The sermon this week was regarding people questioning if Jesus is the only way to salvation, essentially the "all roads lead to God" argument. Two thoughts struck me enough to write them down.
1. If Jesus is who He said He was, if He is factually correct when He claims to be (among other things) "The Way, The Truth, and The Life" and that "Nobody gets to the Father but through Him.", then is seems as if telling anyone anything else is the complete, total opposite of acting out of love or in their best interest.
2. If, in fact, all roads DO lead to God. If, in fact, all roads ARE the same. Then I suggest that you start in downtown Kansas City, MO and try to get to the same place taking I-70 as you do taking I-35.
Sunday, April 30, 2017
Monday, April 10, 2017
Putin must be pissed
After all the effort that Vlad the hacker went to install his puppet in the White House, the puppet turns against the puppet master in such a horrible turn of events. Vlad must be so very, very angry..
Monday, April 3, 2017
Sorry, really last one for today
It has been alleged that men having sexual intercourse with men is a healthy pracitice.
Yet if one reads the latest numbers from the CDC, one might be forgiven for concluding that this is not, in fact, a healthy practice. One could argue that engaging in a practice which is statistically likely to lead to any one of a number of negative health outcomes could be reasonably called harmful.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/no-thug-left-behind-14951.html
"P&S syphilis among men who have sex with men (MSM) has been increasing since at least 2000. In 2014, rates of P&S syphilis increased among MSM, who account for 83 percent of reported cases among men when the sex of the partner is known. Also concerning is that more than half of MSM (51 percent) diagnosed with syphilis in 2014 were also HIV-positive. Infection with syphilis can cause sores on the genitals, which make it easier to transmit and acquire HIV.
Syphilis is currently the only STD for which information on the sex of the sex partner is reported. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that MSM are experiencing similar increases in gonorrhea and chlamydia infections– underscoring the need to further understand what is contributing to the rise.
Gay and bisexual men face a combination of social, epidemiologic, and individual risk factors that can fuel high levels of STDs. Higher prevalence of infection within sexual networks increases the likelihood of acquiring an STD with each sexual encounter."
Because, you know, if the government says it then it must be true.
Yet if one reads the latest numbers from the CDC, one might be forgiven for concluding that this is not, in fact, a healthy practice. One could argue that engaging in a practice which is statistically likely to lead to any one of a number of negative health outcomes could be reasonably called harmful.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/no-thug-left-behind-14951.html
"P&S syphilis among men who have sex with men (MSM) has been increasing since at least 2000. In 2014, rates of P&S syphilis increased among MSM, who account for 83 percent of reported cases among men when the sex of the partner is known. Also concerning is that more than half of MSM (51 percent) diagnosed with syphilis in 2014 were also HIV-positive. Infection with syphilis can cause sores on the genitals, which make it easier to transmit and acquire HIV.
Syphilis is currently the only STD for which information on the sex of the sex partner is reported. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that MSM are experiencing similar increases in gonorrhea and chlamydia infections– underscoring the need to further understand what is contributing to the rise.
Gay and bisexual men face a combination of social, epidemiologic, and individual risk factors that can fuel high levels of STDs. Higher prevalence of infection within sexual networks increases the likelihood of acquiring an STD with each sexual encounter."
Because, you know, if the government says it then it must be true.
One last post for today
There's been a lot of talk about how "sanctuary cities" are going to refuse to enforce federal immigration laws.
Makes you wonder when some clever lawyer with the right jury is going to use this as precedent to get their client acquitted from some other crimes?
"It wasn't a bank robbery, it was an undocumented withdrawal."
Does anyone really think that cities choosing what laws they enforce based on political reasons is a good idea?
Think they'll let the illegal immigrants accused of raping a child in a bathroom,seek sanctuary?
Think they'll let them claim that they're "trans" and had every right to be in the girl's bathroom?
Makes you wonder when some clever lawyer with the right jury is going to use this as precedent to get their client acquitted from some other crimes?
"It wasn't a bank robbery, it was an undocumented withdrawal."
Does anyone really think that cities choosing what laws they enforce based on political reasons is a good idea?
Think they'll let the illegal immigrants accused of raping a child in a bathroom,seek sanctuary?
Think they'll let them claim that they're "trans" and had every right to be in the girl's bathroom?
Since I don't have time to do much with the old blog, I thought I'd just throw up a couple of links to stories that caught my eye.
Haven't seen many on the left speaking out about this story.
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Rockville-High-School-Rape-an-Example-of-President-Trumps-Priority-on-Illegal-Immigration-Spicer-416748893.html
Is it possible that the who 98% of scientists believe in climate change number is not all it's cracked up to be?
http://joeforamerica.com/2017/02/hoax-climate-change/
Maybe, that whole "let anyone into any bathroom they want" thing becomes less attractive when it's you and your kids in the bathroom.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/liberal-mom-objects-to-man-in-disneylands-womens-restroom?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Headline+Tests
From the "even a blind pig..." file.
http://www.charismamag.com/life/culture/22494-how-the-new-christian-left-is-twisting-the-gospel
And folks wonder what could possibly be wrong with our urban school systems and the liberal politicians and union members who control them.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/no-thug-left-behind-14951.html
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Rockville-High-School-Rape-an-Example-of-President-Trumps-Priority-on-Illegal-Immigration-Spicer-416748893.html
Is it possible that the who 98% of scientists believe in climate change number is not all it's cracked up to be?
http://joeforamerica.com/2017/02/hoax-climate-change/
Maybe, that whole "let anyone into any bathroom they want" thing becomes less attractive when it's you and your kids in the bathroom.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/liberal-mom-objects-to-man-in-disneylands-womens-restroom?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Headline+Tests
From the "even a blind pig..." file.
http://www.charismamag.com/life/culture/22494-how-the-new-christian-left-is-twisting-the-gospel
And folks wonder what could possibly be wrong with our urban school systems and the liberal politicians and union members who control them.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/no-thug-left-behind-14951.html
Again with the lemmings (Edited)
A while back some woman who is apparently some sort of internet personality or something created quite a firestorm over a couple of young girls who were prevented from boarding an airline flight because of their attire. In the process, she attributed all sorts of nefarious motives to both the airline and the personnel who made the decision. It was a vicious attack on women's rights, sexist, patriarchial, and lord knows what else.
Oh, I know what else. It was wrong.
The girls were not flying on tickets that they'd bought on kayak, or travelocity or whatever, they were flying on passes of some sort. What those in the industry refer to as "non-rev".
Back in the day, when flying was a bigger deal than it is now, airline employees had what were called "flight privileges", essentially they and their immediate family were allowed to fly anywhere that airline flew for free (there was even some reciprocity between airlines). These benefits were a pretty good deal, except for a couple of rules.
1. You flew standby. Not just standby, but the very lowest category of standby. Behind the folks kicked off of overbooked flights, behind employees traveling on airline business, and if you were a dependent of an employee or on a guest pass behind any employees. Not only that, but employees and guests were ranked by tenure within the company.
2. You had to adhere to a detailed and relatively strict dress code.
In the case that sparked all this outrage, the girls had not adhered to the dress code. That's it. They were given a privilege, which came with a couple of responsibilities and they didn't hold up their end of the deal. Certainly, you could argue that their parents should have known and helped them make appropriate clothing choices. You could also argue that, unless this was their first non-rev flight, they should have known what the dress code was.
None of that really matters all that much, the bottom line is; one idiot with a twitter account saw something she didn't fully understand, decided to parade her ignorance to all her followers, decided to make up things she didn't know so it would get folks riled up, and because of that the lemmings of social media followed her right over a big cliff of stupidity.
One final thought. Had this been framed as questioning the need for a non-rev dress code, that would have been somewhat reasonable. Had this been framed as someone trying to understand what happened, that would have been somewhat reasonable.
But, why be reasonable when you can use and embellish a random situation that you don't really understand as a way to drive up your twitter numbers and fire up a bunch of lemmings to advance your agenda.
EDIT
Apparently the social media jackals are really after United, as the recent incident where a passenger was forcibly removed from a plane has been twisted as it has hit social media. My three favorites are;
1. Anyone who doesn't immediately attack UAL is a fascist.
2. It was Chicago PD who removed the gentleman from the plane, not UAL employees.
3. The fact that the entire planeload of folks would selfishly insist on keeping their seats so this guy wouldn't have had to get off just get a complete pass.
Jackals, lemmings, and hypocrites...
Oh, I know what else. It was wrong.
The girls were not flying on tickets that they'd bought on kayak, or travelocity or whatever, they were flying on passes of some sort. What those in the industry refer to as "non-rev".
Back in the day, when flying was a bigger deal than it is now, airline employees had what were called "flight privileges", essentially they and their immediate family were allowed to fly anywhere that airline flew for free (there was even some reciprocity between airlines). These benefits were a pretty good deal, except for a couple of rules.
1. You flew standby. Not just standby, but the very lowest category of standby. Behind the folks kicked off of overbooked flights, behind employees traveling on airline business, and if you were a dependent of an employee or on a guest pass behind any employees. Not only that, but employees and guests were ranked by tenure within the company.
2. You had to adhere to a detailed and relatively strict dress code.
In the case that sparked all this outrage, the girls had not adhered to the dress code. That's it. They were given a privilege, which came with a couple of responsibilities and they didn't hold up their end of the deal. Certainly, you could argue that their parents should have known and helped them make appropriate clothing choices. You could also argue that, unless this was their first non-rev flight, they should have known what the dress code was.
None of that really matters all that much, the bottom line is; one idiot with a twitter account saw something she didn't fully understand, decided to parade her ignorance to all her followers, decided to make up things she didn't know so it would get folks riled up, and because of that the lemmings of social media followed her right over a big cliff of stupidity.
One final thought. Had this been framed as questioning the need for a non-rev dress code, that would have been somewhat reasonable. Had this been framed as someone trying to understand what happened, that would have been somewhat reasonable.
But, why be reasonable when you can use and embellish a random situation that you don't really understand as a way to drive up your twitter numbers and fire up a bunch of lemmings to advance your agenda.
EDIT
Apparently the social media jackals are really after United, as the recent incident where a passenger was forcibly removed from a plane has been twisted as it has hit social media. My three favorites are;
1. Anyone who doesn't immediately attack UAL is a fascist.
2. It was Chicago PD who removed the gentleman from the plane, not UAL employees.
3. The fact that the entire planeload of folks would selfishly insist on keeping their seats so this guy wouldn't have had to get off just get a complete pass.
Jackals, lemmings, and hypocrites...
Fake news and lemmings
One of the areas where that anti-Trump left chose to express their outrage was in castigating Trump for his inappropriate interaction(s) with women.
It's further interesting that the political left has over the past few decades; ignored sexual misconduct by JFK, ignored sexual assault by Ted Kennedy, Actively defended Bill Clinton against accusations ranging from adultery to sexual harassment to rape.
Fast forward to last week. Someone digs out a 14 year old comment from Mike Pence's wife (takes it out of context) and out come the torches and pitchforks. What we have here is a man who has chosen to establish some personal behavioral standards about how he conducts himself in order to honor his; wedding vows, his wife, his family, and his positions. He's chosen a standard that certainly hasn't been applied to many in the democrat party recently. He's chosen to act in such a way as to avoid the "appearance of impropriety", not just that impropriety. Remember when someone made that argument that it was fine to actively support Hillary because she hadn't been either charged or convicted of any crime? How well has she avoided the appearance of impropriety. What are the chances that Bill Clinton would have engaged in any of his various sexual peccadilloes had he held himself to the standard Pence has chosen?
The fascinating thing is that this didn't become a thing because Pence bragged about how moral he was, it wasn't because he expected or demanded that anyone else live as he lives, he didn't even assert his right to choose who and under what circumstances he chooses his dinner guests, It became a thing because this is the best the "mainstream" media could come up with to tar Pence with. Sure enough, the bait gets thrown out and the lemmings on social media uncritically follow right along making up all sorts of stuff as they go.
No one ever said that lemmings have discernment or critical thinking skills, just a herd mentality and an irrational need to demonize those they disagree with.
It's further interesting that the political left has over the past few decades; ignored sexual misconduct by JFK, ignored sexual assault by Ted Kennedy, Actively defended Bill Clinton against accusations ranging from adultery to sexual harassment to rape.
Fast forward to last week. Someone digs out a 14 year old comment from Mike Pence's wife (takes it out of context) and out come the torches and pitchforks. What we have here is a man who has chosen to establish some personal behavioral standards about how he conducts himself in order to honor his; wedding vows, his wife, his family, and his positions. He's chosen a standard that certainly hasn't been applied to many in the democrat party recently. He's chosen to act in such a way as to avoid the "appearance of impropriety", not just that impropriety. Remember when someone made that argument that it was fine to actively support Hillary because she hadn't been either charged or convicted of any crime? How well has she avoided the appearance of impropriety. What are the chances that Bill Clinton would have engaged in any of his various sexual peccadilloes had he held himself to the standard Pence has chosen?
The fascinating thing is that this didn't become a thing because Pence bragged about how moral he was, it wasn't because he expected or demanded that anyone else live as he lives, he didn't even assert his right to choose who and under what circumstances he chooses his dinner guests, It became a thing because this is the best the "mainstream" media could come up with to tar Pence with. Sure enough, the bait gets thrown out and the lemmings on social media uncritically follow right along making up all sorts of stuff as they go.
No one ever said that lemmings have discernment or critical thinking skills, just a herd mentality and an irrational need to demonize those they disagree with.
Interesting
It seems that we've gone from having proof that Trump colluded with the Russians to "hack the election" to having proof that the P-BO administration broke the law in order to use the intellegence apparatus for partisan political purposes.
I'm just sayin', it'd sure be amusing if this went from impeaching Trump, to criminal charges against P-BO administration officials.
I'm just sayin', it'd sure be amusing if this went from impeaching Trump, to criminal charges against P-BO administration officials.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)