Friday, February 29, 2008

Why Go to Church When I Think I Can be a Solo Christian

A young acquaintance on another forum said he didn't feel the need for church and didn't like being in a situation where he had to stand up and sit down every few minutes. My reply follows:

Well, you don't have to sit or stand every few minutes in our church --just sit in the back or on the edge and you can sit the whole time without feeling conspicuous--assuming sitting is preferable to standing the whole time?

It's a delightful experience, our worship music. We do it because the Bible says we should sing praises to our Maker --and He gave us the gift of music, gave people talents with which to make it. Music is entertaining to us and to God --inspiring to us. Pleasant to the ears. Enjoyable to do. We listen to preaching and teaching and make music because these activities are all part of the New Testament church --a means through which the Holy Spirit makes us wiser and stronger than we would otherwise be. We are motivated to do right and be good through a church's teachings/preachings. We hear of examples and are reminded of what is in the Bible --we are taught what God considers to be evil --and good.

As for church involvement, the Bible says "forsake not the assembly of the brethren." The disciples came together on the first day of the week to do what we do in churches today --to worship God, encourage one another in the faith, listen to teachers and preachers, and sometimes to hear testimonies of what God has done in our lives.

Also, we are to be known for our compassionate works and our love for each other --two things for which churches provide opportunity. We take on projects together to fulfill Christ's commissions --to help the needy, to minister to one another in love, to reach out to the community with God's love--and to tell others that Jesus Christ came to save us for Heaven.

Moreover, the church is the "discipling place" --a place where disciples are made --if the church is doing its job to bring people in and teach them what it means to be "Christian."

Biblically, we are the sheep of the Shepherd and belong in His sheepfold with the other sheep; we are members of Christ's body, each having a function; the Body of Christ includes all the believers together; we are the branches on the vine --and we are to "abide in the vine." Jesus said, "Behold I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears my voice and will open the door, I will enter and dine with him (fellowship.)"

We find God on HIs terms --not our own. After all, "What is man, that thou art mindful of him?"

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Tuesday, February 26, 2008


If Christ had not risen from the dead, what would the disciples have developed as Christianity? A religion about love and forgiveness, perhaps, but not about resurrection and a sure promise of Eternal life from a Resurrected human. I don't think the disciples would have been brave enough to start any religion.

But in fact, 20 centuries ago, they saw the risen Jesus Christ --and there was no stopping the news --and the boldness of their claim. They knew what they had seen --and believed their eyes. If Jesus rose from the dead, then everything He said --and everything the first century followers wrote --is worthy of our study. And I have no compelling reason to disbelieve their testimonies.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Go HUCK! Is there any numeric possibility he can get the nomination now?

With the NY Times story suggesting moral impropriety--and other news outlets reporting on the McCain temper, why is the GOP stuck with him???

If the Times story is true, then McCain may be a serial adulterer --that's how he got Cindy, isn't it? At least, he dumped a wife --and married the cheerleader half his age --I'm not sure if there was overlap--but there was the midlife crisis that characterizes a man of bad character -- yes, like King David of Israel. Can an immoral man be a good leader? When David was chosen, he was a good man annointed by Samuel--God's choice --but lust and power corrupted. We hear McCain has a really bad temper and a sharp tongue, too. Who needs it?

Because there ARE men of good character --I know so many --why do we have to have one who isn't of good character to lead the country? or my party?

Go, Huck! He'll be far more interesting, lively, sharp in rhetoric, entertaining, and wise --than any of the others. Granted, Obama's powers of rhetoric --but what has he done except be a popular politician? What has Obama or Hillary administrated --she couldn't even control Bill! How will she lead the nation? He is her achilles heel --a real heel at that.

Hillary as presenting herself today is an appealing figure to me, actually, but I know her past positions on issues and she is way too radically liberal for me --of course. And the SUPREME COURT IS AT STAKE. Five or six may retire during the next 4 to 8 years --or keel over--and a liberal president will give us their Yale and Harvard Liberals on the court and gay marriage, etc.

So this is the worst choice for pres. we've had in years --except for the colorful man of principle --Huckabee--who put a triple wide mobile home on the governor's property when they were refurbishing the mansion one year.--as featured on the Jay Leno show. Now there's a man with the common touch! We could use one with a REAL sense of humor --and a joy for life --that's what Reagan had. It comes with principles and real spirituality.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

More From the Liberal U.S. Campus Scene --Just Like Liberal Blogs

MORE ABOUT THE WM AND MARY CHAPEL CROSS-- Pres. Gene Nichol "secretly" ordered the removal of that cross from the school chapel. Fortunately, The Virginia Informer, a publication of a campus affiliate with the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, brought national attention to the story and the Wren Chapel cross has been returned to the chapel.

JOHN HOPKINS U-- administrators funded an event featuring a porn movie director and then confiscated copies of a student newspaper reporting on the event--claiming the school had the right to remove "offensive materials," (but, of course, no right to remove porn, truly "offensive material," anywhere on campus, probably, or to prevent such a seminar by a porn director. Free speech is negatively selective at JHU.)

U. OF WISCONSIN--Tony, an A student, e-mailed Professor John Betton 2 articles with viewpoints differing from the prof's about the impacts of immigration. Prof. Betton took offense and accused Tony of making an "insulting assumption that you have the right to teach my class" and called his articles "right-wing racist crap." Tony went to the dean and was referred to a complaints committee headed by none other than Prof. Betton. (I have no update on this.)

TUFTS UNIVERSITY -- Intercollegiate Studies Institute has a network of campus affiliates with conservative newspapers produced by students on various campuses. At Tufts, The Primary Source is one of these papers. The editor, Douglas Kingman, said there was a "Soviet-style show trial" in which the paper was found guilty by the administration of "harassment and creating a hostile environment simply for publishing political satire --a ruling that completely IGNORES explicit school policies that protect controversial expression." The Committee on Student Life recommended that Tuft's student government "consider the behavior" of the magazine when allocating activities money --clearly paving the way for the shool to cancel funding and recognition of the paper. Presumeably, this doesn't happen when liberal views are expressed by papers or clubs applying for the student activities funds.

ONLY 12 PER CENT OF UNI'S REQUIRE STUDENTS TO TAKE EVEN ONE COURSE IN AMERICAN HISTORY OR GOVERNMENT--and many others water down such classes from a fear of being offensive --except when it comes to offending Christians, conservatives or long dead patriots who can't defend themselves against revisionist historians.

MANY UNI'S HAVE BLOCKED STUDENTS WHO WISHED TO SET UP MEMORIALS for victims of 9/11 attacks on the anniversaries of that tragedy.

TWO OUT OF THREE CAMPUSES DENY FREE SPEECH RIGHTS --acc'g to a poll in 300 schools. They "explicitly prohibit speech that the First Amendment protects off campus and all but eight have policies that could easily be interpreted as restricting speech."

Let me hasten to say here, that I think schools DO have a right to restrict some kinds of speech that our constitutional framers would have recognized as institutional right. I think vitriolic hate speech, obscene and pornographic material SHOULD be restricted in academic institutions, the same as slander and libel --especially in Christian and other religious schools which promote traditional Judeo-Christian-Western beliefs about morals. "Politically incorrect" speech, however, should not be restricted when it is reasoned with either religious rationale or factual concerns for public health and societal and individual well-being.

"Liberal academics duck genuine debates on the history of the West or ideology like the plague --they can't stand watching their ideas being shredded and exposed." --T. Kenneth Cribb, Jr. --Intercollegiate Studies Institute

I've found this to be true of some liberal blogs, if not most. They consider the Bible irrelevant as a guide for morality and wise decision-making. They cannot stand a good rationale behind intelligent design theory or creationism. They hate you if you don't think homosexuality is inevitable, healthy, necessary, or good. It's fair game to offend and censor the Christian and all his dearly held beliefs.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Monday, February 18, 2008

Something Not Seen on Liberal Blogs : Liberal Campuses Run Amok

NO CHRISTIAN CROSS IN WILLIAM and MARY'S CHAPEL -- the college president, Gene Nichol, took out the cross in Wren Chapel, a chapel dating to 1699. He said it "sends an unmistakable message" that is "contrary to the best values of the College."

SEX WORKER ART SHOW --"A Celebration of Whore Culture" ALSO at Wm. & Mary College, funded by tax dollars. 100 students were REQUIRED to attend the show for their classes. The President's rationale, "It's not the practice and province of universities to censor or cancel performances because they are controversial."

Oh? then why remove a cross from a chapel? That WAS the province of the university? Retaining a cross as part of the history of a school's religious tradition going back to 1699 is deemed contrary to the school's values? But this school cannot find any good values on the basis of which to reject such an art show???

U. OF DELAWARE REQUIRES 7000 DORM STUDENTS TO HAVE THEIR THOUGHTS REFORMED -- The RA's led these sessions to help students achieve "competencies" to reach the education goal of "citizenship." Their training sessions for RA's included this statement, "A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the U.S., regardless of class, gender, religion, culture, or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists.'"

U. of Wisconsin-Madison and Edgewood College prof Kevin Barrett teaches that the 9/11 attacks were likely orchestrated by the U.S. gov't. to start a war with radical Islam. The pres of the Board of Regents, David Walsh, says Barrett's "academic freedom" must be protected.

(Source: Intercollegiate Studies Institute)

There oughtta be a law against such nonsense on college campuses --which have federal funding.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Another Grand Night for Singing! A Valentine Love Feast at HFM Church

Ninety people (including the 16 entertainers, but not counting the dozen cooks and servers)) gathered for the annual Valentine Banquet at the Holland Free Methodist Church last night.

Foil hearts on ribbons hung from the ceilings; the room had a rosy glow with candles and towers of Christmas lights covered by tulle. Better than a Prom! All red and white with chocolates at each place setting, with a Divine Valentine with scriptures comparing our Lord to an earthly Valentine --He is ever faithful and true, constant in love. He will never fail us. My friend Patty provided the Valentines and Sue Conklin was again the decorator.

The chapel annex featured a chocolate fountain and fruit and marshmallows, etc. for dipping; also, shrimp, cheese and crackers. Sparkling juice was already poured into champaign glasses (well, plastic!) and the guests mingled for fellowship before the dinner was served.

The Mayor of Holland was the emcee and the musicians were the blue, sparkly-clad Royal Troubadours, from Elmwood H.S., directed by Christine Rohrs, accompanied by Dean Bell. They sang romantic solos throughout the evening and did a fantastic sparkling "love show" after the dinner --the highlight of which was the choreographed "In the Mood," with the dancing of the Glenn Miller era. We could hear them so well; our mics and speakers were working! Also circulating the room with his crystal ball and card tricks during the dinner was student and magician, Brandon Coleman.

Following the show, the audience sang a couple of songs about Christian love and God's love for us, as a segue into Pastor Keith Simpson's brief devotional about God's love. He told how Teddy Roosevelt lost both his mother and his wife to illnesses on the same day, a Valentine's Day, reminding us that real love will include sadness --but God will give us the love and strength to go on in our hope of Heaven --thanks to the Love of Christ on the cross.

The students concluded with a choral number called "The Greatest Gift" --which is love.

The area Youth for Christ director, Jim Franks, was there to give a benediction.

The roast beef dinner by Kathy Heisinger and her crew was fabulous and the teens did a great job serving with Andrea Conklin's direction. Dessert was strawberries on Chocolate merangue cookies with whipped topping. Lucious to look at and to eat.

Proceeds for the banquet and table tips went to the youth fund of the church for their summer trips.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

A GRAND NIGHT FOR SINGING ~ CLC (Christian Life Club) for Kids ~ Valentine Party

The amazing Sue Conklin hung large flags of various European nations in our church's chapel (the former sanctuary.) She set up big round tables with decorations and flag centerpieces for each nation we are studying during this Missions Month. Europe is a mission field where the Free Methodist Church has missionaries. She had photos of these missionaries as part of the centerpieces. This was the annual Missions Food night for the children.

My assistant teacher took charge of all the food and our squad (the Trail Blazers of the CLC) helped to set it up on serving tables decorated by Sue with stripes in the primary colors of the European flags --they stood behind the table to identify and help serve the food for the other squads as they came through. I brought the Belgian truffles actually made in Belgium (Did you know the Lindor candies from Switzerland are actually made here now? --that's global economy for you --working in our favor. Churchills had them. ) I took the crust off the bread for some dainty cucumber sandwiches. Patty Bersinger made little tastes for 50 kids plus teachers -of recipes from European nations --cinnamon icecream, sorbet, pizza, little raspberry crepes, and other things I missed the names of because I had to accompany the worship team and leave her the work. But she had other help and she's good at being in charge of party food, games, etc. She likes to do everything I don't.

For the party, our 14 children, 3rd and 4th graders, first decorated and ate a Valentine cookie --baked by one of our teacher/mothers, Deb Claytor. Then Patty took them on a "spy walk" --she gives them each secret code names and they go stealthily through the hallways and downstairs to the music room --where I was waiting with Miss Valentine (Chrissy Rohrs) --who led them in a round --a new song for them: "Love, love love love, The Gospel in one word is love, Love your neighbor as your brother, Love love Love."

To get cooperation of people with spacy attention spans, we bribed them. (Did you know that somewhere in the Bible it does say something like, "A wise man useth a bribe!") So I gave each a zip lock bag and some Valentine treat for having successfully made the Spy Walk --and promised more if they all looked at Miss Valentine or me and participated in the singing, engaging with the words --and they all did! To Miss Valentine's amazement. And they sounded quite harmonious singing the round quite well. I had prepared the lyrics on Valentine stationary. Some asked if they could keep theirs.

We closed with "For God so Loved the World, he gave His only son, to die on Calvary's tree, from sin to set me free. Some day He's coming back --what glory that will Be! wonderful His love to me." The song is based on John 3:16 which was their January memory verse. And more candy was given --and they seemed to think they had had a good time.

Challenges-- we are busing kids in and need more van drivers. We could probably use another van. We are reaching the place where we need to split classes and aren't sure we have the teachers. We have some disciplinary problems but not so much in our squad. The younger kids' class is a bit too big, so we are getting more assistants in there. The older kids' class has a couple of unruly comedians and it is also a little bit larger than ours. So the minister and another young husband are planning to take the boys out for a separate class.

Patty and I are relieved that, so far, we don't have anyone telling us we are boring or giving us bad attitudes. We are experienced mothers of 4 kids each ourselves. So we aren't real strict --and we like all of them. And they know it. And I love to teach and get excited about some of our projects and goals. This is true of all our CLC staff. We just need to know how to deal with our growth and with students who are pretty impulsive, very lively, and very rude to each other, loud and wild, on the vans and in the halls and stairwells especially. An hour and a half with them weekly isn't much influence compared to the rest of children's lives.

The bus driver, Paula Swann, told me that one of my students asked her, "Does God see you all the time?" She assured him He does. First, he had asked, "Does God live at the church?" Paula told him that God lives in the hearts of those who believe in Him and so He is everywhere they are. And everywhere in general. He said, "Does that mean He could see someone in the Boys' coat room even if they were very careful to not be seen?" She assured Him God sees everything. He said, "O NO."

You know, a conscience can be a very good thing to cultivate in children.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Saturday, February 9, 2008


A blogger on Mohammad's blog (see my blog roll on the right for a link)posted the following:

Man's Kill-Culture ----

I tried to copy this photo from the above link onto this comment, but I was not successful. Maybe someone more computer literate can tell me how. Anyway, it is a photo of Chief Joseph, a great chief of the American Plains Indians, in December 1890, starved to death and frozen in a grotesque position in the snow, US Army soldiers in the background standing near their horses. He had been photographed many times in his prime in full Plains Indian regalia draped with beautiful blankets, in full feathered war bonnets. Now he lay in the snow in rags, disgraced, disrespected, his little rag-tag followers also dead, mostly women.

Whenever I look at this photo I feel a great sense of injustice, because I descend from Native Americans, and I can understand how Arabs would feel that their fellow Arab Palestinians had suffered an injustice. It is a sense of loss that is hard to accept, but accept it they must since they cannot change history no matter how they try to "review" it to come up with their own versions of the "resolutions" and agreements to make their case. The Jews feel a sense of injustice whenever they see photos of the piles of skeletal Jewish dead in the yards of Hitler's crematoriums. I can understand how the powers that be felt that sense of injustice with them and helped them gain a homeland.

Who do I blame for the injustice suffered by Chief Joseph and his people? The US Army and its "kill-culture" against Native Americans? No. The Americans fought the battles and won the war, and felt justified in making the land free and safe for themselves. After all, hadn't they purchased the land from Napoleon? But Napoleon never had title to the land either. So land belongs only to the victors for a time, and is lost again one way or another to a more powerful, more determined, better armed invader, time and time again throughout history all over the world. The losers wisely accept defeat and live on.

There have been bloody battles everywhere that man has settled. Those who defend Palestinians forget that before a Jewish homeland was declared, the Palestinian Arab tribes fought many bloody battles amongst themselves. That is an inconvenient truth the defenders of Palestinians choose to ignore.

I don't believe in Jesus as God, but He was wise to tell His followers to put away their swords; the Romans were too powerful and it would not serve their purpose to keep on fighting. His aim was for his people to keep the integrity of their ancestors' beliefs and not fall in with the Romans as the Pharisees did. He spoke not too far from where the current skirmishes between Palestinians and Israelis are going on now.

The Palestinians would do well to put down their weapons and make peace. They revere Jesus as a prophet, same as the Jews do. They both revere the old Scriptures no matter what they call them or who they claim had them first. Jesus lived as a Jew who actually walked that land, He was not a Muslim, and Mohammed only went there in his dreams while still in Medina or Mecca, and so the land is holy to the three major religions and it should be made safe for anyone in the world to come there.

Surely life is easier now for everyone in America more than 100 years after Chief Joseph's demise since there has been peace for that long, but at the loss of the original culture that was there. The defeated that wished to keep their culture gave up everything and stayed together in reservations set aside for them so they could be protected from their enemies and keep their language and some customs and part of their religion, though they were pressured to take Jesus as their Savior in order to show gratitude to their "benefactors". Most have assimilated and share in the bounty that we know now, and we are free to practice whatever religion or to not practice any.

The point I'm trying to make is that the Palestinians were no more a nation than the followers of those Native American chiefs so long ago. The American tribes had their kill-culture too, and took land from each other. The Palestinians are Arab tribes, with opposing Islamic creeds, not sovereign nation states. The American Indians warred amongst the other tribes and never joined forces to beat back the enemy, and doing so would not have accomplished much owing to the fact that the invaders had the latest technology and financial support as Isreal does now.

However the Palestinians lost the land they thought was theirs is a moot point now. They are facing too determined a people who feel as much a historical claim to the land, and much of the Western world agrees, though Israel has been cautioned to stay within the first agreed upon borders. It is a historical fact that most Jews were taken out of the land they have reclaimed, and in truth share common ancestors with the Arabs. Mohamed makes much of "Zionists" and Jews, but Zionism was a movement in the late 19th Century to establish a homeland for Jews. Of course the Palestinians don't want any new borders, but the Israelis have not only taken an inch, they have taken a mile, many miles, and they will not give them up due to the incitement from their radical Zionist element. They have not only won the battles, they won the war, and most of the world recognizes their hard-won state.

Who amongst the Arab states has made a determined effort lately to oust the Israelis? The Palestinians once had the support of their Arab neighbors, but that is lacking now. Their neighbors fought with them at first, but they lost too. It would be best to stop these ineffective suicide bombings and missile firings that cause the Israelis to retaliate. It is the Israelis who react, and it is the Palestinians that are the agressors. The Israelis also could make quite a case for themselves if they had someone like Mohamed to enumerate all the killings and injuries their innocents have suffered from the Palestinians. We here could make a case for Shiites who have suffered loss of life at the hands of Sunnis and vice-versa, but Muslims ignore that.

Arab Muslims have made the Palestinian situation such a bone of contention, that they are obsessed by it to the extent that they are willing to re-invent history and provide weak arguments as justification. Palestinians have not been alone as residents of that land all those generations that they claim; there were Jews and Christians in that land, and there still are.

So, yes, I wonder why Palestinians continue to agitate only because I see that it has been futile to do so for so long. That land is so small compared to other vast nation states like the United States, so people have nowhere to run. There could be peace there if only the Palestinians would stop their attempts to oust the Jews by suicide bombings and missiles that kill and injure innocent Jews and cause the Israeli army to try to disarm them causing death and injury to the Palestinians in turn.

I think that the leaders of other Arab states have tried to broker a peace, but the Palestinians refuse. Only Arab leaders can try to control the Palestinians, since they choose to ignore the UN, and only Israelis can control their own radicals. The rest of the world just seems to want to stay out of their affairs.

I printed out Mohamed's essay, all five pages of it, and I am sorry to say that his arguments do not convince me that it is a good idea for the Palestinians to continue their skirmishes. I feel he is just reiterating what he hears from his elders who have picked up the situation in Palestine as an Islamic cause. As a devout Muslim, he will not contradict what his elders teach him. In his culture it would be unthinkable to have an indipendent thought that goes against the beliefs of the culture.

Port Orchard, WA

I posted something similar prior to her post and a disagreement following. I repeat them as comments to this blog topic.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Friday, February 8, 2008

Address to Video on Canadian Healthcare

This is a web address to a utube video on Canadian healthcare. We don't want their single payer system!

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible


I just heard Hillary speak shrilly today about universal health care. She said of health ins. companies that, "We [democrats] want to take away their power!" --and I thought, "You mean JOBS!" And I heard the real meaning, "WE WANT GOV'T TO HAVE POWER!" She said we want the ins. companies to stop controlling health care. So there go THEIR jobs--and to whom? gov't bureaucrats who know NOTHING about efficiency of health care.

Look at the VA hosptials. That's gov't. Look at the runaway costs of medicare and medicaid --That's gov't. Gov't's best isn't good enough. Gov't is about endless record-keeping of minutia and paper, paper and more paper --or in this case, maybe computer data. Gov't is about inefficiency, waste and waiting, also.

My husband's PA didn't get a letter and form from the state for updating his license. The Columbus office said, "Oops. We'll send it right out." Monday came. No letter. "Oops, somebody left it here on the desk. We'll get it right out." This form could've been faxed and mailed back, but NOOOO! that wasn't their way. So the PA couldn't see patients for 3 days until they got him reinstated. Meanwhile, he is on salary and unable to work, a loss to the business and 75 patients not seen. Gov't doesn't think that way and doesn't care. There will be lots more of such waste of personnel and tax dollars and people waiting longer for care if feds get the power over all of U.S. healthcare.

What people have to do to qualify for their Medicaid, SSI and Medicare --it's all so BURDENSOME --like IRS forms are. And that's all government.

Why would we want to eliminate competition between health providers for our health care dollars? Free enterprise is our friend, People! Government will give us no affordable CHOICES --just whatever they want to give us for our much higher taxes in order to have more inefficient, bureaucrat-laden, holiday-laden gov't programs --that grow ever and ever larger, filled with people who don't have to be efficient or think about being diligent or profitable or even courteous and caring in order to keep their positions.

Keep those insurance companies and providers small and regional, competing with each other, under local control, and that will do us more good than any federal healthcare plan.

That's not to say that big insurance can't be just as frustrating as big gov't. But I do NOT trust the democrats' view of utopia. It's socialism, pure and simple. It's nanny gov't and we will not like it after having the best health care in the world --where even the poor don't have to wait for open heart surgery and new knees if they need it. Yes, health care costs need addressed --and there may be SOME kind of role for gov't to play -- but when I hear Hillary say, "WE WANT TO TAKE AWAY THEIR POWER" --yikes!

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

About Obama's "Yes, We Can" Speech

I like the idea that "WE CAN" -- if it means change within ourselves as individuals -- change to be committed to study in school, to develop individual initiative and a good work ethic, --change to the kind of tolerance that leaves hatred at the door with a willingness to hear and help others --change that minimizes the greed of people at both ends of the economic spectrum --change in those who don't want to help the needy --change in those who want Big Gov't to take from the entrepreneurs and job providers in order to make more people dependent on Big Gov't.

I'm for change if it means we start reserving sex activity for marriage, commiting to our spouses and children so they may have the blessing of two parents to raise them, so more families may know the security of domestic tranquility, i.e. happy homes.

Real change starts in the heart that asks Jesus Christ to be Lord over all our ways and choices --instead of looking to other working people to enable and compensate for the economic blight of sinful and addicted lifestyles. NOt that all the poor make themselves that way, by any means --but we know that divorce and single parenting are a pretty sure path to economic deprivation in America--as are addictions.

Golden Rule Jones, former mayor of Toledo, was a good example of a rich man who had the right philosophy --who put Christ's Golden Rule in signs around his workplace --and challenged people to let that wisdom rule their hearts. He provided for his workers without the hindrance of big, impersonal, wasteful gov't intervention and high taxes.

Does Whoopi Goldburg want her savings taxed again before her daughter can have them? No, she said not. She said, "down with the death taxes." Would anyone want their legitimate earnings taxed again and again and higher and higher by a confiscatory gov't. known for waste and bureaucratic redundancy and impersonal dealings with the people it's supposed to serve? I think not.

What puts more money in the gov't coffers for their aid programs? lower taxes, not higher.

I fear the kind of change that will come with Democrat Party president and Congress.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible


"Liberal label. Dismissive. Unworthy of holding worthwhile ideas and ideals? Sorry, Baldspot, but your labeling of those who disagree with you is nothing more than bigotry, as is your bigotry of gays and lesbians.

Funny that you couch your bigotry as: "the filter of my religious experience colors what I think." Interestingly from all that I have read of the words of Jesus, he was the most unbiased, welcoming person in the history of mankind. He strongly disliked bigots, especially the ‘churchy’ kind, as exemplified in the Sadducees"

This quote is by the blogger, Mudrake, on a French blog which has banned me recently. So another conservative Christian is bearing light over there now named Baldspot. The above was Mudrake's reply to some things Baldspot wrote so effectively.
I do find it peculiar that Liberals feel insulted when they are called "liberal." I don't feel insulted when called fundamentalist, conservative, Christian, evangelical --(as long as fundamentalist is defined as believing that there are certain "fundamental truths" which define "Christian.")

In fact, the irony is that Mudrake used to call himself "Liberal Democrat," but he seems to resent the label if a conservative uses it to describe him. Yet the term really means something in American politics and/or religion. Liberals today tend to be atheistic or agnostic --or at least religiously liberal about Biblical interpretation and Biblical claims and Biblical morality. Religiously, many or most liberals deny the truth and relevance of Scripture and the deity and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There are other ways to be religiously liberal, however. One might say it is liberal to believe that Christ doesn't care if we are sinful; liberal to believe He will forgive us no matter what, even if we are not remorseful about deliberate sin. Some are more liberal in their views of what a Christian lifestyle should be. Some people are more "legalistic" than others. The less legalistic, the more religiously liberal. So there are variants of "liberalness" among the religious. I am more liberal than some Christians in my views and more conservative than others. So the term is relative.

If one is liberal theologically, he is more likely to be liberal politically, seeing no reason for laws and traditions that we have inherited from our Judeo-Christian (and even Islamic) worldviews. In fact, to a liberal person, traditional religious views prevalent in Judeo-Christian culture are a violation of church and state if they have ANY influence on our laws --such as the historical, cultural view of fetal life, the definition of marriage and the discouragement of sodomy. They believe that since these ideas are religiously influenced, government should protect the opposite positions in the name of religious neutrality/church-state separation. This really isn't logical. Just because a law has historical Judeo-Christian Biblical support, doesn't mean the law is only valid in the church and for church people. For example, "Thou shalt not kill." That's a basis for something MOST of the free world considers a civil right to life. People on all ends of the political spectrum believe this is a good law against murder --in free countries. In other systems, Communism and Islam, there is no inherent right to life for innocent civilians who happen to disagree with the government --or proselytize about their faith.

Yes, Jesus is welcoming and unsnobbish and told us to be the same --to love brother, neighbor, and enemy. So we have no justification if we hate liberals --or hate conservatives. Right, Mudly? Yes, Jesus gave the proud and superficially righteous a hard time, THOSE WHO CLAIMED THEY HAD NO SIN --and for it, they gave Him the worst time of all--leading to the Cross. He told them that if they sinned in thought, they were as sinful as those who sinned in deed --and thus all need to repent and be saved.

Liberals today, by my definition, crucify Jesus all over again--by opposing the Church of believers in their efforts to be salt and light in the culture through political representation of the people's will. They crucify the Body of Christ --the Church, and for what reason? for believing and teaching that the Bible and its standards of right and wrong are true.

Christians are remorseful sinners who have embraced the more enlightened Way taught by Jesus Christ. They seek to resist temptation to sin deliberately. We ARE to pursue holiness in our own lives --which means we seek to live in blameless ways --but we know we are not God and do fall short. But we do have His Holy Spirit to teach and guide us in His way --the narrow road that leads to life --instead of the broad road that leads to destruction.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Monday, February 4, 2008


Schools should not have clubs encouraging youth in their mis-identification as homosexuals. Data does not prove a genetic, con-genital, inevitable, immutable cause for gayness. Twin studies, for example, prove the opposite, though more twin siblings are gay than are non-twin siblings. It's more about being a twin than having a gay gene --because most often one twin is straight and the other gay --despite identical genes. Moreover, former homosexuals have successfully changed their orientation, so it can be done.

Ridicule can affect identity and is rightly disallowed by schools. Most youth, especially late-bloomers, are insecure about sexual self-image, attractiveness, and normalcy. This may be less true for those affirmed in their sexuality by their two original parents with whom they have good relationship. Not that parents alone are responsible for sexual orientation, but they play a huge role in cultivating normal self-image. But there is no denying the role of culture, peers, molesters, and rebellion in the formation of homosexual identity. Schools and entertainers seem determined to make homosexuality “trendy.” Youth can be lured into homosexual addiction because of encouragement and opportunity to “explore one’s sexuality.”

We now have another disease entering the population via gays, in addition to all the others that can be spread by immune-suppressed people. A new Staph “super-bug” (the “flesh-eater”) called “multidrug-resistant USA 300” is being disseminated in 38 U.S. states, Canada and 9 European Union countries. (“Men who Have Sex with Men,” Annals of Internal Med. 19 Feb 2008.)

Moreover, there is “conclusive evidence that HPV via oral sex causes throat cancers in both men and women.” Reporting in the May, 2007 issue, of The New England Journal of Medicine, researchers at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center found that having multiple oral sex partners tops the list of risks for the HPV-related throat cancer.

It’s time to stop telling kids that pre-marital sex and sodomy are safe with condoms. They are created male and female; we should help youth feel normal and delay their urges for monogamous, hetero marriage for which they are designed. Sodomy will always, ALWAYS be unhealthy.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible