Another Mosque Controversy
If you think that the U.S. and Israel are the only ones having a clash of religions, here is an article you might want to take in.
It sounds like someone is scared to make a decision either way here. Muslims will not back down and the Hindus who have been dealing with Islamic radicals far longer than us are not willing either.
Keep your eye on this one.....
Pledge To America
From those who have had time to read the entire thing, it appears that it is containing much of the TEA Party agenda....at least in words. The easy part will be getting elected, the hard part will be the actual implementation of those principles.
It will be important for Mr. Boehner and others to communicate that this will not be easy, nor will it be a quick fix. But John must also understand that we will be holding his feet to the fire for the next two years, as well. We will expect some results at least in the effort department. No excuses.
Conservatives have the confidence to know that no one in Congress is beyond being fired.
Showing posts with label Theo-political Issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theo-political Issues. Show all posts
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Monday, March 09, 2009
When Pro-Choice Becomes Anti-Choice
Freedom of choice means the liberty and freedom to choose no, just as much as it does yes. But it's apparent the feminist lobby has now convinced the glorious United Socialist States of America that it is a fundamental right, for every woman to have the right to have an abortion in any hospital she wants.
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch comes this article with some possible ramifications, if this proposal is successful.
I don't spend much time on this topic, because it's generally a no-win debate. Just know and understand that I don't like abortion. But I fear making it illegal, once it's been legal, will deal us similar consequences as what happened with Prohibition. The best way to handle it is through the demand side, by teaching our children that abortion is wrong and adoption is always the better choice.
I don't believe in bombing clinics to make a point, not one iota. I find no justification in injuring and/or killing people to make a larger point. I don't much mind the protesting, if it's peaceful and doesn't result in open harassment. But you won't find me involved in one.
But as my quasi-ambivalence is now better known, I have to stress something. I am not happy about the state, once again, inserting it's nose into something, in which it has no right to do so. This is certainly true for religious issues and/or other issues of conscience. This is addressed in the Constitution and I believe can be proven to be unconstitutional, if taken to court. It will take a trip to the SCOTUS, but it will be upheld because nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee the right to any kind of health care, much less the kind that ends up with a dead fetus.
Even though the article implies there aren't enough votes to get this thing enacted, I think it is time for some lawyers to get ready to do some work. If not on this issue, on others that are predicated on the American people losing more of their liberty, with every action this Congress and President seeks to implement.
Rather than throw in the towel and watch more abuses be attempted by a progressive authoritarian regime, it's time to let the Congress and President know something; if they assert the federal government's actions over people's personal consciences, they will be in for a long expensive trip through the courts. Then if that isn't enough to dissuade them from venturing into areas where they have no business, 2010 is around the corner.
As I said, I am not against a woman's right to choose. I am against people being forced to violate the dictates of their consciences. There are more than enough places for women to choose to abort their unwanted pregnancies. There are no studies to show that demand is not being met.
Let me tell the secular progressives, the atheists, and the feminists (who are ultimately responsible for this) something they do not realize. If you want religion to stay out of politics, you have to keep your politics out of religion. It's a two-way street. You cannot have it both ways and expect the same in return. This is the epitome of hypocrisy and a textbook example of utter arrogance, to even suggest such a thing.
The more this kind of proposed infringement is tried and promoted, maybe the people will wake up and see the trend for what it is. Slowly but surely, the government seeks to take more and more rights away from the people. And they do it through the most deceitful of means, they disguise it as assistance or a helping hand to people, who are not fortunate enough to see through their ruse.
Orwell saw it. I see it. My good friend Mustang sees it.
Do you see it?
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch comes this article with some possible ramifications, if this proposal is successful.
The Freedom of Choice Act failed to get out of subcommittee in 2004, but its sponsor is poised to refile it now that former Senate co-sponsor Barack Obama occupies the Oval Office.
A spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the legislation "is among the congressman's priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later."
I don't spend much time on this topic, because it's generally a no-win debate. Just know and understand that I don't like abortion. But I fear making it illegal, once it's been legal, will deal us similar consequences as what happened with Prohibition. The best way to handle it is through the demand side, by teaching our children that abortion is wrong and adoption is always the better choice.
I don't believe in bombing clinics to make a point, not one iota. I find no justification in injuring and/or killing people to make a larger point. I don't much mind the protesting, if it's peaceful and doesn't result in open harassment. But you won't find me involved in one.
But as my quasi-ambivalence is now better known, I have to stress something. I am not happy about the state, once again, inserting it's nose into something, in which it has no right to do so. This is certainly true for religious issues and/or other issues of conscience. This is addressed in the Constitution and I believe can be proven to be unconstitutional, if taken to court. It will take a trip to the SCOTUS, but it will be upheld because nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee the right to any kind of health care, much less the kind that ends up with a dead fetus.
Even though the article implies there aren't enough votes to get this thing enacted, I think it is time for some lawyers to get ready to do some work. If not on this issue, on others that are predicated on the American people losing more of their liberty, with every action this Congress and President seeks to implement.
Rather than throw in the towel and watch more abuses be attempted by a progressive authoritarian regime, it's time to let the Congress and President know something; if they assert the federal government's actions over people's personal consciences, they will be in for a long expensive trip through the courts. Then if that isn't enough to dissuade them from venturing into areas where they have no business, 2010 is around the corner.
As I said, I am not against a woman's right to choose. I am against people being forced to violate the dictates of their consciences. There are more than enough places for women to choose to abort their unwanted pregnancies. There are no studies to show that demand is not being met.
Let me tell the secular progressives, the atheists, and the feminists (who are ultimately responsible for this) something they do not realize. If you want religion to stay out of politics, you have to keep your politics out of religion. It's a two-way street. You cannot have it both ways and expect the same in return. This is the epitome of hypocrisy and a textbook example of utter arrogance, to even suggest such a thing.
The more this kind of proposed infringement is tried and promoted, maybe the people will wake up and see the trend for what it is. Slowly but surely, the government seeks to take more and more rights away from the people. And they do it through the most deceitful of means, they disguise it as assistance or a helping hand to people, who are not fortunate enough to see through their ruse.
Orwell saw it. I see it. My good friend Mustang sees it.
Do you see it?
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Sunday Reflection: A Call For Political Introspection
Dr. James Dobson is resigning from the organization, Focus On The Family. He is the organization, always has been. He has been a lightening rod for secular progressives, but a standard bearer to those who buy his books, listen to him speak, and spiritually follow his ministry.
The overall mission of this group has been modified and altered through the years. Whereby it may have started out as a sincere Christian Fellowship to teach families about family issues, like any other large entity that gains a large enough following, it has branched out. It has expanded its sphere of influence into the political world, and has become a sizable force within conservative political circles.
In the early stages of 2008 presidential campaign, Dobson began to communicate his views on a certain candidate. He even threatened the Republican Party with staying home on election day, if this candidate was nominated. The only reason given for this withholding of support was the man's religion. He is a Mormon.
Mormons are not considered "mainstream" by fundamentalist evangelicals, despite the family values they seek to apply to their daily lives. They are still considered a heretical religion, with many preaching the likes of them into hellfire and damnation every Sunday. Many see the fringe polygamists as what Mormonism represents, and they unfairly assign that set of values to the bulk of Mormons everywhere. So with all of this negative input, it only stands to reason that many fundamentalists are never going to support a candidate like Mitt Romney.
I had problems with him at first, but not because he was a Mormon. My reservations were on the foreign policy front, whether or not he had the experience on the international level to deal with the threats we face. I really believed that he would have made a better running mate for McCain than Palin. As a VP he could have learned more about international issues, while being the chief architect of getting the economy back into swing, the right way. And looking backward, had he been nominated for President, he certainly would have been a much better candidate than McCain. He would have been a better President than Obama.
Because Dr. Dobson carries a lot of influence in a large sector of conservatives, Mitt pulled out for lack of support, McCain did not consider Mitt as a running mate for fear that he would have lost the Christian Right support, and now we have Barack Obama screwing up the country so badly, we may not recognize it in four years. Wonderful, isn't it?
So, while many of my readers may be sorry to see Dobson step down, I am actually happy to see him go. And while I am not trying to point fingers toward my evangelical friends, I would hope that during the next four years (while watching Obama wreck this nation worse than you could ever imagine), you think about what I am saying here. Not every conservative is going to belong to a church you deem to be mainstream enough and for a leader to picked on the basis of whether or not he/she is "Christian" enough is absolutely ludicrous, as we can now see.
I am not a Mormon, never will be. I, too, have some issues with the Mormon doctrine. But many of them live better lives than me, many of them are probably in closer favor to God than I am, and I am not going to sit in judgment of them. Certainly many of them are better suited to serve in elected office than me.
When I vote, I am not looking for a pastor. I am looking for a President that will not spend this country into oblivion and open this country to a new influx of people that will seek to destroy it. I want someone that will protect my freedom, not curb it because I do not jive with mainstream thought processes.
Dobson and his followers did a good job of alienating people solely based on their personal views of theology. They flexed their political muscles, despite the fact that Christ spoke of the separation of church and state. Now, instead of Willard Mitt Romney, we have Barack Hussein Obama. And while there is no guarantee Romney would have won had be been the nominee (or on the ticket), he would have debated Obama better, ran a better campaign, and would have articulated better economic solutions on the campaign trail. He would have been a hundred times better, than this clown we have now.
So my friends, you can shout from the housetops or mutter under your breaths how I am going to hell, if that makes you feel good. I am at peace with myself and God, right now. While I am far from perfect (as Mustang will readily tell you at the drop of a hat), I must suffer under the leadership of this wretched bunch in power now (like all of us). But even at this, I am at peace knowing that I didn't cut my nose off to spite my face in this last election.
UPDATE:
Romney Wins Straw Poll.
The overall mission of this group has been modified and altered through the years. Whereby it may have started out as a sincere Christian Fellowship to teach families about family issues, like any other large entity that gains a large enough following, it has branched out. It has expanded its sphere of influence into the political world, and has become a sizable force within conservative political circles.
In the early stages of 2008 presidential campaign, Dobson began to communicate his views on a certain candidate. He even threatened the Republican Party with staying home on election day, if this candidate was nominated. The only reason given for this withholding of support was the man's religion. He is a Mormon.
Mormons are not considered "mainstream" by fundamentalist evangelicals, despite the family values they seek to apply to their daily lives. They are still considered a heretical religion, with many preaching the likes of them into hellfire and damnation every Sunday. Many see the fringe polygamists as what Mormonism represents, and they unfairly assign that set of values to the bulk of Mormons everywhere. So with all of this negative input, it only stands to reason that many fundamentalists are never going to support a candidate like Mitt Romney.
I had problems with him at first, but not because he was a Mormon. My reservations were on the foreign policy front, whether or not he had the experience on the international level to deal with the threats we face. I really believed that he would have made a better running mate for McCain than Palin. As a VP he could have learned more about international issues, while being the chief architect of getting the economy back into swing, the right way. And looking backward, had he been nominated for President, he certainly would have been a much better candidate than McCain. He would have been a better President than Obama.
Because Dr. Dobson carries a lot of influence in a large sector of conservatives, Mitt pulled out for lack of support, McCain did not consider Mitt as a running mate for fear that he would have lost the Christian Right support, and now we have Barack Obama screwing up the country so badly, we may not recognize it in four years. Wonderful, isn't it?
So, while many of my readers may be sorry to see Dobson step down, I am actually happy to see him go. And while I am not trying to point fingers toward my evangelical friends, I would hope that during the next four years (while watching Obama wreck this nation worse than you could ever imagine), you think about what I am saying here. Not every conservative is going to belong to a church you deem to be mainstream enough and for a leader to picked on the basis of whether or not he/she is "Christian" enough is absolutely ludicrous, as we can now see.
I am not a Mormon, never will be. I, too, have some issues with the Mormon doctrine. But many of them live better lives than me, many of them are probably in closer favor to God than I am, and I am not going to sit in judgment of them. Certainly many of them are better suited to serve in elected office than me.
When I vote, I am not looking for a pastor. I am looking for a President that will not spend this country into oblivion and open this country to a new influx of people that will seek to destroy it. I want someone that will protect my freedom, not curb it because I do not jive with mainstream thought processes.
Dobson and his followers did a good job of alienating people solely based on their personal views of theology. They flexed their political muscles, despite the fact that Christ spoke of the separation of church and state. Now, instead of Willard Mitt Romney, we have Barack Hussein Obama. And while there is no guarantee Romney would have won had be been the nominee (or on the ticket), he would have debated Obama better, ran a better campaign, and would have articulated better economic solutions on the campaign trail. He would have been a hundred times better, than this clown we have now.
So my friends, you can shout from the housetops or mutter under your breaths how I am going to hell, if that makes you feel good. I am at peace with myself and God, right now. While I am far from perfect (as Mustang will readily tell you at the drop of a hat), I must suffer under the leadership of this wretched bunch in power now (like all of us). But even at this, I am at peace knowing that I didn't cut my nose off to spite my face in this last election.
UPDATE:
Romney Wins Straw Poll.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Sunday Reflection
I don't often mix politics and theology here at PYY, but this is going to be an exception. The London Telegraph has published a piece that warrants some consideration.
For the three significant respects, you'll have to read the entire article, and I do recommend doing so. But it's important to know that the Global Warming crowd has made this more of a faith than a science, which many in the group already spurn because they are not proponents of real theological faith, but rather adhere to science as a form of religion. They openly engage in proselytizing in a manner very similar to those that are in evangelical organizations, of which they thoroughly despise. This they do, despite the fact that science is not cooperating with their deeply ingrained belief systems.
This observation leads us to a scripture that is more than appropriate for this line of thought, it comes from II Thessalonians 2:9-12 and states as follows (emphasis mine):
In our musings, maybe we should consider the argument that this global warming cult is one of those strong delusions causing people to believe lies. I can think of others, but they will have to wait for a more appropriate time.
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
For the three significant respects, you'll have to read the entire article, and I do recommend doing so. But it's important to know that the Global Warming crowd has made this more of a faith than a science, which many in the group already spurn because they are not proponents of real theological faith, but rather adhere to science as a form of religion. They openly engage in proselytizing in a manner very similar to those that are in evangelical organizations, of which they thoroughly despise. This they do, despite the fact that science is not cooperating with their deeply ingrained belief systems.
This observation leads us to a scripture that is more than appropriate for this line of thought, it comes from II Thessalonians 2:9-12 and states as follows (emphasis mine):
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
In our musings, maybe we should consider the argument that this global warming cult is one of those strong delusions causing people to believe lies. I can think of others, but they will have to wait for a more appropriate time.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Vatican, Muslims To Meet
The BBC is reporting on a meeting that is about to take place, for the specific purpose of ironing out details for a future meeting. This, within itself, is a telling sign that this is not going to be an easy thing to accomplish.
The meeting may happen. But the two main questions that surround all of this are, what are the objectives and how much will be accomplished towards meeting them?
After all, there is no one powerful papal office comparable, in Islam. Who is going to speak for the Muslims? Likewise, there are many that may not accept the pope's positions within Christendom, and his own church as well. Is he speaking for them?
I say let them talk if they want. But the Vatican must be prepared to accept the fact that the likelihood of any real success is quite low, for the reasons I state.
The meeting may happen. But the two main questions that surround all of this are, what are the objectives and how much will be accomplished towards meeting them?
After all, there is no one powerful papal office comparable, in Islam. Who is going to speak for the Muslims? Likewise, there are many that may not accept the pope's positions within Christendom, and his own church as well. Is he speaking for them?
I say let them talk if they want. But the Vatican must be prepared to accept the fact that the likelihood of any real success is quite low, for the reasons I state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)