Bringing up the Next Generation

One of the reasons I am a teacher is because I understand that making an impact on youth is one of the best ways to impact the culture at large. Though their behavior might occasionally make you twitch, youth grow up, and the best and brightest assume leadership positions of power and influence.

Many, if not most, significant cultural movements started with young twenty somethings. Just look back to the 60's for evidence of that. Many that were college age rabble rousers back then are now deep in positions of influence in politics, media, and academia.

One conservative religious movement comes to mind off the top of my head: Campus Crusade for Christ. Even if you aren't an evangelical, even if you despise Christianity, you have to admit that this organization has made a considerable impact on our culture.

Over the last couple of years, I've struggled to make sense of how to reach youth. In the church, for example, should we pander to their desire to be entertained? Should we "tone down" our teaching? Isn't youth ministry just about loving relationships, not teaching and instruction? I see the trends, but really, I dunno.

So I did some reading.

Over the summer, one of the books I read was Soul Searching, by Christian Smith. In the book, he lays out a comprehensive research project on the spiritual lives of American teenagers. The project was, to my knowledge, the first of its kind in its breadth and depth. His organization (The National Study of Youth and Religion) surveyed over 3,000 youth via phone and conducted in-depth face-to-face interviews with 267 of those surveyed.

What did he find? Contra the stereotype of the rebellious, disaffected youth, he found that mostly (there were, of course, outliers, some of which he writes about in his book), teenagers are pretty conventional spiritually speaking. They are pretty happy to go along with the flow and follow their parents' lead.

You might think this is a great thing, but what came next gave me (and Smith) pause. When Smith dug deeper, he found that, though the teens were happy to follow their parents' teaching, religion wasn't that important to the family.

How could he tell this?

What comprised the teenagers' faith? Not much. When questioned on their beliefs, few teens could articulate their views. They articulated boredom, but not much else. Here, for example, is the response of a 15-year-old who attends church four or five times a week, when asked to articulate her faith:

I: What do you believe about God?

T: [Pause] I don't really know how to answer that.

I: Are there any beliefs at all that are important to you? Really generally.

T: [Pause] I don't know.

I: Take your time if you want.

T: I think that you should just, if you're gonna do something wrong then you should always ask for forgiveness and he's gonna forgive you no matter what, cause he gave up his only Son to take all the sins for you, so...

You might think that this was an exception to the rule, but this interview was not atypical. Of course, there were teens that did a splendid job of articulating their faith, but those were in the definite minority.

Smith coined a phrase that captures the religion of today's typical teen: Moral Therapeutic Deism: God exists, He wants to make you happy, be nice to people. That's about it.

Smith found that for teens like the 15-year-old described above, religions wasn't that important to them. It wasn't very important to their family either. Yes, they might go to church, profess faith, and answer "very important" when asked in a phone interview how important religion is to them, but there wasn't much there upon inspection. In fact, Smith noted, a significant number of teens expressed frustration at the questions because it was *the first time ANY adult had asked them questions like that!*

Here's the main question: what should our response as adults in the Church be to this?

I can't answer this question fully in a paragraph, but I will mention a few things.

First, we must *teach.* Out with the entertainment based programs. When our young ones go to college, the fledgling faith they have will be assaulted from every direction. Stats show that somewhere between 60-80% (depending on the study. See here, here, and here for examples) of youth group members leave the church in college. We must give them meat...it is that simple.

Second, we must engage...ENGAGE, ENGAGE, ENGAGE!!! We cannot be content with merely "hanging out" with teens. We must be intentional in asking them the tough questions. We must teach, lead, and relate socratically, and we must do this often. By the same methods, we must teach them to evaluate the media they take in.

Thirdly, and similarly, parents: EAT DINNER WITH YOUR KIDS. At the dinner table, dig, even if that gets you the annoyed look that teens have perfected.

Fourth, youth leaders must start teaching apologetics and theology. I'm not kidding. You can blow this off, but by looking at the research, it is what they need (though not the only thing).

My friend Brett Kunkle knows this. He regularly speaks to youth groups and high school clubs in Southern California. He's noted that when you give them reasons for why they believe, they suddenly perk up. When you teach them how to discuss deep things with another person, they come alive.

He's led a few youth trips to Cal. Berkeley. In these trips, he and other adults teach the students theology and apologetics, then they get to apply that learning with leading atheists and agnostics at the school, as well as with the general student population at Berkeley. Afterwards, when they debrief and worship, the students are alive with fervor. He has personally noted to me that the worship sessions after those trips are some of the most vibrant he's seen amongst youth.

I could go on, but that's a good start. Do you see a theme running through those four recommendations?

What can you add?

Also check out this blog on Smith's book

HT: Brett Kunkle at Stand to Reason (follow the above link)

A Man Who Changed the World

Albert McMakin, a 24 year old farmer, had just given his life to Christ the year before. He heard Dr. Mordecai Ham was coming to speak at a tent meeting. He was so exited that he invited countless friends and family members. Many of them agreed to come…except Billy.

Billy was the handsome, big-man-on-campus at the local high school. He didn’t have much interest or time for Jesus. Albert, though, was smarter than your average bear. He borrowed a truck from a friend and asked Billy to drive it. “You don’t even need to stay for the meeting,” said Albert, “just drive me to and from.” Since Billy didn’t have a vehicle of his own and desperately wanted to drive, he agreed to Albert’s proposition.

Billy stayed outside in the truck during the whole time, but he listened to Ham’s words. By the end of the tent meeting, though, Jesus had his hooks in him; young Billy Graham walked forward during the alter call and gave his life to Jesus Christ.

Yes, Billy Graham is a man who has changed the world; but that’s not who I’m referring to in the title of this post.

You’ve probably heard of Billy Graham, but have any of you heard of Albert McMakin? Chances are, the answer is no. However, his is no obscure name in the ledgers of heaven, for his enthusiasm and willingness to share the Good News of Christ to anyone willing to listen (and some, like Billy, who weren’t willing to listen) has rippled through eternity in a grandiose way.

How different would the world be had McMakin kept the Good News to himself?

Do you have an Albert McMakin in your life? I do. I actually have several, and if you take even one of them out of my life, the trajectory of my steps goes in a very different direction. I am eternally grateful for each one of them: Mr. Wenger, Travis, Steve, Matt, Yohan, and Darwin (Isn’t that ironic that one of the men who helped lead me to Christ is named “Darwin”! Ha! Take that, Richard Dawkins.).

Though sometimes fear and apathy get the best of me, It is men like these and stories like McMakin’s that keep me intent on speaking of Jesus whenever I can. May you be encouraged by his story in the same direction.

God Loves a Cheerful Giver

Justin Taylor at Between two Worlds recently wrote a post comparing the giving churchgoers do today to the giving during the Depression. Read the whole thing; it is disappointing.

We are not investing wisely.

Tomfoolery

Melinda at Str points to some craziness about modern tolerance.

Commenter Kevin W puts the irony succinctly and humorously:

“One camp says: Tolerate everyone…let freedom win out, it’s the right thing to do.

The other camp says: Tolerate us or else, it’s the only thing to do.

I guess both groups are ‘technically’ for tolerance.

Strange world.”

The most ironic thing: who do you think the U.N will listen and cater to?

Even the Christians’ definition of tolerance at this gathering leaves something to be desired.

Romney: No Bailout for Detroit

Read the whole thing here.

I don’t know enough about the economic crisis and the auto industry to speak on this, but Romney has a certain amount of authority on this issue.

He makes some good points in the following excerpt:

“The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms — all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat.”

What do you think?

HT: John Mark Reynolds

hmmm...

Sister Toldjah brings up a good question about Barry's choice of H. Clinton for Secretary of State.

Will it be the same 'ol dog and pony show? Time will tell.

Must the World Love Us?

Victor Davis Hanson at NRO online asks a question I've always wondered about "world opinion" of the U.S: is that *always* a bad thing?

Perhaps sometimes, sometimes, angering parts of the international community was a good thing. When you shake down a bully on the playground, afterall, he's not going to be real fond of you.

I mean, ya, sometimes, but I really wonder if we Americans are making much ado about nothing (or at least almost nothing) when it comes to world opinion.

Between Two Worlds: Tony Jones: Monogamous GLBTQ Should Be Sanctified and Blessed by the Church

Between Two Worlds: Tony Jones: Monogamous GLBTQ Should Be Sanctified and Blessed by the Church

Dude...seriously. Who is Jones kidding?

Cal Thomas: Missing the Mark

Ed has recently written a critique of Cal Thomas' recent column in which Thomas basically told conservative evangelicals to "chill out" in the politics department.

Ed had some good points. I'd like to add my own.

First, Thomas says, "Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren't anywhere near as successful as those that focus on changing hearts."

I don't see why it has to be either/or. Why not both/and?

Secondly, he says, "Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative evangelical image has failed."

Failed? Says who? No doubt, conservatives haven't seen as much progress as we'd like (sometimes, that was because we gave up too early and/or let up at key points in the game...but I digress.), but progress has been made. For example, pro-life policies in legislation has curbed abortion and made it easier to pass further pro-life legislation (see Joseph Wright's response here and New's counter to that rebuttal here.)


Third, Thomas states, "Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?"

This is kinda simple minded. I teach for a living, and I see the effect of liberal policies and teaching on the young every day. There is a reason why Obie Baracked the vote amongst the whipper-snappers.

Also, Thomas had better thank his lucky stars that evangelicals have been politically active in the past. From William Wilberforce, to countless American slave abolitionists to Martin Luther King, Jr, many, many advances in both politics and society have been made by politically active evangelicals. I doubt he would poo-poo evangelical political engagement if the issue was, say, slavery, or desegregation.

It's popular and easy to wave his hand at conservative politics now.

I like Cal Thomas...I really do. He points to a legitimate frustration, and perhaps there are a few nuggets of wisdom we evangelicals can get from his column. It's a helpful reminder, for instance, that we ought not put our ultimate hope in politics. Jesus saves, Newt doesn't. But overall, I think he missed the mark on this one.

Prop 8 Protest Links

Not only is California on fire literally, but its figuratively on fire with protests.
Things are getting ugly, folks. Here I’m providing links from around the web and blogosphere so you can keep track of the happenings. Yes, some are links to points of view I don’t agree with.

*Michelle Malkin has video and testimony of Christians’ rough night in San Francisco.

*Kevin McCullough adds his two cents over at Townhall.

*Speaking about Townhall, here are two more moderately decent posts: 1 / 2

*Apologetics.com fellas (and gals) have the granny video

*Robin at evangelicaloutpost gives her thoughts here (check out the comments…some good discussion going on there.)

*Hotair predicts the ending.

*Good ‘ol Keith Olberman...gotta love that guy (end sarcasm)

(ht on Olberman: Stand to Reason)

That should be enough…what say you? rdb268@hotmail.com

Addressing Bologna

I need to say a few things about a column by Cal Thomas which he wrote last week.

The position he takes in this piece entitled Religious right should put politics aside is simply empty-headed. First, he assumes that if Christians engage themselves in the political process, than they are not trusting God. I used to believe that. That philosophy, in fact, was at the heart of why I turned down a job working for Senator DeWine back in the late '90s. Thomas' assumption has no basis with empirical evidence and Scriptural imperatives (e.g. be in the world but not of the world).

Another thing he doesn't understand is the purpose of laws and how it relates to morality. Here's two very short pieces (1 / 2) that I would strongly encourage you read that refutes this presupposition of Mr. Thomas.

If he really believes this view that he asserts in this piece, then he should relinquish his power position as a national syndicated columnist, and go start an orphanage in an obscure town in eastern Kentucky.

I'm not surprised that Thomas is a national syndicated columnist. The leftist media love to give people a microphone, a camera, or a column, who know how to pacify and confuse those religious-right fundamentalists.

Ohio State's Tom Ryan

I wrestled during the Russ Hellickson era. When Tom Ryan took over the Ohio State wrestling program after Russ retired, I have to admit, I was biased against him. I mean, c’mon, Russ was the man. Anyone who rubbed shoulders with him came to that conclusion. His impact on my life puts him in the company of an elite group of men.

But, ever since Ryan took over in 2006, my Buckeye pride has only increased. He’s done a heckuva job. He took the Bucks from a 45th place at NCAA’s the year before he took over to 2nd place last year. In just two short years, he’s revolutionized not only the Ohio State University wrestling program, but he’s energized the sport of wrestling in the state of Ohio.

What’s more, he’s a heckuva guy. He has a strong faith in Christ, and he cares about each wrestler not just as a wrestler, but as a man. He develops them physically, mentally, and spiritually.

For example, he requires each team member to complete a certain amount of community service. Ryan has three goals in regards to his wrestlers: win, graduate, and impact lives. Most coaches out there, whether in the little leagues, high school, or college, merely stress that first goal. Ryan’s philosophy puts him head and shoulders above the rest of the crowd.

Here are a few videos featuring coach Ryan. Be thankful that a man like this is molding the next generation of men:

Reunite in the Afterlife

Overcoming

Dream big

Go Home!

Michelle Malkin is keeping track of the anti-Proposition 8 protests this weekend.

Of course, boycotts are no big deal. Even the fact that they are protesting is not controversial per se. Human kind has been protesting, for better or worse, ever since we could say “ug!”

But this just goes way, way overboard.

I’m not going to go as far as some people and call it “terrorism,” but it’s just flat out extreme. I really, really, really hope the public at large is paying attention and that they see this collective temper-tantrum for what it is.
I’m not holding my breath, though. We are far too easily bullied and placated with empty rhetoric.

How to Influence People and Gain Readers

I'm doing a considerable amount of research trying to find ways to gain more readers. For you fellow bloggers out there, I found a helpful list of links here.

but its a religious argument!!

I was at a teacher training the other day, and I overheard some teachers talking about the Mormon church supporting Prop 8. They were howling about the Mormon's support and saying that they should have their tax exempt status revoked.
"It's separation of church and state," they said.

I didn't enter into the conversation. I stayed waaaay clear. Frankly, I was kinda tired about talking about it and hearing about it. Or maybe it was just cowardice on my part.

At any rate, afterwards I was thinking about a few questions.

What's the big deal with religious people or a religious group supporting a certain policy? Why think that's a violation of the "separation of church and state?" I want to ask these folks: "what, do you think the Mormons (or any other religious group) shouldn't have a vote, or should they not have a voice?"

And, really, what's "separation of church and state" supposed to mean anyway? Where is that in the constitution (hint: nowhere.)?

What's the First Amendment say? "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I stress the "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" part.

Anyway, why think that "separation of church and state" is what the Founders had in mind when they penned the First Amendment?

What religion does Proposition 8 establish? Jews, Christians, Mormons, Muslims, and the members of many other religions agree with the Proposition. While many of the motivations to support it might be religious, the arguments themselves are such that people of many faiths (or no faiths) can agree with them. If the arguments don't establish a specific religion, then they don't violate the establishment clause.

Also, consider that many people *oppose* Proposition 8 due to religious motivations.

This is the case with almost *any* policy position in which people try to marginalize a certain viewpoint for being religious: the death penalty (Mother Theresa opposed it because "Jesus would forgive."), an Obama presidency (many evangelicals, like Donald Miller supported him), and many of Obama's economic policies. If my conservative viewpoint is out of bounds for being "religious," then so are the opposing points of view.

Bottom line: This screaming about "religion in politics" is a bunch of bunk. Its all just to marginalize a viewpoint they don't hold. Don't fall for it.

Tolerance and the "T-shirt Test"

"The new tolerance," as some call it, is pretty much a shell game. Anyone who isn't easily bullied by name calling and who has a decent BS detector can see that.

The reasons it's a sham are legion.

Reason #876: those who pimp the new tolerance the hardest can't even live up to their own words.

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

BWAAHAHA!

BWAAHAHA!

Lol...Dude, seriously.

Many gays and lesbians are decent folk who don't resort to this kind of tomfoolery.

But, just like the Christians have to deal with Fred Phelps (who, arguably, is a wolf in sheep's clothing, not a true member of the flock), so these guys need to be dealt with firmly.

I try to avoid ridicule and name calling, but I don't think I actually need to make a case to convince people that these guys are idiots. Their actions do that by themselves.

They need to be laughed at.

There's a Cost

The Mormon church, after a firestorm of protests at its gate, face a boycott.

Restaraunts and businesses face financial repercussions.

Some have lost their jobs. There is even an 'anti-gay 'blacklist'' floating around out there.

Death threats? Yep.

Some of my friends now have strained relationships due to their support of Proposition 8.

Should we now play the victim and develop a martyr complex? No. We aren't victims, and any cost we face pales in comparison to the cost demanded of true martyrs. We've chosen our path; no one forced us to vote that way, afterall.

SSM proponents, of course, have every right to boycott. That's the way this country works, and it can be a good way to let your voice be heard.

But hey folks, guess what: your convictions might actually cost you something now.

And you know what? That's allright. Seriously. Anything that wakes us up out of our comfort-induced stupor ain't all that bad.

This is something my generation is not used to. We are used to believing whatever we wish, virtually cost-free. Not so much this time around.

So what should be our reaction?

Three things.

First, should you just back down? Should you apologize? No. 'Love' does not mean that you must acquiesce to a destructive lifestyle. If you voted yes on Proposition 8, have the backbone to stand by your convictions, come hell or high water. The times demand men and women who will count the cost and refuse to be bullied.

Like I quoted a few blogs ago: 'screw your courage to the sticking place.'

I don't know what I'd do if I were in that place. I hope that, should I face such a cost, I would follow my own advice.

Second, in addition to some guts, what we will need in the coming months and years is a large number of people who not only stand for conservative, pro-life, traditional marriage, and biblical principles, but folks who can defend and articulate them well. On this issue of traditional marriage, if you are not in that place, you can start educating yourself here.

Third, Christians especially need to continue to reach out in love and care to those who identify as GLBT. My church's outreach to the Padua House in Long Beach is an excellent example.

All three are necessary if we desire to make a difference. We cannot risk being out of balance. The stakes are too high.

See also: Michelle Malkin's post.

Sinaiticus Goes Cyber

Thanks to the collaborative efforts of scholars around the world, one of the oldest and complete bible manuscripts is being offered to everyone in cyberspace. Referred to as Codex Sinaiticus, it is one of the most important hand-written ancient copies of the Greek Bible dating back to the fourth century.

You can find it online by clicking here.

(Please note: this website will be going through a major upgrade sometime this month. So if the link does not work, just google “Codex Sinaiticus”.)

Comment on the election

Mark Alexander of PatriotPost.us offers this summary of the election made by a fellow conservative he knows:

"It's been tough, fellow Patriots; tough to stomach the idea that more than half of my fellow citizens who vote, have booted a genuine American hero to the curb for a rudderless charlatan. What a sad indictment on our citizenry that some are so eager to overlook his myriad flaws -- his radical roots, his extreme liberalism, his utter lack of experience or achievement. Barack Obama is the antithesis of King's dream: He's a man judged by the color of his skin rather than the content of his character. If it's God's will that Barack Obama is our next president, then so be it. We Patriots will pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and wade back to the war front, intent on liberty or death."

Well said.

Hope

I was listening to the Albert Mohler program on the radio today (he's president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). He made a point that really made me think.

He mentioned that according to recent calculations, China, perhaps, has the largest number of Christians in the world. Numbers on the low end are at 70 million, while numbers at the high end tally 130 million.

Even if you take the most conservative numbers, the number of Christians is much, much larger than the number of members in the Communist party in China.

This joins reports from all around the world that show Christianity--serious Christianity, that is--is still dramatically on the rise, even (especially) in places that have heavy persecution.

This is news that despite all the craziness that's going on in the West, God is not done with His church. Though the issues we face here are definitely important, God still marches on.

Another thing Mohler said caught my attention too. He was talking about a recent conversation he had with a Chinese Christian. This Chinese man noted that the Communist government did something very silly that turned out to aid the spreading of the Gospel. As punishment, the government gave Christians dirty, lowly, and unpopular jobs, like garbage collector. These garbage collectors' job was to collect garbage as they went *door to door.*

So the Communist government in China tried to stamp out a missionary religion by sending its adherents door-to-door...nice.

Just goes to show; what men meant for evil, God meant for good.

This gives me hope, folks.

***One thing that gives me pause, though, is that us Christians in the West seem to not have the same strength of nerve as others in more persecuted lands. The most insidious attacks on the church in the West have often come from inside the gates. Also, many of our ranks have been all too happy to lay down our shields and join the wolf pack. Many of us in the West can be and have been bought. We are far too easily mesmerized by bread and circuses. This is not so good....well, perhaps God will use something like what's happening in China to get us to wake up and rejoin the faithful.

Congratulations, Mr. President-Elect

Congratulations to president-elect Barack Obama.

Though I have opposed him vigorously, and will continue to do so when I think he is leading this country down the wrong road, I respect him as my country's future leader. I hope the best for him, and will be praying often for his safety and leadership. My prayer will also be that he is given wisdom and courage in our current, somewhat turbulent age.

He's a very brilliant, very talented man. History is fraught with examples of inexperienced and untested men that turned out to be pleasant surprises. Perhaps Barack Obama will join the ranks of this esteemed group.

At any rate, the next 4-8 years should be pretty interesting.

Vote!

Well, election day is here. No matter what happens, we can at least be relieved that the political ads and phone calls are over, right?

Seriously, though, I hope you all have or will get out and vote. Don't be discouraged by polls that count out one candidate or try to make you think your vote won't matter.

When you're watching the returns tonight on TV, keep in mind that most of the news organizations will use exit polls to call states for one candidate even if hardly any votes are counted (and, in my opinion, they will be more likely to make premature calls for Obama since they are doing everything they can to drag him over the finish line). Since that is the case, this is important news:

Rasmussen asked voters how likely they were to answer exit pollster's questions. The results indicate more willingness on the part of Democrats to talk to the pollsters.

Reviewing Fox News/Rasmussen Reports data from key battleground states raises a couple red flags about the use of early exit polling data to predict a winner. Understanding this data from polling conducted last Sunday night may save some a repeat of 2004’s heartache.

The bottom line is that in every state we polled--Colorado, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia-- Democrats are a lot more eager to take exit polls than Republicans.

In five of the six states, a majority of Democrats say they would be Very Likely to participate in the exit polling process. At the same time, in five of the six states, fewer than 40% of Republicans would be willing to do the same.

In every state, Republicans are at least twice as likely as Democrats to say that they are not at all willing to take an exit poll.

Unaffiliated voters tend to align more closely to Republicans in all six states in both willingness and unwillingness to participate in exit polls.

This is even more important for west coast readers--don't let early returns in the east keep you away from the polls. You need to go vote for state and local issues, even if the presidential race seems like it might already be decided. And given that the exit polls are pretty suspect, you shouldn't assume the presidential race is already decided just because the news organizations said so.

Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!

Reflections

Over the last few months (especially the last 2 weeks), I've done a lot of thinking about the current political scene. There are a loooot of complex, confusing issues out there. The economic crisis, for example, is one of them. All three popular answers that have been given (dems--deregulation. Repubs--government control mandating foolish loaning stretegies. Both--greed) strike me as true *in certain places and certain ways,* though some certainly overstate their case.

There are a lot of issues out there that I can discuss with you, and we can disagree vigorously on them, but at the end of the day, we can still call each other brothers and sisters and go have a drink together.


I've come back to one issue time and time again, though: pro-lifers, Catholics, and Evangelicals supporting Obama. I've shown my cards quite explicitly on what I think about that. What keeps vexing me, though, is why the pro-life, pro-Obama line of thinking is so popular, especially among young voters.

There's a couple of reasons why I think there was an upswell of that kind of thinking this election:

1) Political fatigue. Many are disappointed with traditional politics, especially of the Republican party. Neither candidate seems wholly satisfactory, and perhaps a lot of pro-life Catholics and Evangelicals can't find a home with either party.

2) As to the young, abortion has been identified as the fight of our parents, and we'd rather not engage in the same fight they did. Its just uncool.

3) You've really thought the issue through and you side with Obama. You've seen the information and arguments that I present, and you are unmoved.

Let me work backwards. First, if you are in group 3, you know where I stand on that. I think you're delusional. I have no more to say to you.

If you are in group two: the good, the true, and the beautiful knows no generational bounds. Just because it was your parents' fight doesn't mean its not a worthy fight for you. Perhaps they *were* right on *some* things, despite what MTV has taught us.

In short; don't be blown about by the winds of popularity. Jesus didn't give a hoot, and neither should you. Let truth and courage be your compass.

If you are in the first group, I sympathize with you. I can see why you feel that way. I agree with you that politics can be and is a somewhat silly enterprise.

But let me offer an encouragement; don't throw in the towel. Don't let the best become the enemy of the good. Just because we haven't scored a total knockout doesn't mean we aren't fighting well.

Plus, sometimes you gotta hang in there and hold the hammer down, b.c the stakes are awfully high. One of the many things I've learned the past few weeks is that many significant pro-life gains *have* been made by pro-lifers in legislation. These bills and such have chipped away at Roe, and have reduced abortions significantly. To let our hands down during this round of the match, to let our feet go flat this late in the fight endangers those significant gains. In a boxing match it doesn't matter how many punches you landed in earlier rounds; if you let your guard down and take a ringer on the chin, the fight is over, even if its the last minute of the twelfth round...you lost.

Heck, even if those gains hadn't been made, the pro-life fight is still a worthy fight, just as a matter of principle. It should always be issue #1, just like slavery was issue #1 in many people's minds in its day.
In all likelihood, on Wednesday, November 5, Barack Obama will be president-elect. Mark my words, pro-lifers, especially those who supported Obama this election: you will need lots more stamina to stay faithful the next four years. You must prepare, as Shakespeare said, to "screw your courage to the sticking place." Stand up, regain your nerve, and carry on.

Our very souls are at stake.

"What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul?"

He's the wisest man that ever lived for a reason, folks.

Bordner's Last Stand

This is my last stand, people. Rather than re-create everything here (which took quite a while), I'll just link you to it. Lazy, yes, but whatever.

I kinda got carried away last night. A 5 minute internet check turned into a 2 hour blogfest. GAH! Addictive personality.

The gloves come off in this post. I get harsh. I think I need to.

A lot of the information is concurrent with Robert George's piece, which is linked to below. I just give some more sources and I put my own flourish on it.

Just Tell Us The Truth!

If you are a Christian, you need to watch this video before you cast your vote! And please send this to all of those you know who also care about what God cares about!

One Vote

Obama is Radically Pro-Abortion

For more content and information about Roe v. Wade, go to: www.bornalivetruth.com.

Profile of a Radical: Obama supports infanticide

Pro-Life and Pro-War?

Here’s an excellent one-page response when pro-choice advocates accuse pro-lifers of being hypocritical for decrying abortion while at the same supporting the waging of war.

Obama's Abortion Extremism

by Robert George
Member of the President's Council on Bioethics
Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University

read article

listen to article being passionately read

Louis Farrakhan Declares Barack Obama The Messiah

Here’s a long version of his sermon

The Tape--Obama and the PLO

From Texas Rainmaker--but you can find the story on almost any right-wing blog:

Shameful and disgusting.

John McCain’s presidential campaign Tuesday accused the Los Angeles Times of “intentionally suppressing” a videotape it obtained of a 2003 banquet where then-state Sen. Barack Obama spoke of his friendship with Rashid Khalidi, a leading Palestinian scholar and activist.

Apparently it was newsworthy enough to spawn an article in the paper, so we have to wonder what’s on the tape that is so newsworthy the paper (who has endorsed Barack Obama) does not want the world seeing before the election.

Maybe because the man Obama was heaping praise upon was a spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization and served on the PLO “guidance committee”…
Mr. Khalidi was at that time “a director of the Palestinian press agency.” That would be Wikalat al-Anba al-Filastinija, or WAFA, the PLO press agency, where Mr. Khalidi’s wife, Mona, was chief English-language editor in 1976-82. Mr. Friedman quotes Mr. Khalidi in his official capacity saying that the Israelis are out to “crush the P.L.O.” … he served on the PLO “guidance committee” at the Madrid conference, along with such figures as Faisal Husseini, Hanan Ashrawi and Sari Nusseibeh.

And yet the L.A. Times has a video of Obama praising Khalidi and refuses to release it. Makes you wonder just what they’re trying to hide for their endorsed candidate.

That's a specific instance of media bias--but there's a general trend too. Here are some results from a recent Pew study of major media coverage of McCain and Obama over the six weeks between the conventions and the final debate (Sept. 3-Oct. 16):

For Obama during this period, just over a third of the stories were clearly positive in tone (36%), while a similar number (35%) were neutral or mixed. A smaller number (29%) were negative.

For McCain, by comparison, nearly six in ten of the stories studied were decidedly negative in nature (57%), while fewer than two in ten (14%) were positive.

I'm pretty convinced that the media are pulling out all the stops to push their chosen candidate over the finish line. Don't let them discourage you--they will probably be even more negative about McCain over this final weekend. I wouldn't be surprised to see polls showing a big Obama lead after they've been tightening all week. Just remember what the media bias is, take it all with a HUGE grain of salt, and go vote!