Donald Trump is a “godly, biblical president?”
No, he is not. This is totally false, and Michele Bachmann knows it.
Look, we have who we have. Trump is not a man of good character, but he has delivered good conservative policy. He has not been perfect, but he has been good. So here is the choice in 2020: We can continue with good conservative policy, or we can elect a Democrat – and all of them are terrible.
Today, we remember that the Lord of All Creation sacrificed Himself as the ultimate offering for man’s sins. Even more amazing, our sin was primarily against the very Messiah who sacrificed Himself for our sins. We all deserve eternal damnation in Hell Fire for our sins against God, and yet He allowed His only Son to take the punishment that we wicked sinners so richly deserved.
All of the Christians attending Good Friday services today, and all of those who are not, would have been screaming “crucify Him” and urging that Jesus be handed over to the pagan Roman Empire to be tortured to death. We should think about this today. Realize that each and every one of us is individually guilty of the worst crime in the history of the universe: Not only the murder of an innocent Man, but the murder of the Son of God. We all committed deicide.
Way back in the 1990’s, I covered a protest at the Sample Gates for Hoosier Review. Someone at the protest suggested I was there to “intimidate” the protesters, which I immediately shut down by using some self-deprecating humor about my physical stature. No one is going to be intimidated by me. The suggestion itself was a joke, not a serious argument – just some politicos ribbing each other. But I was reminded of that with the claims that Matt Walsh is a threat to the “physical safety” students at Baylor University.
I had a barn burner of a post scheduled for today that I teased in yesterday’s now-deleted post and on social media. I am not posting it – not necessarily because of the content, but because I have a bad attitude. This is something I need to think about before I jump back into it.
Yes, Christians should use Scripture in arguments over public policy and cultural issues. Where there has been disagreement is the time and place to use such arguments, and what tools to use in addition to Scripture. Therefore, I understand the point Matt Walsh is making (see here and here and here) in terms of using secular arguments to convince unbelievers of our position. I also understand Walsh’s critics on the issue. Unfortunately, I think Walsh has misunderstood the arguments made against his position.
It is profoundly selfish to join a voluntary organization and then demand that the organization change to accommodate you. That is what we are seeing with a lawsuit against a charter school’s standards for girls.
We have a tax-funded public school system already, where children and teens are guaranteed a spot. For those seeking something different, one option is charter schools: Tax-funded fully public schools that operate with fewer restrictions from the state and more freedom to operate as they see fit. No one is forced to attend a charter school, as they can stay in their local public school. Both parents and students know what the standards are before they go there and freely choose the charter school anyway.
Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths.
Think Progress is celebrating the end of the “boyfriend loophole” in the Violence Against Women Act but this is not something to celebrate. It is something to oppose.
First, the fact that someone could lose their Second Amendment rights over a misdemeanor conviction is disturbing. Violent felons should not have guns, and provided they are given due process, it is reasonable to restrict their liberties. They are the ones who freely made those choices, after all. (Of course, we need to fairly and logically define what a “violent felon” is, because even that definition can be greatly expanded.) But misdemeanors is a bridge too far and will be abused.
We should not be fooled: Efforts to control speech and regulate social media are not about eliminating “hate speech” or making sure people are safe. The decision by Big Tech to endorse more regulations is not because they want to stop “hate speech” or make people safe either: This is about crushing competition and ensuring continued dominance for the biggest platform.