The Barb Wire: March 2008

Monday, March 31, 2008

Religious Right Wants to Change Everything? Take away Freedom? Be like the morality police or the Taliban??

Christians today are accused of threatening freedom. It is a very new extent of freedom we oppose--it is licentiousness --and it started in the 60's with the free love movement of the hippies, the 1973 abortion decision, the Sexual revolution with the idea that the pill and abortion meant that women could now have the freedom that men allegedly had --to have sex and "not get caught."

But both men and women DID get caught --new headlines --HERPES and AIDS. GRID, the Gay Related Immune Disease crossed over into the straight population --"and so the band played on" --while people died in droves from their sexual liberty. And acquired life-long, painful, recurrent herpes.

Moreover, fathers were considered unnecessary as long as Uncle Sam would pay more for each new baby on the condition that there was no man in the house. So our welfare burden of LBJ's Great Society became astronomical.

THEN THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT AND PRO-LIFE CATHOLICS PULLED TOGETHER AS SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES TO REVERSE THE DAMAGE --AND TRY TO PUT THE LID BACK ON PANDORA'S BOX.

Our critics say we want to take away freedom and CHANGE things. No, we want to restore common sense and traditional values to the public square and the private lives of our citizens. We want to see the Sexual Revolution of the 70's and 80's reversed --so that there are fewer new cases of STD's, fewer kids thinking gay thoughts, less access to porn in the homes of youth --which porn is addicting, soul-corrosive and ruining marriages.

AS I've said before, we want a more wholesome nation, a safer one --not unduly restrictive of diversity, not punitive --but not unduly tempting people into "sex-periments," such that they, in their youth, get into life-threatening disease and decisions that will make them lonely and miserable in old age.

The best solution: a change in our hearts --such that we want what God wants.

THE CHALLENGE OF PARENTING IN AN X-RATED WORLD

It's a shame that we live in an X-rated world anymore --such that parents have to stand over the TV and find ways to filter that and the internet --and have to watch when we go to Disney that it's not "gay days" and have to be careful about when and where we go lest we run into a gay pride parade with people behaving obscenely --all because unwholesome things are being demonstrated and promoted that should not be viewed by children.

Should the porn purveyor or the gay activist, either one, have the right to flood the world with the obscene --such that children are exposed to it because there are no restrictions --and no self-restraint by people who care only about their own desires and tastes --rather than what is good for children?

Activists say, "Who's to say what is good for children?" Hopefully, enough good parents will rise up to say and prevent the complete public licentiousness that the so-called free speech champions are willing to see, justifying their right to wrongs on the basis that none can decide what is moral for society or for children.

Instead, we ought to make sure that "adult entertainment" is not accessible on TV, radios, phones, internet, strip joints and streets. Use heavy fines, blocking,etc. to shove the obscene back into the closet where the innocent cannot be caught unaware and corrupted, lured into a sex addiction. In fact, what a way to get gov't. revenue!

There has always been sleaze --but it was limited and restricted to certain areas of town where decent citizens could avoid it--where the really determined and jaded would have to seek it out. Folks attempting to live moral lives ought not be confronted with the X-rated fare in their neighborhoods and homes or on outings with the kids --and not in schools either --as in college "porn and sexuality studies."

The best remedy, of course, would be for people to stop buying or watching the indecent --but more and more of our citizens are proving to be "weaker brethren," easily stumbled by prurient interests. Woe unto the nation that won't restrain people's evil impulses. I'm not wishing woe upon us; I'm fearing it. I think many of our national problems, the escalating violence and immorality, the family breakdown, are results of our loss of biblical faith. As for the natural disasters, these may be allowed by God to get our attention back where it belongs --on our dependence on Him. We have been blessed for so long in the USA that we thought it was all our own doing.

Saturday, March 29, 2008

A WARPED VIEW OF CONSERVATIVES --Is this a unique perspective? Let's Hope So!

The following is a new comment by an anonymous Toledo-area blogger who goes by "mud-rake."

To that last statement, I can't resist saying, DUH! OF COURSE pro-lifers are calling for the status-quo --prior to 1973. They don't suddenly become liberals wanting change --just because abortion is legal now. Not even the author of the above piece would call pro-lifers liberals because they want change in the NEW status quo --new since 1973. We are wanting to preserve the status quo of thousands of years of civilized people who didn't approve killing their young in the womb.

It would be interesting if the median age of conservatives is 60 as he guesses --since they would have been young during the hippie years. A C-Span program yesterday featured conservatives talking to youth. There are several conservative activist groups in college today. The conservative movement, usually pro-traditional values, is alive and well among young people --even if they are possibly outnumbered.

I find it BIZARRE that the author sees pro-lifers as "cloaking" themselves as conservatives. HUH??? Social conservatives by definition ARE pro-life and pro-family values --traditional family values. Many of us want constitutional amendments that spell out the "right to life" in the constitution to protect the rights of the very young, the elderly and disabled --and also an amendment to define marriage --because who would have thought at the Constitutional Congress in the 18th Century that this great nation-to-be would legalize abortion and gay marriage??? Not in their wildest dreams did our constitution's framers think that needed to be spelled out. If they could've seen into the future, even the Deists among them would've thought today's people wanting gay marriage and abortion had lost their minds or become terribly foolish or wicked.

The majority of those who call themselves "conservatives" are social, economic, and political conservatives on most issues --but, of course, there is diversity within that group. We certainly expect the GOP to represent our views on all three --or we'd have to form a new party. Abortion and sexuality are BOTH important to God, therefore they are of primary importance to those who believe in Him. But we are hardly guilty of deception, "cloaking" our pro-family views with a broader label of "conservative."

Friday, March 28, 2008

A SON'S DEFENSE OF HIS MOTHER ~ yes, you'll be in my will, you dear boy!

I was impressed by the eloquence of the following:

Whynot had said to my son Rob on the French blog where he went to defend his mother like "the good son" that he is (as he is always reminding me, with respect to my will):

"I have nothing against you personally at this stage."

Rob wrote: I was sharing a little bit of this situation with one of my roommates and mentioned that there’s this French blog where they were photo shopping a picture of my mom in humiliating ways. Immediately he responds, “Oh, so it’s personal.” As western individualists, we tend to forget that the personal connections that aren’t available to the immediate situation are still there, that when we insult someone,when we are verbally violent (and conceptually, in the case of “artwork”), we are striking at someone who loves and is loved by people who are personally concerned. You didn’t intend anything personally against me, but what you didn’t intend is there.

"Your mom created hell on earth here on this blog. To the point where she publicly said she was going to kill this blog by bombarding it with her s---. That was after I accepted her offer (public one) to go away, but she is such a compulsive liar she just cannot respect her own word."

[I, Barb, did none of the above -don't even know what he's referencing. I did say I would leave --and stayed away several weeks --saw my name and religion were still being mischaracterized, so popped back in with another name and email address to get around his block. The compulsive liar reference is because he says I "promised" to "never come back" to his blog. I didn't make such a promise. I said I'd leave if he asked me --I left --and like General MacArthur, I returned! upon provocation, noting they were still at it.]

Did she? That is terrible. What did she do? Did she post pictures with the purpose of insulting people to the extreme.. like pictures of anyone’s head pasted into an image of humiliation and torture, excrement, mocking physical appearance? That might be like a little slice of hell. Does she distort what people say? Hmmm. Does she turn hostile in bipolar fashion at the drop of the dime?

So she’s a compulsive liar? How can anyone tell? Now that you’ve taken to editing her posts, your blog has no integrity. You used to have some inviolable principle against censorship. Seems to me that changing someone’s words is even worse.

"but she is such a compulsive liar she just cannot respect her own word"

I beg your pardon, but long before Jeanette or allegedly, my mom, ever violated a trust, you did it first. I told her you people could not be trusted with her image. You’re proving it in spades.

"I wish her no harm. [WITH THAT PHOTO?] I just want her to stay away from here. What’s so f------ hard to understand? Do I go harrass her on her blog? No. So why can’t she stay away from here?"

Did she harass you? I can’t tell. Her posts are edited in a way that does not speak well of the editor.

You gave an ultimatum. I don’t feel like telling her she should kowtow to the bullying of an observably verbally abusive man, especially when your abuse doesn‘t carry that much power to begin with. But I’m not without understanding here. She gave you a condition. Why should she leave just so you and your friends can gossip. I’m sorry, that hardly seems fair to me. Her condition is quite honestly easy for anyone with a minimal amount of self-control. What’s so Effin hard to understand about that? Granted, Mom said she wouldn’t comment, except rarely. I might be inclined to tell her not to come back even rarely, but not with a situation where she is constantly reviled in your public blog (like it or not, it’s out in the public,) with no recourse to explain her side of it. But I don’t control her.

By the way, how’s that striving for peace and justice going? Would you say that your actions here are in line with that effort. Somehow, I don’t see Ghandi taking this approach, hatefully intimidating the opposition away.

No, real pacifists are confrontational yet in a pacifistic way. You asked my mom to leave you in peace, but there is no peace here. Whether or not she leaves, I don’t believe that strife will permanently walk out with her. It is at home in your heart.

Rob

MY DEFENSE ON THE FRENCH BLOG

Blog Host, Whynot, Philippe Maire, of the French blog, said to Rob, yesterday:

"I don’t have the time to explain why your mom is such an a–h–. Ask her. She f---g well knows what she did to harrass me and others here."

He would say I “beat the blog over the head with the Bible.” That was my harrassment.

No, I never EVER harrassed you, Whynot. I just cared enough about you to post some cherished, powerful Bible stories to you over the past year--[usually with a good segue or in context of the discussions at hand.] And to inform you lovingly of what the Bible says it will mean to the unbelievers if the Bible is true. And to assure you that belonging to God as His Children as brothers and sisters in Christ for Eternity and going to Heaven is not that difficult– starting with repentance –asking God to make the Truth clear to you –being willing to know what truth is available to us about Christ –and to know Jesus Christ as the Way, the Truth and the Life, Savior, Resurrected Lord, Redeemer, Comforter, Holy Spirit, Divine Son of God and Friend, Prince of Peace, Immanuel–God with Us, “closer than a brother” –the resurrected Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

You didn’t like the same message that Jesus gave. “Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is nigh.” You didn’t like His message that we are all sinners who need a Saviour. Your bloggers called my faith in the Bible mere “arrogance.” I clarified continually that I wasn’t claiming to be more righteous than your bloggers, that we are all equals at the foot of the cross. But my claim to believe in Truth or to know Truth about Jesus was intolerable.

However, that’s not ALL I posted about here –you didn’t like it if I had American loyalty or Capitalist sympathies instead of Communistic/socialistic sympathies. You didn’t like it if I said that America wasn’t as horrible in healthcare and regarding the poor as your bloggers said it was. You didn’t like it if I didn’t agree that the Christian religion was only a blight in world history. I was not to join with 2 others to sympathize with Israel over Palestine if it offended the Muslim, Romeo (that was recent)[who had ranted on that topic one day.] I was not to say that prostitution was not safe or good for Stiletto (or you), if it offended you and Stiletto and Kristina –who all think it is a humane public service–even though Stiletto often speaks of hating her "white male pig" customers.

I used no hate speech on you, no foul language, no personal insults–except in teasing “give and take” of blog orneriness. Believe me, I took more insults than I ever gave and only jibed in humor --and was credited now and then by your bloggers for that.I took the Big Red Bloomers insult of me with humor and it became a running joke with my help.

My main insults were to Microdot with his name –and he should not have chosen such a name if he didn’t want it toyed with. [So easy to say Microdevolved to an evolutionist --or Macrodeleterious --or Microdolt --which also became an appreciated
humor gimmick when I was in favor.] As for Mudrake, he only came to this blog to harrass me, which is his career and calling. [In turn,] I only told the truth about his blog harrassment of me, i.e. posting the personal info. [Wherever Mudrake goes in blogging, Microdot kowtows to his sour negativity and buys into it --when he is otherwise very funny even in disagreement. It was Microdot's eventually hateful and humorless tirades that made it totally unpleasant for all as he encouraged a blog boycott until the bloghost Whynot asked me to leave. I had said I would leave if he asked me to --but I didn't promise to stay away forever if they continued to talk about me and my faith with error. And it did make the host angry because the little prostitute gets angry at me. But she is the one who told me how to get around the block.]

From the start, you were the tolerant one, Whynot –and you held the vicious wolves at bay –until Microdot got offended over his ego –he didn’t think I had introduced him to the new blogger, my friend, Baldspot, with enough praise. Baldspot was brilliant, shared common knowledge and interests with Microdot and Kristina–but even though you had encouraged me in emails to bring friends to this blog so I wouldn’t be alone ideologically–when he came, everything [took a nosedive and]went sour really fast –though he was faultless in his pleasantness. But Kender, Jeanette, Baldspot and I were starting to reinforce one another –and something had to be done. I was blamed for people leaving the blog who really did not leave because of me –or JUST because of me.

There is nothing like a little crucifixion when you want to keep control against a religious or ideological minority. Nothing beats simple hate as a weapon, does it???

Rob is right about peace. You didn’t have it before I came –that’s why Jeanette left 2 years earlier and Diane left before I came. You had Stiletto and Ugly American and Kender at each other’s throats before I came. And they didn’t even TRY to get along in those days.

So peace will elude this blog because your bloggers believe it’s ok to hate people with whom they disagree –especially Christians who share their faith and their idea of truth with you. It’s OK for you to share your hatred of Christianity, the Bible, traditional morals –but it’s not OK to hear the other side –even when kindly expressed.

Why I Follow the French Blog and Post There --Though Unwelcome and Harrassed

I have been banned, asked to leave 3 blogs (all related blogs sharing bloggers) -- all extremely left wing. Mudrake's is one, and he blocks all the religious right-wingers when they are too persistent and effective in opposition to his views. But he keeps coming to MY blog. (His, by the way, is www.manwiththemuckrake.blogspot.com)

In general, when I peek at a blog, I have reserved the right to jump back in --even though unwelcome, if I or Christians are being unfairly maligned. I feel justified in going to Mudrake's because he goes to mine even after blocking me on his and then writes about me libelously --or just re-posts my perfectly good comments as though I should be embarrassed about them --which I never am.

I have likened the blog to a living room in which people of divergent views should be able to politely exchange those views with the tolerance so touted by liberals. They are the tolerant ones, they think --but in fact, I could stay in the living room with them; they could not with me. I know this was because of the impact of the Holy Spirit on both sides. When the Hound of Heaven pursues one's soul, he runs because conviction is not a pleasant feeling. Initially, he hates to be reminded of mortality --of the need to "choose this day whom you shall serve."

Of course, they claim they just don't believe in God or the Bible --so I said, then, "Why don't you just scroll past my posts when I post on that topic?" They could not. Too much work for their scrolling finger, I guess.

The link to this French blog is on my blogroll on this home page to the right --but beware --because there are posts of my face--a picture exchanged in pleasanter times --and a picture of me from younger days --on top of an anonymous nude female crucified on a cross. So don't go there if you don't want to be shocked and deeply offended as a Christ-follower. However, anyone can post there until hounded off or blocked--but you had better have a thick skin and ears and eyes that can bear the obscene. It is as Mark Twain said (paraphrased): Man was created a little lower than the angels and has been slipping lower ever since --somewhere between the angels and the French."

Granted, the Americans on that blog can trash-talk and create obscene art as well as the French. Lately there are two women who can't write English --two of the host's new girlfriends, I understand --and so there is more French language than previously. They go to the Google translator and come up with these nonsensical translations. I don't have time to bother translating with such inane inaccuracy, judging by their results.

Porquois Pas professes to be a welcoming place of tolerance for diversity. But it never was that, welcoming, that is, though they sometimes tried --if I would stay away from Biblical quotation and just banter and have silly talk with them which I did often. About Monty Python goofiness, a running "dead parrot" joke, e.g.

There was probably NO serious topic on which our world views didn't clash, though I would agree with the basic premise: yes, war is bad; Christian and Biblical and American histories are not all good; poverty is bad and the rich should be compassionate and sharing; racism is bad --but the compassionate conservative and capitalist view on poverty and other social issues is just not welcome there.

A couple of us WERE able to share some mutual appreciation for classical and jazz music as musicians --and I could appreciate and commend the pleasant art work by several who were artists. There was some friendly, benign humor at times --like about Microdot's wife making him move the bushes around every fall, just doing what he was told--he didn't ask questions. And we all enjoyed Ratatoille, the movie. Romeo, the Muslim engineer from Texas, provided comic relief saying he couldn't fix Parisienne Valerie's washing machine because the security police always stopped him at the airport for his tool belt under his vest --and took him off to jail. I was the one who suggested he come to Paris to fix her washing machine which was always leaking and being overworked as she has "urge incontinence" (the medical term) when she laughs. He would always flirt with the single girls, professing to be single himself.

A couple of us were accused of bragging about our charitable impulses. Understand, we only told about Christian charity, ours and others, because we GOP Republicans were accused of having no compassion for the needy. That just wasn't true --so in defending ourselves, we were accused of boasting.

I was also accused of boasting when I revealed we had a lake cottage. NO matter how humble it is or how I described it as humble, they considered it an offense that I owned one. I was actually telling about a calamitous vacation at the lake where one thing after another went wrong and my husband landed in the hospital. Instead of giving sympathy, a couple of the Americans focused on me telling these allegedly poor people --2 of whom had such tiny apartments --that I had a 2nd dwelling.

Like a bunch of school peers, they followed each other's lead in taking offense --and giving offense. Always, they would pat each other on the back for expressing egregious intolerance in the vilest language.

But I like them anyway --because God puts that in my heart. I marvel at it myself.
Even Mudly. I'd like to meet him --and I could greet him with a big smile. But I don't believe he could rise to the occasion in a similar spirit --YET. Maybe some day...after all, we visit daily!

Why do I do it? Because the BIble says, "How shall they believe if they never hear?" and "Faith comes by hearing the Word of God."

FRIENDS OF THE CLINTONS

Another Email from some time ago:

Just a quick refresher course lest we forget what has happened to many 'friends' of the Clintons.

HOW COULD ALL THIS BE ORCHESTRATED? BILL'S GOOD FRIEND WAS A DRUG KINGPIN WITH TIES TO THAT SLEAZY MAFIA-STYLE UNDERWORLD IN ARKANSAS. BILL'S BROTHER ROGER WAS A USER AND A SOME-TIME EMPLOYEE OF THIS DRUG KINGPIN. THIS FELLOW'S "GIRL FRIDAY"/SECRETARY/"GO-TO GIRL" WAS HIRED BY CLINTON AS A MEMBER OF THE PRESIDENT'S WHITE HOUSE STAFF.

OPEN LETTER TO BILL CLINTON--RECEIVED IN EMAIL --AUTHOR UNKNOWN

Bill & Hillary:
Worse than you thought & worth remembering...and this came from a Democrat.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

BLOG SEQUENCE REARRANGED ~ Open Message to Mudrake

Dear Readers: you may have noticed that my next two posts are not my newest ones. When the Toledo-area blogger Mudrake posted my address and Jeanette's address and phone number 90 times in a two day period (76 times in one day) on the next two blog topics, the easiest way to get rid of them was to copy my blog and comments over into new posts --minus his spammed addresses. I also added the scrambled word feature, to discourage spammers. I learned that Mudrake was right to say Blogger doesn't let us block individuals from our sites except through moderation of comments or forming a team of desired bloggers and shutting out comments from others. But I would rather delete the occasional address posted, and let other unfriendly posts remain--to let the others see whatever true colors people want to display --so they'll realize that the obsession and hateful attitude in the blog battle is not mine--that I don't want the battle. As Rob said, the mud splashes back on the mud thrower.

TO continue to spam with that scrambled word feature I added, Mud-rake would have to be even more insanely obsessed and time-wasting than I already consider him to be. I think this obsession is beneath him. I think he's a victim of a mental disorder of some sort --the one he accuses me of --obsessive compulsive disorder. How else could it be explained? Evil? Nah! He has a better nature toward most people but his obsessive tendencies get the better of him when dealing with people of faith who don't agree with his liberal views.

Praying for you, Mudly. It's OK to own our sins --that is, you own yours; I own mine. Confession is good for the soul. I believe in miracles --that someday you and I, in friendship, may, hopefully, laugh at the ridiculousness of this blog battle.

Jesus expects it of His disciples --reconciliation and forgiveness. So I stand willing anytime, any place. But you pretty much indicated that while you admire Jesus and His love teachings, and attend a Catholic church, the miracles and resurrection were myths --that He is not divine --and thus, you feel no obligation to be loving and forgiving --though you chide us anytime you think we are falling short in that area.

So what DO you believe about Jesus? Should we love and forgive or not? He actually said if we don't, that He will not forgive us --and if we DON'T confess that He is Lord before others, that He will not acknowledge us before the throne of God on Judgment Day.

You and I at our age COULD keel over any time --no man knows his appointed time to enter eternity. Jesus gave us promise and His own resurrected life so that we didn't have to face eternal mortality --or eternal damnation--but could be resurrected to eternal life better than this one --if we would only believe in Him as God's Resurrected Son. I find those New Testament writings convincing --historical. I believe the Church would have died out --or been only about love, etc. --but instead the New Testament disciples endured great persecution and death to get the Word out that Jesus was seen by them alive after His death. It truly is "The Greatest Story every Told." And those early disciples believed it. They were witnesses to His miracles and his Resurrection. I believe them. It makes all the difference in whether or not I am compelled to love you --as HE loves you --or not.

God gives me such peace about you and your harrassment of me (and Jeanette.) His peace is real --and the love He gives us is real --even if we give in to anger at times. Shame on us.

I believe that God is/has a Master Computer of some sort which is "The Lamb's Book of Life" referred to in the Bible. Our names and DNA codes and other identifiers are recorded there so we can be resurrected as He was and known as we are known --that is recognizeable as "us" in Heaven. I believe that He has in this "Book" a "file" of our every word, thought, and deed recorded (as the Bible says) --from which He says He will expunge the sins --THANK GOD! --when we access the blood of Christ over those sins, admitting that we do indeed need our records expunged!

Cleanse my file, Lord! Hide me in the Cleft of the Rock! from your knowledge of sins past. And keep my feet from stumbling into human ways of anger, revenge, hatred.

He answers that prayer.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

BLOG BATTLE FOR TRUTH --More Mud from Muckville

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

The infamous Mud-rake has posted today, a blog topic which is all about me and Jeanette, challenging us on the issue of our Christian love. For sure, he picked out quotations from Jeanette when she was angry. (She's a Baptist, after all--it's just us Free Methodists who don't get mad! (joke, Jeanette!)--actually I have gotten angry at times in Blogville also.) The challenge is to "Be angry--but sin not."

In case you come over here, Mudrake, thanks for giving me more exposure for my well-reasoned views on homosex on your blog today. I would answer your charges over there, but as you know, you have blocked me and Jeanette on your blog.

About your question on vengeance and 9/11. About "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord; I will repay." NO to your question; I don't think we went to Iraq for God's vengeance or our own; we went to eliminate a WMD named Sadam and we believed he had WMD's --and we can't be sure that he didn't have them and just got them into Syria before we arrived --which is what one of his former official co-horts claims.

About my school board re-election--you say I'm the only board member to lose an election. That's not true; if memory serves me correctly, I beat out one when I got elected. There were also some one-termers who knew better than to run again. I won twice --and I think I won the 3rd time --because I was announced as a winner in 2nd place out of 5, remember --until a recount without any observers from my campaign --after which I lost by exactly 100 votes --an easy manual slip of a digit in the old voting machines.

By the recount, I went from 2nd place to 4th --out of 5. But it was ok with me --I protested weakly to the election board and could've made a stink with a lawyer but I'm too cheap--and we could not probably have proved the probable fraud which was politically motivated by haters like yourself who went door to door with flyers against me that were filled with lies like the ones you post.

AS for me trying to affect what the children were taught --you betcha! I certainly didn't want them to be shown any more R-rated movies in jr. high and reading books with graphic, humorously portrayed incest incident in the 9th grade on the supplemental reading list. I didn't appreciate the social studies teacher who said we aren't particular about the "what's" and "when's" of history but more concerned about the "why's." Great. His students would be the ones on Leno's Jaywalk that don't know the Civil War from the Rev. War or have any clue when they occured.

Another concern I had for schools was the life-skills courses with their authority-undermining, faith-undermining, decision-making model --"Well, now, class, no one can tell you what is right for you except YOU!" O great! Value-free "brainstorming" for any solutions at all: no right or wrong answers.

THEN the children were to apply THEIR values --"according to what is best for YOU and your future." (Well, for sure, sometimes telling the truth, not cheating, not aborting --don't seem like the best decision to a kid, but they are best in the long run according to GOD. Without God or any absolute right and wrong, this decision- making model was all about ME, Me, Me --what is best for me, not what is right or wrong for all. And the very year I protested the self-loving self-esteem exaltation in education, national media came out questioning "The Cult of Self-Esteem." I was vindicated for my views (just like Dan Quayle was eventually vindicated for saying that fathers are necessary.)

Mudly, you wrote of God's love, so I wonder if you are a Christian who feels obligated to love everyone --or if you just feel that Jeanette and I should love everyone because we claim to be Christian. I have many times offered you an olive branch and you have unrespectfully declined, preferring to keep up the war. So I'm not sure why you challenge us in this area of loving. We can do it. Or as Obama would put it, WE CAN! Meaning, Jeanette and I. I don't know if you can if you really don't believe that God has commanded you to do so. Change starts with faith. I'm pretty sure you don't love me now.

As for Jeanette calling you Dung Head, should that bother you --considering all the cow dung photos you posted that day when you gathered up many of my blog comments and printed them together as a blog topic? You surely don't think that her reference to excrement disqualifies her as a lover, now, do you? Or are we in agreement that dung used by you was NOT a loving gesture on your part, any more than on her part. Jeanette admitted that she was tempted to do wrong with knowledge she had that someone would not want revealed --but you don't resist temptation. She did. That's the difference between us. She knows it's just plain wrong --and unloving-- to post people's private info if it might bring them harm. You don't seem to realize that yet.

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

Posted by Barb at 7:26 PM
Labels: Mudville's Mud-slinger

Jeanette said...
Good post, Barb, but futile. He won't stop.

I saw his post about us early this afternoon and his comments were miraculously open now instead of just to his team members.

I'm not going to take the bait and respond on his blog. He's not worth the energy or the time for me to give.

He craves attention even if it's negative attention. He surely has a hang-up about born again Christians, yet he told me in an email he is a Catholic who goes to church at a university in Toledo or that area because it is liberal.

He likes to talk about tolerance, but tolerance to people like him is "you tolerate me but I don't have to tolerate you if I disagree with you."

Typical liberal hatred that has been going on since President Bush was elected in 2000 and will continue after President McCain is elected in November. His Messiah is Obama but the way Obama and Hillary are acting they are going to tear the democrats asunder and the election the Republicans are supposed to lose they will win.

I also predict we will come close to taking back the House if not doing so outright and pick up a couple of seats in the Senate or losing just one or two at worst.

This is what angers him. That and the fact we haven't yet become the complete socialist utopia he so longs for.

Pay him no mind. He thrives on it.

March 25, 2008 10:03 PM

Barb said...
Ignoring Mudly is sort of like ignoring the elephant in the room --or rather, the donkey!

Easter Messages from Pres. Bush

From the Religion Clause blog:

O this makes some people angry, doesn't it? Yet, it is historically representative of our country, that great presidents have issued such statements of faith to the majority of religious Americans who are Christian -- with 1/3 said to be evangelicals --and a great many being Catholic and another large portion being mainline protestants. That is our history and our present. It is who most of us are. Should we or the President stop being what we are as Christians to please those who are not the same in their beliefs? Will our country be kinder and gentler if we do not believe in the Golden Rule and the good works commanded by Jesus Christ --and the morality of the Hebrew Ten C's? I think not.

Christianity is the ideological hand that fed this wonderful nation, inspiring our best aspects, our view of human rights, our view of right and wrong. We are open to those of other faiths and they have complete freedom religiously --and to believe or not to believe. If they don't like our holidays and our view of right and wrong, they need not come here.

We have co-existed well. The ones who want to upset the multi-cultural harmony --are not the Christians but the atheists/agnostics --and liberals, in general, who are pushing for the freedom to be immoral, who want a nation where they never would hear about Christ and His claim upon our lives --and lifestyles. These are bitter against Christianity --and they are mockers of Christ and Christians like the multitudes who didn't believe Jesus was from God --who taunted, scorned, whipped and crucified Him, the greatest hope for immortality the world has ever seen--a dead man arisen from the grave after 3 days as He predicted!

I am blocked on some blogs for saying this about Jesus --the time is coming in America when such public expressions will be against the law --as in atheistic and Muslim nations. Newspapers won't print us --and blogs will block --as public forums do now if you give any reason, religious or otherwise, why homosexuality should not be celebrated with parades and marriage ceremonies. And if you quote the Bible or preach the Gospel of the New Testament about salvation from sin. As in Jesus' day, men say, "We have no sin!" The church is being chided for focusing on abortion and gay rights, but those two are just evidence of how much we have changed --when even churches are calling good, evil and evil, good.

So it is refreshing to hear President Bush not give into the trend of the times, denying that Easter is true --and the Bible true and relevant for today.

You go, Pres. Bush. You are showing your true colors --and they are beautiful! You speak of the Resurrection as though it were FACT. You speak of Jesus as the Son of God as though that were a fact. Like the Good Christian you are, not worrying about the politically correct who fear such personal statements are theocratic, offensive to those of other faiths and no faith.

After all, the Bible tells believers to say, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation."

And, also, Jesus said, in Matthew 10:

32"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.

33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

Bush is wiser than so many of his critics the world over. He's not worried about ratings now in the world, but concerned for what His Lord will think of Him.

Posted by Barb at 5:12 PM
Labels: Bush on Easter
83 comments:

Jeanette said...

Barb,

I'm sorry to be off-topic and intend to read the post after I post this, but I wanted you to know Dung Head has blocked comments on his site to team members only.

I guess since he had no answers to our statements and his sarcasm wasn't enough to drive us off he had to do what "over half the right-wing blogs" do and moderate, or in this case, block comments.

I think it's hilarious. Just when I was going to give him a link to the sermon from our church and challenge himself to give it a fair listen to see if it's what he so righteously claims happens in Protestant churches.
March 23, 2008 11:16 PM
Jeanette said...

Not only was Jesus of God---He Is God in the flesh!

I need to ask any of your Christian readers for prayer for me.

I am not following Christ in a way that is pleasing to Him at the moment.

I have been the object of posts on the French blog (you're in there too), filthy talk, the sacrilege of the crucifixion picture, and I find myself angry and wanting to lash out.

There is a certain girl who is posting there who doesn't know I know who she is and where she is from, and it is all I can do not to splash that news around the blogosphere that knows her, but I would never want to be a part of getting her found and deported.

She's pushing me to my limits and I need not only my prayers and those of my church family---I need the prayers of all Christians to let this go and put it in God's hands.

I need you all to pray I can keep myself away from that vile place because it is a stumbling block for me in my Christian walk. I want to love my enemies and they all turned into enemies as soon as they got rid of you.

Please pray for me and I'll also pray for you in this matter too as I know they anger you too. I pray for you daily now anyway.

President Bush delivered a great speech and I wish I had heard it.

I hope you had a great Easter.

He is risen! He is risen indeed!

Amen!
March 23, 2008 11:28 PM
Steven said...

Too bad Bush also celebrates Ramadan, bows before Shinto shrines and considers the peaceful religion of Islam to be a true path to God. He's an idolater.
March 24, 2008 9:43 AM
Barb said...

Hey, Jeanette --appreciate your candor and request for prayer --you got it, Sister.

About the one whose secrets you know -- you don't want to stoop to Mud-rake's level or even make those threats. That's what HE does when he's mad --tells all he can find out about me and my whereabouts, posts my pastor's name, my husband's full name, my church,its photo, map to my house -- and then to add further evil, he LIED about me in regard to allegations of racial bigotry --and actually it's also a lie to say I hate homosexuals. I really do not, even though I believe the Bible when it says all sex relationships outside of hetero marriage are sins to repent of and turn from.

You have loved these blog people and that is the Christian core of your soul. We can "Be angry [indignant] , but sin not." To tell what you know about his poster would be VERY Mud-rakian! You know? Letting the Spirit of Mud-Slinging and unforgiveness affect you? You don't want to give them the victory. This is probably one of those times when you try earnestly to mean it when we say, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." They DO know on one level, but they DON'T have any idea how serious the blasphemy is --or how eternally deadly their resistance is to the Truth.

If you want some challenging blogging for your talents, go to the Religion Clause with me --link on my blogroll --where people's blog manners are a lot better despite vigorous disagreement. It's not often a busy blog --though there are some who are looking for other commenters who like to discuss these church-state issues --perhaps because he posts so many news items everyday that people don't linger on any one discussion very lont.

if the host, a U.T. law prof emeritus, who has a Jewish-sounding name, comments, he probably does it as anonymous --but I don't think he bothers at all. The anonymous posters don't sound as knowledgeable about the law as he would be. Perhaps some may be law students who don't want him to know who they are!

You have now been a first hand witness to Mudly's dishonesty --and his censorship and intolerance to people who make him look bad for his bad blog manners.
March 24, 2008 10:19 AM
Barb said...

I imagine, Steven, if Bush did and said as you claim, that he was thinking of these people as on a path to the Divine, seeking Him anyway, and wanted to show respect for these people's faiths --rather than denounce them as the idolators and followers of false prophets that they are. His job as president does include diplomacy abroad --and we haven't elected him to denounce people's sins --and he doesn't do that--except terrorism.
March 24, 2008 10:30 AM
Barb said...

yes, I was blocked, also, BTW, Jeanette. Probably Fonso, too. He does not believe in free speech --laments there are so many who vote Republican as though he would not let them vote at all if he could have his way.
March 24, 2008 10:33 AM
Barb said...

Mudly believes the intelligent are a few elite "educated" individuals who see everything as he does. And the rest of us are not educable. We are mere ignoramuses who --he once said --should be locked up.
March 24, 2008 10:35 AM
Fonso_2006 said...

Hey Barb, I was just answering your question. I'm not a team members on Mud's blog. He hasn't censored me yet although his response to anything I post is always the same, "you're brain washed by the right wing". I've noticed how harsh he is against you and was really disgusted when I say him post your name on one of his comments. I said something about it but I don't think it did anything. Well I got to get to class but nice hearing for you. Keep doing God's work!.

Alfonso
March 24, 2008 12:54 PM
Barb said...

To demonstrate "the spirit of Mud-rake," he just posted Jeanette's address here which I deleted. No depths too low!
March 24, 2008 2:41 PM
Barb said...

I just had an interesting tho't --Microdot and Mudrake like to suggest that Jeanette isn't really christian when she gives them back the same sort of orneriness that they give out --as she notes, "they can dish it out --but they can't take it."

And they insult her Christianity when she tries to give them back "a bit of their own." Like calling Mudrake, "Dung-Head." Well, he deserves that --for talking about her and me and our postings as excremental droppings with various 4 letter words, etc.

But they are quick to tell us when they think our blog behavior falls short of Christian standards (even if it doesn't really --like when Mudly has to make up stuff in order to "prove" my bigotry).

interesting that they have no guilt for falling short of the Christian standardsd themselves, egregiously --but they know what those standards are! And they think we should adhere to those standards or deserve their disrespect!

IN their rhetoric, we are "blamed if we do and blamed if we don't."
What a pair of knuckleheads!
March 24, 2008 6:40 PM
Jeanette said...

Mudrake,
Be very careful of what you are doing by exposing personal information about me as I have a step-brother who is huge and is a detective on the Toledo police force.

I'm sure he can get the tools to find out who you are and an invasion of privacy charge could be brought against you.
March 24, 2008 10:12 PM
Barb said...

Let's see, Mudly, you have posted 3 times Jeanette's info here and removed-to-revise one. Would this resemble OCD? Do you need to up the Antivert?
March 24, 2008 11:37 PM
Barb said...

Four times--plus my address, now. See your shrink and get some relief, Mud-rake. I'm not kidding; I feel compassion!
March 25, 2008 8:52 AM
mud_rake said...

If you don't like my comments do as you said to me: "ban me, block me!"
March 25, 2008 9:04 AM
mud_rake said...

By the way, I'm featuring you and Jeanette in my next post; it's about bigots masquerading as oh-so righteous Christian women.

By the way, could you send me a recent photo for that new post?

Thank you in advance.
March 25, 2008 9:05 AM
Barb said...

Gee, I hate to see you continue this cycle, Mudly --of making yourself look so outrageously nuts, hostile, rude, dangerous.

And then the next thing you have to do when you observe with horror what you are doing --or your wife or daughter sees it, maybe --is to shut down all your comments --and ultimately your whole blog --and then after a recovery or a much-needed stay in rehab, you gradually start over=--posting more and more about the religious right --which is where I come in to shed some light.
March 25, 2008 9:22 AM
mud_rake said...

Don't worry, barb, your 'guilt trip' comments roll off of me with laughter.

Don't worry about ad hominum attacks either. I quote your words and Jeanette's exactly, word-by-word.

Did I get your address correct? I'd hate to publish false information.
March 25, 2008 10:31 AM
Yankee Doodle said...

Mud_rake,

Would like to publish my address?

Thank you,

YD

www.yankeecommentary.blogspot.com
March 25, 2008 11:33 AM
Rob R said...

I suspect that mudrake acts the way he does because he is more comfortable in his hate if he is hated. Thus he acts in such a way to inspire hate. not thought, not rationality, not understanding or even sympathy, just hate. It is best, if he is not given what he wants.
March 25, 2008 11:47 AM
Rob R said...

Just remember what this specific blog is about. Jesus could say "forgive them for they don't know what they are doing" in part because evil did not triumph as it did not on the first easter, and evil today won't either no matter how successful, or on the other hand, how petty and silly it is.
March 25, 2008 11:52 AM
Barb said...

YOu know what, Mudly, I think you may be worse than a root canal which I just had.

Five comments in two days with our addresses on them. You know I'll keep deleting them so why do you obsessively persist in this futile process of telling the nice people on our blogs where we live? We aren't embarrassed by having our identities known--and embarrassment, unfortunately, isn't your intent. You are trying to frighten and intimidate and that's beneath you, isn't it really?? And surely all your blog friends who come to your blog are nice respectable folks like mine are, aren't they? Nobody to fear, of course.

I think rob has a point --that you want to be hated so you can justify your own hatred.

Well, we don't hate you. Sorry.

Say, Rob, what is wrong when the info bar at the bottom of the screen won't show up?
March 25, 2008 12:27 PM
Barb said...

IN your instances of committing libel, mudly, you have not quoted me. You have made up insults to people which I never made. then when you finally did quote me, it just showed what you distorted. I spoke of "behavior dollars" not earned by some Afr. Am. students for not bringing in folders --and you said I said these students did not behave as well as others, implying they were disruptive, disrespectful, disobedient --which they never were. I said the whole age group was disorganized by virtue of their age. I should've called them "incentive dollars" so you couldn't mess with my words as you did.

You also previously said I called them "messier" than the other students. I never referred to messiness or neatness at all. I don't call it "misbehavior" to not bring in a folder. I made it clear that your accusations were false --but you can't be bothered with truth.
March 25, 2008 12:38 PM
Barb said...

It is petty --but worse than petty--to call someone a racist and misquote what they actually said to make that charge.

And then to post addresses so any vitriolic, weak-minded persons, feeling justified by your labels, can "go get the racist! the bigot and the homophobe!" (those being other labels you have pasted on me.)
March 25, 2008 12:41 PM
Barb said...

6 times you've posted addresses of bloggers, on this thread alone. That's not counting the many times you do it at your website. Aren't your friends going to conclude there is something Obsessive about this? a screw loose?
March 25, 2008 1:06 PM
Yankee Doodle said...

By the way, once you get the address of Joseph Dalton. I'll be glad to grant you the permission to post it in public.
March 25, 2008 4:00 PM
Barb said...

Mudrake said, If you don't like my comments do as you said to me: "ban me, block me!"

I tolerate just about any comments from you, Mudrake --just not the divulgence of personal information which is obscene on your part.

You have spammed my blog in the past with gargantuan articles on obsessive compulsive disorder, on the sexual behaviors of birds, on Aztec sacrifice rituals --all off topic.

My posts on YOUR blog (when you aren't censoring) have been sincere attempts to participate in substantive dialogue--lacking in ad hominem attack. You always responded with insults --and eventually with harrassment and then back again to censorship --which you are doing now on your closed blog. I think your posts are interesting and you are a prolific poster --BUT when you talk about the religious folks in general --and me specifically, you lie. And then you get dangerous -posting personal info. You cannot tolerate women who disagree with you intelligently and substantively so you try to intimidate them with personal info that you have to really dig for to get.
March 25, 2008 4:06 PM
Rob R said...

Mudrake said If you don't like my comments do as you said to me: "ban me, block me!"

He's jealous that he can't run a blog that can entertain informed disagreement while you can, so he wants to goad you into turning on the moderation.
March 25, 2008 5:30 PM
mud_rake said...

"ban me, block me!"
March 26, 2008 1:07 PM
Barb said...

a desperate cry for help. Our loving
Catholic brother has posted our names and address and a phone number on this blog 16 times so far, I believe --without being obsessive about the counting as I delete --with 3 easy clicks and a 4th to get back to the blog. It's not difficult, Mudly. You can do it, too, as you know from doing it so often!
March 26, 2008 1:38 PM

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Argument for an Immaterial Mind/Soul

I'm going to post this now and edit for mistakes later.

This is a challenge to those who believe that we are nothing but matter, chemistry in action and so on, or that a human can be completely reduced to chemical components. It is also a counterexample to those who suppose the natural sciences compose a complete epistemology, that is a theory of knowledge. Such a position leaves much out that is essential to the human experience and it is ultimately self defeating since there is no scientific experiment that can prove that all knowledge should be justified by science, hence the truth of the adequacy of a completely scientific epistemology cannot be verified within that epistemology. This is more or less the same problem that logical positivism ran into in the early 20th century. Logical positivism claimed that all knowledge must somehow be based upon observable facts. The problem is that there is no observation that can validates this requirement, thus logical positivism invalidated itself.

The form of the argument for an immaterial mind is based upon a classical argument for libertarian freedom, or freedom that is not compatible with determinism.

The argument goes something like this:

1. If I am morally responsible for an action, then that action is within my control.
2. If determinism is true, then everything I do is a result of events that took place long before I was born.
3. I am not in control of anything that happened prior to my birth.
4. If determinism is true, then I am not in control of my actions(2,3)
5. If determinism is true, then I am not morally responsible. (1,4)
6. Moral responsibility is a necessity of human nature.
7. I am human.
8. Since there are humans who are morally responsible, determinism is false. (5,6,7)

The argument against materialism and for an immaterial mind/soul follows a similar form:

1. If I am morally responsible for an action, then that action is within my control.
2. If materialism is true, then everything that I do is a result of the laws of physics.
3. I am not in control of the laws of physics.
4. If materialism is true, then I am not in control of my actions. (2,3)
5. If materialism is true, then I am not morally responsible. (1,4)
6. Moral responsibility is a necessity of human nature.
7. I am human.
8. Since there are humans who are morally responsible, materialism is false. (5,6,7)

Perhaps the most important claim here is that we are morally responsible. If one wants to suggest that we aren't, I'd like to see him argue that after getting punched in the nose for a birthday present. But if he still insisted as if it wasn't true that he shouldn't have gotten punched in the nose, then these arguments do not work. And that's okay. The arguments are intended only for those who believe in moral responsibility, that there are ways that we ought to behave.

As of the 17th or 16th posts, this thread is under scrutiny and off topic posts will be deleted. And it's no trouble to me to do some house cleaning every now and then.

20th and 21st CENTURY PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS--Let's not forget the heroism of the martyrs!

Info from Citizen Magazine:

His story, as follows, is found at: www.persecution.com/about/index.cfm?action=WurmbrandStory"

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Home School Basketball Greats! Whaddaya Know!!??

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/sports/16homeschool.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1206036177-+I/2gqKR8MMxY6vtYx5mNg

This is a great article in The New York Times, of all places! I found it on the Religion Clause blog.

Dobson on Christian Leadership

Dr James Dobson hopes for new leaders to be raised up --no doubt in every family, every church, every community, every city, state --and yes, the nation. We always benefit from godly leadership, men of integrity and character, who can resist the temptations that are inundating people through media of all kinds --adversely shaping their character --such that we now celebrate licentiousness in the name of liberty, thinking people ought to be legally allowed to do absolutely anything they want to --short of theft and murder.

Those are the only taboos left --and judging by the numbers of people in jail for those two crimes alone --plus drugs and rape --too many have lost ALL sense of conscience, self-control, and commitment to live rightly--good character.

Add to the prison population, the hypocrites in high places such as the church and gov't, the degenerate pop icons/celebrities, -- and then all the people who celebrate freedom to do absolutely anything they want sexually as a civil right -- well, don't be surprised if God brings us to our knees through terrorists and economic depression.

Dobson and others hope it doesn't come to that --and we Christians pray for leaders to preach God's truths which motivate discipleship and conversion and righteous lifestyles --which do include charity as well as a return to moral chastity.

On a hopeful note, there was a pretty girl guest on Leno tonight with her father in the audience and she said she had never had a boyfriend, or been kissed --because she believes that "true love waits." I was surprised that many in the audience applauded this. We aren't dead yet! I can't help but wonder if a European audience would have seen anything in her statement to applaud! I rather doubt it. I think they would jeer. From what I've observed in Europeans, they have no respect for chastity as an ideal of value at all. Thank God, we aren't there yet.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

EASTER PAGEANT --The Cross of Love --at Fremont Christian Missionary Alliance Church --on Brush St. off of US 20

The 10th annual season and this year's 3rd and final performance of this drama will take place on Good Friday at 7 PM.

The Cross of Love is an annual drama written, revised and produced by the pastor's wife at the Fremont MCA Church. An excellent, condensed account of Jesus's ministry, the Last Supper, the Betrayal of Judas at the Mount of Olives, the appearance before Pilate, Peter's denial, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the encounter with the doubting Thomas -- all are reenacted most convincingly in this local production.

The Jesus figure is very convincing (as are others) --and gives his personal testimony --how he came to this church without any church background or Christian experience, witnessed this production 8 years ago and has been playing the Jesus role ever since. Now he is undergoing trial by fire in his own personal life, afflicted with a serious disease, resulting in a recent depression as well --but the Lord assured him in scripture and through His Spirit that He would be faithful to him through the difficulties that lie ahead. How comforting are Christ's words, "Because I live, you shall live also."

This is well worth seeing. It makes the story literally come to life --excellent for youth and doubters. Before the graphic crucifixion scene, parents are given the option to send their children to the library for the 2nd act. Refreshments are served following the free performance.

There is some excellent vocal and dramatic talent in the little town of Fremont --found in this production. Much of the action, by the way, takes place in the aisles --and all close to the audience. So you will not doze off, believe me. (One of the soloists/actors is our son, who splits his time between this church, his wife's, and ours.)

Take 20East from Toledo, go into Fremont, turn right at the Beer Point Convenience Store (do not stop for beer) and right on Brush St. and on the right is the church.

I was so impressed, I'm going to try to bring our CLC kids there on an outing next year.

FOR THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO TRAVEL SO FAR FOR A GOOD FRIDAY SERVICE, COME TO OUR TENEBRAE SERVICE AT THE SAME TIME IN HOLLAND. SEE PREVIOUS BLOG ARTICLE.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

TENEBRAE SERVICE AT HOLLAND FREE METHODIST CHURCH

REFLECT ON CHRIST’S DEATH ON THE CROSS AT A TENEBRAE SERVICE AT HOLLAND FREE METHODIST CHURCH, on Good Friday, at 7 PM. The church is located at 6605 Angola Road, WHICH IS north of Spring Meadows Mall, in Holland, Ohio.

Tenebrae is the Latin word for “darkness” or “shadows.” This special Good Friday service features music, chimes and readings with the gradual extinguishing of candles until only a single candle symbolizing the life of our Lord remains. As it grows darker, we reflect on the emotional and physical pain of our Lord’s sacrifice. Toward the end of the service, the Christ candle is hidden, signifying His death. At the end, a loud noise represents the earthquake at the time of his death which is followed by the restoration of the Christ candle, symbolizing the triumph of good over evil. We depart the sanctuary in silence. Holy Communion for all believers present will be presided over by Pastor Keith Simpson with Rachel Simpson providing music on the clarinet.

Other music will include the choir, choir and congregation on Were You There? featuring soloist Jon or Rob Rohrs, soloist Paula Swann on The Via Doloroso and Patty Bersinger singing Watch the Lamb. A Rohrs trio will perform a contemporary arrangement of There is a Fountain Filled with Blood.

Easter Sunrise Service on Easter Sunday at 7 AM followed by a light breakfast.

Easter/Resurrection Service at 10:45AM featuring choir numbers, Rhoda Roloff on Was it a Morning Like This? and the Rohrs Trio on Last Night.

Come worship with us!

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

ROCK BAND VOLUME --in churches and anywhere --deafening people! There oughtta be a law!

Inspired by a news item from Ann Arbor, written about today on Religion Clause website (see my link in blogroll at right of my home page.)

I think it's a problem when churches are so huge that if they do an outdoor festival, it has to be loud enough to bother a neighborhood--but that shouldn't be all the time --that the noise would permeate the neighborhood. Neighborhoods in the past have enjoyed the large parish festivals of the Catholics. They shouldn't suddenly get prejudiced against the socially conservative Religious Right churches.

As for VOLUME, there ought to be a limit to the decibels and a way to measure them when rock bands are amplified ANYWHERE, indoors or out, because these overly zealous (and probably deaf) sound techs are DEAFENING people --especially young people --for a lifetime of hearing loss. I've been at my own church's international youth conference and complained that I could hear perfectly well in the indoor arena with my ears totally stuffed with cottonballs! What are we thinking? And so we complained --and the leadership said, "but the kids like it this way!" SO WHAT! The kids like all day candy and ice cream and tv consumption, too!

Why in this area of sound, do we think teen volume preferences MUST be tolerated? to their detriment?

I think communities should be tolerant of outdoor festivals on special occasions--as The Church on Strayer holds around the 4th of July, but even then, volumes shouldn't be damaging to the people in the near vicinity of the speakers --and if they are not THAT loud, I bet they won't be so objectionable in the neighborhood either.

AS for THE CHURCH ON STRAYER --which used to be The Cathedral of Praise --what did they mean by calling themselves "The Church on Strayer" as though they were the only one? Strayer Road has 2 churches that take up most of one side of the street, and the other was there first. (I know musical leadership at both churches, I'm proud to say --as both came from our church.) But it seems pretty rude to call yourself "THE church..." when there is another right beside you which was there first. And the other is also a dynamic church with healthy attendance. Pastor Tony Scott, what were you thinking?

I suggest the other church, Heritage Church of God, rename themselves as "First Church on Strayer!" But then they'd get their mail all mixed up.

Why Hetero Marriage Should Have the Parades

On another blog, I posted the following --when a commenter said that the social conservatives are just "too interested in the personal behaviors of others" --this pertained to gay marriage.

It isn't their behaviors that are at issue. It's the re-defining of marriage as between any two people --regardless of sex. It's an absurdity we never thought possible when I was growing up.

Homosexual behaviors have always been with us --just like adultery, pedophilia, pre-marital sex and pregnancy, sex-slavery, incest, rape, bigamy, polygamy, the desire to transgender, transvestitism, prostitution, porn --and a very few "shacked up" without marriage. There really used to be a lot of shame on losing virginity and pre-marital pregnancy and living together "without benefit of clergy," which is how they described "shacking up." Most rare of all in American society, I trust, was bestiality. All of these are forbidden in the Bible and many have been frowned upon and discouraged in every HUMANE civilization and culture since the dawn of time. Wherever these behaviors were prevalent, the culture has not been admired by history today.

None of these other deviations from the preferred ideal of hetero-marriage have sponsored pride parades in America or asked for legal sanction through the institution called "marriage."

Why should hetero marriage be favored? Simple. It's the institution that brings children into the world with a father and mother who are married to each other, stay together to be the grandparents together, provide male and female role modeling for their sons and daughters. Hetero marriage provides a stable, emotional and economic support system in which to bear, raise, nurture, protect, supervise and educate the next generation. Thus, we will have a future --future military and workers and family members to support the older generations --future married parents to bring on the future generations.

Homosexual relationships are comparatively the end of the road --they don't make children and just don't need the perks of the hetero married who volunteer to take on the burdens of bearing and rearing kids. If they have kids, they didn't make them as a gay couple. There is a father in the case of lesbian parents who needs to pay child support. When two men adopt a child, they both work and afford a nanny. And that mother figure typically changes through the years. The child truly has no mother.

We are crazy to tamper with the definition of marriage to include people of the same sex.

Monday, March 10, 2008

WHEW! Thank God! So far so good!

Hallelujah, some good news! The MA at the gynecology/oncologist's office said no cancer! I said, "Are you SURE!?" Because the doc was pretty sure I did have it from the ultrasound and symptoms. But she said not according to the biopsy. One more test has to come in. The Family Doc with whom I had appointment today, said it worried him tht the gyn expert thought the test would be positive, as he sees a lot of cases and would know how to predict usually. He suspects that surgery may be recommended anyway as a preventative measure. He said you always have to wonder if maybe they didn't biopsy the diseased part of the tissue. Since I have been through this diagnosis and testing before, with the same result, I'm thinking positively.

The surgery is a common procedure for women and I'll cross that bridge when the expert says.

Meanwhile, it was interesting the responses you all gave me

Jeanette thinks God might change a lab sample in the lab as well as in your body in answer to prayer. That's OK with me, but I'm inclined to think otherwise. But if God did it for me, "I'm forever grateful" --as the song says.

Christian Apologist says whatever happens is God's will. I'm not that much of a fatalist. Though there is one verse that says "In everything give thanks, for this is the will of Christ concerning you."

Mudrake says --go watch funny movies and take a walk in the sunshine. And implied it's ridiculous to pray or to think that the more people praying for you, the more efficacious the prayer. Actually, Mudly, it's not the prayer of many people that is effectual; [It's] "the fervent effectual prayer of a righteous man [that] availeth much." Although there is Biblical precedent for God to act when a whole nation or tribe or group repents and looks to Him for deliverance. Prophets and punishment were used to bring Israel to their knees repeatedly.

I am grateful for the good news --and wish the same for all.

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

Friday, March 7, 2008

Facing Mortality --He is Risen! And So Shall We Be also!

I am contemplating my next stage. I am glad for the Resurrection of the dead to eternal life. I am glad that Jesus rose again and walked the earth after being dead. I am glad that he raised Lazarus from the dead and promised the same for us who trust in Him as our Savior.

I await test results on Tuesday regarding what my doctor, after an ultrasound, thinks is a likely case of cancer. He did a biopsy.

I am surprised at how un-fazed I am at this stage of waiting --and how my life is proceding as usual. How I'm still going to have that root canal later this month!

I will ask for your prayers after I find out if it's serious or not.

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

See the Religion Clause Blog --and Where is Kooz?

www.religionclause.blogspot.com

This is the place to go for up-to-date articles on religious legal cases. The host is a professor emeritus from UT School of Law. I would really enjoy discussing these cases with people of various views.

ALSO, where is Kooz who recently opened and closed an excellent blog? again. Are you getting threats of intimidation or anything like that, Kooz? affecting your career path?

The Barb Wire