According to the UK's Independent, ice may disappear entirely from the North Pole this summer.
This is a doom-and-gloom story right out of the catastrophic, overheated, Earth's-on-fire, boiling planet global warming playbook. Will the planet survive?
Let's continue following the Independent to see the expected calamitous impact:
"If it happens, it raises the prospect of the Arctic nations being able to exploit the valuable oil and mineral deposits below the sea bed."
Let's hope so. Maybe they can extract enough oil to fuel Al Gore's addiction to energy consumption -- but that's probably being too optimistic.
Meanwhile, let's enjoy the unusual Arctic conditions while they last.
And continue to marvel at the wonder of God's creation.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Britain's Equality Laws
The Equality Industry in Britain is alive and well.
According to the TimesOnline, equality laws in England and Wales consist of 116 items spread over 4,000 pages. That's a lot of equality!
According to the TimesOnline, equality laws in England and Wales consist of 116 items spread over 4,000 pages. That's a lot of equality!
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Quebec City's Great 400th Birthday Bash
This year is the 400th anniversary of the founding of Quebec City. I've heard that the anticipated tourist rush did not materialize.
We need to get back to PEI, and I discovered that Burlington, Vermont is all booked up this week-end, so I thought I would give the Quebec City area a try and take the Canadian route. We like to stay at the Hôtel-Motel Bernières in nearby Saint-Nicholas. It's near the half-way point between Toronto and Charlottetown. It is privately-owned, has lovely grounds, is pet-friendly, and has a very good, relaxed French-Canadian style restaurant. (I usually order the full-plate of spaghetti, which I often crave when travelling, but I digress.)
I called Hôtel-Motel Bernières and, sure, rooms for either this Friday or Saturday night, no problem. I assumed that the 400th year anniversary celebrations must have ended, and all the tourists who were going to go to Quebec City this summer have already come and gone. I decided to look them up on the Internet. You can try this yourself. I googled
quebec city 400th anniversary celebrations
I expected that the main websites associated with this tourist event would have the key dates and the key events displayed prominently on their home page.
Not so.
See if you can figure out when the actual dates of the celebration are, and what the key events are. Any difficulty you may have may partially explain why people stayed -- or is it staying? -- away.
And that's the way the Boule bounces.
We need to get back to PEI, and I discovered that Burlington, Vermont is all booked up this week-end, so I thought I would give the Quebec City area a try and take the Canadian route. We like to stay at the Hôtel-Motel Bernières in nearby Saint-Nicholas. It's near the half-way point between Toronto and Charlottetown. It is privately-owned, has lovely grounds, is pet-friendly, and has a very good, relaxed French-Canadian style restaurant. (I usually order the full-plate of spaghetti, which I often crave when travelling, but I digress.)
I called Hôtel-Motel Bernières and, sure, rooms for either this Friday or Saturday night, no problem. I assumed that the 400th year anniversary celebrations must have ended, and all the tourists who were going to go to Quebec City this summer have already come and gone. I decided to look them up on the Internet. You can try this yourself. I googled
quebec city 400th anniversary celebrations
I expected that the main websites associated with this tourist event would have the key dates and the key events displayed prominently on their home page.
Not so.
See if you can figure out when the actual dates of the celebration are, and what the key events are. Any difficulty you may have may partially explain why people stayed -- or is it staying? -- away.
And that's the way the Boule bounces.
Rich People Have Bigger Feet
Hoofing on over to the CBC, a shocking, ground-breaking study has revealed that rich people own more and bigger cars and live in bigger houses than poor people.
What becomes clear from reading the article is that "the rich" have very big feet, or at least, footprints, which I assume are a reliable indicator of foot size.
Given this, equality of foot size ought to become a pressing humans rights concern in Canada. People with large feet should be fined and people with small feet should receive subsidies and allowances and official priority-grievance status with the HRCs. (People with only one foot will have to be treated as special-cases.)
Since there is always the possibility for abuse, including the disguising of overly large feet, we will also need a foot registry.
Because, on the long, foot-weary march to social justice, de-feet is unthinkable.
Check it out at:
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/06/24/footprint-households.html
What becomes clear from reading the article is that "the rich" have very big feet, or at least, footprints, which I assume are a reliable indicator of foot size.
Given this, equality of foot size ought to become a pressing humans rights concern in Canada. People with large feet should be fined and people with small feet should receive subsidies and allowances and official priority-grievance status with the HRCs. (People with only one foot will have to be treated as special-cases.)
Since there is always the possibility for abuse, including the disguising of overly large feet, we will also need a foot registry.
Because, on the long, foot-weary march to social justice, de-feet is unthinkable.
Check it out at:
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/06/24/footprint-households.html
Monday, June 23, 2008
The Demise of the United Church of Canada
There are many wonderful, faithful people in the United Church of Canada (UCC).
But this Church as an organization has long ceased to be faithful to Jesus Christ. In fact, at its core, rather than loving Jesus Christ, it appears more like it despises and rejects everything he stands for. Exclusiveness -- "no man comes to the Father but by me" (inappropriately narrow and non-inclusive). Separated holiness (too restrictive: abortion, sexual profligacy, alternate sexualities are all OK). The sharp sword of Truth (dulled to a harmless blunt edge - the Bible's just a man-made book). The blood of Christ (barbaric -- which is why they long ago purged themselves of hymns which celebrate the Blood). The need to be saved (antiquated and impolite to even suggest).
In an article in today's National Post about efforts to revive its declining fortunes through evangelism,
Conservative theologian John Stackhouse says:
"...the United Church shows itself to be representative of a kind of vague liberal civility without any distinctive content, and thus without any real coherence, so no wonder their Church is just slowly centripetally swirling apart -- there's nothing centripetally to hold it together."
Well put. Without content. Without coherence. Without a center. How unlike the gospel portrayed within the pages of the New Testament!
The problem with a post-modern, relativistic Church like the UCC is, if it does evangelize, it's message cannot be "come to Christ" whom it has put off, it can only be "come to us".
I've looked at Christ. And I've looked at the United Church of Canada.
I would rather come to Christ.
The United Church professes to love everybody; apparently evangelical Christians are the exception to the rule. In the National Post article, the only group they took a swipe at, indirectly, was evangelicals:
"...we know we don't want to be like them..." Rev. Blair said.
Fortunately for all, evangelicals don't want to be like them, either. A Church that refuses to stand on the Word of God falls and crumbles and is blown away. Let other Churches gaze upon the once mighty Church of Wesley and Knox and tremble.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
PS - I'm currently attending revival meetings at the Toronto Airport Christian Centre with Jeff Garvin -- now that's another story altogether!
But this Church as an organization has long ceased to be faithful to Jesus Christ. In fact, at its core, rather than loving Jesus Christ, it appears more like it despises and rejects everything he stands for. Exclusiveness -- "no man comes to the Father but by me" (inappropriately narrow and non-inclusive). Separated holiness (too restrictive: abortion, sexual profligacy, alternate sexualities are all OK). The sharp sword of Truth (dulled to a harmless blunt edge - the Bible's just a man-made book). The blood of Christ (barbaric -- which is why they long ago purged themselves of hymns which celebrate the Blood). The need to be saved (antiquated and impolite to even suggest).
In an article in today's National Post about efforts to revive its declining fortunes through evangelism,
Conservative theologian John Stackhouse says:
"...the United Church shows itself to be representative of a kind of vague liberal civility without any distinctive content, and thus without any real coherence, so no wonder their Church is just slowly centripetally swirling apart -- there's nothing centripetally to hold it together."
Well put. Without content. Without coherence. Without a center. How unlike the gospel portrayed within the pages of the New Testament!
The problem with a post-modern, relativistic Church like the UCC is, if it does evangelize, it's message cannot be "come to Christ" whom it has put off, it can only be "come to us".
I've looked at Christ. And I've looked at the United Church of Canada.
I would rather come to Christ.
The United Church professes to love everybody; apparently evangelical Christians are the exception to the rule. In the National Post article, the only group they took a swipe at, indirectly, was evangelicals:
"...we know we don't want to be like them..." Rev. Blair said.
Fortunately for all, evangelicals don't want to be like them, either. A Church that refuses to stand on the Word of God falls and crumbles and is blown away. Let other Churches gaze upon the once mighty Church of Wesley and Knox and tremble.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
PS - I'm currently attending revival meetings at the Toronto Airport Christian Centre with Jeff Garvin -- now that's another story altogether!
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The Search For The Pederast Brain
Scientists are desperate to establish a scientific justification for homosexuality. Public money is being spent. The belief is that if it can be demonstrated that homosexuality is in some way intrinsic rather than chosen, this will normalize and justify it. Proponents of homosexuality are hoping that this will provide a knock-out blow against Christian objections to homosexuality.
It will, of course, do no such thing. Christians understand that, since the Fall, man inherits a corrupt, that is, sinful, nature through Adam. We are born into the world with defective, disordered natures. Put it this way: we are not sinners just because we sin; we sin because we are sinners. Homosexuality will continue to be seen, in this light, as objectively disordered against the objective standard of male and female which can be seen in nature, and, if you can't see it there, in Scripture. The remedy is not the normalization of sin; it is Christ.
Unequal Treatment
Our secular society says that it is deeply committed to the equality of all human persons, regardless of sexual orientation, hence the urgency to legiitimize homosexuality. However it is worth noting that scientists do not display the same sense of urgency to discover a "pederast gene", or a scientific justification for pederasty. However, iif scientific discovery can be used to justify homosexual behaviour, why can't the same scientific methods, and discoveries, be used to justify pederast behaviour? If they are both unchosen, and innate, why should one be viewed as normal and the other deviant? Why shouldn't both be viewed as normal, or, alternatively, deviant?
I did a Google search this morning and found 65,000 references to "gay brain". A similar search for "pederast brain" came up with exactly one entry -- and that was used as a pejorative against someone.
Personhood - Gay vs. Pederast
This discriminatory bias of secular society is also seen in the concept of personhood. Clearly, in our society, the terms gay and person have been twinned, to the point where gay is considered the definition of a person, as opposed to simply a descriptive trait associated with a person. (The media never talk about the rights of "men engaging in homosexual activities", it is always about the rights of "gay persons" -- the "gay" identity being stronger than the "male" identity.) The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. It is the foundation of all arguments in favour of homosexuality. And it is the foundation of all that is wrong with these arguments. Christians who understand that God has made us male and female understand that homosexual and gay are, ultimately, false identities. It may be what a person feels, it may define a person's urges, but it is not who a person is. (And that is why, ultimately, catering to these false identities is neither helpful nor kind -- gays are, like us, first and foremost, males; and lesbians, are, like us, first and foremost females. Rather than viewing homosexuals as some class of "other" with rights, we view them as being "ourselves", welcome them and embrace them as such, while holding them to the same moral standards as we hold ourselves.)
But what about pederasts in our secular society? We don't refer to them as "pederast persons", do we? Pederasty is, arguably, equally unchosen and equally persistent as homosexuality; if rights follow from these two characteristics, then pederasts have the same basis for arguing for acceptance and rights as gays. But our culture draws a sharp and deep line between them. To put it bluntly, gays are persons, pederasts are not. I can understand our society's desire to do this on moral grounds, but it is not moral grounds I am talking about now -- it is scientific grounds, because that is where the argument is currently being played out.
It is also Charter-rights grounds. For a moment, set aside the fact that pederastic acts are illegal. That's not what I'm getting at here. What I'm getting at is the fact that in the view of secular society, gays are persons, pederasts are not. They speak of gay persons; they do not speak of pederast persons. This provides homosexuals with a status and dignity which is denied pederast persons. But, in a society where all sexual orientations are afforded equal status and protection under the law, is that not a clear case of discrimination?
Let's Google it. "Gay person" results in 560,000 entries. "Pederast person" results in exactly 2. Pederasts have a long way to go to achieve the equality they are supposedly guaranteed by our Charter of Rights.
Consistent Moral Thinking
Both Christians and secularists have an understanding of normal, and, from this, right-and-wrong. Secularists find theirs in the amoral idea of adult permissiveness; if two adults are predisposed to do it, and want to do it, how can we say it's wrong? (Especially when we've paid for science that backs us up!) On this basic, they judge homosexuality to be OK, but pederasty not so; Christians, with minds rooted in reason and revelation, have a higher view of humankind, and, because of this, a narrower view of what constitutes a baseline of normal or moral behaviour.
The final point is this: Christians speak and act in a manner that is consistent with their worldview and beliefs; secularists, by claiming to be in favour of equal rights for all, and then slamming the door on an orientation they disfavor, do not.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
It will, of course, do no such thing. Christians understand that, since the Fall, man inherits a corrupt, that is, sinful, nature through Adam. We are born into the world with defective, disordered natures. Put it this way: we are not sinners just because we sin; we sin because we are sinners. Homosexuality will continue to be seen, in this light, as objectively disordered against the objective standard of male and female which can be seen in nature, and, if you can't see it there, in Scripture. The remedy is not the normalization of sin; it is Christ.
Unequal Treatment
Our secular society says that it is deeply committed to the equality of all human persons, regardless of sexual orientation, hence the urgency to legiitimize homosexuality. However it is worth noting that scientists do not display the same sense of urgency to discover a "pederast gene", or a scientific justification for pederasty. However, iif scientific discovery can be used to justify homosexual behaviour, why can't the same scientific methods, and discoveries, be used to justify pederast behaviour? If they are both unchosen, and innate, why should one be viewed as normal and the other deviant? Why shouldn't both be viewed as normal, or, alternatively, deviant?
I did a Google search this morning and found 65,000 references to "gay brain". A similar search for "pederast brain" came up with exactly one entry -- and that was used as a pejorative against someone.
Personhood - Gay vs. Pederast
This discriminatory bias of secular society is also seen in the concept of personhood. Clearly, in our society, the terms gay and person have been twinned, to the point where gay is considered the definition of a person, as opposed to simply a descriptive trait associated with a person. (The media never talk about the rights of "men engaging in homosexual activities", it is always about the rights of "gay persons" -- the "gay" identity being stronger than the "male" identity.) The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. It is the foundation of all arguments in favour of homosexuality. And it is the foundation of all that is wrong with these arguments. Christians who understand that God has made us male and female understand that homosexual and gay are, ultimately, false identities. It may be what a person feels, it may define a person's urges, but it is not who a person is. (And that is why, ultimately, catering to these false identities is neither helpful nor kind -- gays are, like us, first and foremost, males; and lesbians, are, like us, first and foremost females. Rather than viewing homosexuals as some class of "other" with rights, we view them as being "ourselves", welcome them and embrace them as such, while holding them to the same moral standards as we hold ourselves.)
But what about pederasts in our secular society? We don't refer to them as "pederast persons", do we? Pederasty is, arguably, equally unchosen and equally persistent as homosexuality; if rights follow from these two characteristics, then pederasts have the same basis for arguing for acceptance and rights as gays. But our culture draws a sharp and deep line between them. To put it bluntly, gays are persons, pederasts are not. I can understand our society's desire to do this on moral grounds, but it is not moral grounds I am talking about now -- it is scientific grounds, because that is where the argument is currently being played out.
It is also Charter-rights grounds. For a moment, set aside the fact that pederastic acts are illegal. That's not what I'm getting at here. What I'm getting at is the fact that in the view of secular society, gays are persons, pederasts are not. They speak of gay persons; they do not speak of pederast persons. This provides homosexuals with a status and dignity which is denied pederast persons. But, in a society where all sexual orientations are afforded equal status and protection under the law, is that not a clear case of discrimination?
Let's Google it. "Gay person" results in 560,000 entries. "Pederast person" results in exactly 2. Pederasts have a long way to go to achieve the equality they are supposedly guaranteed by our Charter of Rights.
Consistent Moral Thinking
Both Christians and secularists have an understanding of normal, and, from this, right-and-wrong. Secularists find theirs in the amoral idea of adult permissiveness; if two adults are predisposed to do it, and want to do it, how can we say it's wrong? (Especially when we've paid for science that backs us up!) On this basic, they judge homosexuality to be OK, but pederasty not so; Christians, with minds rooted in reason and revelation, have a higher view of humankind, and, because of this, a narrower view of what constitutes a baseline of normal or moral behaviour.
The final point is this: Christians speak and act in a manner that is consistent with their worldview and beliefs; secularists, by claiming to be in favour of equal rights for all, and then slamming the door on an orientation they disfavor, do not.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
The Earth is Shaking In Its Boots
As everybody knows, the Earth has a fever, but what you may not know is that the fever has given the Earth the shakes.
Here are some excerpts from the five-star-alarmist Associated Press:
"... global seismic activity on Earth is now five times more energetic than it was just 20 years ago.
"The most serious environmental danger we face on Earth may not be climate change, but rapidly and systematically increasing seismic, tectonic and volcanic activity..."
Followed by the standard, "it's still possible to save the Earth, but we must act NOW" quote:
"Unless the problem of global warming (the problem of persistent thermal imbalance of Earth) is addressed urgently and comprehensively - the rapid increase in global seismic, volcanic and tectonic activity is certain. Consequences of inaction can only be catastrophic. There is no time for half-measures."
To paraphrase the great environmentalist James Bond, either we stir ourselves, or we all get thoroughly shaken!
And that's the way the shake-it-up, baby Ball bounces.
Here are some excerpts from the five-star-alarmist Associated Press:
"... global seismic activity on Earth is now five times more energetic than it was just 20 years ago.
"The most serious environmental danger we face on Earth may not be climate change, but rapidly and systematically increasing seismic, tectonic and volcanic activity..."
Followed by the standard, "it's still possible to save the Earth, but we must act NOW" quote:
"Unless the problem of global warming (the problem of persistent thermal imbalance of Earth) is addressed urgently and comprehensively - the rapid increase in global seismic, volcanic and tectonic activity is certain. Consequences of inaction can only be catastrophic. There is no time for half-measures."
To paraphrase the great environmentalist James Bond, either we stir ourselves, or we all get thoroughly shaken!
And that's the way the shake-it-up, baby Ball bounces.
Killer Tomatoes Blamed On Global Warming: I'm Two-For-Two!
When the US shark attacks story hit the headlines, I suggested that beleaguered, discredited global warming alarmists "blame it on global warming".
Within a week or so, they did.
When the killer-tomato salmonella outbreak hit the US, I again suggested that beleaguered, discredited global warming alarmists "blame it on global warming". That was June 10th.
They just did. I'm two-for-two! If I keep this up, Al Gore may want to add me to his payroll. (Or, maybe not. I hear his electrical bill is up 10% since he adopted those energy-saving measures.)
Here's the lead sentence of the article:
"The tomato scare that has sickened 170 people and is the worst food scare since the E. coli/spinach outbreak is being blamed by some environmental activists on climate change and the need for more food grown with the help of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/betterplanet/2008/06/17/rotten-tomatoes-caused-by-climate-change/
Can't wait for the next scary global warming scare. They're scary, and I'm scared!
And that's the way the rotten tomato Ball bounces.
Within a week or so, they did.
When the killer-tomato salmonella outbreak hit the US, I again suggested that beleaguered, discredited global warming alarmists "blame it on global warming". That was June 10th.
They just did. I'm two-for-two! If I keep this up, Al Gore may want to add me to his payroll. (Or, maybe not. I hear his electrical bill is up 10% since he adopted those energy-saving measures.)
Here's the lead sentence of the article:
"The tomato scare that has sickened 170 people and is the worst food scare since the E. coli/spinach outbreak is being blamed by some environmental activists on climate change and the need for more food grown with the help of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/betterplanet/2008/06/17/rotten-tomatoes-caused-by-climate-change/
Can't wait for the next scary global warming scare. They're scary, and I'm scared!
And that's the way the rotten tomato Ball bounces.
More on "Makers and Takers"
The book is by Peter Schweizer. This is the Product Description from Amazon -- let's hope it doesn't make liberals who read it throw things.
In Makers and Takers you will discover why:
* Seventy-one percent of conservatives say you have an obligation to care for a seriously injured spouse or parent versus less than half (46 percent) of liberals.
* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts.
* Liberals are 2½ times more likely to be resentful of others’ success and 50 percent more likely to be jealous of other people’s good luck.
* Liberals are 2 times more likely to say it is okay to cheat the government out of welfare money you don’t deserve.
* Conservatives are more likely than liberals to hug their children and “significantly more likely” to display positive nurturing emotions.
* Liberals are less trusting of family members and much less likely to stay in touch with their parents.
* Do you get satisfaction from putting someone else’s happiness ahead of your own? Fifty-five percent of conservatives said yes versus only 20 percent of liberals.
* Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, Bill O’Reilly and Dick Cheney have given large sums of money to people in need, while Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, and Al Gore have not.
* Those who are “very liberal” are 3 times more likely than conservatives to throw things when they get angry.
In Makers and Takers you will discover why:
* Seventy-one percent of conservatives say you have an obligation to care for a seriously injured spouse or parent versus less than half (46 percent) of liberals.
* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts.
* Liberals are 2½ times more likely to be resentful of others’ success and 50 percent more likely to be jealous of other people’s good luck.
* Liberals are 2 times more likely to say it is okay to cheat the government out of welfare money you don’t deserve.
* Conservatives are more likely than liberals to hug their children and “significantly more likely” to display positive nurturing emotions.
* Liberals are less trusting of family members and much less likely to stay in touch with their parents.
* Do you get satisfaction from putting someone else’s happiness ahead of your own? Fifty-five percent of conservatives said yes versus only 20 percent of liberals.
* Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, Bill O’Reilly and Dick Cheney have given large sums of money to people in need, while Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, and Al Gore have not.
* Those who are “very liberal” are 3 times more likely than conservatives to throw things when they get angry.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Tax Freedom Day in Canada - Yahoo!
Yesterday was Tax Freedom Day -- the day Canadians stop earning money that is handed over to the government, and start earning money they get to actually keep and spend.
Yahoo!
Actually, no. Canadians love their social programs, we love our big governments and, as a result, we love our big taxes. That's why Canadian retailers regularly offer "Pay Twice The Tax!" sales events, and we Canadians flock to them!
In a perfect world, the government would take all our money, and re-distribute it in a wise, just, and equitable manner.
For now, we'll have to settle for the government taking half.
And that's the way the taxed Ball bounces.
Yahoo!
Actually, no. Canadians love their social programs, we love our big governments and, as a result, we love our big taxes. That's why Canadian retailers regularly offer "Pay Twice The Tax!" sales events, and we Canadians flock to them!
In a perfect world, the government would take all our money, and re-distribute it in a wise, just, and equitable manner.
For now, we'll have to settle for the government taking half.
And that's the way the taxed Ball bounces.
Makers and Takers
Haven't read it, but how good does this sound?
Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic and Envious, Whine Less ... And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals
And that's just the title!
Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic and Envious, Whine Less ... And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals
And that's just the title!
Here Comes The Sun
Apparently sunspots, or the lack thereof, have a bigger effect on the Earth's climate than even mankind. I say even mankind because, with the man-made global warming hypothesis, "it's all about us" -- we are both the destroyers and the saviors of the Earth.
Right now, sunspot activity is very low, and this is having a chilling effect on the Earth's temperature.
Maybe, just maybe, the universe is bigger than we are, and there are forces at work that make man's dent in the cosmos very small indeed.
I wonder Who controls sunspots? Does He have a name? Is he knowable? Has He revealed Himself to us through any means?
Any ideas?
And that's the way the Sunday morning Ball bounces.
Friday, June 13, 2008
I'm a Murderer -- How About You?
You can't call an abortion "murder" or a doctor who performs abortion "a murderer". At least, you can't without it being considered "hate speech".
Canadian Christians have been jailed for standing near an abortuary and speaking out against abortion. And not for calling the woman in question a murderer, but simply for speaking words of life to her and encouraging her to reconsider her decision.
Which brings us to PETA.
PETA is now referring to the killing of an animal for meat as murder. Presumably, those who eat meat are murderers, or, in the case of western society, guilty of hiring contract killers.
How likely is it that the State will condemn PETA for calling meat-eaters murderers? How likely is it that the government will pass a law requiring PETA to either stop saying this, or, barring that, require PETA to stay at least 200 yards (or metres) away from a restaurant, abattoir, or any other place where meat is either produced or consumed?
The answer of course, is zero.
The reason is this: PETA may call others murderers for eating meat, but it's not going to "stick"; it's not going to bother anyone unduly, because the accusation has no foundation in reason or fact.
Not so with abortion. The response of the pro-choice crowd towards the accusation of murder is fierce precisely because it has some basis in fact -- abortion is the willful, intentional destruction of a human life.
The same with homosexuality. If someone were to suggest that heterosexuality was intrinsically unnatural or disordered, it is unlikely this person would be hauled before some HRC and slapped, fined and humiliated for discriminatory hate speech. Why? Because it is understood that the accusation has no basis in fact. It is precisely because there are rational reasons for viewing homosexual behavior as unnatural and disordered that the opposition is so fierce and the demands for speech suppression so acute.
Something to chew on.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
You Pick the Headline
Picture this: seven people are killed by a Palestinian blast that destroys the home of a Palestinian militant. The Palestinians assume that the Israelis did it, so they fire 50 mortar shells and rockets at southern Israel. In response, the Israelis target Hamas militants preparing to lob more bombs at them from the Gaza Strip and kill three of them.
You're the BBC. So, how do you write it up?
Here's the headline: Israeli air strike targets Hamas.
Here's the first sentence of the article: Palestinians mourned as 14 people were killed in Thursday's violence.
The casual reader is left with the impression that the Israelis are the aggressors and that they caused 14 deaths. You have to read through the body of the article to learn that the Palestinians had lobbed 50 mortars and rockets at Israel before Israel lifted a finger.
Let me ask you this. If 50 rockets and mortars were fired by a neighboring country or territory, however disfunctional, into your country, wouldn't you feel your country had the right to respond?
What should the headline have been?
Palestinians Bomb Israel; Israel Responds With A Surgical Strike
Palestinians Bomb Themselves And Israel, Prompting Israeli Response
Once Again, Palestinians Disrupt the Peace in the Middle East
Perhaps you can come up with a better headline.
Israel is not perfect. But the land of Israel is the apple of God's eye. And the same prophetic voices that predict the coming of the Messiah at the end of the Age also predict that the Jews will be restored to their land and that they shall, in a time of great national crisis, "look upon Him whom they pierced, and mourn as for an only Son".
Don't bet against Israel.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
You're the BBC. So, how do you write it up?
Here's the headline: Israeli air strike targets Hamas.
Here's the first sentence of the article: Palestinians mourned as 14 people were killed in Thursday's violence.
The casual reader is left with the impression that the Israelis are the aggressors and that they caused 14 deaths. You have to read through the body of the article to learn that the Palestinians had lobbed 50 mortars and rockets at Israel before Israel lifted a finger.
Let me ask you this. If 50 rockets and mortars were fired by a neighboring country or territory, however disfunctional, into your country, wouldn't you feel your country had the right to respond?
What should the headline have been?
Palestinians Bomb Israel; Israel Responds With A Surgical Strike
Palestinians Bomb Themselves And Israel, Prompting Israeli Response
Once Again, Palestinians Disrupt the Peace in the Middle East
Perhaps you can come up with a better headline.
Israel is not perfect. But the land of Israel is the apple of God's eye. And the same prophetic voices that predict the coming of the Messiah at the end of the Age also predict that the Jews will be restored to their land and that they shall, in a time of great national crisis, "look upon Him whom they pierced, and mourn as for an only Son".
Don't bet against Israel.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
I'm Going To Try Again...
I've been trying to help the global warming alarmists by feeding them scary scenarios. A month or so ago, I suggested they blame the shark attacks along the US coasts on global warming. Less than a week later, they did.
So now, I'm going to try it again. The latest salmonella scare, and the ban on tomatoes -- find a way to blame it on global warming.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Mexican Bathtub Cheese
I've had many things to worry about during my lifetime.
It started with yellow teeth. I was assured I would "wonder where the yellow went", if I brushed my teeth with Pepsodent. (I'm still wondering -- where exactly does the yellow go?)
Then, there was "jungle breath". That's definitely worth a worry.
Followed by ring-around-the-collar.
I've survived all of these psychic traumas, barely.
But now, thanks to Drudge, I have something new to worry about -- three words I never suspected would appear together in the same sentence:
Mexican. Bathtub. Cheese.
Seems it's a form of unpasturized cheese, and it's causing a resurgence of T.B. in the USA.
Mexican Bathtub Cheese.
I'm trying not to have a bad hair day over it.
It started with yellow teeth. I was assured I would "wonder where the yellow went", if I brushed my teeth with Pepsodent. (I'm still wondering -- where exactly does the yellow go?)
Then, there was "jungle breath". That's definitely worth a worry.
Followed by ring-around-the-collar.
I've survived all of these psychic traumas, barely.
But now, thanks to Drudge, I have something new to worry about -- three words I never suspected would appear together in the same sentence:
Mexican. Bathtub. Cheese.
Seems it's a form of unpasturized cheese, and it's causing a resurgence of T.B. in the USA.
Mexican Bathtub Cheese.
I'm trying not to have a bad hair day over it.
He (Obama) Can Turn The Tides
I came across the lyrics to this song. I believe it was originally about God.
No more.
Obama's candidacy represents a sea-change in the cosmos. Here it is.
He (Can Turn The Tides)
He can turn the tides and calm the angry sea
He alone decides who writes a symphony
He lights every star that makes our darkness bright
He keeps watch all through each long and lonely night
He still finds the time to hear a child's first prayer
Saint or sinner call and always find Him there
And though it makes Him sad to see the way we live
He'll always say, "I forgive".
He can grant a wish or make a dream come true.
He can paint the clouds and turn the grey to blue.
He alone knows where to find the rainbow's end.
He alone can see what lies beyond the bend.
He can touch a tree and turn the leaves to gold
He knows every lie that you and I have told
Though it makes him sad to see the way we live
He'll always say, "I forgive".
Let's see how these lyrics play out as the presidential campaign proceeds.
No more.
Obama's candidacy represents a sea-change in the cosmos. Here it is.
He (Can Turn The Tides)
He can turn the tides and calm the angry sea
He alone decides who writes a symphony
He lights every star that makes our darkness bright
He keeps watch all through each long and lonely night
He still finds the time to hear a child's first prayer
Saint or sinner call and always find Him there
And though it makes Him sad to see the way we live
He'll always say, "I forgive".
He can grant a wish or make a dream come true.
He can paint the clouds and turn the grey to blue.
He alone knows where to find the rainbow's end.
He alone can see what lies beyond the bend.
He can touch a tree and turn the leaves to gold
He knows every lie that you and I have told
Though it makes him sad to see the way we live
He'll always say, "I forgive".
Let's see how these lyrics play out as the presidential campaign proceeds.
Obama-ooma-mow-mow!
Good news for this overheated, on-fire world!
Obama hasn't even been elected yet, and already he's saying that, due to his nomination and inevitable presidency, we will look back to this moment in time as the point in human history when the oceans began to recede.
Presumably, Obama plans on anointing Al Gore V.P. so Al can be Aaron to Obama's Moses.
Stop the planet.
I want to get off.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Obama hasn't even been elected yet, and already he's saying that, due to his nomination and inevitable presidency, we will look back to this moment in time as the point in human history when the oceans began to recede.
Presumably, Obama plans on anointing Al Gore V.P. so Al can be Aaron to Obama's Moses.
Stop the planet.
I want to get off.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Climate Control Magic
The difference between magic and faith is that magic seeks to control the forces of life -- natural and supernatural, while faith seeks to submit to and cooperate with the authority and power of a beneficent Creator.
In centuries past persons would consult a witch, pay a fee, and cast a spell to secure a desirable outcome. (This occult practice continues today.)
In other words, you could control the natural world, but first you had to pay.
Which brings us to today and the great pending global warming shake-down.
Yes, we can control the natural world.
But first, we gotta pay.
According to Drudge, the cost of combatting global warming is going to be $45,000,000,000. That's 45 Billion dollars.
(Did I say 45 Billion? My bad. The amount cited is $45,000,000,000,000. That's 45 Trillion -- 45 Billion - you wish!)
With the ideology of global warming gaining hurricane force, we better all get ready to cough up.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
In centuries past persons would consult a witch, pay a fee, and cast a spell to secure a desirable outcome. (This occult practice continues today.)
In other words, you could control the natural world, but first you had to pay.
Which brings us to today and the great pending global warming shake-down.
Yes, we can control the natural world.
But first, we gotta pay.
According to Drudge, the cost of combatting global warming is going to be $45,000,000,000. That's 45 Billion dollars.
(Did I say 45 Billion? My bad. The amount cited is $45,000,000,000,000. That's 45 Trillion -- 45 Billion - you wish!)
With the ideology of global warming gaining hurricane force, we better all get ready to cough up.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
BCHRC
I've been following the British Columbia "Human Rights Commission" hearings on Mark Steyn avidly this week -- I assume you have too.
If not, you can follow Andrew Coyne's blog at macleans.ca. The hearings begin around 9 am. Pacific time.
And, you can always find out what's on Mark Steyn's mind over at marksteyn.com.
The HRCs are being ridiculed and held in contempt by those whom they are currently targeting. And, rightly so.
Canadian Human Rights Tribunals are oppressive, arbitrary, ideologically-driven, and led by biased people with axes to grind. (Other than that, I suppose they are not so bad.)
The current approach of ridicule and contempt is the right one.
Up until now, it has been mainly individual Christians who have fallen under the path of the Canadian HRC juggernauts; mayors forced to proclaim Gay Pride Days (and then, Weeks), printers forced to print homosexual propaganda, Christians commanded to shut-up and pay restitution to those whose feelings they may have hurt).
Now, it is a national magazine, and, all of a sudden, the issue has become magnified.
Let's hope that a strong light is shone on these wretched HRCs where rules of evidence are replaced by arbitrary decisions and hundreds of years of British jurisprudence is set aside.
If not, you can follow Andrew Coyne's blog at macleans.ca. The hearings begin around 9 am. Pacific time.
And, you can always find out what's on Mark Steyn's mind over at marksteyn.com.
The HRCs are being ridiculed and held in contempt by those whom they are currently targeting. And, rightly so.
Canadian Human Rights Tribunals are oppressive, arbitrary, ideologically-driven, and led by biased people with axes to grind. (Other than that, I suppose they are not so bad.)
The current approach of ridicule and contempt is the right one.
Up until now, it has been mainly individual Christians who have fallen under the path of the Canadian HRC juggernauts; mayors forced to proclaim Gay Pride Days (and then, Weeks), printers forced to print homosexual propaganda, Christians commanded to shut-up and pay restitution to those whose feelings they may have hurt).
Now, it is a national magazine, and, all of a sudden, the issue has become magnified.
Let's hope that a strong light is shone on these wretched HRCs where rules of evidence are replaced by arbitrary decisions and hundreds of years of British jurisprudence is set aside.
Monday, June 02, 2008
Wacko Church of England Bishop
A senior Church of England bishop has reportedly compared people who ignore climate change to Josef Fritzl, the Austrian who kept his daughter locked in a cellar for 24 years.
— "we are in effect locking our children and grandchildren into a world with no future and throwing away the key,” he wrote in the letter entitled "following our dream," distributed around the Diocese of Lichfield.
This is either delusion or lunacy. Or, because Anglicans like to see themselves as balanced, perhaps we can be charitable and say it is equal parts of both.
Church leaders who reject the life-changing power of the gospel for political commentary are a sad lot.
As for me, I am not ashamed of the gospel [as written and presented in the New Testament], because I know that it is the power of God unto salvation, to everyone who believes.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
— "we are in effect locking our children and grandchildren into a world with no future and throwing away the key,” he wrote in the letter entitled "following our dream," distributed around the Diocese of Lichfield.
This is either delusion or lunacy. Or, because Anglicans like to see themselves as balanced, perhaps we can be charitable and say it is equal parts of both.
Church leaders who reject the life-changing power of the gospel for political commentary are a sad lot.
As for me, I am not ashamed of the gospel [as written and presented in the New Testament], because I know that it is the power of God unto salvation, to everyone who believes.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)