Archive for June, 2009

Inalienable rights

I visited a new church today, First Baptist Concord in Farragut (not sure why it’s called Concord if it’s in Farragut). The pastor decided to begin a new three- or four-week series about America, presumably in honor of the upcoming holiday. Today, he introduced his argument that the United States of America began as a Christian nation. (In later segments, he plans to address America’s fall from grace and then delve into end-times prophecy from a dispensationalist standpoint.)

Specifically, he pointed out that the various American colonies adhered to Christianity prior to the Revolution, and that afterward the nation as a whole remained Christian following unification, even after ratification of the Constitution. The colonies appealed to the Christian God as their source of authority in various constitutions and charters. Most of them required adherence to various Christian beliefs for anyone who desired to hold office — often at least a faith in the divine inspiration of the Bible. (As a side note, the Tennessee Constitution technically still requires belief in a deity and in a future judgment.)

Moreover, many of the colonists explicitly declared their intention of evangelizing the Indians. The Virginia Company declared evangelism as one of its objectives when it founded Jamestown — even though profit alone would certainly have been a noble goal!

Even following ratification of the Constitution, the federal government continued advocating national days of prayer, and various states maintained state churches. The Supreme Court never struck down these state churches; people just gradually realized it was a dumb idea for states to fund particular denominations.

Obama and Rick Warren

Anyway, the pastor brought up facts like these and others, and then concluded by discussing the idea of inalienable rights. He didn’t specifically mention the many verses that I would have cited to argue for rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — but he really didn’t need to do so. His main purpose was simply to encourage and embolden Christians, rather than preach on theonomy. Also, it was just the first talk in the series. And besides, any theist with any sense knows that those rights are self-evident.

Besides the holiday, perhaps the pastor also received inspiration from the corrupt tax plan (taxing AIR) just passed by Democrats in the House. He didn’t mention that bill specifically, but he did insert a brief criticism about Obama’s socialist health care plan. Obama apparently argued that you can still keep your doctor under his socialist scheme — which is technically not entirely true, but that’s beside the point. The pastor shouted out, “Well I should hope I can keep my doctor! What business could he possibly have telling me what doctors I can see?” I suspect Jesus has been scratching his head in heaven lately wondering the same question.

The preacher had clearly grown exasperated with politicians violating our God-given right to pursue happiness and obtain property.

christian america

Overall, I got the idea that the pastor felt a little uneasy preaching such a political sermon — although he was certainly passionate once he got going. Nonetheless, I appreciated that the preacher spoke on the topic. There should be more sermons like this one. By that, I don’t mean that churches should become ultrapolitical and speak about politics all the time. I simply mean that all churches should speak about it some of the time. Everyone who claims to follow Jesus needs to understand the evil, anti-Christian nature of the liberal paradigm.

Pastors routinely preach about loving your wives, or having a forgiving spirit, or worshipping God…blah blah blah. How many times can you listen to preachers talk about these generalities before your eyes glaze over? Do you want to know how to worship God? I can think of one way:  Vote conservative in the next election. Conservatism is hardly the entirety of Christianity, but any liberal Christian is living inconsistently with his status as a child of God. These ignorant people should read theirs Bibles more often.


The saddest day of all

Nowadays, we have to worry about North Korea shooting nukes at us, about the government robbing our doctors, or about President Obama taxing us for breathing carbon dioxide. But none of that compares to the most recent tragedy. Michael Jackson has died suddenly and unexpectedly.


I always thought I could handle any calamity, but this is too much! Every eighties night on the radio, and every Halloween from now on, I will face the reminder of the brilliant star whose fire has finally burnt out. Sure, maybe Michael had too many surgeries, and maybe he acted a little weird, and yeah maybe he converted to Islam — but despite any of these pecadillos, he was still one of the greats. You cannot kill greatness.

Some of you may be wondering, But Drew, what about those allegations of his civil and criminal misconduct against young children?! But come on; let’s get serious:  We all know he was innocent.

We’ll miss you, Michael!


(Full narrative video here)

R.I.P. Michael Jackson

Irate Iranians and the girly, dumb response

In the world of international relations, there are smart people, and then there are stupid people.

Iran just had an election. President Ahmadinejad got the most votes — only lots of the votes were from people who don’t exist. Supposedly fifty cities counted more votes than potential voters. Despite these irregularities, Iran announced within hours that Ahmadinejad had won re-election.

Now you might just be thinking, Oh well, it’s Iran; what did everyone expect?

But actually, Iran isn’t a complete dictatorship. They have a “Council of Guardians,” which is a group of ruling tyrants kind of like our Supreme Court. The “Supreme Leader” appoints half these Guardians, as well as numerous other high offices. Through the Guardians, the Supreme Leader makes sure that all the candidates he doesn’t like never get their names on the ballot.

But in this election, two candidates did get their names on the ballot, and the one who actually got the most votes was declared the loser. The Supreme Leader and the Guardians have lent their support toward the “winner,” President Ahmadinejad. That is just plain cheating.

Iranians have taken to the streets in protest over the rigged election. Freedom-loving people throughout the world extend sympathy toward them. You might expect the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave to do likewise, and at least condemn the tyranny. Just making a statement would be nice. It wouldn’t take a nuclear attack, or a war declaration, or even a trade sanction. Just get Hillary on television to say something along the lines of, “This is bad. We don’t like this. Stop being evil.”

But what does Obama do instead? Nothing, really. He claims that neither Iranian candidate was particularly stellar, so speaking out would be pointless. Now you see what I meant about the smart people and the…other people.

Even assuming Obama were 100% correct about the candidates, who cares? The candidates do not matter! You do whatever it takes to embarrass and weaken the Iranian regime! Arg. It doesn’t take a genius law student with a degree in International Studies from Rhodes College to figure this stuff out. Come on.

Sigh. What a wuss. These are the times I almost miss good ol’ W.

Funding foolishness

Apparently, President Obama signed an executive order today expanding certain marriage benefits to gay employees of the federal government. Does anyone else find this decision ridiculous?

Imagine yourself as a parent with three children. These children are fairly wild, but they really like ice cream. Every now and then you have to bring the kids to a social gathering (perhaps a wedding, or a funeral) where their misbehavior would embarrass you. Therefore, you offer to buy the children ice cream if they stay calm and behave at the event.

At a certain party you are attending, the two older children both do well, but the younger one starts whining and crying, and you have to deal with him at the event. Do you buy him ice cream? Of course not.

Eventually, though this same pattern happens over and over again, with the youngest one misbehaving the most often. When you deny him ice cream afterward, he repeatedly complains that he has not received the same “rights” as his older siblings. Eventually, you decide to cave in. You start buying them all ice cream, regardless of their behavior. After all, it’s not fair to discriminate against the youngest child. Ice cream is a right for all your children.

Ahh, but you have just completely forgotten why you instituted the ice cream bribery in the first place!

bad boy

We offer incentives to encourage desirable behavior. Marriage is desirable behavior. Marriage produces children. These children grow up to fight wars, fund social security, invent new technologies, etc. Marriage encourages monogamy. Marriage reduces the spread of disease. Marriage tends to boost a man’s productivity, and hence the GDP.

Can we say the same things about homosexuality? Do we really want to fund homosexual relationships, or any non-marital relationships?

Are marital benefits — whether tax-based or pay-based or honor-based or whatever — any sort of right? No, they serve a purpose. We act like fools when we forget that.

I want to BE this man

Man, I can’t believe I never saw these ads until now! WAY Cooler than Chuck Norris.

A true role model

I don’t always drink beer, but when I do, I prefer Dos Equis. LOL

Inspiring AND wise

They definitely need to make more of these commercials. We men could learn a lot from this guy. I hope someday I can meet him. And dang, he makes me want to go buy some Dos Equis.