How is Biblical sexual morality radical?

Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. — 1 Corinthians 6:18

CBS “News” is trying to embarrass U.S. Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell by bringing up “memorable” statements she made on TV talk shows, including a statement that she wanted people to not have sex before marriage.

How exactly is this unusual?

O’Donnell is a Christian, and that sex should be confined to marriage has been widely accepted as Christian doctrine all across church history. What O’Donnell said is not unusual or “memorable” as CBS puts it. Her position is boringly normal across church history.

The CBS article is also shockingly dishonest. O’Donnell never once said that she wanted the entire country to stop having sex. That is just silly – were that to happen the country would collapse within a generation because there would be no more people born. O’Donnell’s position is that sex should take place in the proper context, and that teens and young adults are capable of abstaining from sex until marriage.

How exactly would this harm our nation? It has been proven statistically that children born out of wedlock generally are worse off than their counterparts in an intact marriage. Illegitimacy has been strongly linked to poverty and crime – resulting in the need for more government to deal with the problems caused by moral depravity in our culture. What is wrong with saying that situation needs to change?

What is going on here has gone beyond normal political discussions and has become open bigotry against Christians. The elitists at CBS and the Democratic Party think they are exposing O’Donnell as a hick with primitive views, but the fact of the mater is that her views are shared by tens of millions of Christians who will not appreciate having their faith mocked by the mainstream media and the Democratic Party.

This will not help Democrats win even in a state like Delaware.

We’re talking about tax increases, not tax cuts

The discussion about “extending” the Bush tax cuts beyond this coming January is a worthwhile debate, but the Republicans have made a tactical error by accepting the premise that we will be “extending tax cuts” rather than increasing taxes. When John Boehner appeared on Face the Nation and agreed that he would extend some of the tax cuts even if he could not extend all of them, he made the same mistake.

The reality is that this debate is not about tax cuts.

If we do nothing, then tax rates will increase in January. To call this a “tax cut” simply ignores reality and accepts a false premise. If tax rates stay the same, no one gets a tax cut. If tax rates go up, then people will pay more in taxes. That is what those of us in the reality-based community call a tax increase.

Republicans need to stop talking about “extending tax cuts” because in reality rates will merely stay the same. Republicans have been on offense politically all year long, so there is no reason to punt the ball on this issue. Republican candidates around the nation – and the Republican leadership – need to start challenging Democrats on why they support tax increases scheduled to take effect this January.

In a sluggish economy that saw the unemployment rate go from 7.7% in January 2009 to 10% by the end of the year, we do not need to have a tax increase on anyone. If we increase taxes at this time, we will discourage investment and job creation. Democrats can whine about “tax cuts for the rich” all they want, but it is the people in higher-income brackets (including businesses) who are creating jobs though investment.

Is it a surprise that economic growth has been sluggish with these tax increases on the horizon? It shouldn’t be. Stopping scheduled tax increases is a political winner – but Republicans need to start framing it properly.

"Babs" Boxer does not deserve the respect she demands

Last summer, California Senator “Babs” Boxer offended a lot of people with her dismissal of a general, demanding he call her “Senator” instead of “Ma’am” during a Congressional hearing. Carly Fiorina has a very effective campaign commercial about it. Chuck Devore, who lost in the primary, also had an effective ad along with a hilarious parody comparing “Babs” Boxer to the Dr. Evil character in the Austin Powers movies.

Boxer quickly became emblematic of the arrogance that has caused many Americans to sour on DC. Boxer wasn’t satisfied with an all-purpose show of respect for the person you’re addressing, depending on the sex of that person. Some Leftists quickly jumped to defend “Babs” by saying her critics are sexist.

And this is why political discourse is often impossible. Instead of directly addressing the “distinguished” Senator’s behavior, Leftists immediately attempt to impugn the character of her critics. Is it any wonder that so many Americans are turned off by politics, when political hacks are unable to address the substance of an issue and must instead personally attack their opponents? And no, I’m not blind – conservatives do it too.

Some people say that “respect is earned, not given.” I disagree with that statement. In my opinion, it should be the reverse. That said, respect that is given can be lost – and “Babs” Boxer demonstrated last summer that she does not deserve the respect that should come with her office.

“Babs” Boxer was the primary example of inside the beltway arrogance… until Baron Hill declared “This is my town hall meeting” and said “you’re not going to tell me how to run my Congressional office.” (See here and here.) We can send a message against Washington arrogance by terminating Baron Hill’s employment in November.

No corporate welfare for the merchants of death




——– Original Message ——–
Subject:  Planned Parenthood’s grant request
Date:Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:47:44 -0400
From:Scott Tibbs <tibbs1973@yahoo.com>
To:vkelson@co.monroe.in.us, whenegar@co.monroe.in.us, jlesh@alumni.indiana.edu, cnewmann@co.monroe.in.us, mhawk@co.monroe.in.us, gmckim@co.monroe.in.us, councilorthomas@gmail.com

Councilors:

When the social services funding committee met on September 23, the audience was informed that the county has budgeted about $95,000 to give to social service agencies but has approximately $250,000 in requests. For this reason, it is extremely irresponsible to give any of that money to Planned Parenthood for their “Recession Rx” program.

First, let’s review Planned Parenthood’s immense financial wealth. In their most recent financial report, Planned Parenthood and all of its affiliates reported over one billion dollars in annual revenue ($1,038.1 million) while spending $953.1 million. This left PP with a profit of $85,000,000. The national office alone took in $84.7 million and spent $73.6 million, for a total profit of $11.1 million.

So why is Planned Parenthood requesting over 5% of the total funds you have available, when the need is so great in this community? The answer is simple. Planned Parenthood is seeking a political endorsement from county government. The greed they have for a handout from the taxpayers’ wallets is utterly contemptible and is a grave show of disrespect for the social services funding process and the other applicants.

The program they are asking you to fund is an exploitative and morally bankrupt program. Consider part of their application to the Bloomington City Council, which partially funded this project over the summer:

Indiana and Monroe County rank very near the top of the Guttmacher Institute’s list of underserved areas of contraceptive services and supplies. In Monroe County, it is estimated that 14,930 women between ages of 13 and 44 are in need of publicly-funded contraceptives.

Why would 13 year old girls be “in need of publicly-funded contraceptives?” It is illegal for anyone to have sex with a 13 year old. Monroe County taxpayers do not need to be funding birth control for underage girls so that their abusers can cover up the abuse. Monroe County taxpayers need to be funding law enforcement efforts to capture and lock up sexual predators.

We should not forget that it was only two years ago that a Bloomington Planned Parenthood employee was caught on tape trying to help what that employee believed to be a 13 year old girl cover up sexual abuse by a 31 year old man. If you fund this program, you are funding the sexual abuse of children and you are unworthy of the trust the voters have placed in you.

There is no reason that the money Planned Parenthood is requesting cannot instead be used by the county Health Department’s Futures Family Planning Clinic, to provide health care to people who need it. I urge you to deny this cynical and disrespectful politically-motivated request for corporate welfare by a billion-dollar corporation.

Scott Tibbs

Resident of Monroe County Council District II

O’Donnell dabbled in witchcraft? Whoop de diddly do.

And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. — 1 Corinthians 6:11

There is a tempest in a teapot surrounding Christine O’Donnell’s admission in 1999 that she “dabbled into witchcraft” in high school and dated someone involved in the occult. Karl Rove, bitter about his candidate’s stunning defeat last week, whined on Fox News Sunday that “churchgoing people” are “going to want to know what that is all about.”

Let me tell you what this is about. It is about the exact same thing that every single Christian has done before accepting Jesus Christ as savior. Some have been involved in the occult, some have slandered others, some have been addicted to pornography, some have stolen, some have committed adultery, and some have even committed murder. The only thing that “churchgoing people” should need to know is whether O’Donnell has repented of this wickedness. There is every indication that she has.

If she has, it is sinful for “churchgoing people” to hold her foolishness from her high school days against her more than 20 years later. This is in direct conflict with the commandments of Jesus Christ about forgiveness. If bitter Karl is going to play the religion card, he should at least pick up a Bible and try to understand what it says – and perhaps explain his own divorce last December. After all, Jesus condemned divorce in strong terms during His ministry.

This whole “controversy” is meaningless nonsense. It is designed to splinter off some of O’Donnell’s Christian conservative supporters and to smear her as a hypocrite. The Republican establishment claims O’Donnell cannot win, but if that is the case, why is the Left (including country club “Republicans”) attacking her so vigorously? Are they afraid of debating the issues? Even O’Donnell’s Democratic opponent Chris Coons, who once described himself as a “bearded Marxist,” is now claiming that he is a fiscal conservative. What a joke.

"Look at the petulant attitude"

In the aftermath of Christine O’Donnell winning the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, Rush Limbaugh had this to say about the Republican Party establishment:


And here’s the bottom line, folks. When they told us we had to support all these people if they won we did. When Specter won, we got in line. We were loyal. OK, the party, the party. We supported somebody that opposed Specter, but Specter wins. We got in line. Now look at the petulant attitude. These people, “Well, screw you. Christine O’Donnell wins, she’s on her own. You’re on you’re own. (incomprehensible whining.)” So it’s always a one way street.

What the party establishment does not get about ideologically conservative voters is that we are not “party people” who are involved in politics because we want to advance the interests of a social clique. I am involved in politics because of my commitment to the conservative principles of limited government, individual liberty and (above all else) preservation of innocent human life. It does us no good to elect a “Republican” if that “Republican” supports more government, higher taxes, and the culture of death.

Leading up to the election, supporters of Mike Castle had argued he was more likely to win, and it was important to have a Republican majority even if Castle voted against the GOP on key issues. They argued that Republican control of committee chairmanships was important. Limbaugh took issue with this, saying it does little good to have a Republican majority if we have several Leftists who will vote with Democrats.

If we accept the premise that Castle would have been a better candidate in the general election, his supporters would have a strong argument for choosing him… if this was a U.S. House race instead of a U.S. Senate race. Individual senators have much more power than individual representatives do, and committee chairmanships carry more power in the House. This is why it does little good for people to elect self proclaimed “conservative” or “pro life” Democrats such as Brad Ellsworth and Joe Donnelly, both of whom voted for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker.

The same phenomenon exists in the Indiana House as well, where voters in the heavily-Republican 60th state legislative district have elected and re-elected Peggy Welch every other year since 1998. Her nanny-state leanings aside, Welch has been a consistent socially conservative vote in the legislature – but that does little good when she is voting for Pat Bauer for Speaker of the House and giving Democrats control of committee chairmanships.

In the U.S. Senate, though, it is much more important to elect ideological conservatives rather than a RINO like Castle. Voters in Delaware told the Republican Party establishment to shove it and voted for O’Donnell. The party establishment should learn from this, but they will not.

Follow O’Donnell on Facebook and Twitter.

Is the Monroe County GOP trying to lose in 2010?

On Tuesday evening, the Monroe County Election Board rejected satellite voting sites for the third time. The Republican appointee admitted that the rejection of the sites was political, saying “I think behind it is Baron Hill. I think he wants all those extra votes.” She echoed the statement of Monroe County GOP chairman Les Compton.

The Democrats knew the sites would not be approved because the Republican appointee is intent on blocking the proposal, so the only purpose of bringing it forward is to embarrass the Republican Party – and it is working like a charm. The Democrats laid a trap and the Monroe County GOP walked right into it.

I cannot figure out why local Republicans are determined to take this stand. We are going to win the U.S. House of Representatives in November, which will hopefully include electing a Republican to replace Baron Hill. We might win the U.S. Senate. Barack Obama’s approval ratings are in free fall. The Bloomington City Council punched a hornet’s nest over the summer with the boycott of Arizona. (And it is a boycott, despite the lies the city has told about it.)

For the first time since 2002 (when the GOP won 3 of 4 county council seats, unseated an incumbent county commissioner and caused the Mayor of Bloomington to lose his own county in the secretary of state race) we have a national tide at our backs. Why are we putting that in danger by needlessly antagonizing Democrats, students and IU employees?

We were smashed in the 2004, 2006 and 2008 county elections, and it has been getting progressively worse. This year is the first year we have a shot at a good election since 2002. But the Republican Party is determined to tick people off before the election. This is going to cost us votes. Yes, the satellite sites will benefit Democrats but what we’re doing is far more destructive.

Plus, how in the world are we going to get students to vote for Republican candidates if we are telling them we don’t want them to vote at all? In some of the city council races – especially Steve Volan’s 6th district and David Rollo’s 4th District – we need student votes to have a shot at winning. If this carries over into 2011, it may even cause Brad Wisler to lose. Remember, he won by only 4 votes in 2007. Wisler is by far the best city councilor Bloomington has had since I moved here in 1993 and it will be devastating if he loses.

Why are we motivating students to vote for Democrats by making it more difficult for them to vote? Were students motivated at all by this election? What Republicans should be doing is using Obamanomics to motivate students. After a trillion-dollar failed “economic stimulus” package, steep tax increases on the horizon in January, and the increased government regulations of ObamaCare, it will be that much more difficult for students to find a job when they graduate. The Republican message should be “vote for us so we can fix this and create a climate that encourages economic growth.

This was just plain stupid. We have other battles we should be fighting – battles that are politically favorable to Republicans. This decision should be reversed.

Bloomington Township taxpayers subsidizing fire protection for other townships

Printed in the Herald-Times, September 13, 2010

To the Editor:

In 2008, 24 percent of fire runs by the Bloomington Township Fire Department were to Benton Township and 19 percent of fire runs were to Washington Township, according to the annual report posted on the fire department’s Web site.

Benton Township gave $46,400 to Bloomington Township for fire protection in 2008. Washington Township gave $53,300 to Bloomington Township for fire protection in 2008. The budget for the fire department’s fire fund for 2008 was $1.276 million, according to township trustee Linda Sievers. Clearly, the payments by Washington and Benton townships are not covering the costs to Bloomington Township.

Recognizing that smaller townships need fire protection, it is nonetheless a problem that taxpayers in Bloomington Township are heavily subsidizing fire protection for neighboring townships.

This raises some questions. Could Washington and Benton townships afford to pay more for fire protection? How much is reasonable? Would it be advisable to consider a county-wide fire fund so that some townships are not subsidizing others?

The township trustee and the township board are up for election in 2010. The board and the trustee candidates should consider this issue and make a public statement to the voters.

Why does Pat Buchanan hate America?

Last Friday on MSNBC, Pat Buchanan had this to say about the aborted Koran-burning in Florida:


If the pastor has not by tomorrow, Saturday, September 11th, if he has not stood down frankly I would have U.S. marshals or the FBI arrest him and take him into custody and pick up those Korans and make sure this went through the weekend without going forward.

Why does Pat Buchanan hate America?

Barack Obama has absolutely no Constitutional authority to prevent this pastor from burning the Koran or any other book, provided the book is his property or he has permission from the owner to destroy it. If Obama were to act as Buchanan suggested, then Obama should be impeached.

Once we set a precedent that the government can arrest someone and preemptively infringe on his free speech rights, we have effectively lit a match to the First Amendment. After all, if this is “dangerous” can a little-read blog in Indiana be censored by the federal government for an article about Biblical doctrine? Can the government send a SWAT team to forcibly remove a pastor before he preaches about the heresies of Islam?

What happened to us, America? Nine years ago, we were ready to mercilessly slaughter the war criminals who perpetrated the terrorist attacks on September 11. Now, we live in unholy terror of Islamic Rage Boy:

Last Week, Michelle Malkin documented The eternal flame of Muslim outrage, from hysterical temper tantrums and death threats over things as innocent as line drawings of an ice cream cone to the more famous cartoons of the Muslim “prophet” Mohammed a few years ago.

How much responsibility does the media have here? Were it not for significant media coverage, no one would know (or care) that a small church in Florida was burning a book. Why not condemn MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News (and so on) for publicizing it? The media clearly gave this much more time on air and in print than was necessary. It’s a small Florida church burning a book. Whoop de diddly do.

The double standards here should be obvious. The Florida pastor is to blame for “spreading hate” but the news media is not to blame for amplifying his message a billion fold? If people are going to attack the pastor for presenting a “danger” to the troops, then the media deserves more criticism – and Pat Buchanan is a hypocrite for participating in a discussion about it on MSNBC.

This is exactly what the Muslim terrorists want, folks. This is the entire purpose of terrorism: to terrorize people so they will do what you want. Muslim terrorists want us to give up our freedoms and prostrate ourselves for them. Nine years after September 11, we have completely forgotten why we can never give in to these people. Like Nazi Germany after the Sudetenland, Muslim terrorists will never be satisfied.

Earlier post: “International burn a Koran day”

Liberal "christianity" and the gospel of hate

It is a common practice of liberal “christians” to spread hatred with a statement that pretends to be based on “tolerance” and “love” for Muslims. The statement in question is a lie that is designed to damn souls to Hell. The statement is that “Christians and Muslims pray to the same one God.”

No, we do not, because of one critical distinction between Christianity and Islam. Muslims explicitly deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. Christian doctrine holds that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and is equal with God. (Philippians 2:5-11) The God of Abraham is the same God who died on the cross for our sins.

Because Muslims explicitly deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, Islam is just one more false religion in a long line of false religions, from Cannanite “gods” such as Moloch to the Greek and Roman pantheons and cults like Jehovah’s Witnesses today. All of these have one thing in common: they constitute demon worship. (See 1 Corinthians 10:20-21.)

Am I wrong about the exclusivity of Christian doctrine? If so, I invite anyone to show me from the Bible where I am wrong. Until then, as Martin Luther said: Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me.

A typically childish response would be that there is “nothing is Scripture regarding Islam.” How silly. There is nothing in Scripture about worshiping your own feces either, but it is still idolatry – and idolatry is explicitly condemned throughout scripture. God does not need to explicitly list every single possible false religion throughout time for us to “get it.”

The reason Christians must make this distinction is because Scripture is very clear that Jesus Christ is the only path to salvation. In John 14:6, Jesus says “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.” In Acts 4:12, we learn that “there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” When liberal “christians” lie about Biblical doctrine and say that Muslims worship the same God we do, those “christians” are damning Muslims to Hell. The eternal destination of souls is at stake here.