R. Scott Clark: On the How of Christ's Lordship

Here. And an excerpt:

We don’t need “redemption” as a category to oppose abortion and defend the right to life. We can do that on the basis of creation. We first encounter the doctrine of humans as image-bearers in creation, not redemption. Indeed, the modern refusal (in Barth and many evangelical and Reformed writers) to distinguish creation and redemption has led to a great deal of mischief in modern theology.

And also see this post. Here's an excerpt:

The fundamental point that evangelicals (and many Reformed folk) need to recognize is that there are two kingdoms in this world, spiritual and civil. The spiritual kingdom is represented by the visible, institutional church. In that kingdom there is no compromise on the means and the message of the kingdom. In worship we live by the regulative principle. In the Christian life we live by the law of God in the grace of God by faith. We are righteous with God by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The power and authority of the visible church is spiritual and it touches spiritual ends: faith and sanctity and its means are spiritual: Word, sacrament, and discipline. The civil kingdom is also ruled by Christ but administered quite differently. Its power is more than persuasion. Its means are not spiritual but coercive. It’s principle is not grace but works and law. To be sure the spiritual kingdom preaches the law and administers it (e.g. in the pedagogical use, the elenctic use, and in discipline) but it does so to spiritual ends. The civil magistrate may and should exercise forbearance or mercy but not grace. The civil magistrate does not always bring to bear the full weight of the law but this is in the interests of justice, not grace. The basic stuff of the civil kingdom is law and that law is revealed in nature, in the human conscience, and is universally known by humans and has been used by civil entities since creation.