Tag Archives: liberal

“Don’t have sex, because you will get pregnant and die.”

The title is a memorable line from the movie Mean Girls, where the gym coach is teaching sex education (see the video below).  Whether by design or not, it demonstrated the ineffectiveness of both extremes of teaching kids about an extremely important topic.

Don’t have sex, because you will get pregnant and die.  Don’t have sex in the missionary position, don’t have sex standing up . . . Just don’t do it, promise?  OK, everybody take some rubbers.

I like how it skewered both ends of the spectrum.  Repeating the Nike hybrid of  Just (Don’t) Do It won’t be effective without some guidelines on avoiding temptation and more, and passing out condoms like that is an implicit and explicit message that you expect kids to have sex outside of marriage (in addition to giving them a false sense of security).

Of course I endorse chastity and the abstinence of any sex acts outside of marriage as the ideal for everyone.  It is the only proven way to avoid pregnancy, disease, and emotional damage (and, if you are one of those religious types, the only way to obey God).

Ephesians 5:3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.

They should also emphasize the most recent statistics demonstrating that those who finish high school and don’t have sex outside of marriage are extremely unlikely to end up poor, whereas if you do the opposite you are very likely to be poor.

They should teach girls the lines that guys often use and how to respond to them, for example:

  • Male: If you loved me you’d have sex with me.
  • Female: If you loved me you wouldn’t pressure me to have sex with you.

They should teach guys the lines girls use as well.  I know of one young man whose girlfriend recently broke up with him because he wouldn’t have sex with her.

But the abstinence / chastity message should include simple but effective ways to avoid temptation.  Too many people have good intentions but put themselves in situations that inevitably lead to compromise.

They should also coach you on how much your actions regarding sex are influenced by:

  • What you view
  • What you think about
  • Who you spend alone time with

Contrary to stereotypes, I have no issue with schools teaching a balanced sex education program, provided it is thorough and fact-based.  Birth control options are real and it is acceptable to discuss them, provided the whole story is told and the schools don’t distribute the condoms or other birth control themselves and don’t facilitate the abortion process.

For example, truly comprehensive sex education should teach the following regarding birth control pills:

  • They are X% effective at preventing pregnancies (but the data must be given for different demographic groups, because discipline and effectiveness tends to be lower for younger and poorer women).
  • They offer zero protection against STDs
  • They offer zero protection against emotional issues
  • There are possible side effects

More considerations and possible elements of a truly comprehensive sex education program:

  • Surveys demonstrate that married couples have the most satisfying sex lives.
  • It is absolutely ridiculous for schools to dispense birth control.  It sends the implicit and explicit message that you expect kids to have sex and that the adults say you should use birth control.  Guess which message they will listen to and which one they will ignore?
  • Hey parents, how about supervising your kids?  Giving kids unrestricted time alone with the opposite sex is virtually guaranteed to turn out badly.
  • Teach the truth about the “hookup” culture, where kids barely know each other and have sex.  Girls participating in “hookups” are basically acting like free prostitutes.  They have all the risks of pregnancy, disease, crushed self esteem, etc., but they aren’t making any money!  Somehow they convinced themselves that they are proving their equality by acting like guys do.  And of course there is the associated drug and alcohol abuse required to numb their minds to what they are doing.  Sad.
  • How Sex is Like Duct Tape (great illustration about chemicals, bonding and the pain of out-of-wedlock sex)

And of course, Christians can teach their children about God’s plan for sex and how great it is when used as designed.

The primary problem isn’t what one class teaches in one part of its curriculum in high school.  Whether  you use the falsely titled “comprehensive” Planned Parenthood type curriculum or that of the abstinence groups, the whole thing is doomed to fail if kids aren’t supervised, aren’t equipped to say no, aren’t given support by parents and just wallow in the sewer of our sex-obsessed culture. 

All of the evils of Planned Parenthood-style sex education are brought to you by the “Christian” Left, mocking God and his word since their inception.  Churchgoers who support “same-sex marriage” have nearly identical views to the world. It shows who their real father is.

1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.

Jude 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

When I pointed out problems of sex ed on one post I got this answer in reply:

The problem is that people screw.

My reply to him:

How Zen-like ;-).

Yes, and people steal.  And lie.  And don’t study in school.  And do drugs.  And drink alcohol and drive.

So do we give up educating them that abstaining from these and other behaviors would be wise?

Do we let them escape from consequences when they do the behaviors?

Do we just focus on making is safer to do these things?  “If you are going to drink and drive, be sure to have an air bag in the car.”

Fortunately, one commenter saw the light:

I think his point was that no matter the sex ed, the rest of culture undoes it.

That sums it up nicely.

The Liberal / Leftist mindset summarized perfectly in one phrase — in their own words

Obamacare Supporter Surprised When She Loses Her Coverage

Alternate title: Mugged by reality.

Seriously, what could better explain their worldview?  The same thing happens weekly in theologically Liberal churches led by false teachers such as Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis.  They take verses out of context about helping the “least of these” — while hypocritically supporting the Democrats’ platform of unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortions that literally destroy the least of these — yet it never occurs to them that by definition you can only give your own money.  If you ask “Caesar” to take it from neighbor A by force to redistribute to neighbor B, then that isn’t giving.  See the good folks at Dictionary.com on the difference between giving and taxes if you need help with that.

Here is a better view of real giving, courtesy of the Holy Spirit:

2 Corinthians 9:6-7 The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

As evil and incompetent as the Obama administration is, they aren’t completely without intellect.  They are so committed to their horrific Cloward/Piven/Alinsky agenda that they don’t mind looking foolish as long as they get their end game: Universal health care and more government control of everything.  They know there is a tipping point after which it will be too late to stop it, short of a full-blown revolution.

But quotes from Leftist voters who are finally impacted by the consequences of their worldview do give a glimmer of hope.  Hopefully enough people will notice how Obama is pushing the next wave of bad news to just after the November 2014 elections and they’ll realize that he didn’t just lie to them once.

Republicans have a golden opportunity — which, admittedly, they will probably ruin — to reset voter expectations for a decade or more.  They just need to relentlessly point out the consequences of the Leftist mindset of “charity” and how superior and more fair the free market approach is.

King David vs. the theological Left

If you ask the government to take from neighbor A by force to transfer to neighbor B, then that is not charity on your part, and certainly not something Jesus taught. He said to give your own money.  Yet the theological Left and its false teachers do this endlessly.

These people, who claim the name of Christ, should follow the example of King David when he was making an offering to the Lord: 1 Chronicles 21:24 But King David said to Ornan, “No, but I will buy them for the full price. I will not take for the Lord what is yours, nor offer burnt offerings that cost me nothing.”

David wouldn’t even take the offerings that were given freely.  He didn’t want to just re-gift something to God.  The theological Left does something far worse than re-gifting: They advocate taking from others by force to “give” in their name.  They are greedy (wanting to keep what they have) and covetous (jealous of what others have), not generous.  Don’t let them fool you, and don’t be a part of it.

Give generously, but give your own money.

2 Corinthians 9:6–7 The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Detroit: The petri dish of Leftist politics, education and unions. And bankruptcies.

Just updating this in honor recognition of Detroit’s bankruptcy.

Best line I’ve seen on Facebook lately: If Obama had a city, it would look like Detroit.

I saw an item where a 50 yr. old lamented that he might not be able to retire this year as planned.  He filled potholes in Detroit for a living.  That is important and honorable work, but the idea that it would prosper one to be able to retire at that age is symptomatic of a much larger problem.

Leftist polices are poison.

As you probably read recently, Detroit has a 47% illiteracy rate.  Forty-seven percent!  Less than 2% of their students could do college work.

Ideas have consequences.  Please watch Steven Crowder’s analysis of Detroit and how the policies that ruined it are spreading to the rest of the country.  Democrats have had a virtual monopoly on inner city politics, education and unions for over 50 years and today’s Detroit is the result.  I think that all Liberal members of Congress should have to live there for a year — with the same un-Constitutional gun control laws they want to force on others.

More details here: Why did Detroit go bankrupt? Who is to blame? Whose fault was it?

Typical comments of Sojourners’ followers

I noticed the following comments left at Top 4 Reasons Jesus Is My Favorite Feminist from the blog of Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis:

Liberal guy: But then you have Paul aka Saul of Tarsus in 2 Timothy going on his anti-female screed.

Liberal woman 1: Paul is not Jesus. Paul seems to be a split personality in his writings. He says a number of things that I suspect Jesus would not have agreed with

Liberal woman 2: Thank you! Finally, someone who gets it: Paul was not divine, nor was he anything other than a man who seemed to be quite conflicted in many ways. Personally, I have little use for most of his misguided and inconsistent writings. I’ve never really understood the church’s seemingly endless fascination with Paul–it’s almost as if he’s right up there next to Jesus, and that’s a ludicrous premise. Paul is waaaaaay overrated.

It is odd to me how someone can claim to be a Christian yet be so dismissive of huge parts of the Bible.  Here was my response:

No one claimed that Paul or any other Bible writers were divine. But everything Paul wrote in the Bible turned out exactly as God wanted it to, and Jesus, as part of the Trinity, agrees with it. If you say otherwise you are creating a god in your own image. You are sitting in judgment of the Bible and only accepting as inspired the parts that agree with your sensibilities (see 2 Tim 4:3, among others). Have you gone through all 31,173 verses to tell us which are “really” from God and which aren’t, and why should we trust your interpretation — which just happens to agree with the world’s perspective?

Having said that, I have yet to find a “Paul was a misogynist!!!” person who actually studied all of the Bible carefully.

Remember, Paul wrote, “Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church.” If you think about that you’ll realize it is the highest possible standard.

Paul was surely perceived just as radically and politically incorrect in his day as he is in ours, but for the opposite reasons. Take off the modern blinders that equate feminism with the right to have your unborn children killed, then read all of what He wrote and consider how God’s word elevated women relative to their treatment at that time.

 

Facebook memes

A friend linked to a “Liberal and proud of it” Facebook page and I read some of their, uh, arguments.  I should note that many Conservative memes are pointless.  I think it is always worth asking if the joke would work on the other side if you just changed the names.  If so, I don’t click “like” or share it.  Just saying, “Obama is stupid,” or attacking his wife’s appearance is about as productive as the Left’s obsession with Sarah Palin.  We have endless facts about his record and beliefs to point to. Why dilute the message with pettiness?

But when the Liberal pages try to make a logical point it is typically loaded with fallacies.  A few samples I saw plus the comments I left:

It is only charity when you donate your money and time. Forcing others to “give” at the point of a gun doesn’t qualify. Jesus didn’t tell anyone to ask Caesar to take from neighbor A to give to neighbor B. Coveting is still a sin.   Even if his definition of giving matched the dictionary he would still be wrong on two counts. First, he pretends that we aren’t already “giving” vast amounts to the poor. Worse yet, he assumes that more of this “giving” will actually help the country.

This assumes that oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” is a civil right, but you haven’t proved that. You have about as much right to that as you do a square circle.

It also assumes that gays and lesbians can’t be “married” today in fake churches and live together as they like. They can do that all-day, every day and we won’t complain. There is simply no need for the government to get involved in their relationships, because by nature and design they do produce the next generation.

Like nearly all pro-abortion arguments, that ignores the body of the innocent human being destroyed in the abortion.The scientific fact (http://tinyurl.com/yfje8lq) is that a new human being is created at fertilization.

Anyone who supports taxpayer-funded abortions is pro-abortion.  They think that pro-lifers don’t have a choice as to whether they should have to fund abortions, and they think that one of our society’s problems is that we aren’t killing enough unwanted human beings.  The Democratic platform is officially pro-abortion.

If it isn’t a political issue, why do the Democrats want to force pro-lifers to pay for abortions?

Yep, we oppose gender-selection abortions — nearly all of which destroy unwanted females — and the Left fights for them. Tell me again who hates women?

Oh, and abortions kill blacks at a rate three times that of whites. And who are the racists who want to increase that rate with taxpayer-funded abortions?

Other commenter: Please quote your source for taxpayer-funded abortion. Fox News? Bzzzz. They definitely don’t happen at Planned Parenthood. Please come back when you can argue without using strawman arguments or false equivilencies.

Hi — would the 2012 Democratic Platform be an acceptable source for you? “Protecting A Woman’s Right to Choose. The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.”  http://assets.dstatic.org/dnc-platform/2012-National-Platform.pdf

Thanks for making the day of this conservative. I hope you reconsider your views once you realize you were just shouting from Stereotype-Land (I don’t watch Fox News — not that there is anything wrong with that).

The Democratic platform called for taxpayer-funded abortions. That would increase the rate of black abortions beyond the current rate, which is three times that of whites.

Democratic policies keep blacks dead or dependent. Coincidence?

The race card gone wild

Abortion is one area where the Left is oddly quiet about playing the race card.  Perhaps that is because abortions kill unwanted black human beings at a rate three times that of whites and Hispanics at a rate double that of whites, and the Leftist dream of taxpayer-funded abortions would take those rates even higher.

That is, they were quiet about it until now.  In a climate where even saying the word “Chicago” is considered racist, Banning Abortion is Now, Apparently, Racism.  You just can’t make these things up.

Right. You caught us, Brian. That’s exactly what the GOP is attempting to do, to make sure there are more Black, Latino, and other minority children not being aborted so that the country will have more Black, Latino, and other minorities because we hate Blacks, Latinos, and other minorities. I find myself rubbing my forehead after writing that, considering what Liberals feel are their deep policy positions.

If anything, pushing for more abortion on demand is racist. Consider that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger was an avowed racist pushing eugenics to reduce the population of Blacks, other minorities, and “defectives.” She spoke in front of the KKK.

So in a Liberal Logic 101 way, remember this:

  • Saying “Chicago” is a code word for racism when used to describe the President’s politics.
  • Having a #1 priority that results in blacks being killed at three times the rate of whites is not racist.  But opposing it is!

Is forgiveness possible?

ER

A friend reminded me of this clip so I wanted to run it again.  The video is fictional, of course, but the premise occurs countless times every day around the world: People need and want forgiveness, but the world tells them lies.

Christianity has the truth and the Good News, but far too many people claiming the name of Christ are unequipped and/or unwilling to share it, even when asked.  If that applies to you, then do something about it.  Right away!  I recommend Tactics by Greg Koukl as a great way to learn how to share your faith as an effective ambassador and apologist for Christ, just as the scriptures command.

2 Corinthians 5:20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.
1 Peter 3:15–16 (ESV) but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.

—–

It was surprising but so encouraging to see that the clip below was on the TV show ER a couple years back.

The chaplain is the classic fake Christian you’d expect to find in most theologically liberal churches today.  I love how the patient doesn’t buy her “just make up a god in your own image” type of platitudes.

The money quotes from the dying patient:

All I’m hearing is some new age “God is love” one-size-fits-all crap . . . I don’t have time for this now . . . I want a real chaplain who believes in a real God and a real Hell . . . I don’t need to “ask myself,” I need answers, and all your questions and uncertainty are only making things worse . . .

I need someone who will look me in the eye and tell me how to find forgiveness, because I am running out of time!

Hey Christians, time to fire up!  Some people don’t want the truth.  But there are lots of real people like this in the world who need and want the truth.  They must be so sick of the lies and the politically correct “God is whoever you want him to be” nonsense taught by the world and by far too many churches.  Is it really so hard to understand that you do not get to tell the creator of the universe how eternity works?  You don’t set the terms and conditions of salvation any more than you get to tell your boss to triple your pay and give you 50 weeks of vacation, or tell your teacher that he must give you an A without you coming to class.

Are you ready to tell people the truth and the Good News?  Forgiveness, redemption and eternal life are possible, but only through trust in Jesus.

Michael Scott & orthodox Christians

The original post down below was a well-deserved shot at the worldliness of theological Liberals and why they preach a false gospel.  But I have to be candid and concede that the root cause the rampant theological liberalism in the Western church is the fault of authentic believers who put their own popularity above church discipline and sound doctrine.  They let these false teachers stay in the church, and the fakes have grown so much that they think they are the real thing.

I always laugh at the scene from The Office where the boss, Michael Scott, reveals his utter narcissism and desperate need for approval:

Do I need to be liked?  Absolutely not.  I like to be liked.  I enjoy being liked.  I have to be liked.  But it’s not this compulsive need to be liked, like my need to be praised.

Sadly, authentic believers may fall into that trap.  As I have pointed out in a leadership / management training session at various conferences, if I really care about my employees I’ll risk my comfort and popularity and tell them the truth about where they have weaknesses.  I can rationalize that I’m being nice to them by not telling them seemingly bad news, but then I’m really just being nice to myself.

In the same way, church leaders who rationalize being nice to the false teachers in the church are really just being nice to themselves.  Life is much easier when you avoid confrontation and let false teachings slide.

We should have shown these people the door decades ago.  I’m not talking about restricting their religious freedoms.  They can go anywhere they like to organize and preach their false gospels.  They just shouldn’t be allowed to infiltrate real churches to spread their poison.  If these teachers lied at their ordination vows or changed their minds later, it is perfectly logical to ask them to leave.  HP wouldn’t take too kindly to its salespeople pushing Dell products.

Fixed: In sheep clothing
Image by manitou2121 via Flickr

Authentic believers need to care more about the sheep than the wolves.  If you want to pray for the wolves to convert, that’s great.  Just get them out of the sheep pen first.  Don’t let them devour the sheep while congratulating yourself on how loving and tolerant you are.  Said another way, don’t apologize for stepping on wolf toes.  

Original commentary about the Michael Scott quote

That captures the personalities of President Obama in particular and the theological Left in general.  “How dare orthodox Christians claim that Jesus is the only way!  The Bible only makes that point explicitly and implicitly one hundred times or so.  They are such religious bigots!  We know that God speaks through all these religions.  Ahhhhhh . . . we showed them.  Now the world will like us and our made-up version of ‘Christianity.'”

Yes, the world likes you all.  Congratulations.

1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.

UPDATE — Detroit: The petri dish of Liberal politics, education and unions

UPDATE: As you probably read recently, Detroit has a 47% illiteracy rate.  Forty-seven percent!

Ideas have consequences.  Please watch Steven Crowder’s analysis of Detroit and how the policies that ruined it are spreading to the rest of the country.  Democrats have had a virtual monopoly on inner city politics, education and unions for over 50 years and today’s Detroit is the result.  I think that all Liberal members of Congress should have to live there for a year — with the same un-Constitutional gun control laws they want to force on others.

How radical is the “radical” right?

no-right.jpg

Given that the political season is in full swing, I’m noticing an increase in the number of “extremist” labels hurled at conservatives in general and Tea Partiers in particular.  Apparently that is easier then addressing the issues and arguments themselves, but it seems more like a concession speech to me.

Those who hyperventilate about the “radical right” (or “extremists,” “fundie nutjobs,” “wacky fundies,” or other eloquent terms of endearment) are either disingenuous or really bad at math, because the majority of Americans share our views on the most controversial topics.  Consider this by Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason:

A poll of readers of the L.A. Times once showed that, in the area of abortion, prayer, in school, homosexuality and traditional family values, the majority of Americans agree with so-called “extreme fundamentalists.” 70% of Americans believe that the traditional family structure is always best; 76% favor prayer in public schools; 55% are against legalized abortion; 61% think that homosexual relations are always wrong. These are the views of the “radical right,” but these are also the views of a majority of rank and file Americans.

Let that bolster your confidence, the next time you’re being marginalized for your conservative moral values. The “radical right” isn’t so radical. It’s actually mainstream.

If they think we’re so extreme, why don’t they just use their faux majority to elect legislators to legalize partial-birth abortion and such?  Then they wouldn’t need judges to ignore their duties and make up their own laws.

It appears to me like the “radical” label is just a cheap way to attack the person and not the arguments, just like they do with the passive-aggressive “intolerant” label (Because whoever yells intolerant first must be the kind, tolerant one – right?).

I submit that if the media, entertainment and education establishments weren’t so outrageously biased the numbers would shift even further to the right.  For example, consider that 90% or more of the media are die-hard pro-choicers and they do everything in their power to spin stories in their favor.  Yet the population is still split pretty evenly on the topic, and the more clearly survey questions are worded the more pro-life the results are.

The only way you can categorize majority views as the radical right is if you are perched comfortably on the radical left.

A big part of the problem

Listen to the President talk about why he would raise capital gains tax rates even though cuts by Clinton and Bush both increased revenues.

Amazingly enough, the liberal commentator Charles Gibson knows and tells the truth about what happens when the capital gains tax rate is reduced:

History shows that when you drop the capital gains tax the revenues go up.

But note how Obama ignores the facts and says he wants “fairness,” as if having a higher rate for those evil rich people will make things more “fair,” even though there will be less tax revenues to fund his liberal projects.

As I said in Jobs!!! Part one, here’s a huge part of the problem: Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?  Self-identified liberals and Democrats do badly on questions of basic economics.  The video is just more evidence of that, not to mention the failure of putting Utopian ideals above financial facts.

And you wonder why unemployment is so high?  It is just like when ideology and feel good finger-pointing unnecessarily cost tens of thousands of jobs with the offshore drilling moratorium.

Hat tip to TNWAHM via Hillbuzz for the video

Can Chuck Currie and the NCC get even one Bible passage right?

As noted in False teacher Chuck Currie outdoes himself, false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie got caught in his game of hypocritical race-baiting.  His premise was allegedly to call people to reason and discussion, but he tipped his hand when when accusing a pastor of being and anti-black racist.  It seems that Chuck couldn’t be bothered to check a pesky detail like the skin color of the person he sought to demonize (turns out the pastor was black).

As a bonus, Chuck parroted a wrong translation of a Bible passage by the National Council of Churches (NCC).  In fairness, fake Christians like Chuck and authentic Christians both take verses out of context at times.  We can all make mistakes and get a little sloppy.

But I’m trying to think of any that Chuck gets right.  He reads John 14:6 and preaches that Jesus is not the only way.  He uses the Matthew 25 “least of these” phrase in roughly every other post but doesn’t realize any of the following:

  1. That passage refers to Christian brothers, not just any poor people.
  2. Jesus wants you to help them with your own money as opposed to the Liberal tradition of taking the money of others by force to redistribute as you see fit and take credit for it.
  3. Chuck is wildly pro-abortion, which is irreconcilable with anyone caring about the “least of these.”

There are so many more.  His abuse of Isaiah 1:18 is just the latest.

The prophet Isaiah (1:18) declares God’s message to the people to “Come let us reason together”. This injunction might serve us well in the present moment.  Reason, (yakah), in this passage does not refer to a dispassionate meeting of the minds but, rather calls for convincing, persuading and presenting a case for a point of view. Vigorous, principled debate advances our thinking and clarifies the challenges before us. Respect for neighbor strengthens the fabric of our communities.

via Come, Let Us Reason Together: We Must Confront Racism With Directness & Reconciliation In Mind.

He pompously pretends to care about reason and problem-solving.  But let’s look at the context of this verse.  Even if you just look at all of verse 18 you’ll see that Chuck and the NCC have misapplied it.  Read the surrounding verses and their problem gets worse.

Isaiah 1:15–20 (ESV)

15 When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen;your hands are full of blood.

16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil,

17 learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause.

18 “Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.

19 If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land;

20 but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be eaten by the sword; for the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”

The verse and passage don’t give some generic advice for people to reason together.  God is telling sinful people to come to their senses and repent and believe.  Oh, if only Chuck and the NCC would preach that message!  But then, they’d have to believe it first, right?  And that is the problem: They are false teachers.  They pretend to be experts by quoting the Hebrew word for reason, but they miss the context of the word within the passage and even the verse.

What did they do here?  They just searched for the word “reason” and grabbed whatever verse popped up.  It makes them sound all “churchy,” I suppose, but it has nothing to do with the text.

What is worse is that Chuck uses it hypocritically.  He doesn’t want to reason with the other side.  He wants to be perceived as wanting to reason while continually playing the race card.  He is the one driving division.  If he told the truth then race-baiters like him would be out of a job.

False teachers abuse scripture to oppose 2nd Amendment

False teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie and the National Council of (mostly apostate) Churches get scripture wrong, as usual, in advancing their religion-disguised-as-politics agenda in Connecticut Mass Shooting Re-Affirms Need For Gun Control; End To Gun Violence.  Let’s examine the bad reasoning in selected portions:

The Brady Center notes this morning:

This morning at least 11 people lost their lives in two incidents of mass gun violence, one at a Connecticut workplace, another at an Indianapolis party….These two mass shootings are examples of the continual tragedy of gun violence in our country.  Every day in the United States, 300 people are shot and 85 die from gun violence.  We must do better.

Gun violence is a bad thing.  Agreed.  So are car accidents, but we don’t ban cars.  The issue is how to best deal with the bad things of the world.

The National Council of Churches USA (NCC) and other religious organizations have been outspoken advocates of ending gun violence in America.  Earlier this year NCC, a communion of “36 faith traditions encompassing 45 million Americans in 100,000 local congregations,” adopted a statement on gun violence saying:

When thinking about the problem of violence, Christian faith is both “idealistic” and “realistic.” On the one hand, there is a stream within the Christian tradition that counsels non-violence in all circumstances. A seminal text is the Sermon on the Mount,found in Matthew’s gospel, where Jesus instructs his followers to bear violence rather than inflict it.

Even if they get the biblical text right (hey, it could happen someday!) they ignore something obvious: How about all the non-Christians who may not want these (false) religious beliefs forced on them?  Where is the ACLU when you need them?

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also…. You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you . . . (Matt. 5: 38-39, 43-44).

Great passage, but it is about insults and not violence.  Note Jesus’ specificity in referring to the right cheek.  90% of people are right-handed, so a strike on the right cheek is probably a slap.  Jesus never said that if someone attacks you that it is a sin to defend yourself.

Pure pacifism is a moral evil.  To sit by while innocent people — including yourself — are violently attacked isn’t Christianity, it is cowardice.

It is difficult to imagine that the One whose own Passion models the redemptive power of non-violence would look favorably on the violence of contemporary U.S. society.

Yes, and it is difficult to imagine Jesus looking favorably on false teachers like Chuck and much of the NCC who are pro-abortion.  Abortion is as violent as it gets, but Chuck & Co. think the Constitution says you can crush and dismember innocent people in the womb but you can’t defend yourselves.  The hypocrisy of pro-abortion pacifists is astounding.

Present-day violence is made far worse than it otherwise would be by the prevalence of weapons on our streets. This stream of the Christian tradition insists that it is idolatry to trust in guns to make us secure, since that usually leads to mutual escalation while distracting us from the One whose love alone gives us security.

The facts speak otherwise.  Criminals aren’t totally stupid.  They understand risk-reward scenarios pretty well and prefer to go where people are unarmed.  If the NCC wants to preach to their members about guns, go ahead.  But again, why force their (false) religious beliefs on others?

. . . the stark reality is that such weapons end up taking more lives than they defend, and the reckless sale or use of these weapons refutes the gospel’s prohibition against violence.

That statement is pure fiction.  They have no way to support it.  And again, who said the gospel is opposed to self-defense?  People like Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution”Wallis make up new meanings for the Gospel all the time.  I’ll stick to the Bible, thanks.

They close with these stats. They should include the 4,000 per day who die from abortion, a much more preventable form of violence.

EVERY DAY (on average)

  • Every day, 300 people in America, 67 of them children and teens are shot in murders, assaults, suicides, accidents, and police intervention.
  • Every day, 85 people die from gun violence, 35 of them murdered.
  • Every day, 9 children and teens die from gun violence.
  • Every day, 215 people are shot, but survive their gun injuries.
  • Every day, 57 children and teens are shot, but survive their gun injuries.

False teacher thinks Nazi references are really, really bad. Uh, unless he’s making them.

Update: This comment by Chuck on his post broke the irony meter:

Funny, I felt that way when she said he hung out with terrorists during the 2008 campaign and then again when she compared him to Nazis. You’d be better off writing her and asking that she be a good American by engaging in honest and principled debate.

He’s the one who put the picture of Palin with s swastika on it and implied that she was doing a Nazi salute (as if you couldn’t catch every politician with their hand in the air waving and do the same thing).  What a hypocrite.

And it is a fact that Obama did hang out with a terrorist.

And Chuck asking for honest and principled debate after his lies?  Pure hypocrisy.

—–

Consistency isn’t the strong suit of false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie (kinda like theology, common sense, honesty, etc.).

He regularly compares Focus on the Family to Nazis (does he even listen to their shows regularly?) but is shocked that Sarah Palin referenced a column by Thomas Sowell that compared Obama to Hitler.

The difference is that Sowell is right.  Obama is avoiding the rule of law, something Chuck probably doesn’t even understand.

And to show why making Nazi references is really bad, he . . . uh . . . shows a picture of Palin with a Nazi symbol.  Very consistent, Chuck.

Maybe Chuck could avoid the logical fallacies and actually address what Sowell wrote, such as:

“Just where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that a president has the authority to extract vast sums of money from a private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation? Nowhere,” the conservative columnist wrote.

Part of the problem is that Sarah appears to intimidate Chuck.  He lied about her regularly during the campaign.

Other Liberals tried to spin Sarah’s Tweet about the article, just like Chuck did:

People for the American Way President Michael B. Keegan said in a statement. “Does Palin agree with Sowell that President Obama’s work to hold BP accountable for the worst oil spill in American history can be compared to the actions of Hitler?”

They ignore the obvious, of course.  She and Sowell weren’t saying not to hold BP accountable.  It was Obama’s shortcut in doing so that was at issue.  But let’s not let that get in the way of demonizing Palin, OK?

Not only did Obama violate the rule of law in typical thuggish fashion, he did so in a stupid way.  He let BP off the hook!  Guess who gets to track and manage the $20B now?  The government.  And guess who has limited their liabilities?  BP.

Oh, and who took the most campaign cash from BP?  Obama.  Chuck forgot to mention that.

Failed preacher.  Failed politician.  What’s next?

See Chuck Currie: Sarah Palin: President Obama Holding BP Financially Accountable Akin To Nazism.