Think About IT: Morals do not matter, what we need are better calculators

I guess the experts were right, people’s morals really don’t affect their job, I mean as long as they are really good at what they do. For example, if a surgeon is an excellent surgeon, what difference does it make if he is an immoral person, or if a lawyer wins cases, who cares what his personal life is like, or if the heads of banking institutions are good financiers, what difference does it make if they are really immoral or even unspiritual people?

Freeing ourselves from primitive beliefs in God, personal responsibility, trustworthiness, telling the truth at all costs, and “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” will allow us to focus on the really important things.

Oops. That would mean that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, and…failed because the CEO’s, apparently at least some of the trustees, and borrowers just couldn’t add and subtract. Now you may be wondering how I know this since I don’t know anyone whoever even walked on Wall Street. It is quite simple actually since personal morals could not have any relevance to this massive failure, it could not have possibly been because of greed, covetness, lying, pride, and other such sins. Therefore what is needed are better math classes, and more…but perish the thought that we have left our spiritual and moral moorings as a nation and need God-granted repentance.

Worse still, is that the government will bail them out so that they do not have to feel the pain of their own greed and arrogance, which results in personal responsibility being further eroded.

Most tragically is that when the government continues on a path of protecting its citizens from the consequences of their own sin, people grow more and more dependent upon government and become increasingly less likely to look to God, who is really the only one who can deliver them. Jesus said, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick” (Matthew 9:12). Meaning sick and know they are sick.

Think about IT: Can abortion be compared to Nazism?

Pro-lifers often draw parallels between the pro-abortion position, Nazi extermination of the Jews, and the Dred Scott vs. Sandford decision 1857, which ruled that black slaves were not fully human and therefore not protected under the U.S. Constitution. Of course, pro-abortionists gnash their teeth at such comparisons, but are they legitimate? Well, not only is it legitimate, it is an obvious comparison because of the common themes. Continue reading →

“Think about IT”: Does infidelity to a spouse relate to politics?

We are often told that a person’s personal life should not influence whether a voter believes that he or she can serve in public office.  In other words, one may be a gambler, liar or a thief at home, but what one does in his personal life has nothing to do with his ability to serve in public office.  Of course this is a relatively new thought in our culture, but it has wide support, and I suppose as morality breaks down even further it will become concomitantly more popular.

For example, when a politician is discovered to have been unfaithful to his spouse, many seem shocked that voters consider that a disqualifier.  Often such infidelities are summarily dismissed as a private matter having no bearing on the job they are doing as a politician. 

But wait a minute.  Isn’t public office a position of trust?  Isn’t whether one keeps his word or not a political concern?  If we cannot trust someone to keep his vow that he made to his bride before God and the people that love them most—and they apparently love the most—then what basis do we have for thinking he will keep his word to a galaxy of voters whom he never personally met, probably will never see again, and to whom what he does or does not do in private meetings is unknowable? 

While we forgive, that is starkly different than concluding forgiveness means trust or that an issue that can be forgiven is synonymous with being irrelevant.  

“Think about IT”: Governor Sarah Palin; Can she, Will she, Should she?

As one who cannot vote for Barack Obama because of his pro-abortion position, economic socialism, comfort in Liberation Theology, etc; and one who, while I have respected Senator McCain, has on a number of occasions strongly disagreed with his position, I have found myself actually elated about the McCain ticket. Why? What happened? Well what happened is that I heard Sarah Palin.

I must say, when I heard Governor Palin accept the invitation to be McCain’s vice president, I became more excited and energized than I have been about a candidate since Ronald Reagan. I later feared that enthusiasm might be diminished by her next speech, but her speech at the Republican Convention not only did not diminish my enthusiasm, it amplified it.

Is she capable of being vice president? I mean she is a conservative, woman, mother of five children, believes that God created the world, advocates abstinence teaching, lifetime member of the NRA, from Alaska, served as mayor of a small ordinary town, Governor of Alaska, Washington outsider, graduated from the University of Idaho rather than Harvard or Columbia, and started out serving in the PTA. In addition, she is, according to every report I have heard, an active Bible believing, conservative, evangelical Christian; and she is a real life pro-lifer, which is evidenced by her choice to give birth to Trig, whom she and her husband knew would be born with Down syndrome, and their handling of Bristol’s pregnancy. The truth is that most Down children are aborted and most teen pregnancies either end in abortion, dismissive relativism, or the teen facing the birth without the support of loving parents.

My answer is an absolutely, unequivocal yes.

Will she stay in the race in light of familial attacks and challenges? I say yes. I have neither heard nor seen anything that makes me think she is a quitter. And I say, “Good for Sarah”. If she runs or quits, it should only be because she believes that is the will of God, and not because it is the will of her enemies.

Should she run for Vice President since she is the mother of five children at home? If I were her pastor, I would have counseled her to choose the nobler, albeit far more difficult, opportunity and stay at home with her children until they were grown. This has nothing to do with her capability or being a woman. It has to do with what the Scripture clearly teaches and the eternal and peerless assignment of God to rear a godly heritage (1 Timothy 5:14; Titus 2:5).

Now you may be wondering, how I can enthusiastically support her ((whether I vote for the McCain ticket is still undecided)) since she obviously would not have taken my counsel, and I would assume she disagrees with me. The answer is that while some disagreements are a deal breaker, others, although very important, are not. If everyone had to agree with me on everything before I could love and support them, I fear that even my two Chihuahuas—known far and wide as Luna Doll the sweetest dog of all and Lilly Brown simply the wigglingest dog in town—would abandon me before nightfall.


“Think About IT”: Bristol is with child; therefore, Abstinence doesn’t work. REALLY?

The pro-abortionists were ever so quick to capitalize upon the pregnancy of seventeen-year-old Bristol Palin in order to demonstrate the failure of teaching abstinence in schools, a program which the now Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sara Palin strongly advocates.

As is discouragingly all too frequent, the demagogues were so quick in their attack that they spoke devoid of compassion, logic, or common sense. They quite gleefully concluded, “Governor Palin’s seventeen-year-old daughter is pregnant…so much for the effectiveness of teaching abstinence.”

By their logic, public education must be an undeniable failure since some politician’s children have not done well or even flunked out; laws against drunk driving have failed since some politician’s children have been arrested for DWI, etc., etc. If we apply their logic to anything in this life, it will be deemed a failure since nothing works perfectly, which by the way is the logical fallacy of the tyranny of the perfect.

The fact is, they would not apply the same standard to anything they support, nor should they. One may argue the merits of public education, abstinence programs…but as a Christian we should do so based upon biblical truth, research, and good old common sense. Further, we should not let pundits, political operatives, and demagogues get away with such inane shenanigans. They should be ashamed, and if not, shamed by those who listen.


Public Nudity: Innocent or Sin?

Recently, I was asked what the Bible says about public nudity. As you well know, many believe that the taboo of public nudity is merely social, and that apart from societal mores, there is nothing immoral about public nudity. What does the Bible say?

First let me be clear. I draw a distinction between task nudity and social or sexual nudity. Task nudity refers to a person being nude for such things as taking a shower at the gym. Therefore, this article does not refer to task nudity but rather whether it is moral to be nude in public, in mixed company other than with one’s spouse, and/or for the purpose of being nude, disrobed etc., for either sexual or social nudity. Continue reading →

The Environment: A Christian Perspective

Recently, Page Lynn presented a paper on the environment in The Ethics Round Table. From which, I suggested four guidelines to The Round Table to assist us in thinking and acting christianly about environmental issues and our involvement. Following are those four suggestions. For a fuller discussion of this issue I recommend Cornwall Alliance web site, or sign up for the Round Table next year. Continue reading →

What I learned from an Atheist!

“There is a God” is the title of an excellent new book by the internationally known former atheist, Antony Flew. The book chronicles his journey into and from atheism over his long and influential life. Years ago I remember Norman Geisler saying that Antony Flew was the most formidable debater for atheism.

Well, I have learned—actually been reminded of—some things from this former atheist, which I think are worth mentioning. Continue reading →

Science, The unbiased and final arbitrator of truth: Really?

Science is often presented as, or understood to be, so objective that there is very little if any bias, and if there is any it will soon be found out and decisively dealt with.  The objectivity of science is portrayed as towering above other means of knowing.  Frequently, in one form or another, I have heard the argument that, “science is the best or only real source or test of truth”.  I have heard this mantra taught in university classrooms, articulated via the airwaves, and mentioned countless times by college students that I come in contact with.  Science as the final arbitrator of truth is based in large measure on its supposed unbiased objectivity. 

However, while science, particularly the scientific method, is an excellent way of studying and hypothesizing about empirical data within its legitimate domain, it does have domanial limitations, and it is not without inherent limitations and biases that can and do result in breaches of ethics, distortions of facts, and hyper-claims. Consider the following: Continue reading →

Evangelicals, Unwanted in The Public Square:

It is undeniable that some Americans just wish Christians would disappear from the public square.  Since that is hopefully not going to happen, they spend most of their time and effort arguing that while it is ok to believe in Christ and the Bible, Evangelicals should not bring their faith into the public marketplace of ideas, e.g. politics, education, law….They do not mind our religious faith as long as it is a private faith, and only practiced alone with other like-minded people.

A study released May 7, 2007 by the Institute for Jewish & Community Research once again confirmed the bias against evangelicals that exists on university campuses.
“Among non-evangelical university faculty, 53 percent… said they held an unfavorable view of evangelical Christians while expressing positive feelings toward most other religious groups. One professor said he attributes the disdain for evangelicals to their Republican Party activism and their perceived opposition to science.

Gary Tobin, the institute’s director and chief pollster, said the results undoubtedly reveal “bias and prejudice” among the nation’s educational leaders. Tobin told The Washington Post, “If a majority of faculty said they did not feel warmly about Muslims or Jews or Latinos or African Americans, there would be an outcry.” He goes on to note, “No one would attempt to justify or explain those feelings. No one would say, ‘The reason they feel this way is because they don’t like the politics of blacks or the politics of Jews.’ That would be unthinkable.”  Tobin further found “that 71 percent of faculty members agreed with the statement: This country would be better off if Christian fundamentalists kept their religious beliefs out of politics.” (( Continue reading →