Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘The Washington Times’

robert knightThe following is excerpted from “The Allure of the Lie” by Robert Knight.  It’s worthy of your read.

We are hip-deep in a culture of lying. It’s the coin of the realm for liberal politicians, the “mainstream” media and Hollywood, all of whom cover for each other. Since an accusation of lying amounts to fighting words, journalists reporting the lies tend to use softer terms, such as prevarication, dissembling, not forthcoming, not fully disclosed, misleading, redirecting, etc.

Lying often is accomplished with euphemisms. Government spending is “investment.” Raising taxes is “revenue reform.” Torture is sanitized as “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Global warming is morphing into “climate change” to accommodate obvious departures from the warming scenario. Gambling is “gaming.” Defense of religious freedom is a “war on women.” There’s a slew of terms invented to validate sexual immorality. The sin of sodomy became homosexuality and then merely gay. Adultery became “finding oneself,” “open marriage” or “swinging.” Prostitutes are “commercial sex workers.” Two men – with no bride – are considered “married.” Pornography became “erotica.” And abortion – the killing of unborn children – is “choice.”

The culture of lying has become so entrenched in American political culture that any deviation is swiftly punished. People who question any part of the theory of man-caused global warming, for instance, are branded “deniers.”  End of discussion. Question the junk science behind the “born gay” myth and you’re a “hater.” If you believe God created marriage as the union of a man and a woman, you’re not only a hater but a bigot. If you favor photo ID laws to thwart fraud, you want to “suppress the minority vote.” If you question the morality or wisdom of putting women into combat, you’re against “equality.”

Often, liberal policies are sustained by repeated citations of a single study or studies, however flawed.  The granddaddy of those is Alfred C. Kinsey’s fraudulaent sex studies . . . .

One of the biggest lies in recent years is that there are no real biological differences between men and women – that masculinity and femininity are artificial social constructs. The latest fallout from this departure from reality is the Pentagon’s opening the military to homosexuality and putting women into combat. We’re told that everyone in the armed forces thinks this is wonderful. Sure they do. It would be a career-ender in this culture of lying to say otherwise.

The culture of lying depends heavily on cooked studies, weasel words and a compliant media that parrots them without examination. It’s a house of cards that’s waiting for a gentle breeze of truth to blow it over.

As G.K. Chesterton observed, “Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”

Robert Knight is a Senior Fellow for the American Civil Rights Union
and contributor to The Washington Times.
He wrote this article following Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s
testimony before Congress.
I encourage you to read the complete article here

Read Full Post »

Thomas J. Vilsack is the former governor of Iowa.  My governor.  He drifted away from Iowa in a bubble of political correctness to land in the chair of U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

Vilsack, apparently still in the bubble, is pushing for an intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training.  The Washington Times (6-19-2011) reports that this training would include a discussion that compares “heterosexism” to racism.  People who view marriage as being between only one man and one woman are guilty of “heterosexism.”

The “push for the training” is coming from Vilsack.  Why?  Does he have too much time on his hands?  Is there not enough work to be done with farm service agencies?  Food and nutrition?  The forest service?  Rural development?  Food safety and inspection?   What does agriculture have to do with homosexual sensitivity training?

Vilsack has launched a department-wide “cultural transformation” that includes a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Special Emphasis Program.  It appears that this program goes far beyond any training now being done by the Pentagon.  The USDA’s program is called “groundbreaking [and a] model for other agencies.”  It “delves more into gay issues and terminology.  It also justifies pro-homosexual political positions.”

Rowan Scarborough, writing for The Washington Times, explains that if the Obama administration accepts this kind of homosexual sensitivity training “it could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination.  Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would add an unnecessary burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.”

Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness, has long opposed the repeal of the military’s ban on acknowledged gays.  She told the Washington Times, “There are disturbing implications for national defense in the USDA’s development of  a ‘groundbreaking’ training program that is to become a model for other federal agencies.”  She notes that “thousands of experienced troops, starting with chaplains and people of faith who do not support LGBT ideology and activism” would be driven out of the military.

Vilsack’s bubble of political correctness will burst.  Of that I am sure.  But, before that happens, I wonder.  How many people and institutions — including the family — will his “cultural transformation” affect?

Why is it more important for the USDA to be a leader in gender-identity diversity training than growing food to feed the world?

Read Full Post »

Experts in New Zealand praise the healthy habit of self-control.  Those with common sense respond, “Well, duh!”

New scientific research shows that if adults cultivate the practice of self-control — starting early — in children, a great many could be saved from addictions, poverty, and crime.  Isn’t that just like scientific evidence?  Always lagging behind but, when pure, testifying to God’s order of creation.

This ezerwoman is a better helper — of men, children, and society — when I practice self-control.  Lest I forget (or resist), God consistently reminds me to be “self-controlled.”  The books of 1 and 2 Timothy refer to the virtue of “self-control” at least four times.  At least five times, the book of Titus instructs older men and women to practice and mentor “self-control.”  There’s good reason.  Self-control glorifies God.  It can result in more hopeful consequences.  It can even reduce depression

Self-control is the opposite of living our lives however we please.  Doing whatever makes us “happy.”  Insisting that our “needs” be met.  Serving self over others.   Perhaps this is what happens when times are good.  We give ourselves license… for whatever, whenever.   We have (in my American lifetime) “lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence” (James 5:5).  For sure, it is what happens when women are encouraged to let their emotions rule.

But, encouraging girls and young women to let their emotions rule has not made them happy.  It is widely reported, writes Dennis Prager, that women suffer depression at twice the rate of men.  If the clinical assumptions are true, Prager suggests that we consider the following:

“Wise cultures have learned that happiness is attained only when we conquer our nature.  This is true for male and female.  With modern feminism, however, came a belief in the superiority of the female nature.  The result?  Society was urged to suppress both the negative and positive aspects of the male nature with little or no suppression of the female nature.  Historically, societies and parents have always known it’s a good thing to teach boys to control two aspects of their male nature — their sexual desires and their predilection for violence.  Decent men were taught from youth to touch a woman sexually only with her permission and to channel physical aggression into sports or into helping fight evil by joining the police force or military.  Men who didn’t learn to control these aspects of male nature not only became bad men, but unhappy men.”

He continues, “Societies and parents also knew it was important to help girls control their natures — in particular, their predilection to be ruled by their emotions.  Women who allowed their emotions to rule them not only became destructive (to members of their families first and foremost), they became unhappy women.  But, while modern society continued to teach boys to control themselves, it stopped teaching girls to do so.  Girls’ emotions and feelings were treated as inherently valuable.  In fact, to repress a girl’s emotions or feelings was labeled ‘sexist’ and showed a ‘hatred of women.’ ”  (Excerpted from “Wanted by women: A few good old-fashioned men” by Dennis Prager, The Washington Times, 6-30-08)

Hmmm.  I’m reminded of the woman who showed up at an abortion clinic.  Why?  “He kissed me and I melted.  I was filled with passion and couldn’t help myself.  Now, I’m pregnant and must take control of my body.”

Lack of self control + unhappy woman = desperation and hopelessness.  Ugh.

There is another choice.   Mature men and women can be examples of self-control and mentor younger ones to do the same.  There is promise in such practice: Hope for living out our lives in anticipation of Jesus’ return (Titus 2).

Read Full Post »

Dennis Prager is a favorite author of mine.  Here are a few observations from his recent commentary in The Washington Times. I selected these because they speak to areas of my concern.  Prager writes:

  • “The left owns the language.  Married women are not to be referred to as ‘Mrs.’ but as ‘Ms.’  And the words ‘lady,’ ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ have largely gone to their graves.”
  • “One can only speak of male-female differences if the difference shows the female superior.  Thus to say women are innately more intuitive is perfectly acceptable, but to say men are innately more likely to excel at math is ‘sexist.'”
  • “A woman may reveal as much of her body as she wishes.  But if a man is perceived by a woman as looking too long at what she reveals, or if he comments on what she reveals, he may be fired from his job and/or sued for ‘sexual harassment.'”
  • “A woman may wear a miniskirt and crop-top, but a man may not have a calendar of women wearing miniskirts and crop-tops on his desk at work.  That constitutes sexual harassment and a ‘hostile work environment.'”

Thank you, Dennis Prager, for including these examples in your commentary “Put Totalitarian Mind Control in the Cross Hairs” (The Washington Times Weekly Edition, 2-7-11).  The behavior that follows such twisted thinking is discussed at great length during our Titus 2 Retreats.  Then, we encourage one another to

Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths.  Rather train yourself for godliness . . . set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity.”

(1 Timothy 4:7-12)

Read Full Post »