one side of the story to be told in the schools. They don’t want you to know that thousands of people like me exist — people who used to self-identify as gay but now have moved beyond that label and live and love out of a heterosexual identity.

And not only do they not want you to know about the reality of former homosexuals, they’re trying to redefine the word tolerance to convince you that in order to be “truly tolerant,” you must give your approval, endorsement and support to their belief that homosexual behavior is natural, normal and something to be celebrated. And this politically correct push to validate homosexuality — which includes bisexuality and transgenderism — is not only happening in the schools, but in all arenas of society.

The bottom line with these intolerant high priests of tolerance is that those who fail to “toe the line” on this issue are often intimidated into silence by being labeled as “homophobes” and bigots. However, the good news is that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees every American the right to freedom of both speech and religious expression. And those who oppose homosexual behavior based on religious, ethical and/or moral beliefs have the right to express their views in the spirit of traditional and true tolerance established by our Founding Fathers.

Truth is, there are many people who experience same-sex attractions but who, because of their religious or ethical views, have made the personal decision to pursue change. I (Caleb Price) am one of these people. And you should know that even pro-gay mental health groups like the American Psychological Association say that people have the right to self-determination — to choose their own path — when it comes to sexuality.

Given that tolerance — correctly understood — necessarily goes both ways, students have the right to hear both sides of the debate in their schools. Not only is it intolerant and un-American to present only one side of the debate in the public schools, it’s dangerous because it doesn’t allow people the freedom to think and choose for themselves.

In America, we’re blessed with the freedom to make choices about how we define ourselves and steward our sexuality as we see fit. If people want to change their sexual identity, it’s their right. And people who call for “tolerance” should be tolerant of the “diversity” that former homosexuals represent.

The Rancho Del Rey Church Salt & Light Ministry salutes Caleb Price for his boldness in standing for light and truth on the battle field of ideas!

Please leave a comment (bottom right) ! All opinions are welcome here. However yours may be contested by another. Iron sharpens iron! Issues such as this, though uncomfortable ground for many, simply must be talked about.

Christians should not take the ostrich "head in the sand" mentality when it comes to hot button issues. Christ didn't hesitate to make bold statements in the face of adversity and neither should we providing that His glory and and the salvation of sinners is the centerpiece of our intent. Keep living Jesus!

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Focus on the Family's Love Won Out ministry reaches out to those struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction.

Pastor calls Jeremiah Wright's comments divisive, unscriptural

This is a re-publication from OneNewsNow.com

Pastor calls Jeremiah Wright's comments divisive, unscriptural

Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 3/24/2008 6:00:00 AM

Bishop E.W. Jackson, Sr., a prominent black pastor and Christian activist, has launched a nationwide campaign to counter widely publicized remarks made by Dr. Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor of Barack Obama's church.

Bishop Jackson is a minister in Chesapeake, Virginia, and a former high-level official in the Christian Coalition. He says Wright's comments are not only anti-American, but also run counter to scripture. "For example, when [Wright] says God d**** America ... people have used the prophets to justify that. The prophets never cursed Israel. They called Israel to account for sin, but they never cursed Israel," Jackson notes.

Wright's anti-Israel bias, according to Jackson, was also displayed last year when Wright's church -- Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ -- honored Nation of Islam head Louis Farrakhan. Bishop Jackson says there are only two possible explanations for Wright's behavior. "Either Jeremiah Wright is very deeply and profoundly spiritually confused; or frankly, the man just does not know Christ. He's a professional pulpiteer, not a true Christian spiritual leader," Jackson contends.

Jackson encourages Christians across the country to stand against Wright's divisive comments. "We need to love one another and not allow what's happened with Jeremiah Wright to cause us in any way to walk away from what we know is our commitment to love each other regardless of race, color or creed," says the pastor. "I believe that one of the most profoundly important things Dr. [Martin Luther] King [Jr.] said was 'Judge one another not by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character.'"

A Harvard Divinity School graduate, Jackson says Wright's comments represent a radical liberation theology which is heretical in many ways. He believes it is vital for Christians to be educated about the candidates and their beliefs and stances on moral and cultural issues.

Salt & Light Ministries perspective

Many of Pastor Jeremiah Wright's controversial comments were seething and mean spirited in nature. It's one thing to be righteously indignant over social injustices but quite another to stir the congregation into a frenzy with wild inflammatory accusations and curses. Dr. Wright also made mention of a conspiracy theory which suggests that the United States Government intentionally developed the AIDS virus specifically with the irradiation of black people in mind. This theory is far fetched and unsubstantiated and as such must not be preached from Christ's pulpit! If Pastor Wright wants to investigate things like this on his own or in private circles he's certainly free to do so but he must be careful not to bring this before the congregation in such a manner.

Tony Perkins of the Family Research council said it perfectly, "As a nation, we have come far on the issue of race, but not far enough. Too many of us are trying to resolve these problems with political ideologies instead of the true vehicle for reconciliation--the church. While public policy can change the law, it rarely changes men's hearts."

Happy Easter everyone. Remember to Live Jesus!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your comments are always welcome here, please leave one!

Rancho Del Rey Church to host Dr. Gary Cass (CADC)

The Rancho Del Rey Church Salt & Light Ministry presents it's first Speakers event of 2008!

Please join us for an evening with Dr. Gary Cass, Director of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission (CADC). The event is to be held on Sunday, 05/18/2008 at 6:00 pm. Attire shall be casual. This event will be free and open to the public.

For location info follow this link: http://www.ranchodelreychurch.com/churchinfo.html

If you don't know of Dr. Cass or haven't heard him speak you're in for a treat. Here's a brief bio:

President and C.E.O. (CADC)

Rev. Dr. Gary L. Cass

Dr. Gary Cass began in ministry preaching the Gospel behind the Iron Curtain and working with the persecuted church in the Soviet Union. For twenty years Gary served as a pastor in the San Diego area and is a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America with graduate and post graduate degrees from Westminster Theological Seminary in California. While serving as a pastor, Gary was recognized for his leadership in the pro-life movement and for helping other Christians get elected for political office. A former Executive Committee Member of a major San Diego County political party, Gary also held a non-partisan elected office. In 2004, Dr. Cass became the Executive Director of The Center for Reclaiming America for Christ, an outreach of Coral Ridge Ministries founded by Dr. D. James Kennedy. Dr. Cass is the author of Gag Order and co-author of The Bible and the Black Board and has appeared in national and regional TV, radio and print media including ABC News and the Washington Post.


Dr. D. James Kennedy and Dr. Gary Cass / Dr. Cass & Rep. Duncan Hunter

After three years with the late Dr. D. James Kennedy as the Executive Director of the Center for Reclaiming America for Christ, Dr. Cass and his wife Sandy are off on a new part of their journey with Christ. He is now the Chairman and CEO of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission (CADC).

The vision of CADC is simple says Dr. Cass, "When believers are unjustly attacked, or our leaders and organizations maligned, or our values and faith disrespected, the CADC will endeavor to be there to defend them. In addition we are working to advance religious liberty at home and around the world."


The entire prayer delegation in a photo op with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki.


Looking out of the airplane during the 90 degree "death spiral" into Baghdad airport. The black strip is the runway. This is the only way to avoid enemy rockets.


On a personal note:

As the Director of the Rancho Del Rey Salt & Light Ministry, It is my hope and prayer that the Body of Christ would be refreshed, educated and prepared to take on the challenges ahead of us while fulfilling our salt & light mandate. These speakers events play a vital part in this ministry. May God richly bless you as you, "Live Jesus!"

Yours in Christ!

Christopher White


Please go to the website www.christianadc.org for information on the activities of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission and to obtain a copy of Dr.Cass' new book, "Christian Bashing."

Ridiculous? Yes.

Obama: Sermon on the Mount Supports Same-sex Unions

On the campaign trail yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) defended his support of abortion and same-sex unions. In response to a question at a stop at Hocking College in Nelsonville, Ohio, Obama said he does not support calling same-sex unions marriage, but thinks same-sex couples should be given the recognition and benefits granted to married couples. "I think that it is a legal right that they [homosexuals] should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." Jesus teaches on a number of issues central to the Christian life in the Sermon on the Mount: being witnesses to the world, loving our enemies, honoring marriage - but there is no instruction on same-sex unions. As for St. Paul's writing in Romans, it is distinguished not by its obscurity but by its clarity and consistency with all of Christian teaching about the nature of sexuality and marriage. Paul writes: "They [the unrighteous] exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator - who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (Romans 1:24-27, NIV) Obama also told the crowd that his support of abortion (he voted against banning partial-birth abortion, and against notifying the parents of minors prior to their having an abortion) and his support of same-sex unions do not make him "less of a Christian."