RSS

Tag Archives: Christianity

Chick-Fil-A, the Bible & LGBT Bullying by Walter Myers III

Chick-Fil-A, the Bible & LGBT Bullying by Walter Myers III

As many already know, the LGBT movement has now set its sights on the Chick-fil-A company ever since President Dan Cathy made recent comments in a (quite beautiful) interview  with the Baptist Press about his company advocating for family values rooted in the Bible.  Specifically, what raised their ire was his company’s support of the traditional family led by a man and a woman, a position on which he said the company was “guilty as charged,” with no plans to change course despite opposition from various groups. Now we see a constant barrage from the liberal media, gay advocacy groups, and even public figures charging that Chick-fil-A and Christian organizations that it donates are “anti-gay.” Well, I don’t see being pro-traditional marriage as necessarily being anti-gay, but it is clearly opposed to gay marriage. And this is a critical distinction that the gay advocacy groups refuse to make or allow because it doesn’t fit into their narrative. While Cathy may be against gay marriage, Chick-fil-A welcomes customers of all types without reservation, and has not exhibited any discriminatory hiring practices, treating both gay employees and customers with the same “honor, dignity, and respect” as everyone else. So Chick-fil-A is hardly being “intolerant,” or lacking in “diversity” or “inclusiveness” — words now used as verbal cudgels.

In reading various articles about this issue, what surprised me was just how much moralizing was going on by those who abhor morals specifically when advanced by Christians. One article  in BusinessWeek correctly stated that while it is not surprising that a company that holds to biblical values would disapprove of gay marriage, the problem is that Cathy “crossed the line” by openly condemning the beliefs of a big chunk of Chick-fil-A’s audience. Yet I don’t recall them saying that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, or Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, crossed a line by their donations to a campaign  to defend the same-sex marriage law in the state of Washington. So should Christians now boycott Amazon and Microsoft for their CEO’s actions, as LGBT advocacy groups are encouraging gay marriage supporters to do against Chick-fil-A? Cathy has a specific moral position that is opposed by Ballmer and Bezos, but Cathy is the one who is supposed to give up his moral code in favor of the moral code of Ballmer, Bezos, and gay advocacy groups? It appears to me they feel this is a requirement, and thus Cathy does not have the right to have a view that is discordant with theirs. Now where is the tolerance in that?

As gay marriage advocates would have it, Christians are supposed to sit idly by and watch them actively advance a social agenda that is anti-biblical, as if Christians have no say so even as citizens of the United States. Gay advocacy groups, indeed, are making a moral argument as are Christians. Yet they seem to think their moral arguments are superior, and if Christians don’t agree with theirs then we are necessarily hateful and homophobic for opposing same-sex marriage. But what other position would they expect a Christian to have? The Bible is explicit about God’s view on homosexuality as a sin, so gay marriage isn’t even a consideration. If a person is a Bible-believing Christian, then that person will necessarily look on homosexual sin in the same way that they look on the sins of idolatry, premarital sex, and adultery. To see this, let’s take a look at 1 Corinthians 6:8-10:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, noridolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, norrevilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

To continue reading this great article click HERE!

Walter Myers III

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 29, 2012 in Featured Guest blogs, Religion

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Exclusive: Black Christian Conservative Allegedly Thrown Out of Summer Program at Georgetown for Refusing LGBTQ Tolerance Indoctrination

Exclusive: Black Christian Conservative Allegedly Thrown Out of Summer Program at Georgetown for Refusing LGBTQ Tolerance Indoctrination

One of the most wonderful news stories that I was so happy to hear over the last two years was that of Urban Prep Academy in Chicago. It is the only 100% African-American male charter high school in Chicago and the entire country. It also has had a 100% college acceptance rate for it’s senior class for the last three years. There has been no shortage of coverage, accolades and pride for these young men in the media and the community, in fact, here are some of the headlines:

“Another Perfect College Acceptance Year At Urban Prep” – Chicago Tribune

“Urban Prep Academy announces 100% four-year college acceptance rate” – Examiner.com

“Urban Prep: 100% of Graduates College-Bound For Second Straight Year” – Huffington Post

Big Things Poppin’ at Urban Prep Academy: 100% of Their Men Heading to College – YourBlackWorld.net

Governor Pat Quinn (D) of Illinois shared this tweet expressing his excitement for Jarrett’s acceptance into his own Alma Mater on March 30th 2012 and rightfully so:


In an article just before the 2012 Urban Prep Academy graduation in the Milwaukee Courier, Jarrett Roby shared this:

I have lived on both the West Side and South Sides of Chicago. I chose Urban Prep because the news of the two previous graduating classes having 100 percent college acceptance rate was impressive,” says Jarrett.

He adds that before he came to Urban Prep, he had good self-esteem. “But Urban Prep challenged me to pursue excellence which has caused my self-esteem to increase. Urban Prep has inspired me to rise above and beyond all negative stereotypes and statistics that society has for young Black males.

Like JaBrice (Reese a classmate of Jarrett’s), Jarrett’s favorite subject at the academy is also African American History. “In my Honors African American History class, I am constantly learning surprising information about my race. The class provokes stimulating debates which in our teams cultivates and inspires outspoken individuals and independent thinkers.

The 18-year-old plans to attend Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. He is considering a major in Biology so as to be a “competitive applicant” when he applies to medical school.

My short term goal is to become an emergency room physician or general surgeon. My long term career goal is a leadership position in the United States government.”

There are plenty more where that came from however, actually, I digress. Not very long ago (June 16th 2012) Jarrett Roby, who was also student body president, not only graduated with honors but was accepted to prestigious Georgetown University and received a full scholarship. He was also selected to participate in the Georgetown University Community Scholars program which according to their website is not only “The Soul of Georgetown” but also:

The Community Scholars Program provides Georgetown students with the unique opportunity to thrive. Scholars are carefully selected during the admissions process based on their academic achievement, impressive co-curricular accomplishments, and commitment to the transformative power of education. They typically represent diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, and are often first generation college students.”

The Community Scholars program is sponsored by “The Center for Multicultural Equity & Access (CMEA). Their mission statement is here. My fellow conservative blogger and radio host Kira Davis of CDN network’s show “The Dark Side” and I simultaneously received some news tips and disturbing information this evening. She and I both were very shocked, angered and saddened to learn that this promising student, Jarrett Roby, future surgeon and physician was given the boot from this program because of his refusal to attend a workshop on “tolerance” of the LGBT community and “people who are different”. To be clear, Jarrett Roby was suspended from the summer enrichment program – Community Scholars, not Georgetown University in the Fall.  We received this disturbing news today from a source (who shall remain anonymous) whose eye/earwitness account was this regarding recent disturbing events at this summer program for selected Georgetown students who will matriculate the school this Fall:

I am here at Georgetown University through a program hosted by the Center for Multicultural Equity and Access called the Community Scholars Program. The program focuses on assisting underprivileged students attain a college education, and therefore they allow us to attend a five week intensive program that immerses us in two classes, and we get priority registration. The program is great overall and has great intentions, but today and over the past week they got out of hand.

It was brought to our attention that the program was requiring us to attend a workshop that essentially pushed for LGBTQ** Rights and “Tolerance” for people who are different than we are. I did not feel comfortable attending such a workshop, so I spoke to the Resident Director and the Assistant Program Coordinator. They both told me that I had to attend and that if I did not attend I would be subject to disciplinary action. A lot of people were not comfortable attending, but because they threatened us with disciplinary action, many just went along.

I finally spoke to the Program Director who then was the nail in the coffin in stating that if I did not attend I would be subject to disciplinary action. An individual who also felt the same as I did decided not to attend and he was expelled and suspended from the program. They even had the Georgetown Police (Department of Public Safety) escort him out. He refused to attend the workshop from the beginning, and we both felt uncomfortable but they refused to respect our ideas. I just went along with the flow, but I was uncomfortable. The other student was expelled from the program because of his religious and political beliefs.”

**LGBTQ=Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning people (people who are questioning their sexuality/gender)

Kira took the liberty of uploading this exclusive video which we received (from an source we will not name) exposes a small portion of this “tolerance” workshop. Here it is:

According to a second source (who shall also remain anonymous) that student was none other than Mr. Jarrett Roby, who according to his profile on a social media site is a “disciple of Christ”. According to that source it is he whom the CMEA had thrown out by the Georgetown police because of his religious beliefs! How ironic is that? He refused to attend a class on “tolerance”of the LGBTQ community rights and “those different than we are” and those who were attempting to coerce him to take the workshop showed him zero tolerance for his faith. It seems as though those persons are the ones needing the tolerance workshop. What is even more shocking is that this would occur on the campus of Georgetown University – the oldest Jesuit and Catholic university in the country.

So what is next – will an atheist be forced to take a workshop on theology or “religious tolerance”? Will a vegetarian be required to eat meat or take a class on butchering a pig? I have to also wonder if in this “tolerance workshop” members of the LGBTQ community were taught to tolerate those of us who exercise our first amendment right to practice the religion of our choice and adhere to it’s practices. You see, contrary to liberal media portrayal, it’s not that Christians (or members of any religion which prohibits homosexual lifestyles) are “intolerant” of the LGBTQ community, for we dislike the sin of homosexual lifestyles but most certainly not homosexuals themselves. In fact, in my blog Conservative Calmversation, I dealt with the issue of unequal sin condemnation among Christians here. I had the pleasure of communicating with Jarrett via social media and confirmed this story and he explained how this situation unfolded. Here is what he shared in his own words:

Me: “How are you Jarrett? My name is Talitha McEachin I’m a writer/blogger for several conservative political sites including CainTV , KiraDavis.net and other sites. I heard about your dismissal from the summer program at GU because of the “Gay tolerance”class and as a Christian & Conservative it makes me VERY upset that they would trample all over your beliefs & force you to take a class (well try to. I’m writing an article about it now). Can you tell me what happened? What made you decide to stand your ground rather than just taking the class in order to stay in the program.”


JR: “
Hello. Thank you for contacting me. I am doing well. I’m just greatly saddened about the situation. Officially, the program directors will say I was dismissed from the program because I left 3 of the Ra’s {Resident Advisers} feeling physically threatened. However I never mentioned anything remotely violent or did anything violent. Also I am confident that all of my peers would support the fact that I have never showed an ounce of violence and any such claims are flawed. The directors of the program who dismissed me said that their reasoning may not be fair, but they were not going to ask for a general consensus of me.

Considering this, I believe I was asked to leave the program because I took a conservative stand against a liberal ideology and liberal group of people who are in charge of the program. Every scholar apart of the program was signed up for an LGBTQ seminar for Monday (July 23). My friend, _____________, and I decided this was a seminar we would not attend. I am a devout Christian so I have no animosity in my heart toward any man whether he is gay or straight. I am required to love all people and I try my best to do so. I have no problems with homosexuals because it is the natural and God given right to be with whom they want to be with (Freewill). I do not support Gay rights, but as a supporter of the US constitution I do tolerate them.


Because I have an established view point on LGBTQ I did not think it was necessary for me to go to the seminar.
I approached a RA privately with my appeal on Sunday and it was automatically shut down and I was told I could expect to be written up if I did not go to the seminar. I held my peace and persisted with the idea of not going. Later that night other students got wind that ____ and I were not planning on going to the seminar. We were automatically attacked and deemed “closed-minded” and “ignorant”. In the mist of this rising confrontation I began to speak up to try and explain to other scholars how I was not trying to be intolerant. During this discussion the same three RAs that decided that they felt physically threaten tried to stop the conversation and send everyone to their rooms before the established curfew.

I once again spoke up in protest of the early curfew and with an appeal that everyone calms down and back off. As the intensity died down it was clear that the RAs had personal biases toward LGBTQ and were against anyone who spoke against it. I heard the RAs say negative things about me but I didn’t respond because once everything died down it was curfew and I did not want to turn a political debate into and emotional onslaught.

The next day I was called in by the program directors and told my actions during the informal debate had reassured the RAs feeling of being threatened. I was told that there had been a meeting with the RA’s and it was decided that I could not stay because 3 RAs were scared for the safety. I believe a true injustice was done to me. I am not looking for revenge, but I am trying to help stop injustice.”

Folks, this young (18 years old) Christian Conservative man has stood his ground for the biblical principles he holds dear and for that I applaud him. What he is saying is that by virtue of accepting Christ and adhering to the teachings of Christ, he is already tolerant of not only the LGBTQ community but all others “different than him”. The interesting thing is that on the website description of the workshop there is no information regarding this workshop as a part of the program, however, to be fair, Jarrett says he learned of this workshop when he arrived on campus for the program as it was in his itinerary: 

Me: Did you express your concern about attending to anyone early on?

JR: No, I did not express my concern about attending early on. I felt like the problem would best be solved near the date and I thought I’d easily be excused from this workshop if I expressed concern based on my religious faith.

Me: Did they tell you you’d be disciplined or possibly kicked out for not attending this workshop early on at the start of the program or was that included in your written itinerary?

JR: They told us that we could receive disciplinary action of we missed some on the itinerary. But I definitely thought I could make an appeal for the LGBTQ seminar because of personal views if I didn’t attend.

Me: Did they give you a reason why you needed this workshop or explain why it was required? After all, Georgetown is a Catholic university.

JR: No, not at all.

Me: Now that you have read the account of the other witness whom I cannot name, is their version of events accurate in your opinion?

JR: Yes that account is accurate. It’s just a broader version of events.

Me: How has this affected your excitement about attending GU in the Fall? Do you think the CS program represents Georgetown’s core values? After all it’s a religious based university.

JR:I Think Georgetown is a great school. I think the CS program is a good program just misguided and biased in some of their approaches. I’m still looking forward to attending GU in the fall and I trust that it will be a good experience.

I want to thank Jarrett Roby for sharing his story with me. I also applaud him for not only sticking to his guns but being so gracious and appreciative for his upcoming Georgetown education. Unfortunately his story (the general discrimination assuming all testimonies are accurate) is one that has become all too familiar. In our society’s efforts to secure rights and tolerance for the LGBTQ community (which I don’t disagree with, they should not be discriminated against), we have begun trampling over the rights of those who do not support such lifestyles based on their religion. He simply did not want to participate in a class that is an effort to inculcate and indoctrinate the homosexual lifestyle acceptance agenda which is contrary to his faith and neither would I. Can you imagine, that at a prominent Catholic University, a young black Christian Conservative is thrown out of a summer program for minority scholars because of his refusal to be subjected to teachings contrary to his religious faith? Shame on the CMEA and Georgetown University! Newsflash CMEA and Georgetown University: Jarrett, myself and millions of other Christians are already as tolerant as we need to be by extending the love of Christ to anyone regardless of their background, age, sexual orientation, race, gender, nationality and a host of other categories.

Jarrett is a perfect example of how to stand your ground amid liberal attempts to make homosexual lifestyles normative and mainstream. If this is any indication of how he will grow and mature as a college student, then perhaps he or others like him will be the first fiscally and socially responsible black president. How is it that Jarrett, an 18 year old college student and a Christian, can refuse to give in to the liberal homosexual agenda yet Barack Obama, 50 years old and another self-professed Christian, caves under the pressure of the LGBTQ community on same sex marriage. Jarrett needs to have a courage workshop and Barack Obama needs to be required to attend it. You don’t have to succumb to the homosexual lifestyle agenda in order to respect them as human beings and treat them fairly. The homosexual members of my family know that I love them but they also know that I mean business when I say that based on my faith I abhor their lifestyle choice. I don’t need to be taught to tolerate their lifestyle because my faith says that all that I have to do is love them. The very fact that this workshop, which is not academic in nature, is being required under the threat of disciplinary action, demonstrates in and of itself a lack of tolerance on the part of those over the program – the very principle they are trying to teach. I have no problem with a voluntary workshop of this nature but coercion never produces tolerance, only resentment and perhaps even intolerance.

What also is very striking is that as per Jarrett’s account and that of the witnesses, these three resident advisers felt “physically threatened” by this young scholar, so much so that they utilized the Georgetown Police to remove him from the premises. Since liberals are so great at detecting “coded language” here’s a translation we all can agree with <sarcasm alert>: He’s black, somewhat large in stature, black, a Christian, black, a Conservative…black…a teenager…black…so we need to call the police and have him thrown out…Did I mention that Jarrett Roby is black? These “tolerant” people who allegedly threw this teenager out with police escorts are the type of people who rail against alleged conservative intolerance but refused to even hear Jarrett out completely.

Kira Davis was scheduled to interview Jarrett Roby on her internet radio show “The Dark Side” on 7-24-12 however, he changed his mind & declined the appearance. She did however, replay a portion of a recorded telephone conversation and read/discussed the various eyewitness statements, here is the recording. Kira received the following emailed response from Stacy Kerr from the Georgetown Communications office earlier today regarding the Roby situation:

“All new students at Georgetown University participate in programming and orientations to prepare them to be successful in a university environment that is inclusive and respectful of diverse groups of people. During orientation all news students participate in Pluralism in Action, a session exploring issues related to diversity and tolerance.Some specific programs, like the Georgetown Community Scholars Summer Program, give us the benefit of time over the summer to address issues in more depth. In addition to diversity, some examples of this in-depth programming include sessions on financial literacy and healthy relationships.In the instance that students make administrators aware of religious or personal objections to any training or programs, the university works to provide alternative approaches to fulfill these requirements in concert with students’ beliefs”.

I also received this anonymous response from another eyewitness who does not agree with the eyewitness accounts above:

“This is really sad how blown out of proportion this is getting. The sources are faulty and biased. I’m a Community Scholar and I am witness to the situation that night. Jarrett was in fact, loud and aggressive. These articles on the situation overly-victimize Jarrett and throw dirt on people who do not deserve it. They explained to us that he was dismissed not because of that incident, but because of a series of other incidents that he has been involved in. He was on probation in regards to the higher authorities of the program. He was not removed because of his beliefs nor was he singled out because of his beliefs. His approach was extremely aggressive and inappropriate and it left many people hurt, in fear, and upset. Of course, his best friends will “attest” to what they claim happened and it is unfortunate how it is being portrayed. ________, the other “conservative” involved, hid behind the shadows of Jarrett as Jarrett went off on a rage that night. _______ said things like “I’m going to get my lawyer!” _______ is the recorder of the video shot during the LGBTQ workshop (WORKSHOP NOT TRAINING).

These articles are out of line and exemplifies how unreliable the media is. It is unfortunate how quickly Jarrett bit the hand that fed him. The very least he could do is own up to his mistakes, learn from them humbly, and go on with life. Exaggerating, falsifying information, and completely sugarcoating his way to sympathy is pathetic and childish. 100% of us could not and WILL not vouch for him because his antics were very offensive, uncalled for, and frightening (not because of what he believes, but how far he would go verbally to make them clear).This has nothing to do with race. There are two white kids out of 52 of us. We are all minorities, including the higher authorities of this program with whom made the decision that Jarrett had to leave. Campus police being called is normal protocol for someone who is being dismissed. They are ensuring the safety of everyone on campus by escorting him out of the front gates. By being dismissed, he no longer had a reason to remain on campus, therefore STOP VICTIMIZING HIM AND SUGARCOATING THE SITUATION. So sad how someone can bash their own school, especially in order to avoid learning from one’s mistakes. Humble YOURSELVES!”

Well, there you have it, and each person can decide for themselves which version of events they find the most plausible. Of course, even with my own provocative opinions, I was not there. I know that some liberals and members of the LBGTQ community may call me “homophobic” (a misnomer I fear nor hate anyone) and others might say that I am “playing the race card”. The latter group may be correct for once. My response is a simple one: You’re damn right I’m not only playing the race card but I’m calling out the liberal agenda with it as well.I hope you all are paying close attention because this story, Jarrett’s story, is one such case where the race card has been put to proper use for once.

 
21 Comments

Posted by on July 24, 2012 in Breaking News, In The News, Politics

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Should Christians Vote For Mitt Romney?

Should Christians Vote For Mitt Romney?

Friends, I’m excited about tomorrow, Sunday July 15th, 2012 because I have the pleasure of hosting a discussion with two great Conservative friends of mine – Hassan Narullah and Walter Myers III, who are fantastic Christian, Conservative bloggers in their own right. We will be discussing the controversial topic of “Should Christians vote for Mitt Romney?” There are some Christians who say that we should not for various reasons and others still, who say that it does not matter. The first amendment gives all Americans the freedom of religion and I am of the opinion that the religious preference of any candidate should not matter (unless of course they happen to be a Satanist but that’s just me!). Everyone is welcome to join us and I am looking forward tot his because it should be very interesting! Again, this conference call/webinar will take place on tomorrow, July 15th, 2012 at 9pmEDT/6pmPDT. You can listen by calling (309)944-9515 and entering access code 2058409 when prompted. Also, the chatroom will be open online just click http://www.anymeeting.com/WebConference/default.aspx?ip_ek=TheElements1

We look forward to having you!

Walter Myers III

Talitha McEachin

Hassan Narullah

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 14, 2012 in Politics, Religion, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Walter Myers III: Has the Black Church Become a Socialist Political Organization?

Walter Myers III: Has the Black Church Become a Socialist Political Organization?

My brilliant friend Walter Myers III knocks it out of the ball park with this one:

Last week, the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) church, which is the oldest religious denomination in America, hosted Michelle Obama as a keynote speaker at their General Conference. They were impressed with her “commitment to family” and her “leadership” in fighting childhood obesity. Now the Obamas are a lovely family, but as people of influence, it is not just a matter of what they are, but just as importantly what they stand for. And the Obamas stand for anything but family values in terms of actual policies and positions. In fact, Michelle Obama, during Barack Obama’s campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, wrote a fundraising letter defending the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion. In this letter, she argued that the federal ban on partial-birth abortion was “flawed law” that was “clearly unconstitutional.” She closed the letter with a promise that if Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he would keep George Bush from appointing a Supreme Court justice that would vote against Roe v. Wade (the Supreme Court decision that stated a woman had a constitutional right to an abortion).

In 1997, while an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama opposed a ban on partial-birth abortion.  In 2001, he was the only senator to speak against the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) which would have protected babies who survived a late-term abortion. Essentially, if a nine-month old fetus, against all odds, survived an abortion, Barack Obama did not believe the child had a right to live, so it should be denied any medical assistance and left to die. He subsequently led opposition against this bill in 2002, and eventually killed the bill in 2003 at a committee meeting in which he presided as chairman. The bill referenced fully born infants, but nonetheless, Obama felt a “previable fetus” does not qualify as a human person. We already know that he is unsure if life begins at conception, but apparently he’s not sure even if a fetus is in its ninth month of development.  And clearly, his wife, Michelle Obama is in complete agreement with him. Well, so much for their “commitment to family.” How the AME church missed these facts is highly troubling, and indicates that like the Obamas, the Bible may not be their ultimate authority either.

To continue reading click here.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 8, 2012 in Featured Guest blogs, Religion

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Walter Myers III: Closer To Truth?

Walter Myers III: Closer To Truth?

This past week I had a married couple as guests at my home, and as usual when they come to visit we invariably get around to discussing religion since Philosophy of Religion & Ethics is my current course of study. I’m not sure if they are agnostics or simply skeptics, though my guess is that it is more the latter. Both are highly intelligent and moral folks who are concerned with living good lives, being kind to others, donating to good causes, and being loving, attentive parents to their young children. But they tend to look strongly askance at anything of a religious nature, though they admit there are some good things that come out of religion that are beneficial to society. Fundamentally, John and Sharon (not their real names), are skeptical that any of my efforts in studying religion necessarily allow me to get any closer to truth than anyone else, no matter how much I may study. Why do they conclude this, and am I simply wasting precious time and energy studying philosophy? Since they both feel there are other people who study as much as I do yet come to different conclusions, their logic is that we cannot get to truth since everyone doesn’t necessarily come to the same conclusions concerning the existence of God, or further that Christ is indeed the Son of God who died on a cross and resurrected on the third day.

At core, John and Sharon have the view that what may be true for me, and others that accept Christ, may not be true for others who accept some other religion such as Islam or Hinduism, or who simply conclude that all religions are false. But it’s okay if it’s true for me and provides some benefit, and I shouldn’t be naive in believing that my truth might actually apply to them or others. I didn’t explain that this view is the typical postmodern thinking that Americans have gradually accepted over the past 40-50 years, which posits that there are no overarching, universal truths. Truth, according to postmodern thought is simply a social construct and a creation of the human mind. Yet John and Sharon admit that in their everyday lives, they behave as if there are universal truths. They feel that stealing is wrong, murder is wrong, and that it is not okay to abuse children. But if there is no such thing as objective truth, then why would they live their lives as if it is so, even asserting there are indeed some moral imperatives as just described? It is wholly inconsistent to on the one hand believe that everything is relative and evolving, while at the same time making statements as to how a certain state of affairs ought or should be when things are constantly undergoing change. If everything is relative and truth is what you make it, then the words oughtor should are in effect meaningless when used in communication.

While John and Sharon are skeptical there is objective truth, and that Christianity could even accord with truth, it is an interesting thing we all agreed that the moral sense of right and wrong is fairly universal within the human race. Even those who choose to do wrong (presuming they are normally functioning) know implicitly what is the good or right thing to do, but simply choose not to do the good or right thing because they have the free will to reject it. This sense of moral order in the universe is, in theological terms, called common grace, since it may be apprehended by all and is common to all humankind. So herein we may reasonably conclude that even though there is nothing we can know exhaustively, common grace can be reasonably construed (in an epistemic sense) as an objective truth, and is true wholly independent of whether we give it cognitive assent or not. In essence, I’m arguing that on this basis, John and Sharon would be wise to conclude that there are indeed some objective moral truths that are not just true for some, but true for all, including them. In other words, truth is truth, and truth has no dependency on them, yet it is there for them to ascertain should they choose to accept it. I feel they sense this, but are somehow afraid of the consequences of accepting this view.

To continue reading click here

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 15, 2012 in Philosophy, Religion

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gerald Harrison: Chiropractors Wanted

Gerald Harrison: Chiropractors Wanted

The latest blog from my friend & fellow Christian Conservative Gerald Harrison of Watchman’s Corner:

As we are seeing our heroes in the faith such as Chuck Colson graduating to be with Jesus, I begin to ponder not only my relationship with the Master, but our world where we live in general – and America, in particular.   How far we have come from the Founder’s vision of freedom from tyranny through the conduit of religious liberty.  Fast forward 235 years from our founding and our country resembles more of the twisted cross of Nazi Germany than the stars and stripes of America.   While poll researchers’ data shows that this nation is overwhelmingly Christian, this version of Christianity is little more than surface deep.  More to the point this nation resembles more of George Romero’s “Night of the Living Dead” than “Onward Christian Soldiers”.

How have we strayed off the path that the Founders have laid out for us?  Two ways.  First, we have said as a nation that we do not want God in our affairs:  whether they are social, economic, or political.  Secondly, and most important, We don’t teach what a Biblical worldview is from our pulpits.  So is it any wonder that a Biblical worldview is not seen in society? It’s because it’s conspicuously absent from the pew…

To continue reading click here

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 14, 2012 in Featured Guest blogs, Religion

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Christianity & Equal Opportunity Sin Condemnation

Christianity & Equal Opportunity Sin Condemnation

I think that one of the reasons that many view Christians as religious bigots when the topic of the day is dealing with homosexuality is because many of us Christians are very inconsistent with condemning all sinful behavior or immoral lifestyle choices equally. We whisper and gossip about the rumors within the church of the woman sleeping around with another woman’s husband – adultery. We might think badly of the fornication of single members of our church but we don’t always confront or condemn this behavior. We may know that a member is smoking marijuana, drinking excessively, beating his or her spouse or stealing and we may even be vocal about it, but not nearly as loudly or with such fervor as we do the homosexuality in our midst. Homosexuality, in my opinion, more than any other sin, is treated as the sin of all sins – the ultimate abomination to Jesus Christ. The swan song of morality. It is regarded as something that is so unnatural, vile and repugnant to us that if we don’t speak up against anything else, we’ll speak up against it – well many of us but most certainly not all.

The very idea that two men or two women would physically & emotionally embrace one another in the manner which the word of God has clearly designed and preserved for one man and one woman is so repulsive to us and quite rightfully so because it is repulsive to Christ. Before someone comments mentally or otherwise that I am a bigot, note that I am speaking of the acts themselves as repulsive, not the person committing them. Now I’m not arguing that we should not view homosexuality in this way, but why aren’t the other sins named and others, equally repugnant to us? None of us are perfect, although I think we should be striving for it as best we can. Even if we are not physically manifesting the sins named, many of us are thinking about dating or sleeping with other men or women when we are married, even if that person is married – we lust and are enticed by sins of the flesh constantly, well I know that I am, if I am being honest with myself. Matthew 5:28 tells us unequivocally that:

“But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his mind.”

Many of us, without manifesting the sin of adultery itself, have been guilty of it repeatedly without giving it a second thought– think about that. Many of us are “in the closet” with our manifestations of heterosexual perversions. So how dare we point a harsher finger (keyword harsher not that a finger should not be pointed at all) at those who sin openly because we feel morally superior in the moment, because no one knows about our sins or we are not sinning in the same way that homosexuals are or committing an allegedly “worse”sin. My father, Leroy “Lee”McEachin (RIP) had a great method for keeping his mind on things that were pure and righteous – he constantly studied and memorized the word of God. When he was on the job he would read over and over again scriptures that were written on the back of his business cards. One of the gifts he received from me one year was his favorite – a small hand held electronic Bible which he used so much the markings on the keys became worn and faded in just under two years. When I was a child our home was filled with conspicuous postings of scriptures on bright orange poster board – above the sink where we brushed our teeth, on the refrigerator, which some members of my house accessed more than others (smile Lance, my brother) and on the mirrors of our bedrooms where we glanced, or stared for hours (okay guilty as charged). Obviously, he too, was not perfect but the habit that he passed along to my siblings and I through his actions more than words, was to commit the scriptures to memory for our spiritual survival in this world full of sins of all types and more importantly, our minds – the devil’s playground. Back then I didn’t appreciate this habit so much but now as an adult I completely understand. After speaking with other fellow Christians about this matter, one of them said to me:

“..i(the church & I know this person didn’t mean all churches) doesn’t view all (non-violent) sin equally. It looks the other way on premarital sex, and is now warming up to same-sex marriage because it doesn’t want to be confrontational, unfair, bigoted, homophobic, etc. The church is just all too willing to be just like the world instead of shining light on darkness. That’s why Christians are trying to find all sorts of excuses to go along and get along on same-sex marriage. I guess they’re just tired of getting beat up. The bottom line is they won’t be able to squirm away from this one so easily.” 

I am in strong agreement with this person. Now back to those non-homosexual sins; I have found none and believe that there is no biblical evidence that the sin of homosexuality is greater than others such as adultery or lying for example. If someone has it, please share it and I will retract that statement after consulting with trustworthy Christian scholars on the matter (trustworthy to me). I submit to you, that the bigotry accusations, due to the view of homosexuality, hurled at Christians, are misguided and misdirected because in our faith, which we have the constitutional freedom to pursue in America, we are taught in Colossians 3:5:

“So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with sexual immorality, impurity, lust and evil desires.”

and also in Galatians 5:19-21:

“When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear: sexual immorality, lustful pleasures, idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division, envy, drunkenness,wild parties, and other sins like these. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God.”

The Bible outright forbids and expresses disdain for the practice of homosexuality in the Old and New testaments:

Leviticus 18:22:

“You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman.”

Romans 1:26:

“That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against thenatural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other.”

I could just as quickly and logically hurl accusations of non-religious bigotry at those who hurl them at Christians but I’m not a fan of ad hominems, so I won’t do that. Instead let me emphasize that although marriage is licensed and taxes are collected from the institution of marriage by the government, the institution itself is a predecessor of government. One thing that religious and governmental institutions once universally agreed on is the belief that heterosexual unions in marriages were the best environments for rearing and protecting children. Consider this, nearly 75% of America’s population says that they are of the Christian faith and Christianity is not the only religion which opposes homosexual lifestyles. When our governing officials attempt to re-define marriage in ways that many citizens oppose based on the tenets of their religious faith, they are in fact launching a direct assault on our liberties and legislating morality for all.

Instead of our current president Barack Obama’s recent open support of gay marriage, and in light of his strong views on the separation of church and state, his only response to the topic should have been in support of states’ rights to democratically decide the legality of non-traditional marriage. At least this way, religious and non-religious citizens alike, on both sides of the argument maintain their choices on this decision where they reside. It is in this tradition that the members of the highest court of our nation – the Supreme Court, can maintain their personal opinions while fairly and objectively rendering legal decisions. For Christians, if the vote is in their favor they can rejoice when the legal mandates are in harmony with their personal beliefs and respect them when they are not, although they should still be able to vocalize disapproval, without the ever present stigma of being labeled a “bigot”, which is etymologically fallacious anyway. A bigot is a person who is viciously and utterly intolerant of a differing creed, belief or opinion. Expressing disagreement in and of itself does not merit intolerance. Many Christians simply agree to disagree with non-theists on the matter, and cast their votes accordingly. Christians, if we were to voice our dissent on non-homosexual sins such as adultery just as quickly, adamantly and loudly as we do at homosexual lifestyle choices, perhaps the non heterosexual community would not be so quick to label us “bigots”. Don’t get me wrong, we don’t live to avoid labels from non-believers but Mark 16:5 states:

“And he said to them, Go into all the world and proclaim the Gospel to the whole creation.”

and Matthew 28:19-20:

“Go therefore to make disciples of all of the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Predestination arguments aside, how are we to achieve this with hypocrisy red herrings regarding the sins we unequally stand against as obstacles? Again, either way this label is unfair, however, we are spiritually charged with the task of and justified in expunging all sin from among us, as much as we possibly can. We must treat the sin of adulterers, liars, fornicators and so forth with equal spiritual condemnation. It is not the fact that we speak out against homosexual lifestyle choices that is problematic, it is the manner in which we treat other sins, equally forbidden in the Bible, as if they render a cooler place in hell or a warmer place in heaven if the offenders are not repentant. I spoke with another colleague who is a self-professed “gay Christian” He says:

I believe that gay persons are born this way. Since many in the gay community are guilty of fornication and promiscuous, the church should advocate gay marriages in order to discourage sexual promiscuity and the spread of diseases just as they do for heterosexuals

There are several errors in his logic and views among other things but I’ll say this – personally, I think that those in the church who believe that “some people are born gay” and use this as an argument to justify their support of gay marriage are wrong. What we are all born into is sin:

“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me…” Psalms 51:5

I believe that we have different inclinations towards different sins and some have an attraction towards the same gender. This alone is not the troublesome issue but rather the fulfillment of such desires in active homosexual lifestyle choices. This is the same problem for sinners whose inclination is for premarital sex who become practicing fornicators. We will either choose the path of hedonism or seek to be forgiven and quell those desires through the teachings of Christ and fellowship with the righteous. So I say to believers under the cyber sound of my voice, that if we want take charge of the religious and general narrative on sexual lifestyle choices in light of morality and be taken seriously, we must first, like my father, form habits which encourage and foster pure thoughts and leave little room for sinful impurities. Then once this habit is formed, we must develop an equal opportunity philosophy towards all sinners, regardless of which one they choose to indulge, including ourselves. Either way, quiescence in the face of sin is equivalent to approval and sin type based, biased, vociferous condemnation is hypocritical. Balance, which is always my personal goal, is found in the scriptures, when applied equally to sin inclination demographics.

Image

 
4 Comments

Posted by on May 23, 2012 in Religion, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: