Friday, April 30, 2010

The Resurrection of Christ says this...

to Science - explain me!

to Technology - duplicate me!

to History - repeat me!

to Unbelief - disprove me!

to you and I - believe me!

- Dr. Jerry Vines

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

"Sexual orientation" - does the Bible even address this?

From gay christian movement watch: Click to read entire article! It is a must read!

What’s the intent of the term’s current usage?

The introduction of the phrase “sexual orientation” marked a watershed moment in our society. Finally homosexual activists and their allies had something in which they could conveniently insert just about any feeling or sexual behavior and call it “orientation”. It is an intentionally broad term because of the growing expressions of perversion needed a home and this provided it.

Planned Parenthood tells teens that “sexual orientation is the term used to describe whether a person feels sexual desire for people of the other gender, same gender, or both genders.”
The conventional gay wisdom is that you are what you feel. And no one can tell you what you feel is wrong for you. Typical postmodernist relativity stuff. As I asked a young gay man once who vigorously asserted to me that since he “felt” gay from the age of two, it was proof he actually was gay. I asked him if he’d felt like a pig since he was age two what would he be right now? Its silliness that doesn’t even qualify as logic.

You might be astonished to know that this type of shallow, illogical relativity has literally become “scientific” evidence upon which laws in this country are passed.

What implications does it have on the church?

Its dangerous and unbiblical for the church to adopt and include terms as “sexual orientation”. If the concept is biblical, then there is only one legitimate sexual orientation. God created man and oriented him sexually, emotionally and relationally to the woman. Thus any other attraction, emotion, feeling, behavior or the likes is illegitimate as it is rooted in fallen sinful nature.

Inclusion of such destructive terms continue to set the church at odds the divine plan of redemption. If sin can be justified with clever new phrases and “scholars” who sanctify the clever new phrases what will be the church’s message?

If our core message is not that man is hopelessly degenerate apart from the repentance and remission of sin, what is it that we will be teaching and preaching. Self help? Im ok, youre ok? All you need is a hug? No! Our core message is what distinguishes us from every other religion because it is the express reason Jesus Christ came, suffered, died and rose again. If we allow outside influences to dilute or change that message in the slightest, we stand to lose our identity.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Dr. Anne Wortham - I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not vote for Barack Obama;

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at Illinois State University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University 's Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological Association and the American Philosophical Association. She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education.

In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were featured in Bill Moyer's television series, "A World of Ideas." The transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his book, A World of Ideas.

Dr. Wortham is author of "The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical Study of Black Race Consciousness" which analyzes how race consciousness is transformed into political strategies and policy issues.

She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on theories of social and cultural marginality.

Recently she has published articles on the significance of multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of victimization and the social and political impact of political correctness. Shortly after an interview in 2004, she was awarded tenure.


This article (below) by her is something worth your time to read.

Fellow Americans,


Please know: I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul's name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a Black president to know that I am a person of worth and that life is worth living. I do not require a Black president to love the ideal of America .


I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival - all that I know about the history of the United States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America .


Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depends. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million Blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that Blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him because he doesn't look like them.


I would have to wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration - political intellectuals like my former colleagues at the Harvard University 's Kennedy School of Government.


I would have to believe that "fairness" is the equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that a man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.


Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead - and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.


So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a Black man to the office of the president of the United States , the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over - and Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmy Carter, too. And the Kennedys have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a Black person.


So, toast yourselves, 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America. Shout your glee, Harvard, Princeton , Yale, Duke, Stanford and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a Black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to - Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine - what little there is left - for the chance to feel good.


There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.God Help Us all...

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Planned Parenthood's defintion of mercy

Abortion Pictures

Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the US. Their founder, Margaret Sanger, once said, "the most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." The question before us, then, is this. Is abortion an act of mercy or an act of violence? While it may be easy to casually maintain support for abortion in the abstract, it becomes much harder when the evidence is put before us.

In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30).

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

Whose hate speech?

The Tea Party folks are pikers compared to the unhinged left.

As self-interested Congressmen try to fool the public into thinking that Tea Partiers yelled the “N” word at them, even as not one shred of proof exists that it ever happened, let’s be reminded of what real hatred looks like… check out this little reminder.

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Queering the Census

FRC: update

In this year's census, the law should count for something. But unfortunately, a very troubling pattern has emerged here in Washington--a complete disregard for the national definition of marriage. First, Congress refused to exercise its constitutional authority when the District of Columbia imposed same-sex "marriage" on the city, deliberately violating the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Soon after, John Berry, head of the Office of Personnel Management, decided to use federal dollars to pay for same-sex couples to enjoy the same benefits as married spouses.

The latest disregard for DOMA comes from the Commerce Department, which is actively encouraging people to ignore U.S. marriage law and invent new definitions for their relationships. In an ad (paid for by your hard-earned tax dollars), Census officials urge gay couples not to let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a favorable gay "marriage" count. While these unions only exist in D.C. and five U.S. states, the Bureau insists, "Same-sex couples who are married or consider themselves to be spouses [in any state], can identify one person to be a husband or wife."

Consider themselves to be spouses? What kind of government actively lobbies citizens to lie on their forms? Under this administration, America's legal realities may as well be minor hiccups on the road to a complete abolition of marriage and family. When it comes to advancing the extreme homosexual agenda of this White House, nothing matters. Not even the facts. If this video were honest, it would say, "Under the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal government does not recognize same-sex relationships as 'marriages.' If you are a same-sex couple, you should mark the box that says 'unmarried partner,' even if you are legally married in the state in which you reside."

For a group desperate to redefine marriage, skewing the data will help homosexuals amass even more Capitol clout. A spokeswoman for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force could barely contain her excitement. "It's humongous," she said. "Our opponents are rightfully concerned, because it does lend an air of legitimacy to our marriages. It's another way of weaving us into the fabric instead of continuing to see us as outsiders." Not surprisingly, gay and lesbian activists are pumping thousands of dollars into the campaign to bypass the law. Part of that effort includes television commercials with Star Trek actor George Takei. Wearing his old Starfleet uniform, he and his space alien "husband" try to push Americans into the final frontier of same-sex "marriage." "It doesn't matter whether you have a legal marriage license or not," Takei coaches viewers. "It only matters if you consider yourself married." As CNS News reported, this propaganda was even posted on the Census Bureau website, hinting at just how complicit the Obama government has been in sabotaging the DOMA. According to the Miami Herald, the government has become a major sponsor of the "queering the census" campaign.

In the end, the only thing this charade accomplishes is invalidating the entire process. What good are these numbers if the Bureau persuades people to fabricate them? Timothy Olson, the assistant division chief for the Census's field division, couldn't be more transparent about Washington's agenda. "We've been very public about our interaction with the gay community. I'm a gay man, and I head up the overall program..." The concern over the census goes beyond the use of fuzzy math to the use of fuzzy facts.

Thursday, April 01, 2010

Smithsonian's New Human Origins Exhibit Targets Students Who Doubt Darwinism

Casey Luskin at Evolution News & Views takes a look at the new human origins exhibit at the Smithsonian:

The most amusing part of the exhibit proudly explains that evolution predicted we'd lack evidence for evolution; that's how we know it's true!

That's right, this is how the nation's most prestigious natural history museum presents evolution: evolution predicts that evolution is supported both when we do and when we don't find confirming fossil evidence. Consider the following from the educator's guide:
Continue reading here . . .