Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
The Dean of the National Cathedral is calling for prayer regarding the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. Since he categorizes himself as a “Christian atheist”, he should be asked what is the point of asking for assistance from aGod that does not exist. According to his theology, it might be more beneficial to flip on the Batsignal.
Militias are accused of complicating things along the border for attempting to uphold a number of laws that the Obama administration border patrol is failing to enforce. However, not a single militia has looted a business or vandalized property. Do CNN propagandists that insist upon detailing the ideological nuances and distinctions found among the Ferguson, Missouri protesters intend to point out this fact just elaborated?
Monday, August 18, 2014
A Moral Analysis Of Physician Assisted Suicide
In this contentious debate, ghouls in lab coats give those wracked with the most horrible of afflictions the impression that the only alternatives available are a life of agony or an end hastened by an IV drip. However, those in the middle of this debate who relish neither the prospects of drawn out pain nor speeding up death as an end in itself can provide a bit of solace in light of life’s most intense existential crisis for their loved ones and colleagues.
Many times if these cases are looked at more closely, one does not find someone that is all that eager to embrace death as they are to ease overwhelming physical and emotional suffering. The goal in such situations ought not be to prolong life beyond what was intended but rather to allow the person’s existential voyage to reach its conclusion at a natural pace in a more serene manner.
Therefore, the best course of treatment to counsel the terminally ill consists of the various options to control the pain. Rae points out that, though there are cases where pain cannot be controlled, these instances are rare and should not be precedent-setting examples upon which a comprehensive policy is based (188). It is Rae’s assertion that most cases can be controlled through a high-enough amount of medication.
Under the principle known as “the law of double effect”, medical personnel could be permitted to administer a sufficient quantity of drugs to alleviate the pain even if one of the possible side effects of the treatment is death (188). To some, this may sound little different than euthanasia; however, the distinction of motive is critical as the patient and medical professionals are not deliberately seeking to end life but rather to alleviate suffering aware of the knowledge that death might be an potential outcome. When you come down to it, this would not be all that more ethically ambiguous than any other risky but necessary medical procedure.
In his lectures for the Trinity Theological Seminary courses in Apologetics, John Warwick Montgomery astutely observed that each of us is more preoccupied about our own deaths and those of loved ones than we are willing to admit. Even for Christians, that appointment none will be able to avoid other than through Christ’s Second Coming might not spark as much apprehension if we had better assurances from the medical community that everything within its power was being done to make the transition into the next realm as comfortable as possible.
In regards to the issue of physician-assisted suicide, its proponents often attempt to turn the tables on their Christian opponents with the following argument: “Since Christians should show mercy and compassion, they should therefore approve of physician assisted suicide.” While this may be difficult to counter initially in light of the immense pain the terminally ill often suffer from, upon closer reflection one will realize that mercy and compassion are not as intrinsically linked with this disputed medical practice as we have been led to believe.
For starters, often the terminally ill are not so eager for a headlong rush into death as they are terrified of becoming a burden or facing the cessation of life in this world alone. Thus, in such circumstances, mercy and compassion would manifest themselves not in a desire to let the dieing do themselves in but rather by standing alongside them as an advocate against maltreatment or to stand beside them as a companion, holding the hand of the ailing letting them know they are still loved despite their failing bodies and that they will be missed each day until we ourselves will be resurrected with them in eternity where we will no more endure the sorrow of death.
If the advocates of euthanasia point out that while such efforts might diminish psychological anguish they do little to ease overwhelming pain, the Christian can respond that the goal ought not to be so much hastening death but rather directing research efforts towards addressing this physical trauma. As Rae points out, the cases where pain cannot be managed are increasingly rare; and in especially challenging cases under the principle known as “the law of double effect”, physicians are justified in increasing the patient’s level of medication to levels nullifying the pain even if one of the potential side effects is death. In such a scenario, death is not the intended result but rather an unintended consequence.
In these debates, it is often considered impolite to call someone’s motives into question. However, since the advocates of physician-assisted suicide have already insinuated that Christians leery of this practice rank up there with the Marquis De Sade for allowing suffering to continue, it would be a fair question to ask whether euthanasia’s enthusiasts are really all that concerned about the comforts of the critically ailing or simply hide behind such a seemingly humanitarian posture out of more materialistic motivations.
For despite hiding behind a cloak of compassion, many calling for physician-assisted suicide are just concerned about the bottom line, claiming that limited resources would be better directed towards salvageable human capital. As former Colorado Governor Richard Lamm said, “We have a duty to die”, no doubt emphasizing this obligation for the common man rather than his own loved ones.
By Frederick Meekins
During the introduction to an episode of his broadcast ministry, Creflo Dollar remarked that he was disturbed by Christians that otherwise live by what they profess but that seem insufficiently transformed by grace. But so long as they live by what they profess, is it really a pastor's business as to the details of the person's life beyond that? Not everyone is going to be a superstar Christian. Often, those that present themselves as such result in the largest theological and existential trainwrecks that end up soiling the name of Christ. And just what does it mean anyways to be sufficiently transformed by grace. Is that some kind of code or euphemism that such souls have not targeted a sufficient amount of funds for Creflo Dollar ministries specifically?
It seems on a city newspaper website that the arts page for the sodomites and perverts is distinct from the remainder of the population that has not evolved to that stage of sexuality. But when it comes to art, I thought one wasn't suppose to judge into what well an artist preferred to dip his pen or against what kind of canvas he preferred to stroke his brush.
It was complained that some would rather give money than to volunteer in church. But what if the church making the complaint will only accept your money and not allow you to volunteer unless you jump through a number of hoops that don't have very much to do with determining whether or not you are on some kind of offender registry. Given the deficits many churches run, shouldn't these ministry staffs be grateful for what funds people decide to give?
All Christians have a spiritual gift. However, can those in a congregation homiletically be bored a new one about not using their spiritual gifts in the context of a partcular congregation if that congregation does not have opportunities in which specific spiritual gifts can be used or does not allow an individual to exercise the spiritual gift that the individual believes that they may possess?
Technically, isn’t the KKK raising funds for the legal defense of the police officer involved in the Ferguson shooting less morally reprehensible than the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party stoking the population to the point of upheaval? One has a right to a legal defense. One does not have a right to loot and rampage.
Friday, August 15, 2014
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Evangelical Elites Aroused Over Coulter's Missionary Position
Ann Coulter's remarks regarding missionaries weren't that far off the mark.
Those engaged in that particular form of ministry often get by with things that would never be allowed on the part of average mundane pewfillers.
For example, some of the throbbing neck vein pulpit firebrands that drone on and on how ungodly church bookstores and garage sales or flea markets are don't give second thought when allowing missionaries to hawk books and tapes as congregant walk by them on the way out the church door.
Coulter pretty much hit the nail on the head in asking why can't Christians serve God in America any more.
For example, I went from kindergarten through 12th grade in a Christian school setting.
A considerable number of foreign missionaries were brought in to speak to the students.
I can't recall any one being brought in to discuss how a Christian worldview could be applied here in America in culturally relevant areas such as mass communications, public service, or business.
Granted, assorted orations in honor of Ben Carson were held each February even way back then.
However, these exhalations were lifted up more so simply because he was Black for it is doubtful his medical aptitude would have been mentioned at all if he had not been born a politically correct hue.
Given the state of healthcare here, where many financially struggle or are even go bankrupt to obtain it, why don't more Christian organizations conduct such outreach on behalf of their own countrymen?
By Frederick Meekins
Lesbian Minstrel Threatens To Brainwash Church Youth Into Accepting Gay Marriage
In response to Ann Coulter’s observations regarding the narcissistic martyr complex often exhibited my missionaries, a Facebook theologian quipped that Albert Mohler is more doctrinally sound than Ann Coulter. Perhaps comprehensively, but not in regards to this issue. What Coulter has enunciated here is merely a different interpretation. It can no more condemned than Paul wanting to head in one direction to evangelize and Barnabas wanting to go in another. Coulter’s missiological strategy enjoys a sounder Biblical foundation and relies less on mere human opinion than Mohler’s insistence that the unmarried over the age of 22 in a congregation are little better than street whores that should be pressured into marriage by the COMMUNITY whether they want to be one not irrespective of whether or not they have kept themselves out of each others pants.
A Facebook meme for the verse about putting away childish things pictures a man tossing teddy bears into the garbage. So is their an approved list of hobbies or things that a man is allowed to collect. And shouldn’t it be one of the most childish things that can be thought of as to allow the COMMUNITY to dictate what items that do not violate Scripture that an adult is allowed to collect?
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Biomedical Developments Require Advanced Ethical Reflection
As an illustration, consider the following. A young mother with two small children has an accident one morning that does not kill her but leaves her in a coma. She is taken to the trauma center where she is placed on life support. Her husband informs the medical staff that his wife stated that she desired no treatment should she ever find herself in such a condition. Since her temperature is rising significantly, her physician believes she should be treated for an infection. Her husband does not approve.
To decide whose wishes should prevail (either her husband’s or the doctor’s), any bioethics committee called in to make a determination would first have to consider a number of factors. For starters, a bioethics committee would need to distinguish between extraordinary and ordinary means of treatment.
According to Rae, ordinary means are those courses of treatment for a disease that offer a reasonable hope of benefit to the patient without being excessively burdensome; extraordinary means are those that do not offer such hope and place undue burdens on the patient (185). In other words, extraordinary means would include things such as respirators that temporarily extend a life that would come to an end without the intervention of such a device. Ordinary means would consist of those things that ordinarily sustain or improve the normal processes of life such as food and water. Antibiotics could be considered an ordinary means of treatment since these substances are administered to curb an infection threatening life and health rather than prolonging life that is beginning to fade away.
Second, the bioethics committee should look into the quality of the of relationship between husband and wife. While such a suggestion might seem nosy, in light of certain disturbing aspects of the Terri Schiavo case, it would be helpful to know whether the spouse is sincerely seeking to fulfill the wishes of their mate in these grim matters or merely looking for an easy way out to make their way on to their next victim, I mean partner.
This case is not that difficult for objective observers with a traditional Judeo-Christian worldview. Administering antibiotics to fight off the infection in order to bide more time to ascertain more fully God’s future plans for this woman would be a moral obligation.
More extensive life support measures would be a decision best left to the family. The most difficult task might be educating the husband as to the distinctions between ordinary and extraordinary means. Though some might consider it presumptuous to speak on someone else’s behalf, at the time his wife made the statement about not wanting treatment if she ever found herself in such a situation, she was probably not referring to treatments such as food, water, and regular medicines but rather to things more like breathing tubes and respirators. For example, one could argue that, if the “no treatment” criteria was to be upheld as an inviolable absolute, the administration of painkillers would have to be withheld as well since these are also a form of treatment.
Furthermore, the medical professional must make it clear that it is not over until it’s over. The antibiotics do not interfere with the chain of events set into motion by the accident, the outcome of which no mortal can know for certain. Rather, these substances prevent an otherwise preventable or treatable secondary matter from overtaking the body and weakening it further. By administering the antibiotics, the family can better prepare themselves for the ultimate will of God in the life of their loved one, which could consist of any number of possible outcomes such as death, healing, or life-long disability.
Even though a number of these states may be far from what we would consider ideal and we might even question them sometimes as mere human beings, it is not our place to be the direct cause of the conclusion of the process known as life. It is rather the duty of the family and authorized caregivers to make the loved one as comfortable as possible and this is most likely what a person means when they say they do not want to be subject to all kinds of extraordinary treatments.
By Frederick Meekins
Bill Gates Insists Common Dregs Of Humanity Not Worthy Of The Second Amendment
Is his own security detail unarmed? Click On The Headline
Mental health functionaries are questioning the propriety of releasing the details of the suicide of Robin Williams. It is claimed such specifics could push those tottering on the abyss into taking the leap into oblivion. But if there is no God or morality binding upon all irrespective of circumstances, what does it matter if someone decides to take their own life or not? Almost just as important, if we are to conceal these specifics because of the few that might attempt this, why is little done to curtail the romping of sack to sack on prime time TV? Still others insist that the intricacies of human reproduction and the physiology of pleasure should be introduced to students from the first day of kindergarten. Yet only a small handful actively seek to end their own lives. Nearly anybody under the right stimuli can be lead towards carnal temptations.
Ibrahim Hooper of the Counsel on American Islamic Relations wants the vandalism of a Northern Virginia mosque investigated as a hate crime. Wonder if he has released a statement condemning atrocities committed by his fellow coreligionists such as the beheading of toddlers, the molestation of underage brides, and the burying alive of religious dissidents. Or are we to conclude that his group of jihadist sympathizers view these as acts of spiritual charity and compassion?
Rush Limbaugh is correct in part about the suicide of Robin Williams being contributed to in part by the leftist mindset. However, it might have been more accurate to formulate the tragedy as the outcome of the materialistic mindset of which leftism is that worldview’s primary socio-political manifestation. For if this world is all that there is and there is no assurance of an Afterlife to take comfort in or aspire to which could result in an eternity worse than the misery we experience here if we do not throw ourselves on the mercy of Jesus Christ, why should we resist the temptation to end it all when the burdens of this life seem unbearable without any chance of improvement.
Fox News’s Shephard Smith is being criticized for referring to Robin Williams as a coward for taking his own life. While it is commendable that light is being shed exposing the despair of depression, it should be remembered exactly who Williams is and what exactly it is that he has done. It’s not like this is the 1800’s and Williams has broken down into fits of uncontrollable crying that he can’t explain nor has he just birthed a baby. It’s not like he was unaccustomed to seeking professional help. How many other acts ought to be excused and praise lavished upon the individual because they feel irresistible impulses within their minds prompting them to behaviors outside the social norm. Applying the example of Robin Williams, instead of financially destroying Paula Deen for confessing to the utterance of a questionable word in the privacy of her own home where not a single human life was lost, shouldn’t she be honored and celebrated like never before? And what about child and wife beaters? Not comparable liberal elites will snap. But hasn’t Williams abused his family in about the worst way imaginable?
Rush Limbaugh is partially correct. Though it is not the place of government to determine the limits or to do anything about the dilemma, part of the despair that drove Robin Williams to suicide was no doubt that which besieges those that have too much or, having acquired nearly every earthly desire imaginable, have little else left to achieve. Media accounts indicate Williams was in part troubled that his career was declining onto the small screen of television rather than the more intense notoriety of successive box office blockbusters. But that said, given his own history of abusing addictive painkillers, shouldn’t Limbaugh be one of the last to criticize those with dispositions prone towards melancholy or depression?
Fox News’s Shephard Smith is being criticized for referring to Robin Williams as a coward for taking his own life. While it is commendable that light is being shed exposing the despair of depression, it should be remembered exactly who Williams is and what exactly it is that he has done. It’s not like this is the 1800’s and Williams has broken down into fits of uncontrollable crying that he can’t explain nor has he just birthed a baby. It’s not like he was unaccustomed to seeking professional help. How many other acts ought to be excused and praise lavished upon the individual because they feel irresistible impulses within their minds prompting them to behaviors outside the social norm. Applying the example of Robin Williams, instead of financially destroying Paula Deen for confessing to the utterance of a questionable word in the privacy of her own home where not a single human life was lost, shouldn’t she be honored and celebrated like never before? And what about child and wife beaters? Not comparable liberal elites will snap. But hasn’t Williams abused his family in about the worst way imaginable?
If Michelle Obama can rearrange our lives because she thinks we are fat, then why can’t psychiatrist Keith Ablow suggest that the First Lady is fat? In response, meteorologist Janice Dean snapped as to the impropriety of a man telling a woman to drop a few pounds. If mouthy broads don’t want comments made, they should keep their mouths shut regarding those areas in which they don’t want to hear criticism.
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Brookings Institute Invokes Transhumanism In Attempt To Destroy The Constitution
I guess the Christian exuding all of the politically correct platitudes one is expected to enunciate if one is to be embraced as an acceptably docile member of the COMMUNITY will lavish praise upon the Trayvonite insurgents in St. Louis for liberating the people’s goods blockaded by the capitalists.
Regarding misisonaries. Ann Coulter did not verbalize anything the average God-loving pewfiller hasn’t thought as missionaries on deputation denigrate America attempting to guilt-trip you into filling the collection plate so they can return to the heathen lands where they will proceed to pump out another half-dozen kids.
CNN propagandist Don Lemon assures that he understands the St. Louis riots even if he does not agree with such actions. Did he extend such dismissive sympathy to Paula Deen when, in proper Maoist self-denunciation, she confessed to verbalizing a questionable word in the PRIVACY OF HER OWN HOME to her husband after a gun was held to her head? Not a single business was pillaged by Paula Deen. Would Lemon express such solidarity with this ghetto rabble if had been the CNN studio torn to Sheol?
A Facebook theologian posted “We need to return to the era where men and women were very easily distinguishable by dress and appearance.” Such a sentiment sounds reasonable in an era with exposed knockers jiggling about so much that they could easily poke someone’s eye out. However, just as often the platitude is invoked in many a fundamentalist sermon as justification why women can’t wear pants and in some circles why they shouldn’t be allowed to cut their hair. Women should probably also be forced to wear a corset to the point of catatonia for good measure. To those invoking such rhetoric, who gets to determine what just isn’t sufficiently moral but adequately feminine, just other men?
Monday, August 11, 2014
Does Christian Compassion Demand Uncritical Exposure To Ebola?
For the most part, the minister condemned those such as Donald Trump as well as a number of Christians that questioned the wisdom of bringing into the United States a number of missionaries that have contracted the pestilence but not yet succumbed to the ravages.
According to the Pastor, politeness and compassion are more paramount than health and survival.
It probably won't be long if one does not want to be excommunicated that the sincere believer will be expected to sip from the same communion chalice as the souls with this particular affliction.
Those such as Rev. Kellett justify their position with appeals to passages admonishing mercy for the suffering and the examples set by these missionaries that fell ill as a result of their ministerial outreach to the less fortunate.
But what about verses and teaching that counsel the protection of one's own family as one's highest earthly priority?
Human empathy and spiritual sensitivity prompt the believer to hope and pray that these servants of God make a full recovery.
However, these missionaries made their own respective choice about subjecting themselves to these dangers.
That choice is not one being extended to the average American, whom this pastor is telling those that do not agree with flinging the doors wide open to the most horrifying of diseases, to sit down and shut up.
These average Americans (not the elites implementing these transformational policies who will be whisked away to lavish underground resorts in a time of crisis) who will be gunned down in the streets by FEMA purification squads or forced to languish in hemorrhagic agony in quarantine death camps.
For decades, the average Christian has sat quietly in the pews enduring many an outlandish claim and denunciations of the American way of life by these missionaries that expect the harangued to bankroll their pietistic wanderlust.
We should at the very least be granted the courtesy of being allowed to voice our concerns when these adventures abroad result in the most vile forms of Third World death being brought to the hallowed shores.
By Frederick Meekins
To mollify terrorist sympathizers, the treasurer of the Virginia Republican Party was driven from office for simply questioning online President Obama's insistence that Muslims were the ones that built the fabric of American society. A spokesman for one jihadist front group remarked how profoundly offended his coreligionists across the country were at the comment. Is such outrage directed by Muslims at adult Muslim insurgents seizing girls as young as seven to be defiled as child brides or the murder on the streets of those failing Koranic trivia? It is fascinating that Obama would rhetorically celebrate Islam's alleged contributions to America yet go out of his way to insist on foreign soil that America is not a Christian nation. If elected officials cave so easily to the demands of these savages at this point, on what grounds ought we to believe that our government will protect the American people when these heathens commence their homicidal uprising?
Obama Voters Rampage In St. Louis
lick On The Headline
Thursday, August 07, 2014
Wednesday, August 06, 2014
In reference to Jesse Ventura's legal verdict against the widow of a murdered Navy Seal, a Tea Party organization posted on Facebook, “Jesse Ventura has to live with the fact that if he runs into any Special Forces people (regardless of their branch of service), he'll get the crap beat out of him. Live long and suffer, you big mouthed jerk.” So apparently it is now appropriate to applaud members of the armed forces inflicting bodily harm upon Americans with which they disagree politically or morally. On what grounds do members of the Tea Party endorsing such an action complain should liberal thugs inflict a similar crime upon someone from that movement enunciating an unpopular perspective?
A theologian posted on Facebook, “The Beatles. No Christian should listen to them.” Before complying, shouldn't the reason be given a reason why? Or are we mere pewfillers expected to obey without question? Also, since we are to be led about like dimwitted herd animals to exist in a continual state of cultural panic, will there be a list provided of tunes we are allowed to listen to? And for the grand question that would probably get me stoned by some religious fanatics, if Christians are expected not to listen to the Beatles with no reason provided, how is it that those we are expected to obey without question happen to know so much about the moptops from Liverpool?
Tuesday, August 05, 2014
Homeschool activist Kevin Swanson laments that bookstore sales have plummeted since 2007 and that people aren’t reading anymore. That does not necessarily follow. Why should I blow twenty plus dollars on a book when I can get it for around $5 often within six months of its release at Ollies? Furthermore, for better or worse, many now acquire their reading material electronically. Many might not find that ideal or preferable, but one can’t issue a blanket condemnation about people not reading. Maybe some that use to read like fanatics as youths, as they grow older that no matter how much they read, they really aren’t getting anything out of it in terms of position, status, or increased bank account no matter how much effort they expend.
Homeschool activist Kevin Swanson castigated Baby Boomers for relying on Social Security more than other generations. And exactly how are they supposed to survive if companies either eliminate pensions or eliminate workers before the qualify for pension plans? If they are to keep working, are the likes of Swanson going to keep their mouths shut when the man at McDonalds obviously has urine soaking his pants because of a botched prostate surgery or the person taking the order is so blind that they can’t either operate the cash register or even see the currency clearly enough to make change?
Monday, August 04, 2014
Turpitude Or Lack Thereof Should Have No Bearing On Asylum For Illegals
Unless an instantaneous background check is conducted, how can that conclusion be made for certain?
Is one to conclude that the migrants with the facial tattoos are simply expressing their childhood enthusiasm for the Mexican equivalent of Bozo the Clown or Ronald McDonald?
Liberal academics and clergy often berate the American public for what such relativists consider the impropriety of applying our own standards to other cultures.
Thus, why are we to assume youngsters crossing at the border are sweet and innocent?
Years ago, a 15 year old and a 13 year old threatened to murder me for not assuming a sufficiently docile posture upon crossing their path.
That is well within the age range that the Obama administration and the immigrant concessions racket insist we are to refrain from scrutinizing with our critical faculties.
Even if those violating the border were of a character that would make the Virgin Mary seem like Jezebel or Delilah in comparison, that is not the issue.
The United States can only allow admittance to a select number in an orderly manner to be determined by the American people or it will eventually cease to be a viable nation-state altogether.
By Frederick Meekins
On his podcast, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson reflected upon the growing number that consider themselves spiritual but not religious. Of those, he hypothesized in part that such individuals do not want to submit themselves to the requirements of COMMUNITY. Probably not in those settings where obedience to the idiosyncrasies of the group rather than what Christ has done for them is emphasized. For in this very same episode, it was insinuated that the problem with seductive Facebook selfies was not so much the element of immodesty but rather that one would post nearly anything to Facebook at all.
Obama Welcomes Hispanosupermacist Drug Gangs But Not Persecuted Iraqi Christians
Interesting. If Tim LaHaye utilizes Dispensational eschatology as the backdrop of his novels, he is accused of desecrating literature to promote religious indoctrination. Then why aren't similar allegations leveled against Stephen Spielberg for doing nearly the same thing regarding his own worldview when it comes to human/extraterrestrial half-breeds?
The Great Martian War was advertised as a documentary as if World War I was reimagined as an interplanetary conflict. And what if such a scenario was promulgated deliberately depicting Martin Luther King as a android or clone rights activist? Guess the Dough Boys weren't Black enough for the most part to be extended a similar degree of respect.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
On the 7/28/14 edition of the O’Reilly Factor, Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelley went on a tirade about communication devices that undermine human interaction and aggravate addictive pathologies. Sort of like the time O’Reilly was accused in a sexual harassment suit of crank calls propositioning lewd behavior. So since Bill can’t control himself around a cellphone, no one is suppose to have a cellphone. If O”Reilly and Kelley are so concerned about alleged disengagement attributed to social media and its supporting technologies, perhaps these figures should be among the first viewers tune out in a return to a low tech lifestyle.
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Evolutionists Outraged At County Fair Creation Science Displays
It is further cautioned “County fairs have proved good places for creationists to reach captive audiences”.
But aren't these venues less captive than those in which evolutionists purvey their own propaganda?
For example, no one is forced to attend the county fair.
However, unless a child's parents are able to scrimp together the tuition necessary to finance private education or are talented enough to educate their own children through homeschool, the vast majority of students will be bombarded by public school indoctrination where the science curriculum exudes doctrinaire Darwinism.
Secondly, if you attend the county fair and an offensive both grabs your attention, you are free to speed by.
However, if a child wants to successfully complete school, he must remain subjected to this teaching no matter how much it might ridicule the child's most deeply held beliefs.
Thirdly, organizations must pay for the use of county fair booths.
However, educators are paid from public funds to ply the naturalistic perspective. County fairs are held in part in celebration of rural culture and values.
As such, as areas characterized by deep religious faith, creation science ministries and organizations should be encouraged to highlight this particular aspect of the American philosophical landscape.
By Frederick Meekins
It was claimed in a sermon that there was a day when ministers were held in higher esteem. There might have also been a day when they were less likely to keep their hands out of the collection plate and off the underaged in the congregation as well. But then again, folks might have just been more brainwashed not to say anything about it as well.
By saying that when voting someone into ecclesiastical office one is obligated to set aside one’s opinions about an individual, aren’t you close to creating an atmosphere where one is saying you are obligated to potentially vote “yes” in regards to an individual that you have an inclination (perhaps even a longing in the spirit to put the matter in parlance the overtly pious will find it difficult to dismiss) is going to possible treat you life digestive effluent and possibly even ruin the lives of your family for years to come?
Pastor Corey Dykstra of Hope Reformed Church in Brampton Ontario in a sermon on the responsibilities of church office insisted that one is not called to preach until that is confirmed by an established ecclesiastical body. So what is to prevent you from engaging in the homiletical act anyway. Furthermore, on what grounds does he then hold to the likes of Calvin being a valid minister he the duly constituted organizational authorities of that day viewed the reformer as has having apostatized from his office?
So frankly, what one is really saying is that if one feels a call to a certain office, occupation, or work and one does not exhibit a sign of an objective disqualifying factor but an external authority refuses to confirm that call, thus prohibiting one from pursuing what it is one has a desire to do, is that God gets a kick out of yanking people’s chains.
One might have to be a member of THE CHURCH to enjoy salvation. However, that doesn’t mean one must belong to a particular organized church. Contrary to many, there is nothing in Scripture forbidding the Christian from going around to different churches. If preachers often claim that the Spirit is leading them elsewhere to different ministries every few years, why do many of these same preachers sermonize as if the average believer’s backside must be superglued to the pew.
Monday, July 28, 2014
Pastor Suggests Suppression Of Witches
The minister did a superb job in pointing out that not as many lost their lives in this tragedy as is commonly believed and the role played by Christians such as Cotton Mather in actually bringing this outrage to an end.
Somewhat disturbing was his contention that the civil magistrate should not allow those of that deviant creed to meet publicly as they do here in America.
It is correct that in the Old Testament that the theonomic covenant commanded that Israel was to drive practitioners of these beliefs from the land to the point of execution if need be.
However, we do not see that approach being taken in the New Testament.
For example, instead of physical force being used to repel these abominations, what we see transpiring in the more Gentile context in which the Apostles operated was apologetic confrontation where the errant beliefs were exposed and the alternative of the Gospel offered.
Furthermore, if the Christian magistrate suppresses conscience in this area deemed offensive, on what grounds do they protest when they find their beliefs being persecuted and oppressed?
by Frederick Meekins
A Christian Approach To Technology
Futurists have estimated that nearly 90% of the knowledge today has been discovered within the past decade. This is especially true of scientifically complex fields such as biology and medicine.
Ethics is the branch of philosophy concerned with determining what is right and wrong. Bioethics attempts to apply these principles to issues relating to matters of life, its quality, and preservation. As such, it is a relatively new field of inquiry coming to prominence since the 1980’s.
As a new discipline, overall bioethics is underdeveloped with Christian involvement scantier than it ought to be. With its frontier flavor however, bioethics is not confined solely to those with doctorates in esoteric subjects. Rather it is a field needing input from a wide variety of backgrounds and perspectives if mankind is to chart a balanced course into what was before now unexplored territory.
For example, many couples unable to have children on their own have turned to a number of fertilization techniques where egg and sperm are brought together outside the body for implantation inside the womb. While the practice has become quite commonplace, it is in fact fraught with a number of ethical dilemmas that need to be addressed by the church.
For starters, the reader will note that nowhere above is it spelled out that the sperm and the egg belong to the husband and the wife of the couple seeking to have a child. Sometimes these are donated --- often bought and sold like farm produce --- from total strangers, undermining the sanctity of the marriage covenant and no doubt unsettling the identity of the child should the offspring ever learn of his true parentage.
Yet of even greater concern in these procedures is when more eggs are fertilized than are needed. Since it can be concluded from Matthew 1:20 that fertilized eggs posses life, quite a dilemma develops over what to do with the leftover embryos.
If these individuals are disposed of, it becomes an act of murder. They can be placed into storage for up to seven years if the couple would like to have an additional baby in the future; but what happens if the couple divorces?
These conundrums and many others just like it are the result of the underlying worldview upon which much of contemporary culture rests. For since the days of the Renaissance, up through the Enlightenment and French Revolution and no doubt accelerated by Darwinism, no longer is God and His Word seen as the ultimate source of moral authority. Rather, the moral focus has switched to human autonomy in either the form of the individual or the state.
In the Book of Genesis, the student of Scripture learns that man is created in the image of God. As such, upholding this ideal preempts individual happiness when personal satisfaction comes into conflict with innocent human life.
Unfortunately, in this day the preservation of innocent human life often takes a backseat to “I want” and “me, me, me”. Such anxiety can drive the longing soul inward to concentrate on one’s own existential despair rather than outward towards those with even greater needs.
For example, a couple unable to have children on their own biologically wanting to have one --- often pressured into it by members of the congregation and clergy thinking they know more about the will of God for other people than the people themselves --- often turn to artificial fertilization these days rather than other ways to satisfy an otherwise humanitarian impulse such as adoption or other charitable pursuits.
Likewise, at the other end of the continuum of selfishness are those that, rather than coveting life so much that they would dishonor it by an illegitimate attempt to grasp at and possess it on their own terms rather than through God’s providence, that view life needing care beyond the ordinary in order to be maintained such as that at the beginning or end of temporal existence as an inconvenience to be done away with as soon as possible.
Those holding to the Biblical position of respecting the image of God within each individual irrespective of the physical frame’s condition would do what was within their power to defend the young under their responsibility and lend comfort to those passing out of this life on God’s timetable rather than according to some arbitrary definition of quality.
Furthermore, if those in their declining years were treated as human beings created in the image of God rather than as beasts of burden that have outlived their usefulness, senior saints might enjoy a better quality of life irrespective of their bodily circumstances.
By Frederick Meekins
Would The American Legion Endorse Turning Disabled Children Over To UN Control?
Friday, July 25, 2014
Why Shouldn't Pregnant Bitch Robbing The Elderly Be Shot?
How was this victim suppose to know if this wasn't a ploy to gain his sympathies and then turn around and do him in.
She apparently wasn't so incapacitated by her reproductive indiscretions as to prevent her from going a looting.
Click On The Headline
ESPN correspondent Dan Graziano insists “Dungy’s Comments Better Left Unsaid”. The headline is a reference to Dungy’s admission that he would not have drafted Michael Sam because of that player’s propensity to flaunt his sexuality to advance his career. So why aren’t Graziano’s comments regarding Dungy better off left unsaid? Why is it that tolerance and acceptance are to be bestowed only upon those that embrace the prevailing moral decline?
Will Obama Airlift Immigrant Insurgents Into U.S. Heartland?
Sarcastically I joked that eventually Coast Guard or Naval transports would probably ferry the border violators across.
It now seems that the Obama Administration may go above and beyond that level of accommodative outrageousness.
According to the New York Times, a proposal is being considered to transport young Hondurans 21 years of age and younger directly into the United States.
This is so they can avoid the journey through Mexico.
Instead, their energies can be reserved for carousing, looting, and other generalized forms of criminality once they reach not only the shores of the United States but apparently now the innermost destinations of the country as well.
Given that most Americans graduate around 18 years of age and can enlist in the military or qualify for most forms of employment at that age as well, it seems a sizable percentage of these trespassers aren’t the tiny helpless children the American people have been duped to believe.
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Will Government Robots Patrol American Homes?
This is being proposed in the name of obesity prevention.
So what happens when the human beings disobey the robot?
If these robots are government owned and subsidized, what is to prevent the robot from cataloging for your intelligence agency file everything you say and do.
What if in in a fit of anger you say something uncouth about protected government minorities?
What if the little woman is aroused to carnal relations in a politically incorrect manner?
Click ON The Headline
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
In defense of a strident understanding of predestinarian soteriology, a meme has been posted on social media pointing out that a sheep cannot become a goat and a goat cannot become a sheep because they are born that way. If this holds true, what is the point of discussing religion whatsoever other than to preen about like a peacock strutting one’s theological erudition and ecclesiastical finery? For with the exception of the Transhumanists, no one goes around advocating why one ought to alter one’s inherent ontology. Of course, you will find those mesmerized by their own doctrinal navals that parrot that God predestinates the means as well as the ends. Those holding that one is bestowed a degree of choice in determining one eternal destiny are often accused of idolatry. However, if the Calvinist hegemony holds true, isn’t the retort against free will itself an even greater act of idolatry? For its basic assumption, if clerics holding to it are going to continue to berate their co-religionists on the grounds of insufficient evangelistic zeal, that God’s sovereign choice can somehow be thwarted by His minions failing or refusing to implement it.
Italian multinational corporation Beretta is being applauded for its principled defense of the Second Amendment by planning to move it operations from Maryland because of that state’s firearms restrictions. Do they also plan to withdraw from Italy as well in opposition to characteristically strict European gun control laws or are we obligated to ignore rank hypocrisy?
President Obama has confessed to not watching the news. Will this revelation be mocked as evidence as diminished intellectual capacity as it was in the case of President George W. Bush? Or will this revelation be celebrated as proof as to how enlightened and advanced Obama is beyond we mere mundane human beings?
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Nothing Unpatriotic About Taking Advantage Of Tax Code Loopholes
Technically, if this is taking advantage of a loophole or provision of of the legal code, is it really un-American?
To many of this perspective, the issue is not so much about exhibiting a love of country as it is about statists wanting to bleed victims dry financially like a vampire with a tapeworm.
For example, golfer Phil Mickelson was about condemned for treason for hinting that he was considering a move from California to Florida in part for tax reasons.
And mind you, that geographic change would have been within the boundaries of the United States.
In a constitutional republic, it is not the business of the centralized authorities as to why an individual decides to move within the system to localities more in accord with that individual's philosophical vision.
Would these same leftwing centralizers have been outraged if Mickelson announced if he was moving from a jurisdiction opposed to gay marriage to one more accepting of that particular lifestyle arrangement?
Multiculturalists and tolerancemongers enjoy nothing more than to look down their noses and snap how out of sync what the United States is doing from that of the rest of the world.
Interesting how one seldom hears of the benefits that might result should America decide to lower tax rates on both individuals and corporations alike.
By Frederick Meekins
Monday, July 21, 2014
Regarding pub crawl permits. I don't drink or bar hop. But how can a government impose permit requirements if one person invites 2 people to a bar, these people invite two more, etc etc until a swarm forms? So long as they are within their legal occupancy limits, are these establishments then suppose to turn away paying boozers?
Friday, July 18, 2014
Thursday, July 17, 2014
Are Baptists Fielding A Security Force Openly Modelled On Hitler's Brownshirts?
The Pope has admonished that nations should be more welcoming of the immigrants flooding over their borders. So does that mean tourists should be allowed to storm the papal apartments and gorge themselves upon whatever treats might be in the private papal pantry? Can whoever wants to without prior approval take a leak in the Vatican bathroom with the nudie paintings on the wall?
In discussing how he would have ended the “Life With Archie” series in which the eponymous protagonist is murdered, home school activist Kevin Swanson announced he would have instead had Archie arrest the gay character and banish the reprobate from the town. So if this is the idealized jurisprudence of the Christian Reconstructionist, what is to prevent rumors of carnal transgression from being concocted in the attempt to seize the property of business rivals or from those that simply have a nicer place than yours?
It has been announced that Archie will lose his life in defense of a homosexual acquaintance. Not getting as nearly as much press is that the gay character is a senator campaigning for increased gun control. So if Archie had been allowed to retain and exercise his Second Amendment rights, this comic hero might have been able to foil the assassination attempt without having to sacrifice his own life. Hopefully, conservatives will make as much fuss over how such narratives paint as an ideal the willingly giving up our own lives for elites thinking that they know how to run our lives better than we do.
Vancouver Catholic Schools Surrender To Transgender Restroom & Pronoun Policies
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Is The Slow Church Movement The Next Religious Threat?
According to the 7/23/14 Christian Century review of the book “Slow Church: Cultivating Community In The Patient Way Of Jesus”, these authors contend that the individual should stay in only one church.
This is because, “Every time we move from one church to another, we lose a little bit of our patience for all things religious.”
But what if the church is so small that the less desirable regions of the Afterlife will cover over with glaciers before the average person will be able to participate through means of other emptying pockets into the collection plate?
But more importantly, this perspective could easily lead to the fostering of an atmosphere where the victims (oh, I mean members and attenders of the congregation) will put up with increasingly shocking forms of abuse and levels of generalized mistreatment for fear of endangering their immortal souls.
Even if that is not what the authors originally intended, that is most likely what will result in a world characterized by Jonestown, Waco, and the epidemic of sex scandals blackening the eyes of both the Roman Catholic and Protestant branches of Christendom.
According to the authors of a manifesto on the Slow Church Movement, one is to remain in the same church more or less no matter what.
The authors clearly look like Emergent Church beatniks.
One of them is even a Quaker.
That means he does not view doctrine formulated upon the foundation of His unchanging word as the primary way that God conveys His intentions to mankind.
Rather, we are to fumble about being leading by what is assumed to be the Holy Spirit.
But with that given a higher status than the Bible, we don’t really have any proof that the message we are receiving is from the indwelling presence of the Triune Godhead or rather from demonic entities kicked out of the gates of Heaven.
In the end, this Slow Church mindset will no doubt be used to denigrate the character of those that get up and walk out once the gay weddings or the wife swappings commence and be used to applaud as spiritually awakened those willing to go along with such abhorrent practices.
by Frederick Meekins
One of the principles of the Slow Church Movement holds that the individual should remain in the same church. So will ministry positions and opportunities go to the people that have remained at a church for ages? Or will this be more like the typical workplace where the gloryhounds swoop in when something opens up with the old timers overlooked because they aren’t the right demographic (meaning they are the wrong color or the plumbing hooked up incorrectly) with the excuse being that those at the bottom need to remain where they are (meaning there needs to be somebody to be stepped on).
Overly enthusiastic activists vandalized a Westminster MD Army Reserve Facility intending to detain illegal migrants by spray painting on the structure “No Illegals Here. No Undocumented Democrats”. Police are investigating the incident as a hate crime. But why should the perpetrators receive a harsher sentence than if someone had painted “Welcome conquerors!” Furthermore, why is this act a more profound transgression of the law than the border violation that sparks this response. Shouldn’t this expression be celebrated as protest art? These ne’er-do-wells have caused less property damage than the Occupy Movement.
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Environmental Propagandists Full Of It Over Dog Poo Run Off
Often, the pamphlet contains interesting information regarding the state's geography and natural resources.
Some of the content, however, is outright environmental propaganda.
For example, there is one activity consisting of a maze titled “Scoop The Poop”.
The text admonishes that, by scooping the poop of the 1.3 million dogs estimated to reside in the state, residents of the New Order are playing their role in removing harmful nutrients and bacteria from entering local waterways.
While picking up after Fido might make things more healthy and pleasant for human beings, such an activity can't possibly do as much to restore the Chesapeake as this dinky tractate leads one to believe..
A proverbial aphorism questions “Does a bear take a you-know-what in the woods?”
The title of a book boldly proclaims “Everybody Poops”.
Are these activists going to insist that the digestive effluent of these particular creatures is appreciably different than what is grunted out of the backside of the average household canine?
Unlike most dogs, fish living in the bay just let it rip right there in the bay.
Some of these animals, not unlike many a Redneck, probably consider roadkill fine dining.
One of the goals of bay restoration is to increase the number of animal species depleted by man (especially Whites aspiring to live a lifestyle above that of prancing through the woods 3/4's naked in a loin cloth procuring whatever nuts and berries one can happen to scrounge).
But if increasing the number of animals that live in, around, and above the Bay also increases the amount of #1 and #2 flowing into these sacred waters, then why doesn't it become our obligation to exterminate these creatures as quickly and as thoroughly as possible?
By Frederick Meekins
In a podcast condemning American Evangelicals reluctant to ship their progeny to the foreign mission fields, it was suggested that Westerners were guilty of greed while the noble savages (these days referred to as indigenous populations) were not guilty of such. I guess that’s why they’ll sell their kids for a pair of blue jeans and hack each others hands off in the attempt to gain control of diamond mines.
In addressing the theology of hunting in “Rise, Kill & Eat” by Doug Giles, too bad theologian and apologist Kevin Boling did not ask the author why it is necessary for Americans to travel to Africa to kill animals. If you are rich enough to travel to Africa, you have more than enough money to procure food and clothing from other sources.
Monday, July 14, 2014
Transborder Migrant Attempts To Spread His Misunderstood Brand Of Child Love
Mind you, I am only wording that headline in a way that would be approved by both the Obama and future Bush administrations Click On The Headline
A Washington Post profile of a Honduran woman here illegally attempting to smuggle her offspring into the United States as well asks what’s so wrong with those coming here simply wanting a better life for themselves and their children. Given that he’s such a big fan of amnesty, according to this kind of logic why should squatters in one of Bill Gates’ many spare rooms be evicted?
Friday, July 11, 2014
On a Gay Pride Whooper advertisement, a child exclaims that we are all the same on the inside. If that is the case being uplifted as the most important truth, why are these preferences even being mentioned and everyone conditioned into accepting this particular lifestyle. You don’t see Dairy Queen going out of its way to market to men that like a little more bounce to the ounce in that department.
In a Dallas Theological Seminary podcast regarding the phenomena of Emerging Adulthood and Extended Adolescence, it was remarked that, in 1960, 70% of the population had achieved what are considered milestones of adulthood such as marriage and procreation by the age of 30. Today, however, only about 40% of the population achieved these by the age of 30. Given the epidemic of divorce, the unhappy marriages that lead to the dissolving of what ought to be a lifelong bond, and the resultant social upheaval that has transpired since 1960, that isn’t exactly a good track record of why it is advisable to push the young into situations they might be entering more out of social pressure and conformity rather than as something they actually sincerely desire.
Do Dallas Seminary Scholastics Insist Church Has More Right To Children Than Christian Parents?
It use to be that the name “Dallas Theological Seminary” was akin to a Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval” in conservative Evangelical Protestant circles.
Upon hearing that name, it was pretty safe to assume that what you were subjecting yourself to was sound theological teaching.
However, as in the case of the Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval, it seems this once great name in theological erudition and learning can also be bought for a price in an era of declining standards and quality.
One comment in a podcast about the phenomena of Emerging Adulthood produced by that particular institution ought to send chills down the spines of the discerning.
One of the speakers in the discussion remarked that parents ARE NOT to think of themselves as the primary disciplers of their children regarding the Christian faith.
Instead, that is an area over which the parents are to yield to the authority of the Church.
Frankly, I doubt that is a concession even the most sincerely devout of Roman Catholics are willing to make to Vatican hierarchs.
So just how much control over what is taught in the home in regards to doctrine and practice in regards to secondary issues are the parents suppose to surrender to the pastor and his underlings?
Ideally, the parents are to be the primary teachers of the faith to their offspring.
The church is there as a source a general teaching and consultation should the family face an issue over which they do not feel equipped to address.
This mindset where the parents are looked to as glorified innkeepers and hotel bellhops with the real task of character formation left to credential and positioned experts has worked out splendidly in terms of the public education system.
Why should we assume it will work out any better in the confines of the Church.
By Frederick Meekins
Has Handout Mentality Penetrated Dallas Theological Seminary?
A Dallas Theological Seminary podcast tackled the issue of Emerging Adulthood.
That is the phenomena where many youth do not assume all of the responsibilities of adulthood all at once but rather over a span of time that can extend into the 30’s.
In reflecting, one of the seminarians remarked how in his own life as soon as graduating from Biola he set out straight to Texas to embark on his ministry.
Essential to his own success were regular checks from his church COMMUNITY.
Instead of simply offering a statement of gratitude, the seminarian went on to lament how this practice was no longer usually the case.
Why should it be?
Most people are struggling financially on their own to keep their heads above water.
On what grounds are those that are in jobs or occupations that they might not care for obligated to turn hard-earned money over to an Evangelical Christian equivalent of a shiftless beatnik meandering about trying to “find themselves” or are unwilling to lift a finger on their own until landing in their dream job?
Shouldn’t church money or money from church people instead go to those enduring ACTUAL hardships?
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Calvinists Overly Critical Of Altar Calls
Such humor is an attempt to ridicule the practice where pastors and evangelists encourage those under conviction to come forward so that they might invite Jesus into their hearts for forgiveness and salvation if they are not exactly how to commence this journey towards a beatific eternity.
Granted, such tactics might prompt an insincere or misunderstanding person to rush forward thinking the profundities being approached are formulaic.
However, what those spreading this missiological propaganda fail to reveal is that they don't really want you making a decision irrespective of the venue.
If they had their way and preached sermons consistent with their soteriology, you'd remain neutral with your fingers crossed (unless they make a fuss about that gesture also somehow being pagan in origin) with the mystery resolved of whether you'll awaken after death in Heaven or Hell only after you arrive in one of these two regions of the Afterlife.
It is claimed that this ritual urging the penitent to march forward to receive Christ is not in the Bible.
But neither are many other traditions that these hardline Biblicists of a Calvinistic persuasion insist upon retaining.
For example, it should be pointed out to those holding to this variety of predestinarianism from a Presbyterian or Anglican perspective that there is nothing about infant baptism providing salvatory protection for a baby.
It might be a beautiful symbol of welcoming a child into the covenant community.
But if you, dear Christian, are relying on that liturgical act to protect your precious little one from the fires of Hell throughout a lifetime and do nothing more to introduce that child to Christ as the Savior they must claim for themselves, spiritually you have doused your child in gasoline and edged them to the brink of those unquenchable flames.
Next, there is really not a thing in the Bible about formalized membership in one particular church organization.
At most, the Scripture speaks of one church in a particular town.
So if we are going to be such a stickler on detail, if your church is not the oldest congregation in town, are you guilty of being a schismatic?
Interestingly, those looking down their noses at those congregations that make use of altar calls as part of their order of service certainly don't mind going out of their way to whack me over the head about not “belonging” to a particular congregation even though I go to church most weeks out of the year, listen to sermons and conservative talk radio at least four hours per day, and nearly every day post conservative and/or Christian content to the Internet.
The Bible provides the basic rules by which the Creator expects us to abide if we are to please Him and for us to receive His blessing even if that reward is not granted this side of eternity.
However, one truth that each of us often struggles with is that the specifics in which those absolutes are implemented on the practical level might not be as clearly spelled out.
By Frederick Meekins