The Big Tent

I believe in the BIG TENT.

We are all welcome in the Family of God --if we simply acknowledge who we are (sinners) and who Christ is (Savior.)

Out of that Family, we go into all the world and tell people there is Good News --we tell people who do not believe, that God has made Himself, His Law and plan of salvation known through the bible and in the person and death and resurrection of Jesus.

I would rather spend my days talking with people who do not agree with me --who do not believe in the Bible --who do not know or believe that Christ has made an escape from death for us.

I don't expect to be popular for it --Jesus wasn't --HIs disciples weren't --early church martyrs were not --

In fact, a Christian who is universally adored and respected hasn't stepped on any toes --but the Word of God, when preached and taught and quoted --DOES step on toes. And avoiding toes, won't save anyone. We have to engage in crucial conversations. It's a matter of life or death.

Of course, it's most effective if we can have loving relationships and influence people to have faith out of those relationships --but anytime push comes to shove --and we are confronted with the claims of Christ and the necessity to do something about them before we die --the love relationship is strained.

Jesus did not make everyone happy --He stepped on toes --especially the toes of the proud --which might be all folks today.

I may speak as though I think "I know" --I sound confident in what I believe and that is not admired. But it isn't arrogance about ME. I'm not claiming to be the righteous one --He is--it's just that "I know whom I have believed" as the scripture says. i know my own spiritual experience --and I have become assured that this Gospel of Christ is truth and essential for everyone to know and believe.

And the gospel does apply to every social issue in the world.

So I'm here on forums and blogs because diversity should be desireable on forums. I should be able to say, "Liberals think this.... or that....." and have them come back and say yea or nay --I am either right or wrong about them. Likewise, things said about the religious right folks on line are often extremely wrong --I should be here to say so.

Or is delusion really preferable?

He is Risen Indeed! Lib. profs say otherwise

There was no reason for the Gospel writers to elaborate on a risen Jesus --they could have followed a religion without it. They believed --because there WAS a risen Jesus--and I take their accounts as reliable.

uptheflag does not. And apparently you do not, LD, since you scoff at the "irony" of those who "hold fast to a belief" in the resurrection. I know all about our liberal profs who dig up obscure myths of deities resembling Jesus to cast doubt on the faith of millions of college students--but none of their finds has so much historical documentation as the One whose temple of living stones housing the Holy Spirit has survived and flourished to this day--even in the hearts of highly educated, civilized people.

Easter will come and MILLIONS of Christians will say the age old greeting of the early church to one another: "He is Risen!" and answer, "He is Risen Indeed!"

Why our No. Korea Strategy/defense of Rice

From a forum:

You Democrats should be sued for libel and slander. The stuff that outrages you is the SAME sort of thing you'd be pilloried for by the foreign press (and probably conserves, sad to say) if YOU were in their shoes. Bush and Rice ARE dealing with complex problems --strategies will change --experiments are undertaken--much advice is given and received and they can't follow all of it. And I'll bet it's true that it's impossible to keep accounting or memory of every memo that flies in from all over.

Rice knows a heck of a lot more about foreign affairs and cultures and the intelligence briefings --than you guys can surmise in your little fingers. she'd still make a real pres. compared to Hillary.

Democrats are just keeping up the pressure and the chronic negativity in hopes of getting their pres. and court appointments in. As for what your party would do with terrorists --"fiddle while Rome burns." Or do the very same sorts of things but you'd defend it because YOUR party was doing it.

I just got a letter from one of my 2 friends in India --who praises Bush for recently pushing Pakistan harder to deal with its terrorists.
so not everyone abroad thinks as Microdot about the Bush administration.

Here's another idea: everyone has been jumping on Bush-Rice for ignoring No. Korea compared to Iraq --for not negotiating with Iran and No. Korea --for being a lone ranger and not working with other nations --so the best a team of nations can get from diplomacy with N. Korea is not good enough --and I agree --it wasn't good when Clinton did it nor now--but is it for a temporary easing of the tensions re: both critics of Bush's leadership and the problem with No. Korea --seeing as how our hands are full with middle-eastern terrorists and Iranians halping to keep the pot stirred in Iraq --hoping you libs will prevail and get us out of there so they can have their terrorist safe-haven or continue to blow up the region and kill millions with their ethnic war drawing from Al kaida Sunnis on the one side and Iran Shiites on the other.

Quotes from Am. History

How can liberals say that our PRE-HISTORY in America had nothing to do with the Constitution and after? such as Jefferson's Dec. of Ind. statement: "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, ...endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Various famous people of other religions did not belive this --especially those secularists Hitler and Marx and Stalin and all the leaders of communist nations --and Muslims like terrorists and Sadam. Different cultures breed different values. I'll take a country based on the bible any day compared to any other.

Of course it affected our CULTURE --our national values system. Churches and church life, sermons, and Bible knowledge --affected every small town. The bar and the miscreants and those who came merely for profit motive were here, too.

Did your private high school tell you that many of the signers of the C. were members of the American Tract Society --I believe that's what it was called --that distributed Christian material? Did they tell you that all the schools studied the bible and considered it an important text and had religious holiday observances/programs? Did they expose you to the values of the McGuffey Readers?

Did they tell you --as they should in any secular grad school of education--that a primary reason for our first public schools was so all people could read and have access to the Bible --and not be misled by theocracies interpreting for the people to take advantage of them?

Also, it was considered that the values of Christianity were essential to free people -an agreement about the values of law, life, liberty, justice, equality, compassion -- which derive from the bible.

I'm not saying all our forefathers were Christian or that all our laws,judges and churches were wholly good. We don't have a spotless history with slavery, e.g.

In fact, Abigail Adams noted the liberals of those day when she said,"I am no friend of bigotry, yet i think the freedom of inquiry and the general toleration of religious sentiments, have been, like all other good things, perverted, and, under their shelter, deism, and even atheism, have found refuge."

Did you know that Thomas Jefferson wrote in Notes on Virginia: "Can the liberties of a nation be sure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift of God?"

Did you learn that our first Pres., Washington, in 1789, established the first Thanksgiving Proclamation? saying the day should be "devoted by the people of these states to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the Beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for thIs kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation --that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions..."

(Their idea of transgressions would have been from the Bible.)

And in his first inaugural Address: "It would be peculiarly improper to omit....my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being, who rules over the Universe, who presides in the councils of nations and whose providential aids can supply every human defect...we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself ordained....No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the U.S."

And finally, at the Constitutional Convention itself in 1787, ben Franklin said, "I have lived sir, a long time; and the longer I live the more convincing proofs i see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. We have been assured that, 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' I firmly believe this."

and "If a sparrow can not fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?" He is referencing jesus' teaching in calling for prayer to advance them in their daily discussions about the Constitution.

Notice they said Congress could make laws --not the courts. In roe vs. Wade, the court made law by striking down laws against abortion made by legislatures. And not because the Constitution really provides for abortion.
Human beings have a right to life once they get it --and they ARE live humans --human life --from conception on --allbeit in their earliest stages --none the less, their dna code is established and fetuses are human beings in process at conception, just about 20 weeks from viability outside the womb.

Yes, the constitution's writers may have built in a little flex for the people through their legislatures--realizing that someday we might have to amend the constitution to keep people from doing outlandish things with their freedoms --such as redefining marriage as between any two humans, any age, any sex, any familial relation, etc. --or even any two living creatures. I doubt they anticipated the things we'd try to legalize today--but they did figure the legislatures were the place for making the laws --not the bench.

More on Abortion and Sex Ed in Africa

Don --I said a constitutionally faithful court will recognize partial birth abortion for what it is. I didn't address the legislative issue.

In Roe V Wade, the law of the land was against all abortion. They may have only legalized 1st term, but that, in effect, legalized abortion in general, especially in the public mind -- the state at first had no laws to address abortion with a 1st trimester exception, since all abortion was illegal.

Someday the partial birth abortion issue will reach the federal bench, i suspect, given the extreme position of pro-choicers who DO favor abortion as birth control --for whatever reasons women choose at any time during the pregnancy.

You said the court had consistently weighed in to protect fetal life --obviously not in 1973 --after which the abortion of the allegedly raped Roe never occured --whose child is a pro-life activist today --and the mother, also, after being converted to Christ and leaving lesbianism and her job in an abortion clinic. Her alleged rape was not a rape. The phony Rape claim made the court more sympathetic to her plight as a pregnant woman.

So the great Roe decision was founded on fraud.

Microdot, Uganda embraced the abstinence before marriage style of sex ed in their nation and is the leading African nation in REDUCTION of new HIV infections and AIDS victims.

You tout the condom advocacy method of sex ed without realizing it only gives our youth license to become sexually active --because of the way the info is given--non-judgmentally, with expectation that premarital sex is inevitable and even desirable --without moral instruction about the realities of promiscuity, the real risks to emotional and physical health, the jeopardy to future family stabilty --even with condoms and birth control --

I DO favor KNOWLEDGE of condoms and the Pill and all their risks --and knowledge of the fact that promiscuity, even with safeguards, cannot guard the heart or one's romance --nor prevent all pregnancy or disease --nor the MANY other negative side effects of promiscuity and extra-marital activity at any age --but especially for the young.

The Abortion Battle Rages On

Liberal dem--I don't get any of my comments right out of magazines --unless I attribute to them.

You are being very judgmental to say i don't care about kids after they are born. And wrong. Your bigotry and vitriol are leaking out for all to see.

I don't really get ANY magazines that are primarily about "pro-life" --a couple of news bulletins in the mail now and then. I don't even read them often because I know the position. However, we do read occasionally in conservative press about the deaths of women in abortion clinics. I told you before, but you deleted it, about my young friend in Angola who wanted to back out of her abortion after paying $600 to the clinic --and they forced her on to the table and forced her to go through with the procedure. If I knew a good lawyer.....

FAR FEWER women sought abortions when it was illegal --so overall, fewer died then, than die now from being aborted. and there were more shotgun weddings as boyfriends didn't have an alternative to kill the child --many of those couples stayed together and made good marriages.
I think we've killed 40 million so far.

And don't tell me pregnancy is more dangerous to women than abortion --not so with the one for one breast cancer rate.

Watch LD delete me --He posts his own prejudicial garbola as truth, and very little that disagrees with it. He wants a totally consistent liberal point of view on his blog --without challenge or exception. Except when he has time to try to persecute me. But sometimes, he's at a loss for words and then deletion is easier.

Global Warming --what can we do? PRAY!!!

Some think we should just vote for the democrats, but what difference will that make? The nation is encouraging fuel efficient autos and recycling, and we have EPA standards, inspections and fines. Can you afford a hybrid car? Will you carpool? Do you recycle?

And how will we control the emissions in the other countries who are gaining more and more autos and industry?

I still favor asking God's help as an additional measure. He does the miraculous --and He also helps us to find solutions and GIVES THE WISDOM AND INSPIRES THE WILL to do what needs to be done. And yes, this process is often enabled by dedicted scientists--who were, in fact, worried about an impending ice age not so long ago.

I'm all for wind energy --but noticed that our most liberal senator, Kennedy, opposed such windmills anywhere near Hyannisport, his neighborhood. I think they are actually aesthetically pleasing on the landscape.

God has historically blessed nations, families, individuals --or let them suffer. And He also lets us suffer the natural consequences of our selfish and sinful ways and habits --but He also listens and responds to prayer when we get on our knees and acknowledge who HE is and who WE are --as sinners who make most of our own messes.

On this same theme, Jesus also said "The rain falls on the just and the unjust." And the Bible says that the wicked may prosper for a season, but ultimately there will be a day of justice--sometimes here --and always in the hereafter. But those who humbly, sincerely repent and plead the blood of Christ to cover their sins will escape their just desserts in the hereafter.

back up for my elsewhere post --on extremist Muslims and their disapproval of our decadent sex lives

Deny away, noah's ark --you with the leaky boat of leftist logic and overreaching satire.

Extremist Muslims being cultivated in the most fundamentalist schools of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and even in the u.s. -- think the west is decadent and filled with evil temptation and thus should be overcome by them so a Muslim theocracy can eventually rule the world.

If I am in error about this, LD is even in GREATER error for accusing the evangelicals/fundamentalist Christians in the U.S. of being just like these extremists. We'd like to see an eventual theocracy, all right, with Jesus as King --but He said His kingdom is not of this world. Though there is to be a 1000 year reign of Christ prophesied in Revelations. We don't think we have any duty to usher in that era by fomenting problems in the middle east--as we are accused of doing. And we don't think forced conversions are conversions at all. So we aren't like the extremist Muslims who will only spare your head if you convert.

These fundamentalist Muslims do share one thing with fundamentalist Bible believers in America--the belief that those big issues in America's "culture war," those big concerns to the "values voters," are sins and a symptom of America's decadence.

But I would agree that murder is a worse sin. The crime of 9/11 was worse than anything we do in our sex lives. But ALL sin is equally condemned by God and separates us from Him --such that we need to repent of it in order to receive His free grace and eternal life.

Pelosi's Plane Problems for Micro Dot of France/also global warming discussion

If LD would not have deleted my comment, you would know that I asked if the security people said Pelosi needed to fly non stop. That did not come out in the original news stories --and I suspect it was subsequent spin.

I saw video of her commenting about keeping up with the boys in perks --she was not to be denied what was due her just because she was a woman --she was angry. She sounded as though she was the one who insisted it be non-stop flight --even if it meant she had to fly commercial, she said.

The spin on it NOW says security people wanted her to fly non-stop --but that's not how it came out in the tv news outlets or in her public remarks. I'll get the full story from time or newsweek--not that they always have the facts, but they are better than tv for a longer story anyway.

Note that Tony Snow himself defended Pelosi and said it was "much ado about very little." So her problems weren't the result of a "vast right wing conspiracy" fueled by the White house, as Dems would normally assume.

But why would she suggest flying commercial (with those security risks, putting a whole plane of people at risk --if the non-stop flight wasn't her OWN objective?) She made it clear in her public comments that SHE felt entitled to a non-stop flight if her predecessor, Hastert, who lived closer, had one.

Record high for February in Maumee was 71 degrees --and that was not lately. We've had an average Feb. here --but like I said in deleted remark --more hot air in France.

As for my soccer moms comment --I said liberal, not because of soccer, but because they were known for support of Clinton--(yes, I know that is just media spin from the Clinton election cycle --) and also known for their SUV preference.

And so I did conclude that IF global warming is a problem --it is because of all of us who have our lifestyle preferences --including liberals like Pelosi and the SUV drivers.

Re: Jim Wallis and the demise of Religious Right

Jim Wallis is a liberal and I can't imagine any but a liberal audience who would cheer the demise of the Religious Right, so consider the source and the audience. I don't think the Religious Right's Era is over --unless you can completely shut down freedom of speech in America.

I do think the GOP lacks a strong candidate of appeal to the Religious Right, but it may be too early to tell. If they start up a 3rd party, it wouldn't bode well for either the dems or the republicans.

As an evangelical, I was not disappointed by GOP's judiciary appointments --at least as far as we know the two new fellows are constructionists and not activists from the bench --who may therefore get a chance to rule on the constitutionality of abortion --and gay marriage--social issues which were newly promoted as legitimate starting in 1973-- contrary to the centuries old will of the majority. These two issues represent the culture war more than any others--along with a concern for media entertainment, including internet porn, sex slave trade, etc.

If the Bible is true about the Creator God, we do well to have another Religious Awakening in America. At least UptheFlag recognizes that 'there is nothing new under the sun' when it comes to the impact of Bible believing people on American history. I say they are responsible for the best of American values.

On Weyrich's Criticism of Bush, Call for 50's Values

Paul Weyrich and Bill Lind call for a revival of 50's values in The American Conservative. Bush simply is too conservative for the left--and too left for the right --I say, because he IS a compassionate conservative and spent money like democrats (AIDS relief in Africa, e.g.) --and he DOES have the long view regarding the Middle-East --BUT he's no Lone Ranger in his views --he has plenty of advisors on foreign policy and from the military. He can't heed all of them, so he goes with the ones whose views sync most with his own --and Rice's. And I think he's absolutely right about IRaq --we better win --or die. Announcing withdrawal and pressuring us to do it, gives the terrorists and insurgents lots of patience --they'll just wait us out, only to really step it up after we leave.

Dems are very strident and loud right now -- really afraid of a victory for Iraq because that might mean another Republican president --and THAT might mean the eventual end of legalized abortion as birth control --and the prospect of gay marriage--their two pet projects.

If we abandon the peace loving moderates of Iraq who just want peace and safety more than revenge against each other and Israel, we will leave the place in a worst tempest than they've had since our presence in the country. And don't think we brought the mess to Iraq --unless you think Sadam was a humane and orderly leader. Orderly, perhaps --if that's what you call exterminating all your critics in the most grisley manner. His own death at the hands of his victims was his just dessert, not that we approved of the method, but he did deserve to experience what he had done to so many during his reign of terror.

I certainly do agree with the authors, that we must win the cultural war in America --both legislatively and judicially --and in the hearts of the citizenry. Porn and extra-marital sex are going to reap a harvest of broken homes and gov't dependent citizens in therapy.

As for 50's Culture, as I recall, it wasn't all that great --however, we did have more respect for family, church, believers, the Bible --generally --in those "good ol' days --and less filth in entertainment media.

Autism Gene Found & Implications

The possibility of healing by altering DNA is good news even from a conservative point of view. However, the prospect of abortion of disabled children is a temptation for us that we should flee. Pre-natal therapies and remedies should continue to be our goal.

God IS a loving God --and all of life's imperfections are a result of man's original rebellion --but Jesus also said God could be glorified in our weaknesses and infirmities --as Jesus healed such people. People's disabilities actually bring out the best in the rest of us, sometimes, as we see people approach sainthood with their tireless devotion to and affection for the disabled --such as those at Sunshine Children's Home--many of whom have happy dispositions and enjoy their lives, despite their afflictions --regardless of our judgment on the quality of their lives.

I know such a child, worse off than autistic, and he is joy personified --and could not be more loved than by his mother and grandparentss, nor more cared for by medical community. He was the product of a one-night stand UTI, but the mother would not abort. Her life is wholly devoted to this child whom she loves supremely.

Jesus promised a new future where there will be no more tears, sickness or death. The disabled often know of God and love Him completely --and they will go straight to Heaven like innocent children, covered by Christ's atonement regardless of their capacity for understanding. That's the kind of God we have in Christ --compassionate for the humble and the weak.

Democrats and Hedonism/Hypocrisey

My Letter to the Blade

Democrats would advance hedonism


Former White House staffer J. David Kuo urges Religious Right voters to take a two-year "fast" from voting to show the Republicans that they are not in their pocket.

Of course, if they do, the Republicans would lose and the effect would be a disaster - as it will be if the Democrats win and embrace the socialistic, immoral, blindly dovish, anti-family ideologies of their liberal leadership.

Hopefully, a Republican Congress and President have given us some better judges who will help to put the brakes on our slide into national debauchery, already woefully advanced.

I am astounded by how many young couples don't bat an eye about living together without being married.

I am chagrined by Honeywell, Ford, Disney, Wal-Mart, and other Fortune 500 companies advancing the gay agenda with their support for gay events and financial benefits bestowed upon homosexual couples same as married hetero couples.

People who live by traditional mores and conceive and raise children are still the bedrock of civilization, sacrificing their time and money, trying to raise responsible, moral, and educated citizens for the future, who will in turn raise those who will support Social Security, defend the nation, and produce more children like themselves in the future.

The self-centered, promiscuous, porn-addicted, sexually confused hedonism of our culture will only be advanced by a Democratic majority in government.

Of the Republican "scandals," the charges are all about using money to get each other elected (forgetting the gross campaign finance offenses of the Clintons), and trying to mercifully, discreetly get the pederast Mark Foley to behave before he would bring down the party with him. Mr. Foley's gone; the adulterous Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy stayed in office. How can the Democrats call the Republicans the hypocrites? The GOP at least believes in morality.

Jesus' Message the Same Today

Jesus' message was not well-received by all, obviously --and SOME of my message that annoys is the same as His coming from HIs words and other parts of the Bible --so I don't expect to be well-received either.

Jesus says there is a Hell to shun and a Heaven to gain --a curse of death and a promise of heaven for the repentant who believe Christ and seek to obey Him. He says He will separate the sheep from the goats. And the lists of sins for which we should repent are consistent in the New Testament and not contrary to the Old --for the most part.

If a person doesn't agree, he can go his merry way. "Broad is the way that leads to destruction and many there be that go that way, but narrow is the road that leads to life and few there be who find it." There is something to be said for being "narrow-minded."

On original Sin

liberal_dem said...
But actually, there is nothing new under the sun--when it comes to mankind's sinful nature.

Why do you suppose, barb, that mankind IS so sinful? Was it the apple?

9:17 AM EST


Barb said...
It wasn't the apple. Call it allegory if you want. It was the temptor.

Mankind heard him at the door, and walked through with him --and has been doing so ever since --and receiving the death penalty for it. You can deny the cause, to your detriment, but you cannot deny the penalty. It's coming for each of us.

It's as though they accessed a forbidden icon on their desktop and received a curse for all of us for their disobedience.

I never LIKED this story --who would? But if it's true --there is a bright side --an escape from the curse --access the Repentence icon --and the Faith in Christ as Savior icon--and a whole new world opens up --and it's eternal. And as Jesus said, "My yoke is easy; my burden light." He is our mediator --our attorney --our defender --and when a Holy god looks upon our sin, it is covered by the blood of the Passover Lamb.

Whether you believe the Bible or not, death is the bad news which cannot be denied --and the Gospel of Christ is the good news which gives us great hope beyond the grave.

12:46 PM EST

About Cheney --and the Definition of LIE

I don't defend Cheney because he is more of an unknown to me. I don't think he's particularly Christian or known for his faith in God. So I don't know how honest he is or what patriotic or religious values motivate him --if any.

AS for your remark about lying

The dictionary defines lie as I do: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.

You aren't guilty of lying if you believe what you are saying --whether it is actually true or not.

As a mother, you will find out that kids will try to call you a liar if you have to cancel plans to do something you told them you would do. But you didn't lie when you said you were going to go to Cedar Point on a future date. Who knew you'd break your leg?

As for WMD, they DID find some --and Sadam was one himself.

Response to Liberal Democrat calling pro-lifers names

LD, I missed this bigoted rant against pro-lifers as "right wing religious zealots."

What exactly are you afraid of, LD? that the church will punish you for dancing as in Saudi Arabia?

Or that you can't abort the products of your indiscretions when you, like a Bill Clinton, bed women other than your wife? or that you and your wife might have to use birth control instead of putting her through abortion trauma? that you and others would, in fact, have to be more responsible in your sexual activities?

Are you afraid that a new license to gay marriage won't go through? --even though we've gotten along without such a thing in the whole history of mankind and nations?

Are you afraid the church will burn YOU at the stake for irresponsible, malicious, anti-Christian blogging? We don't do that anymore. In fact, if ARthur Miller's take on it is accurate in his play, The Crucible, it wasn't really Christian people who started the hysteria, but a truly nasty teen girl and her followers --influenced by an angry slave with occultic, witch-like beliefs -- nothing Christian about what happened to the really decent, nice Christians in the story. The lawyer/judge types and the rabble of the streets (like the mob who called for christ's crucifixion) were deceived by the girls behaving badly( the Bible warns against being so deceived.) It wasn't witches who were persecuted in Salem --it was Christians who were accused of being witches --by naughty girls wanting to deflect blame from themselves to the good people in the town--

JUST LIKE YOU, LD,FOCUS ON CHRISTIANS AS THE ENEMY IN ALL THINGS, CALLING US THE WITCHES --saying we are JUST AS BAD AS FUNDAMENTALIST TERRORISTS ABROAD. Your kind of rhetoric, inflaming gullible people, would get ME and the other bible believers burned at the stake --and somehow, i don't think you would mind --or see your role as wrong. You'd say good riddance --and you WOULD be so, so wrong--biting the hand (the Lord's churches) that fed this nation's best qualities based on our Judeo-Christian values of unselfish kindness, equality for all, freedom of belief and speech, (to be Christian is a matter of individual free will and assent --not force) --compassion for all --forgiveness, etc.

America is still a nominally Christian nation --and coincidentally the best place to live on the earth.

However, the radical Muslims see us as a den of iniquity, tempting people to immorality --and as such see no reason why we should live.

Yes, secular American culture is a den full of iniquity with its unlimited porn, easy to get drugs, free-flowing alcohol to our underage youth and to America's parents, rampant divorce, adultery, predators --our shacking up couples --our serial monogamists and worse --our cruisers in public restrooms --our fascination for same sex attraction.

But I don't see that government is the solution as much as religious revival, missionary fervor --and love for and from the Church --but the law is a cultural teacher --and it ought to support traditional American views of right and wrong--rather than experiment with liberal redefinitions of what is good and evil, moral or immoral.

Why Evolution is Impossible --one reason

"Here is just one reason why an evolutionary origin of life is impossible" --by Duane Gish, 2007

"All forms of raw energy are destructive. The energy available on a hypothetical primitive Earth would consist primarily of radiation from the sun, with some energy from electrical discharges (lightining) and minor sources of energy from radioactive decay and heat. The problem for evolution is that the rates of destruction of biological molecules by all sources of raw energy vastly exceed their rates of formation by such energy. The only reason Stanley Miller (Science 117:528) succeeded in obtaining a small amount of products in his experiment was the fact that he employed a trap to isolate his products from the energy source. Here evolutionists face two problems. first, there could be no trap available on a primitive Earth. Second, a trap by itself would be fatal to any evolutionary scenario, for once the products are isolated in the trap, no further evolutionary progress is possible, because no energy is available. In his comments on Miller's experiment, D.E. Hull stated that "These short lives for decomposition in the atmosphere or ocean clearly preclude the possiblity of accumulating useful concentrations of organic compounds over eons of time.....The physical chemist guided by the proven principles of chemical thermodynamics and kinetics, cannot offer any encouragement to the biochemist, who needs an ocean full of organic compounds to form even lifeless coacervates."

The Hull quote is from an article by him in Nature 186:693

Just happened to have this on my computer desk --from Institute for Creation Research.

Was it the Apple that made us sinful? asked LD

I had said, But actually, there is nothing new under the sun--when it comes to mankind's sinful nature.

and LD said, Why do you suppose, barb, that mankind IS so sinful? Was it the apple?

My reply:
It wasn't the apple. Call it allegory if you want. It was the temptor.

Mankind heard him at the door, and walked through with him --and has been doing so ever since --and receiving the death penalty for it. You can deny the cause, to your detriment, but you cannot deny the penalty. It's coming for each of us.

It's as though they accessed a forbidden icon on their desktop and received a curse for all of us for their disobedience.

I never LIKED this story --who would? But if it's true --there is a bright side --an escape from the curse --access the Repentence icon --and the Faith in Christ as Savior icon--and a whole new world opens up --and it's eternal. And as Jesus said, "My yoke is easy; my burden light." He is our mediator --our attorney --our defender --and when a Holy god looks upon our sin, it is covered by the blood of the Passover Lamb.

Whether you believe the Bible or not, death is the bad news which cannot be denied --and the Gospel of Christ is the good news which gives us great hope beyond the grave.

For Liberal Democrats who compare Christians to Terrorists

LD, I missed your bigoted rant against pro-lifers as "right wing religious zealots."

What exactly are you afraid of, LD? that the church will punish you for dancing as in Saudi Arabia?

Or that you can't abort the products of your indiscretions when you, like a Bill Clinton, bed women other than your wife? or that you and your wife might have to use birth control instead of putting her through abortion trauma? that you and others would, in fact, have to be more responsible in your sexual activities?

Are you afraid that a new license to gay marriage won't go through? --even though we've gotten along without such a thing in the whole history of mankind and nations?

Are you afraid the church will burn YOU at the stake for irresponsible, malicious, anti-Christian blogging? We don't do that anymore. In fact, if ARthur Miller's take on it is accurate in his play, The Crucible, it wasn't really Christian people who started the hysteria, but a truly nasty teen girl and her followers --influenced by an angry slave with occultic, witch-like beliefs -- nothing Christian about what happened to the really decent, nice Christians in the story. The lawyer/judge types and the rabble of the streets (like the mob who called for christ's crucifixion) were deceived by the girls behaving badly( the Bible warns against being so deceived.) It wasn't witches who were persecuted in Salem --it was Christians who were accused of being witches --by naughty girls wanting to deflect blame from themselves to the good people in the town--

JUST LIKE YOU, LD,FOCUS ON CHRISTIANS AS THE ENEMY IN ALL THINGS, CALLING US THE WITCHES --saying we are JUST AS BAD AS FUNDAMENTALIST TERRORISTS ABROAD. Your kind of rhetoric, inflaming gullible people, would get ME and the other bible believers burned at the stake --and somehow, i don't think you would mind --or see your role as wrong. You'd say good riddance --and you WOULD be so, so wrong--biting the hand (the Lord's churches) that fed this nation's best qualities based on our Judeo-Christian values of unselfish kindness, equality for all, freedom of belief and speech, (to be Christian is a matter of individual free will and assent --not force) --compassion for all --forgiveness, etc.

America is still a nominally Christian nation --and coincidentally the best place to live on the earth.

However, the radical Muslims see us as a den of iniquity, tempting people to immorality --and as such see no reason why we should live.

Yes, secular American culture is a den full of iniquity with its unlimited porn, easy to get drugs, free-flowing alcohol to our underage youth and to America's parents, rampant divorce, adultery, predators --our shacking up couples --our serial monogamists and worse --our cruisers in public restrooms --our fascination for same sex attraction.

But I don't see that government is the solution as much as religious revival, missionary fervor --and love for and from the Church --but the law is a cultural teacher --and it ought to support traditional American views of right and wrong--rather than experiment with liberal redefinitions of what is good and evil, moral or immoral.

response to Don on Mudville

Because Mudville's Liberall Democrat deletes me now and then --my blog is my back up.


I won't speak for Republicans --only for my self AS a Republican who is an evangelical Christian.

I am a Republican from my family heritage --taught to be one by my very smart mother and father. The reasons then were the party's belief in small gov't, less taxation, local control of gov't and schools, less gov't intrusion into small business, people's lives via taxation and federal programs. If we weren't self-governing and self-reliant, we would lose our freedom to laws, bureaucracies, high taxes, red tape, etc.

I was taught that the republicans had freed the slaves as the Party of Lincoln --but my family didn't believe in demonstrations as a means of pubic discourse as they usually became violent when the emotions hit the streets. they didn't blame all crime on poverty or racism, nor think that poverty or racism justified immoral behavior of any sort. Liberals were leaning that way even in the 1950's when I was a child.

I was taught the song, "Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight, jesus loves the little children of the world." The equality of the races --and the missionaries to Africa --were emphasized in my church --as we had missions in Sierra Leone mainly. One African man was an American trained doctor because of our missions and he and his wife would teach our all-white VBS kids in our small town.

In those days, Bibles were given to hs.graduates by local businessmen or ministerial associations at graduation--different versions for the Catholics or the Jews in our city. Public prayer was taken for granted and not seen as a conflict between church and state. Religion was respected in the public square --not banned or scorned as on this forum.

My mother and father had no use for FDR --one, he was rumored to be adulterous --he also got us into WWII and they were ironically as opposed to that as you all are to our involvement in Iraq. They didn't believe that a man who couldn't be faithful in marriage could be a really wise leader (without remorse and repentance.) I still believe that. They didn't like his public works programs putting people to work for the government. I'm not opposed to that idea if worthy projects were completed --as they were. They also believed in Prohibition. I'm sure you are not surprised. My husband will tell you that the medical stats show that it WAS good for the national health. The cirrhosis of the liver cases dropped definitely. We didn't get back to our pre-prohibition level of per capita consumption of liquor until the 1970's --the prohibition era slowed down our national consumption for half a century. (Granted, there were moonshiners and speakeasies. But most people abided by the law most of the time --and the bars weren't beckoning on every corner as today --by the way, my neighbor was killed in a bar fight in our trendy pub in our trendy inner city, gov't subsidized community in the 1970's. Had the bar not been there and so popular and respectable, he might not have been there -and be alive today.)

as for my belief in the depravity or sin nature of man --yes, I believe that man is essentially selfish --and that it is not the constitution that reminds him of civil rights and counterracts his selfishness. It is our Bible-based cultural history that was bedrock to our Constitution and cultural view of what is "right" and "nice"--we believe certain things are just right or wrong based on historically Christian culture. We think selfishiness is a sin --but that self-reliance is a virtue to encourage and equip people for.

we really don't consider it legit for a wife to shoot her ex husband and his new wife in their bed because he was such a jerk about everything. She will go to jail at least.

Whereas in a fundamentalist Muslim culture, as in ancient Jewish culture, it was appropriate to put both adulterers and homosexuals to death.

In India, women were sometimes burned alive on their husbands' funeral pyres.

In Hinduism, you transcend the problems around you, the beggars at your temple door, because those beggars need to endure their Karma.

RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AFFECT OUR VALUES --I.E. OUR VIEW OF RIGHT AND WRONG AND JUSTICE and COMPASSION and thus affect the kind of government we have, the kinds of laws we make.

Liberals think there is some grand nobility to secular thought --that secular ideas are the noblest --that religious-based values violate separation of church and state --yet secularism is the bed partner of atheism, the granddaddy of communism --the three philosophies say man's problems can't be addressed by religion, see religion as a negative--and believe that religion should have no part in what is deemed right and wrong --and of course Stalin killed 50 million and Hitler his 11 million because their God was not the God of the New Testament Christ who would never countenance murder of the innocent to advance a political system or leader.

We get our ideal of democracy from a verse that says we who believe are all one in Christ Jesus --that we are all members of the Body, all branches on the Vine, all Children of the Family of God, all living stones of the temple of God --and that ALL who repent may be part of this body of equals --and that God loved the whole world so that ALL could come to Him in repentance and be part of this whole.

Thus, if everyone is created equal (as Thomas Jefferson believed out of His Christian-influenced deistic philosophy of life), every voice can be heard. of course, at first they didn't think that included women and slaves--but the Bible verse DID include women AND slaves as equals in Christ. Our civil rights law eventually caught up with the implicit Biblical theme of human equality --for all races, all disabled, all socio-economic classes --ALL PEOPLE.

We have left wingers now who see us as equal to all living creatures --who won't eat animals, who won't test products, etc. on animals, etc. --these people have a view of right and wrong which is NOT derived from the Bible. Left wingers also see people as products of their environment such that their crimes are not their fault --and so they should be given another chance to repeat their crimes. I do believe in mercy and rehabilitation --but through religious conversion. I don't think man's nature becomes unselfish and righteous without a commitment to Biblical-based values --some hold to such values without faith in the Bible --but over time, as we erode the influence of religion in our culture, I believe we'll become more and more violent and base in our morals.

Unrestricted internet porn, song lyrics, movies, etc. as free speech is an example and will hasten our moral demise --is doing so right now. Addictions abound --because our youth are not committed to Christ --and because we don't restrict or punish sin enough to preserve a good culture for our kids to grow up in. Many of us will be shocked at what our kids will do despite a good upbringing --even the religious.
Because secular culture has run amok--we don't self-censure as we should --there are evil people making porn and we let them prosper in it. Likewise with drug sales and alcohol. When the law doesn't prohibit our worst excesses, we say they are "rights" --and our kids think they "have a right" --to do whatever. Listen to the Bill Mahers champion drug use and immorality in general. As if these things had no consequences that were tragic, --debilitating at least.

On creationism/ID theory --didn't want to be erased on Mudville

Actually, I talked with Miller personally once --tracked him down on the phone. He sent me some materials.

It's as hard for me to want to read his book as it is for Darwinists to read anything by John Morris, Duane Gish, Michael Behe, phil Johnson, et al.

For me, Miller will probably be over my head. When he talked with me about findings in Pakistan, he still didn't convince me that these creatures were transitional, evolving to other forms --instead of just unique extinct creatures.

The creationist and ID writers are often very effective communicators to laymen --and thus win debates --so often that the evolutionists have decided the best way to refute creationists and ID people is to refuse to acknowledge they exist or have the credentials such to make a debate even-handed --so they no longer debate on campuses as they used to.

In one of the carolinas, the head of science ed. warned the evolutionists to avoid public discourse with the creationists because they would lose, being unfamiliar with the arguments they would present and thus ill equipped to deal with them. However, the spokespersons for creation and I D science understand evolution VERY well --in order to refute it well --and so they do.

I remember when PBS had a special on the topic and a debate between two panels, and the Darwinian side just didn't get it --they kept bringing religion into the discussion--saying what YOU are saying --that the bible isn't a book of science. THAT'S NOT THE POINT!

The point is that Darwin's theory of origins takes faith to believe in it because what evidence we have to point to the origin of life does not support the one-celled amoeba as the granddaddy of all life theory WITHOUT A DESIGNER/CONTROLLER --spontaneous and unguided by natural processes.

About your wife, yes, go figure. Ask her why a God who can rise from the dead, raise others from the dead with a command, calm a sea, walk on water, heal 10 lepers, change water to wine, make the blind see and the lame walk --why cannot this God-Man create with a word --with a command --like we lowly humans bring forth things instantly on a computer because of stored knowledge? Why can't the LOGOS do this with his logos? He did it before the eyewitnesses. THIS KIND OF GOD DOESN'T NEED DARWIN'S METHOD TO CREATE! HE SPEAKS THINGS INTO BEING OUT OF HIS KNOWLEDGE AND CREATIVITY! He makes the dead live again for goodness sake! With a word. So what does He need millions and millions of years of gradual, invisible natural selection, occuring so slowly that we say it's still going on? yet everything does just what Genesis described: each species reproducing after its own kind. --what God begets is God --what man begets is man --what chimp begets is chimp --etc.

from Mudville --on religion --how to be forgiven

A dialogue post of mine to Liberal Democrat, et al on Mudville site:

So what do you believe about God since you are not an atheist?

Do I think He is keeping track of your irreverence? Indeed I do.

Jesus said every thought and word is being recorded.

Of course it is --we are hooked up to that celestial computer --if our computers can record minutia, I'm sure God can also. His intelligence is limitless --and He has us online. But the Bible also says that when we repent and believe in Christ as Savior, our sins are blotted out --washed away --buried in the deepest sea --removed as far as east is from west (figuratively speaking) --we, in effect, access the delete key in God's mind through faith in Christ and He remembers our sin against us no more.

But we have to access the right keys --"I'm a sinner; I need God's grace; I believe He sent Jesus to save us from our sins --and to save us from death." It's the GRACE icon. Undeserved favor from God.


Neighborhood Concerns said...

I believe in one creator or god if you will with many helpers but none above the creator.

Barb said...
NC,I thought you said you were a "born again Pagan." You say you believe in God with many helpers. And you have defended God and prophets of the Old Testament and consider Jesus was crucified because He claimed to be God (true enough) --as would an orthodox Jewish believer. So I'm concluding you might be a pagan of Jewish background with some Jewish beliefs. Most liberals like Jesus and misinterpret Him as being like them; I don't think you do like Jesus but see him as an enemy of the one true God --as did many (but not all ) of the Jews in His day.

Those that saw him bring Lazarus out of the tomb after he had been dead 3 days --who saw him heal 10 lepers, the blind, the lame, the demoniac, the woman with an issue of blood for many years --when they saw Him do these things-- and heard His wise teachings on love and forgiveness and humility -condemning self-righteousness and pride and unforgiving attitudes and behaviors =--and then touched and spoke with Him after His resurrection --those people were Jews who believed Jesus had to be from God, the Messiah, One with the Father, both Son of God and Son of Man --not another God --but one with the Father (He said, "You have seen me; you have seen the Father." --He was the human manifestation of God who walked among us and died for us ---to satisfy the debt of sin --so that HIs blood is the blood of the Passover lamb for ALL who believe --from every tribe, race and nation --so that the angel of Death will pass over us for eternity.

This is the Good News, the Gospel --that Jesus conquored the grave for all mankind who would repent and believe. His blood atones for our sin, the way the lamb's blood did the same for the O.T. Jews.






[

The Bible, The Church, and Women

Not all fundamentalist or conservative churches follow Paul's statement about what HE allowed or disallowed in churches. That's the way he put it: "I don't allow....." and his reason was that Eve had been the one deceived. I think Paul was inspired --but he also said in his writings that he sometimes spoke for himself and other times for God. This teaching about Eve was in a letter to Timothy, I believe. I'm not sure Paul thought he was writing God's Word at this point. For one thing, Adam WAS just as deceived by the Serpent as Eve was --in that he believed enough to eat of the tree himself. I can say that --by reading more of the Bible than just a few verses.

When students of the Bible deal with such verses they look to the whole Bible to see how a topic is treated--Paul also wrote that in Christ, "There is neither east nor west, Jew or Gentile (Greek), male nor female, slave nor free --but all are one in Christ Jesus." the implications of this are that women should be treated the same as men in the area of opportunities for service in the church.

Also, scholars note that all of the results of the curse after the Fall, are rightly resisted and diminished by Christians: we resist and fight disease, pestilence, and death and the hardships of work and childbirth --therefore we ought also to resist and ameliorate female subjugation rather than glorying in it as some men and cultures seem to do.

In the Bible we have Deborah as an example of a woman judge who led into battle and was for a time the leader of Israel. There is no condmenation in the Bible for her leadership, so God did not disapprove it.

The Bible says that in the last days the Holy spirit would be poured out on both men and women --and they would both prophesy, i.e. "tell forth the Word."

Jesus was also kind to women and while he didn't choose any of them to be his 12 (would have caused distracting criticism, probably) the Bible refers to various women who were leaders in the faith. I believe that one is listed among some apostles.

Eve was to be a helpmeet beside Adam, a companion made from his side to be at his side.

The Bible says men should love their wives sacrificially as Christ gave himself for the church; and the wives are to RESPECT their husbands as heads of their homes. And as Christians, they are to both be mutually submissive, one to the other ....in honor deferring to one another. this is the pattern for successful marriage in which both husband and wife thrive.

I believe that most women want a man who is strong and leading responsibly in the home --rather than one they can lead about by the nose.

The Bible also says a man should love his wife as his own body.

Oddly enough, some of the most socially conservative, lifestyle strict, Bible-following churches have been ordaining women for 150 years --where as some of the mainline and more liberal groups (including Catholic) held out against equal roles for women in churches, such that it is an issue today for them. Other conservative churches still maintain Paul's restrictions against equality for women as stated in Timothy --but there are too many Biblical exceptions to Paul's rule to make it worth hanging on to.

The person with the biggest Sunday School movement ever was a woman --Henrietta Mears, and she taught and modeled for male pastors in Baptist and other churches how to evangelize and disciple through S.S. Baylor U. lists her in their series as one of the 20th Century's Leading Christian Educators (along with my grandfather, i might humbly add
: D)

Women who want leadership in church for reasons of equality come across as masculine and strident, not as people who could lead a church. Women who earnestly desire to serve God and have gifts to use in teaching, should also be free to teach men in their audiences --as Kay ARthur and some other Bible-teaching women have done. Men who have a problem with hearing a woman, are fighting the wrong battle to their own detriment --if the Holy spirit inspires a woman, men should not miss out on hearing the Word of God from any source.

St. Paul a Homosexual? No Way!

uptheflag said...
St. Paul was a homosexual himself. He rebukes homosexuality to cover this own gayness up. In the OT, Jews wrote against it because they needed males to fight against the Arabs. Christ didn't even have any words about it. It's time to come to grips with reality, barb, and accept that homosexuality is a development of our evolutionary existence. If a God is love, God is good, and if
salvation is only thru Jesus Christ, how can a mere human deny God created a dangerous and unfit person? To posit a "God" is to accept with love and goodness what "God" creates. Indeed, you and others may have to burn in hell
for rejecting and persecuting humanity that "God" created.

6:59 AM EST


Barb said...
Uptheflag: On what authority do you say Paul was a homosexual? He said he had the gift of celibacy --as Catholic priests are supposed to have before going into the priesthood.

Paul said it is better to marry than to burn (with lust) and that he didn't have that problem and that celibate single status freed one to give all his time to ministry.

He certainly denounced homosexuality --and then denounced judging people for sins when you are guilty of the very same sins --so I don't think he was like poor ted haggard --preaching against a sin he was committing.

He also would have been denounced by the Jews and Christians if he practiced homosexuality.

As for Jesus, He said He didn't come to reinterpret or change the Law of God --but to FULFILL it. He said the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. And He said that [while eye for an eye is a standard of justice}, he had a new command that we return good for evil. After all, the Old Testament God said, "Vengeance is MINE, I will repay" --meaning we were not to try to get even all the time by returning evil for evil. Both Testaments say we should leave the justice to God in our personal disputes and concentrate on the forgiveness that makes for peace. that didn't mean we ignore bullies who are oppressing the weak. That didn't mean there was never a "just war" or an episode where justice should be carried out.

Jesus said a man should "leave his parents and cleave to his wife." He didn't address homosexuality directly because it was not a condoned activity nor a common sin among the Jews to whom Christ preached. No one was trying to condone the sin of homosexuality in his audience --nor was He, by not speaking about it. They all agreed that the only rightful sex was hetero-marriage. Anything else was SIN: fornication, adultery, or abominations like homosex, bestiality, sex with close relatives (incest) --or "harming the little ones" (pedophilia.)

He spoke out against divorce except for cause of adultery. and we assume abusive exploitation of any kind would be just cause for the innocent party to divorce.

Incompatibility would be no excuse; and deciding to adulterate with a gay lover would be no excuse to divorce a wife and leave children--though the episcopalian church condones it for their bishop.

Homosex is certainly not a matter of evolution--because homosexuals don't reproduce. There is no evidence to date that homosexuality is caused by genes.

I don't reject or persecute murderers, thieves, adulterers, pedophiles, or homosexuals. All of these have entertained sinful thoughts and proceeded to act on them. They sinned first in thought and then in deed. The Bible warns us to resist temptation --FLEE it.

susannah Wesley said to her 17 children that they couldn't keep the birds of temptation from flying around their heads; but they needn't let them nest in their hair. So it is with sinful inclination. We have free will. We have choice. and there are consequences to our choices.

Homosexuals are not inevitably homosexual. they may be victims of parenting and other childhood influences --parents who don't help them have normalcy --who may cause their abnormalcy --but they are not MADE homosexual from birth by God. The Bible says God gives them up to their sins, however, because they CHOOSE to worship creature more than Creator --which is what happens when one first entertains any sinful thought --to do that which he knows to be wrong --but does it anyway.

I especially feel sorry for someone who feels homosexually attracted because they have sexual self image issues --because they identify with the opposite sex. We should be looking for causes to prevent this sad state in our children --we should consciously influence children to be normal in their sexuality because they are not designed for same sex activity. It's generally an unhealthy and extremely promiscuous, unsatisfying life --and shortened by disease for many men in these past few decades.

See this week's Newsweek about Prosti-Tots --Little Girls Gone Wild

WOW, See this week's Newsweek with Brittney and Paris on the cover. I'm always thrilled to see the secular media wake up to the cultural influences that are corrupting our kids. Thrilled to see that they recognize corruption when they see it--and don't just report on it, but TAKE A SIDE!

I think MOST parents don't want their kids to live like Brittney --who even LOOKS bad after all she's been through. Hardened. Crazed --running around in short skirts without underwear. She looks like a druggie.

Anne Coulter was right when she said "liberals are godless." They aren't typically the guardians of a moral culture because the elites of liberalism tend to be very anti-orthodox religion --anti-christian --almost atheistic --at least agnostic. Their religion is from their imaginations. "There is a way that seems right to man, but it leads to destruction --death."

And so it is that Liberals advocate sexual experimentation called "exploring your sexuality"--they believe goofy things like little girls and boys being in the wrong body and needing to trans-gender, that parents can't teach or promote a normal sexual self-identity (Oprah's programs)--they think condoms make teen sex safe and permissable--they believe premarital teen sex is inevitable --they think gay sex is inevitable for 10 per cent of the population (it's 2 percent that identify gay, at last report)--they will put their teens on birth control, rather than chaperone and teach abstinence. Their kids are shacking up without marriage; they think drugs and alcohol use are inevitable by youth; some will accommodate by letting under age kids have drinking parties in their homes. they condone gay marriage and abortion as birth control.

Conservatives' kids are doing some of these things --but their parents are resisting and resent a school and media culture that entices kids into sinful addictions and choices.

My Comment --3rd Version-- Deleted from Politics in Mudville

In response to Cleveland Mom's questions to me on why I do bring up the hot button issues of homosexual and abortion "rights": It is true that a very hot topic for both parties is judicial appointments --there is a rabid concern for getting a democrat president so he can stock the courts with judges who will say that abortion and gay marriage are constitutional rights. 70% of the public doesn't think abortion ON DEMAND for birth control reasons is right (since there are humane methods of birth control better for the health of women AND children) And most every state has voted to define marriage as for a man and a woman in their state constitutions. We conservatives don't want to see the Supreme Court over-rule the states on this issue.

So there IS a desire for a litmus test on the part of both parties --to get judges who will share our respective views on these 2 hot button issues. The conservatives want judges who will interpret but not MAKE law from the bench. The democrats seem to favor activist judges who will override the will of the majority of the people as they did in Roe v. Wade to legalize abortion on demand.

I mention those issues because they really are among the most important to the social liberals and the social conservatives -- the social liberals ARE democrats, of course, and the social conservatives usually support the GOP.

I mention those issues on this topic of education since you, Cleveland Mom, commented on how and why many want charter and religious schools. A lot of parents want more parental control and involvement, a smaller student body, students who come from chaperoned homes where the parents are involved with their children, supervising them, students whose families have similar views of right and wrong so that when their kids visit each other, they can assume they aren't finding porn in the father's closet (as one of my young sons' friends did at his public school buddy's home) --not that there is any guarantee. I was furious about the porn exposure to my 12 year old --which started problems for him in an addictive interest. It was hard core nasty porn. His friend brought his father's stash to MY kid's room and I didn't know about it for too long.

So, yes, school can be a doorway to erosion of your own family values and to negative peer influence--besides the fact that the secular life skills and values courses of public schools teach a decision-making model that contradicts our own.

Many liberal educators DO want to introduce curriculum to very young children regarding homosexuality --such as the book titled "Heather's Two Mommies," and a program "Project 10" in california. School health teachers have oddly promoted homosexuality in their warnings about AIDS (showing Early Frost to 9th grade, the movie depicting the love of gay couple as admirable love.)

When I was in school, we never heard about homosexuality until high school --and then it was thought to be REALLY weird --and none of us was interested. If anyone was, he kept quiet about it --now it's a bloomin' fad! Trendy for Brittany and Madonna and their youthful emulators to kiss each other on the lips, e.g.

Planned Parenthood put out lit in the 70's from Colorado branch that was distributed in Toledo --I have a copy --It says girls no longer have to live by the double standard for girls and boys. All have sexual choices because of birth control,
etc. They said that in our grandmother's day, nice girls didn't have sex, but the boys did and noone knew because boys didn't get pregnant --now they all could explore sexuality, because of birth control and abortion --no more of this nice girl/bad girl stigma for sexual activity.

I don't know about you, Cleveland Mom, but that's not what I want my kids taught. And PP has unfortunately been a standard setter for pubic school sex ed --except for the conservative protests that brought in promotion of "abstinence until marriage" sex education.

I have listed on my blog some of the excesses of public school which I observed first hand as a school board member. There really are "change agents" posing as teachers, who want to liberalize our kids and undermine the family influence of conservatives. They believe that education is enlightenment to a liberal point of view about everything.

Some of these excesses I observed are found at-- http://thebarbwire.blogspot.com/2007/01/in-self-defense.html

the last 4 or 5 paragraphs of that blog entry.

Today, LD, I haven't time to search for the NEA platform but every year they DO spell out their advocacy for gay and abortion wrongs and value-free sex ed -- just as the democratic party does--and surely you know this, LD. I imagine it is posted on their website. If it isn't there, they are being stealthy about their true values.

The Taliban vs. Christians re: Homosexuals --Haggard Rehabilitated?

Ted haggard needs to seek employment other than the preaching or teaching ministry, as he has a pretty severe problem and while I believe in God's miraculous power to forgive and heal, the years of duplicity as a minister preaching against homosexuality while seeking male prostitutes, cannot be ignored. He only quit because he was caught, apparently.

I said the same of Bakker and Swaggart. Ted needs to find some other secular way to replace his lost income and keep the standard of living to which his family has become accustomed. Either that, or work out his repentance by going into sacrificial ministry, such as practical work on a mission field --building habitat houses or something like that. I feel sorry for his family who was used to living well financially. And I'm sorry the church has lost a gifted minister. I hope they don't back down and put him back in the pulpit at his church or any other. His word and integrity have simply lost credibility. I feel sorry for him, for this compulsion he had, but we can't trust him so quickly to not be a wolf in sheep's clothing.

As for your charge, LD, that the Christians who believe homosexual acts are sin, who don't believe in ordaining gay ministers and thus have pulled their churches out of denominations which have changed to condone homosexuality --for you to say they are the same as Taliban who would murder homosexuals--that's just illogical, unfactual, wrong--hyperbolic to the extreme.

The American Christians are not calling for murder of homosexuals. St. Paul and the Old Testament did say that homosexual acts deserve death --he didn't call for their death because they already receive it. Paul and the rest of the Bible list homosexual acts with a host of other sins that all of us have committed, to some degree or other --and he said that the wages of ALL sin are death --The death penalty and curse for sin in general are already upon all of us --we are mortal because of sin. And we ALL deserve it because "All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God." "There is none righteous, no not one."

so Paul was stating the obvious, homosex is sin and sin has already earned death from God --MORTALITY.

It is when we repent of our sin, trusting Christ for our eternal salvation, that we REGAIN the spiritual IMmortality God intended for us at Creation.

As for the Creationism book, I'm sure that Muslims are just as divided on this issue as Christians. The fundamentalists in either religion would not believe in evolution. it's just not as self-evident as, say, gravity. And we don't see the evidence ongoing today --no humans evolving --in fact, some might say devolving is more obvious. We certainly aren't becoming more civilized or godlike with time. Witness the ongoing childish conflicts between democrats and conservatives --such as the irrational charge that Christians want to murder gays.

Notice a NASA gal who would travel in a diaper and disquise to threaten or kill a rival.

A man who would kidnap 2 boys.

We know better than to live like animals and follow every base inclination--but we do it anyway.

And that's why we die --but while "the wages of sin is death; the gift of God is eternal life through jesus Christ, Our Lord."

the problem with the gays in the churches, is that they want us to "call evil good and good, evil" --to change the definition of sin in the Bible.

The Charter School Question --Perz Problems

Liberal Democrat of Politics in Mudville blog, has blasted the Perz women today and the concept of charter schools, saying they just take money from public schools.

I don't know the Perz women that well --have met them briefly long ago.

But I would like to comment about schools being in the hands of private citizens and religious groups.

But first of all, let's agree that charlatans and mis-managers and incompetent people --and financial problems --seem to come to the public system, too, even though their boards are subject to the voters. They get to come to the voters for levies to cover their cans.

Voters rarely get an accurate picture of board members --I know one mentally ill, very reactionary and not very bright (at least not about education issues) or suitable person who has been on a board for years --few in the know would disagree with my description- but the person gets elected by playing up his or her political party affiliation for this non-partisan office --and the party edge and emphasis gets this person elected every time-

Moreover, most boards are gutless and their main job is hiring a sup't. and rubberstamping all decisions made by administrators.

So the quality of a school really depends on 3 things: the quality of the teachers; the quality of the parenting of the students; and the discipline (self and external) of the students. Administration is important in the choosing of staff, the money and facilities management, community and staff relations, structuring the school so teachers can teach and so students have varied opportunities to excel, including athletics and arts.

The religious school numbers, charter and otherwise, have arisen because of the social change objectives of many in public education --of people like LD who hold Christians and Catholic Church in such low regard --like the author of the book calling Christians Fascists. Many such educators hope to weaken the influence of religious homes and get more support for the democratic party sacred cows of gay and abortion 'rights.' They don't believe in traditional morality --and thus, we tax paying parents tend not to trust them with our kids.

Result: a demand for religious schools, home schooling and smaller schools with more parental involvement re: curriculum --including schools that emphasize special talents and attempt to provide a peer group of similar talents and interests.

Yes, there are some who probably hoped to get rich --or just wanted to run schools without the rigmarole of the public system. But many wanted a smaller, more personal alternative to our mega-schools. Many wanted a better handle on the values education of their children, realizing that many in public ed would undermine those values. And they rightly think some of their tax money should go for the education of their choice --either through vouchers or charter school subsidies. Vouchers are still the best idea.

The NEA national platform and agenda are evidence to what I have written here about liberals in public school wanting to undermine conservative parents.

Contending for the Faith

This was my response to someone else's blog about religious belief.

As you believe to be true, the Bible says THERE IS A PLACE of acceptance and belonging for everyone in the Kingdom of God. We are the stones of the temple of God designated for a specific function and place --with Jesus as the cornerstone --we are the branches on the vine --with Jesus as the True Vine --we are the members of the Body of Christ --like hands and feet, etc. of a human body --each with his own unique place and function--we also have a place in the sheepfold --with Christ as our Shepherd.

We are of inestimable worth to our Creator --such that Jesus said if ONE SHEEP is lost from the fold, the good shepherd will go after it, to save it from harm. He didn't want us to be confused about who He is --and so has communicated with us from the beginning --through the written words of the Jewish prophets (descendents of Abraham through the promised child of Sarah named Isaac --the Creator God is said to be "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" --who are the first 3 generations of Jews.) He came to us in greatest clarity through the Living Word, the Word in the Flesh, the person of Jesus Christ, Son of God and Son of Man --who is also a descendant of Abraham and extends "chosen" status to the Gentiles --all of us.

Jesus extended the right of ALL men to become "children of God" through His sacrifice on the cross. Had He not done the miracles and risen from the dead, we would have less reason to believe. AS it is, we have very detailed, well-preserved accounts from Christ's contemporaries --telling us why they were willing to be martyred for this faith that countered the prevailing culture of the 1st century AD. They had seen, heard and touched a resurrected man who promised to go and prepare a place for them, that where He is, we may be also.

He promised to send the Holy Spirit as a Comforter --as the divine presence which is felt near and within us as believers --wherever we are. You described this awe for a Creator when you said you love His creation and feel that this IS worship of the Creator. To feel close to the Lord, to feel His love for us, is evidence of His Spirit on the earth and abiding in us.

Yes, the terrorists and violent haters around the globe, even here in the U.S., have not found their place --they don't know that they CAN fit in to God's family, His kingdom, because they do not believe that Christ was the Savior --nor do they admit their sinful status and their need for a Savior. They have been misled by wolves in sheep's clothing, by mere humans, by what Jesus called false prophets, who have led them away from the truth that Jesus Christ is more than a prophet but the very revelation of God presenting us a choice --to believe and receive Him and His love and grace for eternity--or to reject Him and be outside the fold of the shepherd, for eternity. These violent misfits DO feel a sense of belonging in their groups; they have accepted counterfeit love as Lucifer is a great deceiver; they have accepted a place on the wrong team. Sometimes this is because the missionaries of truth have not been allowed to speak to them and tell them that this planet was visited by God in the flesh who conquored the grave.

It's not manipulative, or coercing or commanding to TEACH the Bible as truth if that's what the teacher believes. Everyone still has a choice to believe what he wants --but there really are consequences --if the Bible is true.

People feel manipulated by the threat of a Hell to shun and a Heaven to gain --but if that IS the truth, wouldn't we want to know so we could gain Heaven??

AS regards truth: it doesn't matter what I believe or what you believe --our beliefs don't amount to a hill o' beans --if they are just products of our imagination and wishful thinking. Or if they come from a non-authoritative source --instead of from a RISEN Savior.

That's why my belief is based on the Book written and preserved over thousands of years --which gives us great continuity about the history of God and Man. The book is consistent that God LOVES --that He does hate sexual immorality, violence, and lack of charity, forgiveness and compassion --He hates them because those things are not good for His creation.

What we humans would prefer is eternal Heaven for everyone no matter what they believe or do in life. Even for the Hitlers? we wish that God had not given us a choice or any ultimatums --as in "Believe in Jesus or perish." (that's not a bible verse --but we are promised that we WILL NOT PERISH if we believe in Jesus as God's son and adhere to his teachings as He said, "keep my commandments." )

We wish we were not accountable to God and had no choice to make --or that we could define God's standards according to what WE think is best.

E.G. --we in the 21st c. would say: Living together intimately before marriage is OK because we love each other and plan to marry.

If marriage doesn't work out and we fall out of love --we can go to new relationships and start additional families without repenting of our failure to love. (There is legitimate divorce in the Bible for reason of adultery --and we would rightly think violent abuse and other exploitive conditions should qualify as well.)

If we aren't ready to be married or be parents, we can abort our products of conception.

If we are attracted to our own sex, it's ok to exchange the natural use of the opposite sex in order to have sex with same sex--even though our bodies are not designed for same sex intimacy --even though the Bible clearly warns against all sex outside of hetero-marriage.

It's OK to indulge in various mood altering substances though we know they can be harmful and addictive and impair our judgment and physical health. the Bible says "be not drunk with wine, but filled with the Holy Spirit"

Viewing porn and seeing prostitutes, having one night stands, etc. --all OK

Today's people believe God loves us and doesn't care what we believe or what we do. He's all forgiving even without our repentance-- because we don't think God's word is true --we don't think He REALLY cares what we do --We THINK He's very tolerant!

In fact, All of the above cause a lot of grief to ourselves and those around us --therefore, all that God has decreed as His standards and laws, with a few exceptions from Old Testament rabinnical laws that don't apply today --most all are still valid standards for today and give us the most stability for healthy, happy individuals, families, communities and nations.

The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Gay Marriage --Why NOT!

Gay marriage --why not? My son the philos. major says because we are made in the image of God as male and female, with the female designed to complete the male. Obviously, we are designed for heterosexual coupling. there IS something abnormal between the ears when we don't mature past our childhood preference for same sex friends to interest in the opposite sex.

Also, gay marriage and couples out of the closet will confuse children --give them an idea that they have to decide whether they want to be gay or not --ARE gay or not --and they will confuse their normal same sex adorations in childhood with homosexuality. Exploring their sexuality will mean sexual experimentation --with all the risks.

children shouldn't be exposed to the idea of homosexuality --which is why some are home-schooling and really monitoring their tv's.

Also, young people have a lot of self-consciousness, social pain about not being accepted by people of either the same sex, the opposite sex or both. They tend to think something is wrong with them, no matter what. If their peers are calling them fags and dykes they'll be even more unsure of their heterosexual normalcy.

And lonely and miserable people will look for any port in the storm; the gay community is always willing to take them in and convince them they are gay if they are confused on the topic--or tell them to experiment to figure it out.

BESIDES THAT, there are religious prohibitions to homosexual behavior that are VERY clear in both Testaments.

I figure that people are able to have their buttons pushed erotically by any stimulating touch if they are inclined to suspend their inhibitions, their consciences and their self-image and self-respect and seek orgasm any old way --People are also attracted to attractive people for friendship and can be seduced into activities by aggressive others --and the Bible suggests people have indulged with animals as well--and we know of other perversions such as necrophilia and pedophilia.
Any of these behaviors can become addictive when started at puberty --like porn addiction.

AND FOR SURE, MARRIED PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN OFF WITH PEOPLE TO WHOM THEY ARE NOT MARRIED

So temptation to have sex outside hetero marriage has always been with the human race since man's first sin --and we ought not be normalizing any of those temptations and calling them good. As with the Man- Boy Love Ass'n which has been welcomed to march in some gay pride parades.

"In the last days, people will call good evil, and evil, good."

The half empty glass--always republicans' fault

You will always find some need which America is not filling, here and abroad --and blame the Republicans for it --as though the Democrats would be able to fill every need in the world with their high taxes which historically cripple the economy and dry up the tax coffers --as though the human tendency to worry about one's own security for self and family, thus resisting higher taxes, were unique to the one party.

I notice that its the very rich liberals who won't notice higher taxes --like Streisand and ex-presidents --you don't ask for your OWN taxes to be raised --just those you imagine to be filthy rich if they have more money than you --which ends up being those who work really hard to establish small businesses and who employ and provide benefits for dozens of other working families. My husband works the hours of 3 men and provides income to 19 other families with work that all has to have his personal touch and signature --which requires him to absorb all the liability. Yet we bother men like him with frivolous lawsuits and threats of higher taxation --when he already gives over 20 percent away plus a third at least to the gov't.

The U.S. has always --and are still --throwing HUGE chunks of money into the developing nations -- --for AIDS and other problems they have. as well as at least 70per cent of our monies into Social security and health care here. We have helped many countries whose attitude toward us is lousy. Like France.

I'm sure Bush would like to spend all the money we have on such projects as Uganda's wells--but we need to first help Iraq and Afghanistan and have gotten many health clinics, hospitals and schools and infrastructure up and running in both nations. The recent report on Afghanistan was great --on C-span--telling of the road that now encircles the nation to join all the rurual areas --and the schools and clinics established. We have Katrina, too. My church is taking its 3rd team down there to assist in clean-up or building projects soon.

I suspect we have been afflicted all across our nation by natural disaster in God's effort to bring us to our knees --to get us to contemplate our sin and realize that "righteousness exalts a nation" --while sin brings it down. For our culture is awash in immorality through online sources, and the public promotion of perversion.

Fortunately it is Uganda, i believe, which promotes abstinence until marriage to combat their aIDS crisis --and they report the largest decrease in new AIDS cases of any of the African nations with that problem.

In this country, I have a young friend with some very minor health problems who gets $600 a month from S.S. plus foodstamps, plus another $200 from welfare plus free healthcare and transportation to her healthcare --plus her estranged husband's voluntary $400 and more a month for 2 babies. Plus Legal Aid and free mental health counseling and a payee to handle her bills. Her husband picks up any slack in what the gov't doesn't give her. So don't tell me about the cruelty of our gov't toward the needy who are deemed unable to work whose husbands are accused of dom. violence or molestation or whatever. We pick up the pieces.

Many of us give thousands to charities who go and deliver the aide personally --such as an India Rice Fund that goes to hostels for kids run by my church --and child sponsorship so they have school and one meal a day through the mission. and the Appalacian mission boarding school which takes in troubled students --whose brilliant teaching staff gets most of their grads into and through college.

I met a wonderful young man from Kenya who told of walking 5 miles a day both ways to a mission school --and eventually he was sent to America to a Christian college. He was a freshman so he asked my son if I would look over an essay he wrote on "kenyanization" (the modernization of Kenya.) He had bleak hopes for it because of the tribal culture and customs (the way of initiating the young men into adulthood with teen-age circumcision and weeks in the woods with the men) that he believed held his nation back from true progress--and from Christian values --and held them in tribal rivalries with a war-like mentality amongst themselves. He could write English and express himself excellently--all thanks to the Christian mission school he had attended.

I believe the African Children's Choir is an outgrowth of Christian missions, considering the songs they sing. There used to be a Korean Orphans choir with World Vision --and I heard that nation is now sending out more Christian missionaries than the U.S. Don't know if that is true or not, but I did hear it.

The charities with the lowest overhead are Christian --and there are MANY who do wonderful work --including Operation Christmas Child for which church people prepared millions of boxes last Nov. World vision and Samaritans' purse have done water well projects for years in foreign countries--as did a local Rotary club here in Toledo for Haiti.

Our church has sent medical mission teams out to Haiti before.

Bush is right about the heart --He got this notion from the Bible and experienced it in his own life --with his alcohol and purposeless younger years --which years you focus on --instead of Clinton's continuing shallow life.

The bible says the heart is desperately wicked and deceitful --and that out of our hearts procedes sin--but Jesus is quoted as saying, "Behold I stand at the door and knock (visualized in a famous religious painting as our heart's door) --if any one hears and will open the door, I will come in to him and fellowship (dine) with him."

When you experience this, your heart (mind/soul) is changed --as in "Be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds."

I have no doubt that Bush sincerely wants to do rightly for our Country.
And that he believes as I do, that our superior war capabilities CAN enable us to secure the peace in Iraq --if we pull together in resolve to "git er done." And quit aggravating the situation with our own civil strife --and short sighted desire to just get ourselves out of their religious civil war. We took out their Hitler, a just cause --he WAS a WMD-- we need to help them build their gov't.

10:14 AM EST