Showing posts with label God and Country. Show all posts
Showing posts with label God and Country. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

BSA Leadership

 “It's not hard to make decisions when you know what your values are.” 
― Roy Disney




“On my honor, I will do my best 
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; 
To help other people at all times; 
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”

Sitting in an Eagle Board of Review a few weeks ago I considered what the scout in front of me was swearing to. I considered this boy, almost a man, and the promise he made.  As I’d known him in his Cub Scout days as well, I had a pretty good handle on the type of young man he was.  I reflected on the Oath he was making and it struck me that I would no longer be able to be certain that future scouts would be able to demonstrate in honesty what the oath required.

“I will do my duty to God…”  Please notice this is not an all-inclusive “little ‘g’ god.  This is a term of reverence used to specify the Christian God.  Not Buddha, or Allah or Krishna or other gods.  Although Boy Scouts is not specifically a Christian organization, in this instance the oath represents a Christian God.

That same Christian God specifically calls us to stand for what is right, follow His judgments and obey His laws.  One of the laws that He instructs us to follow is to keep our bodies sexually pure.  And, in specific, He warns against sex between same-sex persons and encourages either remaining abstinent or marriage between a man and woman. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27).

To keep myself…morally straight.”

BSA has made a financial decision to change their “timeless” values to reflect the current belief that sexual choices are a personal decision.  However, in a youth organization that presumes to protect those young people; whether physically or emotionally; allowing anyone with destructive sexual choices into an organization can only lead to injury and damage to the same youth it promises to protect. 

I have served the organization in many facets for many years and completely supported the program and the opportunities it provided for scouts of all beliefs and backgrounds.  The belief that the value of sexual morality is of no consequence to our young men and women as they become adults is a dangerous and harmful ‘compromise’ that neither reflects timeless values or strong moral code.

It is because of that decision that will impact the lives, morals, values and futures of many youth in the organization for years to come; I have decided to terminate my membership in all areas of BSA.  This was in some ways a difficult decision as I still believe in many of the principles of the scouting program.  The decision further saddens me as I’ve already discovered that in standing for my values, I have been labeled as hateful and phobic; a misunderstanding that unfortunately reflects the consequences of standing for what one believes, instead of following the crowd and the social wind.


I wish the scouting program and all involved the best as they struggle to remain protective and active in a society that is destructive and unproductive.

Sunday, June 30, 2013

A HUGE Bottle of White-out!

I began a post on the subject of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) vs. allowing same-sex couples to marry in December of 2010.  I edited it a few times, but never posted it; after recent events, I've decided to made a few more edits and post.

This last week, the Supreme Court of the United States made a determination that not allowing same-sex marriages and their participants the same benefits as one-man-one-woman marriages was discriminatory.

I have maintained for a very long time that if our government decides to allow marriage between people solely based on love; while allowing them all the benefits of marriage (but none of the natural benefits of child-bearing); our country is doomed in many ways -- least of all in our population and economy.  This is not just a religious problem but an issue of historic proportion.

It will also open Pandora's box to a host of other related issues, including adoption/foster/child welfare, divorce and may well open the doors to polygamy and child-marriage being considered acceptable and legal.

My original blog post referenced a letter dated January 31, 1997 written by Barry R. Bedrick 
Associate General Counsel to The Honorable Henry J. Hyde, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives.  The letter addressed Mr. Hyde's query "in your September 5, 1996, letter, to identify federal laws in which benefits, rights, and privileges are contingent on marital status."

The letter and supporting documentation can be found here.

Mr. Bedrick's cover letter concludes:  The result is a collection of 1049 federal laws classified to the United States Code in which marital status is a factor. “

It continues…

“To give readers a sense of the kinds of federal laws in which marital status is a factor, we classified the laws on the list into the following 13 categories4:

  • Social Security and Related Programs, Housing, and Food Stamps
  • Veterans' Benefits
  • Taxation
  • Federal Civilian and Military Service Benefits
  • Employment Benefits and Related Laws
  • Immigration, Naturalization, and Aliens
  • Indians
  • Trade, Commerce, and Intellectual Property
  • Financial Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
  • Crimes and Family Violence
  • Loans, Guarantees, and Payments in Agriculture
  • Federal Natural Resources and Related Laws
  • Miscellaneous Laws


While we believe this classification scheme is useful for organizing the hundreds of statutes on the list, and for representing the range of federal programs and activities in which the law makes marital status relevant, it should not be regarded as definitive.

4The order of the categories is not significant, except that the first four are those in which marital status is most pervasive, and are the largest.”



Another source I read in my research was located at Great Green Room.

This post discusses the "Legal Consequences of Marriage".  

"Summary: To understand what we are talking about when we talk about extending the rights and responsibilities of civil marriage to gay couples, it is important to understand what those rights and responsibilities are. After some general discussion of what marriage is in a broader sense, this essay provides a summary of the ways in which married couples are treated specially by the law."

The author discusses what marriage is; civilly, fundamentally and religiously.  

"Public recognition of a marriage by the community, the churches and the government can be interlinked. Often a single wedding ceremony can formally establish all three. But they are still fundamentally separate. You can have a civil wedding without a religious wedding, a religious wedding without a civil wedding, and community recognition without either."

The author references the letter I used above and further clarifies a few points:  

"In 1997, when Congress asked the General Accounting Office for a summary of the Federal Laws that treat married people differently from unmarried people, their report turned up 1049 such laws. There are probably more. Even the GAO wasn't eager to do all the work necessary to make a complete list.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The fifty states each have their laws that frequently give special rights and responsibilities to married couples. Connecticut's Office of Legislative Research did a similar report on laws in which marital status was a factor, and found 588 such laws. Other states probably have about as many, all different from each other, so on the state level there are probably 30,000 laws relating to marriage. And who knows what laws various municipalities might have.

Besides that, there are also companies that give different treatment to married couples. I'm no lawyer, so I'm not sure how legalization of gay marriages will effect what private companies do, but my guess is that one way or another, most private companies would eventually fall in line with government policy.

So, here's my best list of the more significant legal effects of marriage:
  • Taxes: Taxes are different for married couples. Tax law treats a married couple almost like they were one person. This has advantages and disadvantages
  • Health Care: When a person is seriously ill and not able to make their own decisions, hospitals regularly turn to the person's spouse to make health care decisions, up to and including whether to disconnect a person from life support.
  • Judicial: Married people cannot be required to testify against each other in court.
  • Government Assistance: Married people can get higher payments from some government assistance programs, including Medicaid, supplemental security income, and federal employee and veteran's disability payments.
  • Death Benefits: If your spouse dies, you may be eligible for a wide range of different benefits.
  • Bankruptcy: Married couples can file jointly for bankruptcy which can be beneficial.
  • Immigration and Citizenship: Spouses of legal aliens are automatically legal and are not subject to immigration quotas.
  • Divorce: The legal system often provides mediation services and expedited hearings for married couples who are breaking up.
  • Government Employment: Spouses of veterans can get preferential treatment in hiring for government jobs.
  • Retirement Plans: Changing the benefits in a retirement plan often requires written consent from your spouse.
  • Domestic Violence: There are state and federal laws relating to the special circumstance of domestic violence.
  • Parenthood: If a married woman has a baby, her husband is assumed to be the father.
  • Adoption: In some states, it may be necessary for a couple to be married to be able to adopt children. 
[I've only listed the topic headings; not all of the post.  Please read for yourself for more details.]


Of course, with any relationship, there can always be a break-up.  Divorce is messy enough between one-man-one-woman marriages:  Division of assets, custody and visitation for the children, child support, etc.  Courts have traditionally awarded custody to the mother for many years, birth parents take priority over adoptive or foster parents in many custody cases and then there's the discussion and medical web of surrogate parents and donors.  This entire process will feed the court systems for a great many years while no one truly wins (does anyone win in divorce now?).


So, now that the President of the United States, the government and the Supreme Court have upheld the "right for everyone to marry", they will be required to change 13 categories of the tax code in addition to a host of other legal and religious rulings.  Changing the definition from “one man and one woman” in any way will allow for marriage and civil unions of all modes to be recognized.  If marriage is no longer between one man and one woman, but between consenting persons, then what defines “consent”?  What determines "person"? You cannot define consent by age or race or gender or species; moreover you would need to open consent to any being that did not disagree with the union

Can the government expect to deny the right to marry to anyone who says they're in love?  Is love is any less real and strong between a 14 year old and a 50 year old than between two persons of close age?  Can it be upheld as law that if love between two is acceptable, then love between more must be as well?  Can it still be considered illegal for cousins or relatives to marry?

What about the states that have not yet allowed same-sex marriages?  Will they be forced to uphold the federal standards instead of their state laws?  At what point will the government override the beliefs of many churches and religions that have to this point been able to refuse to marry couples that do not share their beliefs?  The government has already been asked to rule about businesses who choose not to serve clients based on difference of beliefs; in Colorado, Washington and New Mexico, just to name a few.  

Changing the availability of marriage to be a "right" is dangerous ground to tread; and one not easily swallowed by many people.  20 years ago I would have never dreamed that people of the same sex would be allowed to be lawfully married and have the same standing as couples who married to follow their religious and moral beliefs about family, love and children.

If marriage is only about love and benefits and rights, then it demeans the beauty of the vows for every person; regardless of sexual orientation.

Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.
Alexis de Tocqueville 



Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
George Washington 





Tuesday, March 12, 2013


I haven’t written much about this subject because it’s bound to upset someone and, knowing that I’ll hurt someone’s feelings or make them mad, I’ve tried to avoid the issue in general discussion.

Let’s talk about Boy Scouts of America and homosexuality.

I’d like to start off by saying that I don’t hate homosexuals, nor do I wish them any harm.  I don’t know how God will decide if they go to heaven or not and I don’t have the answers regarding why some people are “born that way” or not.  I also don’t understand bacon-maple-bars or why anyone would jump out of (perfectly good) airplanes, but that doesn’t make maple bars or sky-divers wrong or evil.  I don’t think AIDS/HIV is God’s punishment for homosexuality (but it is a consequence just like pregnancy is a consequence of sex).  I don’t find homosexuals creepy or scary or evil.

But, I don’t agree with them either.  Marriage isn’t a right for anyone.  Sex was designed for the creation of children.  Yes, we as a species enjoy the act of sex – to my knowledge we were designed to do so.  But sex is not just about pleasure and love; it’s about making babies.  Biologically, physically, emotionally, it’s hard for me to rationalize that our bodies that were made to fit like two puzzle pieces – man and woman – should be used in a way that doesn’t fit.  It’s like two negative sides of a magnet.  They push away; they don’t attract like a negative and a positive.

However, I don’t get to decide who anyone else is attracted to or even who they marry or have sex with.  And, I can’t honestly say I understand why God would “allow” same sex attraction when he specifically forbids it in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.  I know that adultery and substance abuse are spoken against in the Bible as well as other things that God considers sin.  I also know that God gives us, his creations, free will so that we can choose to obey his laws or go against them. 

Sermon over; opinion starting.

Boy Scouts of America is a PRIVATE organization and not open to everyone.  It’s not open to girls (although allows female leaders); it’s not open to children under the age of 6 and over 21.  And, as the organization lays out its membership “rules” in every book and manual, it’s not a surprise that they expect there to be a moral code.

I won’t argue what morality is or if people choosing to live against God’s laws can be moral or not.  We’re all sinners and there are really no levels of sin (although there are some sins listed as abhorrent).  It’s not like alcoholics will have a different level of salvation than murders or rich people than poor.  Our salvation is based on choice and our willingness to live according to God’s laws is how I believe God judges our eternal reward.
 
BSA specifically states that they have a moral code and that members must have some sense of religion or spirituality.  Scouts at every rank level are asked to review their family’s religious beliefs.  BSA is available in many countries and open to many religions including Muslim, Catholic, Buddhist, Jewish, Orthodox and Protestant.  (Wikipedia)
Robert Baden Powell felt strongly about religion – specifically Christianity – in the program saying “We aim for the practice of Christianity in their everyday life and dealings, and not merely the profession of theology on Sundays…” (Scouting for Boys, Baden-Powell, Oxford University Press). 
Christianity has several references to same-sex relationships, marriage and homosexuality in the Bible; Islam has writings in the Koran, and many other religions speak against same-sex attraction – even if they do not forbid it.
BSA is NOT a religious organization; however it is a private organization and privately funded through donations and membership dues.  It has a nationally recognized non-profit status and until recently, its membership requirements have not been questioned. 
By asking the BSA to change its membership requirements to fit the current society is not only wrong but selfish.  There are many organizations available to youth that have many of the benefits of the scouting program.  Watering down any organization to make it a one-size fits all program lessens the effectiveness of the program as a whole.
The purpose of the BSA program is to turn boys into men.  It’s not to tell them whom to love or marry or even which religion to choose. It’s not about getting straight A’s or being a mechanic or a missionary.  The program helps boys learn to be leaders and give them a comfort level with many activities and experiences they might not otherwise be able to participate in.  Learning to play marbles or shoot BB guns or use a knife safely; planning a healthy meal and perform first aid and show community and civic pride. 

None of these programs specifically tell anyone they can’t love who they want; but when it comes to the part about staying morally straight and being reverent it’s difficult for me to imagine how anyone who isn’t living according to some scriptural principle could consider themselves reverent or moral by directly disobeying specifically mentioned restrictions in a holy book; regardless of which holy book it is.
I have friends who feel very strongly that this is a discrimination issue; much like racism or slavery.  If everyone had to join the BSA in order to get into school or college or get a job, I might feel the same.  No one is forcing someone to be a scout or to live in a moral fashion.  No one is deeming which religion is right and wrong.  You’re not forbidden from drinking from a specific fountain or attending school if you’re not a scout.
In fact, unless you’re wearing your uniform or a BSA insignia, no one would know you were a scout unless you told them. You’re not required to wear a star on your coat or a caste mark on your forehead to signify your membership.  No one denies you from entering college or applying for a scholarship based on your BSA membership status.
Joining a private organization is a choice.  If you don’t like the rules, don’t join.  If you don’t want a milkshake, don’t get one.  Don’t like cars?  Ride a bike.  Hate credit cards?  Pay cash.  Don’t require everyone to follow your choices.  No one is making anyone be a Cub or a Boy Scout.  You can choose not to wear the shirt and say the oath and follow the motto.  But if you choose to join the ranks, then you’d better agree with the viewpoints of the organization instead of changing them to fit your needs.
My recommendation is that if you don’t like the game; walk away and start your own game somewhere else.  Develop your own program that includes the rules and values that you support.  Order your coffee without whip cream or with organic, free-trade beans.  But don’t make everyone else follow your values just because you feel left out or guilty or convicted.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

A little panicky

I wrote this last night when I couldn’t sleep because of my fear, anxiety, worry, confusion and uncertainty.

Yes, God is in control, but it's difficult to see His path clearly when it's all so dark. I don't know how we'll make it through but I know we will because we are children of God.

I read Bible verses on peace. 

Matthew 11:28-30 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.

John 16:33 I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”

Some of my friends don’t understand my worry.  I’m just being a “poor loser”.  I’m exaggerating.  The changes will make a better difference…

I wasn’t raised to let others take care of me when I can take care of myself (that’s why I struggle with me vs. God).  I don’t understand those who welcome ‘someone else’ taking care of their every need.  I’d rather do it myself – face the responsibility AND take the blame if I’m wrong.

I’m not sure that the difference that’s coming will be better for those of us that still believe in doing it ourselves.  I’m not sure that there will be much of a country left in another four years.  I’m not sure that my children will have any future to look forward to other than dependency and working for the betterment of everyone. 

I’m afraid that choices will be limited, if not completely done away with, unless you want to choose to live or die. 

I’m afraid that it won’t be too long before people who speak their mind, hold to their principals and face responsibility will be imprisoned for their beliefs. 

God is Holy and just and loving.  Man is evil and greedy and hateful.  God is perfect, we are not. 

Hard changes coming and I just need to remember He's got me in His hand. Lord, please give me peace and the wisdom, knowledge to follow the right path. Please help me, Lord.

Romans 8:6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace.

Colossians 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful.

Yeah though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no evil...

Thursday, November 1, 2012

How I vote


My mother used to vote a straight Republican ticket.  If they had an “R” next to their name, she selected them as her candidate.  My voting process is not so straight forward, which makes it more challenging and requires more thought.  Although I do tend to vote a fairly aligned conservative/republican ballot, my decisions involve many factors:

Party Preference
Yes, I’ll admit it’s the first thing I look at.  No, it isn’t the deciding factor, but it’s either one point for or one point against. 

Candidate Statement
I read these, usually several times.  I HATE when there’s no statement.  I think it ought to be a requirement than when you run for office you put in some kind of statement.  As I don’t know each of the candidates personally, how am I supposed to know who they are without a statement?

Business/Office Experience
Has the candidate been doing this same office for a number of years?  We need a change.  I usually vote for the one that hasn’t been doing the same position for a number of years.  The only exception to this is judges. 

Endorsements
This usually is the “closer” for me.  Based on my personal beliefs, experiences and choices, I usually find a point or an organization that helps me choose where the candidates priorities lie.  It’s a pretty good tell for me how the candidate is going to support (or not) my interests.

In the end, if I just can’t decide, I just mark the one that most closely aligns with my beliefs.  Yes, I have voted for a party other than my own; and I usually pay for that decision in the end (Maria Cantwell comes to mind…).

Voting isn’t easy – it shouldn’t be.  It means we need to stay informed on the issues, vote with our hearts and yes, pray about the candidates.  Voting means we need to take the time to listen to all side of the news, investigate a bit on the candidates and the initiatives, and read between the lines sometimes.

Vote because you have the privilege to voice your opinion.  Vote because you don't like how things are going (or you do).  Vote because you can.  But get out there and VOTE!

Sunday, August 19, 2012

Dear President Obama:



I’ve had many of my “non-conservative” friends ask me what I expect of our President.  I expect him (or her) to make promises they intend on keeping.  I expect honesty, consistency and yes, religious faith.  Political rhetoric and party affiliation put aside for a moment, I would like to list the things that I wanted you to accomplish in your first term as the President of the United States; the highest office in our free country:

  1. Encourage our people through patriotism and defending our country.  Bowing to other leaders, not saluting the flag and speaking negatively of our country does not represent our country in the way we expect our leader to conduct himself.  If you weren’t proud of this country, then WHY did you run to be President?
  2. Cut back on spending.  MOST of us that attempt to live within a budget get rid of the extra expenses like espressos, entertainment and vacations when we’re cutting back.  We don’t get new credit cards; max them out by giving money to our friends and then expect others to pay them off while vacationing and spending more than we make.
  3. Show more honesty and be more respectable than anyone else in the country.  Don’t hide your financial records, college transcripts and identification documents.  If you want us to respect you, show us you can be trusted.
  4. We all make mistakes.  Own up to yours and find a way to make them better.  Don’t blame them on someone else.
  5. Don’t tell us to cut back and spend less and then expect us to throw more money into taxes while you and your wife take expensive vacations, wear expensive clothing and travel to exotic places. 
  6.  Don’t complain that the media incorrectly context your words, actions or press releases.  Welcome to technology.  If you said it, thanks to technology, someone will have it on video with written transcripts before your press secretary can spin it differently.
  7. Don’t expect you deserve time off just because you work hard.  We elected you to work harder, smarter and longer than all of us.
  8. Donate all proceeds from your speaking engagements and books to a charitable organization (or several) of your choice.  This would have shown good faith that you mean what you say about social justice and taking care of others less fortunate.
  9. Cut off financial aid to all countries that we are constantly bailing out of trouble.  If they haven’t paid off old loans, they don’t deserve new money.  If they don’t appreciate the United States, our prosperity and our “standards”, then we’re happy to call in our loans and they can be free of the burden of our military, economic and social benefits to their countries.
  10. End our ridiculous association with the UN and other world concern organizations that only hinder our relationships with other countries and drain our finances and power.
  11. Don’t bail out companies that should fail.  The banks and the car companies that got in over their heads by faulty, illegal or bad business practices shouldn’t be rewarded for their poor choices. 
  12. Privatize medical coverage.  By this I mean that doctors and their companies should be allowed to determine their costs and who they’ll provide services to.  Medicine is a business just like banking and auto manufacturing.  My mechanic doesn’t have an issue working this way.  If I don’t like it, I go to another mechanic.  No insurance company should be able to tell me what procedures I can have performed.  If Doctors were able to take care of their patients instead of worrying about acceptable procedures, they’d have a lot more time to care for the patients that need it and at prices that would be more affordable to everyone.
  13. Support your religious values and stick by them.  If you’re going to quote the Bible, then stick with the entire Bible.  Don’t pick and choose which parts you like and which parts you don’t.  Don’t change your mind mid-stream about your convictions. 
  14. Repeal and destroy “No Child Left Behind”.  There are educational standards that every child should have to meet on an annual basis and they are pretty easy to define.  Children either know it or they don’t.  Those that don’t need help.  Those that need help can receive it from a variety of private resources. 
  15. Declare English as the only language in our country.  Do away with multi-lingual mandates that confuse and lessen the power of our communication.  They can speak all the languages they want privately and with their friends but if they can’t speak or read English, then they can’t get a driver’s license or a job or obtain citizenship. 
  16. Close the borders.  People who came here illegally (without proper documentation) need to be sent back to their country.  People who are here legally, but have not completed their citizenship documentation need to be approved for citizenship or sent back.  Fix the immigration/citizenship process so that people who follow the process and abide by our laws become citizens speedily.  Send the criminals back to where they came from.


If you had been able to keep any of your promises, and accomplished some of the items above, I might have considered voting for you this November.  Through your constant contempt and disregard of your promises, you have shown continuous contempt and disregard for your country and its people. 

This is what I'll be expecting of the candidate I vote for in November.  Will the “next guy” be any better?  I can only hope so.

Friday, August 3, 2012


Every year we are given an opportunity to have our voice heard.  Every four years that voice needs to be even louder.

I believe it is every citizen’s duty and privilege to vote.  Voting is a duty because it’s the reason the Pilgrims and other people left England and other countries to come to a new land.  They wanted to be free of the rule of one person’s decisions about their lives.  They wanted a chance to make their own decisions and their own rules and their own mistakes.

Voting is a privilege because when this country began, many people were unable to vote:  Women, slaves and the uneducated were not at liberty to vote their views.  Voting is also a religious duty as believers are to attempt to keep our country morally and ethically strong and good based on our beliefs.

Does voting always “work”?  Is my voice always the prevalent one heard?  No.  But that is not a reason to silence my voice. 

Voting is difficult; it’s not meant to be simple.  Some people vote alphabetically, some logically, some by elimination and some throw darts and mark off a dot.  My mother always voted a straight Republican ticket.  If they had an “R” next to the name, she checked it on her ballot.  I take time and read all the statements – yes, even from the democrats and independent candidates.  I look at their supporters, what service agencies they volunteer at, their family and their religious affiliation (if they mention it). 

Sometimes it’s not a clear decision.  Sometimes, there are two people who both say they represent what I believe.  And when that happens, I just make the best, educated GUESS I can and mark my ballot.  Sometimes I’m wrong.  Most times I’m in the minority (read: my “guy” loses). 

Why should you vote?  Vote because you can; because you live in a country that allows you to vote; doesn’t badger you or threaten you if you vote the “wrong” way.  You aren’t afraid of being shot or hung or having your family injured because of your vote.  Vote because people for centuries have fought for the right to vote.

Vote because you want your voice to be heard.  

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Obscure


Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

According to President Obama,
“I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told ABC News reporter Robin Roberts in an interview to air this evening.
He added that his wife, Michelle, agreed with him. “We’ve talked about it over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way,” he said.
“We are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others,” Obama stated, “but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing Himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule.
He explained his foot-dragging reticence to support full same-sex “marriage” by saying he “was sensitive to the fact that, for a lot of people, the word marriage was something that evokes very powerful traditions – religious beliefs and so forth.”
However, Obama had previously implied the Bible supports homosexual unions. “I believe in civil unions that allow a same-sex couple to visit each other in a hospital or transfer property to each other,” he said in 2008. “If people find that controversial, then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans.”

I find it interesting that, at best, President Obama is “mixing metaphors”.  He states that passages in Romans are “obscure” regarding same-sex marriage, and yet forgets an entire group of biblical passages that refer to male and female, man and wife, husband and wife and marital union between two people of opposite sex.

1 Corinthians 7:2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

If those two verses aren’t enough – I purposefully chose New Testament verses – then search for other verses about marriage in the Bible;  Genesis 1:27-28, Genesis 2:21-25, Malachi 2:14,15 just for starters.

What’s God’s description of “sexually immoral”?  

1 Corinthians 6:9–11
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
 

I think that our President also mixes his use of religious beliefs.  He can’t quote or reference a Bible verse on one hand and then throw out the rest of the Bible because it’s uncomfortable or unpopular.  Supporters of same-sex marriage like to call those who oppose it “religious bigots” and “haters” and “bullies”.  And yet, they conveniently use obscure Bible verses to show that Jesus would have approved of marriage between two men or two women.  

God is very clear on the issue of marriage, sexual relations, salvation and what HE considers sin.  The Bible is either inerrant and infallible or it’s just a nice piece of out-dated literature.  You can’t have it both ways.  You can’t support some verses of the Bible and throw the rest out with the recycling.

Friday, April 6, 2012

Free!

Why not free everything?  Don’t we all, as human beings, have a RIGHT to have: 

Free Housing    
Free food          
Free fuel
Free transit
Free cars
Free toys
Free coffee
Free medical
Free clothing
Free shoes
Free education
Free internet
Free Tele/cell phones
Free email
Free insurance
Free travel

I say we just send all of our money, stocks, paychecks and spare change to the government and then we can live free of everything!  I wonder what happens when the government runs out of money and needs to find another way to finance the “everything is free” plan…

There are two freedoms - the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought.  ~Charles Kingsley

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Demand


So, let’s say you can’t have children.  Or maybe you don’t want children.  One is a lack of ability, the other a choice.  

And now, let’s pretend that the government mandates that everyone must have at least one child and if you don’t have at least one child, you’ll be fined or put in prison.  

This poses several problems as I see it:  The people who can’t have children must either adopt (what if they don’t meet the qualifications?) or go through painful and expensive medical procedures to conceive a child (they still may not be able to conceive a child).  The people who don’t want children are being forced to care for and maintain something they don’t desire. It’s also a problem that assumes that everyone is qualified to be a parent and that being a parent is a need for the populace.

Of course then there’s the question of complying with the law:  does every person need to have a child; or just each ‘family’?  What constitutes a family?  Does blood or genetics or marriage (civil or otherwise) make a family?  Can you provide a child for a member of your family up to a certain age (i.e. it is not their child, but your ‘extra children’ cover their need)?  Are there age limits – will you need to have a child if you are 50?  60?  70?  

And there is the question of who pays?  Who pays for the procedures, the medical and educational needs?  Does everyone pay the same amount?  Will people that are proven as unsafe to children be exempt from the mandate?  Will they still have to pay?

Seem unfair?  Socialistic?  Intrusive? 

Demanding that every person have healthcare is much like requiring everyone to have a child.  Some people don’t want health care at all, some want more and some want less.  Some don’t qualify for coverage and some qualify for everything but don’t need it all.  And some wouldn’t go to the doctor even if they had coverage.  

Should everyone have healthcare?  Yes.  Is it a right?  No.  Requiring health coverage is as absurd as demanding that every person have a car or a pet or a mortgage.  Or a child.

Sunday, March 4, 2012

GOP Caucus 2012


For the first time in my voting life, I attended the Precinct Caucus for the GOP (Republican Party).  The King County Precinct was held at the Redmond VFW Hall on Saturday, March 03, 2012.  I attended with Barbara Johnston, who attended in 2008 (and was the only representative of our voting precinct that year).

We arrived approximately at 8:45 to stand in line for our registration process.  There were only about 10 people at this time and the doors weren’t scheduled to open until 9 AM.  Announcements were made about using computers to registers us, the need for both photo ID and Voter Registration Card, and a recommended (NOT required) donation of $5 per person to cover costs for the caucus.  We were informed that the remainder of unused funds would be donated to the GOP nominee campaign.  

On a side note, one of the attendees was immediately agitated that the “suggested donation” was in fact a “Poll Tax” and that we were not required to pay.  He later made a motion to notify all attendees that the party was in fact, charging a poll tax, and that it was against primary regulations.  The motion was seconded and noted in the record.  (See below for definition of “Poll Tax”).  This same attendee made another motion or two regarding items that were not relevant for this article (and in my opinion were not necessary or relevant for the caucus).

According to MSNBC, the “Caucus” is a non-binding straw poll, usually used together with the state primary to decide the candidate for the national convention.  Washington State has 43 delegates at the Republican National Convention (held August 27, 2012 in Tampa Bay, Florida).  As Washington State has no primary this election year, the candidate will be determined using the delegates (or alternates) selected at today’s caucuses; who will attend the county convention, then the state convention and finally the national convention.

As the caucus began in earnest, we located our precinct area and sat in the chairs; after most of the over 100 attendees were seated or registered (it was a SRO crowd), our King County Caucus Chair covered some housekeeping items and went over the basic agenda and format for the remaining time.  We then moved into our individual voting precinct groups, were required to sign in and state our choice for GOP candidate (where the straw poll count comes from), and then set about to appoint a Precinct Caucus Chairman and Secretary.  After the Chairman and Secretary were appointed by our group we discussed the platforms for GOP Candidates for Washington states by completing a “bubble sheet” using questions regarding the economy, health, immigration, education and several other topics.  

After our platform sheets were completed, we elected two delegates and two alternates for our voting precinct (delegate and alternate needs are determined by the size of the voting precinct).  We had a group of 10 people, and the voting was civil and informative.  At the end of our elections, we completed the forms, tallied the “votes” for presidential nominees, sealed the envelope and turned our packet into the Caucus Chairman.  

Our small group had some valid, respectful and thoughtful discussions regarding each of the three candidates.  The Straw poll for our small group of 10 voters was 1 vote Ron Paul, 2 votes Rick Santorum and 7 votes Mitt Romney.

I was impressed by the number of people in attendance, the diversity of the crowd and the organization of the volunteers.  The crowd was about 50/50 for new vs. experienced attendees and other than the few motions at the beginning regarding housekeeping items, it seemed to flow rather smoothly.  

We adjourned at 12:30 PM.

Click here for more information on “Poll Tax”

For more information on the 2012 Republican National Convention, click here.