I have been very disappointed during this election season by the churches of Denver because of their unwillingness to address the Christian issues on the ballots. Their lack of support for things that are clearly designed to protect and advance Christian ethics and morals in our society is a shame to them and to the Christian people of our state.
Somehow, the pastors and the elder boards of the churches think that it is against the law for them to speak out on Christian issues and even Christian principles. They think that they will lose their coveted tax exemptions if they speak out on anything that comes up on the ballot. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, there is nothing in the law that would prohibit them from actively advocating for issues in an election that concern our faith. The following link from the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization, describes what can and what cannot be proclaimed from the pulpit during an election season: http://bit.ly/9O13mh.
I think that part of the problem with churches and pastors is ignorance of the issues. I spoke to one pastor who had already voted in Colorado. He told me that he was surprised to find the Personhood Amendment on the ballot when he got to the polling place. This issue, which would define the beginning of human life at the point of conception, is clearly a Christian issue of life. The pastor had not taken the time to inform himself of the issues on the ballot. (He did take the time, however, to deny me the privilege of informing his church on this issue.) In these days, ballots are so very complicated that one cannot decide intelligently on most of the issues by simply going to the polling place and seeing what one might vote on. One has to inform oneself of the issues long before going to vote.
This appalling situation would not have obtained during the early days of America. Preachers and churches were not afraid to proclaim the truth from the pulpits of pre-revolutionary America. Every one of the 27 reasons for revolution elucidated in the Declaration of Independence was clearly presented to the American people by the preachers of America in the 10 years before the revolution. Without the leadership of our churches, the American Revolution might not have ever happened. What a difference from the situation today when the churches are afraid to even mention Christian issues from the pulpit! GOD HELP US ALL!!
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Conspiracy of Silence
Abraham Lincoln said, “To sin by silence when you should protest makes cowards of men.” Christ died for us and asks us to care about each other. Christ died for us and that gives us compassion for our fellow men, especially those in mortal danger. The bumper sticker says: “If you’re not completely appalled by now, you’re just not paying attention.” How many more babies have to die before the people of God will stand up and say, “Enough!!!?”
Abortion is a national and international disgrace. The blood of the aborted cries out. “We have been silent too long.” God is on the side of those who stand for Life. He gives victory to those on the side of truth. So, do not be afraid to wear a Precious Feet Pin or put a Pro-Life bumper sticker on your car. Support your local pregnancy centers and other Pro-Life organizations.
When you stand before the judgment seat of God, you will be glad you did something. You will also be glad that Jesus did something so you can live well now and eternally.
One practical thing you can do this election year is to vote for Pro-Life candidates and vote YES on Amendment 62, the Personhood Amendment in Colorado.
This blog post was excerpted from Pastor Wayne Riddering of Hope Lutheran Church in Westcliffe, Colorado. Pastor Riddering is a former President of Lutherans for Life in Metro Denver.
Abortion is a national and international disgrace. The blood of the aborted cries out. “We have been silent too long.” God is on the side of those who stand for Life. He gives victory to those on the side of truth. So, do not be afraid to wear a Precious Feet Pin or put a Pro-Life bumper sticker on your car. Support your local pregnancy centers and other Pro-Life organizations.
When you stand before the judgment seat of God, you will be glad you did something. You will also be glad that Jesus did something so you can live well now and eternally.
One practical thing you can do this election year is to vote for Pro-Life candidates and vote YES on Amendment 62, the Personhood Amendment in Colorado.
This blog post was excerpted from Pastor Wayne Riddering of Hope Lutheran Church in Westcliffe, Colorado. Pastor Riddering is a former President of Lutherans for Life in Metro Denver.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Vote YES on Colorado’s Personhood Amendment. Here’s Why.
Everyone should vote yes on the Personhood Amendment (#62) on November 2nd. This amendment would proclaim that human life begins at conception.
For obvious reasons, those on the Pro-Abortion side of the life argument want this amendment defeated—-it would cut into their business. But some powerful voices in the Pro-Life movement are actually joining forces with the Pro-Abortion movement to try to defeat this amendment. Those Pro-Lifers believe that inevitably, this amendment would come to a Constitutional test by the Supreme Court; and the amendment would be defeated because of the liberal make-up of the Court at this time. They would have us wait until the Court becomes more conservative and more amenable to upholding this amendment.
This thinking is not indicative of what Pro-Lifers should do now. The Pro-Life movement is presently at a high tide of public opinion; and it is gradually gaining strength according to several polls. However, it will soon be replaced in the minds of conservative voters the country over by their concern for the homosexual issue. I believe we should act now as we have never acted before. Several states are also considering a Personhood Amendment like the one in Colorado; if many people could see that Colorado has passed a personhood amendment they might be more inclined to do so, themselves. In that case, the Supreme Court would see that the vast weight of public opinion is on the side of life in this country, and they might be inclined to uphold it. (I will admit that the courts do not seem very interested in the will of the people a lot of the time.)The argument for waiting is futile because we would probably have to wait for 20-30 years for the Court to become more conservative, even if it were to do that unlikely thing in the future.
Additionally, this Amendment stands directly within the stated will of God in the Bible—THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Christians are clearly called upon to fight for the right, just as Joshua and Caleb were called upon to fight for the Promised Land. We must stand up for the right thing to do here and we should not cringe back into the shadows because we are afraid of the opposition. Vote YES on Amendment 62!
For obvious reasons, those on the Pro-Abortion side of the life argument want this amendment defeated—-it would cut into their business. But some powerful voices in the Pro-Life movement are actually joining forces with the Pro-Abortion movement to try to defeat this amendment. Those Pro-Lifers believe that inevitably, this amendment would come to a Constitutional test by the Supreme Court; and the amendment would be defeated because of the liberal make-up of the Court at this time. They would have us wait until the Court becomes more conservative and more amenable to upholding this amendment.
This thinking is not indicative of what Pro-Lifers should do now. The Pro-Life movement is presently at a high tide of public opinion; and it is gradually gaining strength according to several polls. However, it will soon be replaced in the minds of conservative voters the country over by their concern for the homosexual issue. I believe we should act now as we have never acted before. Several states are also considering a Personhood Amendment like the one in Colorado; if many people could see that Colorado has passed a personhood amendment they might be more inclined to do so, themselves. In that case, the Supreme Court would see that the vast weight of public opinion is on the side of life in this country, and they might be inclined to uphold it. (I will admit that the courts do not seem very interested in the will of the people a lot of the time.)The argument for waiting is futile because we would probably have to wait for 20-30 years for the Court to become more conservative, even if it were to do that unlikely thing in the future.
Additionally, this Amendment stands directly within the stated will of God in the Bible—THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Christians are clearly called upon to fight for the right, just as Joshua and Caleb were called upon to fight for the Promised Land. We must stand up for the right thing to do here and we should not cringe back into the shadows because we are afraid of the opposition. Vote YES on Amendment 62!
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Legalizing Prostitution??!
A pro-family activist in Canada is applauding a decision by that country's justice minister to appeal the ruling of an Ontario Judge who gutted federal prostitution laws in the province.
The Globe and Mail reports that Justice Susan Himel struck down all three Criminal Code provisions that had been challenged -- communicating for the purposes of prostitution, pimping, and operating a "common bawdy house." Himel argued the current laws endangered more than protected prostitutes.
Brian Rushfeldt, executive director of Canada Family Action, sees things a different way.
"She's in essence legalizing it as long as you do prostitution now within your home or within a brothel," he remarks. "It's atrocious to think that a judge could ever endorse prostitution, which really is an abuse and a violence against all women when it comes down to it."
Rushfeldt says as with the ongoing legal wrangling over California's marriage amendment (Proposition 8), this case demonstrates that activist judges are working both sides of the U.S.-Canada border.
"I would term it 'judicial dictatorship' -- because what these judges are doing by the rulings, whether it be in Canada or the United States, [is] overriding the elected officials; and in doing that they're overriding the will of the people," he explains. "And if that's happening, then in essence democracy is dead."
OneNewsNow.com 10-12-2010
The Globe and Mail reports that Justice Susan Himel struck down all three Criminal Code provisions that had been challenged -- communicating for the purposes of prostitution, pimping, and operating a "common bawdy house." Himel argued the current laws endangered more than protected prostitutes.
Brian Rushfeldt, executive director of Canada Family Action, sees things a different way.
"She's in essence legalizing it as long as you do prostitution now within your home or within a brothel," he remarks. "It's atrocious to think that a judge could ever endorse prostitution, which really is an abuse and a violence against all women when it comes down to it."
Rushfeldt says as with the ongoing legal wrangling over California's marriage amendment (Proposition 8), this case demonstrates that activist judges are working both sides of the U.S.-Canada border.
"I would term it 'judicial dictatorship' -- because what these judges are doing by the rulings, whether it be in Canada or the United States, [is] overriding the elected officials; and in doing that they're overriding the will of the people," he explains. "And if that's happening, then in essence democracy is dead."
OneNewsNow.com 10-12-2010
Friday, October 8, 2010
Today’s Financial Situation
It is not hard to see some of today’s troubles as a repeat of the errors of the 1930's. There is arrogance up top. The federal government is arrogant with the money supply and exhibits disregard and even hostility to all other businessmen and money handlers. It is as a result of this that economic recovery seems out of reach.
The key to recovery, now as in the 1930s, is to be found in property rights. These rights suffer under our current politics in several ways. The mortgage crisis, for example, arose out of a long-standing erosion of the property rights concept. Broadening FDR’s entitlement theories of the 1930’s, Congress has taught the country that home ownership is a “right.” This has fostered a misunderstanding of what property is. The owners of homes have failed to realize what ownership entails—that is, they haven’t grasped that they are obligated to deliver on the terms of the contract of their mortgage. In the bipartisan enthusiasm for making everyone an owner, our government has debased the concept of home ownership.
Property rights are endangered as well by the ongoing assault on contracts generally. A perfect example of this was the treatment of Chrysler bonds during the company’s bankruptcy, where senior secured creditors were ignored, notwithstanding the status of their bonds under bankruptcy law. The current administration made a political decision to subordinate those contracts to union demands. That sent a dangerous signal for the future that U.S. bonds are not trustworthy.
Three other threats to property loom. One is tax increases, such as the coming expiration of the Bush tax cuts. More taxes mean less private property. A second threat is in the area of infrastructure. Stimulus plans tend to emphasize infrastructure—especially roads and railroads. And after the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision of 2005, the federal government will have enormous license to use eminent domain to claim private property for these purposes. Third and finally, there is the worst kind of confiscation of private property: inflation, which excessive government spending necessarily encourages. Inflation is closer than the country thinks.
Property rights must be firmly established or else we will not have the kind of economic activity that leads to strong recovery. Economic growth depends on the impulse of the small businessman and entrepreneur to get back in the game. In order for this to happen, we don’t need a perfect government. All we need is one that is “not too bad,” whose rules are not constantly changing and snuffing out the willingness of these players to take risks. We need a government under which the money supply doesn’t change unpredictably. Business must be confident in the possibility of seeing significant returns on investment.
Recovery won’t happen from the top. But when those at the top step back and create the proper conditions, it will happen down there on main street.
This blog post was excerpted and modified from Imprimis, September 2010.
The key to recovery, now as in the 1930s, is to be found in property rights. These rights suffer under our current politics in several ways. The mortgage crisis, for example, arose out of a long-standing erosion of the property rights concept. Broadening FDR’s entitlement theories of the 1930’s, Congress has taught the country that home ownership is a “right.” This has fostered a misunderstanding of what property is. The owners of homes have failed to realize what ownership entails—that is, they haven’t grasped that they are obligated to deliver on the terms of the contract of their mortgage. In the bipartisan enthusiasm for making everyone an owner, our government has debased the concept of home ownership.
Property rights are endangered as well by the ongoing assault on contracts generally. A perfect example of this was the treatment of Chrysler bonds during the company’s bankruptcy, where senior secured creditors were ignored, notwithstanding the status of their bonds under bankruptcy law. The current administration made a political decision to subordinate those contracts to union demands. That sent a dangerous signal for the future that U.S. bonds are not trustworthy.
Three other threats to property loom. One is tax increases, such as the coming expiration of the Bush tax cuts. More taxes mean less private property. A second threat is in the area of infrastructure. Stimulus plans tend to emphasize infrastructure—especially roads and railroads. And after the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision of 2005, the federal government will have enormous license to use eminent domain to claim private property for these purposes. Third and finally, there is the worst kind of confiscation of private property: inflation, which excessive government spending necessarily encourages. Inflation is closer than the country thinks.
Property rights must be firmly established or else we will not have the kind of economic activity that leads to strong recovery. Economic growth depends on the impulse of the small businessman and entrepreneur to get back in the game. In order for this to happen, we don’t need a perfect government. All we need is one that is “not too bad,” whose rules are not constantly changing and snuffing out the willingness of these players to take risks. We need a government under which the money supply doesn’t change unpredictably. Business must be confident in the possibility of seeing significant returns on investment.
Recovery won’t happen from the top. But when those at the top step back and create the proper conditions, it will happen down there on main street.
This blog post was excerpted and modified from Imprimis, September 2010.
Friday, September 24, 2010
It is a true fact that marriage in America is in deep trouble. For the first time in our nation's history, a child living in a single-parent family is just as likely to be living with a never-married parent as with a divorced parent. We can see that not only the fact of marriage break-up in our society; even the definition of marriage is changing. Just about any configuration of people living together can be called a "family." All they need to say to call themselves a family in our liberal society is to say they "love" each other.
In the past, divorce was the primary engine driving family breakdown, and it still serves as a major cause. The Census Bureau explains, "the fastest growing marital-status category (over the past 25 year period) is dovorced persons. The number of currently divorced persons quadrupled from 4.3 million in 1970 to 17.4 million in 1994. The scale of marital breakdowns in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent. There has been nothing like it in the past 2000 years, and probably longer.
Today, however, the main problem seems to be the large number of people who are not even bothering to get married, at all. Seventy-two percent of all adults were married in 1970 but by 1994, the number had dropped to 61%. Many of these unmarried people are cohabiting--just living together with the benefit of a marriage certificate. Children are present in 40% of cohabiting unions, and estimates from the National Survey of Families and Households incicate that 27% of all nonmarital births were to cohabiting couples.
It is my opinion that these bad statistical facts do not apply equallly to committed Christian families and church-going families that pray daily, read the Bible regularly, and acknowledge their Savior as Lord. I believe that those who live in the Christian sub-culture are in much better shape marriage-wise than their secular associates. But Christ must some day penetrate much more deeply into our society than He does today if we are ever to reverse the miserable condition of the institution of marriage in America.
In the past, divorce was the primary engine driving family breakdown, and it still serves as a major cause. The Census Bureau explains, "the fastest growing marital-status category (over the past 25 year period) is dovorced persons. The number of currently divorced persons quadrupled from 4.3 million in 1970 to 17.4 million in 1994. The scale of marital breakdowns in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent. There has been nothing like it in the past 2000 years, and probably longer.
Today, however, the main problem seems to be the large number of people who are not even bothering to get married, at all. Seventy-two percent of all adults were married in 1970 but by 1994, the number had dropped to 61%. Many of these unmarried people are cohabiting--just living together with the benefit of a marriage certificate. Children are present in 40% of cohabiting unions, and estimates from the National Survey of Families and Households incicate that 27% of all nonmarital births were to cohabiting couples.
It is my opinion that these bad statistical facts do not apply equallly to committed Christian families and church-going families that pray daily, read the Bible regularly, and acknowledge their Savior as Lord. I believe that those who live in the Christian sub-culture are in much better shape marriage-wise than their secular associates. But Christ must some day penetrate much more deeply into our society than He does today if we are ever to reverse the miserable condition of the institution of marriage in America.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Marriage Matters. It's Important!
This blog post is a continuation of my series on the advantages and disadvantages of marriage. Today’s post deals with the impact of marriage education.
Marriage education is the key that can unlock the doors of conflict, communication, and intimacy. It can set free the power of healthier marriages.
A meta-analysis of over 100 studies on the impact of marriage education found clear evidence that marriage education programs work--"to reduce strife, improve communication, increase parenting skills, increase stability, and enhance marital happiness." (The Heritage Foundation: Backgrounder #1606, 2002)
A meta-analysis of 20 different marriage education programs across 85 studies involving 3,886 couples found an average positive effect size of 0.44, indicating that the average couple participating in any one of the marriage education programs studied improved their behavior and quality of relationship so that they were better off than more than two-thirds of the couples that did not participate in any marriage education program. (J. of Marital and Family Therapy Vol.11, 1955 p257-271)
The message seems clear--if a couple wants a healthier and happier marriage, they should strongly consider participation in a marriage education seminar.
Marriage education is the key that can unlock the doors of conflict, communication, and intimacy. It can set free the power of healthier marriages.
A meta-analysis of over 100 studies on the impact of marriage education found clear evidence that marriage education programs work--"to reduce strife, improve communication, increase parenting skills, increase stability, and enhance marital happiness." (The Heritage Foundation: Backgrounder #1606, 2002)
A meta-analysis of 20 different marriage education programs across 85 studies involving 3,886 couples found an average positive effect size of 0.44, indicating that the average couple participating in any one of the marriage education programs studied improved their behavior and quality of relationship so that they were better off than more than two-thirds of the couples that did not participate in any marriage education program. (J. of Marital and Family Therapy Vol.11, 1955 p257-271)
The message seems clear--if a couple wants a healthier and happier marriage, they should strongly consider participation in a marriage education seminar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
