Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited

 

The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Monday, December 31, 2007

The Animal Passions of Abortion


Prolife Blogs today points to the assertion of Christina Page that

Study after study proves that contraceptive use is the only way to prevent abortion; the places on earth contraception is most available are also where abortion is most rare.

Most rational people might be tempted to say, "The only way to prevent abortions is...not to have one." But that answer is unacceptable in feminist and other liberal circles.

Like many other pro-abortion advocates, this assertion seems to be built on the supposition that sexual activity is inevitable, beyond the choice of the woman or the ability to choose NOT to have sexual activity. Indeed, sexual activity seems to be as assumed as breathing. From where would such a supposition spring?

It seems to issue from the belief that since our bodies are biologically capable of sexual acts, they should therefore be utilized for sexual acts at any and every time possible. The possibility that a woman might choose not to have sex, or to exercise restraint about when and who they will have sex with, seems inconceivable. The old saying "I think, therefore I am" might be adapted to express this liberal truth: "I am, therefore I have sex."

Within this subject there appears to be another assumption that contraception, if used, will always work. That isn't always the case. Even oral contraceptives, the most reliable form of birth control for decades, sometimes fails. (I have two children that I love dearly, both of whom prove that it can fail).

Contraception can certainly reduce the odds of getting pregnant, and by extension the odds that women who consider abortion as a contraceptive option will actually end up exercising that option.

But just because a woman gets pregnant doesn't automatically mean that the pregnancy must end in abortion, as seems to be a parallel assumption. Pro-abortion liberals seem to automatically assume that women are incapable of performing the selfless act of allowing the child (which was conceived because of an act she performed) to develop inside her body and be born.

Getting bent out of shape that pregnancy sometimes results from sexual intercourse is like getting bent out of shape because you walked out into a field, spread around some corn seed, and then, by golly, corn sprang up. Reproduction is the natural outcome of sexual intercourse, especially at certain times of the month. Being incredulous that a pregnancy results from sexual intercourse is about as logical as being incredulous that the grass in your lawn is green after having run your sprinkler.

The only thing is, even if you are upset by such outcomes, you can chop down your corn rows or mow your grass without destroying human life. I have no problem with mowing your lawn, and I have no problem with contraception...as long as human life isn't destroyed in the process. And since the unborn child has a unique set of human DNA from the moment of conception, it can't be anything other than "human life."

In making these progressive assumptions (that sex must happen and pregnancies must be aborted), maybe they're just following through with the Darwinian perspective most liberals hold today: that humans are simply highly evolved animals.

Animals for the most part act on instinct and do not make make reasoned decisions. Perhaps in the tortured logic of liberals, this extends to women being unable to do anything other than have sex and then abort the resulting child. (How sad it must be for a human being to be so governed by their biology that they cannot act intelligently, ruled only by their instincts with one inevitable outcome.)

But it might also be said that even animals sometimes surpass the "humanity" of humans. You see, very few mothers in the animal kingdom intentionally kill their offspring, while about 1 million mothers a year kill their children in America.

Maybe the Darwinists are onto something. Maybe humans are more animalistic than any other animal?


Iraqi Freedom Minute



Focusing on the latest news from Operation Iraqi Freedom. American Forces Network Iraq presents Iraqi Freedom Minute.


Freedom Watch Afghanistan



The latest from Operation Enduring Freedom showing the activities of American troops in country. Produced by AFN-Afghanistan.


General Petraeus Briefing



The main challenge for coalition forces in Iraq during 2008 will be to build upon and solidify the gains made in the country's security over the past year.


We Do Affect Others


From today's Men of Integrity devotional:

Kid after kid was being hauled before a judge in a juvenile court, most from one inner-city neighborhood. Exasperated, he asked one young offender, "Where did you learn to do this stuff?"

The adolescent replied, '"Rocko taught me."

When the next case came up, the judge asked, "Who taught you to steal?"

"Rocko did."

Over the next three days, the judge found 33 juvenile delinquents who'd picked up their criminal skills from Rocko. Realizing that he was the key to cutting the crime rate, the judge instructed the district attorney to find him and bring him in. Two days later, Rocko stood before the bench.

"Well, what do you have to say for yourself?" the judge demanded. "I've got a jail full of minors whose lives you've corrupted. How could you do such a thing?"

"Eddie taught me," the young man replied.

In a perverted but potent way, gangs do what the community of faith ought to have been doing all along—multiplying themselves by using the influence of personal relationships to affect attitudes and behavior.

I still grieve sometimes over the bad influence I spread many years ago when I was living for Satan. I've been forgiven of it, but so many of those people that I affirmed and encouraged to do bad things, I'll never see them again to tell them I was wrong.

When we make bad choices, it encourages others around us to do the same. When we tell others that bad behaviors are good behaviors, or at least act like they're morally neutral, we participate in another person's journey down the dark path.

In 2008, let us all resolve to "spur one another on toward love and good deeds."


The Art of Self-Deception

Have you ever wondered how liberals manage to delude themselves with such skill? I have to admit I have. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, they usually manage to pull a "Gollum," putting their hands over their ears and chanting, "Not list'nin', not list'nin'."

But I've been reminded of this tendency with fresh evidence recently. One instance is in the Rapid Reply of the Rapid City Journal's article on the recently released 2006 abortion statistics.

In the Rapid Reply, I pointed out that the most telling statistics in the report--the reason for the abortion--were left out of the news article.

Instead of discussing the fact that the vast majority of abortions were done purely for convenience, one commenter says this:

" ahh, stats with no record from whence they came. how is that refreshing? both sides can provide stats that are skewed. . . "

It's true that in my Rapid Reply, I didn't specifically state the full name of the report, only referring to it as "...the recently released abortion statistics..." Well, duh! What report was the article talking about? Pretty obvious to most folks.

After another commenter filled in the blanks for the slow commenter, the first commenter (or another?) responds:
" thanks for posting where your stats came from, for the future, your stats will be far more effective if you do so in the original post along with a link to where you found them. "

Again, what report was the news article talking about? You don't need to be a genius to extrapolate that.

Was this really a lead-like density on the part of the commenter? Was it a child-like insistence on being spoon-fed information? Or was it an attempt to cast aspersion on the impact of the data?

In a subsequent Rapid Reply, I stated that it was pretty obvious what statistics I was referring to, and the brain trust replied to that:
" no, it really wasn't. . . but whatever. just one more instance of misused stats. *tear* "

So how were these stats "misused?" Were they misused to reveal a truth that pro-aborts would rather keep hidden--that most abortions are done as retroactive birth control?

On a different subject, Keith Rhudy of Rapid City wrote a letter to the Rapid City Weekly News a few weeks ago about the Laramie Project play which Central High School will soon put on is a play that "plays" upon the sympathies by lifting up the murder of Matthew Shepard as an example of why homosexuals must have special rights and special protections. In his letter, Rhudy pointed out that the children who will be exposed to this play will likely not hear about the health risks of homosexuality, only that those who practice it must receive special protections.

Michael Coats, who is the most vocal homosexual activist in the Black Hills, responded with a letter that accused Keith and those who point out the dangers of homosexuality of "distorting other people’s work."

This is what homosexuals say when you point out scientific studies which show that homosexuality dramatically increases a person's risk of AIDS, Chlamydia, herpes, HPV, “gay bowel syndrome,” gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis, anal cancer, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, depression, anxiety, suicide, domestic violence and a much shorter life span.

The work of these researchers is often released in the form of raw data, with no moral or practical conclusions drawn. Homosexual activists can live with that. But if you then cite that research data and draw from it a moral or practical conclusion, then you've "distorted" or "misrepresented" someone elses work. Doesn't matter if a 5-year-old could connect the dots and reach that conclusion; you're just not supposed to do that. What value is there for data from which no conclusions can be drawn?

Because Rhudy didn't cite information that was highly specific and referenced, he was also accused of putting out false information (you're only allowed so many words in a Letter to the Editor, so it's a challenge to provide full footnotes and still have room to say anything meaningful).

So I wrote a letter providing more detail, citing as much about the studies as I could and still have room to say anything of substance. I included specific percentages and enough reference data that an interested party could look it up, without taking up too much space in the letter.

Dennis Halterman responded to my letter
And the statistics — as suspect as any other group of statistics —...

Halterman's letter provided absolutely no information whatsoever to counter the scientific evidence which proves that homosexual behavior is very dangerous. Instead, it was filled with what characterizes so much of public discourse today: emotionalism.

Further, according to Mr. Coats' blog, Old Man's Lavender World, my references were again insufficient. Mr. Coats is apparently bereft of the ability to look up this information on his own, using only the clues I provided. Like Rhudy--and as I'm charged with doing on the abortion issue--I apparently "misrepresented" these studies.

Coats even found it necessary to disparage my citation of a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report (I did include that specific reference--"CDC" doesn't take up much space, and it's authority generally speaks for itself) that shows 72% of AIDS cases are contracted through homosexual behavior and homosexuals doing drugs, claiming I had "distorted" it. How does one "distort" a statistic as basic and simple as that? ("Yes, but religious conservatives hate homosexuals, so that statistic doesn't count"???)

It's true that some statistics can be twisted and interpreted to mean different and often opposing things. This is not the case, however, with all statistics. Sometimes the numbers tell a story that is so clear-cut and so damning that they can mean only one thing. Those indicted by them have no choice but to try and cast aspersions on them and/or pull a Gollum.

This is a technique employed by the Left over and over and over again. They start out insisting that everything be immutably rooted in science; no less-tangible justifications from the philosophical or religious world are allowed, no matter how their effects can be demonstrated in "real world" outcomes. Then, if they don't like the "science" with which they're provided, they sulk and complain that it doesn't have enough footnotes or references (even though the origins of the work can be easily obtained with just a little effort), or that the author once pulled the wings off a fly. Finally, if they don't like where the "science" leads, then, well, the person citing it must be twisting or misrepresenting it. Usually little or no effort is made to counter or refute the evidence, and what little effort is made is usually rooted in emotionalism.

I've been there before. I've been at the place in my life where I was doing self-destructive things and not inclined to change. I used to be a drunk. I used to be a risk-taker. I used to be a foul-mouthed skirt-chaser. Like everyone engaged in destructive behavior, when confronted with the truth about this destructiveness, I was faced with some choices: (1) Ignore it, (2) pretend that what you're doing is really morally acceptable because _______________ (i.e. try refuting the evidence), (3) change. For a long time, I opted for #1, consoling myself with the belief that I was only hurting myself, and that at least my professional life was still going well. I never tried #2 (I knew darn well what I was doing was wrong), and eventually surrendered to #3.

But a lot of folks caught up in destructive behavior don't have the intellectual honesty to avoid #2. When you avoid #2, it's only a matter of time before #1 doesn't work anymore and #3 is staring you in the face--that, or death. So they opt for #2--obfuscation, minimization and willful dismissal--because it buys a lot more time.

If you can convince yourself (and others) that evidence of your destructive behavior is unreliable, then you can keep on doing what your doing for a long time. And if you can even convince yourself that it's normal, natural and healthy--and get some other folks to pat you on the back, too--then you can keep it up indefinitely.

So even though someone is trying to warn you--and others--to stop or avoid a harmful behavior, your efforts to help are branded as "hatred." Jesus came to this world to "set the captives free," and that took pointing us to the truth of our sin, so we could identify it and let go of it. If Jesus is a hater, then so, indeed, is my motivation. But He unequivocally proved that He loves each of us immeasurably, even as He tells us to "go and sin no more."

Despite realizing all this, I still find it hard to fully understand that whole process of self-delusion. It's a process where the heart speaks for the mind, indeed, the heart convinces the soul that it IS the mind. Thus, we end up responding to things emotionally rather than rationally or logically. Our emotions don't naturally respond to logic and reason, so they are much harder to tame than the mind.

Perhaps that's why God tells us "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?"

The human mind is not infallible, but the heart is far more likely to blindly lead us down the path of destruction.


The Abortion Story that Wasn't


In today's "mainstream" media we have not an absence of bias, but a bias of absence.

The latest abortion statistics for South Dakota were released the week before Christmas. Perhaps the most striking thing found in these statistics is in the section where the reasons given for the abortions was provided. The single largest percentage was because "The mother did not desire to have the child." Already large the previous year at 79.5%, it increased even more to 84.6%. Meanwhile, abortions for rape/incest/health constituted a combined 1.9% of all abortions.

So we passed up an opportunity to ban abortion for the 1.9% that meet the criteria of the exceptions demanded by the majority of the voters in 2006.

So 84.6% of abortions in South Dakota were done not for rape, not for incest, not for the life of the mother, and not for the health of the mother, but as retroactive birth control. The child inconvenienced the mother, so the child was disposed of.

We sacrifice the 98.1% that all but the most extreme abortion supporters say should be saved, in order to keep the right to kill the 1.9% that some say don't deserve to live.

Now, about 10 days later, you'd expect to have seen this reported and discussed in any number of places, right? Wrong.

In the Argus Leader on Dec. 22, you finally find mention of this reason 9 paragraphs into the article.

Another Argus Leader story, nothing.

At KELO, nothing.

Sioux City Journal, nothing.

Yankton Daily Press, nothing.

Rapid City Journal, nothing.

Now I'm just curious why almost all the media outlets in South Dakota missed the most impactful statistic in this report, and the Argus Leader only skirted it half-way through their article with no specific number mentioned?

Was it media bias?

Was it that the reporters didn't consider the reasons women are aborting their children--the reasons we continue to have this debate in the first place--to be important?

Was it just a case of the media acting like sheep, with one following essentially the same scant story details as all the others?

Was it just sloppy journalism?


Church Pays $7 Million to be Faithful to Christ

Despite the growing hostility toward Christianity in America today, most of us here don't face any real sacrifice in order to maintain fealty to our faith. In a world where the average Christian faces government restrictions on his faith, and many pay with their lives, we've had it pretty easy for 200 years in this country founded by Christians on Christian principles. But that's changing.

From the Hartford Courant, a church in Connecticut that is older than the United States is walking away from $7 million dollars in church property in order to remain faithful to the Scriptures and to God.

The church was founded under the Church of England in 1764. In 2003, Benedict and several other Connecticut rectors clashed with Connecticut Bishop Andrew D. Smith, who supported the naming of V. Gene Robinson as New Hampshire's bishop. Robinson is gay. Benedict and Christ Church leaders also feel the national church is rejecting scriptural authority and traditions of the church.

Would that we all had this kind of courage and loyalty to our faith. If we did, it would be the apostates leaving the church denomination, instead of the faithful leaving an apostate denominational leadership.

Hats off to the faithful believers at Christ Church! I believe the Lord will someday award your dedication and trust in Him.


Recommended Reading



Governor Mike is already feeling the backlash of his budget

By Gordon Garnos

AT ISSUE: It has only been about a month since Governor Mike Rounds proposed what some insiders say is one of the tightest budgets in South Dakota's history. The projection for the state's next fiscal year is already being shot at on various fronts although the 2008 legislative session does not go into action, or inaction, until next week. The Governor's proposal has a price tag of some $3.55 billion. What it will be by the time this session of the Legislature is over is a great big question. The backlashes heard so far could spell a big difference in what the state should spend and what he has prepared. (Full Article)


Faith and Emotions

Psychologist Dr. James Dobson explains why faith shouldn't be based on feelings!

Click here to listen

Fron OnePlace.com


Washington Watch Daily - Tony Perkins

Secularists may be calling for "cease fire" on war on Christmas

Click here to listen

From OnePlace.com


Family News in Focus 12-31-07

Highlights:

British teen boys participate in sex trade targeting young girls

Unbelieving archaeologist finds evidence of Genesis flood

Anti-Christian messages in the schools

Click here to listen

From OnePlace.com


More Lessons from Scopes

Answers with Ken Ham

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Sunday, December 30, 2007

Recommended Reading



Saturday, December 29, 2007

A Man Worth Listening To

BY STAR PARKER
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT
COALITION ON URBAN RENEWAL & EDUCATION

In the midst of year-end craziness - taking care of my organization's year-closing business and doing Christmas shopping -- I didn't anticipate that I'd find time to read a new book. But when I saw Dr. Ben Carson's, "Take the Risk: Learning to Identify, Choose, and Live with Acceptable Risk," I couldn't resist.

I spotted the slim volume while gift shopping in a bookstore. But it wasn't the catchy title that caused me to pick it up. It was the author. I already knew Ben Carson's remarkable story. I read his first book "Gifted Hands" 10 years ago. After I read it, I gave it to my kids and insisted that they read it. (Full Article)


Family News in Focus Weekend

Highlights:

Don't take a good marriage for granted

How a country changed its culture through song

Extended adolescence


Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Washington Watch Weekly - Tony Perkins

Washington Watch Daily - Tony Perkins

Included: Mark Levin on the Fairness Doctrine, George Barna on poll results on why parents want a better future for their children, and Bridget Gabriel, a Lebanese civil war survivor who tells about why radical Islam is a world threat.

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Does Huckabee Have a Grasp on the Issues?


Not only do I not trust Mike Huckabee's recent conversion on the illegal alien/border control issue, he appears to be all over the map and a little confused about this issue.

From the New York Times:

On Thursday night he told reporters in Orlando, Fla.: “We ought to have an immediate, very clear monitoring of our borders and particularly to make sure if there’s any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country.”

On Friday, in Pella, Iowa, he expanded on those remarks.

“When I say single them out I am making the observation that we have more Pakistani illegals coming across our border than all other nationalities except those immediately south of the border,” he told reporters in Pella. “And in light of what is happening in Pakistan it ought to give us pause as to why are so many illegals coming across these borders.”

In fact, far more illegal immigrants come from the Philippines, Korea, China and Vietnam, according to recent estimates from the Department of Homeland Security.

Asked how a border fence would help keep out Pakistani immigrants, Mr. Huckabee argued that airplane security was already strong, but that security at the southern United States border was dangerously weak.

Okay, I'll buy that Pakistani terrorists might come to Mexico and then cross our borders. However, their greatest difficulty might be with Mexico, since Mexico's immigration and alien controls are far tougher than ours. But really, his response to this came across as pretty muddled.

But it sounds like his incorrect assertion about how many illegals are coming from what country just makes him continue to sound ill-informed on this issue, like when he said in the past that illegal immigration wasn't a real problem in the first place.

That, and the fact that he got it wrong about whether Pakistan was still under martial law. Someone who wants to be president should be on top of issues like this.

And "apologizing" for Bhutto's assassination isn't the thing to do...unless he thinks we had something to do with it. I know Huckabee's pretty liberal, but surely he isn't liberal enough to have joined the blame-America-first crowd. Probably just a mis-statement. But a mis-statement that makes Bush's "misunderestimated" verbal gaffs pretty inconsequential in comparison


Recommended Reading



How Clean was Bhutto?


The New York Post has a different take on the Bhutto assassination than you're likely to see in most of the media.

While writer Ralph Peters makes it clear that he doesn't condone the assassination, Bhutto may not be as squeaky-clean as the media may portray her.

In fact, Bhutto was a frivolously wealthy feudal landlord amid bleak poverty. The scion of a thieving political dynasty, she was always more concerned with power than with the wellbeing of the average Pakistani. Her program remained one of old-school patronage, not increased productivity or social decency.

The piece goes on to mention the corruption scandals that drove her from power, as well.

I didn't follow Bhutto's political career as closely as I have some other world leaders, so I don't feel confident offering an opinion of the level of veracity in the corruption claims.

But sometimes, unfortunately, when partnering with Third World countries against a greater evil, sometimes we have to choose the cleanest dirtbag of the lot. There's an unfortunate element of truth to the old saying: "Yeah, he's scum. But he's OUR scum."

Was she clean? I don't know. Was she dirty? I don't know. Was she cleaner than Musharraf? I don't know that, either.

But both she and Musharraf seemed inclined to work with the West in fighting terrorism. In addition to the regrettable loss of human life, Bhutto's assassination has robbed the people of Pakistan of much-needed stability, and much-needed choice in their democratic elections.


Freedom Watch Afghanistan



The latest from Operation Enduring Freedom showing the activities of American troops in country. Produced by AFN-Afghanistan.


Friday, December 28, 2007

Leftist Myths of the Vietnam War


Another good article from Commentary Magazine, this time about the Vietnam War. It is long, but well worth the read to the end of page 2.

The piece dispels many of the Leftist myths that have been poisoning America for 40 years.

It also gets to the heart of why we finally just gave up on this 10-year war that cost 58,000 American lives:

Tragically, the Johnson administration never accepted that it could win a war it was in fact winning. As H.R. McMaster shows in Dereliction of Duty (1997), the overarching theme of the Johnson years was not reckless war-mongering but its opposite: indecision followed by halfway measures, and a growing pessimism leading to more halfway measures. It was this that encouraged the North to extend its efforts in 1964, enabling its Vietcong auxiliary to regain lost ground. The same indecisiveness plagued the American approach to bombing, employed by Johnson and his Defense Secretary Robert McNamara largely for political rather than military objectives, i.e., in the vain hope of convincing the North to come to the bargaining table. Until 1968, in fact, Washington’s carefully planned bombing campaigns barely had an impact on the course of the fighting.

The article also points out how the Leftist media helped us lose a war we weren't losing, examining the Tet Offensive which was a brutal loss to the communists:
To be sure, all this made no impression on the American public. That was because the press had presented the Tet offensive as a stunning Communist success and a signal that there was no light at the end of the tunnel. The suddenness of the attack had caught not only the American military by surprise, but also the American media. After the war, one of their own, the Washington Post’s Saigon bureau chief Peter Braestrup, documented exactly how the major media proceeded to turn the reality of American victory into an image of American and South Vietnamese defeat.1 Basing themselves on that image, Walter Cronkite and others clearly felt they now had definitive grounds for mistrusting their government’s word and for concluding that, just as the antiwar movement had declared, victory in Vietnam was not and never had been a possibility.

Does any of this sound strangely familiar, as in recently familiar? There are definitely parallels between Iraq and Vietnam...but not the ones the Left wants you to believe in.

You can't win a war that you don't believe you can win. Sadly, that's a lesson that America's Left still hasn't learned after 40 years.

Maybe it's a lesson they don't really want to understand. It would require a bit of moral certainty...and that's something the Left avoids like the plague.


When Satan Comes Calling

From today's Men of Integrity devotional:

A stalwart believer who worked in the mines was injured at a young age and became bed-ridden. Life passed him by.

When he was old, a younger man visited. "I hear that you believe in God," he said. "How can you with what's happened to you? Don't you sometimes doubt God's love?"

"Yes," the old miner admitted. "Sometimes Satan sits by my bed where you're sitting now. He points out my window to the strong, still-active men I once worked with, and asks, 'Does Jesus love you?' Then he casts a jeering glance around my tattered room, points to the fine homes of my friends, and asks again, 'Does Jesus love you?' Finally Satan points to the grandchild of a friend of mine—a man who has everything I don't—and whispers, 'Does Jesus really love you?' "

"And what do you say?" asked the young man.

"In my mind," the old miner said, "I take Satan by the hand to Calvary. There I point to the thorn-tortured brow, to the nail-pierced hands and feet, and to the spear-wounded side. Then I ask Satan, 'Doesn't Jesus love me?' "

—Bryan Chapell in The Wonder of It All


Who is Dr. Del Tackett?



Here is a brief introduction to Dr. Del Tackett... (more)
Added: August 22, 2007
Here is a brief introduction to Dr. Del Tackett.

Dr. Del Tackett is president of the Focus on the Family Institute and Senior Vice President of Focus on the Family. He is also the chief spokesperson for Focus on the Family's The Truth Project—a nationwide initiative designed to bring the Christian worldview to the body of Christ.

An adjunct professor at New Geneva Theological Seminary and Summit Ministries, Dr. Tackett served more than 20 years in the United States Air Force. During the George H. W. Bush administration, he served at the White House, where he was appointed by President Bush as the director of technical planning for the National Security Council. Dr. Tackett later served in various senior analyst and manager capacities at Kaman Sciences Corporation and ITT Industries.

As a professor, Dr. Tackett has taught more than 30 undergraduate and graduate courses at three different institutions, over a 12 year period. He is also an ordained elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. Dr. Tackett holds three earned degrees (D.M., Colorado Technical University; M.S., Auburn University; B.S., Kansas State University).

A sought after conference speaker, Dr. Tackett addresses topics such as American Christian heritage, Christian worldview, technical subjects and management.

Del and his wife Melissa have been married since 1972. They have four grown children.

Visit www.thetruthproject.org for more information.

South Canyon Baptist Church in Rapid City will start the 12-week Truthy Project on Sunday, Jan. 6 at 8:57 am to 10:15 am. Everyone is invited to this life-changing opportunity.


Huckabee Sounds like Democrats on Economy

I've pointed to a number of areas over the past few months where Mike Huckabee comes up short in the area of moral discernment (an odd thing to say about a Baptist preacher, but I'm convinced it's true).

But here's another area where Huckabee comes up short: economics. When he talks business, he sounds like one of these Marxists in the Democrat Party. He seems to think when business succeeds, it's only does so by cheating "the little guy" somehow. He seems to think the policies of Ronald Reagan, which brought this country out of a economic tailspin and into unprecedented growth, personify "greed.

Here's what Jeffrey Lord has to say about Mike Huckabee, and the Club for Growth's exposure of his Marxist rhetoric, in the American Spectator:

The Club is famous for delving into the records of GOP candidates for not just the presidency but other offices as well, carefully combing the fine print of their speeches, programs and votes as office-holder or candidate and matching them to the Reagan ideal. Mike Huckabee, it seems, has supported any number of taxes while governor, and the Club has inevitably zeroed in on his economic beliefs.

What disconcerts is Huckabee's gut level response. Instead of either defending his record or admitting to a mistake or challenging the views of the Club he said this: "The Club for Greed, I call them. They hate that. Oh, they hate it. And I enjoy giggin' them about it..."

Hello? Is the Republican Party seriously considering nominating a candidate whose instinctive response to criticism from Reaganites is to use the favorite code word of Reagan's enemies? Does Huckabee really believe that Reaganomics represents a philosophy of greed? Does he agree that the 1980s was "The Decade of Greed"?

Can a poor or middle class person be greedy? Is the guy or gal spending hard-earned money on video lottery or lottery tickets not greedy for big winnings? Is the person who looks at the wealthy with such (jealous?) contempt not greedy? Liberalism itself feeds greed--greed for what others have.

Is there greed in parts of the private sector? Sure. Is there malfeasance and wrongdoing? Sure. But advocating that government simply take over and redistribute wealth--which is where Huckabee's kind of rhetoric is leading--is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, or blowing your head off to cure a headache.

Where criminal activities occur in the business world, prosecute them. Where immoral and unethical behavior occurs, encourage morality and ethics (I know that even though they hate the unethical behavior, liberals somehow can't bring themselves to encourage morality).

But penalizing business simply for being successful, or taking wealth away from one person and giving it to another who has not earned it is simply a form of legalized plunder, or legal theft.

We don't want our government to be a legalized thief. It's not only immoral, but who knows when someday they might decide you have too much money...


When Churches Go Astray


Mark D. Tooley has an informative expose on the ultra-liberal National Council of Churches (NCC) proposed “Social Creed for the 21st Century.” The new creed, an updated of their 1908 one, is intended to infuse new life in an organization which is withering under the weight of its own liberalism and counter-Biblical positions.

While it is accurate to say that modern liberalism is in almost every way counter to Biblical counsel, Tooley goes on to explain why this is so, and why the vision of liberalism--and the NCC--is so flawed:

Accurately, the NCC’s new president, Archbishop Vicken Aykazian told the NCC’s General Assembly in November, “We Christians, we thought the 20th century was going to be a century of peace and prosperity, and we were wrong! … [The 20th century was] a century of bloodshed.” But the left-leaning mainline Protestants who dominate the NCC are loath to recognize the persistence of human sinfulness. Instead, they assume an array of government or multilateral initiatives, backed by the right motivations and sufficient funding, will extinguish poverty and war forever.

Now, as in 1908, the church council focuses nearly exclusively on the power of the state to impose its secularized vision of God’s Kingdom. Universal health care, more public education, more social security, redistributive tax policies, and restricted global trade. The only wars that seem to concern the NCC’s Creed writers are those waged by the U.S. That U.S. power, and not the United Nations, deters countless other wars goes unacknowledged. The role of church, family, cultural traditions, and other mediating institutions in creating a more just society are likewise and revealingly unmentioned.

This failure to recognize and acknowledge the sinful nature of man is what puts liberalism at odds with everything the Bible teaches--and at odds with how America was designed to function, since the Founders recognized man's fallen nature and worked to block it at every turn in our government.

The Bible teaches that, since the Garden of Eden and the fateful choice made by Adam and Eve to do it their way instead of God's way, humanity has been born with a sinful nature. This sinful nature means that humans are born with a predisposition to do the wrong thing, to put radical self-interest above conformity to God's character.

The only way to overcome this sinful nature is to become "born again," as Jesus put it in John chapter 3. Even then, the Christian's new born-again nature wrestles with the old sinful nature we're born with...and sin can be so attractive that we don't always allow our new nature to win.

But the failure to acknowledge this is why liberalism is an unworkable, dead-end philosophy. It assumes that if you can just remove all the negative environmental influences in the world (poverty, injustice, disease, etc.) that humans will naturally make the right choices.

The Bible says exactly the opposite, and the last century--filled with more innovation, disease-control and wealth than ever before--has proven it by being the most bloody century in human history.

The Founders of America recognized this fallen nature of man. It's why they created a Constitution to define in law our ideals and governmental parameters, set up the three-part government (executive, legislative, judicial), why they built-in checks and balances throughout our government, why they instituted federalism to share power between the central government and the states, and it's why they encouraged an informed and free citizenry. These all work together to diffuse that sinful human nature that, if concentrated in a central government, tends toward oppression.

It's why empowering government beyond its constitutional limits and making free people more dependent on government are so dangerous. This is why liberal efforts to undermine the Constitutional rule of law, the proper checks on government, and federalism all so disturb me. When we undermine these things, we undermine what makes our country work. When we undermine these things, we undermine the security of our own freedom.

And I am particularly disappointed that groups like the NCC fail to realize all this. Being Christian, having the same Bible that the rest of us have, they of all people should know this. The church is the conscience of our society; it should know better than this.

But then again, as I said before, that old fallen nature can still kick in, even among people who have a Bible. That fallen nature is what leads us away from the Bible and God's counsel, and toward the same mistake that Adam made in the Garden: I'll do it my way.

It's why, as Tooley said of the NCC, "For them, political creeds are the desired alternative."


Unsanitary Abortionists Says He Has a 'License to Lie'

Washington Watch Daily - Tony Perkins

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Family News in Focus 12-28-07

Highlights:

Pro-family groups in California are trying to fight off bill that mandates gay indoctrination in schools. Situation serves as warning to other states

It appears three out of four Americans support stem cell research, if it doesn’t require death of human embryos

Importance of family-life for infants is underscored in Harvard study on orphans and effects of timely adoption

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


The Benefits of Traditional Family

James Dobson Family Minute - Dr. James Dobson

Author Dr. James Dobson and colleague Dr. Bill Maier stress the benefits of a mother and father who are committed to each other.

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Individuals Can Apply Religious Test, Not Government


From OneNewsNow, David Barton says what I've been saying in response to some assertions that Christians shouldn't prefer Christians when they consider their vote for office holders:

But David Barton, founder and president of WallBuilders, says Whitehead's assertion is completely ridiculous and a complete rewriting of Article VI. Voters who oppose Romney because he is Mormon, says Barton, do not need to be intimidated by Article VI -- which he believes is the intent of the current effort.

"Article VI has nothing to do with Romney's faith anymore than it had anything to do with Kennedy's faith," states the Christian historian. "It has to do only with preventing the establishment of a national church, and citizens are free to use religion or any other criteria they want in choosing whoever they want for president."

According to Barton, Article VI is a limitation only on the federal government -- not on the rights of individual citizens. "It was one of the clauses to make sure that there was no national denomination," he explains. "So if the federal government can't have a religious test -- such as the federal government [saying] you have to all be Mormons, or Anglicans, or Baptists, or Methodists, or whatever -- then there's no chance of having a national church."

I don't know if it's a systematic campaign by liberals to undermine the application of constitutional freedoms, or whether education on government and civics has become so dumbed-down that people simply don't understand this kind of thing anymore.

The limitations on government seldom apply to individuals. Our Founders believed individuals should have as much freedom as reasonably possible, but they also believed that government needed to be restrained in order for individuals to keep on enjoying those freedoms. That's why the government is prohibited from requiring a religious test for office.

But private individuals have the right to their opinions, and their preferences. And they can and should exercise that right.

And as John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, said,

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."


Recommended Reading



Thursday, December 27, 2007

South Dakota Focus Top Stories


I tuned in to South Dakota Focus "A Year in Review" on PBS tonight. The show featured a panel of news hounds, including Pat Powers (South Dakota War College) and Todd Epp (SD Watch). The panel also included Carson Walker of SD Associated Press, Bill Harlan of the Rapid City Journal (by phone), and Greg Belfrage, a radio host at KELO AM in Sioux Falls.

I thought Pat and Todd's answers at the beginning were actually the most reasonable, stating that it's hard to judge the impact of some of the "top stories" of the year, such as Hyperion and TransCanada, since they might have a long-term impact, or they might just bubble up and not amount to anything. It's too early to tell the impact of some stories because their events are not yet fully developed.

Todd was "shameless" about how the Dan Sutton and Ted Klaudt issues had driven traffic to the blogs to discuss these moral issues.

Greg Belfrage, who has a radio show and used to publish a blog, said that most of his radio listeners aren't following the presidential campaign yet, "it's too far out." Greg floated the idea that the country might want to consider moving to regional primaries where states like South Dakota with a late primary aren't left out of the picture.

On the issue of the education funding lawsuit, Pat voiced my opinion that, if people believe public education is underfunded, then the people need to elect representatives who will vote in the legislature according to their priorities--government agencies suing other agencies for more tax dollars is silly and financially irresponsible.

The host Richard Muller asked why abortion didn't make the top 10 list, and Greg said he believed there was a burnout factor, though it's an issue that will definitely be back. Pat said that the defeat last year was due to the lack of rape/incest and health exceptions, but that no matter what happens, any bill will end up in the courts for a while.

Todd also mentioned the the Shawn Cable issue and the surprising amount of interest it generated. It almost seemed like a version of "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego?"

During the discussion of the Sanford hospital donation, Todd said Sanford was a "modern-day robber-barron." (Marx would be proud, Todd.)

In the discussion of Hyperion, Todd said he had worked at a refinery during college, and that on the downside, they were smelly, etc. but were necessary for our energy needs and also provided jobs.

The Elijah Page execution was a #1 story on many lists, and Bill Harlan said everyone in the Black Hills area was hyper-aware of it. Harlan said what struck him was the "sheer ordinariness" of it. He said it was easy, bloodless and routine, and that struck him as "kinda odd, I guess."

On the issue of the Iraq war, Greg and Pat talked about it on a personal level, of how people come together to raise support for care packages and other needs for those deployed, and how people are more concerned for their friends and neighbors who are involved, than in the politics of it.

On the subject of under-reported stories, Walker said the diminishing number of kids going into the school system and the effect that's going to have across several segments of society.

Greg said he thought the Ted Klaudt story was over-reported. He said it was despicable, but it only impacts a few people greatly.

Todd said open government/open records was under-reported and commended the Argus Leader for their efforts.

Pat said the mayoral race in Rapid City was under-reported, with things like critical emails, slimy mailings, and drunken transvestites.

Harlan said Iraq was under-reported. He said we're at war but many of us don't have to make any sacrifices.

Muller said he believed anything Native-American had been under-reported.

Harlan also talked about how huge the TIFs and Cabela's deal was in the Rapid City area.

Greg said the "nanny state" issues have really gotten out of control and are infringing on property rights.

As for the blogger panelists, I think that, regardless of ideological bent, they represented the blogosphere positively and professionally. Good job, guys!


Ingalls Family Leads in Love


The Black Hills Pioneer ran a story a few days ago on the Ingalls family who live near Faith. I'm honored to know them; they are a special bunch of folks.

Robert and JoDee (in the picture, JoDee is left, with Sandy Rhoden holding the Ingalls' baby Joey) have 13 children, five of whom are adopted, and many of them have special needs. Here's a little of what the article said:

Today, the oldest child in the family is 15-years old. From there the family has almost every other age covered, with ages including 14, 13, 11, 9, two 8-year olds, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1-year old. Of them all, five have downs syndrome, one is also severely autistic, one has fetal alcohol syndrome, one was exposed to methamphetamines, and another was exposed to another drug. They're all special, and they all bring a specific attribute to the family unit which helps bind them together.

"It just works here," JoDee said. "We are really set up and geared toward the children and their needs. We have always been very interested in special needs. There was a time when we were afraid of it, until our first child had downs syndrome. She just really shattered the myths that we had. We had a lot of false concepts about people who have disabilities. We realize that it's not so bad after all."

We frequently here pro-abortion folks cite birth defects as a reason why we need to keep abortion available. However, even if caring for a child with birth defects is too much for a woman or family, there are plenty of families out there who are willing and even eager to adopt children with special needs.

Families like the Ingalls (and I know other families like them) have an exceptional love and selflessness that, I'll be honest, I cannot claim. But folks like this exist, and they're not as rare as you might think. So it's particularly vexing to me when I hear pro-abortion folks want to end the lives of children who aren't perfect, even before they can get out of the womb. Baby Joey narrowly escaped abortion himself, when his sisters were aborted in the womb he also was in, and the abortion of his sisters has a lot to do with why he has many health problems

The world needs more selfless, loving people like the Ingalls'.


Processional Caterpillars

James Dobson Family Minute - Dr. James Dobson

Dr. James Dobson compares busy families with processional caterpillars.

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


On Ethics, Students Still Have a Lot to Learn

Washington Watch Daily - Tony Perkins

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Freedom Watch Afghanistan



The latest from Operation Enduring Freedom showing the activities of American troops in country. Produced by AFN-Afghanistan.


Iraqi Freedom Minute



Focusing on the latest news from Operation Iraqi Freedom. American Forces Network Iraq presents Iraqi Freedom Minute.


South Dakota Population Growth is Moderate

According to the Census Bureau and the Las Vegas Review Journal, South Dakota comes in around the middle of the pack in terms of population growth: #20

State July 2007 July 2006 %Change
South Dakota 796,214 788,467 1.0


Homeschoolers for Huckabee

There's been a lot of buzz about homeschooler support of Mike Huckabee, as a OneNewsNow article illustrates. It even contains a funny paragraph about how incredibly dumbfounded elites are about homeschooling:

Huckabee's Iowa campaign manager says reporters have been known to ask him strange questions on the subject, and he cited a time when one mainstream media outlet asked, "How do home schoolers communicate with each other?" To which a sarcastic Woolson replied, "They use telepathy."

We homeschool, so I appreciate this article.

However, I have to wonder how many of the homeschooling families (who are typically conservative) know that Huckabee isn't too keen on vouchers, and is pretty fond of throwing even more money at an abysmally failing public education system? That, in addition to the host of other areas where Huckabee leans Left? If they knew Huckabee's actual record, as opposed to what he's saying these days, would they still support him over a real conservative?


Great White Fleet Honored



The "Great White Fleet"...16 battleships that embarked on a 14-month voyage around the world to show the power of the U.S., marks its 100th anniversary this month.


When is a Day Not a Day?

Answers with Ken Ham

What's in a day? When does "day" not mean "day?"

Click here to listen

From OnePlace.com


Wealth and Poverty

From Renewing Your Mind - Dr. R.C. Sproul

Is poverty a sign of lack of faith? What does the Bible teach about wealth and poverty? Are Christians allowed to have more than they need?

Series: Making Tough Moral Decisions

Click here to listen

From OnePlace.com


Romney Complicit in Homosexual 'Marriage' in Mass.


CNS News is pointing out something I've said about Mitt Romney before: he was pretty spineless when the royal Mass. Supreme Court decreed that homosexuals should be able to "marry."

former state legislator Brian Camenker claims that Romney's moves during the period leading up to the May 17 implementation of the court's order actually helped grease the skids for gay marriage in the Bay State.

The November 2003 Massachusetts high court ruling said that the rights and privileges of marriage had to be applied to everyone -- including same-sex couples -- under the state constitution. It gave the Massachusetts Legislature 180 days to act on a homosexual marriage law.

By April 2004, lawmakers had not acted. But Romney had. Camenker said not only had the governor ordered JPs to perform gay marriages, but he also issued new marriage certificates that replaced the titles "husband" and "wife" with "Party A" and "Party B."

"The legislature never acted. He didn't have to do anything," said Camenker, who is currently president of MassResistance, a suburban Boston-based anti-gay marriage group. "Romney was a major force in creating same-sex marriage."

Of course Romney claims he had no choice but to do this. But the Supreme Court had zero authority to order this, as evidenced by the fact that the court told the legislature it had to act; if such a decision already had a legal basis, there would have been no need for the legislature to do anything.

And if the courts get to create law (which they they have no authority to do), then why could they not decree that a man could marry his cat, or that a woman could marry her son? If the source of authority for what's right and wrong depends on a court majority, then these would be just as legitimate as a decree that two men can shack up, have sex with each other and call it "marriage."

We don't need a president who lets himself be led around by the nose by people who have no authority.


Presidential Candidates on 'Corrupt' List

According to OneNewsNow, Judicial Watch says four of the current presidential candidates are on their "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians" list:

The public-interest group says former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani were the two Republicans on the list, while Senators Barack Obama (D-Illinois) and Hillary Clinton (D-New York) made the list from the Democratic side. Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton says Mrs. Clinton has a long and "sordid" ethics record dating back to when she first entered public life -- and in 2007 the scandals continued.

Interesting that Mike Huckabee would be on this list, with all his support from Christians and other conservatives. Hmmmm. Maybe he isn't as conservative as he says he is?


Recommended Reading



Time Releases Annual List Of Least Influential Americans


Time Releases Annual List Of Least Influential Americans

Time Magazine's eagerly anticipated annual list of the 299 million least influential Americans hits newsstands this week.


An Inside Account of Bush's Embryonic Stem Cell Policy

Commentary Magazine features a long but interesting piece by Jay Lefkowitz, a lawyer and White House advisor.

The piece deals specifically with stem cell research and the process through which President Bush decided to allow taxpayer-funded embryonic stem cell research only on those lines where the human embryos were already destroyed.

This decision drew predictable disappointment on both sides of the issue, but Lefkowitz's article illustrates that it was a decision Bush didn't take lightly. It is also very informative about the entire issue and the arguments on both sides.

Don't forget to click the "next page" link at the bottom of the first page. It's long, but worth the read.


Poll Just Out: Hillary Clinton at the Bottom of the Heap

By Carrie K. Hutchens

I just took a poll of the people around me and it was unanimous -- no votes for Hillary! What makes any other poll fairer or more unfair than the one I just conducted?

There was a time when I respected polling and thought there was some positive benefit to conducting them and studying the results. I suppose that was when companies, candidates and others truly wanted to know what the people thought. It was before the rigged questions with answers that were likely to get a specific (and determined) end result. It was before the rigged polls were used to sway public opinion. After all, there are some people who go with the numbers, rather than deciding for self. And, by wording the questions just so... one can often plant other false information in the minds of unwitting people. The Terri Schiavo case comes to mind. (Full Article)


Family News in Focus 12-27-07

Highlights:

Could 2008 turn into a virtual Tale of Two Nations in the U.S.? We'll look at what the New Year and an Election could bring

Pro-abortion forces deny link between breast cancer and abortion. But a new look at European data says there is a correlation

Latest attack on marriage is an idea that calls for "privatizing" the concept. But what does it mean?

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Stem Cell Breakthrough Likened to Turning Lead into Gold

From Breitbart.com:

It was the kind of breakthrough scientists had dreamed of for decades and its promise to help cure disease appears to be fast on the way to being realized.
Researchers in November announced they were able to turn the clock back on skin cells and transform them into stem cells, the mutable building blocks of organs and tissues.

Then just earlier this month a different team announced it had cured sickle cell anemia in mice using stem cells derived from adult mouse skin.

"This is truly the Holy Grail: To be able to take a few cells from a patient -- say a cheek swab or few skin cells -- and turn them into stem cells in the laboratory," said Robert Lanza, a stem cell pioneer at Advanced Cell Technology.

"This work represents a tremendous scientific milestone - the biological equivalent of the Wright Brothers' first airplane," he told AFP.

"It's bit like learning how to turn lead into gold."

Amazingly, there remain some who STILL insist in destroying human life in embryonic stem cell research--even after this breakthrough, and even after the numerous adult stem cell treatments that have ALREADY helped people.

I knew there were many adult stem cell successes, but had never actually counted them. Well, the Family Research Council has done so, and it turns out the adult stem cell successes to embryonic stem cell successes is a little, um, lopsided:



Let's end our embrace of the culture of death, and choose life. It's not only more ethical, it's more productive!


Iraqi Freedom Minute



Focusing on the latest news from Operation Iraqi Freedom. American Forces Network Iraq presents Iraqi Freedom Minute.


In God We Trust, Back to the Forefront


It's good to see I'm not the only one who feels this way about the new dollar coins with the "In God We Trust" printed on the edge.

From Baptist Press:

The coins feature what the mint calls edge-incused inscriptions -- used in other countries -- of the year of minting or issuance, "E Pluribus Unum," "In God We Trust" and the mint mark. The size, weight and metal composition of the presidential coins is identical to that of the Sacagawea Golden Dollar. The 2005 congressional bill mandated the inscriptions be placed along the edge to allow "larger and more dramatic artwork" on the front and back. It was not a decision made by the mint.

But some coins made it through production without having the inscriptions stamped on the edge, and some experts say the wording on the coin's edge could rub off over time. Others expressed concern that moving the "In God We Trust" motto to the side of the coins was the first step in removing it altogether.

"Since the colonial beginnings of the United States, citizens of this nation have officially acknowledged their dependence on God," Brownback said in a news release Dec. 6. "It is important that our national motto, 'In God We Trust,' is prominently displayed on all of our currency. We should not relegate our heritage to the side."

The inscription on the side is not nearly as prominent as one so important should be. I've also seen lots of quarters where the ribbing on the side has been rubbed smooth. And given the anti-Christian sentiment among elites in this country, I suspected this move might be some precursor to removing "In God We Trust" altogether.


Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Timely Snapshots of South Dakota Interstate Roadways Available Online

PIERRE, S.D. -- Motorists in South Dakota now have a valuable new tool to help them travel safely.

The South Dakota Department of Transportation announced today that camera images of Interstate highways are now available on its traveler information Web site, www.SafeTravelUSA.com/sd.

(Full Article)


Love INC: Transforming Lives for the Better

Love INC's motto is "Mobilizing Churches to Transform Lives and Communities in the Name of Christ." Love INC's approach is the superior, life-changing way to extend compassion to those in need.

From the latest Love INC newsletter...

An excerpt from the testimony of one family that went through Love INCs Budgeting Program:

We experienced freedom when we learned to be intentional about spending. We use cash for purchases (people spend 30% less money when they use cash). We started a savings account, balanced our bank statements, and after a year, miraculously, we were debt free. It was awesome. About four months later we incurred some unavoidable medical debt, but this time we prayed together and had a plan to pay it off. We weren't discouraged; God gave us hope and vision. It is not about putting your security in money--it is about trusting God and being in His will.

A new Love INC Budgeting Program 10-week class starts on Thursday, January 3 in Rapid City. Visit www.loveincinline.com or call 605-718-5683 for more info. (I know a manager from a major national finance company that volunteers his time to teach some of these classes--it's a great thing!)

Love INC could also use some help with child care on Thursday nights. The newsletter says, "Helping as little as four times a year can truly bless these children and their families. Call Janene at 484-4313 for more information."

The newsletter also tells about the new Successful Living classes Love INC started in September. They help people "live with a purpose while minimizing the things that hold them back." Here are some of the topics: Life Values, Time Management, Boundaries, Truth and Lies, Relationships, and Personality SHAPE. People from Pennington County Extension, Cornerstone Women's Home, Lutheran Social Services, Living in Reconciliation Counseling and others came together to develop this curriculum.

Volunteering your time or financial contributions would be most welcome. Contact Love INC Executive Director John Ligtenberg or anyone at Love INC about how you can help extend the true compassion to those in need--and help transform lives for the better!


CIA Gone Rogue

At CNS News, Robert Novak details a "Rogue CIA" which is part of what I've referred to as a "shadow government" operating to undermine President Bush and our national security interest.

In the piece, Novak talks about the CIA destruction of interrogation tapes, Valerie Plame, and the myopic National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) which says Iran is now a good little boy when it comes to their quest for nukes.

Bush has not taken a firm enough hand with these shadow government types. I had hoped he might clean up the State Department and CIA, among others. However, there is little or no evidence anything has been cleaned up.

We cannot afford for liberal elements within our government, which should be accountable to elected representatives, do just do their own thing.


Romney's Support for Homosexual Agenda Incompatible With Pro-Family Support

CHICAGO, December 26, /Christian Newswire/ -- Peter LaBarbera, longtime pro-family advocate and founder of the Republicans For Family Values website, is calling on pro-family leaders who have endorsed Mitt Romney to withdraw their support for his candidacy in light of his recent comments on NBC's "Meet the Press" supporting pro-homosexual "sexual orientation" state laws. (Full Article)


Geological Evidence for the Genesis Flood


Answers in Genesis has an article today listing six "Geologic Evidences for the Genesis Flood," for those who have a mind open-enough to seek the truth.

They are:

Evidence #1—Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level due to the ocean waters having flooded over the continents.

Evidence #2—Rapid burial of plants and animals.

Evidence #3—Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas.

Evidence #4—Sediment transported long distances.

Evidence #5—Rapid or no erosion between strata.

Evidence #6—Many strata laid down in rapid succession.

If you're uncertain about the truth of our origins, or even a skeptic, try purging your mind of any materialistic/naturalistic biases, and just consider the evidence to see if it makes sense. Maybe even more sense that the theories offered by atheists?


Freedom Watch Afghanistan



The latest from Operation Enduring Freedom showing the activities of American troops in country. Produced by AFN-Afghanistan.


South Dakota's Top Stories of 2007

From the Yankton Press & Dakotan, here are the state's top 10 stories as rated by South Dakota Associated Press member newspaper editors and broadcast news directors:

1. The execution of Elijah Page.

2. Sen. Tim Johnson's recuperation.

3. Homestake's selection as a national lab site.

4. The Ted Klaudt case.

5. The DM&E is denied a government loan.

6. A philanthropist gives $400 million for health care.

7. A killer Black Hills fire.

8. The Elk Point area is eyed as a refinery site.

9. The state Senate censures Dan Sutton.

10. Spring rains inundate Aberdeen.

The Elijah Page execution may have actually been the top story, but somehow it doesn't feel like it. After all, we (in Rapid City) didn't have to endure any more 1,900 word violin-accompanied soliloquies about the tragic life of Elijah Page, eclipsing any sympathy toward his victim or his victim's loved ones. One episode of that was more than enough.


Family News in Focus 12-26-07

Highlights:

If you are in a good marriage, don't take it for granted. That's advice of marriage experts who recently surveyed marriage landscape

When your child takes off for college, it's important for them to find a spiritual home away from home

'In God We Trust' is found on everything from buildings to license plates and 2007 marked 50th anniversary of its appearance on back of one dollar bill

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Breakpoint: Nietzsche Would Laugh


Morality without God
Is it possible to build a moral society without belief in God? That's what the "New Atheists" would have you believe. The old atheists would laugh in their face.

Click here to listen.

From OnePlace.com


Middle Class Not Sinking into Poverty


The National Center for Policy Analysis highlights a Washington Post article which shows that, in addition to the growing GDP, the middle class isn't sliding into poverty:

True, fewer people today live in households with incomes between $30,000 and $100,000 (a reasonable definition of "middle class") than in 1979.
But the number of people in households that bring in more than $100,000 also rose from 12 percent to 24 percent.

There was no increase in the percentage of people in households making less than $30,000.

So the entire "decline" of the middle class came from people moving up the income ladder; for married couples, median incomes have grown in inflation-adjusted dollars by 25 percent since 1979.

It's a simple fact of life that human beings are different. Some will inevitably be better money managers, work harder, make better decisions, take more risks that pay off, and so on down the line. And some of us will simply value a life of less stress and more free time, over the life of 16-hour days and forgotten families that many big-earners live.

Using government to try and erase these differences is not only unbiblical, it's impractical and nonsensical. As communist experiments with doing this have shown us over and over and over, just like the "Animal Farm," equality-schemes will still only establish that "some animals are more equal than others."


America Still Overwhelmingly a Christian Culture


The loud-mouthed secularists among us would have us believe that only a few ignorant, drooling primitives are Christians or identify with Christianity. After all, no intelligent person could identify with the silly, superstitious claims of Christianity, right? The reality is a little different.

From Gallup:

About 82% of Americans in 2007 told Gallup interviewers that they identified with a Christian religion. That includes 51% who said they were Protestant, 5% who were "other Christian," 23% Roman Catholic, and 3% who named another Christian faith, including 2% Mormon.

Because 11% said they had no religious identity at all, and another 2% didn't answer, these results suggest that well more than 9 out of 10 Americans who identify with a religion are Christian in one way or the other.

The poll really breaks down quite well, taking it down to the point of separating those who are "cultural Christians" and those who take their faith seriously.

It's very informative. I'd recommend reading the whole article.


Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Will Smith Gets It on Evil

From NewsMax, Will Smith is falsely being accused of saying Adolf Hitler was a good person.

Will Smith is angry over celebrity gossip Web site articles that he said misinterpreted a recent remark he made in a Scottish newspaper about Adolf Hitler.

In a story published Saturday in the Daily Record, Smith was quoted saying: “Even Hitler didn’t wake up going, ‘let me do the most evil thing I can do today.’ I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was ’good.”’

The quote was preceded by the writer’s observation: “Remarkably, Will believes everyone is basically good.”

Over the weekend, dozens of celebrity gossip Web sites posted articles about the comment, many saying that Smith believed that Hitler was a “good” person.

I wouldn't give you a nickle for rap music--even the clean stuff--but I've always liked Will Smith as an actor. And from personal interviews I've seen of him, he seems like a nice guy.

Despite this, I think the media generally has a positive impression of him, too, which is why I'm reluctant to put this false accusation down to malice.

At the same time, even knowing liberals like I do, I still find it hard to admit that some in the media could be this stupid as to misinterpret what he said.

It's something I've said a number of times myself. Most if not all evil people don't believe what they're doing is evil. They have a rationale for why what they're doing is good, whether their name is Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein, or John Doe down the street.

It goes back to the fact that right and wrong aren't subjective and they aren't dependent on our feelings ("Well, I don't feel that's wrong"). Something is wrong based on the fact that it mistreats another human being and/or violates the character of our Creator, regardless of what we think or feel about it.

Sadly, many today can't grasp this truth, as the hard time they're giving Smith proves.

And the fact that he DOES get it just raised my opinion of him yet another notch.


 
Clicky Web Analytics