Tag Archives: separation of church and state

Roundup

Randy Alcorn’s interesting perspective on suffering.

Throughout history God has delayed justice, both upon believers and unbelievers, to give them time to come to him, grow in Christlikeness, and trust him more deeply.

Don’t we give thanks for God’s patience with Saul, the self-righteous killer who became Paul? Or John Newton, the evil slave trader who accepted God’s amazing grace and preached and wrote the song that countless millions have sung? Are we grateful for God’s patience with us? Think of those who endured many years of suffering before the day you came to faith in Christ. Aren’t you thankful God did not deliver this planet from the Curse when millions asked for relief, before you heard the gospel? I came to Christ in 1969. What if Christ had returned and brought final judgment in 1968? Or in 1950, before I was born? If God had brought justice long ago, where would you and If be today? We would either not exist, or we would have been ushered into an eternity without Christ [emphasis added].

—–

By their own words, Democrats must be racist for requiring photo IDs to their convention.

Obama administration advising black pastors on how to get out the vote — Don’t worry, the ACLU will put a stop to this transparent violation of the “separation of church and state.”  Wait, what’s that?!  The ACLU is part of the process?  Shocking.

It isn’t surprising that they are focusing on those supposedly racist voter ID laws that even flaming liberals in other countries realize are as practical as can be.  The real racism is assuming that if you aren’t white then you are too stupid to get a free government ID.

—–

More racism, from the “read from the script or get kicked off the plantation” category: NBC Dumps Corey Booker, Punishes Out Spoken Black Democrat for Disagreeing With Obama

—–

The vote on gender-selection abortions highlights just how extreme the pro-aborts are.

—–

EvangellyfishIf you like satire, check out Evangellyfish by Douglas Wilson.  I thought the Amazon reviews were good reflections of the book.  It was a good send up of false churches and the hypocrisy we can all fall prey to, yet still had a message of biblically accurate hope underneath. And it was funny.

—–

Half of all Americans live in households that get government handouts — And the worst part is that Democrats think this is a good thing.  I’m really glad I’m a Christian and that I have hope in eternity.  Otherwise I’d be really depressed about where this is all headed.

No, wait, it is worse: a college educated Liberal has no idea where food stamps really come from.  Junior Achievement classes should be required for all grades in this country.

—–

Religious Photographer Ordered to Take Pictures of Homosexual Ceremony

A soft tyranny is still a tyranny — and if this isn’t tyranny, what else do you call it? . . .

No doubt the courts would inflict the same ruling if the owner were black and refused to photograph a KKK cross burning. Just kidding.

The ruling confirms five facts familiar to countermoonbats:

1. We have lost the fundamental right of freedom of association.
2. The businesses we run are not ours, but the government’s; therefore, the government determines how we operate them.
3. Our rulers hold Christian religious convictions in contempt.
4. All the animals on the farm are equal, but perverts are much more equal.
5. If we don’t start fighting back more effectively, our society is lost.

—–

Abiogenesis, or life from non-life: Still impossible.  But that won’t slow down those with blind faith.

Simple responses to common objections

contradiction.jpgMy guess is that if you have any conversations about abortion or the definition of marriage that you encounter these objections.  They seem to have lasting rhetorical force, which is why they are used so often.  But they crumble under a little bit of analysis.

Here are some easy and bullet-proof responses.  Don’t expect answers, though.  I can almost guarantee that they will change the subject and/or attack you personally.  When they ignore them a second time you can be sure that you are dealing with a dishonest debater.

Use them politely and hopefully you’ll plant a seed.

1. Objection: “You are just forcing your beliefs on others!”

Response: Do you think murder and theft should be illegal?  If so, are you forcing your views on others?  By that definition of “forcing” all laws would be wrong.

2. Similar objection, with bonus anti-religious bigotry: “You are forcing your religious beliefs on others and we have the ‘separation of church and state.’”

  • Since the Bible says murder and theft are wrong, does that mean I’m forcing those religious beliefs on others?
  • Must I vote the opposite of my religious views, such as requiring that stealing from and murdering atheists should be legal?
  • Why are you trying to suppress my First Amendment rights?  The First Amendment explicitly protects religious and political speech, it doesn’t restrict it.
  • How does opposing the destruction of the unborn or stating that the definition of marriage is the union of one man and one woman qualify as forcing others to join my religion?
  • Do you speak as consistently to silence the opinions of theological liberals who share your views, or do you just try to stifle those who oppose you?  (The latter would be hypocritical of you.)

3. Objection: “You pro-lifers only care about children in the womb and you don’t care about them once they are born.”

  • Protesting an immoral act does not obligate you to take care of its victims.  
  • If the government wanted to solve the homeless problem by killing homeless people, could you object to their destruction without having to personally house them?  In the same way, we can object to the killing of innocent human beings without having to feed, clothe and house them for life.
  • Your statement is false.  Pro-lifers help women and children before and after pregnancies with their own time and money.  There are more pregnancy centers (which offer services for free) than their are abortion clinics (which make huge profits).
  • Unless you are insisting that poor people must have abortions, the same obligations of support and care that you require of pro-lifers would fall on you.

So where’s the ACLU when you need them?

From Christians Urge Yes On 66 and 67:

As a voice for many in the faith community and as a provider of social services, we add our support to Measures 66 and 67. We all have a solemn responsibility to care for those who cannot do so for themselves, especially in challenging economic times like these. We believe it is fair and just to ask corporations and the most prosperous Oregonians to do their part in helping us through these tough times.

Sounds like coveting to me.  What if these initiatives don’t completely solve all the problems?  Well, these fine religious folks will just go back to corporations and the most prosperous citizens (typically defined as anyone who makes $1 more than these clergy) and take more of their money.  Because there are never unintended consequences like lost jobs, right? 

Note that I pay all my taxes and think all Christians should give generously.  And as always, people can argue these initiatives based on secular reasoning.  But when fakes like this bring Jesus into it I have a problem.

Hey, Chuck & Co.: You are more prosperous than 98% of the world.  Using your logic, they should keep taxing you until you have the same amount as them.  After all, until all these problems are solved you need to keep being taxed more and more.

Or perhaps you could set an example and give more yourselves and encourage your congregations to do likewise.

Those of us who operate faith-based charities and non-profit organizations know that we cannot meet the needs that exist in Oregon without a strong government role in providing health care, affordable housing, job training and other services that provide hope and opportunity.

How Biblical.  The church can’t carry out its mission so it turns to . . . the government!

So why is it that the separation of church and state crowd doesn’t sue over things like this?  Oh, yeah, because they want more government as well, and the churches most often involved in these ecumenical organizations typically gave up on Jesus a long time ago.  No threat to the Communists there.

Ballot Measures 66 and 67 help protect the most vulnerable Oregonians and secure adequate funding for public education, health care and public safety programs. The national economic crisis has had a profound impact on all of us. But it has hit society’s most vulnerable – the working poor, seniors and children – particularly hard. 

Perhaps you should be endorsing conservative economic principles instead of trillion dollar political payoffs and horrible health care bills that include taxpayer-funded abortions.

Join with Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon and faith leaders in voting Yes on Ballot Measures 66 and 67.

Christians working together make sense, but partnering with Muslims and other religions breaks the commandment not to be unequally yoked.  But since when did Chuck let God’s commands get in the way of his politics?

I have a post coming up soon which highlights how cheap most Liberal politicians are with their own charitable giving (Biden, Obama, Kennedy, etc.).  Yet they get into office and gladly spend other people’s money and consider themselves to be champions of the poor.  Sure. 

I’d love to know how much the leaders of these ministries personally donate. 

As always, it is only giving when it comes out of your pocket.