Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

Blurring the Lines of the IRS Targeting

sam allen Wrote: Jul 05, 2013 10:35 AM
I listened to an NPR report the other day on this issue, and I thought the same thing. I knew that they were intentionally trying to soften the blow on this one. Not that I believe that their reporters are specifically trying to act like opinion journalists, but rather that because this story went against the grain of their political leaning they went looking for "the other side of the story."
You know the problem with this analysis is not the Chris Matthews believes it, but that the President appears to believe it too. He is appears so self-righteous that he cannot believe that he has any major failings and therefore does not see a need to correct himself. When something goes right, he takes all the credit, because of course it must be his own doing, but when something goes wrong, it cannot be his fault because he did not intend anything bad and he did not outwardly do anything that he would define as bad. Like many moderns, who are their own final authority, they cannot see that they ever do anything bad. His vision of the world and of himself seem to be so rosy that when the real world impinges on it, he actually believes his own thoughts and ideas rather than the facts around him. The incredible danger in this worldview is that people can be very incompetent and even do evil things while all the time thinking they are doing good and never seeing a need to reform themselves. Now perhaps this analysis is wrong, but so far, President Obama's words and actions seem to indicate that he like Matthews does not have a realistic view of himself or the world.
In response to:

My Apology to Mormon Readers

sam allen Wrote: Jun 06, 2013 5:31 PM
What many Mormons and frankly many Christians do not realize is that while we often use the same terms they mean very different things. For instance, Son of God to an orthodox Christian means the unique eternally existing Son who lived with the Father and Spirit for all time. In official LDS doctrine son of God means something very different, namely the Jesus is one of the spiritual offspring of a god named Elohim. So we both use the some of the same term, but mean different things. We are different. In fact, Joseph Smith said we are different. He is the one who made the distinction, not us. Latter Day Saints are not Christian in the sense that Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, and Presbyterians are Christians. Each of those groups affirm (or at least did until recently) the same central understanding of who God is and the core doctrines of the church. Mormons do not hold to anywhere near the same doctrine. They believe in a different god. Now perhaps they are right and the rest of us Christians are wrong, but either way we are not the same. If you think we are the same then you either misunderstand LDS doctrine, Christian doctrine, or more likely both. As a Christian pastor, I have more beliefs about God in common with a Muslim then I do with a Mormon.
In response to:

How Far Does 'Marriage Equality' Go?

sam allen Wrote: May 29, 2013 10:52 AM
The question we should ask is whether traditional marriage served a public function that deserved special recognition and privileges? (Yes marriage is a privileged relationship and same sex couples are asking for societal blessing not just equal rights.) Both modern social science and thousands of years of experience point to the good of a stable nuclear family. So the next question should be whether other types of relationships provide any benefit to justify their also getting a privileged position? By making every relationship '' special '' we make no relationships special and thereby weakened our value for the one relationship that we no helps to build a stable society. My challenge for anyone who does not believe that a strong nuclear family is unimportant for a healthy society is to find a society that is healthy and growing without strong families.
In response to:

How Far Does 'Marriage Equality' Go?

sam allen Wrote: May 29, 2013 10:39 AM
Once the popular meaning of marriage changed from a public institution to an affirmation of private feelings then anything goes. The sexual revolution really brought this on, which in turn is a result of existentialism, which is a logical end of atheistic materialism. If life has no ultimate meaning then live for the right now! In law this lessening of the larger meaning of marriage first showed up in no fault divorce laws. Once you could leave a marriage for whatever reason then marriage was no longer primarily about the good for all, but rather was now an affirmation of private feelings. If that is the case then why just heterosexual feelings, and by natural logical extention why just feelings among 2 people?
In response to:

Immorality is Trending

sam allen Wrote: May 23, 2013 5:16 PM
Concealed, While I agree with your points (accept #3 which is not necessarily true, because people may believe in other gods or even in contradictory things), I do not think your presentation of them was particularly helpful in convincing anyone of anything. You may have felt better in stating them, and perhaps a few other Christians will give you an atta-boy, but insulting people (you basically called those who disagree with you dumb and evil) is not a helpful way to convince then of what you believe to be true. If you believe the Bible to be true then here are some other truths: 1. God loves His enemies. Romans 5:8 2. Even if you have now accepted Jesus as Savior, you were once an enemy of God and it is only by His grace that you have been saved. Ephesians 2:8-9 3. We should speak the truth with love. Ephesians 4:15. Btw, Dr. Brown is a really good example of this. He does not shy away from sharing the truth, but also does so in a loving manner. See his recent interaction with a homosexual man named Randy. 4. God wants people to here the good news, and we should be good ambassadors of that good news. 5. A good portion of the message of the gospel is the character of the one who delivers it. In considering how you presented your truths, could you say that you did it out of love for those who might read it. Do you think that those who do not agree would be moved closer or further from believing them? If someone who disagreed with you presented their understanding of the world in the same manner you presented, would you be more or less likely to engage in further respectful dialogue? Would you want to be their friend?
In response to:

Immorality is Trending

sam allen Wrote: May 23, 2013 4:59 PM
Wander, It is not true that same-sex couples do not want our approval. Traditional Marriage is a privileged (approved) relationship in society because as Alive stated, it is proven to be good for society. Same-sex couples in asking for marriage are asking for society to declare their relationships also good for society. Why? Do same-sex relationships provide any proven benefit for the society as a whole? And if same-sex couples can get that kind of legal recognition then why not other types of relationships, like polygamy, as Dr. Brown points out is coming soon. In fact, why should romantic feelings have anything to do with it anyway? Why shouldn't 2,3,4 or 25 platonic friends (whatever their genders) also get the legal benefits of marriage? If you deny them special benefits, then you are a bigot against platonic friendships. You see the choice is really between affirming that which we know to be good, namely families with a Dad and a Mom, or not really affirming anything particular at all. The arguments for same-sex marriage can be used for any type of relationship, and therefore it means the end of any real definitions of marriage.
Good article, but not completely honest about women who choose abortion. Some women do in fact feel trapped or coered into having abortions. Other women though are pretty calloused and have either bought the lie that babies are tissue or they simply do not care whether the baby is human or not. These women have no regret and see it as simply another medical procedure that makes their lives easier. I know of one woman who went to the doctor's office to get an ultra-sound to find out the sex of her child and when it was not what she was looking for, told the staff she was going to get an abortion. Some pregnancies are crisis pregnancies, and some are caused by men and women who lack morals and can only see their own wants.
Ok, here is my argument, not built on thumping the Bible, but rather on why we have laws and what is good for society. http://harvestpastorman.blogspot.com/2013/03/moving-marriage-fence.html By the way, people have been making these arguments for years (See the book "The Meaning of Marriage" from 2006), but no one even on the right wants to listen to well reasoned arguments that might limit anyone's sexual freedom. Soundbytes rule the day, and frankly the libertarians often get much more play on conservative networks than someone making an argument for reasonable laws related to any form of Judeo-Christian morality.
You know what I find odd. How many people cannot follow a logical argument, and therefore end up attacking the person rather than the argument. Or perhaps you prefer the Alinsky tactic because you just don't want to talk about the argument. Barber laid out a clear argument and even presented evidence that at least some in the opposition understand the argument and desire this result. Those argument is not primarily about gays, lesbians, or even same-sex relationships, the argument is primarily defending something we consider good, namely traditional marriage. We consider it good because we see the effects of not having good family all over the place in our society.
In response to:

CBS Apologizes for Anti-American Show

sam allen Wrote: Mar 25, 2013 2:33 PM
This episode gave me a great opportunity for me to talk to my kids about propaganda and communism. For them it was a great educational opportunity. I thought it was pretty terrible of Amazing Race to do it, but they probably got their itinerary from government and being leftists themselves simply did not see how offensive it was.
Previous 11 - 20 Next