THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS BLOG DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF ALL CONTRIBUTORS AND EACH TEAM MEMBER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FACTS AND OPINIONS CONTAINED IN HIS POST.


CLICK FLAGS FOR PAGE TRANSLATION OPTIONS

  Google  
           Search ESPRESSO ROAST Search WWW

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Off To Boston

I leave later this afternoon for New England where we'll be through the weekend (Marlborough tonight and tomorrow, then downtown Boston Friday through Sunday). We are making our annual pilgrimage to our home-away-from-home. I look forward to visiting old friends and colleagues from our many years there, to be capped off by my wife's company Christmas party Saturday night. That's always a fun black-tie event in one of the ritzy hotels downtown.

As time permits, I am anticipating plenty of opportunity to blog with wireless in our hotel and plenty of great cafes, so hopefully, there will be no beats missed. Maybe I'll post a few pics of the city throughout the trip...who knows. Anyway, until then...be blessed.

Labels:

Ridiculous Item of the Day: Michael Jackson Set To Build Mosque in Bahrain

"His ex-wife says his children are Jewish, his legal opponents allege he invented a drink called Jesus Juice, and now some Middle East media outlets are reporting that pop star Michael Jackson is building a mosque.

According to a front page story in Friday's Bahrain Tribune, the famed singer and 'moonwalker' has pledged an undisclosed sum to build a 'state of the art' mosque, which will stand as an expression of gratitude to the small Gulf state that has served as Jackson's home since his acquittal in June on child molestation charges in a California courtroom."
Appropriate, isn't it, that Michael Jackson made the Moonwalk famous? No matter how much he might look and thinks he's moving forward, he's just keeps moving backwards.

Full story here.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Extreme Christmas Decorating Makeovers

Hat tip to Short Attention Span for pointing to this amazing Christmas decoration, lighting extravaganza. Anyone want to place odds on how many times the cops are called?

Enjoy.

Labels:

New York Times: Kids Gone Wild

I have spent the last half-hour reading articles in news publications all lamenting the same thing: declining behavior in children. I don't know why it should surprise me to see these kinds of articles since our society has largely given up on the idea of training and disciplining children in order to make them productive individuals in society. What surprises me is more related to the fact that people are actually starting to notice and beginning to open up a dialogue through these kinds of articles that could lead to a healthier approach to raising children.

In the Sunday edition of the New York Times, a surprising article was written about the downward spiral of the behavior of children and the lack of respect they have towards adults. This particular article, entitled "Kids Gone Wild", pointed to a recent survey that revealed "nearly 70 percent of Americans said they believed that people are ruder now than they were 20 or 30 years ago, and that children are among the worst offenders. (As annoyances, they tied with obnoxious cellphone users.)"

Let's think about this for a moment: children are more rude now than they were 20 or 30years ago. That would put us back around, say, 1975 to 1985, right? Now, since we're talking about children's behavior in public, then we're talking about children that are probably around the age of 8-10 years and older which would result in children who were born sometime in or around the 60's, give or take a few years. This would be around the same time that the influence of the "Builder generation" was dwindling and the rise of free love, women's liberation movements, and rebellion became pretty popular. The influence of those who actually believed in such things as discipline, hard work, elder-respect, and personal sacrifice was beginning to lose it's hold on the public mind.

What we have seen of late is the result of the social philosophy of those raised in what many called a "post-Christian" age, meaning an age in which Judeo-Christian values which had, to this point, been the driving force of society, were largely abandoned. People began listening to many different voices, like Dr. Benjamin Spock, who is seen by many as the driving figure of the more permissive attitudes of parents towards children. In fact, some have even said Spock is the primary cause of the rebellious sixties, a point of which is debatable, but according to the popularity of his book (which falls third in all-time sales behind the Bible and Shakespeare), it is not surprising.

These children of the 60's grew up and began influencing culture themselves...and eventually [shudder]...having children of their own. We're talking people like the "material girl" herself, Madonna. Perhaps no one else has had such an influence on a generation as she has. Ironically, as these cultural architects age, they find themselves unable (or unwilling) to consistently live the lifestyle they vociferously advocated:

Even Madonna - her "Papa Don't Preach" years long past - has joined the throng, proclaiming herself a proud "disciplinarian" in a recent issue of the British magazine Harpers & Queen and bragging that, as a mom, she takes a tough line on homework, tidiness and chores: "If you leave your clothes on the floor, they're gone when you come home."

Part of the problem is that too many fathers listened to Madonna and stopped "preaching" to their kids. They became more tolerant of their children's behavior and gave up on teaching them to show respect and did little to earn it.

Unfortunately, people like Madonna learn the lesson long after they have already influenced millions to act just like they did and raise material kids who know nothing of respect and care nothing of civility. Perhaps even more sad is the fact that, through her music and sideshow, she continues to preach the very things she no longer lives.


It seems we have come to a point of publicly complaining about the behavior of children, but not really knowing what to do about it. Funny, this article in the New York Times points to the lack of discipline in children's lives, yet the moment that discipline is carried out by parents or educators, someone cries foul.

We live in a society that is confused. There is a growing number of people who realize that our social structure is out of control, but most feel unable to do anything about it. On the one hand, there are parents who either fill ill-equipped to actually be
parents or are too tired to fight the battles that lead to better kids:

Most parents, Dr. Kindlon said, would like their children to be polite, considerate and well behaved. But they're too tired, worn down by work and personally needy to take up the task of teaching them proper behavior at home.
"We use kids like Prozac," he said. "People don't necessarily feel great about their spouse or their job but the kids are the bright spot in their day. They don't want to muck up that one moment by getting yelled at. They don't want to hurt. They don't want to feel bad. They want to get satisfaction from their kids. They're so precious to us - maybe more than to any generation previously. What gets thrown out the window is limits. It's a lot easier to pick their towel up off the floor than to get them away from the PlayStation to do it."

Of course, then there are the parents (who may be in the majority), who parent according to a prevalent social Darwinist worldview (whether they are aware of it or not). These are the ones who train their kids to compete and win at all costs; it's survival of the fittest out there...a dog-eat-dog world and if you aren't prepared to win, you will be defeated. These are the parents that instill in their children a drive that will take them to the top but leave a whole lot of people...and life...in their wake:

Parenting today is also largely about training children to compete - in school and on the soccer field - and the kinds of attributes they need to be competitive are precisely those that help break down society's civility.
Parents who want their children to succeed more than anything, Dr. Kindlon said, teach them to value and prioritize achievement above all else - including other people.
"We're insane about achievement," he said. "Schoolwork is up 50 percent since 1981, and we're so obsessed with our kids getting into the right school, getting the right grades, we let a lot of things slide. Kids don't do chores at home anymore because there isn't time."

On the other side of the coin are those who are paid to train children. Many are so shaped by the current cultural climate that they, themselves, barely have it together, believing that children should be shown nothing but respect, removing terrible obstacles to their developmental processes like punishment, expectations, and limits to their freedom...ooooh, limits bad; freedom goooood. These are the ones who should quickly be shown the proverbial exit door to public education. Others, though, know what needs to be done and desire to do it, but feel as though their hands are tied and are, therefore, helpless to do little more than watch the next generation slip a little farther down the path of no return:

...other adults, even those who should have authority, are afraid to get involved. "Nobody feels entitled to discipline other people's kids anymore," Dr. Kindlon said. "They don't feel they have the right if they see a kid doing something wrong to step in."
Educators feel helpless, too: Nearly 8 in 10 teachers, according to the 2004 Public Agenda report, said their students were quick to remind them that they had rights or that their parents could sue if they were too harshly disciplined. More than half said they ended up being soft on discipline "because they can't count on parents or schools to support them."
And that, Dr. Rosenfeld said, strikes at the heart of the problem. "Parents are out of control," he said. "We always want to blame the kids, but if there's something wrong with their incivility, it's the way their parents model for them."

Sadly, they are right. Teachers could (and probably would) be sued in many instances in which discipline was handed out to children. Parents are out of control. Kids must be held accountable for their own actions, but it largely stems from their parents, long having abandoned a system of standards deemed a sham by society, who fail to shape the minds and hearts of their children.

What's the moral of this story? All of the talk about the importance of a biblical worldview on this and other blogs is not just a suggestion or option for our culture. We have seen over and over again, in many different places, that when that society was built upon the principles laid out in Scripture and according to a social order with God as its Head, it and it's people thrived. It just does. Likewise, societies built on other systems or that abandon their Christian roots, inevitably fail.

Today, nearly 3 million Americans live in a Country in which that abandonment is nearly complete. Some who are reading this right now currently live in countries where that abandonment has long been completed and could give testimony to the consequences in the lives of their people.

The United States is not completely there yet, but we're making up ground every day.

For more, read Kids Gone Wild in the New York Times, TV, No Homework Can Turn School Suspensions into Vacations in the Washington Post, and Poor Grades Aside, Athletes Get Into College on a $399 Diploma, also in the NY Times.

Labels:

Monday, November 28, 2005

Sweet Snacks Could Be Best Medicine For Stress

Great, another excuse to feed my sweet-tooth:
Researchers from the University of Cincinnati (UC) have found that eating or drinking sweets may decrease the production of the stress-related hormone glucocorticoid.
If you'll excuse me, please, I think I feel a little stress coming on...better go take care of it.

Full article.

Labels:

Indiana Abortion Law Upheld

I read in the Thanksgiving Day edition of the Louisville Courier-Journal that the Indiana Supreme Court has upheld a law requiring counseling for abortion 18 hours before the procedure for young women and, further, it must be done in person.

The issue was over whether or not the requirement places an "undue burden" on women wanting the procedure. After the 4-1 decision, abortion opponents called this "a common-sense victory." Both sides made their voices heard:
Mike Fichter, executive director of Indiana Right to Life, said the court's decision confirms that the waiting period is 'a reasonable and necessary requirement to ensure that women are not rushed or pressured into decisions that will impact their own lives and the lives of their unborn children.

But Betty Cockrum, president of Planned Parenthood of Indiana, said, 'it's a disappointing day for women,' many of whom will now have to travel twice, miss two days of work or find two days of child care to obtain a legal medical procedure.'
Ms. Cockrum makes this "legal medical procedure" sound like a root canal. Of course, to people like Ms. Cockrum, a root canal is preferred over the inconvenience of being responsible for another human being. What this law does, however, is to uphold the demand for counseling that serves to remind young women seeking abortions that, regardless of whether they choose to go through with the abortion or not, they are still responsible for another human being. They will either be responsible for his or her upbringing, or his or her death...responsibility will not go away with a "legal medical procedure."

Ms. Cockrum went on to point out that "we have only five counties out of 92 in Indiana where there are abortion facilities, and it's a pretty big state." Yes, Ms. Cockrum, you make a great point. Why does it not make you ask the question of why there are only five out of 92 counties that offer abortion procedures in your entire state. Could it be that your state doesn't support abortion? Could it be that you are trying to force the people of your state to endorse and embrace something that they realize goes against the very fiber of what it means to be human?

Nah, I didn't think you would get it.


The part about in-person counseling is an issue because out of twenty-three states that require women to undergo a waiting period including counseling, only six require that the counseling be done in person, the others (including my current residence of Kentucky) conduct the counseling over the phone. In my opinion, that is a great weakness since it lacks the personal touch and involvement of caring individuals who can sit eye-to-eye and discuss the issues involved, especially on a subject that will not only determine the fate of a child, but will also change the woman going through with the abortion forever.


The part that I found gratifying about this decision (besides the fact that this establishes precedent for future cases) is that in addition to the opinion given that this law does not violate the Hoosier state's right to privacy, Justice Brent Dickson went a step beyond simply concurring with the opinion to write a separate opinion. In it, he wrote that the court should have "explicitly declare(d) that the Indiana Constitution does not protect any alleged right to abortion."


Dickson went on to say, "In addition, because the challenged statutory pre-abortion requirements not only discourage harm to fetal life, but also protect the health of pregnant women, particularly in light of the risks to women from post-abortion psychological harm, I am convinced that these requirements not only are a proper exercise of legislative power but also are in direct harmony with the furtherance of core values [of the state constitution]."


Good on Justice Dickson. Not only should this be considered common-sense (a rare commodity in society of late), but also a point upon which other elected officials should have the courage to stand. Indiana state representative Eric Koch was right in stating that the abortion debate will continue to rage, but moves like this one go a long way to help settle some of the preliminary issues involving the limits to women's rights and to further the subsequent issue involving the extent to which the rights of unborn children must be taken into consideration.

Labels:

I Devolved

Man, take a few days off from posting and you get smacked. I've devolved to an adorable little rodent. Shees...I always knew this evolution mess was a sham!

UPDATE: There seems to be work going on in the ecosystem, so maybe it's a glitch...funny, I don't feel any different.

UPDATE 2: Well, the ecosystem has changed and, to be honest, I'm glad it has. It took this to realize just how meaningless these distinctions are, though I have put some stock in my "standing" (I can say standing because I'm still a rodent who does stand) in the system. The bottom line is that there is no system that determines blog quality, it is whether or not you are writing quality stuff that people want to read.

I will write the best I can under the circumstances in which I find myself and hope other people want to read it. If so, that's really wonderful. If not, it's out of my control. My goal is to continue to write about real issues from a biblical worldview perspective, point to others doing the same, and point you to items of interest that either have worldview implications or are just fun to read or see. I'll enjoy what I'm doing and leave the response to you. So away with the ecosystem ranking. Thanks TTLB...I think I've evolved.

Labels:

Saturday, November 26, 2005

Good News From That "Quagmire" That Is Iraq

Thought Quotient blogged on some good stats coming out of Iraq:
  • Five million Iraqi students are back in school, with 51 million new Ba’ath-free textbooks in circulation
  • Academics forced into exile under Saddam are coming back to teach in Iraqi universities
  • There are now over 200,000 trained Iraqi security forces personnel
  • The Ministry of Industry has issued 7661 licenses for new businesses
  • A complete rebuilding and renovation of major telecommunications infrastructure
  • A new sewer system is improving health conditions
  • Public Health Centers are bringing family healthcare to Iraqi neighborhoods
All news deemed too good to report...I guess.

Labels:

Friday, November 25, 2005

Liberalism 101: Teacher Gave Anti-Bush Vocab Quiz

BENNINGTON, Vt. — A high school teacher is facing questions from administrators after giving a vocabulary quiz that included digs at President Bush and the extreme right.

Bret Chenkin, a social studies and English teacher at Mount Anthony Union High School, said he gave the quiz to his students several months ago. The quiz asked students to pick the proper words to complete sentences.

One example: "I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes." "Coherent" is the right answer.
More.

Labels:

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Ridiculous Item of the Day: Freegans Fight Waste By Eating Garbage

OK, call me wasteful, but the waste gets wasted. In a move to fight consumer waste (which is not a bad thing to bring to attention), a group in New York insist on eating for free by digging through trash in order to find din-din.
Dinner shared by a group of friends at a well-appointed Greenwich Village apartment featured eggplant Parmesan with a salad of mixed greens and avocado dressing. The guests already had snacked on hors d'oeuvres of smoked mozzarella and crackers.

Not bad considering the diners find their food by digging through garbage. They call themselves "freegans," a play on the words "vegan" vegetarians who avoid all animal products, including dairy, and "free." In an ideological rejection of consumer waste, they only eat food that's been discarded. And in New York City, at least, they never go hungry.
Full story here.

Labels:

One Thing I'm Thankful For Today...

...is religious freedom.

As more and more stories continue to come out regarding countries in which religious freedoms are becoming more and more limited, I am thankful today to live in a country that still values the freedom to worship according to one's own conscience. I have posted on this subject recently (here and here) and today, another story comes out dealing with new limits on religious expression. This time, it's Russia:
The Russian government said that within the coming weeks it may begin tightening control of foreign missionaries and religious organizations.

According to reports and Russian newspapers, the Justice Ministry is considering adopting stricter rules on granting visas to foreign missionaries – an action if effective would lead to the limitation of foreign missionaries in Russia. The government also expressed plans to make the suppression of religious centers easier while causing registration of religious organizations more difficult, according to Zenit News.
Full story here.

Labels:

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

An Espresso Shot [11-23-04]: What Is the "Right" Road to Nirvana?

Buddhism teaches that right thinking and self-control can enable people to achieve nirvana a divine state of peace and release from desire.
Just a quick thought: What constitutes "right" (or "rightness") for a Buddhist and what are the grounds for claiming that any type of thinking is right...or wrong for that matter?

That may be a rhetorical question, though someone actually may feel they have a good response. If you do, I'd really be interested in hearing it.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Labels:

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Beaming Buddha Boy Brings Big Bucks [UPDATED]

Thousands of pilgrims are pouring into the dense jungle of southern Nepal to worship a 15-year-old boy who has been hailed as a new Buddha.

Devotees say that Ram Bomjon, who is meditating silently beneath a tree, has not eaten or had anything to drink since he sat down at his chosen spot six months ago.

Witnesses say they have seen light emanating from the teenager's forehead.
Six months outside...bald head...light on forehead...sunburn, maybe? An interesting aspect of this story is the results of this event:
A thriving market has grown in the once pristine forest, supplying pilgrims with everything from chewing tobacco and bicycle repairs to incense and religious amulets. The ground is covered with litter.

A fence was built around Ram's tree to prevent pilgrims from prodding him, then a second, and now a third is planned, as well as a bus park, leaving Ram at the center of an ever-growing circle of commerce.
Chewing tobacco, huh? Who would have guessed. Interesting how these so-called worshippers seem to be acting in ways contrary to what Buddhists claim to value, including destroying the harmony of the peaceful forest, littering, and having to be held back by fences so they can't prod their god.

Full story here.

UPDATE [03-22-06]: Many have wondered what happened to the boy. Seems he left...just left. Rather anti-climactic, isn't it? Read the latest from this BBC report.

Labels:

Cheney Gets the "X"



CNN tries to explain why a big 'X' appeared over Vice President Dick Cheney on-air during a recent speech.

Labels:

North Korea is Dark



You may have seen this already, but it is absolutely amazing. This satellite image clearly shows the distinction between two political philosophies at work. North Korea is to the north with South Korea lit up below.


Link: North Korea is Dark

Labels:

Monday, November 21, 2005

Not Evil...Just Different

Relativism is defined as "a theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them." Those who hold to certain worldviews such as postmodernism and naturalism adhere to a relativistic view of truth.

Within these worldviews, nothing is really right or wrong. Well, they wouldn't tell you that; they would say that there are certainly things that are "wrong," but if you question them, you'll soon find out that those things that are wrong are things that are wrong to them. It doesn't so much matter whether or not these things are considered universally wrong or even whether anyone else thinks they are wrong. That's not the issue. They are speaking to personal, subjective issues...it is relativism (though if you ask them about environmental issues, women's rights, animal rights, or vegetarianism, they will probably speak in terms of universals).

Perspective is an important word for relativists. After all, it's not so much that things are wrong, universally, they are just of different perspectives and the more we can understand and respect the other perspective, the better off the world will be.


Now, I'm all for understanding another's perspective. Such an understanding is the basis for real dialogue. After all, one cannot even begin to discuss the error in another's view if he does not even understand where that person is coming from. However, to take the next step in saying that all views are legitimate and "right," depending on one's perspective, is illogical and foolish.

I mentioned the Law of Non-contradiction in an earlier post which states that P and not-P cannot both be true at the same time and in the same way. Relativists usually reject the veridity of this law and rarely think through the implications of their views in order to realize that they really don't desire the conclusion of the worldview they are advocating.


Let me give you a good example of the absurdity of which I speak. Michelle Malkin points to a statement made by Chris Matthews, host of one of CNBC's talking head shows, during a speech to a group over the weekend:

The period between 9-11 and (invading) Iraq was not a good time for America. There wasn't a robust discussion of what we were doing," Matthews said."If we stop trying to figure out the other side, we've given up. The person on the other side is not evil. They just have a different perspective.
What Matthews is saying here is that the motivation that leads terrorists who blow themselves up in order to kill large numbers of innocent people is not evil...it is just...different. They have a different perspective on things. They believe that blowing themselves up for the purpose of killing large number of innocent people is just an innocent way to make a political and/or religious statement. This is, of course, absolutely ludicrous.

It really doesn't matter what perspective maniacal terrorists have, what they are doing is universally
wrong...it is evil. I have a strong feeling that Chris Matthews' view would change if he had a family member fall victim to a homicide bomber. He would probably recognize what most other people already know through their God-given conscience. Unfortunately, people like Matthews are too intelligent to bother with mere common sense.

So, why exactly has western culture witnessed a shift away from universal morality? The reason is primarily a rise in postmodernism in which multi-culturalism and relativism have been embraced and the Judeo-Christian foundation upon which western culture was built is considered archaiac and closed-minded. The more tolerant western society becomes of illegitimate and self-defeating worldviews, the more ridiculously impotent our society, in general, and our legal system, in particular, becomes.

Let's look briefly at the implications of such philosophy. If people like Chris Matthews really believe that issues of morality are nothing more than matters of perspective, then any action an individual takes can be argued to be legitimate; simply a matter of perspective. Is this really where we want to go with our society? Do we really want to begin looking at things like homocide bombers as just different ways of self-expression? The thing is, if we adopt Matthews' philosophy (worldview), then our legal system is forever changed, undergoing an irreversible erosion of justice and liberty for all.

No longer will victims of violent crimes be able to rely on a jury's ability to determine the guilt of an individual because he did something "wrong." He was simply acting from a different perspective. Prosecutors will be out of a job because there will be no one to prosecute. As a matter of fact, the words "crime" and "wrong" become devoid of all meaning.

Admittedly, I am painting a picture of society built on the logical foundations of its stated values. Most societies aren't that honest and don't think about what they believe enough to realize that many of their views are completely maniacal. However, even if our culture never becomes a complete anarchy, we will continue to see the erosion of "civil rights" as issues of justice will progressively become based on
societal constructs, most of which are designed and implemented by a small but vocal minority; the whims and wishes of a society rather than on universal principles of morality.

It is wise to look at the different perspectives people have in order to learn what drives them and makes them function in a particular way. It will, however, be the complete and utter destruction of a society if we make the mistake of taking the next step of accepting all views as equally legitimate.

That's my perspective.

Labels:

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Health Crisis in China: A Heart-breaking Situation

How desperate can it possibly get for one to feel the best of all possibilities is to take one's own wife and mother to a morgue to be cremated alive because care is no longer affordable? It is, sadly, the story of one impoverished family in China:
A Chinese peasant woman who suffered a brain haemorrhage was left at the undertakers alive for cremation because her family could no longer afford hospital treatment, state media said on Friday.

She was only saved by the tears in her eyes.

The case is the latest in a series of tragedies illustrating China's stretched health care system and the inability of rural workers to meet spiralling medical costs.

You Guoying, a 47-year-old migrant worker from southwestern Sichuan province, was taken for cremation by her husband and children in Taizhou, eastern Zhejiang province, where she worked, the China Youth Daily said.

Fortunately for You, the undertaker realised she was still alive when he saw her move and tears in her eyes
Full story here.

HT: Pearcey Report

Labels:

Saturday, November 19, 2005

Worldviews Unhinged: U.S. Author Lauds Suicide Bomber

Kurt Vonnegut: an honest liberal.
ONE of the greatest living US writers has praised terrorists as “very brave people” and used drug culture slang to describe the “amazing high” suicide bombers must feel before blowing themselves up.
You really should read the full story here.
HT: LGF.

Labels:

Friday, November 18, 2005

An American Shift: U.S. Is Becoming More Isolationist

MSNBC reports that Americans seem "less enchanted as sole superpower" than we have been in the past. Citing the results of a recent Pew Research Poll (which actually was in two parts, a survey of average citizens and one of the "influentials"), the report states that just four years ago, thirty percent of those surveyed believed that America should "mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own." Since that time, that number has risen to forty percent, up most sharply among Democrats (55%) and Independents (42%).

I find this desire for isolationism an example of wishful thinking on the part of some short-sighted Americans since September 11 proved it is impossible for the United States to ignore problems and let them go away. They simply won't. They will always find their way upon our shores...now, moreso than ever. I wonder how many lessons like this we must learn before we finally get it.

Even before our most recent reminder, many Americans had taken a similar stance following World War I. The United States, tired from battle and financial difficulties at home, wanted nothing to do with the problems the rest of the world was facing with Adolph Hitler and the maniacal Nazi Party of Germany and the imperialism of Japan. We learned from the events at Pearl Harbor that the world will not leave us alone.

Beyond the fact that we cannot truly become isolationist, we should not want to. We have, as a nation, been given much. We have the means and the foundation upon which much good can be done. We have seen many of the results of what can happen to a people like the Iraqis when the big kids on the block decide to use their powers for good. We see children going to school, women speaking up and taking their place in society, men and women casting votes...real votes that actually count for something. We have been given much and
"to whom much is given, much is required."

Other findings state that many Americans would welcome the emergence of a second super power:
The Council on Foreign Relations said its analysis found "“a striking revival of isolationist sentiment among the general public." In fact, more than a third of Americans (35 percent) said it would be just fine with them if a second superpower were to emerge to challenge U.S. leadership. At the same time, fewer than half of Americans (48 percent)— have a positive opinion of the United Nations, down from 77 percent just before 9/11.
This reflects the fickled nature of the American public wanting their cake and eating it, too. Though many Americans say they would like a second super power, chances are high that it would not be a favorable "partner" in world affairs (as reflected in the United Nations), nor would it likely share American values of freedom and liberty to the same extent. That would lead to more problems than ever. The exception, perhaps, being a country such as Great Britain, though in many respects, much of the British population is as fickled or moreso than the American population. No offense, Britain. I love you, but your people tend to be more quickly impatient with leadership and you are several steps ahead of us in the secularization of society and leadership which always leads to nowhere fast. If there is nothing solid upon which to build the moral direction of a super power, its decisions and value-judgments will eventually become muddled and capricious, caving to the whims of a people.

Most importantly in this report, in my opinion (please read this part!), is the revelation regarding the dichotomy between the views and attitudes of the average citizens and those of the "elites."
This survey demonstrates why we should be very cautious in how much we allow negativism and nay-saying of the "influentials" to shape our thinking:
If anything, the "“influentials"” (the report'’s shorthand for its sample of opinion leaders) are even gloomier about America's world prospects than the public as a whole. For example, 37 percent of Americans as a whole believe the U.S. effort to establish a stable democracy in Iraq will fail, but that view is held by 84 percent of scientists, 71 percent of foreign affairs specialists and 63 percent of journalists.

Meanwhile, while 44 percent of Americans believe the war in Iraq has damaged the international struggle against terrorism, higher percentages in every opinion leader category hold that view, —including military leaders and 82 percent of those who study foreign affairs for a living.

And, except for military leaders, all of the categories of "“influentials"” are more downbeat about prospects for democracy in the Middle East. Even then, only 34 percent of the public (and the same percentage of military leaders) believe it will ever happen; by comparison, only 17 percent of foreign affairs specialists and 14 percent of security experts agree.
We must be careful following the leadership of the "influentials," a group defined by Pew as "journalists, academics, state and local government officials, religious leaders and experts in foreign affairs, national security, science, engineering and the military." Yes, I noticed that religious leaders are in that category, too. I agree that they should be. There are a lot of theological perspectives flying around, all of which must be passed through the filter of Scripture in order to arrive at their level of truth (see my previous post for an example of one "religious authority"--among many--worthy of discounting).

Certainly, getting involved in the world's affairs opens the door for a messy situation. There is always risk and positive results are never a certainty as we experienced in Vietnam. Nevertheless, inaction almost certainly guarantees not only the destruction of our society by those who would exploit are lack of will to fight tyranny, but it would do far worse: it would destroy the moral foundation and desire to do what is right in the world upon which this country was built.


NOTE: Several months ago, I wrote an article on my perspective of war from a biblical worldview. If you are interested, you may read it
here.

Labels:

Showdown in London: Archbishops Threaten Split Over Gay Clergy


In the heat of his current crisis,
Rowan Willams appears to be
calling the Mother Ship
requesting they beam him up.
Unfortunate for us all,
they seem to have denied
him his request.
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, faced the gravest threat to his authority as leader of the worldwide Anglican communion last night, as nearly half the church's presiding archbishops launched an unprecedented attack on his leadership over the issue of gay clergy.
Full text here.

Labels:

Churches Burned in France. MSM Silent

The Astute Blogger submitted an excellent post today on the silence of the MSM in the wake of a dozen or so churches being torched in the ongoing Muslim riots (oops...did I say Muslim riots?). What are the headlines in the media? THOUSANDS OF CARS CONTINUE TO BURN AS RIOTS THROUGHOUT FRANCE CONTINUE. Here is an excerpt of the post:
One dozen Christian churches were defiled, ransacked and/or torched by rioters in France during the intifada. That's one every other day over the last two weeks. Quite a clip. And during the same period, not a single mosque was torched by the rioters, (whose Muslim-ness has nothing to do with the riots - according to the MSM. And nothing about these targeted attacks against churches has appeared in the MSM, either).

In the old days, when the KKK - (who were like today's islamofascists: a group committed to tyranny and willing to use terror to impose it) - were torching BLACK churches, liberals did not hesitate to join the fight against the KKK. WHY DO THEY STAND AT THE SIDELINES NOW!? WORSE: why do actively work to make it tougher to defeat today's "GLOBAL KKK" the jihadoterrorists!?
Good question. Most of us know the answer, don't we?

Labels:

Thursday, November 17, 2005

Challenges Facing Turkish Christians

In spite of the fact that Turkey passed widespread measures last month to expand civil liberties including freedom of religion, Turkish congregations are still being challenged constantly with the need to remain faithful and strong in the face of "unofficial" oppression.

A Washington Times article reports on the difficulty these Christian congregations are facing and the fact that, though the laws have been passed allowing for free movement of missionaries, legal gatherings, and free evangelism, the Turkish government is clearly using it to its advantage to try and inch its way into the European Union.

The motives of the government would be largely inconsequential, except that these congregations are still receiving ill treatment since the deeply held conviction for most of the country is that to be Turkish is to be Muslim. This, of course, is all that is needed to lead to problems for these Christian groups. The following is an excerpt from the article highlighting some of the challenges these groups face:

To understand the other problem facing Christian congregations...one need only look out a church window into the street, where a police officer dozes in a van while a colleague keeps watch from a plastic chair.
The building has been under guard since last year, when a mentally ill visitor became abusive, unsheathed a knife and tried to set fire to the downstairs meeting room.
Other Turkish congregations have suffered worse. In Ankara in April, gasoline bombs were hurled at the International Protestant Church, causing $10,000 in damage.
Last November, in the southeastern city of Gaziantep, an American missionary was bound and gagged by two assailants claiming to be members of al Qaeda.
Although they didn't follow through on their threats to kill him, they warned that they would come back and finish him off unless he and his family left Turkey immediately.
Missionaries have long been treated with suspicion in Turkey, where rampant conspiracy theories link them to international attempts to divide the country.
The latent mistrust grew into something approaching paranoia in the first half of this year, when news outlets and some members of Turkey's government aroused fears.
On June 11, the staunchly secularist daily Cumhuriyet quoted intelligence sources as saying that evangelists were promoting ethnic divisions by concentrating their efforts on Turkey's Kurds.
The Islamic weekly Aksiyon said in March that 35,000 clandestine congregations were meeting in Turkey. The claim was wildly exaggerated but typical.
Rahsan Ecevit, the secularist wife of a former prime minister, charged in January that missionaries were paying Turks to convert to Christianity.
"We cannot ignore this activity," she said. "At a time we say we are entering the [European Union], we're losing our religion."
Timur Topuz, who attends church in Altintepe, thinks such prejudices stem ultimately from a widespread notion that being Turkish equals being Muslim.
His own grandmother, a Muslim, found it hard to credit his joy at watching Turkey defeat Ukraine in a recent soccer match, he said.
"You, a Christian, happy that Turkey won?" he quoted her as saying.
"People here still haven't realized that nation and religion are different things," he said with a shrug.
It is a good reminder that there are still plenty of places around this globe in which followers of Christ still receive ill treatment, including outright persecutions. It would serve us all well not to get too comfortable with the freedoms we possess. This level of persecution could be coming to a community near you. I wonder how we will respond?

Read full text of "The Cost of Faith"
here.

Labels:

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Hooray for Tasha Henderson

An Oklahoma mother is taking heat for proactively addressing her daughters failing grades, bad behavior at school, and lack of concern for her education. In order to get 14-year old Coretha's attention, she made her stand on a busy street corner, wearing a placard that read: "I don't do my homework and I act up in school, so my parents are preparing me for my future. Will work for food."

I absolutely applaud this family's concern and love for their child that they will do what it takes to make sure Coretha doesn't end up on the street for real. I'm sure it was humiliating for Coretha, but it should be pointed out that this was not a case of the little girl being dumped off on the street. Tasha Henderson was by her side.


While there were certainly mixed messages from bystanders, including a telephone call to police, citing "psychological abuse," the results have been positive.
Tasha Henderson said her daughter's attendance has been perfect and her behavior has been better since the incident.

Coretha, a soft-spoken girl, acknowledged the punishment was humiliating but said it got her attention. "I won't talk back," she said quietly, hanging her head.

She already has been forced by her parents to give up basketball and track because of slipping grades, and said she hopes to improve in school so she can play next year.
I agree with Marvin Lyle, a 52 year-old bystander who said, "I don't see anything wrong with it. I see the other extreme where parents don't care what the kids do, and at least she wants to help her kid." That's right, Marvin. That there were more parents like the Hendersons.

Unfortunately, too many "professionals" are telling parents that punishment and correction will "damage the child's self-esteem." What a load of pucosh! What damages a child's self-esteem is when he flunks out of school, gets busted for possession and spends the better part of his life in the slammer...all because the parents didn't want to damage his self-esteem.


If more people were like the Hendersons, education would be up, crime would be down, and kids would be much less likely to end up on the streets or in the morgue.

Who gets the last word? Regrettably, it's usually someone like Donald Wertlieb, a professor of child development at the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development at Tufts University:
[Wertlieb] warned that such punishment could do extreme emotional damage. He said rewarding positive behavior is more effective.

"The trick is to catch them being good," he said. "It sounds like this mother has not had a chance to catch her child being good or is so upset over seeing her be bad, that's where the focus is."
Certainly, rewarding good behavior is an important part of child-rearing, but the problem is that so many people follow the advice of "experts" like Professor Wertlieb that there is rarely opportunity to "catch them being good" because there is no discipline to encourage it.

"Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates correction is stupid."
Proverbs 12:1 (NIV)


Looks like other bloggers agree.

Labels: