Pastor Dave Curell is arrested for trying to feed Terri Schiavo.
And (Jesus) was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." (Luke 9:23-26)
Inconvenient, damned inconvenient...
Five weeks before Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for the last time, I was thinking about the inconvenience of being a disciple of Jesus Christ. God seemed to be directing my thoughts to see my love of that which makes me comfortable. I was beginning to see that my schedule and my distractions were interfering with my 'spiritual service of worship' (Rom 12). I began to look for opportunities to become inconvenienced.
Tim Bayly, a pastor with whom I work, started talking about going to Florida to oppose the killing of Terri. The leadership of the church was supportive, myself included. I thought briefly about going along but quickly dismissed the idea, thinking that having more than one staff gone at one time would cause hardship for the church, that my duties would not get done, that it would cost too much, and that I wasn't sure protesting there would be my "thing." I kept all thoughts of civil disobedience way in the back of my mind...
Speaking of Power Line, these are the concluding paragraphs of Power Line author John Hinderaker's against-the-grain-of-conservative-thought analysis of last week's Supreme Court decision in the Kelo case:
Today most significant development projects involve multiple uses and cooperation between public and private entities. While such projects can no doubt be subject to various abuses, they can also be enormously successful and of great public benefit--to take just one example, consider the spectacular renovation of Baltimore's inner harbor. Moreover, two factors minimize the danger that economic development projects pose to individual rights. First, they are carried out in the glare of publicity. Nothing in local government attracts more scrutiny or more criticism than such projects. Second, the Fifth Amendment requires that anyone whose property is taken for a public use be fairly compensated, and in practice, most takings are compensated generously. Thus, while condemnation can undoubtedly impose hardship on individuals, it is unlikely to result in gross injustice.
The principal threats to property rights lie elsewhere. In particular, regulatory actions often severely limit what an owner can do with his property. Unlike urban development projects, such regulations are often adopted in forums that are remote from, and unresponsive to, the political process. And what an owner generally hopes for in such situations is to be covered by the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of compensation for the loss of use of his property, which is automatic in the case of a condemnation.
So it is a good thing that the Kelo decision has focused attention on the erosion of property rights; but, despite the critical consensus that has formed among conservatives, it is far from clear that the case was wrongly decided.
I don't know if Hinderaker is right in his assessment of the positive value of such redevelopment efforts, but he is dead on in his description of the greater problem in his next-to-final paragraph.
Regulations and zoning are increasingly vehicles for governmental theft. Perhaps some time Tim will detail here the amazing story of Church of the Good Shepherd's years-long travail in seeking to put a church on a thirty-acre plot of land they purchased in central Bloomington. By the time governmental demands for rights-of-way, permanent easements, and donations to a local park were added to zoning and environmental demands, Church of the Good Shepherd was left with less than twenty percent of their purchase to build on.
They did the only sensible thing--sold, and purchased new land outside the city limits.
I think Hinderaker is right. We're straining at a gnat in the Kelo case, having swallowed a camel in our acceptance of so much regulation and restriction in the past.
by David and Tim Bayly on August 15, 2005 - 6:01am
Citizens who grieve the slaughter of the unborn breathed a sigh of relief when President Bush turned away from Alberto Gonzales, instead nominating John Roberts for the Supreme Court. Although Roberts has flown under the radar most of his career, and although a central plank in Bush's initial campaign for the presidency was that abortion would not be a litmus test for his judicial nominees (huh?), we may hope.
Really, though, the problem with our judiciary is larger than individuals; it is the whole practice of judicial review that has allowed the Supreme Court to arrogate to itself powers inconceivable to our Founding Fathers. Check out Joe Sobran's essay, How Tyranny Came to America. A teaser:
Question: When did the Supreme Court first declare an act of Congress unconstitutional?
Answer: In 1857 when the Taney Court issued the infamous Dred Scott decision which, by the same majority as Roe v. Wade (7-2), declared negroes not full persons under the law:
We think they [people of African ancestry] are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. -Dred Scott v. Sandford
by David and Tim Bayly on August 18, 2005 - 9:36am
At Christ the Word we've recently been encountering opposition from residents and township leaders in an area where we're seeking to purchase twenty acres for a future building. Our opponents have forthrightly declared themselves opposed to our purchase of the land--and the issuance of a special use permit by township authorities--simply because we're a church.
Increasingly churches are fair game for governmental interference and opposition. For this reason, the chronic trials of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, as they've sought simply to act as a normal Evangelical church with typical church programming and affiliated church-related educational institutions are battles by proxy against the entire American Church.
Christ Church has faced:
1) Preposterous and ongoing zoning charges
2) Alcoholic beverage denial (they wanted to serve communion in a service at a rented university building and were denied permission because they would be "serving alcohol to minors" forcing a change in worship location)
3) Overt, orchestrated opposition from governmental officials
4) Calumnies and libels in local papers--culminating recently in a newspaper article headlined "Neo-Nazi Christians make presence felt again in Northern Idaho"
Doug Wilson mentions on his blog the existence of a New Saint Andrews College legal defense fund in the course of a recent entry on the progress of Christ Church's "Trinity Fest."
NSA began distributing little stress balls, with the NSA logo, along with an inscription that read something like Moscow Zoning Complaint stress ball. A small donation to NSA's legal defense fund will get you one, and they come in lots of happy colors.
No address for the fund is given but it would be a worthy cause.
by David and Tim Bayly on November 26, 2005 - 9:48am
While we've not failed to argue the reformed distinction between general and special revelation--that general revelation is sufficient to condemn while special revelation alone leads to saving faith in Jesus Christ--there is a current within reformed churches today that uses this distinction to provide comfort for what appears to us to be heartlessness toward our neighbors. The illogic goes something like this:
If pagans choose to kill their unborn (or newly born) children, they do so because God has given them over. Who are we to intervene?
If pagans choose to copulate like alley cats, they do so because God has given them over. Why should we oppose what God has decreed?
If pagans choose to sterilize their marital love, more power to God's covenant people who will have lots of children, teach them how to think and lead, and take over our nation.
If pagans choose to sodomize one another, what business is that of ours? We can't expect them to acknowledge, let alone follow, God's Law. Let the civil authority handle such matters in the way best calculated to preserve peace among us; if sodomites come to Christ, they will see the error of their ways and repent.
It is such reasoning that allows reformed and evangelical leaders to argue in favor of the repeal of all laws opposing sodomy across our nation. What are we to say to them...
The following was written over a year ago as my own personal mental discipline in response to a certain teaching elder within my own denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America, coming out in a prominent national forum in favor of the repeal of all sodomy laws across our country. I have not published these thoughts on the blog or in any other forum. Now, though, I am putting them on this blog to assist others in fighting against this betrayal of God's Truth and the souls and lives of those vulnerable to sodomy. I would welcome E-mails from any who have additional sources or arguments to add strengthening this case.
Genesis 2:20-25 The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
God ordained the nature and meaning of sexuality prior to the Fall, and no human authority may separate what God has joined together: sex is to be within species and heterosexual (between man and woman). This is a universal truth rooted in the Creation Order and therefore binding on all men across all time. This is the teaching of Genesis 2 and other texts having to do with sexuality, and marriage only builds upon what Genesis 2 declares.
Exodus 20:14 You shall not commit adultery.
As the Westminster Standards teach, sodomy is prohibited by the Seventh Commandment. If, despite the teaching of this Commandment, the man of God is justified in opposing and seeking the repeal of the civil authority's laws proscribing sodomy, are there any sins against this Commandment the civil authority may proscribe?
by David and Tim Bayly on November 28, 2005 - 11:10am
Several years ago I was speaking to Ken Sande and he told me of the growing movement in Canada to prosecute Christian pastors, churches, bookstores, etc. who proclaimed Scripture's doctrine of sexuality, particularly its condemnation of sodomy. Sande's organization, Peacemakers was at that time involved in providing legal counsel for Canadian Christians under such attack.
Since then, my own congregation has had occasion to use the services of another Christian legal organization, the Alliance Defense Fund, and I commend them to our readers for their godly work defending the free exercise of religion.
A good example of that work is their involvement in the notorious case of the Swedish pastor, Ake Green, whose prosecution for preaching Scripture's truths concerning sexuality is before Sweden's supreme court. (Here's the text of Pastor Green's sermon.)
by David and Tim Bayly on February 4, 2006 - 6:29pm
A recent commenter on this blog left notice of an internet petition drive requesting the State of Mississippi to reexamine the death sentence of Cory Maye.
We've written about Cory Maye before. Tim and I, as cousins to a dearly beloved (former) staff attorney for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court who suffered through petition after petition and uproar after uproar on behalf of manifestly guilty Pennsylvania cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, don't lightly suggest petitioning on behalf of a convicted murderer.
But the case of Cory Maye is an exception....
AT 11:00PM ON DECEMBER 26, 2001...
Members of the Prentiss, Mississippi police force and the Pearl River Basin Narcotics Task Force conducted a drug raid on the duplex apartment of Jamie Smith. Cory Maye lived in the other apartment that made up the duplex. Maye was not named in the police warrant for the duplex. Smith was arrested for marijuana possession. As the raid on Smith commenced, some officers went around to the other side of the duplex, in search of more contraband. They either thought the other side of the duplex was part of Smith's apartment, or they may have thought it was abandoned. The door was actually a door to Maye's home. Maye was asleep and awoke when he heard the rear door being smashed in. The rear door opened into the rear bedroom where Maye's 18 month old daughter was asleep. Fearing for himself and his daughter, Maye picked up his gun and fired at the intruders as they came into his daughter's bedroom. A bullet hit and killed the first officer to enter, Ronald Jones. When other officers shouted "Police," Maye ceased firing and surrendered to arrest. Maye is now on death row for the killing of a police officer.
by David and Tim Bayly on April 19, 2006 - 10:22am
One area Christians can, and should, speak prophetically to our political leaders is to warn them against the use of nuclear arms in military conflict, and this includes nuclear arms that are strategically deployed--in other words, something less than the full scale bombing of cities. Not being old enough to remember if there was such a prophetic voice against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I can't say whether we fulfilled our calling then. But if Seymour Hersh's piece in the latest (April 17, 2006) New Yorker, exposing the Bush administration's plans to wage war against Iran, is reliable (and Hersh is about as reliable as any journalist at work today), our duty is clear and the time to speak is now.
Hersh begins his piece:
The Bush administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a major air attack. ..."The planning is enormous," (a) former senior intelligence official said. The plans include "significant air attacks on (the Iranians) countermeasures and anti-aircraft missiles--a huge takedown." He depicted the planning as hectic, and far beyond the contingency work that is routinely done. "These are operational plans," the former official said...
One of the military's initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapons...
by David and Tim Bayly on April 20, 2006 - 10:03am
By any Christian and biblical, as opposed to nationalistic, evaluation of the righteousness of the United States in her conflict with middle eastern nations, we must not stoop to using the hypocritical criteria of a patriot who says, "My nation, right or wrong." As Christians we are different, called by God to "judge rightly." And a righteous judgment of our nation must start, not with others' sins against us, but ours against a holy God.
It's always easier to point a finger outside our home, community, or nation and to cry out against others' sins, but judgment must begin locally, and move out from there. This is the meaning of Jesus' statement about splinters and beams--we are to correct ourselves before we correct others.
As Christian citizens, then, we must look long and hard at our own nation when we consider the justice of our claims against Iran, Iraq, or Al Qaeda. As the Apostle Paul says:
Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? (Romans 2:1-4)
So when Christians cry down the wickedness of other nations and rulers without any mention of our own wickedness, I read it as nationalism uninformed by Scripture. And that's bad. Christians are not to judge their own and other nations as if the relations between nations are only a matter of who did what to whom on the international level.
When we want to condemn some combination of mid-east forces for bombing the World Trade Center and the Pentagon...
In the past couple of weeks, our congregation has been involved in bearing witness to our public servants in two areas: one, a local city ordinance that was passed this last week by our Bloomington City Council raising "gender identity" into a protected status equal to race, age, religion, and so forth. They'd already raised "sexual orientation" into protected status, but deemed that insufficient protection for various souls, particularly the "transgendered." Despite our witness at all three meetings where the ordinance was read and debated, it passed unanimously. Pastor Dave Curell engaged the city fathers in an E-mail correspondence that I'm hopeful can be put up here on the blog soon, but will first need some formatting.
Then the other shoe dropped. This same week the Indianapolis Star had a very large headline across the front page announcing that the Indiana Court of Appeals had ruled in favor of what the Indy Star called "gay adoption." The ruling was two to one, with an excellent dissent written by Judge Ted Najam. I've read the majority opinion and it's pure legal casuistry--all kinds of closely reasoned arguments making it appear that their ruling is only an absolutely necessary deduction from the plain meaning of adoption legislation passed by the Indiana legislature. But anyone who knows the Indiana legislative climate will recognize that as a joke.
Before reading anything about the decision and knowing who the judges were, I submitted the following letter to the editor of the Indy Star. Here's the letter, which today was responded to by three letters to the editor you can find here, here, and here.
Are you serving faithfully as salt and light in your community, steadfastly proclaiming both God's 'yes' and His 'no'? Or have you lost your savor, having convinced yourself that doctrine and truth don't really matter--only friendship evangelism and random acts of human kindness.
To the Editor:
The big news today? The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in favor of "gay adoption," two judges in the majority and one dissenting. And although I don't yet know the names of any of the three judges, one thing is clear: two judges have defied nature and nature's God, while the third fears God and loves the citizens of the state of Indiana--particularly her children...
I'm not much for conspiracies as they're normally conceptualized--plots carried out by evil men who act in concert with one another while hiding their identities and intentions.
Why? Because a good conspiracy requires discipline and a lot of hard work, and the liberals I've known are too lazy for that kind of stuff.
But I do believe, intensely, in conspiracies planned and implemented by Satan using men as pawns in his insurrection against the Only True God. At times, I think we'd almost have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to see the direction he's heading. One of those directions I've often written about in the past is the steady loss of religious freedom that is making it more and more costly for followers of Jesus Christ to live according to Scripture's principles.
Take the matter of churches' hiring practices, for instance: the state continues to fiddle around the edge of our religious freedoms by declaring that certain matters are simply a question of equality and justice--not moral or religious principles. The state claims to have an interest in assuring that churches and other religious institutions conduct their business in such a way as not to violate our current civil compact, particularly in matters where that compact is going through radical change.
Sexual matters are the center of this oppressive use of civil authority today--particularly the normalization of sodomy. Does the free exercise of religion allow bigoted churches to call sodomy "sexual perversion" and refuse to hire a sodomite as their church organist or high school youth leader? Generally, the answer here in the U.S. is still "yes," but not for long--I guarantee it. The direction of Satan's conspiracy is clear to those who have trained themselves to distinguish good and evil. As the Holy Spirit says, "...solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil" (Hebrews 5:14).
A week ago, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a decision in Petruska v. Gannon University that does not bode well for the peaceful life of the People of God. Good commentary on the significance of this bad decision may be found here and here.
Dissenting from the majority, Judge D. Brooks Smith wrote: "I disagree with the majority's fundamental premise that a church's choice regarding who performs particular spiritual functions is not necessarily a religious decision. Rather, in my view, such a decision is, by its very nature, a religious one.... (T)he process of selecting a minister is per se a religious exercise. A minister is not merely an employee of the church; she [sic] is an embodiment of its message."
by David and Tim Bayly on October 22, 2007 - 12:07pm
(Jesus said) I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep. (John 10:11-13)
(Tim) Tonight I'm leading a discussion of Herbert Workman's Persecution in the Early Church (Oxford Paperbacks) with our first year Pastors College men. If you haven't read this book, you simply must. Nothing has helped me understand our present pressures and how best to prepare our children for the coming persecution as well as this little treasure.
Anyhow, I was reminded of Workman's book while reading this excerpt from an account published in the Times of the recent persecution of Buddhist monks in Burma:
A teacher talked about the pain of seeing Buddhism desecrated and the fear of the military that spread among the monks.
I know dozens of monks. One monk is very old. He is 78. It never occurred to him that in his lifetime he would have to hide. The day after the shootings started, I went to this monastery and the faces that I saw on those monks was something I had never seen. It is not fear. It was a sadness so unbelievable.
Now the young monks that I talked to--who weren't rounded up--they want to disrobe...
by David and Tim Bayly on January 13, 2008 - 6:17pm
(Tim; thanks David C.) Here in Bloomington over the past decade or so, we've watched the human rights commission become an aggressive advocate for sexual perversions from sodomy to transexual bathrooms and locker rooms. Hiding behind a name carefully calculated to cause everyone to lower their guard, most everything these commissions promote and seek to enforce by law would be more accurately described as the denial of human rights--the free exercise of religion and free speech, most particularly.
For a good description of the systemic evil these commissions are at the heart of, read this statement made to the Alberta Human Rights Commission in Clagary by Ezra Levant on January 11, 2008.
by David and Tim Bayly on March 22, 2008 - 11:57am
(Tim) When I read Jacques Ellul's False Presence of the Kingdom a number of years ago, I found it very helpful in giving me a Christian understanding of Church-state relations, and particularly the danger of the Church being compromised in her work and message by the influence and power of the state.
Any Christian pastor watching the ruckus over the sermons of Senator Barack Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, this past few weeks should have quickly concluded that this controversy is significant, principally, in yielding one more step in the inexorable movement of the removal of truth and courage and boldness from the proclamation of God's Word in churches around our country. It's been a terrible moment when someone watching closely could literally watch the feminization of discourse taking huge steps forward, particularly in the public discourse of the Church and Her Word known as preaching. (And no, I'm not defending the particulars of Pastor Wright's sermons.)
If you haven't read this work by Ellul, buy it now and read it carefully. Ellul has the sort of mind and pen that probe and expose our hearts such that we are invigorated and feel as if we might be partaking of the air and wind of another more truthful and honest age.
Remembering Ellul's wonderful bracingness, I just found and read a short essay by him, from 1947, titled, "On Nuremberg." I post it here as an historical meditation on the depravity of man, and thus the necessity of the substitutionary atonement--Good Friday's priceless treasure of the cross and blood and death of Jesus Christ. Oh how we need that precious blood!
Think beyond ourselves, to the terrible bloodsheds Western civilization has been (and presently is) built upon...
(Tim, w/thanks to Lucas) From my perspective, there's little difference between the claims of unity of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Both amount to little more than, "We're real, real old."
Read Calvin's Institutes and you'll see that evangelical reformed doctrine and practice are much older, going back to the Apostles themselves with much support in the early and medieval church. I like to tell my congregation that the Roman Catholic church didn't exist until the Council of Trent when it went off in schism. Yes, it's slightly hyperbolic, but a good bit true, too.
Here's an article from the New York Times documenting something those of us with brothers and sisters in Christ working in former Soviet bloc countries knew already. Just as Orthodoxy's scribes were tight with the KGB before Communism's fall, they're tight now with the blinkered nationalistic thugs governing these countries today. And Orthodoxy's patriarchs are in The Man's hip pockets...
by David and Tim Bayly on April 29, 2008 - 10:29am
(Tim w/thanks to Dan) Speaking of the loss of liberty, here's one of an almost-limitless number of articles that demonstrate where we're headed in these United States. Western European nations, Australia, and Canada are already far down the trail, but it's still a bit of a shocker here at home. "As to be hated needs but to be seen." In time, though, I'm afraid we'll all settle in and decide no Christian witness is at stake here, there, or anywhere.
I wonder whether Christians right now believe spanking their children is a basic act of biblical obedience? How many evangelicals would, as an act of conscience, oppose national or state laws banning it?
You think you know something about the churches David and I serve, right? Well, we just lost a woman who'd been at Church of the Good Shepherd for twelve years because...
(Tim) In an op-ed piece today, the New York Times is concerned about the results of the recent Rand Corporation study, Invisible Wounds of War, which found that "women suffer from higher rates of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression than men" after military deployment. Really.
We are a nation of idiots--callous, degraded, wicked idiots. We send our wives and daughters off to war and, when they come home emotional wrecks, we act surprised and blame it on the fact that one third of them were sexually assaulted or raped while they were deployed. Really.
I have compassion for these daughters, wives, and mothers, but my compassion makes me remember and ask that you all remember, also...
(Tim) Now that our busy-bee legislators have made a law banning toddlers from riding in cars without a special car seat, we can guess what's next. Those terrible bunk beds out wreaking havoc each and every night. Watch out, our Nanny State is on the move and there's no stopping her. Sodomites kill one another and mother's murder their unborn babies with no fear of the civil authority, but bruises and bumps from bunk beds? Something's gonna be done.
(Tim: A week or so ago, thirty plus members of Church of the Good Shepherd went to Bloomington's City Council meeting to oppose our tax dollars being appropriated by the Council members to fund an organization that makes Hitler's Third Reich and it's Holocaust factories look like child's play. I'm speaking of course of Planned Parenthood which makes its living off of the slaughter of unborn children tenderly nestled in their mother's womb. By itself, Planned Parenthood is responsible for a quarter of a million of those murders each year, and they're moving their abattoirs into more affluent areas in order to grow their bloody profit.
Each year here in Bloomington, Planned Parenthood goes through the charade of requesting tax dollars to help provide its clients with some service close to, but not exactly coterminous with it's slaughter machine. And each year, our city fathers cuddle up to this progressive nonprofit and ante up our dough over our vociferous protest. One of those speaking against this Holocaust funding this year was Mary Lee's and my dear friend and fellow CGS member, Joshua Congrove. Although we were out of town at the time, we heard Josh's testimony was good, so I asked him if he could send me a copy. Here are a few prefaratory comments he wrote to set the scene, followed by what he said that night.)
This year, as usual, Planned Parenthood received a donation from the Bloomington City Council (and from public funds) to support a particular medical procedure. While the procedure itself is unobjectionable, the giving of public money to an organization that performs hundreds of abortions per year is an egregious act that demands objection...
NOTE: IF YOU'VE READ THIS ONCE ALREADY, CLICK THROUGH AND READ THE FINAL PARAGRAPH ADDED JUST LAST NIGHT. IT'S NEW AND IT'S AN EXCELLENT CONCLUSION. -TIM
(Tim) Two friends copied me on the following correspondence. I have chosen not to identify the person asking the question. The answer is given by Brian Bailey, an Indianapolis attorney who, with his wife Nicole and their children, are a part of Church of the Good Shepherd here in Bloomington.
A friend asks Brian this question: A commenter here at BaylyBlog linked to another blog about a woman in the Presbyterian Church in America (Missy Irons) who says she is in favor of homosexual marriage because it is their civil right. She claims that since we Christians are afforded protection through civil rights, then we shouldn't be hypocritical and deny them the same. (That's basically me paraphrasing a few of her blogs into one sentence, I'll admit). How would I respond? Is there any "secular" reason to oppose homosexual marriage?
Brian Bailey responds: I'm happy to take a stab at answering your e-mail... I’ve numbered the paragraphs to streamline the response and give it more organization.
1. The proponent of sodomite marriage as a civil right seeks to change the status quo across all previous cultures, eras, and places. Any earthling would admit sodomite marriage is a radical innovation peculiar to our post-20th century Western culture. The promoter has the burden to prove the existence of that right.
2. To assert a right is necessarily to appeal to some source of authority beyond merely saying, This is the way I want things to be. The proponent must appeal to some source, beyond his predilections and preferences, for the alleged right to sodomite marriage. And to say that homosexual marriage is a civil right proves nothing. He must locate the source of the right.
3. There are two, and only two, possible sources of a right: God or man.
4. Historically, Americans have believed and declared that God is the ultimate source of their rights. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This is not a theoretical construct or a way to lend solemnity to foundational legal documents. A people steeped in the knowledge that they live, move, and exist in God (Acts 17:28), that the truth shall set them free (John 8:32), and that Thou shalt not steal (Exodus 20:15), will confess that God is the source of their rights. See, e.g., Indiana Constitution, preamble (“TO THE END, that justice be established, public order maintained, and liberty perpetuated; WE, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to ALMIGHTY GOD for the free exercise of the right to choose our own form of government, do ordain this Constitution.”)...
by David and Tim Bayly on September 24, 2008 - 12:00pm
Woman was not made for this, O man, to be prostituted as common. O ye subverters of all decency, who use men, as if they were women, and lead out women to war, as if they were men! This is the work of the devil, to subvert and confound all things, to overleap the boundaries that have been appointed from the beginning, and remove those which God has set to nature. For God assigned to woman the care of the house only, to man the conduct of public affairs. But you reduce the head to the feet, and raise the feet to the head. You suffer women to bear arms, and are not ashamed. (Chrysostom, Homily on Titus 2:14).
(Tim) In other discussions on this blog of Governor Sarah Palin's candidacy for Vice President, someone left a link to a piece by Dr. Al Mohler commending the leadership of women outside the church and home--as long as the dishes are done and the diapers changed first, that is. Front end, I want to say that I have great appreciation for Dr. Mohler's leadership, particularly as it pertains to God's order of sexuality.
And yet, here is the heart of his argument:
The New Testament clearly speaks to the complementary roles of men and women in the home and in the church, but not in roles of public responsibility. I believe that women as CEOs in the business world and as officials in government are no affront to Scripture. Then again, that presupposes that women -- and men -- have first fulfilled their responsibilities within the little commonwealth of the family.
The New Testament does not clearly speak to the complementary roles of men and women (in) roles of public responsibility and women as CEOs and government officials "are no affront to Scripture." Yet here's what the Apostle Paul writes in that same New Testament to which Dr. Mohler refers:
But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. (1 Timothy 2:12-15)
Writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Apostle Paul declares he does "not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man." Why this prohibition?
Two reasons: First, because God established a Creation Order when He created Adam first and then Eve; and second, because Adam was not the one deceived, but Eve was deceived and fell into transgression.
According to the Holy Spirit speaking in the Word of God, we are not to "allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man" because of the Creation Order and the Fall. So says the New Testament.
When I served as the Executive Director of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, I tired of those halfway covenant men who showed great zeal to defend the creation order where it maintained the male prerogative in the church and home, while dismissing it Monday through Saturday, everywhere else. Are the Fall and Creation Order really meaningless outside the church and home? Are they really immaterial everywhere else? Does it really not matter a whit that Sarah Palin is a woman?
by David and Tim Bayly on October 6, 2008 - 8:45am
(Tim, w/thanks to Brian) If you, good reader, have never read G. K. Chesterton's essays on womanhood; if you've never allowed yourself to think thoughts contrary to our culture concerning woman's unique calling; if you've never noticed the patronizing attitude of evangelical feminists toward godly women of the church who cook, wash the feet of the saints, show hospitality, teach other women and children, and pray; if you've never taken particular notice of the transfer of charity from Christian women confessing their faith to well-paid female executives running nonprofits or working for government bureaucracies; if you've never had a wealthy female church member who serves as a county supervisor tell you not to worry about the poor in your community because "that's what we pay taxes for;" if you haven't noticed how the loss of constitutional government in these United States has produced bondage and bloodshed for her citizens; if you have never found yourself sickened over the naked pandering at the heart of every state of the union address and every campaign speech of our time; if you didn't hang out in the church parking lot yesterday, basking in the warm sunshine of an early Fall afternoon as you listened to a missionary couple's son explain...
by David and Tim Bayly on October 20, 2008 - 11:30am
(Tim) For all those inclined to think larger, more aggressive government is the answer to any crisis, here's a good article demonstrating how the present crisis was compounded by regulations passed after Enron.
Years ago, I lost a parishioner in an airplane crash. A few years later, I read an article detailing how passing new regulations intended to avert the circumstances leading up to that crash would likely cause even more disasters. Laws often have unintended consequences worse than the danger those laws are intended to protect us from. Here's a book filled with such cases.
Government will never be our Savior. "Some boast in chariots and others in horses, but we will boast in the Name of the Lord, our God" (Psalm 20:7).
by David and Tim Bayly on October 27, 2008 - 1:56pm
(Tim, w/thanks to David) Years ago, a missionary friend who worked in Sweden admitted to me that he couldn't spank his children without fear of government action, so he hid whatever spankings he gave them. This news item ran in Portage, Wisconsin, just a few miles from where I served prior to being called to Bloomington, Indiana.
Brothers in Christ, we live in a wicked day. Already, aided by the civil authority, our minor daughter can contract with Planned Parenthood to hire a murderer to kill her unborn son or daughter. And the government helps her to hide it from her father and mother.
As I've always said, this is the most wicked aspect of our current baby-killing regime. A godly father or mother cannot protect their minor daughter from those seducing her to become a murderer. They may well never know.
Meanwhile, spanking renders Christian parents vulnerable to losing custody of their children. The normal Christian parent who uses the corporal punishment commanded by God (Prov. 13:24; 22:15; 23:13; 29:15; etc.) is always in danger of prosecution and loss of parental rights.
by David and Tim Bayly on October 30, 2008 - 7:40pm
For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, that the cross of Christ should not be made void. For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside." (1 Corinthians 1:17-19)
(Tim) Here are some thoughts about the state of our civil compact as we approach Election Day. And, following the political stuff, I make a stab at some applications to those who identify themselves as the prophetic voices of the Emergent Church. If your patience wears thin with the political part, buck up and finish it because it forms the perfect backdrop to grow in our understanding of the goals and strategy of church leaders today who have woman deacons, talk a lot about the city and contextualization, and have a staff member titled "Associate Pastor for Art, Weird Glasses, and Chai." First, then, let's look at the political scene...
by David and Tim Bayly on November 3, 2008 - 4:21pm
(Tim) Those inclined to think the posts critical of Barack Obama here on this blog are due to partisanship on the owners' part should know that neither David nor I have ever placed the slightest hope in a Republican presidential candidate. About nine years ago, I told Marvin Olasky I was concerned about his support of George W. Bush's presidential candidacy. In the end, I voted for him twice, but never with anything other than grim resolve.
Whether grim resolve is enough to do the trick with me tomorrow has yet to be seen. This cycle I'm leaning toward flaming out in a better direction--maybe, say, giving myself to the audacity of hope and pushing the button for Chuck Baldwin...
(Thanks to James) On this Election Day, here's an artifact of history from the editors of Touchstone, a Christian magazine I subscribe to and recommend. Originally run in 2003, this editorial is more pertinent today than it was five years ago. If you read nothing else, be sure to read the last two paragraphs...
Practical atheism revisited
Last week I came upon an editorial I wrote during the 2003 political season which seems to me even more applicable now. Today I would add that whatever one thinks about Senator Obama's plans for using government power to take money from those who have more of it and give it to those who have less, the social control which must be gained to make such things come to pass has never boded well for Christians in the countries where it has happened. The Gentiles, even--or perhaps especially--the religious ones, have not changed their opinions about people who regard them as morally unclean, nor will they fail to punish them for it when they gain sufficient power. What concerns them, I believe, is not so much that the poor be enriched, but that the middle classes be brought as low as possible by confiscation of their ethically significant wealth...
by David and Tim Bayly on November 5, 2008 - 6:45am
(Tim)Writing as a pastor concerning his own nation's election of a new president several weeks ago, Brother Conrad Mbewe of Lusaka, Zambia, says precisely what ought to be said today to Christians in these United States as we look at God's choice of Barack Obama to lead us. I hope you'll read it.
by David and Tim Bayly on November 5, 2008 - 10:18am
(Tim) Natalie is a longtime friend of the Bayly family--particularly our eldest daughter, Heather. This afternoon, Heather forwarded this e-mail she received from Natalie earlier today, and I asked Heather if Natalie would permit my posting it? Natalie was fine with it. I appreciated very much what she had to say and thought it would strengthen our readers, also. So here are the post-election thoughts and feelings of a young Christian wife and mother named (Mrs.) Natalie Calhoun.
* * * I'm feeling pensive and sad this morning. It has less to do with who won the election, though I am disappointed in that result. It has much more to do with who voted for him. Perhaps I was naive to believe that people I respected in college, who, I thought, shared my world view, would think the same as me. But I don't understand this wave of young Christian people who supported and voted for Obama. I really want to understand.
I have heard a lot about social justice with regard to this election. I'm for justice. I'm for taking care of "the least of these". I believe that "true religion is taking care of widows and orphans." What I can't get over is the complete disregard for the value of life that is represented by Obama and how a Christian can support that...
by David and Tim Bayly on November 12, 2008 - 9:55am
(Tim, w/thanks to Brian) The Christian Law Association reports: "For years Crestwood Baptist Church has unashamedly declared the Gospel of Christ and the Word of God through the display of Scripture on the marquee in front of their church. Tragically, this common practice for churches has now come under attack.
In the days leading up to
the Presidential election, Crestwood Baptist Church displayed
Proverbs 29:2, '...when the wicked beareth rule, the
people mourn,' on their marquee...
"Nearly a week after the
election, while jogging past the marquee, a nationally
syndicated news reporter took notice of the verse, erroneously assumed
it was the church’s attempt to slander a particular candidate, and
reported his biased opinion on CNN news.
This unmerited report
sparked animosity towards Crestwood and its pastor, Phil Edge, who
have received numerous emails and phone calls demanding an explanation
for his alleged attack on the results of this recent Presidential
A couple comments: First, confessing Christians must play hardball to protect our nation's First Amendment rights. We'll lose, but we must go down fighting. We don't live in the Roman Empire; it's our Constitution and we are its stewards.
So, for instance, the actions of the IRS in the past decade have been egregious governmental intrusions into the work of the church. Our government has been rattling its saber
by David and Tim Bayly on November 12, 2008 - 12:00pm
(Tim) Filmaker Ken Burns endorsed Senator Obama for president, commending Obama's "moral courage" and comparing him to President Abraham Lincoln. Since Obama's election, many have made this same comparison pointing out the felicitous conjunction of Obama's Inauguration and the 200th anniversary of Lincoln's birthday. Senator Diane Feinstein announced the theme of Senator Obama's Inauguration will be "A New Birth of Freedom" with words courtesy of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.
Such comparisons are great theater, but sheer hypocrisy. Barack Obama is the leader of the bloodshed consuming our land and we all pat ourselves on our backs congratulating one another over our nation's great strides against racism? What is the injustice of racism compared to the slaughter of tens of millions of little babies?
Self-congratulatory about the end of racism in America, we point to a black champion of freedom we say bears the stature and moral authority of Abe himself. We look forward to sitting down with our families, having a good cry while we watch his Inauguration. Happily, no bloodshed has been required to reach our vision. Pull the lever for Obama and we all become heroes of truth and justice.
Obama's another Lincoln? Is he willing to do battle to end the slaughter of fifty million of our children by wicked oppressors? Is he preparing an Emancipation Proclamation for those little ones? Will he speak of them in his first Inaugural Address, warning his nation of God's holy wrath unleashed against those who offend even one of His "little ones?"
What a wonder it would be if, to celebrate Lincoln's 200th birthday, Senator Obama were to model his first after Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address:
by David and Tim Bayly on November 22, 2008 - 9:35am
(Tim, w/thanks to James) Of the stuff I've come across, this is about the best summary of the significance of our recent coronation of President-elect Barack Hussein Obama. Giving grace for it coming from a Brit who's not got perfect pitch about our country, it's something pretty close. For instance, here's what he says about Jessie Jackson's tears in Grant Park: "No wonder that awful old hack Jesse Jackson sobbed as he watched. How
he must wish he, too, could get away with this sort of stuff."
by David and Tim Bayly on November 27, 2008 - 8:05am
(Tim) On Facebook, a friend and former CGSer has been discussing sodomy, marriage, divorce and the civil law with several friends who have said things like: "semantics is a cheap reason to deny a minority their civil rights. None
of the many gay folk I know agree with the "semantics justification"
for denial of marriage. Also, such a social mandate (YOU live by OUR
rules) has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ--and
everything to do with the teachings of the Pharisees."
Wanting to say a couple things, I pointed the conversationalists to this page and here's my own contribution to their dialog. Sorry I haven't linked things, but I wanted to get this up before all our guests arrive for Thanksgiving Dinner. If any of you want to add links, just post them in the comments.
* * *
Sam, Scripture isn't just dogma; it's narrative. Descriptive isn't necessarily prescriptive. It can be, but with divorce, incest, polygamy, concubinage, etc. Scripture reveals both where it was that every culture got marriage and also the laws to which God bound all sexual intimacy.
So, for instance, when Jesus was asked a question similar to yours (but this one concerning divorce), He responded saying it wasn't that way from the beginning (Creation) and that God made male and female for each other for life with the two becoming one--not three, four, or a thousand (Matthew 19:3 ff.). So there's no inconsistency between the Old and New Testaments on this matter. The two, male and female, shall become one until, by God's decree, death parts us. (My dear wife and I are on our thirty-third year, now, and still chugging away in harmony and love, praise God!)
All Christians through all time have always spoken this truth...
by David and Tim Bayly on December 12, 2008 - 1:30pm
(Tim) If pornography is the drug our government uses to keep men passive, gun control leaves us compliant. Imagine the Revolutionary War with only Redcoats allowed to own muskets and you get the idea. And this from a man whose parents forbid him to play with guns, who registered for the draft as a conscientious objector, and who's never owned a gun. Actually, no gun except a potato gun I made out of PVC a few years ago.
So yes, I'm in favor of defending the Second Amendment against the relentless attacks it suffers. In defense of that amendment, here's an anouncement just received from Fran Griffin, the wonderful woman who administers Joe Sobran's e-publications. Let's all buy the book:
Here's an exciting way to help derail the anti-Second Amendment forces in Washington: A Second Amendment Book Bomb on December 15, Bill of Rights Day.
If a huge number of people buy the book on the same day, this could catapult it to best seller status, which would stun the Obama camp. Obama claimed to support the Second Amendment during his campaign so he wouldn't lose blue collar Democrats, but he is really very much opposed to it.
by David and Tim Bayly on December 18, 2008 - 9:50am
(Tim) So everyone's talking about Rick Warren's payoff. He gets to
pray in front of millions during Senator Obama's inauguration, calling
down God's presence and blessing on a ceremony centered around the
national politician most committed to the slaughter of his
nation's children taking God's Name in vain as he falsely promises to
uphold the Constitution of these United States.
When our nation was founded, our Declaration of Independence declared our commitments this way:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men
are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit
Thus, in the "Preamble" to our Constitution, we state the Constitution's purpose to be to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."
how does a man swear by God's Holy Name to secure the blessings of
liberty to our posterity who himself is our nation's political leader most committed to the slaughter of that posterity? The wickedness of Governor Blagojevich pales by comparison.
Selling an appointment to the
U.S. Senate is child's play compared to the child slaughter which was a central
plank of Senator Obama's campaign. Talk about wickedness in high places!
no one's watching. We're all transfixed by our nation's little morality
play over there on Chicago's South Side.
Also, by the vision of Evangelicalism's own Balaam, the Warrenmeister, thinking gentle thoughts about how his invocation of
the Triune God can help heal our nation as we all unify behind our new
President. So Rick Warren, prophet of Israel, hoists himself on his donkey...
And by the way, did you notice that the state is "investigating" to see if laws were broken by this mother carrying her children to term? Sitting in the fridge, they were, prior to nestling into their mother's womb.
The headline is "Octuplets' birth spawns outrage from public."
Listen, if people are angry at the cost of the octuplets and ready to tar and feather the mother...
by David and Tim Bayly on February 11, 2009 - 2:54pm
(Tim, w/thanks to Brian) Although it makes me uncomfortable seeing national sovereignty lose to the New One World Order, praise God for this victory for religious freedom in Bulgaria won in the European Court of Human Rights by an attorney allied with the Alliance Defense Fund. If you have never supported the Alliance Defense Fund and you're able, please do so...
by David and Tim Bayly on April 15, 2009 - 11:13am
(Tim) From my incomparable tutor in all things political for over thirty years, Joe Sobran, I learned of the existence of the Tenth Amendment, but also of its impotence in the hands of the crooks who have served on the U.S. Supreme Court in recent decades. Also from Sobran, I picked up the habit of never, ever, ever referring to "the United States," but always and only "these United States."
The past few years, Church of the Good Shepherd has had an influx of Texans who move here for a few years to complete their doctorates at IU. Most of them plan to return to the motherland so, half-seriously, I've told them of my wish that Texas would secede so I could move there...
(Tim--Partly in an effort to take into account some of the comments, I've changed this post substantially this Saturday evening. If you'd read it before, you might want to read it again.)
For years it's been clear the egalitarian feminist attack upon reformed ecclesiastical communions has not been content to limit itself to the Christian Reformed and Evangelical Presbyterian Churches, but is increasingly focused on our own Presbyterian Church in America. This became obvious to me while serving on our General Assembly's Ad Interim Study Committee on Women in the Military. The arguments I heard then concerning the meaning and purpose of sexuality were absolutely abysmal--particularly those emanating from sophisticated teaching elders who saw themselves as God's gift to the PCA provided to aid their country bumpkin colleagues at rural, small town, and southern churches in learning how to contextualize the Gospel within this postmodern world.
As I listened to them carefully, it was evident the sound bites they employed in denying the truth or application of God's order of sexuality everywhere but inside the elders meeting and pulpit Sunday morning perfectly reflected arguments I'd heard in prior years at presbytery and general assembly levels in the mainline Presbyterian Church (USA). You know: slavery, cultural context, wife abuse, barefoot and pregnant, you can't turn back the clock, people will laugh at us--that sort of thing.
Then, of course the conservatives had their own reasons for not standing in the gap, opposing the feminist heresy. There was that old battle axe of Southern Presbyterianism, the spirituality of the Church, that conveniently kept many from feeling any responsibility to oppose our civil magistrate sending off our mothers and sisters and daughters to die for us on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq. And there was also the federal vision to deal with--that issue alone took so much time and energy there was little zeal left for contending for God's order of sexuality.
(David--with thanks to Douglas Wilson for his suggestion that other pastors preach to President Obama as he recently did.)
Sunday, June 7, 2009 2 Timothy 2:8, 9
Last Sunday morning while we were gathered in worship a gunman entered a Lutheran (ELCA) church in Wichita, Kansas and shot to death the nation’s most famous abortionist, a man whose specialty had long been the dismemberment of late-second and third trimester infants, while he was serving as an usher.
A notorious murderer met what is certain to become a notorious end. By the goodness of God the witness of the Church was not entirely silenced in Dr. Tiller’s life. He had been excommunicated by his previous congregation, a church of the Missouri Synod Lutheran denomination. And so the judgment of God had been declared; not every watchman was silent, not every shepherd proved a hireling.
(Tim) Two weeks ago, our high school men and women went over to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, to serve those trying to recover from the terrible flood the community suffered last year. Led by their youth workers, David Abu-Sara, Veronica Allen, Abram Hess, Emily Hess, and Ryan Schnitzer, they returned reporting that the governmental authorities were not particularly helpful to the residents, being better at red tape than getting things done.
The work done by the group was coordinated by church planters, Jeremy Knapp and Michael Langer, of One Ancient Hope (PCA). Our men and women were given a place to sleep in the basement of Hope Evangelical Church (PCA).
The Iowa Independent ran an article on the post-flood political problems and our group made the blurb under one of the pictures...
A few years ago, a godly Rwandan was preaching to us here at Church of the Good Shepherd and he took the occasion to rebuke us, saying we Americans had no authority to condemn Rwanda's genocide when we were slaughtering 1.3 million children in our own nation, year after year, with no sign of the bloodshed ending.
Truth is, many, many denominations, churches, elders, and pastors have endorsed the slaughter of the unborn here in these United States. And even among those pastors who claim to be pro-life, precious few are anti-abortion. Like the Rwandan priests and pastors, many of us...
(Tim) My good brother, Bob Patterson, recently did a piece for National Review Online (NRO) that I commend to our readers. In an e-mail to friends, Bob summed up the argument he makes this way:
The decline in marriage and fertility rates among the Baby Boom generation stands at the heart of what presently ails the American economy. After noting the demographic concerns of former Fortune columnist David Goldman, I suggest that national GOP leaders can no longer ignore the interplay between social and economic issues if they want the party to make a comeback in 2010 or 2012.
(Tim, w/thanks to my Mary Lee) The July 18, 2009 issue of World ran an article about South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's confession of adultery. The article is worth reading, especially if you're a frequent traveler, rich, or influential. Wealth is deceitful and pride goes before the fall.
Three statements stuck out to me.
First, why am I not surprised that YWAM's Virginia rep knew nothing about YWAM's ownership of the Fellowship's $1.8 million C Street home, and that when World asked them for clarification, the Fellowship declined to respond?
Second, the article admits it's common for politicians to have no church home or to skip church. This is increasingly true of missionaries, also, so here at Church of the Good Shepherd we've begun to implement standards with the missionaries our church supports. They must be a part of a local church, where they work, as well as hold permanent membership in an evangelical Bible-believing church that they and the church recognize as their home church.
Third, to the degree that Gov. Mark Sanford had a church, he claimed it was an evangelical congregation called Seacoast Church in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina. He sometimes attended an Episcopal congregation when he was working in the capital, but Seacoast is his home church.
So, when Gov. Sanford publicly confessed to adultery, how did his Seacoast pastor respond?
by David and Tim Bayly on August 12, 2009 - 8:59am
(Tim) For several weeks, now, the news has been filled with articles reassuring Americans that government medicine is inevitable and poses no danger to us. They tell us government medicine will not fund abortions except in the most extraordinary cases where any reasonable man would agree the baby must die. It will not require the wholesale slaughter of the old and feeble--what we are taught to refer to as "euthanasia." After all, termination counseling isn't mandatory; it's simply an option offered those who may find it helpful.
A front page article in the Indy Star yesterday (picked up from the LA Times, by the way) blamed Rush Limbaugh for all the fear. "Nothing bad will happen," the civil authority tells us. "Just trust us."
You have got to be kidding! Trust you? You can't be serious!
Look at your track record. Your government education is so bad you'd sooner die than enroll your own children in the public schools serving your neighborhood there at the White House. And this is equally true of Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama.
by David and Tim Bayly on August 26, 2009 - 7:01am
For the scepter of wickedness shall not rest upon the land of the righteous, So that the righteous will not put forth their hands to do wrong. - Psalm 125:3
(Tim) Government funding always means more government control. Always. And today, that cannot possibly be good news.
government control will lead to less compassion (for single mothers,
for instance), responsibility (for single fathers, for instance),
justice (for unborn children, for instance), mercy (for the homeless,
for instance), truth (for children educated in government schools, for
instance) and freedom for citizens forced to foot the bill for
government's aborting those very virtues her subjects hold dear.
is the reason compassionate, responsible, just, merciful, and truthful
Americans are joining Libertarian ranks in droves. They've read Paul
and learned that the sort of leaders profiled by the New Yorker and the NYTimes Magazine will talk about love for the people and national compassion while demonstrating an
astounding selfishness in their own personal lives.
Need I list examples?
Hillary Clinton of It Takes a Village
fame? Her husband, Bill? The latest entrant into the race for that
moral squalor called the Office of Governor of the State of New York,
Rudy Giuliani? Our resident global-warming prophet safely ensconced in his
carbon-spewing mansion (except when he's flying in his carbon-spewing coporate jets), Al Gore?
won this last election by hoodwinking young and middle-aged
"Christians" who had been softened up to the deception by years of
being inoculated against all discernment by ear-scratchers like Rob
Bell and Brian McLaren. Their pastors had turned them into easy marks
for Barack Obama's lies.
But among those who saw through
President Obama's lies...
by David and Tim Bayly on August 29, 2009 - 5:44am
(Tim, w/thanks to Mark C.) If the truth that God hates divorce is not enough for you, here's something that may stiffen your resolve. A ten-year-old home schooled girl whose parents are divorced has been ordered to go to government school and the order has been approved by Judge Lucinda V. Sadler for this reason: "(the child's) vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view." Of course, her "religious beliefs" considered by the court to be a threat to her well-being are Christian.
Why are the courts making this decision about a ten-year-old girl?