HT: Sharon Hughes

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

"Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, "The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt."

Hence God led the people around by the way of the wilderness to the Red Sea; and the sons of Israel went up in martial array from the land of Egypt.

At that moment it hit me...hard. God led them in the wilderness so that they did not become afraid and turn back. How many times does God lead His people into a wilderness experience either for their protection or their preparation? The wilderness was God's doing, but it was not for their punishment but rather so that He could fulfill in them what He had purposed. He did so to protect them from themselves; from their fear in that even though God could have defeated the Philistines, they may have been too afraid at that point to go forward. They simply were not ready. They needed more preparation.

God confirmed to me that I am, indeed, in a wilderness. The next day, I was mowing my yard listening to a sermon by Ed Young of Fellowship Church on the iPod in which he dealt with learning through, yep, the wilderness. Two days later, I had randomly downloaded a sermon from SermonAudio.com which dealt with...you know already, don't you?...lessons to be learned in the wilderness. OK, I got the message.

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

"EXILED preacher of hate Omar Bakri has begged the Royal Navy to rescue him from war-torn Beirut.

The Muslim cleric who fled Britain last year, tried to board a ship full of women and children yesterday but was turned away."

"The mad mullah, who hailed terrorists as 'magnificent' martyrs, bought a £150,000 bolthole in the exclusive Doha district of Beirut.

In March he boasted: 'When I left England I bought a one-way ticket out. I never want to see the place again.'

But cowardly Bakri changed his tune as soon as bombs started dropping.

He contacted the British embassy asking to be allowed back to see the six children he deserted. Bakri said last night: 'What concerns me is my safety.'"

Labels: David C. Price

President Bush from the White House, backed by children adopted while still embryos:

Like all Americans, I believe our nation must vigorously pursue the tremendous possibility that science offers to cure disease and improve the lives of millions. We have opportunities to discover cures and treatments that were unthinkable generations ago. Some scientists believe that one source of these cures might be embryonic stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells have the ability to grow into specialized adult tissues, and this may give them the potential to replace damaged or defective cells or body parts and treat a variety of diseases. Yet we must also remember that embryonic stem cells come from human embryos that are destroyed for their cells. Each of these human embryos is a unique human life with inherent dignity and matchless value. We see that value in the children who are with us today. Each of these children began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization, but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete. Each of these children was adopted while still an embryo, and has been blessed with the chance to grow up in a loving family. These boys and girls are not spare parts. (Applause.) They remind us of that is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells. And they remind us that in our zeal for new treatments and cures, America must never abandon our fundamental morals.

Labels: David C. Price

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.” By definition, “Truth” is totally dependent on things like one's perspective, environment or culture, or his desires or wishes. It is the world as he wishes to see it. What is “true” for one person may be “false” to another with neither of them being considered wrong. For a Relativist, there is no “wrong” unless one does not submit to the tenets of Relativism. That person is then universally wrong.

Since I have previously dealt with the philosophical problems of Relativism and how even those who claim to be purely Postmodern and, thus, Relativists, do not (cannot) live their lives consistently with their beliefs, I will not go into that now.

Instead, using a speech from yesterdays debate in the United States Senate over embryonic stem cell research, I want to deal with a real life example of Relativism at work. Through it, I hope to demonstrate how much issues of public policy, ethics, morality, and everyday life are influenced by competing worldviews and how easy it is for us to fail to recognize it.

Republican Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon argued on the Senate floor for the passage of the bill allowing for broader spending on embryonic stem cell research based on morality from a relativistic viewpoint. Mr. Smith opened his speech with the following:

I believe the Federal government has a vital and moral role to play in the development of stem cell science to ensure that the appropriate ethical guidelines are followed.

Senator Smith is correct in pointing out the important role Congress has by way of a moral role in determining the ethical guidelines the U.S. Government should follow. In this situation, the question arises regarding whose ethics? What constitutes “ethical”? It is clear that there is certainly no consensus in that room on what is “ethical.” Senator Smith went on to say, “If you leave this to the private sector with no moral boundaries, I don't know where this leads.”

Honestly, I do not know what boundaries Senator Smith is proposing. In watching the senator's speech, it is clear that he advocates doing whatever it takes to “find the cure.” How is this any different (or better) than the private sector? If this is Mr. Smith's position, he should most certainly know exactly where it leads.

With Mr. Smith's next remarks, we begin to get a glimpse of his worldview:

The key question that looms over this debate is when does life begin? For me, it begins with mother; with the implantation of an embryo. I believe the Scriptures provide ample support showing that flesh and spirit become one with a mother. This is one of womankind's supernal gifts. I find these verses over and over in the Old and New Testament...[These Scriptures] lead me to feel comfortable in a conclusion—an ethical conclusion—that life begins when flesh and spirit are united and not before.

Without being implanted in a mother's womb, an IVF pluripotent embryo is a group of cells growing in a petri dish. But if those cells are left there for a thousand years, they have no possibility of developing into anything. They remain a group of cells—the dust of the earth—one of the building blocks leading to life. It is the act of implantations within the mother that gives them life.

After years of reflecting on this issue, it has become increasingly clear to me that being pro life requires protecting both the sanctity and the quality of life.

That whole statement is so absurd, I don't really know where to start. I cannot even loosely put together any idea as to where that came from. Certainly not Scripture.

More to the point, though, is the use of “For me.” Don't miss this next part because, in spite of Mr. Smith's claim to Scripture (if that is what it can be called), we begin to see the heart of his worldview. Gordon Smith said a lot in that last statement. Read it again: After years of reflecting on this issue, it has become increasingly clear to me that being pro life requires protecting both the sanctity and the quality of life. [emphasis added]

Did you catch that? Being pro life requires protecting the quality of life. With that statement, we see the direction the United States is moving as a “conservative” makes that kind of statement. See, right now it is the issue of embryos that have no “quality of life.” However, fully developed, this philosophy extends to all who have a questionable quality of life: the physically and mentally disabled, the sick, the elderly, the unwanted. All of these, by someone's definition, has a poor quality of life.

What Mr. Smith has attempted to do with this statement is to redefine what it means to be pro life! Mr. Smith has fully revealed his relativistic worldview and is calling on each of his colleagues (and us) to embrace it:

I believe that one of the great gifts the United States; of the best example of the United States to the world is our pluralism; religious pluralism. It is something that we see in absence tragically in too many places in the world...because of sectarian views which are held to the point of murder.

We, therefore, I do not believe, serve the public well by taking the narrowest theological positions and trying to impose them on public policy. We should be open enough to include other considerations: of ethical ideas, Scriptural interpretations, and scientific hope.

For me, Mr. President, as I consider issues of life and death (note: Mr. Smith brings out an over-sized Bible at this point), I often turn to the Good Book; try to discern wisdom that I do not have of myself and what I find in the earliest pages of the Torah or the Old Testament is this statement: the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being.”

Mr. President, I am not a scientist and I am not a theologian, but as I use my agency to interpret this early description of the sanctity of man's—mankind's life, what I read is we are made of dust. Our cells are dust and to the dust we will return. Then you come to the contraction in this verse—the contraction “and”: “...and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life...”. And then you come to another contraction: “...and man became a living being.”

I believe the pluripotent stem cells are one of the building blocks of life. Clearly, they are. But clearly if you leave them in a petri dish for an eternity, they will remain cells—the dust of the earth.

I believe we are missing the understanding of the importance of the spirit; the breath of life; the spirit of mankind as the essential ingredient of when life begins.

So, Mr. President, I do no find that religion and science are in conflict on the Senate floor today. I believe they are in harmony and I believe we should have a broad enough view to include the many views that comprise American pluralism.

The point is that relativistic arguments are arbitrary, at best. It mattered little as to whether Mr. Smith chose this passage, another, or none at all. The emphasis is on what is right and true to him. Sure, this Republican senator wants to have a “broad enough view to include the many views that comprise American pluralism”--when there is no absolute truth, one is left with trying to paint in the broadest of strokes so that no one is actually wrong in their beliefs, any idea with the most votes is “right” and no one loses...except those who believe in Truth.

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

"NEWLYWEDS in America are “meshing” their names in an attempt to banish the sexism that comes when a woman takes her husband’s surname.

Much as the tabloid newspapers have christened film stars Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes “Tomkat”, couples are opting to mix and match elements of their names as a sign of togetherness.

Gary Ruderman, 43, a playwright and architect, got married last year to Jodi Wilgoren, a writer for The New York Times. The couple now go by the name of Rudoren. Ruderman’s wife-to-be first raised the subject, saying that she would love to share his name but on an egalitarian basis."

The feminist custom of retaining one’s maiden name is going out of fashion. According to Claudia Goldin, an economics professor at Harvard University, the number of college-educated women in Massachusetts who kept their original name at marriage dropped from 23% in 1990 to 17% in 2000.

“It’s gone the same way as feminism,” Goldin said. “There has been a shift even among liberals towards more family-oriented values.”

Those who begin by hyphenating their surnames often give up, Goldin added: “They have these long names and then they have problems with the school district or the plumber. It gets too hard.”

Labels: David C. Price

There is a growing movement among some Hispanics to stand against those they see as "attacking" their race. People like Paul Harvey. You know, "the rrrrest of the story" guy. If you're wondering how Paul Harvey could be considered a "monster" who is "proud of the racist genocide that Europeans committed against the Indigenous people of this continent," and is a member of "the KKK of the radio airwaves," I am too. I suppose it is because they support the Minuteman Project designed to keep illegal aliens out of the Country.

The question remains as to whether this is a growing threat to the people of the United States regarding a new terror group unrelated to Islamic radicalism or just a loud-barking, but largely toothless pup. Based on some of their comments, I wonder. The irony is that, though they claim to be victims of racism, they are basically a racist group, calling for racial segregation and supported by such organizations as The National Council of La Raza Charter School Development Initiative; Raza Development Fund, Inc.; and the Pasadena City College chapter of MeCHA, or Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan. FYI, La raza means, "The Race."

The group calls themselves the Mexica Movement and believes that they are the rightful claimants to parts of the U.S. which they intend on eventually taking back:

"La Raza"...is a designation by many Mexicans who see themselves as part of a transnational ethnic group they hope will one day reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.

Thus far, the group has only called for peaceful boycotts against such companies as the Disney company, for which "Adolph" Harvey works. According to their website, they only support peaceful change:

We are an organization that focuses on an educational solution to the injustices of European colonialism. We are for a non-violent solution, but we are aggressive in our demands for truth and justice.

We support the constitution of the United States and are not for the overthrow of any of the governments of "North America". We know that under the present governments that one day it will be possible for our people and the colonial Europeans to understand the monstrosity of the crimes of European colonialism. We know that we can reconstruct our nation and our people as Nican Tlaca, as the Anahuac nation.

The potential problem lies in the fact that this group says it supports the government of the United States, but also believe that they will one day be able to reconstruct their nation, which stated earlier, includes a large part of the western United States. Notice the contradictory language? What happens if the "colonial Europeans" never "understand the crimes" to the extent that these people are not allowed to "reconstruct" their nation? Do they raise the stakes? We see the results of this kind of thinking right now in Israel (as well as other parts of the Middle East).

Reading further on their website, it is clear they are taking a stand against those who are calling for the deportation of illegal immigrants. However, they seem to believe that those individuals like Paul Harvey and Doug McIntyre (and any other "racist European") are against ALL Hispanics and want them all deported. That couldn't be farther from the truth. The stand many Americans have taken is only against those who are legally citizens of another Nation who have broken the rules/laws of this Country by sneaking in and illegally using American resources without permission. There is a vast difference.

There is no doubt that there were unconscionable cruelties carried out by the settlers of the United States against the indigenous people of the North American continent. That sort of treatment should never have happened, regardless of who is doing it. Unfortunately, though, the reality is that most (if not all) of the nations of the world were settled through warfare. One group moved into a region, battles broke out and the strongest got the land and grew a particular nationality. This history is the main reason there are conflicts today throughout the world and why terrorists do what they do. They don't like the results and feel they have the moral superiority (regardless of their immoral methods) to take back what is rightfully (in their eyes) theirs.

My concern is related to how far this particular group will eventually go. The Mexicas claim to be peaceful, but acknowledge radicalism: "Yes, we are radical," says the Mexica Movement on its website. "More radical than you can imagine."

In the 21st Century context, those don't sound like words of peace.

Primary sources: WorldNet Daily and the Mexica Movement website.

Labels: David C. Price

So, exactly who is upside down?

Labels: David C. Price

"Ministers have given the clearest indication yet that fertility clinics will no longer be able to refuse treatment to single women and lesbians."

Public Health Minister Caroline Flint said there was "probably not a case" for keeping "the need for a father" clause in new fertility rules.

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

The scientists implanted a tiny silicon chip with 100 electrodes into an area of the brain responsible for movement. The activity of the cells was recorded and sent to a computer which translated the commands and enabled the patient to move and control the external device.

'This part of the brain, the motor cortex, which usually sends its signals down the spinal cord and out to the limbs to control movement, can still be used by this participant to control an external device, even after years had gone by since his spinal cord injury,' added [Dr Leigh] Hochberg, a co-author of the study published in the journal Nature.

Labels: David C. Price

To understand how Darwinism undercuts the very concept of rationality, we can think back to the late nineteenth century when the theory first arrived on American shores. Almost immediately, it was welcomed by a group of thinkers who began to work out its implications far beyond science. They realized that Darwinism implies a broader philosophy of naturalism (i.e., that nature is all that exists, and that natural causes are adequate to explain all phenomena). Thus they began applying a naturalistic worldview across the board–in philosophy, psychology, the law, education, and the arts.

At the foundation of these efforts, however, was a naturalistic approach to knowledge itself (epistemology). The logic went like this: If humans are products of Darwinian natural selection, that obviously includes the human brain–which in turn means all our beliefs and values are products of evolutionary forces: Ideas arise in the human brain by chance, just like Darwin's chance variations in nature; and the ones that stick around to become firm beliefs and convictions are those that give an advantage in the struggle for survival. This view of knowledge came to be called pragmatism (truth is what works) or instrumentalism (ideas are merely tools for survival).

Labels: David C. Price

"I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan."

1) "The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those "good 'ole' boys", we will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of whom or where they are. They're illegal!!! France will welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5) No foreign "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island someplace. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH...learn it...or LEAVE...Now, isn't that a winner of a plan?

"The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'you want a piece of me?' "

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

for like the grass they will soon wither,
like green plants they will soon die away.

Labels: David C. Price

Once you can accept the universe as matter expanding into nothing that is something, wearing stripes with plaid comes easy.

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

Labels: David C. Price

"LAKE ELSINORE, California -- It was a 'silent inning' to honor a 'silent birth' as the Lake Elsinore Storm saluted Tom Cruise.

When the minor-league baseball team played the High Desert Mavericks on Friday night, no music was played and no batters were announced for one inning to mark the Church of Scientology-dictated 'silent birth' of Suri, Cruise's baby girl with Katie Holmes."

Labels: David C. Price