Death of Liberalism - Part 2

There is a growing realization that Americans are deeply religious, especially compared to Europeans. "Religious devotion sets the United States apart from some of its closest allies," according to a recent survey by the Washington Post. Dave Shiflett found this to be true as he worked on his new book Exodus: Why Americans are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity. In interview after interview, Shiflett discovered that believers rejected the God-lite of progressive Christianity in favor of the absolute God of tradition.

Throughout the course of reading Shiflett's book, one fact became crystal clear: While the Liberal Left imagines a world devoid of the One True God, Gay Rights and Abortion Rights activists think they have control of our family economics, Liberal thinkers in our seminaries think they can beat down the Truth of God's Word, and progressive churches think they can feed God's people with a watered-down gospel -- God is still in control!! The truth of Proverb 14:12 shines through in this global deception: "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death."

The most recent Religious Congregations and Membership study, published in 2000 (the study is conducted each decade) by the Glenmary Research Center, tells the statistical story. Progressive churches are marching into oblivion. The Presbyterian Church U.S.A. (11,106 churches) has experienced a decline of 11.6 percent over the previous ten years; the United Methodist Church (35,721 churches) was down 6.7 percent; and the Episcopal Church (7,314 churches) lost 5.3 percent of its membership. Also, the United Churches of Christ (5,863 churches) declined 14.8 percent while the American Baptist Churches USA were down 5.7 percent.

Why is this happening? I think it's because most church-attenders are looking for a God who will fix a parking ticket. My term for this is spiritual anemia. It is the guiding principle in most progressive churches today. This King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Almighty God, the Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace (see Hallelujah Chorus) wants to fix the heart - not a parking ticket. I Samuel 16:7 provides the light: "Man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart." Liberals are more concerned with the outward appearance, as a result there is no substance in the Liberal message. True seekers are discovering this and finding other fountains.

Death of Liberalism - Part 1

One of the bumper stickers I've pasted to the rear window of my vehicle says "Liberalism is a Curable Disease!" It is not surprising that the statement would get mixed reviews as I am toodling around town and driving on the Interstate. I occasionally get someone at a stoplight who asks me where I purchased the bumper sticker. Most of the conservative items I purchase from CafePress online. They offer everything from coffee mugs and t-shirts to hats and specialty items - from both sides of the political aisle. Attention Liberals: You're the disease! I'm the cure! (to quote Sylvester Stallone).

The darkness of Liberalism has a profound destructive effect on the morals of our society. Dr. Richard Land of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission has documented many of these destructive effects - both within the church and beyond. If you are interested in reading about the death of Liberalism, Dr. Land suggests several different resources:

• The Fertility Gap (by Arthur Brooks) - Liberal politics will prove fruitless as long as liberals refuse to multiply. The Liberal wackos have ignored the youth vote for decades.
  
• Liberal Baby Bust (by Phillip Longman) - Liberal progressives are so much less likely to have children. It's a pattern throughout the world.
  
• Roe Effect (by Larry Eastland) - Abortion is costing the Democrats voters, figuratively and literally. Missing voters (due to abortion) gave Bush the victory in 2000.
• Liberal Christianity (by Charlotte Allen) - Liberal Christianity is paying for its sins as gay marriage and sexist doctrines are gutting liberal churches (except in California).
  
• God Lite (by Dave Shiflett) - I bought Shiflett's book Exodus: Why Americans are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity, and I haven't been able to put it down.
• Why Are Conservative Churches Growing? (by Albert Mohler) - It's no secret that Conservative churches draw strength from their beliefs and practices.
• Problems with Biopolitics (by Joseph D'Agostino) - Liberal progressives attach themselves to ideas and policies with a 40-year record of failure.
  

Joe Lieberman: Diamond in a Steaming Pile of Cow Dung

In an extremely tight race for a U.S. Senate seat in Connecticut, challenger Ned Lamont narrowly defeated incumbent Joseph Lieberman last week. Lieberman remains on the ballot running as an Independent - and today he has a 2 percent lead over Lamont. This is the same Joseph Lieberman the Democrats hoisted as the Vice Presidential candidate with Algore in 2000. They praised Lieberman as a man with backbone and vision. Joe Lieberman is proving he has backbone and vision - and the self-destructing Democrats are growing increasingly angry about it. It's amazing how much difference 6 years can make!

Joseph Lieberman visits the Mideast about 4 times a year. He sees firsthand the progress that troops are making in Iraq (the progress that the idiot Liberal media wants to hide from you). Lieberman had the vision to suggest that setting a deadline for bringing U.S. troops home would only bolster terrorist plans for attacks against the U.S. and its allies. He had the backbone to stand up and say the Democratic Party was out of the political mainstream. Lieberman's comments prompted a senior Democratic aide to say "he hurts our ability to take back the senate."

That's what the Democratic fertilizer is all about! And it's not because Ned Lamont is such a great candidate! He is a single-issue "peace candidate" with a very simple mind. Lamont comes to the campaign for U.S. Senate from absolutely nowhere - and it shows nowhere better than in his shallow statements on public issues. Of course, he also thinks that U.S. troops should be replaced by the U.N. in Iraq - proving that he knows nothing about the history of the idea. He grasps little of the complexities of the issue. Lamont is nothing more than a cable television entrepreneur with easy access to campaign capital.

Joe Lieberman is muscular on national defense, assertive in foreign policy, genuinely liberal on social and economic matters, but not heavy-handed on regulatory issues. He marched for civil rights and is committed to an equal opportunity agenda with reasonable results. He has qualms about affirmative action. He is appalled by the abysmal standards of our popular culture. But he is courageous - and courage is a rare trait in politicians. It is an extinct trait in the Democratic Party. If Ned Lamont wins the election in November, the Democrats will lose the future - and deservedly so. The Liberal wackos are the pile of cow dung.

Pop Culture Saturday: This Isn't Your Daddy's Solar System

Pop Culture Saturday is intended to be a more light-hearted look at American culture. There's much more going on in America than the darkness of Liberalism.

Remember that test in Science class where one of the questions required you to list the nine planets of the solar system in order (beginning with Mercury and ending with Pluto)? Well, you might need to forget most of what you learned in that Science class regarding planets. The International Astronomical Union (the organization that determines what IS and what IS NOT a planet) is in the process of redefining planetary requirements. The resolution will be discussed and voted on this week most likely.

The IAU is a collective braintrust of 2,500 astronomers from 75 nations who are meeting in Prague this week to hammer out a universal definition of a planet. Primarily, the resolution will either reaffirm or deny the status of Pluto as a planet. Also up for consideration in the resolution is the status of a few other heavenly bodies. If the resolution is approved, the 12 planets in our solar system would be Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Charon, and UB313 (currently nicknamed Xena).

Until recently, Charon has been listed as Pluto's largest moon. It is now graduating into full planet status. Ceres has long been considered an asteroid, although it was a planet in the 1800s before it was demoted. Due to its flip-flop nature, some are calling Ceres the John Kerry of heavenly bodies. Couldn't resist!! I should send that one-liner to Jay Leno. The IAU also has a watchlist of at least a dozen other potential candidates that could become planets as astronomers learn more. "We don't want an American version, a European version, and a Japanese version of what constitutes a planet," said IAU president Ronald Ekers.

Other portions of the resolution would add a new category of planets called plutons, referring to Pluto-like objects that reside in the Kuiper Belt (a mysterious zone beyond Neptune containing thousands of planetary objects). Pluto, Charon, and UB313 would be plutons. The resolution would also toss the term minor planets in favor of the much longer phrase small solar system bodies. This galactic shift would force publishers to update encyclopedias and school textbooks. Science teachers would also have to replace the solar system mobiles hanging in their classrooms. Well, as long as they don't have anything better to do...

Big Liberal Lie: There Is No Religion in the Public Skrewls

The new school year is upon us - and with these first days of the 2006-2007 school year, my thoughts go out to the unfortunate souls who will be forced to survive in public skrewl. Drugs are rampant in our public skrewls (despite the Just Say No campaign that was born in New York in 1980). Violence in the public skrewls has increased exponentially in recent years (despite the Zero Tolerance Policy that began in California in 1986). Middle-schoolers are becoming more and more sexually active (despite massive funding for programs such as Abstinence-Only and Abstinence-Plus).

Sex education in the public skrewls is now a full-blown controversy. Many schools are hosting what they call chastity events, where the students sign a pledge to refrain from sexual activity. Wouldn't you know it, the ACLU has forced their way into the battle in an effort to keep any mention of God or religion out of the pledge process. Anthony Romero is indeed going to hell! My question today, despite the ACLU's involvement, is this: Are public skrewls allowed to promote religion? Answer: YES.

Secular Humanism has been the established religion in American public skrewls for several decades now. The United States Supreme Court has identified Secular Humanism as a religion. It ruled that the First Amendment grants the same protection and imposes the same limitations on the "religion of Secular Humanism" as are applicable to other religions. The doctrines of Humanism have been set forth in two Humanist Manifestos. The first tenet of Manifesto 1 states "Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created." This is not just a philosophy - it is a way of life!

Humanist Manifesto 2 contains the following statement: "We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life." These tenets of Humanism are diametrically opposed to the basic principles of Christianity. The public skrewls are in this depraved condition because they have removed the truth and replaced it with a big liberal lie. Do not let your children be taken in by the lie!

Big Liberal Lie: Adult Stem Cells Have Limited Use

Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) have received tremendous media attention recently as the U.S. House and Senate sent two bills to the White House. A third bill died in Committee. Proponents of ESCs have enlisted the help of scientific mercenaries to perpetuate a fraud upon the gullible American public. The big lie: Adult Stem Cells (ASCs) have no real curative value. The fact that the ESC proponents don't want you to know is that ASCs are curing diseases here and now and have been doing so for decades.

Dr. David Prentice of the Family Research Council, using stricter standards of evidence, has compiled a list of 72 diseases for all types of ASCs. But three ESC advocates have directly challenged this list, publishing a letter in Science magazine. The letter claims ASC treatments are "available to treat only nine of the conditions." Even if this were true (which it's not), that would be nine more than can be claimed for ESCs. There are 1,175 clinical trials for ASCs and zero for ESCs. It is not surprising that these scientific mercenaries are at odds with the medical community as a whole.

Dr. Prentice has included ASC therapies that are approved in other countries but not yet here. More important, stem cell therapy is not a drug, and the FDA does not regulate it the same way. Some have been used successfully for decades with no one seeking or receiving federal approval. Did you know that aspirin (which the FDA recognized only for aches and pains) never went through the clinical trial process and never received formal approval by the FDA.

How can Science not know all this? The answer is simple: It does! Some members of the scientific community have become a propaganda sheet for ESC research, as well as other political causes. It should change its name to Pseudoscience. In January 2006 Science magazine had to retract two groundbreaking ESC studies that proved fraudulent. The journal wants to fund ESC research with taxpayer dollars because private investors know how unpromising it really is.

Prominent Gay Activists Push Against Legal Limits

We are looking at the end of marriage as we know it, my Conservative friend! With increased frequency in recent months, the defenders of marriage have been sounding the alarm about the real goals of the so-called "gay marriage" movement. The supporters of this movement have preached that everything which makes a marital relationship worthwhile to heterosexual couples, to their children, and to the state would apply to gay couples as well. The Conservative defenders of marriage saw through this "gay marriage" scam.

Scholars like Hadley Arkes and Robert George noted that by rejecting the grounding foundation of marriage (the unique unity possible only between one man and one woman) the state would lose the basis for refusing to recognize polygamous and polyamorous marriages. For those educated in the public skrewl, that means marriages of one man to multiple women and multiple men to multiple women. For pointing this out, Arkes and George were called scaremongers. As it turns out, they were prophets.

Gay rights leaders have explicitly endorsed relationships consisting of multiple (more than two) sexual partners. They have even argued that justice requires both state recognition and universal acceptance of such relationships. They recently released a statement (entitled Beyond Gay Marriage) in the New York Times. The statement was disguised as a full-page ad, but it lists several examples of polygamous and polyamorous relationships.

This list is mild compared to what follows: The gay activists demand the legal recognition of "queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple in two households." The language is breathtaking! Queer couples (plural) who jointly create a child? And intentionally raise the child in two (queer) households? Of course, no reference is made to the child's welfare - only to the fulfillment of queer desires. This logic would result in the abolition of marriage as we know it.

Big Liberal Lie: Not As Safe As We Were Before 9/11

Every weekday morning at 7:00, Vice Admiral John Scott Redd, the Director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) in northern Virginia, picks up the intelligence report that lists as many as 60 or 70 potential terrorist threats against the United States. The white binder is four inches thick, and each copy is specially numbered for the person receiving it. Admiral Redd gets number one. Inside the binder, a 16-page document called the Threat Matrix lists the latest threats.

The Threat Matrix notes the type and reliability of the source for each threat, such as: "new source, unevaluated, first time reporting" or "established source, generally reliable, provided reliable information in the past." The binder also contains a situation report produced by the Center. Before 9/11, the U.S. President (Liberal idiots should interpret that as "Bill Clinton") did not bring together all the intelligence on possible terrorist plots. Clinton did not make sure the appropriate agencies were pursuing leads. Truth be told, Clinton took a more active role in dismantling our nation's intelligence agencies.

At the NCTC, Admiral Redd meets with a small group of analysts at 7:15 a.m. and whittles down the list of plots against the U.S. to perhaps 25 or 30. Tossed out are plots from walk-ins who may be looking for money and seem flaky or offer details that don't check out (these are the folks educated in our public skrewls). Fifteen minutes later, Redd meets with a larger group and cuts the number of threats to be scrutinized to 10 or 20. "Some days you get stuff that's just off the wall," Admiral Redd said in an interview. "But you gotta take it all seriously."

The plot born in London was foiled because the NCTC, along with the FBI, CIA, and NSA, had been working closely with the British during the investigation. According to the portrayal by the wacko Liberal media, the FBI and CIA don't talk to each other. At the NCTC, they not only talk to each other, they sit side by side 24 hours a day in a 10,000-square-foot operations center, sharing information and leads. This level of cooperation will most likely be dismantled by Hillary Rodham if she is elected President in 2008. We cannot let that happen!

Pop Culture Saturday: AOL ... Never Had It, Never Will

Pop Culture Saturday is intended to be a more light-hearted look at American culture. There's much more going on in America than the darkness of Liberalism.

If you close your eyes and think the words "You've Got Mail!" you can probably hear that voice from AOL clear as a bell. You can now close your eyes and listen to that same voice say "We Have Failed!" Time Warner (the parent company of America Online) announced this week that they will be giving away e-mail accounts and software in a "strategy shift" likely to tick off some paying customers. The good news: We will NOT be receiving any more unsolicited "drink coasters" in the mail from AOL. The bad news: If you have AOL dial-up, you'll still be paying about $26 per month for service.

Broadband users will be getting AOL services for free. With these changes, AOL will be losing about $1 billion in annual revenue. There will undoubtedly be a number of job cuts in marketing and customer service. You should expect to reach somebody in India if you go looking for technical support. AOL is still calculating the payroll and network savings (but they will later add employee severance totals). Also, you should expect to be deluged with online advertisements - which is how Time Warner is going to make up for the lost revenue. I sure do feel good that I never hooked up with America Online!!

I've always thought that America Online was a misnomer. Some of the people using AOL are not in the continental United States. And I've always been computer-literate enough to manage my own connection - and that means not having to work through AOL's portal to get to the Internet. No, I don't use Internet Explorer either. Bottom line: The fall of AOL as we've known it provides a picture of the free enterprise system at work! With more people going to broadband, AOL should have converted its proprietary software to open source much earlier - but it took the loss of millions of customers to make this happen. Computer users voted with their dollars.

Jonathan Miller, AOL's chairman and chief executive, said the strategy shift would help AOL "maintain and deepen our relationship with many more members who are likely to migrate to broadband. Providing them with their familiar AOL software and e-mail for free, over any broadband connection, will be critical to our future success." The company is starting over - but it could have avoided a total overhaul by keeping a closer watch on the market and facing the brutal facts: No one (with the exception of the computer-illiterate) wants to pay for just a portal. Now they've got to provide it for free!

Big Liberal Lie: Stem Cell Research is Dead

The Liberal media is buzzing with news that President Bush destroyed stem cell research last week with one non-stroke of his pen. I hope that you are intelligent enough, my Conservative friend, to realize that the buzz is merely a big Liberal lie! Bush used his pen last week to approve a limitation on stem cell research ... and then in a stroke of genius, he put the pen down and refused to sign the second. It was the first time he'd used his presidential veto power since winning the election in 2000. For those unscrupulous twits educated in the public skrewl, let's review the three bills that have been packaged in Washington:

• S. 3504 (Fetus Farming Prohibition Act) bars the acceptance of tissue from an embryo implanted or developed in a woman or animal solely for research purposes. The Senate passed this bill 100-0, and the House also pushed it through unanimously. Bush signed this bill into law on July 19.
  
• S. 2754 (Alternative Stem Cell Therapies Act) would have promoted the development of embryo-like stem cells without creating or knowingly harming embryos. To understand this bill, you must take some time to educate yourself about the several different types of stem cells. The bill passed the Senate but failed in the House.
  
• H.R. 810 (Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act) would have provided federal funds for stem cell research that destroys embryos. This is the controversial bill that passed both the House and the Senate. Bush vetoed the bill on July 19. There are not enough votes in the Congress to override the veto.
  

The Alternative Stem Cell Therapies Act was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Richard Santorum (R-Pa) on May 5, 2006. Since it failed in the House, the bill is now dead. However, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) introduced [H.R. 5526] a similar bill in the House on June 6. The political process in Congress will probably have this bill stalled in committee for a lifetime. The bottom line is that stem cell research is still a living science.

In a future post to this forum, I will attempt to explain the lies perpetrated on the American public by the scientific community and all the reasons it was morally right for President Bush to veto H.R. 810 - these are things the Liberal wackos cannot understand. All they know is what they learned in kindergarten.