Finding Balance – Two Recent Examples

Example 1:  My first impression of the newest development in the scandal that has become professional cycling was one of regret and empathy.  I expressed this to one of my Christian friends in my workplace and was surprised to hear how much disdain he had for Lance Armstrong.  He filled me in on his back-story; of how he basically abandoned his family to pursue his fifth, and following Tour de-France competitions.  Regardless of the details, it highlighted something to me.  As much as I agree politically with the concept of what Rush Limbaugh calls the American Rugged Individualism, it can easily be taken to the extreme.

While statists like Obama and the rest of his predecessors, blatantly seek to kill the concept of God and replace Him with Government, not so blatantly, but perhaps more deviously, individualists just as easily kill God and replace Him with … themselves.  We shower admiration upon successful individuals in America.  People like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Thomas Edison, Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods are all lauded for their individual success; proof of the do-it-yourself attitude, determination, and drive that “made America great”.  But what of their wives?  What of their families?  What of their relationship with their creator.

Example 2:  I just recently saw one of those patently trite, banal, and intellectually-shallow little photos probably posted by some hack from MoveOn.org.  It was on Facebook and was of course, dutifully shared by other vapid, and intellectually uncurious emotional basket cases; the typical types that populate the left.  In the picture, it depicted on one side, an unborn child in the womb, and on the other, a starving, child raised in squalor and abject poverty.  In the caption it asked how Pro-lifers can be for saving the life of the unborn and not for saving the life of the impoverished.  Not wanting to throw pearls before swine, I declined pointing out that socialism and the other programs sponsored and popularized by leftist statists were responsible for more death and misery in the past 150 years than any Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital’s could have ever produced over the time frame of 3 millennia, but I digress.  But it did make me think that in our zeal as Christians to defend black/white moral imperatives such as homosexuality and abortion, we lose perspective on Christ’s command to love.  Now, I’m not advocating throwing money at the first pan-handler that comes around trying to score some scratch for their next bottle of MD20, but Christ fed the poor, healed the sick, and ministered to the destitute.  How many of us would invite a teenager who just aborted her baby into our homes to feed her and attempt to minister to her soul?

Balance is necessary in all things.  While believing in Calvinist theology is all fine and dandy as an intellectual exercise, if taken out of practicality, it is a detriment to practical Christian living and evangelism.  While being in a Charismatic church, getting filled with the Spirit, and speaking in tongues may leave one in a momentary spiritual euphoria, it also leaves one foundationless and unprepared for the struggles of a walk with Christ.  Balance is the key.  To paraphrase, Churchill famously said that young people who are conservative have no heart and that older folks who are liberals have no head.  When finding a balanced perspective of what our duties first as Christians and then as citizens, it’s imperative that we have both.

The Pink Mafia and the Chick-fil-A Non-Event

Chick-fil-A Owner Dan Cathy

The recent kerfuffle on Dan Cathy, the owner of Chick-fil-A restaurant chain is simply emblematic of the manufactured non-controversy controversies stewed up by the militant homosexual activists who continue to force their own issues upon a public and upon institutions that overwhelmingly do NOT agree with them.

As I have highlighted previously in this blog.  The Department of Defense was coerced by President Obama (who is the Commander in Chief) through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff into manufacturing agreement across the military services with repealing of the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law.  The panel that reported its ‘findings’ was nothing more than a kangaroo court who dismissed every valid concern; in no way, shape, or form provided an avenue of the OPINIONS of service members and their families; and presented their cases to those whose feedback the ‘requested’ as a foregone conclusion.  In other words, the results were politically predetermined and the panel was a sham to provide top-cover to the ignorant public to the cowards in the upper echelons of the military.

Also as I have highlighted in this blog, the only way the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was accomplished was through a lame duck session the Saturday night before Christmas, after the Democrats were due to lose control of the House due to similar shenanigans used to pass the health care abomination the last year’s Christmas coal the libs slipped into America’s stocking.

Also, in keeping with the military milieu, just this past month the Department of Defense made an official exception to policy to allow servicemembers to march in a Gay Pride parade in San Diego… in UNIFORM.  The mere fact that they felt they had to issue an exception to policy was tacit acknowledgement that gay servicemembers are well, slightly more special than straight servicemembers… or at least those that espouse liberal political viewpoints and make the most noise.  I will not be holding my breath for my exception to policy letter to appear at a rally in uniform to express my moral and civil rights convictions for the protection of the very lives of unborn Americans… and illegal unborn immigrants for that matter.

Consider the facts.  32 states have had open referendums on legalizing homosexual marriages… to include such bigoted, conservative bastions as California.  Each and every time, these measures have been resoundingly defeated.  The public DOES NOT WANT IT.  The only way gay marriage has been sanctioned is through the actions of militant legislatures through dirty tricks and through activist courts creating law through their highly creative and imaginative interpretations of laws.

And now we have the Chick-fil-A non-event.  The article which ‘sparked’ all this outrage is here.  If you’d note, it no-where says in the article he is anti-gay marriage.  Of course you could infer it from his religious convictions and support for the traditional, Biblically defined family…. But then again, the vast majority of AMERICANS feel the same way… I guess that makes us all extremists and deserving of official boycotts and pauperdom.  If you would notice he DID say:  “We don't claim to be a Christian business … ‘There is no such thing as a Christian business’.”  But now, ironically, even supporters of gay marriage are being hurt by these knee-jerk lunatics of the pink mafia.

This is just another prime example of the militant homosexual activists creating controversy where none exists.  It also shows that if you scream loudly enough, wear enough meat dresses (Lady Gaga), chain yourselves to enough White House fences, and nauseate the rest of us (to include those who desire to keep their private sexual life hidden simply to avoid normal social stigmatism, you can become more equal than others.  It also reflects the sickening moral state of our nation, the complete devolution of the nuclear family, and the hastening of our ultimate demise as a great people.

Random Thoughts While on a 2,039-mile Road Trip

So I’m driving from around Tucson, AZ to Savannah, GA.  Since most of Interstate 10 is within 100-miles of the border, the feds in the US Border Patrol have pretty much free reign over its entirety.  Not that that’s entirely a bad thing, it’s just laden with irony.  As I pull up to a particular checkpoint, the Border Patrol agent tells me to stop, says hello, looks at me… looks in my car… and waves me along.  Hmmmm…. What’s the purpose of this stop, and what’s the methodology behind this encounter?  Would it be different if I had my buddy of Mexican origin dressed down and after a very long, dirty hike sitting in the car next to me?  Would he have treated me differently?  Probably.  I’d say he wouldn’t be doing his job correctly if he didn’t determine the legality of my driving partner because that would simply make too much sense.

This is occurring in Arizona mind you… You know, the state that just two years ago passed a law designed to give state law enforcement the ability to check on a person’s legal status upon a probable cause stop for some reason.  The state whose law was under extreme criticism by the left for conducting ‘racial profiling’ and which law explicitly stated racial profiling was NOT being used to conduct said stop.  The state that is being sued by Attorney General Holder (who has stated he will not enforce laws in which white people are victims) for said law.  Anyone else see the irony here?  The Feds are out there conducting LEGAL racial profiling in policing our border while in the same state, the same Federal Government is litigating against a law that gives an extra tool to state law enforcement to police up their own state of the problem the Feds are leaving them with.  It’s ok for me to do it… but not you Governor Brewer.  You just have to pay for it.

Between Tucson and Abilene, TX I did not see a single traffic police vehicle the entirety of I-10 and I-20… a distance of almost 800 miles.  Between Abilene and Texarkana, a distance of 360 miles, I saw probably about 50.  Same thing elsewhere.  Next to no traffic police the rest of the way save Atlanta where they were crawling with them.  Coincidence?  Probably not.  Give me a locality with a bunch of libs spending themselves to oblivion and I’ll show you a police state wherein every form of revenue raising takes place… including taxing motorists for driving what speed they are comfortable with.  There are already laws on the books for dangerous and reckless driving.  The statistics do not lie.  Traffic accidents do NOT rise when speed limits are raised or completely abandoned (as in Montana).  Traffic fines are simply for revenue purposes only.

Islamic Rage is Really Getting Old

So, two more U.S. soldiers have been murdered in the name of Islam and our gutless wonders in the Department of Defense and the White House continue to prostrate themselves before the impotent, back-stabbing Karzai regime in Afghanistan.  Why?  Because U.S. forces disposed of several Korans that were being used as message boards for unlawful communication between detainees.

I’m fed up and sick of this lunacy pretending Islam as practiced in these basket-case countries is a legitimate, peaceful religious practice and nothing more.  Clearly, as demonstrated in just these past ten years, it is not.  It is a violent, completely devoid of toleration, ideology that seeks to place the boot on the neck of every person in the world.  It tramples basic human rights that Western Civilization has sought to recognize and enshrine in statutory rules of law for the past four hundred years.  It is completely incongruent with our way of life.  It should be fought against… not tolerated (at best), and pandered to, which is what happens at every turn in this ridiculous, pointless waste that is going on over there.

This is not a political issue, because Bush was just as big an idiot on these matters as our current regime.  We clearly went wrong in believing we could simply ‘gift’ the idea of democratic government to a people mired in an oppressive political-religious dogma which is fundamentally incompatible with the principals that rule our own way of life.  Once again, this debacle of “nation-building” in Afghanistan is a complete refutation of the idiocy propounded by luminous academic boobs of Woodrow Wilson, John Kennedy, Robert McNamara, David Frum, etc.

Where does this all stem from?  From the idiotic and blatantly false idea of moral equivocation.  To say that all cultures and all ‘religions’ are basically the same and should be treated and tolerated as such is a denial of basic, observable facts.  We are seeing these facts burning down the world every time someone drops an insult on Muhammad.  Some cultures and some religions are morally superior than others.  To deny otherwise is to deny basic, common sense.  Until we realize this and readdress what we are actually fighting against, we will continue to be pushed into a corner until it is too late and it DOES become an all-out religious war.

A Collegial Reply to a Critical Comment on One of my Posts

Three days ago I received a comment on my posting concerning the DoD's 'survey' of troops regarding the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.  I give this person very high marks for his/her candor and courtesy, but feel like I have to educate him/her a little on Constitutional matters and this seemed a proper forum.  Here is the comment and my reply afterward:

Separation of church and state is in the constitution. This is a human rights issue, not a spiritual/religious one. You have only expressed your opinion on this matter and it is obviously strictly influenced by your belief in God. I understand that for those that do believe in God that it is all-encompassing in that person's life. You mention that you are a Christian. The only time that I remember Jesus getting angry at sinners was when they defiled God's temple. He knew about the many differences in the way people lived, even contrary to what he taught, but he never got hateful and angry and attempted to stop anyone from making decisions. To me, thats what being Christ-like is. On another note, I learned long ago that you can't change the way a person operates or thinks, but you can influence them. I respect your belief in God, you as a human being, and especially as a soldier (thank you for your willingness and strength). I just hope that you can see that there is many people out there that have several ways of thinking. This comment was by no means an attempt to insult you or anyone else. God bless

 Reply:

First of all, thanks for the respectful nature of your commentary.  It's always refreshing to hear.

Second:  The overall intent of the commentary herein was to highlight the disingenuous nature the DoD conducted this 'survey.'  It was a far cry from how the media presented it.  It was (from PERSONAL experience) presented to servicemen as a statement of FACT and HOW we are going to deal with it.  It was "this is what is HAPPENING, how will it affect you."  It was in no, manner, shape, or form a questionnaire to present ones views on the subject and whether or not this is a positive thing.

Second:  'Separation' of church from state is a myth that has been perpetuated by those that wish to destroy the concept of God and the moral foundations of this country.  What the First Amendment prohibits is Congress passing a "law respecting an establishment of religion".  The actual original intent of this phrase was to directly prohibited Congress from interfering with already "established" state religions amongst several of the first 13 states.  The "separation of church and state" is a radically liberal interpretation of a phrase that has nothing to do with the original intent of the document.  A very scholarly article written on the subject is here: 

Third:  You are right, Christ in no way practiced anger or hatred towards any of the countless sinners around them.  However, he never once condoned sin, nor sanctioned it, nor tolerated it.  Many point to Christ's saving of the woman who was caught in adultery from being stoned to death as evidence of His cool, modern, Buddy-Jesus persona.  What people don't think about is that He said to the woman shortly thereafter, "Go and SIN no more."  What Christ showed was mercy for sin, not toleration of it.  He came not just to die and pay the penalty of our sin, He died to free us from the power of sin.  He does so because He HATES sin.

Lastly:  The militant homosexual agenda is not about equal rights.  They already have equal rights.  (They can marry someone from the opposite sex anytime they wish!!!)  What they are after is a complete acceptance of their lifestyle.  This is not about all gays.  Most do what they do with no problems, no issues, no pushing it in people's faces at all.  In fact the majority (and if someone can find the source on this I'd be very grateful) of homosexuals in the military do not wish to practice this openly.  This is all about imposing a lifestyle upon the sole remaining traditionally moral institution of the country.  I may not go so far, but others believe it is intentional to destroy the very foundations of our military.

So thank you for your comments and allowing me to respond.

But by the grace of God be I,

-Josh

Today’s Example of Environmentalist Wackos Idiocy

Remember, they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions… well in this case, call it good ‘feelings.’  Today’s example of how environmentalist wacko policies are nothing more than a tax on stupid people to make them feel temporarily good about themselves comes from Germany (the land that invented insane, feel-good policies that destroy industry while doing nothing to ‘protect the environment.’).

I think this one calls for a MK-10

So, there I am doing what to most Americans would (or at least, used to) seem a straightforward task:  throwing out the garbage.  Except here, in the wonderful land of Oz, we have to separate our waste into three piles (more if you’re in some even areas that make even AlGore look like Rush Limbaugh), food-trash (read compost), normal trash, and recyclables.  Now here, even normal trash ‘service’ costs about as much as tuition to a public university… and not to mention different things get picked up on different days, unless it’s one of many holidays not even marked on calendars, and then you’re stuck with piles of garbage until the next time (two weeks) the garbage man comes to pick it up again (if he even does dump it, as has happened twice this past six months… unions…) but, I digress.

Anywho, there I am gathering my ‘recyclables’, which is a ‘free’ and ‘unlimited’ provided for by the benevolent do-gooder nanny state of Baden Württemberg (thanks 19% Value Added Tax and other industry stifling taxes!).  And like most environmentalist wacko ‘recycling’ programs, they seek to make as small a ‘carbon footprint’ as possible, hence these official, yellow recycling bags you must use.  I say small ‘footprint’ because the bags are made out of thinner-than-paper-mâché plastic polymer that tear when I look at them cross.  So, after figuring out (in no less than two bags, a huge mess, and thirty seconds into my first foray) that these bags are simply not able to do what they are designed to do, my wife got smart and simply used the thickest version of Hefty bags they stock over here.  After that, I wrap my functional bag in their feeble excuse for a bag and that’s that.

So, the scoreline again:  Environmental wackos:  0.  American Ingenuity:  1.  How much of a carbon footprint did your plants make manufacturing these ridiculous, non-functional bags simply so a lot of chain-smoking, nanny-state socialists, and liberal do-gooders could feel good about themselves.  Of course, I could care less… except it probably costs a great deal of money to manufacture these infernal objects (union labor), and a lot of time (again, union labor), and it costs me time and money to buy REAL BAGS to do the job these stupid devices are supposed to do.

File this one next to ethanol, the low-flow toilet, one-ply toilet paper, the electric car, and the CFL lightbulb.  Except this one thing hasn’t actually killed people… yet (see food riots back during the first ethanol craze).