Defining Vocabulary

Good Morning,

For starters, I would like to clarify that I do not consider myself a“wordsmith.” I am not really smart, but I have managed to gain common sense over the years, a quality that seems to be more uncommon today.  From a simple man’s perspective, let us consider words. 

One of the sickest things that a godless society does is make up words, terms, and colloquialisms that are such a tragic abuse of language.  For instance, the most obvious definition of a man and a woman. Like the characters in The Emperor’s New Clothes, everyone knows the obvious truth, but no one is willing to speak it for fear of offending someone.  We all know what a man is and what a woman is.  We also know that there are some men who act feminine, and some women who act masculine; but they are still what God made them – male or female.  If the truth offends you, that does not mean it is a problem of society; the offense you harbor lies in your sad choice of whom you allow to influence you. 

I have had many animals throughout life: goats, sheep, chickens, pigs, horses, cows, ducks, and traditional pets like dogs, cats, fish, and the unusual snakes and rodents.  I never saw a rooster lay and egg, nor has a bull or steer ever produced milk.  As Paul writes, “God is not the author of confusion,” but Satan certainly is and has brought about confusion through the misuse of words.  

For thousands of years, a baby was born, and one of the first questions has always been, “Is it a boy or a girl?”  Now, for some foolish, demonic reason, society has decided that gender is determined by how one feels.  The very word queer was not a gender term from the beginning; the word has always been defined as something unusual, strange, or not natural – thus the word queer was used to describe men who like men. Paul worded it as being “against nature;” God says it is “vile.”

Romans 1:26 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:” 

Let us consider the very politically incorrect subject of “women’s reproductive rights?”

If one simply speaks that phrase, one might think someone is destroying women’s ability to  reproduce.  My guess would be that someone is sterilizing these women or making laws, like China did, to say a woman could only have one child. Taking away a women’s reproductive rights must mean to take away her right to reproduce. [Which, by the way, if that happens, no matter what liberals say, men cannot reproduce by themselves (the human race would end in a few years).]

To take away “women’s reproductive rights” would mean that the right of a woman to reproduce is taken from her – but we all know that is not what the liberals mean. When a liberal speaks of “women’s reproductive rights,”  they mean that a woman wants to have the right to carelessly and recklessly violate moral principles that have been taught and believed for centuries, and then because they conceive a child that they don’t want, they demand the right to kill that child. They do not want the results of their behavior, which is also a common sinful frustration.  “Women’s reproductive rights” in the view of liberal society actually means the right to take an innocent life and destroy it.  This violates any dictionary definitions.  

As with defining “choice,” a selfish woman wants the right to “choose” to kill a baby.  Our society is redefining words; all it takes for one to accept such change is to toss out your brain, your dictionary, history, and logic. 

No one is telling women with whom they should be involved intimately; no one is telling women that they cannot or that they must be involved intimately. Now, of course, God has a moral standard for the Christian, but He does not even force it on people. He simply says that this is right and this is wrong. God says marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled. (Hebrews 13:4) God also says that He will judge adulterers and fornicators, but even God does not force people to do something or not to do something – He gives them freedom.

To accuse a conservative of taking away a woman’s “reproductive rights” or of being against the “choice” is dictionary illiteracy.  We need to rediscover dictionaries and definitions of words.

Pastor