Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Culture Shifts’ Category

Hedonism: America’s Official Religion

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Citizenship, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , , , on February 11, 2012| 2 Comments »

What follows is an article by Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse.  It was published by Dr. Morse and MercatorNet,  (2/9/2012) and reprinted with permission (see below).  Ezerwoman believes there is no need to try to write what someone else has written so well.

How Hedonism Became America’s Official Religion

An edict from the Obama administration has ended the American experiment in religious liberty.

No, I’m not exaggerating. The American experiment in religious liberty is officially over. The First Amendment provided institutional structures that allow different religions to peacefully coexist. All groups agree to not try to capture governmental structures for the benefit of their own particular denomination.

But the Obama administration has ended that truce. The administration made a decision to require all employers to provide contraception, abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization. The administration offers no religious exemption for people who have the audacity to believe that pregnancy is not an illness that needs to be always and everywhere prevented.

In effect, we have a new state religion, a new Established Church of the United States of America, with Barack Obama as its head. It is the religion of Secular Hedonism, the worldview that sex is a sterile recreational activity, with babies thrown in as an afterthought, an optional extra, for people with quirky life-style preferences. The contraceptive mandate uses the full might of the US government to scrub the public square clean of any competing religious voices that dissent from the new orthodoxy.

But because this worldview is fundamentally irrational, it cannot stand on its own two feet. Some sexual activity does result in babies. Not everyone wants their government acting as if the highest goal is that pleasure is to be sought. Not everyone believes that the purpose of the government is to allow people to indulge themselves sexually, without a live baby ever resulting.

The Catholic Church for instance, famously opposes every precept of Secular Hedonism. As a matter of fact, so did all of the Christian churches, right up until five minutes ago. The ancient Christian teaching is that marriage is the proper context for sexual activity and for child-bearing, for the good of children, women, and men alike, as well as society as a whole.

The government believes that this dissenting voice cannot be tolerated. It must be crushed. And, of course, from their point of view, they are perfectly correct. They have an established religion that says that every sexual act is intrinsically meaningless except for the meaning we might happen to assign it. They simply can’t allow someone to go around saying that each and every sexual act is sacred, and endowed by our Creator with inalienable significance. From the point of view of Secular Hedonism, Catholicism must be crushed.

And of course, anyone else who dissents from the new orthodoxy must be crushed as well. That is why so many other faith traditions have joined in criticizing the Obama administration’s usurpation of power from civil society. The National Association of Evangelicals, the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, Orthodox Christians and Orthodox Jews have all criticized the administration’s attack on religious liberty. These religious bodies know that their religious liberties are at stake as well.

The religious truce is officially over. The Established Church of Secular Hedonism has declared war on the rest of us, enlisting the might of the United States government on their side. We will respond using nothing but peaceful means.

We used to refrain from making religious arguments in the public square. We thought it was our duty. We thought it was good strategy. The Ruth Institute has specialized in defending the ancient Christian teachings, using non-religious arguments. This no longer makes sense. The arguments are still good arguments. But there is no longer any reason to hold back from proclaiming our faith. Our position deserves respect, not simply because it is our “deeply held religious belief”. Our position deserves respect because it is grounded in reason and evidence, and in a far deeper understanding of the human person, and the human good. The ancient Christian teachings on marriage, family and human sexuality are superior to the teachings of the Established Church of Secular Hedonism.

If we don’t respond firmly, the Obama Administration will assume they can get away with ending religious liberty. This website, StopHHS.org will become a clearing house of info about the insurance mandate. Go sign their petition.

Dr Jennifer Roback Morse, PhD, is the founder and president of the Ruth Institute, a project of the National Organization for Marriage.

This article by Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, PhD, was originally published on MercatorNet.com under a Creative Commons Licence. If you enjoyed this article, visit MercatorNet.com for more.

Read Full Post »

Making Wrong Choices Unthinkable

Posted in Citizenship, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , , on February 2, 2012| Leave a Comment »

It is not that Christians can make this a Christian nation.  Or a Christian culture.  We may not be able to prevent laws, such as nationalized health care which appears to mandate many practices a Christian doesn’t and can’t Biblically support.  But, Christians can choose to not do wrong things and, thus, affect their family,  neighbors, and community — one person at a time.  History records that it is possible for small groups of people to make wrong things unthinkable and even, eventually, illegal.

In Rome, it was culturally acceptable to take an unwanted, newborn baby outside the city gates and abandon the child to the elements.  It was, basically, legal.  But, Christians helped to make that behavior unthinkable by rescuing the newborns.  They took them home, adopted them, and founded orphanages.

William Wilberforce and a small group of Biblical men and women in England determined to obey God and help their country stop the practice of slavery.  It took 30 years of Wilberforce’s life.  Slavery did become illegal but, first,  it had to become unthinkable.  Christians who knew slavery was wrong helped others see the practice as economically and morally unthinkable.

What can we learn from this as we Christians in America face legalized abortion?  Legalized euthanasia?  Legalized embryonic stem cell research?  Legalized national health care?  We can choose not to engage in the procreative act of sex outside the faithfulness of marriage.  We can choose to see every human life as God sees it: so valuable that Jesus Christ would die for him or her.  We can choose to live in ways that honor the Creator of life so that even non-believers are encouraged to make choices that build a moral society.

Read Full Post »

Assault on Freedom of Religion

Posted in Citizenship, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , , on February 2, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Pliny the Younger was a provincial governor in the Roman Empire.  He asked Emperor Trajan if he should execute Christians who refused to burn incense in worship of the emperor.  “Pliny, in keeping with the customs of the empire,” writes Wesley J. Smith, “didn’t care about forcing Christians to believe that the emperor was a god.  But, in public, they had to behave as if they did.”  It wasn’t that Christians were targeted for their faith, but over their refusal to declare themselves part of the reigning social order. 

Smith, in writing his article “Free Birth Control vs. Freedom of Religion,” said he thought of Pliny when reading about the specific rules being created to implement nationalized health care.  Some of these rules seriously conflict with Christian faith and conscience.  Under nationalized health care, religious organizations will be required to provide insurance coverage for practices they believe to be morally wrong.  The “free-birth-control” rule will require all employers (with a very narrow exception) to offer their employees health insurance that provides FDA-approved contraception, female sterilization, and other “reproductive” services – free of charge.  It will not matter if the employer is a religious organization and will violate its doctrine by providing the insurance.  With such a rule, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is imposing a legal duty on faith organizations.  What is that duty?  To comply with the values of the state whenever engaging in public action or charitable enterprise among the general society.

But, what about “freedom of religion?”  More and more, U.S. officials refer to “freedom of worship” rather than “freedom of religion.”  They are not the same thing.  The former means an individual is free to believe whatever he wants and worship privately without interference.  The latter means an individual is free to express their core faith out in society even if not endorsed by the state.  Freedom of religion, as defined by the Founding Fathers, allows Christians to maintain a Christian school, hospital, or inner-city mission – true to Biblical teaching and practice — where the general public is served.   Freedom of worship would not allow that.

The specific rules of nationalized health care, as directed by HHS, knowingly force religious organizations to pay for medical services to which they are theologically opposed.  These rules represent a frontal assault on freedom of religion at an institutional level.  This is not a trivial matter.  “To date,” writes Wesley J. Smith, “public controversies over ‘conscience’ in health care have mostly involved individuals – e.g. doctors, nurses, pharmacists – whose personal morality or religious conviction conflicted with the provision of certain medical procedures or substances.”

But, explains Smith, “the free-birth-control rule goes much further than creating a potential conflict between the general law and individual religious beliefs.  Rather, the rule targets the right of religious organizations to conduct their public activities consistently with their religious dogma and moral values – except within the narrow confines of an actual church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or monastery.”  How narrow might this be?  “The group health insurance covering nuns in a Catholic religious order,” writes Smith, “would probably not have to cover contraception.  But insurance provided by the same order’s elementary school probably would.  Ditto a hospital established by the nuns.”

“Despite much screaming from opponents,” Smith explains, HHS “has refused to broaden the religious exemption in the final rule — forcing religiously founded organizations to violate their parent church’s teachings, a frontal assault on the freedom of faiths to operate institutional outreach organizations consistent with their beliefs.  If this rule stands, it won’t end there.  If Catholic organizations can be compelled by federal diktat to violate their religious tenets, so can other religious organizations in different contexts.”  According to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, even if a religious employer does not cover contraceptive services, they are to tell where such services can be obtained.  “Thus,” observes Smith, “the Obama administration is attacking even freedom of worship by forcing exempt organizations to tell their employees where and how they can violate church teachings.”

“This birth-control rule,” concludes Smith, “is the latest and most egregious example of government forcing religious organizations to conform their operations to reigning secular moral values.  In this sense, faith organizations are being compelled to participate in a metaphorical Caesar worship.  As in the Roman Empire, the government will allow religious organizations general freedom of worship, but, increasingly, not freedom of religion.  Pliny would approve.”

Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow
at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism and a consultant
for the Patient Rights Council and the Center for Bioethics and Culture.
To read Wesley J. Smith’s article, please visit National Review.  

Read Full Post »

Religion, Sex & Biology 101

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Citizenship, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Parenting & Education, Relationships, Vocation, tagged , , , , on January 24, 2012| 18 Comments »

Sex is protectively positioned between religion and biology.  Otherwise… well, let’s take a look.

“The Obama Administration,” writes Chuck Colson, “has decided to promote and emphasize lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered rights – and it is doing so at the expense of everyone’s God-given freedom of religion.”  (Breakpoint 1-17-12)

Colson backs up this strong statement by quoting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  In an address entitled “Human Rights Agenda for the 21st Century,” (12-9-09), Clinton said people “must be free to worship, associate, and to love in the way that they choose.”

“Did you catch that?” Colson asks.  “In one sentence, little noticed at the time, Mrs. Clinton showed the Administration’s true priorities.  In one fell swoop, she changed our God-given right to freedom of religion, a public act, to a much more restricted ‘freedom of worship,’ a private act, which any Chinese official could go along with.  At the same time, Mrs. Clinton, speaking for the administration, elevated the quote ‘right to love in the way they choose’ as a fundamental human right.”

Last December, Mrs. Clinton told a gathering of diplomats that “gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights.”  She also said the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human right of LGBT citizens.”

President Obama told a pro-gay-rights group, “Every single American – gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transgender – every single American deserves to be treated equally before the law.”  Colson rightly asks, “Does that include marriage?”  There are those in this present Administration who have expressed their support of so-called same-sex “marriage.”  This Administration has refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act.  Where is the threat to religious freedom?  If so-called homosexual “marriage” can be defined as a civil right, then those who oppose it on Biblical grounds could be branded as practicing “sexual discrimination.”

So, how did we come to this place?  How is it that sexual liberty trumps religious liberty?  That sexual freedom is the one right above all rights?  The one right upon which no one else dare tread?

We were taunted with one question, “Did God really say . . . ?”  We doubted divine creation.  Put ourselves in place of God.  Raised our will above His.  Determined our own identity.   When we see ourselves, first and foremost, as “sexual beings,” then one might assume the right to express that sexuality according to personal preference.  But, God created us to be more than our flesh side.  We are each a soul.  We are created in His image and, though fallen from that perfect image, we are not captive to sexual instincts.  The Savior, Jesus Christ, pulls us out of ourselves and away from harmful choices.  His Spirit equips us to avoid sensuality and, instead, pursue purity and holiness.  Things of God.   When we fail, all is not lost.  We are not destined to despair, but invited to confess.  Ask for forgiveness and help.  Start over.  And over… and over…and over.

A good way to start over is to leave foolishness behind.  We have been too long in “human sexuality” class and not nearly long enough in Biology 101. 

Heterosexual is a biological term describing how a mammalian species reproduces.  The “higher” species reproduces sexually.  The lower invertebrates reproduce asexually.  Therefore, the suffix “sexual” refers to reproduction.  The prefix “homo,” which means “same throughout” with “sexual” is an oxymoron.  Mammals can’t reproduce with two like genders: male with male or female with female.  For the sake of civilization, let’s get our biology straight. 

Who better to consult than the Master of biology.  When He finished speaking animals into existence, God put His hands to work on His greatest masterpiece.  Humans.  He made two genders: male and female.  Count them.  Not three or four or five, but two.  He shaped man, then built woman from man.  He made them equal, but different.  Gender is determined by our anatomy.  (If you’re not sure which one you are, look down.)  An individual male or female, not paired, might be lonely, but they can actually survive without sexual involvement.  However, if they want to continue the human species, they must “fit together.”

God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:18).  “Fit for him,” taken literally, means “like his opposite.”  Do you comprehend this?   Male and female are compatibly different.  Their different anatomy allows husband and wife to “fit together” in order to bring new life into the world.  It is for our physical, emotional, spiritual, and generational health to live as male or female in a way that honors God rather than self. 

God tells man and woman to avoid sexual immorality and sensuality, but never once does He tell us to avoid being male or female.  As a man or a woman, single or married, we have a choice.  We can live in a way that glorifies God and makes the world a better place… or not.

Mock God, Mr. President.  Re-define creation, Mrs. Secretary of State.  Replace freedom of religion with “freedom of worship.”  Disregard biology and let people “love as they choose.”  Claiming to be wise, you lead many on a path of foolishness.

The Holy God stands in contrast.  “My ways are not your ways.”  While we have opportunity, let us speak of holy things.  Oppose foolishness.  “Fit together” in marriage.  Grow children.  Explain what it means to love.  To be human.

Read Full Post »

Mom Aborts Twins After Birth

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Parenting & Education, tagged , , , , on January 18, 2012| 1 Comment »

Jackie Burkle gave birth to twins at home.  But, on January 11, she was charged with the killing of her daughters.

Jackie is a 2008 graduate of a high school twenty miles from my home.  She was a music major at my local community college.  As of this writing, she is incarcerated thirty miles from my home.  She is facing two counts of first degree murder and being held on a million dollars bond — half a million dollars for each child.  The Judge told her that she will face “a mandatory life sentence in prison if convicted.”

Police found Jackie’s twin daughters in the trunk of her car.  She confessed to the crime.  The DCI special agent handling the case said, “She acted to terminate the lives of both of her newborn infants.  She also stated that she intended to end their lives and was not at any time intending that these children would live.”  Police were called to check on the 22-year-old mom after someone noticed that she wasn’t pregnant anymore.

How do we make this kind of behavior unthinkable?

Believers in the Creator of life need to ask ourselves some important questions.  Why?  Because we are all part of Jackie’s human family.

  1. Did Jackie know about Iowa’s Safe Haven Law?  If a parent takes an “unwanted” baby to a hospital or health care facility and leaves the infant there with staff, no questions will be asked.  Fourteen Iowa newborns since 2001 have been dropped off at a safe place. 
  2. Did anyone tell Jackie about the Lighthouse Center of Hope (a caring pregnancy center close to her) or any one of the many life centers in Iowa?  Did anyone discuss making an adoption plan?
  3. Did Jackie have anyone who cared enough to ask her questions about her pregnancy?  How she was doing?  If she was in need of emotional, financial, or spiritual help?
  4. Did anyone invite Jackie to a support group, Bible study, or even out for lunch?
  5. Did anyone explain to Jackie that she and her babies are “fearfully and wonderfully made?”  That each is a treasure for whom Jesus gave His life?
  6. Was Jackie schooled by years of sex education, made comfortable with her “sexuality,” and taken captive by a sensualized culture?  Had Jackie been convinced by Planned Parenthood-style education that she could separate the act of sex from procreation?
  7. Did a man use words of love to lead Jackie into intimacy and then abandon her?
  8. Was Jackie influenced by billboards that read: Children are loud, smelly, and burdensome… unless you want one…?
  9. Did Jackie rationalize that if it’s o.k. to take a baby’s life days before birth then what can be so wrong with a few days after?
  10. Will anyone help Jackie confront the evil of her action and tenderly lead her to the mercy and healing forgiveness of Christ?

Maybe Jackie will be found “mentally incompetent” or traumatized.  Maybe she will be spared one kind of prison.  But, there is another.  It is the guilt of our sin.  Of doing something that goes against creation itself.

Jackie is my neighbor.  Your neighbor.  Jackie did not have to choose death for her daughters or suffer the consequences of aborting them after birth.  She had other choices.  There are many.  But, we are part of those choices.

For the sake of all the other Jackies — confused, frightened, lonely — and their babies, we need to be watchful.  Willing to lead away from danger.  Offer a better way.  A hand.  A shoulder.  A safe place.  A new beginning.

Read Full Post »

Ordinary Passionate People Plant Seeds

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , on January 9, 2012| Leave a Comment »

What’s going on?  The whole culture has changed.  We’re in a moral and ethical mess.  What has happened… and what can I do about it?

First, it’s important for the Christian to recognize that two worldviews are in conflict.  Man’s perspective on life opposes God’s.  The Biblical worldview is Creation, The Fall, and Redemption.  All questions of life can be answered by this worldview.  But, when man doubts the Creator and places himself as the ultimate authority, he is left with only evolving opinions about how life should be lived.

Second, history proves that whenever Christians stepped into the public square, the culture was dramatically affected.  In Rome, for example, unwanted children were placed outside the city gates and left to die, but Christians started orphanages or even welcomed abandoned children into their own homes through adoption.  It was common for sick people to be neglected, but Christians started hospitals and hospice care.  Women were too often considered property, but Christ-followers saw women as equal to and compatibly different from men.  This made Christianity worth thinking about.

Third, those who resist God want others to resist Him, too.  Passionate about their perspectives, they step into the public square — especially coveted areas of academia and the media — to influence others.  Passionate people are persuasive people with words and actions.  Labeling something “scientific” makes the idea “progressive” and worthy of consideration.  Labeling something “religious” implies personal, but antiquated beliefs unworthy of any modern thinker.  If you are “scientific,” you are intelligent and welcomed to dialogue.  If you are “religious,” you are clinging to “some faith superstition” and your views are fine for you but not for general consumption.  Since the 1950s, children taught “Bible stories” in Sunday school grew up to become students at the university where “science” ridiculed “faith stories.”  Zealous disciples of Darwin, Marx, Dewey, Kinsey, Sanger, and others replaced the disciples of Jesus in the cultural conversation.

Fourth, when Christians pull out of the public square to take refuge inside the walls of the church or keep their faith private, the culture suffers — in every area from marriage and family to education and ethics.  We miss huge opportunities to push back against evil and raise up a younger generation in Truth when we do not talk about what God has done throughout history (documented in His Word beginning in Genesis); when we let the “science” of evolution intimidate our faith in the Creator God; and when we assume our faith is a “private thing” not to be lived in the workplace, classroom, or neighborhood.  It’s true that there is strong opposition to Christianity in our time but, in the midst of the opposition, there are people everywhere crying out for answers to the critical issues of life.  If we believe Christ is the Hope of the world, don’t we also believe that His Word is applicable to the world?

Can one person  make a difference?  Yes.  How?  By being as bold, confidant, and passionate for God as those who oppose Him.  The Christian citizen living in a morally and ethically-bankrupt society makes the greatest difference when he/she fears (trusts) and loves God above all things.  Trusting God’s Word, we can use it to serve our  neighbor.  We serve our neighbors by:

  • Speaking God’s Word of Law in love to those not aware that they are making wrong choices.  We should always be prepared to contrast trendy opinions with God’s Word about our beginnings, the sanctity of human life, relationships, marriage and family, sexual behavior, health care, law, and ethics.
  • Speaking God’s Word of Gospel to those sorry for their sins and ready to live as changed people in Christ.

This culture is in need of ordinary people who make a difference right where we live.  Parents and grandparents faithful to God’s Word affect families and neighborhoods.  We don’t have to be an author, speaker, or teacher to impact the culture.  We can ask questions that help people think, confront issues, and entertain challenges. 

If we don’t have the answer to a particular question, we can promise to find out.  Heaven knows resources are as close as our fingertips.  Some of my favorites are the Colson Center for Worldview, Vision Forum, Stand to Reason, and Answers In Genesis.  Some of my favorite worldview authors include Nancy Pearcy, Chuck Colson, Frank Beckwith, Greg Koukl, C.S. Lewis, J. Budziszewski, Marvin Olasky, and Gene Edward Veith.

We can make the best of every opportunity.  If you can’t speak to a crowd, speak to one.  If you can’t speak at all, write a letter-to-the-editor or a personal note.  Keep your eyes open and ears attentive.  Many people are struggling in confusing situations.  They’re not looking for someone’s opinion, but for a life-changing word of hope.  I know that Word of hope, don’t you?

Small seeds planted by faithful people of God will grow a better culture.

Read Full Post »

Planned Parenthood & “Induced Miscarriage”

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , , , on December 22, 2011| Leave a Comment »

In March, I posted some observations on Planned Parenthood.  At the same time I invited any readers to contact their senator with a request not to fund PP with tax dollars.  Yesterday, I received a comment on  my post.  The gentleman wrote:

“I noticed the religious overtone to your perspective on the issue of abortion.  You have every right to your views and ideologies, but consider an “abortion” is no longer specifically a medical procedure.  It is most commonly a prescription of two pills.  It is now an induced miscarriage.  Your life  may be stable, as your health may be, but not everyone shares the experience of your comforts and bliss life.  These induced miscarriages save lives.  There is no regard for the living breathing woman from PP opponents.”  Mike.

Compelled to respond, I began writing.  I clicked a key and my text disappeared.  I started in again.  Once more, the text disappeared.  Still compelled, I started in again, saying:

Mike… It is because I have “regard for the living breathing women” that I warn against abortion  That I cannot endorse the profiteering of Planned Parenthood.  Thirty some years out and about across this big country have taught me valuable lessons.  I may have been the one invited to speak, but I also became a listener.  I have yet to meet a woman who wanted an abortion.  Instead, women tell me that they felt “trapped,” alone, and without support during a very vulnerable time in their lives.  They knew other choices had been made in their lives which led to pregnancy.  Sex is not recreational; it is, rather, procreational.  A woman who has an abortion is no different from me.  In a moment of temptation, she chooses to become her own “god” and decide for herself what is right or wrong.  I am guilty, far too many times in a difficult situation, of trying to take control and be my own “god.”  But, I am a believer in Hope after my wrong and hurtful choice.  Yes, you recognized the “religious overtone” correctly.  My hope is in Jesus Christ.  Without Him, I’m left to despair in my own miserable mess.

A last count, 24 of my friends, relatives, or acquaintances have shared their abortions with me.  They asked me to speak up.  To warn.  To help other women avoid what they experienced following their abortion choice.  It is precisely because of “living breathing” women that I became a part of a “hope and healing” ministry for post-abortive women called Word of Hope.  It is because of “living breathing” women that I co-founded a caring pregnancy center where we walk with women throught their pregnancy and offer help to them and their families during the months following birth.  It is because of “living breathing” women that I started a small, but caring ministry called Titus 2 for Life in order to help older women confront the mistakes of their past and help mentor younger women to avoid similar life-changing mistakes.

Abortion is not an “induced miscarriage.”  It is not natural.  It is the intentional choice to end the life of a fetus (Latin: “young one”).  The “common prescription of two pills” as you mention, reveals that action is being taken on the part of the doctor and mother to intentionally end a pregnancy or, more honestly, the life of a “young one.”  Miscarriage is very, very different.  It is not the choice of the mother.  It is something that happens beyond the mother’s control.

You are correct that I, as you, have “every right to [my] views and ideologies.”  That’s the beauty of living in a land where freedoms of religion and speech are protected.  It is because I believe in the God who creates, loves, and redeems life that I speak up.  Warn.  Help and support others in times of difficulty.  Because, you see, I believe I am more than body and mind.  I am also soul.  My soul, and therefore my relationship to the Creator of my soul, matters.  All may not be well with my physical life or with my emotional life (after all, it’s a hard and sinful world), but I most certainly desire that all be well with my soul.  I desire this, also, for every “living breathing woman” and man.  Our souls become right because of Jesus.

I appreciate the fact that you cared enough to comment, Mike.  Thank you.

Word of Hope — The Lighthouse Center of Hope — Titus 2 for Life

Read Full Post »

Sex Ed Success, Modesty Removed

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Parenting & Education, Sexy or holy?, tagged , , , , , , , , on October 17, 2011| 2 Comments »

The question was asked, “What is the difference between ‘modern sex education’ and ‘comprehensive sex education?'”  The answer: Both are education in sex.  Education in sex is quite different from God’s Word to instruct in purity and guard modesty.  So, perhaps, when we know a particular class is called “sex education” or “sexuality for boys and girls,” or a set of books is labeled “a sex education series,” or even “Christian Sex Education,” we ought to ask: What are the desired outcomes?

One of the desired outcomes of modern sex education is to help boys and girls become more comfortable with their bodies.  With their “sexuality.”  A well-known Christian author/teacher in the field of sex education once confronted me.  He said: I understand that you’re displeased with our church’s sex education.  In that particular time and place, I could only respond quickly with my concern about modesty.  “Yes, I am concerned.  Couldn’t we, at the very least, teach boys and girls separately so as not to break down their natural inhibitions and destroy protective boundaries?  Doesn’t God desire that we protect the innocence of children?”  His response?  He said he was pleased that his son, at age ten, knew more about sex than he did at that age.  I wondered aloud: “Is that a good thing?”

Modern sex education has, indeed, achieved a desired outcome.  Everywhere I look, I see young women who are comfortable with their bodies.  Their “sexuality.”  They are comfortably exposed at the Lord’s Table much to the discomfort of pastors offering the sacrament.  They are comfortably exposed at the mall, on the beach or at the pool, on dates, playing sports, at church youth events, or in Bible study.

Girls are, indeed, comfortable with their “sexuality.”  Christian girls shop at Victoria’s Secret or Abercrombie & Fitch just like non-Christian girls.  They purchase sensual dresses for prom or other social events, often to the delight of moms who gush pride in their “sexy” daughters.  Girls are not embarrassed by sexually-suggestive remarks.  They speak, text, and post sensual messages.  They are so “comfortable” with their bodies — their “sexuality” — that very little is left to the male imagination.

It’s difficult to mentor, guard, or practice modesty when sex education’s goal is to make classrooms of boys and girls together more comfortable with themselves.  When God speaks of modesty, isn’t He calling us to be “holy” as opposed to “sexy”?  Isn’t He calling us to dress and act in ways that call attention not to our glory, but His?  And, as with all things godly, isn’t there a reason for this?

Those who promote Christianized-sex education insist that their emphasis is on chastity.  They claim this is a far cry from secular instruction on how to use a condom or where to go for an abortion.  But, the innocence of children is stolen away by even the most passionate Christian who wants to come out of the Victorian closet of prudish inhibition.  There are many well-meaning Christians who, with the sincere hope of preventing sexually-transmitted diseases and unwed pregnancy, support some form of sex education.  But, Douglas Gresham, the step-son of C.S. Lewis explained to me that he views “modern sex education as child abuse because it is ill-planned and poorly thought out, thus adding to the very problem it is trying to address and eroding the structure of a healthy family.”

What does he mean?  Perhaps this.  So-called “sex education” before Alfred Kinsey was generally a discussion of human biology and procreation, hygiene, and marriage.  It was a discussion to be had in the home with the parent in the role of teacher.  Who would better guard the virtue of children?  Who would better explain “sex” (defined by a pre-sexual revolution dictionary as ones “maleness” or “femaleness”)?  Who would better assist a son or daughter in being patient until marriage and, thus, help build a structure for a healthy family?  But, after Alfred Kinsey, this life-shaping responsibility was transferred to school teachers and so-called “experts.”  Prior to the release of Kinsey’s research, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948, no child development experts suggested that children were sexual from birth or that they benefited from childhood sexual activity (or, I’d like to add, from childhood sexual discussions between boys and girls in classrooms).  (Note: For documentation on this and more, I recommend you read Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences by Dr. Judith A. Reisman, 2000)

In 1986 Planned Parenthood (PP) commissioned a poll to determine how “comprehensive” sex education affected behavior.  “Comprehensive” means placing emphasis on the practice of “safe sex.”  Much to the PP’s dismay, the study showed that children exposed to such a program had a 47% higher rate of sexual activity than those who’d had no sex education at all.  (Planned Parenthood Poll, “American Teens Speak: Sex, Myths, TV and Birth Control.”  Lou Harris and Associates, December 1986, p. 59, table 6-1.)

So, I wonder:

  • Do Christian children exposed to modern sex education (post-1960, teacher/expert, boy/girl classroom-style) have a higher rate of sexual awareness, sensual dress, and sexual inhibition than those who’ve had no sex education at all?
  • Has sexual activity increased more among Christian young people who’ve been sexually-educated in the last three decades than those who’ve had no sex education at all?
  • Do Christian young people who’ve been made more comfortable with their “sexuality” suffer from more sexually-transmitted diseases, depression following multiple bonding, unwed pregnancy, and post-abortion grief than those who’ve had no sex education at all?

I’m thinking that it just might not be a good thing — no, not a good thing at all — if my nine-year-old grandson knows more about sex than I did at his age.

Read Full Post »

Fickle Feelings

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, Parenting & Education, tagged , , , , on October 5, 2011| 1 Comment »

It happened several times while I was on my recent road trip.  A decision needed to be made.  Take the interstate and make time, or meander the backcountry road and enjoy the scenery.  Stop two hours earlier and “wind down,” or press on to a further destination.  Stay with a friend or relative another night, or reserve a motel room and get some work done on the laptop.   Relying on my feelings left me hanging in mid-air.  One minute, I felt like exploring the aspen groves and kicking my shoes off by a mountain stream.  But, maybe less than an hour later, I felt like I just wanted to be home.

My feelings changed with my moods.  Refreshed and starting a new day with beauty all around me, I felt adventuresome.  Undaunted.  But, as the sun lost its brilliance and slipped beneath the horizon, I felt like settling some place safe and making my “nest.”  Plans for the day made, I felt like engaging.  Plans changed or unsure, I felt like disengaging.

Feelings are fickle.  They cannot be trusted.

Yet, for a long, long time, I’ve been watching a younger generation make life-altering decisions based wholly on feelings.  The sixteen-year-old knocks at the door of our caring pregnancy center.  “He told me he loved me.  Do you think I’m pregnant?”  The phone rings late at night.  “I felt like moving in with him would secure our relationship, but tonight when I shared my concerns with him, he kicked me out.  Will you come get me?”  Years of separation from God haunt the woman.  “In that moment of despair, I felt like an abortion would make things right again.  But, I never again felt good about myself.  Can God ever forgive me?”  The young man’s shoulders slump under the orange prison garb.  “Pride pumped my ego.   Boundaries were for lesser men.   I felt in control, exhilarated by the risk, and confident in the adulation of others… until they slapped on the cuffs.  Now, my family is paying the price.”

What kind of people do we become and what kind of culture do we build when we are ignorant of “right” and “wrong?”  When we are “self”-guided by feelings?

Some time ago, a sociologist from Notre Dame interviewed 230 young people across the U.S.  The sociologist, Christian Smith, asked questions pertaining to morality.  Smith summarized in his book, Lost in Transition, that the results were “disheartening.”   It isn’t that the behavior of young people today is better or worse than my generation.  The problem is a lack of moral reasoning.  When asked about the “moral dilemmas and the meaning of life,” the young people offered Smith “rambling” replies which testified that “they just don’t have the categories or vocabulary” to even engage in moral reflection.  “I don’t really deal with right and wrong that often,” said one young person.  For these 18-23-year-olds, right and wrong is judged by how a particular action made them feel.  As one put it, “I have no other way of knowing what to do but how I internally feel.”

But, asks Chuck Colson, what happens when doing the right thing requires ignoring how you “feel” and, instead, determining actions by an external standard?  In what ways are parents — with the support of the Church — helping the younger generation to think rather than just feel?  There are those who predict that these young people will grow more reflective with age.  But, reflection requires that we have principles and ideals on which to base our reflections.  Young people who are bombarded by messages from the world, deceived by Satan, and influenced by their own fickle feelings and changing opinions will be ill-equipped for ethical decision-making.  Marriage.  Parenting.  Being a good neighbor.

So, what can we do?  There is a practical tool for congregations to use with parents, college students, teachers, and a concerned community.  It’s a DVD series titled Doing the Right Thing featuring a panel of morally academic “thinkers” interacting with an assembly of students.  Panelists include Chuck Colson, Dr. Robert George of Princeton University, and other astute and principled men.  The series is moderated by Brit Hume.  Our son, Jon, purchased the series and our family has viewed it.  We highly recommend it and hope to make use of it in our own congregation and community.  Why don’t you, too?  Doing the Right Thing is available from The Colson Center for Christian Worldview.

Fickle feelings can’t be trusted.  But, doing the right thing — based on a standard outside of ourselves — can.

Read Full Post »

Christian Citizens Can Be Agents of Change

Posted in Citizenship, Commentaries of others, Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, tagged , , , , , on September 8, 2011| 2 Comments »

It’s easy to become discouraged these days.  Those who don’t want to acknowledge the Creator God are bold.  Those who want to acknowledge Him long enough to blame Him for all the ills of the world are just as bold.  All worldviews except the Biblical worldview are tolerated on campuses.  A “progressive” media scoffs at the “downward-sloped forehead” people who live in virtually every state except along certain coastlines.  The culture, in general, is certainly more coarse.  Immodest.  Selfish.

New York state legislators and the governor rammed through so-called “gay marriage” earlier this year.  Iowa’s Supreme Court did the same last year.  Most Americans oppose this redefinition of marriage.  It has failed in 31 states where it was put to a vote.  But, through the efforts of a small group of activists, America appears to be closer to embracing a radical social experiment that will, without any doubt, undermine marriage, hurt children, and destroy religious liberty.

Of course, having said all this, I run the risk of being labeled “intolerant.”  “Judgmental.”  A “theocrat.” A “dominionist.”  Or a “Christianist.”  (I run this risk because I don’t believe that my faith is a private matter.)

In spite of all this, there is hope.  (Ezerwoman believes there is always hope.)  “Think about it,” writes Chuck Colson.  “Most surveys estimate the number of homosexuals in America is only around two to four percent.  If these few people, with the help of like-minded liberal elites, can bring America to this dangerous tipping point, why can’t faithful, orthodox Christians — who make up a far greater percentage of the population — bring some sanity to the critical moral and cultural issues of the day?”

Colson references an article in ScienceDaily.  “Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society.”

Did you know this?  Why might this be?  Colson explains.  “Researchers at RPI note that this is possible because people do not like to hold unpopular opinions and are always seeking to reach a consensus.”

As a Lutheran, I’m compelled to ask, “What does this mean?”  It means there is hope!  Colson writes, “Those who stick to their intellectual and moral guns can eventually influence their undecided neighbors to adopt their views — and begin to spread them themselves!”

The very thing that Jesus did He asks us to do.  Jesus launched a movement that greatly impacted the world for good starting with twelve disciples.  Twelve ordinary, kinda-like-you-and-me people.  Those disciples became agents of change.  Modern Christians who use God’s Word and try to practice their faith wherever they are and in every circumstance are agents of change.

Well over 10 percent of the U.S. population, according to every survey conducted by any polling group, identifies itself as having unshakable Christian beliefs.  So why do we appear to be losing on so many cultural fronts?

Colson answers well.  “We need to be more active in sharing our beliefs about absolute truth in our pluralistic society.  Too many culture-war-weary Christians have retreated to the pews.  Too many so-called ‘Christian leaders’ are advising the rest of us to do the same.  Nonsense.  We must speak up.”

Second, says Colson, “we need to make our case confidently, winsomely, and positively.  The Christian worldview provides the only way to live rationally in the world.  It is the blueprint for human flourishing.  And it is visible whenever we defend the dignity of every man, woman, and child; when we feed the hungry and clothe the naked; and when our marriages and families and churches and schools are refuges for love and learning.”  (Breakpoint.org 8-19-11)

For most of my life, I’ve been surrounded by agents of change.  This was no accident.  God placed them in my life so that I could learn how to be one, too.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »