Camille Paglia analyzes our present cultural attitudes toward evil and how those attitudes affect campus life...
Lone Tree
I have often been told that you should never discuss religion or politics in public, because it might start a fight.
I believe the reason those two subjects start fights so easily is because they are so important. Your own personal religious beliefs and political ideologies determine a great deal of who you are. Even if you have no particular belief, that determines much of your approach to life. Furthermore, the prevailing religious and political ideas of the country you live in and of the world as a whole are fundamental to determining the conditions of the country and the world as a whole.
I conclude that people with any real interest in the world or its future have to discuss religion and politics. Even if it starts a fight.
Thursday, October 02, 2014
Wednesday, October 01, 2014
Christian Theology: Grace vs. Law
The Law (the Ten Commandments etc.) and Grace (God's unmerited favor
which Jesus purchased on the cross) cannot be in the same room with one
another.
The Law
is lesser than Grace; Grace is greater. If Grace is not greater,
then Jesus died for nothing. Jesus, who is Grace Personified, kept the
Law and paid for all the infractions against it. He was able to do this
because He was Perfect in Everything. He paid for all, not
some, all infractions against the Law. Once He did that and if we call Him "Lord," dragging our
behavior back into the picture
also drags back in the Law. When we focus on our behavior instead of
Jesus' Love, we reduce the importance, the glory, the magnificence, the
power and the majesty of the Cross to insignificance in the light of our
failure according to the Law. We magnify our sin and reduce the Lord Jesus. And,
we, in effect, call God a liar. We say to God, "We are not what You
say, "the redeemed; joint heirs; children of God; brothers of Christ, "
we are still sinners." Any time human beings focus on their behavior,
good or bad, it is a guaranteed, automatic FAIL. That is because it
becomes all about us and how well we've kept the Law and not about Jesus.
The Apostle John refers to himself in his Gospel as "the disciple Jesus loved." I'd always thought he did this because he didn't want to call attention to himself. Matthew carefully tells his Gospel account in third person and Mark, in a practical, pragmatic fashion, relates the facts with simplicity in his Gospel. (Luke was not one of the disciples, but a physician who set about to write the early history of the church, the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and does so with affection and detail.) But John simultaneously distances and personalizes his account by calling himself "the disciple Jesus loved."
Mark tells us Jesus called John and his brother, "Sons of Thunder," teasing them for wanting Jesus to punish a town that rejected their presence, Mark 3:17. And John's mother approached Jesus asking Him to place her two sons, James and John, one on His left and the other on His right, when He enters His Kingdom, Matthew 20:21-23. However, when Mark tells the story, he sets the responsibility fully on James and John, Mark 10:35-37. John is not the pure driven snow. He's temperamental, vindictive and power hungry. Yet, in his Gospel, John almost always refers to himself as "the disciple Jesus loved."
We see Peter in action, the bold, impetuous disciple who blurts out the first thing that comes into his head, once declaring the revelation, "Jesus, You ARE Messiah," and another time imploring Jesus not to go to seeking death, for which Jesus said, "Get thee behind me satan," Matthew 16:21-23. During the Last Supper, Jesus explains that soon they'll all scatter and hide because He is going to a very bad death. Peter replies he will never deny Jesus, Mark 14:27-31; Luke 22:31-38; John 13:36-38. In his heart he is firm in his resolve, commitment and love, but when confronted in the courtyard outside the Jesus' first sham trial, he fails. Not only does he prove incapable of laying down his life, he is incapable of even admitting he knows Jesus at all. Peter boldly declared, "I will follow you. I will lay down my life for you," John 13:37. The Israelites at the foot of Mount Sinai promised, "We will keep the Law," and no sooner had the words escaped their lips than the Israelites built an idol in the shape of a calf and worshiped it, breaking the most important commandment of all. And like them, no sooner had Peter's declaration escaped his lips than he denied even knowing Jesus.
Here's the scene: John was the disciple with the contacts able to gain admittance to the courtyard of the building where the Pharisees' and their soldiers took Jesus for His first illegal trial. He managed to get Peter into the courtyard, but John, with higher credentials, went on into the room where the Pharisees questioned Jesus. Later, we see John standing at the foot of the cross--the only Apostle with the balls to be there; all the others had run away and hidden themselves on the night of Jesus' arrest, one losing his clothing in his mad rush, Mark 14:51 & 52.
What gave John the balls to stick with Jesus all the way? It wasn't his temperamental attitude nor his desire for power. Raging at the Pharisees would have gotten him crucified along with Jesus and there was no power to be gained following the Lord to the foot of the cross--at least not in the temporal and immediately obvious sense. The Man, Jesus, endured three trials during which the accusers each took their turns beating, mocking and humiliating Him. There's no power for John to gain in the midst of that apparent disaster. Yet John was either present or nearby throughout Jesus' entire ordeal. All of Peter's burning desire to follow Jesus to death, his will power to honor Jesus with his whole being, amounted to nothing. He couldn't even remain true to Jesus in the face of a servant girl who insisted Peter had been with Him, Luke 22:54-57.
What's the difference? The difference is the focus. Peter focused on behavior--his behavior. He said things like, "I will follow You to the death," and "I will never deny You." John, whose behavior was clearly bad, focused on Jesus' love for him. Jesus' LOVE gave John the power to follow Jesus from the Garden of Gethsemane, through the courts and to the cross. Peter's "I will" amounted to worse than nothing. John's revelation of Jesus' vast LOVE made it possible for him to do anything, and this was before Pentecost.
When we focus on behavior, we're looking at the wrong thing. As human beings, for us, it's all about behavior. It's about rules and regs. And we put ourselves back under the Law when we do that. And so, like the Israelites and Peter, when we focus on behavior, the Law and our intentions to keep it, our words espousing our will power to do what we promise amount to worse than nothing; our "I will" is a guaranteed, automatic FAIL. But, if like John, we focus on Jesus' LOVE for us, we can do anything. A good place to start, follow the Apostle John's example and think of ourselves as "the one Jesus LOVES," then we can do anything, even keep the Law.
The Law
is lesser than Grace; Grace is greater. If Grace is not greater,
then Jesus died for nothing. Jesus, who is Grace Personified, kept the
Law and paid for all the infractions against it. He was able to do this
because He was Perfect in Everything. He paid for all, not
some, all infractions against the Law. Once He did that and if we call Him "Lord," dragging our
behavior back into the picture
also drags back in the Law. When we focus on our behavior instead of
Jesus' Love, we reduce the importance, the glory, the magnificence, the
power and the majesty of the Cross to insignificance in the light of our
failure according to the Law. We magnify our sin and reduce the Lord Jesus. And,
we, in effect, call God a liar. We say to God, "We are not what You
say, "the redeemed; joint heirs; children of God; brothers of Christ, "
we are still sinners." Any time human beings focus on their behavior,
good or bad, it is a guaranteed, automatic FAIL. That is because it
becomes all about us and how well we've kept the Law and not about Jesus.The Apostle John refers to himself in his Gospel as "the disciple Jesus loved." I'd always thought he did this because he didn't want to call attention to himself. Matthew carefully tells his Gospel account in third person and Mark, in a practical, pragmatic fashion, relates the facts with simplicity in his Gospel. (Luke was not one of the disciples, but a physician who set about to write the early history of the church, the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and does so with affection and detail.) But John simultaneously distances and personalizes his account by calling himself "the disciple Jesus loved."
Mark tells us Jesus called John and his brother, "Sons of Thunder," teasing them for wanting Jesus to punish a town that rejected their presence, Mark 3:17. And John's mother approached Jesus asking Him to place her two sons, James and John, one on His left and the other on His right, when He enters His Kingdom, Matthew 20:21-23. However, when Mark tells the story, he sets the responsibility fully on James and John, Mark 10:35-37. John is not the pure driven snow. He's temperamental, vindictive and power hungry. Yet, in his Gospel, John almost always refers to himself as "the disciple Jesus loved."
We see Peter in action, the bold, impetuous disciple who blurts out the first thing that comes into his head, once declaring the revelation, "Jesus, You ARE Messiah," and another time imploring Jesus not to go to seeking death, for which Jesus said, "Get thee behind me satan," Matthew 16:21-23. During the Last Supper, Jesus explains that soon they'll all scatter and hide because He is going to a very bad death. Peter replies he will never deny Jesus, Mark 14:27-31; Luke 22:31-38; John 13:36-38. In his heart he is firm in his resolve, commitment and love, but when confronted in the courtyard outside the Jesus' first sham trial, he fails. Not only does he prove incapable of laying down his life, he is incapable of even admitting he knows Jesus at all. Peter boldly declared, "I will follow you. I will lay down my life for you," John 13:37. The Israelites at the foot of Mount Sinai promised, "We will keep the Law," and no sooner had the words escaped their lips than the Israelites built an idol in the shape of a calf and worshiped it, breaking the most important commandment of all. And like them, no sooner had Peter's declaration escaped his lips than he denied even knowing Jesus.
Here's the scene: John was the disciple with the contacts able to gain admittance to the courtyard of the building where the Pharisees' and their soldiers took Jesus for His first illegal trial. He managed to get Peter into the courtyard, but John, with higher credentials, went on into the room where the Pharisees questioned Jesus. Later, we see John standing at the foot of the cross--the only Apostle with the balls to be there; all the others had run away and hidden themselves on the night of Jesus' arrest, one losing his clothing in his mad rush, Mark 14:51 & 52.
What gave John the balls to stick with Jesus all the way? It wasn't his temperamental attitude nor his desire for power. Raging at the Pharisees would have gotten him crucified along with Jesus and there was no power to be gained following the Lord to the foot of the cross--at least not in the temporal and immediately obvious sense. The Man, Jesus, endured three trials during which the accusers each took their turns beating, mocking and humiliating Him. There's no power for John to gain in the midst of that apparent disaster. Yet John was either present or nearby throughout Jesus' entire ordeal. All of Peter's burning desire to follow Jesus to death, his will power to honor Jesus with his whole being, amounted to nothing. He couldn't even remain true to Jesus in the face of a servant girl who insisted Peter had been with Him, Luke 22:54-57.
What's the difference? The difference is the focus. Peter focused on behavior--his behavior. He said things like, "I will follow You to the death," and "I will never deny You." John, whose behavior was clearly bad, focused on Jesus' love for him. Jesus' LOVE gave John the power to follow Jesus from the Garden of Gethsemane, through the courts and to the cross. Peter's "I will" amounted to worse than nothing. John's revelation of Jesus' vast LOVE made it possible for him to do anything, and this was before Pentecost.
When we focus on behavior, we're looking at the wrong thing. As human beings, for us, it's all about behavior. It's about rules and regs. And we put ourselves back under the Law when we do that. And so, like the Israelites and Peter, when we focus on behavior, the Law and our intentions to keep it, our words espousing our will power to do what we promise amount to worse than nothing; our "I will" is a guaranteed, automatic FAIL. But, if like John, we focus on Jesus' LOVE for us, we can do anything. A good place to start, follow the Apostle John's example and think of ourselves as "the one Jesus LOVES," then we can do anything, even keep the Law.
Monday, July 14, 2014
Thoughts on religious liberty....
If you're an American citizen, the present, American, federal government wants to become your god. It wants to watch you and control every aspect of your life. It wants you to have sexual liberty, but it doesn't want you to choose for yourself how you will eat, what car you will drive, what kind of toilet you will own, how much stuff you can put in your garage, what you can do with water that you own or falls as rain on your land or which light bulb you will use.
More than anything, the American federal government wants to control how you think and for whom you vote. Voter fraud is rampant and the idea of "one man (or woman) and one vote" is a joke, but nobody who has any power does anything about it. And those who try are persecuted by the IRS, the new enforcement arm of the American king and his minions.
Unfortunately, the American media largely is in agreement with these objectives and the Republican party too often appear hapless and inarticulate. Truly, only someone with the talent of Ronald Reagan, which most of us do not possess, can talk over the media's heads directly to the people and make thoughts clear. However, too many Republicans get to Washington and become infected with the same disease that rots the Democrat party--the notion that begins with the idea that government can help.
The truth is, ninety-nine percent of the time, government cannot help, it can only make things worse. The "War on Poverty" has destroyed black families and has made poverty and living on government charity a way of life for many. The federal minimum wage law has ensured that no person who lacks basic skills and a high school education can get a job an employer can afford to give him while he trains him in a trade. Federal laws controlling student school attendance and integration of students no matter their academic ability or mental capacity ensures that neither our brightest students nor our dullest will receive what they need. Government student aid has driven up the cost of a college education to the point where only the wealthiest citizen can pay for a full load of course hours per semester by himself and the rules make sure that the middle class is hammered because they are neither wealthy enough to pay for everything themselves nor poor enough to obtain a free ride. And now the federal government is busy making sure that nobody can afford healthcare either.
Unless we're talking public roads, national defense and international diplomacy the federal government can't do anything useful. Government is like a zombie, except it is blind and though it is controlled by regulation, there is no mercy or true charity. That can only come with the sight and intelligence of personal contact and liberty to do some things and not others as best benefits the needy individual.
Where power can be concentrated, those who desire power will also concentrate. The ultimate objective of a person who desires power, as opposed to someone who desires to serve, is the ability to control, to rule, to dominate--to become a god.
The (Not) Affordable (No) Care (subject to un-constitional revision by the executive branch) Act seeks to further whittle away Americans' liberty.
More than anything, the American federal government wants to control how you think and for whom you vote. Voter fraud is rampant and the idea of "one man (or woman) and one vote" is a joke, but nobody who has any power does anything about it. And those who try are persecuted by the IRS, the new enforcement arm of the American king and his minions.
Unfortunately, the American media largely is in agreement with these objectives and the Republican party too often appear hapless and inarticulate. Truly, only someone with the talent of Ronald Reagan, which most of us do not possess, can talk over the media's heads directly to the people and make thoughts clear. However, too many Republicans get to Washington and become infected with the same disease that rots the Democrat party--the notion that begins with the idea that government can help.The truth is, ninety-nine percent of the time, government cannot help, it can only make things worse. The "War on Poverty" has destroyed black families and has made poverty and living on government charity a way of life for many. The federal minimum wage law has ensured that no person who lacks basic skills and a high school education can get a job an employer can afford to give him while he trains him in a trade. Federal laws controlling student school attendance and integration of students no matter their academic ability or mental capacity ensures that neither our brightest students nor our dullest will receive what they need. Government student aid has driven up the cost of a college education to the point where only the wealthiest citizen can pay for a full load of course hours per semester by himself and the rules make sure that the middle class is hammered because they are neither wealthy enough to pay for everything themselves nor poor enough to obtain a free ride. And now the federal government is busy making sure that nobody can afford healthcare either.
Unless we're talking public roads, national defense and international diplomacy the federal government can't do anything useful. Government is like a zombie, except it is blind and though it is controlled by regulation, there is no mercy or true charity. That can only come with the sight and intelligence of personal contact and liberty to do some things and not others as best benefits the needy individual.
Where power can be concentrated, those who desire power will also concentrate. The ultimate objective of a person who desires power, as opposed to someone who desires to serve, is the ability to control, to rule, to dominate--to become a god.
"Religious freedom is the freedom to practice your faith, not just in the church, but outside the church. And, unfortunately, increasingly, the progressives in this country and the president see freedom of worship as just the ability to do whatever you want to do within the church, at least for now. But once you are outside the church, then you have to do what the government tells you to do and think the way the government tells you to think. That's not what the first amendment says, that's not what the court, thankfully, said....Freedom of conscious is the most important freedom because none of the others matter if you can't say and act according to what you actually believe," Rick Santorum.Americans have been endowed with vast liberties which are being whittled away little by little through time. Compared to the days when a teenager could leave an abusive home and strike out on his own to build his own business or take a viable job learning a trade, he now has no such liberty. A teenager who leaves home soon becomes a slave in the sex trade or a homeless derelict. Ask any farmer how much liberty he has when federal law for chemical use damns him if he does and damns him if he doesn't--the only thing that prevents him from suffering a huge fine, a lawsuit or arrest is the fact that the authorities haven't decided to punish him yet. In labor law, the employer is guilty, now what is the question? How much liberty do we have when the government can confiscate our money and do things with it which we abhor? And, when a government becomes a "charitable" organization, doling out aid to the needy, its blindness and its regulations automatically make it an organ to be massaged for free cash.
The (Not) Affordable (No) Care (subject to un-constitional revision by the executive branch) Act seeks to further whittle away Americans' liberty.
"The prevailing view in Democratic circles is that Americans enjoy constitutional and legal rights when acting alone but not when acting jointly — i.e., not when it matters most to public affairs. Under this model, the owners of Hobby Lobby enjoy First Amendment religious protections, and RFRA protections, when they are kneeling in prayer by their bedsides, and perhaps, with certain limitations and IRS oversight, when they are in their church pews. But if they make a decision together, as a group of business owners with a particular vision of the good life and their own duties as people of conscience, then the Democrats believe that their legal and constitutional rights should be set aside, as though human beings and American citizens acting in concert with one another were less than human beings or less than American citizens because of that act of coordination," National Review editorsAmericans need to do more screaming, they need to do more pounding on politicians' doors and more pelting them with letters. We the people need to rise up and demand bureaucracies funds be curtailed, that our borders be secured and agencies be whittled down to the barest minimum. We need to run for office and we need to write letters to the editor. We need to cry out to God for help. He will answer.
Sunday, July 13, 2014
The truth about the Middle East...
The Roman emperor, Hadrian, hated the Jews and wanted to obliterate them from the face of the earth. From the Roman point of view the Jews had been a thorn in the Roman side for generations. He renamed the land of Israel, "Palestine," with the idea that renaming it would mean that Israel had never existed. The ancestors of the "Palestinians" lived there alongside Jews back then and still live there now, only now, they want to claim Israel has no right to exist. This video is short, succinct and to the point covering many of the key points pertaining to conflict in the Middle East.
Thursday, May 01, 2014
Sunday, February 09, 2014
Interview with Snowden from the German Press
You won't see this interview in the American Press. That's because the American Press believes the Obama Administration can do no wrong--which is a very bad thing for a press to believe of any administration. In short, the American Press is not doing their job.
Very interesting interview....
Very interesting interview....
Friday, February 07, 2014
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Tuesday, April 02, 2013
Can freedom last forever?
"In all of history’s great civilizations, there has come the moment when
their citizens became their own worst enemies, thinking and living at
odds with the values and principles upon which their nation was built.
Political analyst and social critic Os Guinness provides both historical
and current evidence that suggests America is perilously close to
reaching this point today. But with this alert, Guinness also offers
direction and encouragement for those seeking to achieve what the
country’s founding fathers predicted would be most challenging:
sustainable freedom." This quote is from Os Guinness' website promoting his new book, A Free People's Suicide. We don't have to commit suicide. There is hope! But we're pushing closer and closer.
The link below will take you to a video recording of Os Guinness' speech for the Socrates in the City series:
Os Guinness speaks at "Socrates in the City" on the topic of American liberty...
Os Guinness' web site
"In all of history’s great civilizations, there has come the moment when
their citizens became their own worst enemies, thinking and living at
odds with the values and principles upon which their nation was built.
Political analyst and social critic Os Guinness provides both historical
and current evidence that suggests America is perilously close to
reaching this point today. But with this alert, Guinness also offers
direction and encouragement for those seeking to achieve what the
country’s founding fathers predicted would be most challenging:
sustainable freedom." This quote is from Os Guinness' website promoting his new book, A Free People's Suicide. We don't have to commit suicide. There is hope! But we're pushing closer and closer.The link below will take you to a video recording of Os Guinness' speech for the Socrates in the City series:
Os Guinness speaks at "Socrates in the City" on the topic of American liberty...
Os Guinness' web site
Monday, March 25, 2013
Western Civilization? Eh, Burn it Down!
People who think they're smart and sound off about things they don't understand usually end up looking like donkeys. Unfortunately, these days when the donkeys sit in positions of authority or have control of the noise making devices that are broadcast in the popular culture, they seem to have quite a following of devotees who listen and come to agree with them. I have no idea how many people, young or middle age or old, actually do agree with them, but they certainly make a lot of noise! Every time I think, 'Surely this will be the last straw,' the power elites manage to pile on another ton. One begins to wonder whether anyone will realize why everything has finally, totally gone to hell when it does finally go totally to hell.
Blame George W. Bush!
The longer things go the more frightening the future looks. Imagine western civilization is a 22-story building built on centuries of God working to shape human beings into better creatures.
Western civilization has achieved a series of great high points through the years besides art and music. How about the invention of capitalism; the invention of the scientific method; religious and political freedom; the end of slavery (in the western world); rights for women and the rule of law, by the people and for the people, as opposed to the rule of the guy who manages to kill off enough of the competition that he can command his thugs to control the rest.
Now we have a passel of entertainment and education elites joining forces with liberal politicians who despise the very culture that has made it possible for them to exist. This group has been busy setting fire to the pillars upon which the culture stands--one after the other--since the 1960's. Among other things, they teach:
Capitalism is evil. Nobody should be allowed to make money running a business, the business exists to provide money and benefits for its workers. Now, sports figures and entertainment celebrities and politicians, they should be allowed to make all the money they possibly can.
Science is good, especially now that we can use it to show how God didn't create everything and is irrelevant.
Persons of the same gender should, not only be able to have sex with each other, but they should be able to get "married" without giving any thought to what marriage actually is or if it will work well for the mental health and stability of the children they'll be raising. Kind of like the great results we've been getting with single mothers raising children.
The common man (especially if he's a Conservative or Christian or a farmer or a rancher or a business owner) is an idiot. Wouldn't it be nice if we had only one political party and our leader could be a dictator?
Slavery is good. No, wait! Don't call it that. Call it "benefits" or "entitlements" or other euphemistic phrases. Slavery is good because these poor fools can't get into university by their own merit on their own cash; they can't get a job and feed their kids themselves and you certainly don't expect them to amount to anything, do you? Besides, if we give them free stuff they give us more power by voting for us.
Fine teaching, isn't it? Great progress teeters on a burning foundation while the fire-starters mock those of us who want to put out the fire and repair the damage.
It's sad how so few people are asking, "If X was thought to be the right way to do something for centuries, shouldn't we kind of step back and think about this before we blow it up?"
Jim Carrey, who has made a living acting like a donkey in most of his movies, decided to do a parody on a TV show made by and for a group of people who traditionally have been humble enough to poke fun at themselves (which is why the TV show Hee Haw ever existed in the first place). In this parody, Carrey browbeat a great actor who is dead and can't defend himself while mocking cowboys, farmers, rednecks and anybody else who thinks the 2nd Amendment is about ordinary citizens having the ability to take down an out of control government. He uses actors pretending to be pillars of western civilization to help him set his fire and together they laugh derisively at the hapless object of his hatred. It's mean spirited; bigoted and not funny, but it's Jim Carrey and that makes it ok. Doesn't it?
Cold Dead Hand with Jim Carrey
Greg Gutfeld Destroys Anti-Gun Jim Carrey in Epic Rant
Blame George W. Bush!
The longer things go the more frightening the future looks. Imagine western civilization is a 22-story building built on centuries of God working to shape human beings into better creatures.
Western civilization has achieved a series of great high points through the years besides art and music. How about the invention of capitalism; the invention of the scientific method; religious and political freedom; the end of slavery (in the western world); rights for women and the rule of law, by the people and for the people, as opposed to the rule of the guy who manages to kill off enough of the competition that he can command his thugs to control the rest.
Now we have a passel of entertainment and education elites joining forces with liberal politicians who despise the very culture that has made it possible for them to exist. This group has been busy setting fire to the pillars upon which the culture stands--one after the other--since the 1960's. Among other things, they teach:
Capitalism is evil. Nobody should be allowed to make money running a business, the business exists to provide money and benefits for its workers. Now, sports figures and entertainment celebrities and politicians, they should be allowed to make all the money they possibly can.
Science is good, especially now that we can use it to show how God didn't create everything and is irrelevant.
Persons of the same gender should, not only be able to have sex with each other, but they should be able to get "married" without giving any thought to what marriage actually is or if it will work well for the mental health and stability of the children they'll be raising. Kind of like the great results we've been getting with single mothers raising children.
The common man (especially if he's a Conservative or Christian or a farmer or a rancher or a business owner) is an idiot. Wouldn't it be nice if we had only one political party and our leader could be a dictator?
Slavery is good. No, wait! Don't call it that. Call it "benefits" or "entitlements" or other euphemistic phrases. Slavery is good because these poor fools can't get into university by their own merit on their own cash; they can't get a job and feed their kids themselves and you certainly don't expect them to amount to anything, do you? Besides, if we give them free stuff they give us more power by voting for us.
Fine teaching, isn't it? Great progress teeters on a burning foundation while the fire-starters mock those of us who want to put out the fire and repair the damage.
It's sad how so few people are asking, "If X was thought to be the right way to do something for centuries, shouldn't we kind of step back and think about this before we blow it up?"
Jim Carrey, who has made a living acting like a donkey in most of his movies, decided to do a parody on a TV show made by and for a group of people who traditionally have been humble enough to poke fun at themselves (which is why the TV show Hee Haw ever existed in the first place). In this parody, Carrey browbeat a great actor who is dead and can't defend himself while mocking cowboys, farmers, rednecks and anybody else who thinks the 2nd Amendment is about ordinary citizens having the ability to take down an out of control government. He uses actors pretending to be pillars of western civilization to help him set his fire and together they laugh derisively at the hapless object of his hatred. It's mean spirited; bigoted and not funny, but it's Jim Carrey and that makes it ok. Doesn't it?
Cold Dead Hand with Jim Carrey
Greg Gutfeld Destroys Anti-Gun Jim Carrey in Epic Rant
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Eric Metaxas speech at the 2013 CPAC Conference
Eric Metaxas, author of a handful of children's books, two biographies one on William Wilberforce and one on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, former Veggie Tales writer and writer for Chuck Colson, seems to be on a one man crusade to wake American Christians from their slumber. He's not the only person sounding the alarm. Ben Carson is also. Dear reader, look for their speeches on the web and watch them.
This blog is devoted to the very principles Eric Metaxas addresses in his speech before CPAC. That is, freedom of religion that doesn't impact our every day lives, how we conduct our business affairs and our political views isn't much of a freedom and isn't much of a religion either. As Metaxas points out in his speech, China has freedom of religion! There the concept is keep that religion stuff inside the four walls of the building or in your prayer closet, once you enter the outside world you come under the auspices of the State and it is your god--obey or be punished. This brings home his idea, which he attributes to Os Guinness, that without freedom of religion you don't have freedom.
Those of us who do not have the sorts of platforms where men like Eric Metaxas and Ben Carson speak may think that we can't do much, but that doesn't mean our efforts don't matter. Think on these things, share them with your friends, have debates and discussions--get people thinking, wake up your neighbors! Our nation is a nation governed by "we the people" let's take it back from "we the elite."
Eric Metaxas, author of a handful of children's books, two biographies one on William Wilberforce and one on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, former Veggie Tales writer and writer for Chuck Colson, seems to be on a one man crusade to wake American Christians from their slumber. He's not the only person sounding the alarm. Ben Carson is also. Dear reader, look for their speeches on the web and watch them.
This blog is devoted to the very principles Eric Metaxas addresses in his speech before CPAC. That is, freedom of religion that doesn't impact our every day lives, how we conduct our business affairs and our political views isn't much of a freedom and isn't much of a religion either. As Metaxas points out in his speech, China has freedom of religion! There the concept is keep that religion stuff inside the four walls of the building or in your prayer closet, once you enter the outside world you come under the auspices of the State and it is your god--obey or be punished. This brings home his idea, which he attributes to Os Guinness, that without freedom of religion you don't have freedom.
Those of us who do not have the sorts of platforms where men like Eric Metaxas and Ben Carson speak may think that we can't do much, but that doesn't mean our efforts don't matter. Think on these things, share them with your friends, have debates and discussions--get people thinking, wake up your neighbors! Our nation is a nation governed by "we the people" let's take it back from "we the elite."
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Pay for My Contraception or Else!
In case you can't read the lettering on the cartoon image at left, here it is:
"If you don't want women to get abortions, don't oppose coverage for contraceptives that would keep them from getting pregnant."
In other words, nobody should have to pay for their own contraception. And if any girl or woman gets pregnant and doesn't want to be, it's your responsibility. (Funny how these same people who want free contraception don't want anybody regulating their bedroom activities!)
The old-fashioned "wait until you're married" rule for having sex (which at least most girls used to enforce) is so passe now, in fact, it's so passe that it's cause for mockery and off-color joking directed at anybody stupid enough to utter the thought. If a celebrity, heaven forbid, is foolish enough to make such a promise out loud, the press waits to see if he or she can keep that promise and if he or she doesn't, you can bet the snide remarks will escalate. Further more, there's not a smidgen of slack given to a celebrity who pledged virginity until marriage if that celebrity ends up divorced. BAM! Get a divorce and the mockery doubles should that person dare to date again.
Among the noise makers who occupy many of the voice boxes of our nation, the concept of virginity has lost its classification as "noble and good" along with heroism, patriotism and other virtues adults used to promote in their youth. Their ideas about what is "noble and good" include gay marriage, rights for Islamics, "green" technology and doling out other people's money to help the poor. Does anybody ask why virginity and heroism and patriotism were considered "ideals" for centuries and why they were promoted? Nope. Us moderns is smarter than you passe folks. (Most teenagers are smarter than their parents, after all, they were born more recently.)
In practical terms the basic attitude seems to be: the sex drive is so overwhelming that nobody can control themselves, so why bother? It's normal. Rutting is normal. So, go forth and rut. (Am I using hyperbole?)
If evolution is true, then rather than moving forward (after centuries of promoting virginity and the other passe virtues which our predecessors thought were "noble and good") toward a population of more advanced beings, we've slipped back into a more animal-like state where hormones take over and a male or a female lose control when the sex drive flares up. Give me contraception now! I've got to do it right now! And I don't want to do any yard work to pay for it!
Anybody who's ever owned a pet knows that when the animal goes in heat, there's no stopping that burning urge to make or get pregnant! The animal roams about howling, seemingly in pain, until a beast of the opposite sex in the same species arrives and then let the coitus begin! Don't care where and don't care who's watching! Male animals in the wild go berserk and practically kill each other fighting to collect and retain the most females. Human males are encouraged to adopt a lower version of that model, just rut and move on. More like how insects do it--except women don't often kill their sexual partners.
The pill didn't clarify anything or free anybody. Since we have contraception and that present day "last ditch" alternative, abortion, the whole business is ten times more muddled than it's ever been before in history. The sixties idea that, "The pill is great! Now we can have all the sex we want with no consequences," has turned out to be worse than a pipe dream, it's turned into a nightmare. Generations of kids whose progenitors thought they could fool around without having to take responsibility for their actions now darken the doors of public schools. Some don't know who their sperm donors were and might be on their fourth or fifth male in the house sleeping with their mother. Many are ignored and ill-fed, barely able to interact with other human beings because they've had so little socializing with Mom and Dad, some of them are hardly able to speak beyond the most infantile utterances! Young males growing up without fathers roam the streets beating each other up and killing one another in drive-by shootings or trapping each other in drugs and crime because there's no mature male to show them what it means to be a man. What a great society all this "free" sex has wrought! Give them welfare!
Of this group, the lucky ones that sprang from the loins of parents who bought into the "free sex" lie are those whose progenitors recognized the folly of their ways and tried to do better. Of this group, the more highly evolved try to make a marriage and raise their kids. Other offspring of this newly enlightened group are farmed out to be raised by mature grandparents, some are lucky enough to have both genders of grandparents living with them. But far too many of these children conceived by a male who wanted to have sex and a female who believes she's supposed to let him have ended up dead before they could even take their first breaths!
Sex is way more important than almost anything!
But, let's face it: once conception occurs, the only difference between the initial ball of cells and a baby is time and the proper conditions! Everything that will make that mass of cells into a baby is there at the moment of conception.
We're talking about a human being.
A human being who was invited into the universe, not an invasion force to be repelled at all costs!
Despite all the years and years of sex ed with the bananas and the condoms and the graphics provided by Planned Parenthood, somehow or other many people of all ages don't seem to recognize that the sex act is an invitation to a potential human being to come join us here on planet earth. It's not about the boy "getting off" and the girl feeling loved--it's about making babies. The pleasure part is just the anesthesia to bond parents to each other and lull them into happy mode before the baby is born and keeps them up all night for months, years on end.
Back-alley abortions used to be the dread of females who made a stupid mistake, or who were trapped in abusive relationships, or forced into sexual relations. Abortion rights advocates used the gruesome portrait of the victimized pregnant woman suffering a coat-hanger abortion as their clarion call for legalizing the barbarous act.
Fine, legal abortion is better than back alley coat hangers, but the abortion promoters didn't stop there! Abortion has become a millions-of-dollars profit industry in the United States, subsidized by tax dollars, with lobbyists in Washington who work to make sure the abortion industry remains legal and lucrative.
Arrive at a Planned Parenthood clinic and not only will the employees dispense contraception, but if a woman thinks she's pregnant, they will administer a pregnancy test and help her get an abortion. Adoption is not on their list of services. (Neither are mammograms though Planned Parenthood labels itself a "health" provider.) And they don't want anybody lurking around outside suggesting to their customers that adoption might be a viable alternative nor do they want any states making laws that require the woman see an ultrasound of the mass of tissue they're about to murder before they go through with the deed. It would interfere with their profits.
These days, abortion is promoted about as much as contraception and both are pushed almost as much as rutting!
Abortion advocates wailed about the evils of back-alley abortion clinics, but women going into abortion clinics today aren't treated much better than they were in those bad old days. Recently, a woman in Chicago died after a botched, second trimester abortion performed in a Planned Parenthood clinic. Here's a link discussing it: Woman dies after botched abortion. or if this link is a dud, google "botched abortion," an article about one is certain to turn up. While you're at it, google "second trimester abortion" and click on the "image" link. A page full of those photos should make your heart ache and cause you to lose your dinner. If it doesn't you're well on to your way to becoming one of the walking dead like the living heart donors who do this kind of thing for a living.
Why, if the woman was going to get an abortion anyway, would she wait until the second trimester boggles the mind.
But the point is, having legal abortion clinics doesn't necessarily result in fewer deaths for women or less grief and agony for women.
Planned Parenthood has no love for these women seeking abortion, why should they? The "mother" wants to kill someone and they're more than happy to be paid to do the deed. The woman walking in is just an opportunity for profit. The respect level by default is going to be pretty dang low.
It doesn't matter what rationalizations are trotted out. Nobody willing to commit murder will have respect for someone who wants to have the murder done, unless that someone has the power to kill the hired murderer themselves. There's no respect in the "dog-eat-dog" world of killing other human beings except for the biggest, meanest dog and that only as long as he's the top killer.
People today argue that rutting is just human nature, well, so is lack of respect for someone willing to hire someone to kill--especially who kills by extracting a human life from inside another person's body. The one paying for the extracting didn't have respect for life to start with, why should the extractor have respect for either the life of the being who will be extracted or the one from whose body he or she is removed?
Which leads us back to the beginning: a culture that casts off old mores without understanding why generation after generation promoted those mores will create for themselves and their progeny a disastrous mess. Disastrous mess, here we come!
Marilyn
"If you don't want women to get abortions, don't oppose coverage for contraceptives that would keep them from getting pregnant."
In other words, nobody should have to pay for their own contraception. And if any girl or woman gets pregnant and doesn't want to be, it's your responsibility. (Funny how these same people who want free contraception don't want anybody regulating their bedroom activities!)
The old-fashioned "wait until you're married" rule for having sex (which at least most girls used to enforce) is so passe now, in fact, it's so passe that it's cause for mockery and off-color joking directed at anybody stupid enough to utter the thought. If a celebrity, heaven forbid, is foolish enough to make such a promise out loud, the press waits to see if he or she can keep that promise and if he or she doesn't, you can bet the snide remarks will escalate. Further more, there's not a smidgen of slack given to a celebrity who pledged virginity until marriage if that celebrity ends up divorced. BAM! Get a divorce and the mockery doubles should that person dare to date again.
Among the noise makers who occupy many of the voice boxes of our nation, the concept of virginity has lost its classification as "noble and good" along with heroism, patriotism and other virtues adults used to promote in their youth. Their ideas about what is "noble and good" include gay marriage, rights for Islamics, "green" technology and doling out other people's money to help the poor. Does anybody ask why virginity and heroism and patriotism were considered "ideals" for centuries and why they were promoted? Nope. Us moderns is smarter than you passe folks. (Most teenagers are smarter than their parents, after all, they were born more recently.)
In practical terms the basic attitude seems to be: the sex drive is so overwhelming that nobody can control themselves, so why bother? It's normal. Rutting is normal. So, go forth and rut. (Am I using hyperbole?)
If evolution is true, then rather than moving forward (after centuries of promoting virginity and the other passe virtues which our predecessors thought were "noble and good") toward a population of more advanced beings, we've slipped back into a more animal-like state where hormones take over and a male or a female lose control when the sex drive flares up. Give me contraception now! I've got to do it right now! And I don't want to do any yard work to pay for it!
Anybody who's ever owned a pet knows that when the animal goes in heat, there's no stopping that burning urge to make or get pregnant! The animal roams about howling, seemingly in pain, until a beast of the opposite sex in the same species arrives and then let the coitus begin! Don't care where and don't care who's watching! Male animals in the wild go berserk and practically kill each other fighting to collect and retain the most females. Human males are encouraged to adopt a lower version of that model, just rut and move on. More like how insects do it--except women don't often kill their sexual partners.
The pill didn't clarify anything or free anybody. Since we have contraception and that present day "last ditch" alternative, abortion, the whole business is ten times more muddled than it's ever been before in history. The sixties idea that, "The pill is great! Now we can have all the sex we want with no consequences," has turned out to be worse than a pipe dream, it's turned into a nightmare. Generations of kids whose progenitors thought they could fool around without having to take responsibility for their actions now darken the doors of public schools. Some don't know who their sperm donors were and might be on their fourth or fifth male in the house sleeping with their mother. Many are ignored and ill-fed, barely able to interact with other human beings because they've had so little socializing with Mom and Dad, some of them are hardly able to speak beyond the most infantile utterances! Young males growing up without fathers roam the streets beating each other up and killing one another in drive-by shootings or trapping each other in drugs and crime because there's no mature male to show them what it means to be a man. What a great society all this "free" sex has wrought! Give them welfare!
Of this group, the lucky ones that sprang from the loins of parents who bought into the "free sex" lie are those whose progenitors recognized the folly of their ways and tried to do better. Of this group, the more highly evolved try to make a marriage and raise their kids. Other offspring of this newly enlightened group are farmed out to be raised by mature grandparents, some are lucky enough to have both genders of grandparents living with them. But far too many of these children conceived by a male who wanted to have sex and a female who believes she's supposed to let him have ended up dead before they could even take their first breaths!
Sex is way more important than almost anything!
But, let's face it: once conception occurs, the only difference between the initial ball of cells and a baby is time and the proper conditions! Everything that will make that mass of cells into a baby is there at the moment of conception.
We're talking about a human being.
A human being who was invited into the universe, not an invasion force to be repelled at all costs!
Despite all the years and years of sex ed with the bananas and the condoms and the graphics provided by Planned Parenthood, somehow or other many people of all ages don't seem to recognize that the sex act is an invitation to a potential human being to come join us here on planet earth. It's not about the boy "getting off" and the girl feeling loved--it's about making babies. The pleasure part is just the anesthesia to bond parents to each other and lull them into happy mode before the baby is born and keeps them up all night for months, years on end.
Back-alley abortions used to be the dread of females who made a stupid mistake, or who were trapped in abusive relationships, or forced into sexual relations. Abortion rights advocates used the gruesome portrait of the victimized pregnant woman suffering a coat-hanger abortion as their clarion call for legalizing the barbarous act.
Fine, legal abortion is better than back alley coat hangers, but the abortion promoters didn't stop there! Abortion has become a millions-of-dollars profit industry in the United States, subsidized by tax dollars, with lobbyists in Washington who work to make sure the abortion industry remains legal and lucrative.
Arrive at a Planned Parenthood clinic and not only will the employees dispense contraception, but if a woman thinks she's pregnant, they will administer a pregnancy test and help her get an abortion. Adoption is not on their list of services. (Neither are mammograms though Planned Parenthood labels itself a "health" provider.) And they don't want anybody lurking around outside suggesting to their customers that adoption might be a viable alternative nor do they want any states making laws that require the woman see an ultrasound of the mass of tissue they're about to murder before they go through with the deed. It would interfere with their profits.
These days, abortion is promoted about as much as contraception and both are pushed almost as much as rutting!
Abortion advocates wailed about the evils of back-alley abortion clinics, but women going into abortion clinics today aren't treated much better than they were in those bad old days. Recently, a woman in Chicago died after a botched, second trimester abortion performed in a Planned Parenthood clinic. Here's a link discussing it: Woman dies after botched abortion. or if this link is a dud, google "botched abortion," an article about one is certain to turn up. While you're at it, google "second trimester abortion" and click on the "image" link. A page full of those photos should make your heart ache and cause you to lose your dinner. If it doesn't you're well on to your way to becoming one of the walking dead like the living heart donors who do this kind of thing for a living.
Why, if the woman was going to get an abortion anyway, would she wait until the second trimester boggles the mind.
But the point is, having legal abortion clinics doesn't necessarily result in fewer deaths for women or less grief and agony for women.
Planned Parenthood has no love for these women seeking abortion, why should they? The "mother" wants to kill someone and they're more than happy to be paid to do the deed. The woman walking in is just an opportunity for profit. The respect level by default is going to be pretty dang low.
It doesn't matter what rationalizations are trotted out. Nobody willing to commit murder will have respect for someone who wants to have the murder done, unless that someone has the power to kill the hired murderer themselves. There's no respect in the "dog-eat-dog" world of killing other human beings except for the biggest, meanest dog and that only as long as he's the top killer.
People today argue that rutting is just human nature, well, so is lack of respect for someone willing to hire someone to kill--especially who kills by extracting a human life from inside another person's body. The one paying for the extracting didn't have respect for life to start with, why should the extractor have respect for either the life of the being who will be extracted or the one from whose body he or she is removed?
Which leads us back to the beginning: a culture that casts off old mores without understanding why generation after generation promoted those mores will create for themselves and their progeny a disastrous mess. Disastrous mess, here we come!
Marilyn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





