Wednesday, October 23, 2019
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
Monday, October 21, 2019
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Apparently A Sin To Back Trump As Nothing More Than The Lesser Of Evils
Doesn’t there come a point as an adult where the sane individual doesn’t really enthusiastically support any candidate but rather employs a calculus settling for the lesser of the available evils?
Click On The Headline
Sunday, October 13, 2019
Consulting Online Maps Condemned As Idolatry
The author Sarah Dixon Young repents of, upon getting lost while driving, vocally asking Google for directions instead of asking God of whom she reminds owns cattle on a thousand hills according to the Bible.
The concern that human beings might surrender too much control to technology as we grow increasingly reliant upon it is valid.
However, there is also something said against attempting to appear so pious as to overreact in response to what is a legitimate use of technology.
Had Sarah Young asked God for directions, in most instances, is He really going to indisputably give them to her with a thunderous “Thus saith the Lord” when in most of life's other complexities the answers He provides are not usually so explicitly direct but rather through other means built into the system of creation that He sustains?
So just how far does Sarah Young want to take this analogy?
Are those driving to the supermarket for bread denying that God is the Bread of Life who will supply our needs according to His riches?
Would those going to a doctor's appointment be guilty of denying that God is the Great Physician as argued by the Christian Scientists, related metaphysical cults, and assorted faith healers tottering along the brink of heresy?
And are those even driving automobiles in the first place guilty of the great going to and fro predicted in Daniel 12:4?
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, October 08, 2019
Monday, October 07, 2019
Sunday, October 06, 2019
Thursday, October 03, 2019
Enemies Of Free Speech Agitate To Remove Buchanan From Airwaves
In contemporary America, progressives have exposed their true nature by suggesting that the best way to address ideas with which they disagree is not to debate them or to present a coherent refutation but rather to have such concepts banished altogether often under threat of violence.
As such, the purveyors of such enlightenment are suggesting that the columnist should not be allowed on the program for allegedly being a “White supremacist”.
It is argued that that particular ideology must be resisted with all possible means as it dehumanizes any that it does not look upon with favor.
Yet one article bemoaning the return of Pat Buchanan to regular broadcast news analysis is titled, “The Conservative Undead Will Never Leave Us”.
In other words, conservatives that do not go along with the prevailing consensus even when they do so with fully articulated reason free from gratuitous name calling are the equivalent of zombies.
And as viewers of the horror genre know, such creatures are worthy of no consideration as human beings for they no longer are.
You simply exterminate such monstrosities in the most efficient manner available.
So if the pundit's supporters are expected to sanitize their rhetoric for fear it encourages outrageous acts of violence, why isn't something similar expected of those demanding the elimination of our most basic of liberties in order to implement their particular cultural vision as well?
By Frederick Meekins
