Tuesday, July 10, 2018

Should Those Bucking Public Opinion Be Banished Unto Utter Desolation?

Acolytes of tolerance and inclusion are applauding one Indiana town where these values are not to be extended to a congregation daring to exercise its First Amendment rights with a sign simply reading “LGBTQ is a hate crime against God.”

For nothing more than summarizing a basic Christian doctrine or moral presupposition, the congregation has been kicked out of the structure in which its services were convened.

Those holding to an absolutist libertarianism will likely respond that the individual should be able to evict any tenant that advances values with which they do not agree.

Perhaps so.

So should landlords be able to remove from their premises leasees that are practicing coupled homosexuals or heterosexual shackups that romp in the sack without benefit of matrimony?

In response to this message, one activist little better than a graffiti vandal rearranged the letters to read “Stay open minded”.

If private property is now to be upheld as the inviolate standard, will there be as much hue and cry over this particular individual imposing their preferred morality upon a means of public expression that does not belong to them.

For unless we have indeed descended into mob rule, property rights are not predicated upon compliance with the herd mentality.

By Frederick Meekins

Friday, July 6, 2018

Fundamentalist Attends Baseball & Auto Races But Not Ministerial Association

In the 8/12/16 edition of the Sword Of The Lord, the publication's editor Shelton Smith composed an article titled “The Fellowship Thing: A Clearly Defined New Testament Concept”.

In the column, the minister concluded that, even if someone professes to be a born again believer, you really ought not have much to do with the individual unless they pretty much march lockstep with you in agreement on a comprehensive litany of secondary matters.

One wonders how Smith feels regarding other denominations as leery of those wild-eyed Fundamentalists.

As evidence of his hardline position, Shelton Smith referenced a ministerial association he had been pressured into attending as a young pastor and seminary student.

To justify the fact that he never went back, Smith mentions seeing so-called ministers of the Gospel caught smoking cigars and hearing others engaged in “off color conversations”.

Some might have even remarked how good a lady might have looked in tight-fitting jeans and a short haircut (ha ha).

As shocking as that might have been, can he really insist that what he might have been exposed to at such a meeting in the 1970's was really worse than what he was in the vicinity of during the NASCAR races and baseball games he is on the record of having attended in the pages of the Sword of the Lord, a publication that at one time published an article explicitly stating viewers of Stat Trek were not fit to teach school?

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, June 27, 2018

More Off Target With Moonie Offshoot Than Firearms

On an episode of A&E’s “Cults and Extreme Belief”, correspondent Elizabeth Vargas profiled an offshoot of the Unification Church called the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary.

Instead of detailing how the sect’s theology differed from that of orthodox interpretations of Christianity or even the questionable recruitment techniques utilized by Moonie organizations, the episode spent an inordinate amount of time harping upon the sect’s admittedly idiosyncratic incorporation of firearms into certain aspects of its liturgy.

While such might not be a normal part of spiritual practice, such is not without historic precedent.

As such does Elizabeth Vargas intend to broadcast similar exposes with accompanying ominous voice over narration asking do Sikhs really need those ceremonial daggers and just why does a sword play a role in certain Masonic rituals?

Not once do I recall anything said as to the legality of the guns depicted which had been deliberately emptied of ammunition.

Instead, a lengthy reflection dwelt upon the tragedy that could result should the firearm end up being misused by a less rational adherent of this theology.

For as you know, the line of argumentation continued, anyone that doesn't embrace the transgender movement and believes that legitimate marriage can only be between a man and a woman is by definition well on their way to being diagnosed as mentally deficient.

As proof, the plight is followed of a former Unification member whose mother was paralyzed when she was accidentally shot by his brother because the youths in the sect enjoyed recreational shooting.

One cannot help but sympathize with a family that has experienced such a tragedy.

But isn't it the fault of the one that shot her, her own child?

Off all of the abridgments of human decency perpetrated over the years by the Unification Church and now apparently its offshoots, this incident really isn't one for which these parties bear responsibility.

Elizabeth Vargas has been open regarding her struggles with alcoholism.

As such, because some people can't control themselves around alcohol to the point that they are a danger to themselves and others, does that mean no one should be allowed to utilize the substance in ways otherwise considered legal?

If not, then why this journalistic production where one constitutional liberty is invoked for the purposes of subverting another?

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

Warehouse Criminal Migrants On Properties Of Open Border Propagandists

Professional religionists spanning a broad theological spectrum along with a number of prominent public figures have joined forces in criticizing migrant detention policies blamed on President Trump perceived as splitting up family units.

A number of these such as the Roman Catholic Church and Southern Baptist Convention also hold sizable properties such as universities and denominational headquarters.

So have any of these leaders, as well as the First Ladies joining in this chorus, that any other time crave as much media attention as possible to share just how much “social justice” concerns burden their respective souls ever offered to shelter these people under their collective roofs?

If not, why not?

It will probably be responded that such a gesture would likely inconvenience the vital work of these important leaders, compromise their safety and diminish the value of their real estate holdings.

Then why is that a burden that must be borne by the neighborhoods and lives of those that don't get to make the decisions as to whom is granted entrance to this great nation in order to placate the assorted open border rackets?

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, June 16, 2018

The Perdition Declension

The disorienting light swept over me unexpectedly. The pain and nausea was overwhelming for a moment, but subsided nearly as quickly as it had arrived. My mind was a bit slower to recompose itself. I slowly lifted my head and opened my eyes. I looked around in the attempt to figure out where I was.

“Where, where am I?” I asked.

One of the gathered nearby responded, “I don't know.”

My head continued to clear. “I...I think there was some kind of explosion.”

We looked at one another.

Another added, “I was in a hospital room.” I supposed that would have made sense. She was, after all, adorned in what looked like light-blue scrubs of some sort.

But we were no longer obviously in a hospital or any other kind of medical facility.

We appeared to be outside.

The realization swept over me in a renewed wave of nausea. I solemnly informed the gathered,. “I think we are dead.”

The eyes of those closest to me widened.

“Dead?” they mumbled in considerable yet hushed silence.

We took stock of our situation. We looked up the verdant clover and grass-covered path that sloped continually upward. One could not avoid feeling drawn towards it.

We realized that was one of two possible directions. However, reluctance began to build to view what laid in the other. Yet there was a greater cosmic compulsion regarding each person to view it nonetheless.

Before us, we could see charred and burned trees. Not a single leaf clung to the lifeless limbs of the trees lined along the dry rocky path that sloped downward.

Beyond what were once vibrant trees in the distance, dark smoke billowed slowly into the sky. Its ascent seemed as reluctant to reach for the sky as had been our reluctance to gaze it its direction.

The smoke lingered to form what could be described as nothing but a warped, sinister halo. At the center one could glimpse at briefly before having to look away an intense flaming orange and yellow. It made a blazing sun seem cool and refreshing in comparison.

“That must be Hell,” I said to clarify things as much to myself as anyone else around me.

By deduction, someone else concluded, “Then that way must be Heaven.” They pointed in the direction for added emphasis.

The reality of where everyone was continued to sink in. Still, no one was really all that eager to make a choice.

Hesitation continued to grip me. But I knew I had to say something. It seemed that no one else would.

“I guess we go in the direction dependent on whether or not we want to see Jesus.”

“Jesus?” someone responded in a tone mixed with both surprise and disgust.

Murmuring spread amongst the group. One of the particularly more vocal enunciated,. “Well, I certainly don't want to see him.” A few nodded in agreement.

Another lamented, “But I've been so bad he won't let me near him.”

“Hold on, “ someone tried to comfort, “all you've got to do is to want to see him and be sorry about what you've done.”

Parties began to form. We found ourselves with one last chance at a choice in light of the evidence with which we were confronted staring us in the face. Despite being on the very boundaries of the Afterlife, the larger group still did not want anything to do with Jesus. Perhaps one or two changed their minds, but not many.

Most were convinced that they had never done anything wrong. Some were eager to flip Christ off for even the bare minimum of a requirement to avoid the Hellfire blazing before their very eyes. Their disgust and contempt overrode even the primal instinct to avoid the fire and billows of smoke at the end of the decimated path strewn with jagged rubble. They did not want to commence their perambulation into perdition, but through the stubbornness of their own wills, they conscientiously began the descent nevertheless.

The remainder of us looked on stunned in silence, aware of the torment and suffering that awaited them at the end of the journey. Despite pleading, they went in that direction anyway.

We watched for a while. Morbidly, one supposes, our own lamentation and regret for them subsided as they passed out of sight into an eternity of their own choosing.

Nothing could be done for them. Even with the evidence of the two paths set before their very eyes and what was required to avoid the less desirous destination, they had set out in that direction anyway.

After much solemn contemplation and awkward silence, the remaining began to look one another in the eye again. Smiles crossed our faces.

By deduction we concluded that if those that wanted nothing to do with Jesus went down towards that fiery pit, then Heaven must be in the opposite direction up the verdant hilly path.

Many laughed joyously in celebration. This was what, after all, each of us hoped would be awaiting us at the conclusions of our earthly lives. Some had been expecting it for decades; others not quite so long.

“Well, I suppose this is it. We'd best get started,” some suggested. Nearly every one smiled and cheered. We were, after all, on our way to Heaven.

No one seemed to mind the inclined perambulation at first. Surely Heaven was worth an uphill but otherwise even walk. Some a little ways off were singing hymns.

Joy filled the air.

Despite the anticipation of the destination, minds --- even if no longer alive in the terrestrial sense --- could not help but wander.

The ease of the ascent did not exactly channel one's thoughts into the task at hand.

Thoughts of family began to fill my head. How would they get along without me?

Sure, I'd be more than fine in Heaven. However, they'd be stuck in misery for now back on Earth.

I stopped for a moment to catch my breath. It seemed that, with each additional thought regarding my family, the following steps up the leisurely slope grew increasingly difficult to take. I tried to put thoughts of the mortal life and world out of my mind.

As I did so, the pace would become easier. There was much to look forward to at the end of this easy and gentle ascent.

The path was certainly much more pleasant than the jagged crags selected by the majority for no other reason than that they did not want to see Jesus. Besides, not only would we see Jesus, but I would also be reunited with loved ones that passed away earlier. Others would be there that I had never met but loved anyway. Possibly cherished pets might even be there as well in eager anticipation. Speculation about that question alone and curiosity to see it resolved once and for all imbued me with renewed vigor to continue.

Yet family, to the mortal mind at least to one transitioning from one realm to the next, exist as an interconnected whole. As much as my mind focused on grandparents, departed uncles and even buried dogs and cats, I couldn't block out images of those still on Earth.

Once again, movement forward grew exceedingly difficult. It seemed as if I slid a few steps back down the hill.

“What the....?” I caught myself mentally from completing the thought. There was no need to be nearing the Gates of Heaven quite literally with such verbal formulations on my mind and tongue. Furthermore, having seen some march willingly towards the infernal destination just a short time prior dissipated any of the psychological relief one might under terrestrial circumstances experience verbalizing such profanities of metaphysical reference.

I turned to the other perambulating pilgrims. “Did you see that?', I asked as they walked by as I slid back. They smiled kindly enough with sincere reassurance but continued with their singing and walking forward.

The more that I felt I was not worthy to number among the happy throng assured of their beatific triumph, the more I thought about family back on Earth, the further back down the hill I slid.

I elevated my head in realization at the extent of my declension. I was back to where I started.

I looked over to my right. It seemed that I was back on Earth. My family was so close that I could have touched touched them if I possessed corporeality.

My finger touched the translucent barrier separating the realms. Ripples cascaded across it like soft shock waves skipping across a pond.

I placed my hand against what I concluded must be some kind of energy barrier. It could not be consciously seen, but one could sense it nonetheless. The sensation was not unlike that of pushing together the same poles of two magnets.

I pushed my hand against the barrier a little harder, eventually making a fist so to concentrate the pressure of my efforts at a single point on the barrier. Maybe I could find a weak spot.

For what purpose, I did not know. After all, I was dead, right? I couldn't go back.

It seemed at this very point where the material world and what, for lack of a better term, one might term the spirit world weren't even converging in a cemetery. If I somehow broke through, I wouldn't even have my body to inhabit.

Despite logic insisting I start back up the hill towards Heaven, I still couldn't resist the urge to poke a little more at the ethereal barrier. I pressed my fist against it once more.

A cone began to extend through to the other side. My hand disappeared altogether into the funnel.

I stopped. If my entire hand could slide in without too much effort, how much more of me could fit into it?

I extended my arm in up to the elbow. Other than a slight repulsion similar to a light magnetic field, there was very little in the way of sensation or resistance.

I wondered if anyone on the other side could see what I was doing. Maybe my efforts were manifesting there in the physical world in the form of some kind of paranormal phenomena.

I looked down at my arm. From my perspective, the appendage had disappeared.

I stopped for a moment. Should I pull it back out? Maybe I should push against the barrier with my other hand as well. Perhaps I should try to push again at it with my entire body, or at least with what I perceived of as a body.

I braced myself, pushing my hands against and then into the nebulous barrier. I kept walking forward. My nose tingled as my proboscis rubbed up against it. But I did not stop.

As the field approached my eyes, everything blurred. At first, the image was out of focus but eventually everything turned a translucent cream color not unlike looking through a teardrop.

My body tingled as it passed through the barrier. Dizziness and nausea swept over me.

The distortions grew overwhelming. My consciousness began to fade.

Instead of reaching either of the Afterlife's eternal destinations, would my own existence now dissipate into nothingness? I clung to any sliver of awareness for as long as I could.

Fading.

Fading.

Fading....

The Nothingness. It lasted only a brief second.

Whereas before my vision was distorted by an illuminated blur, that brightness was now replaced by a distinctive darkness.

My heart was racing, the fear causing my tympanic membrane to pound.

Consciousness washed over my eroded mind. Slowly I realized I was not dead. From the weight of the blankets draped over me, I concluded it had all been a dream. A very intense one, but still nothing more than a dream.

My heart slowed. Fear dissipated. Whether right nor wrong would be an issue for theologians with too much time on their hands, but at the moment I was relieved to consider this world my home.

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Hit & Run Commentary #112

A survey indicates that most millennials would rather date a convicted felon over a Trump supporter. Likewise, why should Trump supporters settle for these deadbeats and sloppy seconds? Jesus might forgive but that does not cure STD’s. Given the conscientious vocalization of this sentiment, perhaps pity should be denied when said millennials are victims of the convicted felon’s domestic violence, indolence, and criminal conspiracy.

Investigators have concluded that there is no proof that California Assmeblywoman and MeToo movement supporter Cristina Garcia groped a staff member in 2014. So sort of like a significant percentage of the cases of individuals accused by MeToo activists possessing no forensic or corroborating evidence beyond “He said, She said”.

Activists are sponsoring a mariachi band to play outside the office of a lawyer that flew into a tirade over the refusal of restaurant staff to speak English. So will these radicals applaud pro-lifers taking a stand on behalf of the unborn outside of abortion clinics?

If a landlord can evict a lawyer caught on video for articulating his displeasure against restaurant staff speaking in Spanish, on what grounds should a Christian business be required to bake cakes for gay weddings?

Will a video of a lawyer caught in a tirade over restaurant staff speaking Spanish rather than English also be used to ruin the careers and livelihoods of others heard in the video?. For those were actually the ones threatening violence. For the most part, the lawyer was merely stating his compliance with the see something say something propaganda we are constantly conditioned with.

Will New York Democrats condemning the comments of a lawyer videoed articulating dismay over restaurant staff vocalizing Spanish rather than English as a “violation of our civil society” defend President Trump for his accurate portrayal of the horrendous acts of violence perpetrated by a number of illegal aliens?

Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz has decreed that the National Rifle Association is “just shy of a terrorist organization”. If that is the case, does that push C.A.I.R and Black Lives Matter over the threshold into being legitimately categorized as such? C.A.I.R. has never really explicitly denounced Hamas or Hezbollah as terrorist organizations. And, unlike the NRA, activists affiliated with Black Lives Matter regularly destroy property as a method to express their displeasure in response to unpopular trial verdicts or police actions.

The producers and cast of the new iteration of “Murphy Brown” have declared that their core mission is to take on the world of alternative facts. They do realize, one hopes, that Murphy Brown is not real. Has the medication not had time to kick in at the retirement home? As a fictional character, isn’t any scenario the screenwriters present by definition an alternative to reality? And many dare to ridicule the conspiracy theorists that decipher the symbolism referenced in the latest science fiction productions? There will probably be more accurate content on the average episode of Ancient Aliens than in the escapades of this nonexistent broadcaster.

In a Christianity Today article, Albert Mohler doesn’t even reference by name Paige Patterson, dismissed as president of a Southern Baptist Seminary largely over a matter of words rather than of deeds. It is almost as if the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary had never even heard of the president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and former prelate of Mohler’s own denomination. As disturbing as Patterson’’s remarks might be to those of anti-masculinist sympathies, the issue boils down to what Patterson said rather than over anything he did. So if Mohler is in a rush to distance himself from one colleague over what boils down to a matter of interpretation and opinion, why did Mohler assure C.J. Mahaney at a conference that he was surrounded by hundreds of his closest friends? For what Mahaney is accused of doing can not be boiled down to simply holding an opinion at odds with prevailing revolutionary fervor but rather in delaying justice from being dispensed in the case of an accused child predator serving directly in Mahaney’s chain of authority. For should that not be considered a greater offense than an off hand remark that teen boys are visually drawn to teen girls?

In a Southern Theological Seminary Leadership Briefing on the public virtue of George Washington, Albert Mohler did not hold anything back pertaining to the first president’s shortcomings in regards to matters of race and ethnicity. So does this Reformed theologian intend to deliver a prominent oration as hard hitting critical of Calvin’s role in the execution of Michael Servetus or the role played by the Puritans in abridging the innate liberties of Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson, and a number of Quakers?

A South Carolina Baptist church has voted to remove a series of sculptures depicting the life of Christ on the grounds that the works are perceived as being “Catholic”. The artwork has been erected on the grounds of the church for eleven years. If they bothered the pastor so much to the extent that he strongarmed the congregation into authorizing their removal, why did he become pastor of this church in the first place? If installed after his ascension into the pulpit why didn’t he stand by his convictions and resign in protest? If a church wants to do everything by the Good Book and avoid anything that is not authorized in its pages, does the congregation intend to remain consistent and resign from the Southern Baptist Convention as well? For does not an ecclesiastical organization found nowhere in the pages of divine revelation ruling from an ornate centralized location also reek of the alleged odious stench of Catholicism as well?

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, June 2, 2018

Hit & Run Commentary #111

A missionary said that Christians ought to share the Gospel with those that do not look like them.  But shouldn’t the Christian also be willing to share the Gospel with those that DO look like them, even if this includes White and Americans?  If missiological theory now holds that it is often best to let the natives reach out to other natives if at all possible, why should Whites and Americans be chastised if they are most comfortable with reaching out to other Whites and Americans?

A missionary praised a letter by Adoniram Judson to his prospective father in law essentially berating him that he was a bad Christian if he did not consent to surrender his daughter to a man readily admitting he was unfit to provide for her in the name of missionary outreach.  That’s certainly a gutsy approach to persuade a father to grant the hand of his daughter in marriage.

Reflecting on a missionary’s admonition on the need to genuinely respect Muslims, a pastor confided that in public he is careful not to directly look at Muslim women for fear of offending their high moral standards.  First, if Muslim women do not want to be looked at, they can return to their excrement pile homelands. This is America. If you are a woman and you don’t even want to be looked at, don’t come here. Given that where many of these women come from they can pretty much be raped if caught in public unaccompanied by a male family member, one would think simply being looked at would be a welcomed improvement.  If Americans are obligated to pander to this extent to the Islamist adversary, this global worldview war is already lost. What other defeatist postures are Christians obligated to assume? Are believers in Bible Belt states such as North Carolina now expected to eliminate their thriving pork barbecue culture?

Because of the wave of a missionary’s hand, the congregation of a Baptist church where the pastor once regularly went out of his way to emphasize what a wretched religion Islam is is now harping how believers are obligated to show “genuine” respect to Muslims such as at least hearing out what the Koran has to say.  One must ask will such an open approach now be extended to Catholics, science fiction enthusiasts, and women that wear pants?

If ever criticized in Independent Baptist circles for my interest in science fiction and comics, I might just ask how is this different than the “genuine” respect and interest we are now obligated to manifest on behalf of Muslims.  If I was any good at outstretching my hand and expecting something to be placed into it, I should have claimed I need funds for outreach to ComiCon.

Of Adoniram Judson, he and his first wife lost their first child through miscarriage, their second child eight months after his birth, and their third child sixth months after his first wife’s death.  Of the 13 children he sired, only six survived. Given that these deaths were likely attributable to the squalor endemic to the heathen world, though he is worthy of praise as a missionary, is anyone going to have the courage to point out that he was a lousy husband and father?

Baptist functionary Paige Patterson ahas been castigated for remarks suggesting that teen boys often display an enthusiastic appreciation for female physical attributes. If these marms are eager to chastise men for determining a woman’s worth based on the size of her measurements going to be as eager in disabusing the young women that the value of a man is determined by the size of his bank account or the horsepower of the automobile that he drives?

Because the thoroughfare is named after the President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis Highway in Northern Virginia is slated to be renamed Richmond Highway.  But since Richmond was also the capital of the Confederacy, shouldn’t that name itself also be just as offensive? If we are to be consistent, shouldn’t the entire city of Richmond be “renditioned”  in a manner similar to that which occurs on the USA drama “Colony” in order to remove this geographical “trigger”?

A 104 year old scientist who technically wasn’t terminally ill killed himself at a Swiss suicide clinic.  Is there no reason he couldn’t have waited a few days

Technically, isn’t the Captain Marvel being foisted upon the movie going public in the upcoming film actually just Ms. Marvel from the comics before these periodicals become hyper-political?

Regarding this level of abuse that Southern Baptist functionary Paige Patterson is alleged to have endorsed.  Does that consist of actual hitting or is this merely of a man simply articulating disagreement with a woman and raising his voice in reply to a voice that was first raised at him?  Do these Dana Carvey-style good church women intend to say anything about the increasing number of women that mistreat and disrespect men as well?

If professional sports teams can ban fans living outside of certain zip codes from purchasing play off tickets or from wearing the paraphernalia of the visiting team as in the case of the NHL playoffs, why should we give a flip when these enterprises cry a river about decreasing attendance at these high priced competitions?  If people want to be berated and ordered about in a surly manner, they can just go to the DMV.

So will authoritarian progressives feigning opposition to human oppression to the extent that all vestiges of the Confederacy from statues to road names must be obliterated from public consciousness toss hissy fits as vehement against the erection of an 18 feet tall Karl Marx statue paid for by the Red Chinese in his hometown of Trier, Germany to celebrate the bicentennial of the deadbeat philosopher?  

In a tweet, Maxine Waters quipped, “How many diet Cokes did Trump consume while he gulped and waited for the defeat of his pedophile candidate?”  How is Trump’s consumption of diet soda any more outrageous than those in her preferred constituency known for their proclivity for gape soda? Roy Moore might have dated a few a bit young for his age.  But unlike many in the community this particular legislator claims to represent, at least Moore did not leave these gals with a litter of out of wedlock children in his wake.

If it is unacceptable irrespective of what statutory law allows for 30 year olds to date 18 year olds because such young minds are impressionable and easy to manipulate into compliance, why is it acceptable to manipulate those of that age into giving their lives in their country’s wars?  Is not the government making promises of education and enlistment bonuses not much different than a man promising to lavish nice things upon a compliant young woman?

It is insisted that Confederate statues should only be allowed to exist if these memorials are placed in an historical context.  That means they must be exhibited in a way so as to maximize the amount of White guilt elicited. So if exacting nitpicky detail is the ultimate goal, will additions be made to the Martin Luther KIng memorial pointing out that he fooled around on his wife, denied a number of fundamental Christians doctrines, and that he received support from a number of avowed Communists likely themselves at the behest of the Soviet Union?  Or is this one of those instances where we are supposed to overlook Russian meddling in American affairs but are expected to react as if it is the opening scene from Patrick Swayze’s version of Red Dawn if subversive operatives are accused of conducting under the table discussions with Trump administration representatives?

Outrage erupted when Ben Carson observed that a good measure of poverty is actually a mindset.  Are those jacked out of shape that this is a criticism of individuals or that government complicity in the welfare racket has been exposed.?  This mental shackling has ensnared nearly all of us to some degree. When considering an undertaking or an enterprise, often thoughts no longer dwell upon  do I possess the skill need to succeed or what will happen if the idea we think is so great turns out to be a flop. Rather, we calculate is it even worth the effort given the penalties likely to be incurred for failing to comply with with the intricacies of complex taxing regulations or even the violence one is likely to incur for criticizing ideas contrary to the orthodoxies of entrenched elites.

Homeschool activist Kevin Swanson suggests avoiding the public library because of books on the shelves that promote the homosexual agenda rather than simply avoiding those books. Among certain fundamentalist sects, attendance at places such as amusement parks, beaches, and the cinema are also forbidden. Children probably shouldn’t visit museums either because their impressionable minds might be exposed to evolution. Extending this logic a bit further, one supposes these youngsters should not be allowed to go to the supermarket either because they might catch a glimpse of the condom display or the heaving bosoms of the tramps on the covers of Cosmo magazine or those trashy paperback romances. So when is the homeschool child ever allowed to leave the house? Even if they aren’t allowed to date, won’t their mail order brides be exposed to assorted carnal evils racing through the airport on their way to the cordoned off family compound? If those from this Evangelical sociological subgrouping are to live lives this sheltered or separated, on what grounds do such thoroughgoing Protestants gripe about cloistered monks and nuns?

Mitt Romney has condemned the selection of Robert Jeffress to offer the opening prayer of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem on the grounds that the Baptist minister is a religious bigot.  So what Romney is saying is that it is unacceptable for someone to articulate why they are reluctant over religious grounds to vote for a candidate running for elected office but perfectly acceptable to exclude that individual from a public event over refusal to embrace religious universalism.  Technically, Romney is not much different then philosophically from the Romans that tossed Christians to lions in the gladiatorial arena. If dedicated temple Mormons like Mitt Romney really do believe no religion is better than any other with all sincerely held paths leading the individual to an eternity with God in Heaven, why does his sect spend so much time canvassing the neighborhoods of the world with missionaries many of whom have been strongarmed pretty much into this service taken away from their families?

President Trump is being criticized for acknowledging the hero in the Waffle House mass casualty incident three weeks after the fact.  Had Trump thanked the individual at the time, the President would be accused of being a media whore having to interject himself into the story.

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, May 27, 2018

Purpose Of Military To Kill The Enemy & Not Indoctrinate Citizens

Columnist F.H. Buckley in a New York Post op-ed has proposed that the draft should be reconstituted in order to combat the sense of entitlement pervasive among Millennials.

But a perspective insistent that the purpose of the military is anything other than the protection of the nation through the use of force is an incipient form of totalitarianism.

In his commentary and in a follow up interview on Fox and Friends, this academic who himself never served day one in the military now pushing this requirement as ideal for everyone else insists that this will resolve the epidemic sense of entitlement pervasive among the nation’s youth and reverse the impact of a decaying system of education.

But will it or merely transfer the problem elsewhere?

For while many to come out of the military are first rate people, others are nearly as obnoxious as the Millennials Buckley apparently has an issue with.

A number increasingly demand preferences or set asides akin to something like affirmative action.

Others nearly threaten violence against you if you dare articulate an opinion at odds with the policy preferences of organized veterans’ rackets.

And if the best among us come out of the military sounding as if they are in need of comprehensive resocialization before obtaining basic civilian employment, is the education available through this otherwise venerable governmental institution as first rate as this professor would lead taxpayers to believe?

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, May 26, 2018

Hit & Run Commentary #110

A hate bias incident is often defined as incidents that may range from acts of ignorance or indifference, to acts directed to inflict harm. So can you be hauled up on charges if you refuse to donate to the United Negro College Fund and the offended construes that as an act of “indifference”?

In these remakes of Star Trek that attempt to incorporate even more thoroughly the latest postmodern hooey, wonder if there will develop a story arc about a faction within the Federation actually conspiring to be assimilated by the Borg and condemn those opposing this idea as enemies of diversity and proponents of subversive individualism.

Did not really care for the Joker’s origins on Gotham. The evil of this character is best represented through Jerome’s explicit embrace of amoral nihilism rather than his brother Jeremiah in essence being forced into the role through really no choice of his own.

Former FBI Director James Comey compares Trump’s leadership style to that of a mafia crimelord. But if this is not a reference to explicit illegality, what successful business is not run like the mafia? Aren’t some of the practices adhered to by this nefarious organization what has contributed to its vitality and endurance?

Isn’t it less of an outrage for Sean Hannity to avail himself of the services of a lawyer connected to Donald Trump than for the judge overseeing the case connected to this revelation being a close associate of George Soros?

The Starbuck’s barista that called police over two loitering Black men has been released from employment. As such, if the result is going to be losing your job, why should you say something if you see something?

The episode of the 3/29/18 edition of “Standing For The Truth” was titled, “The Next Time We Are Tempted To Complain” in which the media director of Voice Of The Martyrs was interviewed. Do those that suffer for Christ include those allegedly molested by Voice Of The Martyrs' personnel?

Unless their legs have been blown off which would entitle them to a handicapped parking placard anyway, veterans can park in the same spaces as everybody else.

Obama is building a swimming pool at his Washington, DC mansion. Yet this is the president that tossed a fit about Americans eating what we want, heating our homes to 70 degrees, and riding around in SUV's. His supporters are the same ones that have nervous breakdowns if you leave the water running while brushing your teeth.

Sufi propagandist Reza Aslan has warned that the Trump presidency is taking on the trappings of a religious cult. Did he issue similar warnings when Obama was delivering stadium orations surrounded by Grecian columns while preschoolers and worship bands were singing what amounted to hymns in his adoration?

In New York, a man wearing a Make America Great Again hat allegedly pushed another individual onto the subway tracks. Do the acts perpetrated against people wearing Trump paraphenalia merit as much national media attention?

Wonder if Will and Kate’s newest whelp would be denied transport to a Vatican hospital in a last ditch effort to save the child’s life.

If the Simpsons producers are obligated to eliminate Apu because this offends Hindus, does mean that Ned Flanders must be eliminated for mocking Christians, that Ralph Wiggum must be eliminated for ridiculing those with special needs, and that Barney the Drunk should be done away with for making light of alcoholism?

A student accused of a politically incorrect prom invitation is not only being denied the opportunity to attend prom but graduation as well. In light of the carnal debaucheries known to take place after prom given the births that take place nine months later to those in their late teens that we are admonished are really nobody’s business, why isn’t this same degree of latitude being extended to the way in which a young man attempts to woo a maiden into accompanying him to the festivity? Furthermore, if a school can ban from both prom and graduation a youngster that successfully utilized risqué humor to win the affection of the girl he desired, why should we be outraged if a school inflicted similar retribution upon gay or lesbian students? After all, a joke referencing cotton picking is in nothing more but poor taste whereas these other situations veer into issues of actual immorality.

In his assessment of the future of Western civilization, Dennis Prager lamented the mental enfeeblement caused by television. But isn’t this the fault of those such as Prager’s associate and friend Adam Carolla whose claim to fame was “The Man Show” epitomized by women with big bosoms in tiny bikinis jumping on trampolines?

And what if the teen accused of cultural misappropriation for wearing a Chinese-styled dress to prom had been harboring racist thoughts? So long as her bosom and backside are modestly concealed does it really matter? Should the entire Japanese animation industry be accused of cultural misappropriation because the characters are nearly all Caucasian even in the productions too violent and filthy to broadcast on American television?

So if the account of Genesis is to be invoked as part of anti-dating pulpit tirades, isn’t the exegete forced to then argue that the only Biblically proper way to acquire a mate is through DNA replication akin to genetic engineering and cloning?

In a concerning philosophical twist, some viewers are coming away from “Avengers: Infinity War” convinced that deliberate, systematized depopulation overseen by an extraterrestrial with a messiah complex is not really such a bad thing after all. Would they feel the same way if they did not make the cut to be extended the “privilege” of continued existence?

The Huffington Post has published an article titled “Chaplain Ouster Shows What Version Of Christianity Controls The GOP” The article further laments, “There's no room in the party for a Christianity that puts economic justice before conservative social issues.” So do the Democrats hire many religious functionaries that do not adhere to the party line on pervasive infanticide, carnal debauchery, and institutionalized indigency where public assistance is not provided for a brief season but rather is imposed as a multigenerational lifestyle?

Controversy has erupted over the nature and background of the religious functionary to fill the role of the Congressional chaplain. Given that those working on Capitol Hill are professionals well into adulthood, do the American people need to be paying for them to have a chaplain to begin with? Most workplaces operate without an official member of the clergy on staff. If these folks are in need of God or spiritual counsel, why can’t they seek these services on their own time and dime like nearly every other American?

In review of “Avengers: Infinity War”, homeschool activist condemned moviegoers for preferring fantasy spectacles over films depicting realistic mundane topics. Will similar condemnation be brought to bear against fantasy works by authors professing some manner of Christian affiliation such as C.S. Lewis or J.R.R. Tolkien? Swanson lamented that people no longer want to see something based in reality such as “The Sound Of Music” (because, though based on actual events, there is nothing more realistic than singing through the Alps while fleeing from Nazis). If Thanos in the film is primarily a radical environmentalist wanting to eliminate most of the life in the universe, how is this not a philosophically realistic plot given there are actually thinkers holding to similar ideas?

Home school activist Kevin Swanson claimed that Avengers: Infinity War exhibits a bad worldview because half of the population of the universe is wiped out by the end of the film. So does the book of Revelation also exhibit a bad worldview for nearly similar numbers perishing in that particular apocalyptic text? Are Christians to take away from this line of argumentation that in narratives deemed acceptable for consumption by the faithful that villains are not to be depicted doing bad things. If so, hasn’t Swanson contradicted his previous lamentation about films no longer addressing realistic topics?

In hardline Christian condemnation of the Avengers claiming these films advocate pantheism, how come no one ever references the line and scene from the first Avenger movie where Captain America (usually considered the moral compass in the Marvel Universe) pretty much pointed out that these beings despite all of their powers were not gods and pretty much put Loki in his place when the Norse entity demanded the crowd bow before him in worship?

The President that stuffs his face with junkfood and who a number of medical professionals diagnose as borderline obese has decided to continue Obama’s jihad against fat sedentary youth has appointed a number of celebrities such as Dr. Oz and Herschel Walker to the Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition. But would a president that was really sincere about “draining the swamp” even have a formal group formulating policy in this manner. There is no provision in the Constitution authorizing extensive intervention in this area. Given how close the nation is to financial collapse, it probably won’t be too long until one will no longer have to worry about kids eating enough to become overweight and nutrition will become a luxury no one will be able to afford to worry about anyway,

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, May 19, 2018

Hit & Run Commentary #109

If Obama is so outraged by the divisiveness sparked by the numerous sources of information online, why is the propaganda he intends to produce to be available over a streaming service rather than traditional broadcast? So apparently he can provide his “alternative facts” but it is an outrage for Alex Jones to do so.

The winter 2018 edition of PETA Global is heralding the lawsuit the front group filed that granted intellectual property rights to a macaque that took a selfie with a camera set up by a photographer. Will the next time an ape hurls poo across its enclosure qualify for a government arts grant? The brief write up goes on to celebrate how the photographer was strongarmed into a settlement forcing the surrender of a percentage of the proceeds generated from the image to a number of wildlife charities and how other wildlife photographers are being intimidated into making similar donations. In the future, will you be required to get your dog or cat to sign notarized releases before uploading their images to social media? Too bad PETA is not as concerned about the animals euthanized in its care just so the creatures wouldn’t be forced to endure the indignity of having their basic needs catered to by adoring and dutiful human beings.

Propagandists at Good Morning America warn in an editorial posted on the program’s website “Alabama Senate Race Highlights That New Tribalism Threatens Our Democracy”. The piece observes that a group of Alabama voters have decided that ideology and party are more important than integrity and the common good. But in rejecting Moore now for decades largely over his defense of the Ten Commandments, these media elites are the ones that established the precedent of downplaying the existence of a morality beyond that of the group or “tribe” (as it is termed in a denigrating way in this segment). But aren’t these as dedicated to the so-called “tribe” as the consideration that trumps all others? For example, Barack Obama was elected primarily for being Black. The masses were directed to back Hillary Clinton simply because she was a woman. And no one is supposed to say a peep critical of Black Lives Matter despite the propensity of those in that movement to loot beauty salons for haircare products and burn other businesses to the ground in the name of social justice.

A Harris Poll concludes 84% of Americans hold the opinion “no gun under 21”. Why don’t the same numbers oppose enlistment in the military or enrollment in Select Service below that age threshold?

In a SermonAudio homily, it was correctly warned that many of aspects of life can be pursued with such zeal that we fail in one’s service to God. To bad this admonition was not applied to organized religion as well.

World educators supportive of students skipping class in opposition to the Second Amendment be as supportive if students walked out in favor of Confederate war memorials, the Tea Party movement, or school prayer? An alleged study indicates that a significant number of women are demanding that a man be at least six feet tall before they would considering dating them. Even when you meet their height requirements, they still aren’t likely to go out with you. And if women demanding a man meet certain physical requirements in order to be worthy of companionship, what is so wrong then with men insisting upon sufficient bosom birth, an exacting hip to waist ratio, or a specific age parameter (with some men preferring younger while other skew older) in order for a woman to be worthy of consideration?

The punishment for the teacher feeding a puppy to a snapping turtle in front of his students ought to be to force him to put his own hand in the snapping turtle’s mouth. If he loses his hand, he should have thought about that before feeding the puppy to the snapping turtle.

Trump’s suggestion of a “Space Force” to handle extraplanetary military operations has allowed for a good laugh across social media. However, the concept is less ridiculous than NASA conferences held were the attendees ponder the question if Jesus died for Klingons not from the standpoint of whether extraterrestrials have souls but rather as way for academics to bash Christians for holding up cultural development and where Levar Burton and Nichelle Nichols were no doubt paid significant honoraria to make a public appearance.

In response to the hordes of students skipping class in opposition to the Second Amendment, Nancy Pelosi said no one's political survival is more important than the survival of the nation's children. Unless, of course, if the child is still in the womb.

The Washington Post is celebrating the lone student at one school that walked out of class in opposition to the Second Amendment. Would this liberal rag defend students that remained in class in support of the inalienable right to bear arms?

A brat demonstrating against the Second Amendment remarked that you should not be allowed to own an "assault rifle" unless you can articulate a reason why. Shouldn't the same apply to cellphones and free birth control?

Nancy Pelosi has decreed that the prototypes of Trump’s proposed Great Wall Of America are too high for civilized society. If the Congressional leader ever watched “Pacific Rim”, she would have probably applauded the interdimensional monsters busting through the barrier to lay waste to what remained of human civilization. But in all seriousness, if high barricades are an offense to democratic values, does she intend to advocate for the removal of the ones surrounding the Capitol? More importantly, does she intend to tear down any fences surrounding her properties or to leave the doors unlocked at night so vagrants can traipse around at their own leisure?

Hispanosupremacist Jorge Ramos says that he is now having the worst time of his life in his 34 years in the United States. He is always free to return to Third World poverty any time that he so desires.

The Syfy drama Krypton is not without potential. However, it is not as enjoyable as Smallville or Supergirl. One has to be really steeped in Superman lore to follow what is going on and the English accents of the actors don't help either. As a family member not as familiar with superheroes and comics confided, this Krypton certainly looks different than the one from the TV shows and movies. Often Superman's home world is depicted as almost heavenly with crystalline architecture of an almost cathedral like appearance. However, this world simply looks rundown. In many versions of the Superman story, Krypton is left to its fate as a result of a scientific establishment too mired in its own procedures to admit to the obvious. Yet this version seems to want to take the narrative in a bit of another direction subtly anti-Christian as the religious elite deny the existence of life beyond their world to the point of persecuting those advocating on behalf of the idea. To emphasize the point, the primary religious leader, the voice of Rao, is depicted in a multi-faced mask reminiscent of an image from church history intended to illustrate the Trinity.

The cover story of the April 2018 issue of Sojourner’s Magazine is titled, “How Evangelicals Became White: For much of American evangelical history spreading the Gospel meant spreading Whiteness”. Does Sojourner’s stop to explain and, even more importantly, lament how the so-called “mainline churches” are probably even “Whiter” than those of the Evangelicals being denigrated in this propaganda? Are Black denominations being condemned for being overwhelmingly Black? Is the Roman Catholic Church ever condemned in the pages of this publication for abetting in the violation of U.S. immigration law?

Revolutions are seldom satisfied accomplishing the initial stated objective. These movements eventually become increasingly strident. Once those with wandering hands or raunchy mouths (as determined by feminists that are not so much in favor of decorum as they hate men) are removed from public life, what is to prevent assorted surveillance technologies from being deployed to eliminate the last remaining vestiges of maleness? For example, close circuit TV could be used to catch those stealing a glance of a jiggly bosom or backside strutting by. Will fit bits be required to catch men that become aroused by an alluring woman in their presence who saying nothing about it but who would be betrayed by an increased pulse or blood pressure rates?

One adolescent orator at the March For Our Lives Rally claimed to speak on behalf of “African American girls whose stories don't lead on the evening news.” In her racialist tirade, did she point out that most Black youths are shot by other Black youths with firearms not acquired or used in a manner approved by the NRA nor by the organization's membership?

A number of dimwitted waifs at the March For Our Lives rally insisted that the Constitution was outdated. So if these rabble rousers had been denied the opportunity to assemble or had their gathering disbanded at the end of police batons, tasers and tear gas, there would have been nothing wrong with that. Because the right to speak and petition for the redress of grievances is just as much part of that Constitution these activists denigrate as the Second Amendment.

Miami officials are considering a plan to allow educators strapped for rent to live at school. And you thought accounts of the sexcapades occurring in the public schools were wild before?

In calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment, does that also include the right to bear arms of the security details of retired Supreme Court Justices as well?

If former Supreme Court Justices are calling for the elimination of the Second Amendment because the constitutional provision is no longer considered socially utilitarian, what is to prevent them from issuing similar pronouncements calling for the elimination of freedom of speech and religion when those particular statutory clauses are deemed similarly subversive to public order?

If Youtube can’t be forced to allow for Conservative speech, why should Christians be compelled to bake gay wedding cakes?

If the census should not be allowed to ask if a respondent is a citizen of the United States, why on the American Community Survey was I required to answer how far I drove to work and how many toilets are in my house?

A Maryland Park and Planning Commission is holding a teen athletic competition advertised as the first annual “Hunger Games”. As a science fiction fan, I found the Hunger Games series of films a compelling and highly plausible dystopia. But it is a DYSTOPIA. That means no rational individual would want to find themselves in that situation. In spoofing the emphasis placed upon the love triangle in the story, Homer Simpson lamented, “When do we get to killing the children?” Will this be the fate of those losing these municipal competitions? For like it or not, that was the point of this fictionalized athletic spectacle as a form of social control and the only way to survive was to kill or be killed. Any bureaucrat employing this name as part of what ought to be a wholesome youth activity either doesn’t understand the point of the narrative or are hoping to manipulate the population to the point where one day such blatantly homicidal bloodsports are accepted without question.

If it is unacceptable for the government to ask who is a citizen, why is it acceptable for government to not only know how much money individuals make but also how much of that money individuals withdrawal from privately owned banks after taxes on those funds have already been paid?

For daring to comment on a public online post by gun control fanatic David Hogg, pundit Laura Ingraham has been accused of cyberbullying. But isn’t Hogg even more directly a bully? After all, is he not the one issuing threats and ultimatums if his preferred policy directives or managerial preferences are not implemented?

It was argued on the Berean Baptist Church SermonAudio podcast that, even if a “pew sitter” comes to church 52 out of 52 Sunday’s a year, they are not sufficiently demonstrating the value of the church until they sing in the choir, serve in AWANA, or play an instrument for 52 out of those 52 weeks. Would the pastoral staff be serving the 52 out of 52 weeks if there was no paycheck on the line? If showing up is not is not sufficient demonstration of devotion to Christ, perhaps they’d rather people not show up at all? Furthermore, why would anyone want to hazard the commitment necessary to hold a volunteer position in a congregation that has mentioned in previous publicly available podcasts how criteria to qualify are nowhere detailed in the pages of Sola Scriptura? Furthermore, by definition a church of a finite size only has so many teaching positions available and, given that these are non-compensated, one is under no obligation to pursue them particularly if one is not skilled in or desirous to participate in the open opportunities.

It was said in a Berean Baptist Church SermonAudio podcast that the true believers are those that serve IN the church institutional or organizational. How can one hand down a definitive ruling that those not explicitly serving under ecclesiastical scrutiny are not performing works for Christ beyond an inquisitorial gaze? Furthermore, how is what this pastoral staff is advocating little different than the blatant works righteousness of most strains of Roman Catholicism?

A Sacramento woman with her house on the real estate market is refusing to sell to any Trump supporters. It is claimed that political affiliation is not listed among the protected classifications known for rampaging in the streets and looting local businesses at the rendering of unpopular trial verdicts. As such, this would not constitute a technical act of discrimination. Fine. If this is allowed to stand, all one should need to do to get out of selling a home to minorities is to decline on the grounds that the individuals are likely Obama voters. Christian bakers wanting to avoid entanglements with gay weddings could articulate similar reasons. More importantly, given that most Americans do not necessarily wear their politics on their sleeves, what is to prevent someone from saying that they did not vote for Trump when they really did? It’s not like this inquiry is regarding one’s faith in Christ.

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, May 2, 2018

Hit & Run Commentary #107

President Trump’s immigration policies are being cast as the villain in the saga of a 39 year old father being deported after having been living undocumented in the United States since he was nine years old. How about much of the blame being placed on the Obama administration and the court system pussyfooting around for nearly a decade with one repeated stay after another instead of decisively settling this case? Perhaps this example ought to serve as a reminder to all of us that this governing by kicking the can down the road cannot go on forever indefinitely.

Albert Mohler posted an article titled “Moralism Is Not The Gospel But Many Christians Think It Is”. If that is the case, isn’t that more the fault of professional religionists such as himself rather than the mere pewfillers often forced to abide by an extensive list of regulations if they desire to remain in the good graces of those wielding authority? Sometimes these requirements are, at best, merely tangentially related to anything explicitly stated in Scripture or, at worst, the mere opinions of the ecclesiastical staff. If the mere pewfillers are the ones coming off as judgemental about enforcing nitpicky rules, it is often because they have been forced to live under the most stringent requirements their entire lives while they are passed over in terms of position, opportunity, or even attention in favor of newcomers and the like who (though perhaps sincerely Christian) are not held to the same standard as those that have bought into what is being taught from the pulpit that believers must act a certain way and if you don’t you aren’t likely one. Right or not, those told that it’s evil to date and further bashed from the pulpit if they are then not married by the age of 24 are going to raise an eyebrow in resentment if they see the pregnant teen moms fawned over with babyshowers.

In a review of “Thor: Ragnarok”, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson condemned the superhero genre for depicting Germanic gods. One can legitimately point out how these films promote a version of ancient alien hypothesis in that Thor is depicted as an extradimensional entity. But the movies do not really depict Thor as an actual god or that your child is likely to abandon their Christian faith if they happen to enjoy these sorts of costumed adventures. In the first Avengers movie, didn’t Captain America say that there was only one God and that he certainly wasn’t Loki? Even if movies consisted of nothing more than accurate detailed depictions of Bible stories, would those of this sort of hardline mentality accept that or would they find something else to gripe about. Coming to mind particular are fundamentalist objections to “The Passion Of The Christ” and criticism of Roma Downey’s series “AD”.

In his review of “Star Wars” The Last Jedi”, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson lamented that parents should not be surprised if after steadily watching these sorts of films that their children walk away from the church. That is because watching these films is the epistemological equivalent of regularly attending a mosque and then converting to Islam. First, if Swanson wants to remain consistent with his Calvinist soteriology, doesn’t he have to admit that those walking away from the faith as a result of allegedly being exposed to Star Wars were never intended to rank among the predestined to begin with? Second, in his remarks does Swanson intend to criticize those Christian leaders that for decades level condemnation against those believers that would have been drawn towards creative pursuits such as literature and filmmaking?

Isn’t the greater outrage not that a Trump appointee to Americorps articulated blunt remarks over how protected demographics often live their lives at variance with majoritarian preferences but rather that this constitutionally dubious agency continues to exist?

Al Sharpton said the integrity of Evangelicals that support President Trump. But does a “minister” that advanced the lies of Tawana Brawley and stoked the burning of Freddie’s Fashion Mart possess any integrity himself?

President Trump is now being accused of speaking in an Indian accent to imitate the Prime Minister of India. If that is to be condemned, will similar criticisms be leveled against those that spoof the President’s own elocutionary idiosyncrasies such as his oddly shaped lips and sounding hoarse much of the time?’

If all countries are to be viewed as possessing equal quality with no one allowed to admit what these places are really like, aren’t those that vacation in Bermuda, Aruba, or the Bahamas but not Hati even more racist than Donald Trump?

If President Trump does not want his offspring criticized in the media, perhaps he should utilize other minions as his policy advisors and enforcers.

A Washington Post column laments in the title, “Trump Evangelicals Have Lost Their Gag Reflex”. Shouldn’t these establishmentarian elites be the first to celebrate religious conservatives for having advanced their sense of political sophistication to the point that distinction is now made between an elected official’s policy positions and personal moral failings? Didn’t the liberal pundits used to pine how they wished America could be more like France where no one cared how many mistresses a high official might have bedded? If Evangelicals now downplay the importance of private virtue in public life, it is for the most part for having been ridiculed for decades how if they didn’t let go of their outdated morality particularly in regards to sexual ethics, they would forever consign the Republican Party to electoral defeat. For were not influential media outlets the ones that depicted public officials that consistently lived by their professed values such as Ted Cruz, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum as something akin to a Sasquatch with communicable leprosy?

For Afrosupremacisit Propaganda Month, a Vermont school has announced it will fly the Black Lives Matter flag for the month of February. Mind you, these are the same sorts that threaten renewed rounds of looting of hair care product providers and electronics retailers unless every remaining remembrance of the Confederacy is removed from public view.

The growing concern is that social media is potentially harmful to democracy. This perspective is now so pervasive that even the Facebook corporate office concurs. Do the propagandists in in the mainstream engage in the same degree of manufactured outrage when it comes to the dangers posed by centralized hierarchical journalism and media analysis?

If so-called “Indigenous People” cannot celebrate Columbus Day because of the mistreatment received at the hands of European colonizers, why should European-Americans support Indigenous People Day because of the mistreatment innocent settlers experienced at the hands of heathen savages?

President Trump has been accused of an alleged affair with a pornstar. If true, talk about low hanging fruit. It doesn’t say much as to the prowess of your manhood and skills as a lover to bed a woman that will not only sleep with anyone for the right amount of money but also allow the encounter to be videoed.

Celebrity Chef Gordon Ramsay announced that he lost over 50 pounds over fear that his girth would cause him to lose his wife to another man. Frankly, it sounds like she is not worth keeping. Where is the media outrage that would have erupted about fat shaming and positive body image if it was his wife that felt similar pressure to lose weight in order to save her marriage?

In a broadcast commentary transcript, Cal Thomas concluded, “You may not like his behavior. You may not like his personality. But you cannot deny the objective results. This President in his first year in office is bringing about real change that is promoting the general welfare.” So is Thomas now saying that the health of a nation is determined solely in terms of materialistic financial statistics? The promised wall is no more closer to being built, proposals are being suggested for what will essentially amount to yet another amnesty, and (as usual) the State of the Union promises to be a litany of yet additional handout programs that the country can no longer afford. As a self-professed student of Francis Schaffer, one would think Thomas would know better. Does Thomas renounce the inclusion of his name in an edition of National Review published prior to the election suggesting that a Trump presidency would mark the ruination of the Republic?

During the 2018 State of the Union Address, Democrats booed President Trump’s remarks that immigration policy should consider quality individuals or nuclear family units rather than import entire slum villages as results from chain migration. If Joe Kennedy III is stepping forward to spearhead the antithesis of the Trump agenda, perhaps hundreds of migrants can be warehoused on the numerous spacious Kennedy family properties.

Fascinating how liberal agitators demand the remainder of the country refrain from comment when Columbus Day is rebranded as “Indigenous People Day” in urban cesspools of multiculturalism but they have no problem imposing their New York values upon the bastions of the Confederacy when it comes to what memorials will be allowed to remain on public property.

At an event titled “The People’s State Of The Union”, celebrities, activists, and social justice front groups converged to reinforce amongst themselves just how much they despise the idea of others enjoying a standard of living just above that of mere squalor to the point that they are advocating violent Communist upheaval. For if these limousine revolutionaries really gave the proverbial rodent’s rear shank about actual poverty, wouldn’t they have actually instead directed the resources needed to give themselves a gigantic pat on the back to actual poor people?

Did the thought police all jacked out of shape at a racially questionable sweatshirt sold on line ever get around to expressing similar degrees of outrage regarding the knockout game or the looting of businesses over unpopular trial verdicts?

Pope Francis repeatedly lectures the West about defending the oppressed and downtrodden in terms of throwing borders open to swarms of migrants and refugees. Yet in regards to the persecuted in Red China he certainly doesn’t mind turning the proverbial blind eye in terms of forcing two underground bishops to step down and granting Vatican approval to the bishops of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association.

A Super Bowl commercial proclaimed the following: "You come with open minds and the instinct that we are equal. Some people may see your differences and be threatened by them. But you are unstoppable. You'll love who you want. You'll demand fair and equal pay. You will not allow where you come from to dictate where you're going. You will be heard, not dismissed. You will be connected, not alone. Change starts now." Does that include Roy Moore loving whom he wanted to love in his younger days? And what of those now advocating bestiality, necrophilia, and these reports of a man fathering a child with his own 20 year old daughter? Will those that disagree with this predetermined agenda be guaranteed the same right to be heard and not dismissed or will that privilege only be granted to those acquiescing to the preferences of nefarious cabalistic elites? For what if the individual approaches the evidence and articulated justifications with this supposedly open mind and he concludes that the change needed is not to the extent advocated by the nihilistic vanguard?

Amusement Park King’s Dominion will no longer be referring to its classic wooden roller coaster as “The Rebel Yell”. Such an allusion to Confederate heritage might unduly trigger the weak minded and sociologically delicate. Instead the attraction will be renamed “Racer 75”. Just how much longer will this stupidity continue? Should the entire park be renamed since “King” refers to not only monarchy but one ruled over by a patriarchal figure without paying due homage to the gynocracy for the atrocities committed in the name of phallocentrism. And shouldn’t the name “Racer 75” also be considered offensive? For does not “Racer” imply a competition based on speed with that quantifiable measurement used to determine such potentially psychologically damaging categorizations such as winter and loser. Lastly, since the 75 is a chronometric recognition of when the ride was built, shouldn’t that also be considered offensive since that measurement is ultimately a relativistic one calculated through tabulation of the temporal interval having elapsed from that moment back to the existence of Christ?

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Will NPR Snobs View Trade School Graduates As Cultural Equals?

NPR’s All Things Considered posted an article 4/25/18 titled “High Paying Trade Jobs Sit Empty While High School Grads Line Up For University”.  

Students should be encouraged to consider these occupations if they are naturally imbued with mechanical aptitude.

However, the sorts of leftwing elites that gravitate towards NPR need also be asked a question or two regarding their own promotion of this alternative career path.  

Should students pursue a trade school rather than the academic route, will the biases of technocrats result in a sort of caste system where those not credentialed in the liberal arts or higher science backgrounds NPR types prefer as their equals be excluded from weighing in on cultural concerns?  

Punitive sanction might be imposed upon any daring to raise a voice beyond the narrow concerns of their servile guild craft.

In the olden days, this used to be looked down upon as articulating opinions above or harboring aspirations beyond one’s station.

Already teachers look down upon parents that raise concerns seen as infringing upon a profession that the parents have themselves not been schooled in.  

It must also be noted that many of these trade jobs are highly paid because they are quite frankly labor intensive and often downright dangerous.

So what will be done with those pushing into their late 40’s and early 50’s whose bodies are worn out by that point but who do not have the academic qualifications to move on into work considered more white collar in nature?

Sure the pay is good when one is able to bust one’s back.   

But soon as the back is busted, some of these employers are ready to toss aside workers that barely missed a day the previous twenty years if the employee is unable to return to the job full steam ahead a month after surgery to repair injuries aggravated by these glories of proletarian labor advocated by this vanguard that hasn’t lifted a finger at all.

By Frederick Meekins

Monday, April 16, 2018

Municipalities Take Aim At Basic Liberties

The town of Deerfield, Illinois has enacted a regulation banning assault weapons.

Those violating the ban could face fines of up to $1000 per day.

Will progressives that tossed a fit over Sheriff Joe Arpaio taking it upon himself to enforce the national immigration laws that the federal government refused to get as worked up over mere town ordinances contradicting what might be allowed under state and federal law?

What other products otherwise perfectly legal in a state might municipal aldermen take upon themselves to ban?

For motorist safety, what if a town decided to forbid residents from owning compact automobiles that rolled off the assembly line after a given year since in traffic accidents such vehicles often have about as much structural integrity as the average soda can?

What, if in order to protect pedestrians, a town passed legislation insisting that smartphones present such a threat of distraction that it is not enough to restrict when these devices can be used but that these gadgets must be banned altogether within the boundaries of a specified jurisdiction?

While we are at it, if local authorities possess the power to ban products deemed legal by the state granting the municipality the right to exist in the first place, why not certain behaviors or even relationships?

 For example, if the representatives of Deefield, Illinois insist that if those electing them to office want to live in a town without firearms it is their right to do so irrespective of how neighboring jurisdictions might decide to order their own affairs, on what grounds then should some backwoods enclave be forbidden from retaining laws against sodomy or promulgating a decree refusing to accept the validity of gay marriage?

By Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Ingraham Insufficiently Deviant For Leftists To Defend Her Speech

The world has about come unhinged over Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham for daring to poke a little fun at a petulant youth known to excoriate with the vilest of profanities those reluctant to embrace his policy proposals demanding the abandonment of centuries of constitutional theory deemed fouler than his acute potty mouth.

The font of deliberative political contemplation, GQ Magazine, has posted a column in support of the Ingraham boycott titled “Boycotting Ingraham Is Patriotic”.

Yet those assenting to this sentiment are the very sorts of thinkers that would condemn the Census for tabulating how many within the boundaries of the United States are actually citizens.

But if it is inappropriate to classify who is and is not of a particular jurisdiction --- the most basic of functions in establishing the foundations of a nation/state --- isn't the concept of patriotism --- the idea that a set of principles in large part derived from a particular geography inhabited by a specific sort of people is superior to all others --- even more verboten?

GQ is celebrating the decentralized justice inherent to a boycott as about the purest form of free expression imaginable.

After all, consumers are not obligated to bestow their funds upon someone advocating a set of values that they find abhorrent.

Likewise, Ingraham is not entitled to be lavished with these funds.

Interesting, though, how amongst postmodernist hordes this realization is a one way street.

For would the editorial staff of GQ Magazine as eagerly applaud a boycott organized by a Christian cabal seeking to impose their particular ethical idiosyncrasies in a way that would implement comprehensive revolutionary change across the entire culture even if a significant percentage was still not amenable to such a fundamental alteration of the social compact.

After all, those now threatening social upheaval are the children of many who denounced Pat Buchanan's culture war oration at the 1992 Republican convention.

At the time, opponents of the pious populist insisted that absolute objective values did not exist and, even if they did, it was not the place of cultural institutions to advocate on behalf of or to enforce a hegemony of values.

Of Lady Ingraham's status within the ongoing civic discussion, the enlightened archons of GQ assure the unsettled of weak mind, “Laura Ingraham remains as empowered as ever to impart her bad takes, whether to viewers on Fox News or to passer-bys on the street, without fear of being arrested by agents of the state.” But for how long?

Already the right of free expression --- deliberately enshrined among the first protections of the Bill of Rights --- is restricted in the presence of those seeking an abortion --- a procedure that honest jurists are compelled to admit cannot be found clearly delineated anywhere in this charter document but rather only in interpretative penumbras of it.

In the case of Lara Ingraham still enjoying her innate liberties as a free citizen despite being economically inconvenienced, how is that less of an outrage than the gay couple denied the wedding cake by the Christian baker?

In the transaction dragged before the judicial system, no one prevented the couple from the state granting its official recognition of their unnatural liaison.

The only thing they would have had to have endured was the search for a baker willing to provide it, which would have cost considerably less that the advertising revenue rescinded from Fox News.

So why are some forms of speech worthy of protection and some not the part of the most vociferously insistent that the most egregious imposition imaginable is to somehow insist that someone else's truth might not be quite as true as initially suspected?

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Southern Baptist Convention Undermined By Russell Moore's Propensity Towards Compromise

Granted, in response to what was seen as encroaching apostasy and unbelief eroding both strong moral and sound doctrine, Fundamentalism at times presented a militant brand of conservative Protestantism that could could occasionally be construed as a bit gruff around the edges. In such circles, a soft answer was not necessarily perceived as turning away wrath as admonished by Proverbs 15:1 but rather as a sign of spiritual weakness and, even worse, possible compromise.

In what is categorized as the nation's largest Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention serves as an interesting sociological barometer in terms of what direction ideological winds tend to be blowing. For example early in the twentieth century, the ecclesiastical association nearly succumbed to the temptations of liberalism and modernism only to be pulled back from this brink by a conservative resurgence that coincided with the ascent of Reaganism on through the Republican Party taking both houses of Congress in the 1990's.

Now it seems the tide might once again be receding. Those that have in a sense grown up in an environment characterized as overwhelmingly religious are tempted to surrender the ground gained as a form of repentance in their minds for certain admitted excesses and as a way to promote the peace and toleration always being yelled about in one's ear.

In his early 40's as of this writing in late 2017, Dr. Russell Moore of Southern Theological Seminary and now the Ethics and Public Policy Commission is often fawned over as a prominent young leader who could very likely shape the Southern Baptist Convention throughout the course of much of the twenty-first century. If that is the case, conservative Baptists mind end up finding themselves betrayed on what could very well be a sinking ship.

Without a doubt, Russell Moore professes those fundamentals of the faith necessary to assure the individual of salvation in Christ and eternity in Heaven. But it is in those areas where it is easy to compromise for broad approval and applause that Dr. Moore presents the greater spiritual danger.

I Corinthians 9:22 counsels to be all things to all men. By this, it is believed that the Gospel message can be adapted within certain parameters or presented in such a way that addresses individuals in the particular circumstances in which they find themselves.

The problem with Russell Moore and an increasing number within Evangelical Christianity in general and the Southern Baptist Convention in particular is the growing conviction that, in order to appeal to what is perceived as untapped demographics, professional religionists must go out of there way to publicly denigrate those expected to financially sponsor these outreach efforts. And in so doing, one is expected to turn one's back on much of the foundation that was laid as the foundation that got us to where we are today.

This is particularly evident in Russell Moore's response to the Trayvon Martin incident. As someone that presents himself not only as a clergyman but as someone that also makes his comfortable living as such, one might think Russell Moore would have endeavored to remain above the fray in regards to such an issue by calling for cooler heads to prevail or to point out how quickly individual lives can be lost.

Instead, Moore came out quite publicly in favor of Trayvon Martin and against George Zimmerman. The mouthpiece of Southern Baptist public policy is quoted in the 7/16/13 edition of the Washington Post as saying, “Regardless of what Trayvon Martin was doing or not doing, you have someone who was taking upon himself some sort of vigilante justice, even by getting out of the car. Regardless of what the legal verdict was, this was wrong.

Perhaps we really should consider what transpired and especially what it was that Trayvon Martin was doing the moment his life ended.

From what the judicial process has been able to establish, Trayvon Martin was beating George Zimmerman and delivering blows to the head that could have resulted in permanent injury and even death. Why does the criteria Moore invokes to defend Martin not apply to protect Zimmerman in this incident as well?

For example, according to Moore, the chain of events began when Zimmerman disembarked from the vehicle. That may or may not have been the wisest course of action. However, that was probably more legal and less suspicious than Martin zig-zagging late at night in and out of people's yards like a drunk or reefer addict up to no good.

So if Zimmerman committed a great wrong by laying his hands on Martin, why should Martin be exonerated for attacking Zimmerman who was doing nothing worse than perambulating over a public thoroughfare? However, it is apparently not enough for Moore to simply side perhaps with the party that did not have access to a fire arm in this altercation.

One can barely find a piece of direct mail promotional newsletter propaganda these days that does not go out of its way to denigrate White people for simply being white. A considerable number of these ecclesiastical functionaries have adopted a rhetoric of White guilt more typically emanating from the likes of Phil Donahue and Woody Allen that from behind a Dixie pulpit. One of the foremost practitioners of this victimization narrative is none other than Russell Moore.

To the analysis of the Trayvon Martin issue, Russell Moore added, “And when you add this to the larger context of racial profiling and a legal system that does seem to have systemic injustices as it related to African Americans with arrests and sentencing, I think makes for a huge crisis.” Moore further observes, “Most white evangelicals...are seeing [the Martin case] microscopically and most African Americans are seeing it macroscopically. Most white Americans say we don't know what happened that night and they are missing the point.”

As dumb as Whites are depicted now by the hierarchs of the Southern Baptist Convention, it's a wonder they are able to drop their tithe into the collection plate. But perhaps it is because of such stupidity that Whites so flagrantly mocked don't take their religious dollars elsewhere.

Notice that nowhere in those comments did Moore ponder that Trayvon Martin might have been as high as a kite or that George Zimmerman might have taken the only course of action that would have preserved his own life. If Moore is going to be this discombobulated over matters of race and ethnicty to the point where in matters of law enforcement and civil adjudication that the primary concern is not so much that of an individual's guilt or innocence in terms of committing a certain act but rather on the basis of the individual's membership in certain demographic categories, Russell Moore should be asked just what is he himself willing to sacrifice in terms of comprehensive social equity.

For example, if Russell Moore on a proverbial dark and stormy night found himself confronted by a Black assailant that proceeds to perpetrate violence against this seminarian naive to how the world actually exists, is he going to do what he expected of George Zimmerman and allow himself to be pummeled either to death or into a state of permanent mental imbecility as a result of brain damage received for the good of the cause? More importantly, is Dr. Moore willing for his wife or daughters to be raped in order to balance out what Southern Baptist functionaries such as himself now consider the scales of ethnic justice?

Just as important, should these kinds of tragedies befall Rev. Moore or his ecclesiastical allies and the scumbag is apprehended by law enforcement, are these theologians then going to parrot the fashionable liberal drivel about disparities in sentencing should the perpetrator of the crimes against them be one of the minorities the denomination has come to coddle and fawn over these past few years? For in his praise of Trayvon Martin and condemnation of George Zimmerman, Moore went out of his way to emphasize this issue.

In 2013, the Convention went out of its way to enact a resolution condemning incarceration with little mention as to whether or not those tossed in the slammer might actually deserve to be there. Perhaps the denomination would instead prefer to come out in favor of more explicitly Old Testament punishments such as floggings and public executions.

The Convention also condemned former chairman of the Ethics and Policy Commission and eventually forced into retirement Richard Land for merely verbalizing what it was that the vast majority of Americans were already thinking that President Obama was “trying to gin up the black vote” and that allied racemongers “need the Trayvon Martins to continue perpetuating their central myth --- America is a racist and evil nation.”

It is not only in the area of race relations where Russell Moore falls pitifully short of the kind of leadership Baptists need if the denomination and that particular theological perspective is to not only ride out the waves of the looming cultural collapse but possibly even rescue the nation from drowning in these overwhelming historical tides.

In coverage of the 2013 convention in which Russell Moore was installed as the chairman of the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission, an observer gushed in one press account that his election brought a more moderate tone. As it was explained, “The new generation is less ideologically motivated.” However, is it that the new generation is “less ideologically motivated” or simply that it decided to collaborate in implementing a more leftist ideology?

It seems Brother Moore is quite adept at implementing a don't do as I do, do as I say mentality. For on an episode of the Albert Mohler Program broadcast sometimes around 2006 probably around the first time I had ever even heard of Russell Moore, he confessed that, while thoroughly enjoying Halloween himself as a youth, it is now wrong for contemporary Christian children to participate in Halloween. And the point of raising this issue, some are probably asking with perplexity? After all, such a viewpoint is no doubt common among a variety of theologies found among Independent Baptist, conservative Southern Baptist, and even Pentecostal or Charismatic churches.

Indeed it is. However, the example is brought up to point out that Russell Moore and the young Turks advocating his style of social engagement are not quite of the live and let live mindset those unaccustomed to fully parsing phrases such as “less ideologically motivated” might be led to believe. If anything, it would seem Russell Moore has something of a tendency to crackdown in those areas where individual preference should be allowed to flourish while allowing things to get a bit out of line where, if one slacks an inch, assorted subversives will take a proverbial mile.

How does this represent a more moderate wind being blown into Baptist sails? I can assure you, I know first hand the sort of message has been pounded into the minds of Christian youth for nearly thirty years.

I remember back in my day that, along with whether or not you watched “The Simpsons”, you would speak in hushed tones about celebrating Halloween for fear of bringing the wrath of the more religiously fanatical teachers in Christian day school down upon you. It often seemed that some would even go out of their way to assign extra homework or schedule a test for the next day as a way to punish those that might succumb to the temptation of masquerading for prepackaged nocturnal confections.

This hypocrisy aside, it is not the only issue regarding which this new breed of seemingly less ideological Southern Baptist leader may actually be more ideological than ever before. Baptists might be mocked with the mantra of “Don't drink, don't chew, and don't go with girls who do” in terms of the rigorous behavioral codes many adhere to in the attempt to differentiate themselves from those considered worldly and in an effort to adhere to a lifestyle that they believe would be pleasing to God. However, if there is one area in which Baptists are noted for a spirit of liberation it is in the area of food.

However, Russell Moore and his allies would likely impose an additional set of regulations upon those in their congregations and within their respective spheres of homiletical influence in regards to this aspect of existence in no way derived from Biblical principles such as those regarding booze.

On 1/2/2006, Russell Moore posted an entry on the blog of the Henry Institute at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary titled “Crunchy Cons and Veggie Tales”. The brief essay is a review and elaboration of an emerging ideology known as crunchy conservatism coined by Moore's “Touchstone Magazine” colleague Rod Dreher.

In the post, Moore describes crunchy cons as, “...conservatives who are religious traditionalists and political conservatives but who are deeply suspicious of the materialism and consumerist assumptions of the reigning culture.” However, the materialism denounced here goes beyond that requiring the latest iteration of the I-Phone when the one acquired last year still works perfectly fine or having to acquire an entirely new wardrobe every year irrespective of whether or not the duds from the previous season have worn out

Rather, it is of the variety of how we mere working slobs are expected to willingly embrace with deliberation and aforethought a harsher and less convenient lifestyle because doing so makes detached intellectuals like Russell Moore that have not gotten their hands dirty in years or even decades feel so much more satisfied with themselves because they know more about how you ought to spend your miserable existence better than you do.

In the TimesOnline article referenced by Moore titled “Mr. And Mrs. Crunchy”, his “Touchstone Magazine” colleague Rod Dreher begins, “We had come to believe that the family, not the individual, is the basic building block of our society.” It depends upon what the writer means by that.

Bravo if by that he is expressing a realization that, upon having children, his wellbeing and that of his wife takes a backseat and their needs play second fiddle to those of the children. However, to those such as Rod Dreher and Russell Moore, the notion likely goes considerably beyond that.

For example, often those of this mentality having procreated believe that they are entitled to an ever-increasing percentage of the income and accumulated resources of those that do not have children, especially if such people are single. This confiscatory compensation can take on a number of forms.

The first is in the form of traditional taxation. Those of a communalist mindset believe that each additional child that they parent into the world should grant them a larger piece of the economic pie to be siphoned off as form of punishment from those not having produced children or not having produced by what in their standard is an acceptable number. One radical homeschooler has even insinuated that those not having at least four (the particular number he just happens to have) of harboring an insufficient love of children. It is about time to end manipulation of the tax code as a kind of mind game to trick supposedly free people into engaging in predetermined behavior of any kind.

In expanding that the family and not the individual is the building block of society, Rod Dreher expounded, “I heretically came to realize that Hillary Clinton was right: it really does take a village to raise a child. We conservatives, with our exaltation of consumer choice and the sovereign individual, were dismantling the village as effectively as the statist libertines we opposed.”

This notion of the village goes beyond simply perhaps curtailing the amount of smut broadcast on television. Rather, it allows for the COMMUNITY often in the guise of government authorities to have final say over decisions regarding your existence that might not really be based upon any principle clearly delineated in the pages of Scripture.

Dreher further elaborates regarding free market principles, “But they were based on fundamentally materialist assumptions about human nature which conservatives ought to have known were inaccurate and which would lead to a loss of purpose, of community, or idealism.”

But is it really the place of government (because that is ultimately what is meant by COMMUNITY to these neo-beatnik types) to police these matters in the lives of individuals and families? For what if these are at variance with what communal elites decide constitutes prevailing values and acceptable citizenship (for lack of a better term for those advocating for the elimination of traditional borders).

For example, what ought to happen when the COMMUNITY decides you as a professional baker you will provide your particular goods and services for gay weddings? Better yet, in such circumstances, what happens when the COMMUNITY decides that its vision of marriage not being limited between a single pair of heterosexual partners but rather open to any combination of consenting adult partners is the view to be taught to your children?

Granted, it is doubtful that a good Baptist like Russell Moore would applaud such social decay. In fact, overall the Southern Baptist Convention has stood for the God-ordained traditional heterosexual family even if a number of the association's spokesfolk have been hoodwinked into public forums and dialogs where the attendees mired in that specific inclination are not so much looking to be delivered spiritually from that particular sin but are instead attempting to lure the well-intentioned but somewhat naïve Baptist into a state of ever-increasing compromise.

Russell Moore could be one of the most prominent Baptist leaders of the twenty-first century with the possibility as many as five additional decades of theological productivity before him if he is blessed with mental vitality and a long life. As such, American Evangelicals need to be cognizant where his accumulating compromises undermine what little remains of the nation's conservative values and influence upon America's cultural institutions.

Most would agree that a progressive licentiousness pervades much of the Western world's media landscape. However, one of the few remaining areas in which conservatives of varying stripes have been able to hold their own has been talk radio.

Yet, if Russell Moore had his way, conservatives ---- particularly of the Evangelical variety --- would relinquish the ground that they hold in the media or at least moderate their tone to the extent that such voices would be indistinguishable from any other variety of broadcaster.

At the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention's 2014 Leadership Summit, as that body's president, Moore said that if all he knew about Christianity was what he heard on Christian radio in the Nashville area while driving to that particular conference, he would hate Christianity too. Such an allegation, in and of itself, might have merit. The thing of it is that, since then, Moore has been disturbingly vague and elusive regarding the nature of these criticisms.

In this particular tirade, Moore said, “There are some people who believe that fidelity to the gospel simply means speaking 'you kids get off my lawn'. That is not the message of the gospel. If the call to repentance does not end with an invitation that is grounded ...in the cross and the empty tomb of Jesus we are speaking a different word than the Word that has been given.”

Such a statement is accurate if the venue and/or media under consideration is the pulpit on Sunday morning. However, talk radio (even Christian talk radio) can have a slightly different methodology dependent upon the particular program under consideration.

For example, in his tirade Russell Moore said, “If all you and I are doing is standing and speaking a word, including a truthful word, about sexual immorality...the world does not need us for that. The devil is able to do that on his own. We have not been called simply to condemn. We have been called to reconcile.”

It seems that increasingly in Dr. Moore's homiletical repertoire that “reconcile” has become a euphemism for capitulation and pandering. There is indeed more to repentance than condemnation. But in order for someone to admit that they are wrong and want to do something about that situation, doesn't the individual need to informed that they have done something wrong?

Apparently in his attempt to garner the approval of religious leftists, Russell Moore insists that the world does not need us to stand and speak against sexual immorality. But if not Christians and conservatives of various persuasions, who will be left to do so. In light of the Duggar and Bill Gothard scandals most prominently and to a lesser extent R.C. Sproul Jr's confession to his own carnal temptation, it seems this variety of compromise is even coming to grip those uplifted among us as supposedly the best that Evangelicalism has to offer.

For how long did Russell Moore listen to talk radio during the day in question? Shouldn't he be required to listen to a station's entire weekly program rotation before rendering a somewhat objective verdict that the complete Gospel message is not being presented?

Russell Moore dismisses Christian talk radio as little more than the rhetorical equivalent of “you kids get off my lawn”. But if certain people are deliberately somewhere they ought not to be doing something they definitely shouldn't be, why shouldn't they be told about it? Professional religionists and clergy such as Moore certainly don't mind letting this be known when the tithes and offering slack off.

In the effort to protect their stations and privileges placing them on a rung on the social ladder higher than that of the average pewfiller, a number of ministers like to emphasize the passage found in Ephesians 4:11 stipulating that some are called to be teachers, some pastors, and other evangelists.

So why cant this also apply to the various ministries and programs features on an average Christian radio station? Some shows might emphasize family life and personal relationships. Others such as Moore seem to prefer, according to his remarks, to focus upon explicitly evangelistic outreach. Others might be a bit more hard hitting (in a way that seems to turn off Dr. Moore) by exposing the doctrinal deficiencies in systems in competition with Christianity or the moral controversies eating away at the heart of American society or Western civilization.

Russell Moore is partially correct in that if all we know of Christianity came from the assorted radio programs broadcast in the faith's name one might very well not want anything to do with this particular religion. Does the theologian articulating such scathing remarks intend to repent of the role he has played in such a development surprisingly not always so much the result of an excess of conservatism but often times as a result of his desire to curry favor with religious leftists?

For example, as previously stated, where in the pages of Scripture is the pastor or evangelist instructed to berate the Christian for acquiring provisions from large chain retailers such as Target or Walmart? Likewise, what self-respecting White person is going to want anything to do with your religion when you rhetorically flog them for things that happened nearly half a century ago when it is often the minorities that these self-loathing Caucasians go out of their way to pander towards destroying property and threatening the innocent in the blighted urban areas?

It might be one thing to strive for the Biblical admonition to be all things to all men. However, in the way in which they attempt to do so, Southern Baptist functionaries such as Russell Moore would do well to remember that those having been loyal members all along are just as much worthy of respect and admiration as those attempting to be brought into the fold.

By Frederick Meekins