Category Archives: Culture War

Rebuttal to “How To Silence Idiotic Kim Davis Supporters”

I support Kim Davis 100%. Below is a video that proposes to teach how to “silence” me (and the title calls me an idiot, to boot, which is an ad hominem argument). First, watch the clip, then read my reply.

Warning: Some crude language.

Well, I’m a Kim Davis supporter, and it does not silence me. The clip is woefully wrong on so many levels. Let’s name just a few:

  1. One need not agree with, endorse, or even understand someone else’s religious belief in order to afford them accommodation for conscience sake.
  2. The clip’s implied notion of “it is wrong to live by part of the Bible if we don’t keep all of it” is a clever deception. There are multiple covenants in the Bible. The previous ones are often lumped together in a singular phrase: “Old Covenant.” Christians are enjoined to the “New Covenant.” If someone has not agreed to a certain covenant, then we don’t hold them accountable to its precepts. The fictional characters here act as though all the world are signatories to the Mt. Sinai Covenant (also known as the Mosaic Covenant). Christians don’t demand of unbelievers an obedience to our own covenant, let alone obedience to one we don’t even belong to. If you don’t want to take part in a certain covenant, then, yes, you can ignore its precepts, but you also won’t get its rewards, either. Remember that last part when the Day of Judgment arrives.
  3. It is nearly-universal Christian teaching that the Mosaic Covenant’s ceremonial codes and judicial penalties are not binding on non-Jews, i.e. those who are not part of that covenant (although the Old Testament has some broadly-applicable, explicit commands and some clear, timeless moral judgments of God, and all its content, however minor, harbors principles worthy of study). While we are on this, if we cannot believe in the Bible unless we live by all its covenants, then liberals cannot invoke the Supreme Court in Obergefell unless they also abide by all SCOTUS rulings, such as that black people are not persons, etc, and liberals cannot invoke “rule of law” over Kim Davis, while they ignore all the laws on the books protecting natural marriage (as done, for instance, by President Obama and many states’ attorneys general).
  4. The Bible’s overall message regarding sexuality has moral aspects that are clear in both the Old and New Testaments. One need not be a Jewish “Old Covenant” believer to know homosexuality is sexual sin; the “New Covenant” believer gets this knowledge from the New Testament as well. Furthermore, the Old Testament’s descriptions of what behaviors constitute the sexual sins, which all fall under a blanket term (fornication) are binding upon non-Jewish believers, as this matter falls within a limited set of Old Testament requirements declared binding on Gentile believers (see Acts 15).
  5. The TV script writer foolishly presumes that all transgressions are equal in nature, i.e. “all sins are equally severe; there is no big sin and no little sin,” which is blatantly false. Our Western judicial system is based in a significant way on the Mosaic Law’s “Lex Talionis” — the principle or law of retaliation, that “the punishment should fit the crime” (i.e. a penalty inflicted should correspond in degree and kind to the offense of the wrongdoer). This is based on a bedrock truth that not all sins are equal. The TV script writer betrays both their faulty view of “equality of all sins” and their glaring ignorance of the Bible by inserting into the script two falsehoods—that mixing crops/seeds and mixing thread types in clothes were both to be worthy of death under the Mosaic Law (the Bible nowhere called for such a penalty)—and implying that all minor infractions against the Mosaic Law are equal to, and as severe as, homosexuality, which is a concept that is indisputably not biblical.
  6. Bible passages that regulate/restrict bad behavior, including  slavery, rape, polygamy, and wrongful divorce, etc, are not endorsements of said behavior, and the overall message of the Bible has always led true believers away from such behavior.
  7. Finally, the TV clip “creates” the very bigotry it seeks to rebuke, in two ways: by fictitiously and intentionally portraying a callous, arrogant Christian it creates a false preconception of Christians, and in modeling a horrendous, flawed “how to silence the Christians” approach, it teaches anti-Christian bigotry to biblically illiterate unbelievers who “buy the lie” hook, line, and sinker. That fosters hatred toward believers and ensconces ignorance and bigotry as noble attributes.

Biased and/or Poor Reporting

This WCHS channel 8 report is either biased or hugely ignorant: it paints the Democrats’ recently defeated bill as being about “free contraception,” when it was actually about overturning the Hobby Lobby ruling, which was about (and specifically limited to) abortifacients as pertaining to an unlawful effort by HHS to force persons to pay for the abortifacients, even if against their religious convictions.

Furthermore, the report inaccurately implies that the bill was about “restoring” something that American women supposedly lost due to the Hobby Lobby ruling. That is either deliberately misleading or ignorantly misguided, as the whole point of the Hobby Lobby case was that the unlawful HHS mandate tried to impose a brand new burden on religious persons (that of paying for abortifacient coverage for employees) which was not something that American women ever “had” previously.

Since there never was such a mandate lawfully implemented against religious persons, there is nothing to be “restored.” The HHS mandate itself was not implemented by Congress. It was conjured out of thin air by HHS, and insomuch as it sought to overpower religious persons (via coercing closely-held corporations), it was against the law from the start. In other words, it was always illegal from the start. It never legally existed as far as closely-held, religious, for-profit corporations are concerned. Not only was the mandate itself unlawful from the start, but it never actually took hold—an injunction was granted. Then it was invalidated by the US Supreme Court before ever being enforced for even a single day against Hobby Lobby.

Both before and after the ruling, any American woman employed by a religious person/corporation had and still has the legal occasion to buy and pay for certain abortifacients, on her own. To reiterate, those women still have that option now. There was only an unlawful, failed attempt by HHS to create a government mandate that all corporations, even closely-held religious ones (both for-profits and non-profits), be compelled (by penalty of crippling fines) to pay for abortifacient coverage in violation of religious conviction. It was struck down, as pertaining to closely-held, religious, for-profit corporations. American women lost nothing by that ruling. There was never anything to be restored. How can the reporter be so mistaken on this?

Furthermore, it is both alarming and sad that Senator Manchin is so easily confused and so utterly mistaken on the true issues at stake here. According to the report, Senator Manchin holds that if one is a religious person then he or she is not permitted to make a profit as a corporation and still have his or her religious freedom protected. The senator is simply, sadly, horrendously wrong. Religious persons are indeed free to make a profit, even as corporations, and not check their religion at the door. So says the law, in clear language, and thus it was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Mad Libs: Dems Search for Words to Describe Outrage

If you wanted to see fireworks in D.C., you didn’t have to wait for July 4th. Yesterday’s decision on the HHS mandate exploded on the media scene, lighting a fuse under the radicals of the Left. While most Americans watched with pleasure as a pillar of ObamaCare fell, liberals sulked at another loss for lawlessness. Democrats couldn’t fire off their press releases fast enough as they vowed to push their assault on faith in the marketplace by ending justices’ opt-out. Promising a legislative fix, Majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) insisted that Americans’ “right” to sex-on-demand trumps a company’s deeply held beliefs on contraception and abortifacients.

As out of touch as liberals are with the law, it turns out that they’re even more out of touch with voters. While the Left trotted out its tired “war on women” line, FRC’s Cathy Ruse pointed out that the majority of women opposed the mandate — including 60% of the lower court female judges who voted to stop it!

Read more at Family Research Council.

Why I’m Oddly Glad the Obama Admin Overreached with HHS Mandate

There is some odd confusion regarding what’s at the heart of the Hobby Lobby case—resulting in part from [willful?] misleads by the liberal media (notice Bill calling out CBS Radio regarding blatant false reporting) and liberal politicians (for example, Hillary Clinton, the clear early frontrunner in the 2016 presidential race, proves in her response to the Supreme Court’s decision protecting Hobby Lobby from the Obama HHS mandate that she really has no fundamental understanding of what the case was about). It seems many on the left incorrectly think the case was in regard to “all” contraceptives (i.e. Hobby Lobby supposedly being exempted from paying for any contraception). Yet the Christian-owned company already pays for 16 of 20 contraceptives that the HHS mandate insists upon. Only the four that could cause the abortion of a fertilized embryo were contested. Even then, the case was not about blocking anyone’s “access” to those four abortifacients, but rather about preventing Obama’s HHS from compelling business owners to pay for the abortifacients in violation of the owners’ religious beliefs.

However, there is an underlying issue at stake, just as important as the obvious one.

Ever since America fell so far as to have many of its citizens think that only non-profit persons/entities can be permitted to hold religious convictions, this is the first time that such a bogus and dangerous notion has been tested and decided upon at the highest level. You only get one chance to have a legal “first impression” in the highest court of the land.

Punishing owners of for-profit businesses simply because they are unwilling to check their religious beliefs at the door is the edge of a legal razor blade that was bound to eventually strike at the judicial heart of our society. The precedent set here will have ramifications so far reaching that it’s practically beyond the description of words—and the timing is crucial, because the worldview of the SCOTUS justices serving at the given moment will determine where they come down on this, and likely will dictate pretty much forever afterward how related issues will be decided.

It is disturbing that four of the nine justices dissented in this case, discounting the hallowed American tradition of protecting our right to free exercise of religion. This judgment almost went the wrong way. By a margin of only one vote, freedom of religion was upheld. It is alarming that the decision was even close.

Had Kathleen Sabellius and her HHS minions not overreached at this point in history—if their challenge were to have occurred later, after additional moral decline and perhaps even the replacement of conservative justices with liberal justices, or perhaps just after gradual changing of the minds of some justices—the decision could have gone the other way. Thankfully, America got a 5-4 decision in favor of religious freedom.

The Obama Administration’s HHS department overreached so far that their unlawful demands resulted in threatening all closely-held corporations (e.g. family-owned, for-profit businesses) with massive punitive fines so steep it would bankrupt the businesses unless they comply and pay for abortifacient drugs. That forced the matter to be dealt with.  Before the judgment was announced, I was quite concerned. In the end, I’m relieved that it was now and not at some later time. The forces of the left jumped the gun. At a later time the same overreach might have resulted in a bad decision instead. As it was, we got a good decision from the court.

The struggle for right is far from over, though. My friend and fellow author, John F. Harrison, summed things up powerfully when he said to me recently, “It irks me that people are so unclear on the issues, and the mainstream media is deliberately making them unclear. This was never about ‘access’ to contraceptives or anything else. Or have we become so infantalized by the nanny state that we believe we only have ‘access’ to something if it is provided free by the government or paid for by a third party?”

Exactly, my friend.

Should We Surrender the Cultural Wars? | Bob Russell

“In recent years, many churches have dropped all images of war in favor of a peace treaty with the world. We speak of Jesus as a healer and leader, but not Lord and King. We shout grace, whisper repentance and make inordinate attempts to ingratiate ourselves with those who oppose us. We retreat into silence in the face of horrendous evil and hope it will all go away….” [read more]

No more snow?

Here in West Virginia, as in many parts of the country, this past winter poured many, many snow storms on us (above average), and even the so-called early spring has had several snow storms.

Today, on April 7, by faith I officially turned off the artificial snowflakes feature of this blog, with hopes that the last snow of the season is behind us. This is despite the fact that it is currently still quite chilly here, and there were reports of snow in some parts of West Virginia as recently as night before last!

Algore, how’s that “global warming” thing working out for you?

(My study of the research indicates there has been no evidence of global warming for over 15 years, yet government officials and tree-hugger “science” people still cling to their stance about it, while others want to continue to foster gestapo-style tactics under the moniker of “climate change” instead of “global warming.” Sigh.)

How Old Is Our Planet?

The age of the earth is hotly debated among Christians today. This issue is not really whether God created Adam but whether our planet is as old as most secular scientists insist. The conflict is that the text of Scripture does not appear to allow for anything like millions or billions of years—and if the scientific dating techniques are as accurate as portrayed, then it is difficult to take the book of Genesis at face value.

Institute for Creation Research (ICR) teams have conducted thorough technical research on the dating processes, and there is plenty of scientific evidence indicating our planet is much younger than the supposed 4.6 billion years secular naturalism suggests.

The focus of this article is to challenge Christians to trust the integrity and accuracy of God’s revealed Word over the interpretative suggestions of secular scholars and scientists…. [Read more]

For Darwin Day 2014, Discovery Institute Will Name University of Chicago Biologist Jerry Coyne as “Censor of the Year” – Evolution News & Views

Discovery Institute’s “Censor of the Year” award recognizes success in choking off free speech on evolution and intelligent design. To be given on Darwin Day, February 12, the prize this year will go to University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne, author of the popular blog Why Evolution Is True. In 2013, Coyne was instrumental in pushing Ball State University in Indiana to formally ban teaching about the scientific theory of intelligent design (ID). The move represents a milestone in the drive to punish critics of Darwinian theory.

via For Darwin Day 2014, Discovery Institute Will Name University of Chicago Biologist Jerry Coyne as “Censor of the Year” – Evolution News & Views.

The Strongholds Between Your Ears | Author Nathan D. Maki

Image of Masada, ancient stronghold in Israel
In AD 73, at the Fortress of Masada, 960 Jewish freedom fighters held off 15,000 Romans for 3 months.

What were strongholds?

In ancient times civilizations would build strongholds as fall-back points. When an enemy army invaded in such force that they either defeated a nation’s army or could not even be met on the field of battle everyone would abandon their unprotected villages and fall back to strongholds.

We find a mention of strongholds in Judges when the Midianites were invading, filling the land like grasshoppers. The Israelites built themselves strongholds in the mountains. Invading armies could strip the land of its crops, pillage and burn the villages, but behind the high walls and towers of these craggy fortresses the people would survive.  And as long as the people survived so would the nation.

Strongholds between my ears?

2 Corinthians 10:4 tells us that… [read more of this excellent article by my friend and fellow author, Nate Maki.]

Two simple steps to help WV against Common Core

WV-Against-Common-Core-rella-6-960x400

Thanks to our friend, Diana Bartley (who, by the way, is a good conservative candidate for the WV House of Delegates), we have become aware that West Virginia has a good Senate bill (SB 429) against the horrendous and dreaded Common Core initiative. In standing against Common Core, this good bill seeks to to protect student’s personally identifiable data, and requires both a complete cost analysis and a 2-year moratorium on assessments to allow for statewide hearings. The bill is sponsored by WV Senators Boley, Nohe, Barnes, Blair, Carmichael, Cole, M. Hall, Jenkins, Sypolt, and Walters.

Step 1: Click here to download a petition to print and have signed by fellow parents, church members, fellow employees, club members, etc.

Step 2: Click here to leave a comment for the Governor of WV using an online comment box. You can copy and paste this wording, if you wish: 

Yes! I join WV Against Common Core to express: my support for SB 429, my support for legal protection of parental rights regarding the education of their children, and my concern about, and opposition to, “Common Core.” I urge our elected officials and our Governor to support and pass SB429.

You will find information on the bill, as well as the actual bill itself, at a website devoted to “WV Against Common Core.” Please share this post with all your contacts and ask them to send the signed petition to the Governor. We need to make everyone aware of this bill. In addition, have everyone contact their state representatives and ask that they support SB 429. We can make this happen if we stay resolved to stop federalization of our schools.

Keep the federal government and business out of WV schools!

http://wvagainstcommoncore.wvconstitutionaladvocates.com/2014/01/senator-boley-introduces-sb429/

Senator Boley Introduces SB429 | WV Against Common Core

“SB429 affirms the parent as the final authority in matters of a student’s education and requires prior written consent for disclosure of student information other than in the aggregate, prohibits the implementation of the…” [read more].