Monthly Archives: September 2015
I don’t want to focus on the chips so much as I want to focus on the partnership Doritos has entered in to with the It Gets Better Foundation. But before I do, let’s talk about the chips for a second.
Every company has the right to support whatever they want. But they also must know that by doing so they bear the responsibility of the consequences. For example, I stopped supporting the United Way and Susan G Komen for the Cure years ago. Why? Because they are partners with Planned Parenthood and, as much as possible, I want to make sure not a single dollar of my money goes to that criminal, vile organization that takes pleasure in profiting from the murder of innocent babies. By the way, that’s the reason I don’t support the Girls Scouts as well.
When I learned that PepsiCo was using the cells of aborted babies in their flavor testing process for various sodas, I immediately stopped buying any Pepsi products. In fact, that was nearly 8 years ago. So while Doritos has every right to support homosexuality, I have every right to show my disapproval of their decision by not buying their products. Just as I show my support for Chick-Fil-A’s position on marriage by eating there as often as possible.
Now, having said that, let’s talk about the real irony and near stupidity of this decision by Doritos.
If I were to ask you whether churches would ever lose their tax-exempt status (or be sued) for refusing to support homosexuality, what would you say?
Can you imagine a time in our nation when a church would be forced, under penalty of law, to accept something that it believes is sin? That is the question many people are currently wondering. In light of the earlier Supreme Court ruling in the Obergfell case, political analysts are speculating that it is just a matter of time before churches are in one way or another forced to support homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”
In particular, commentator Bill O’Reilly said he thinks it’s “just a matter of time” before churches are sued for refusing to perform same-sex weddings. In a video after the Supreme Court decision he said:
“It’s just a matter of time before lawsuits are filed against churches and religious organizations, trying to strip them of their tax-exempt status if they don’t toe the line on gay marriage and other progressive causes.”
Let’s be honest here, it has always been religious people that have stood in the way of liberal causes. When you think of the primary opposition to abortion, homosexuality, and other liberal social ideas, it is Christians and those with deeply held religious convictions that stand opposed. For this reason people of faith are a target, an obstacle to be removed in order to achieve some liberal idea of a utopian society.
I’ve listened to this song dozens of times, sometimes several times in a row. This is the only song I know by this artist, so it’s not about the person singing. The words of this song haunt me as I come face to face with my own depravity. But I can’t help realizing how broken our churches are. Maybe this song can help us repent of our sin and refocus our worship on the One that deserves it. Imagine if every church placed ultimate priority on repentance, prayer, and the glory of Jesus Christ. Take a moment to listen and consider what is being said here.
If the video doesn’t appear automatically, please refresh your browser.
The more I read the less I’m sure of. Is Kim Davis an example that Christians should take note of for her refusal to compromise her religious convictions? Is she a criminal interfering with “the law of the land” that needs to either “get with the program” or get out of the way?
One thing I am sure of is that most people, by now, have at least heard of Kim Davis. And I am fairly certain that most people have made up their mind about whether they view Davis as a hero or a villain. But all the noise and static in the media and on blogs takes time to wade through.
At the risk of personifying irony by becoming part of the noise and static, I wanted to share some thoughts on what could, potentially, be one of the most crucial incidents in our nation’s history.
There seems to be a grave misunderstanding taking place that could alter the course of events if not adequately cleared up. Some are inclined to think that the Supreme Court of the United States makes laws in our country when, in fact, they do not. The Supreme Court has no authority to make laws but, in reality, is to uphold existing laws. It is Congress that has the task of making laws. For this reason Kim Davis is well within the bounds of law to refuse to sign a marriage certificate for a same-sex couple. Why?
Once again I find myself struggling to determine what is acceptable as I read a recent headline causing a stir. It seems the lines between “rights” and “discrimination” have become so blurred that it’s hard to decipher anything clearly.
The story making headlines is that of an Office Depot store in Illinois that refused to print the pro-life flyer a woman brought in because, they said, the language used was graphic and offensive.
The flyer in question is one being used to call for prayer for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business. The flyer shares details from Planned Parenthood’s most recent annual report, includes information about their harvesting body parts, and includes a prayer for the conversion of Planned Parenthood. While I can certainly understand someone not agreeing with the content of the flyer, there is nothing that I can see which would cause anyone to describe this flyer as “graphic” or “offensive.” (Click here to see the flyer.)
Of course many media outlets, organizations, and corporations have supported Planned Parenthood over the years. They have covered up atrocities committed by the abortion giant, refused to report on shocking cases of abuse, rape, sex-trafficking, and abortion related death, and donated money. So maybe Office Depot is simply protecting a friend, an asset.
Once again Planned Parenthood has been caught, on camera, discussing how they evade federal laws to profit from the sale of aborted baby body parts. The tenth video in the undercover series carries explicit admission that a “fair amount of income” is generated by the sale of aborted baby body parts. Deborah VanDerhei, the National Director of the organization’s Consortium of Abortion Providers, makes it clear that there is profit to be made, but also that every attempt to keep this from the public is made due to the “disaster” that such headlines would be for the abortion industry:
“Is this really worth getting–I don’t even know what in general, what a specimen generally brings in? I have been talking to the executive director of the National Abortion Federation, we’re trying to figure this out as an industry, about how we’re going to manage remuneration, because the headlines would be a disaster…But we have independent colleagues who generate a fair amount of income doing this.”
Due to these undercover videos, as LifeNews reports, at least 12 states have begun investigations into Planned Parenthood: “So far, 12 states have responded to the Planned Parenthood videos and launched investigations into their abortion and organ harvesting business including South Carolina,Florida, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Kansas, Missouri, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia,Texas and Louisiana.”
Watch the video below to hear more about how Planned Parenthood is violating federal law in order to make money selling aborted baby body parts. If the video doesn’t appear automatically, please refresh your browser.
After posting an article related to the Ashley Madison hack last week, I had the opportunity to engage in conversation with a family member, a long-time friend, and a pastor-friend regarding, essentially, whether or not pastors caught in the scandal should be restored to pastoral ministry. It was an occasion for learning as it helped to clarify thoughts on forgiveness and consequences.
There is two sides that have voiced thoughts on how a pastor caught using Ashley Madison should be handled.
The first voice says that the pastor should resign or be fired. This side believes in forgiveness and encourages the church to forgive the pastor if he is repentant and seeks forgiveness. This side also emphasizes the critical need for the pastor to seek counseling to restore his marriage and family. But ultimately, this side does not believe the pastor should stay in his role at the church and should move on. Indeed, this voice isn’t sure the pastor is even qualified to be a pastor anymore.
The other side says the church should consider not just forgiving the pastor but becoming his biggest support in seeking reconciliation with his wife and healing for his family. This side says that since Christians have a bad reputation for shooting their wounded that perhaps allowing the pastor to continue at the church would be a powerful witness. This side does not believe the church should allow the pastor to be in leadership or even preach for a season; but that he can stay on staff through the healing process and, in due time, when the leaders believe it is appropriate, be restored to his position.
I was struck by the juxtaposition of two article recently. One discussed the “effective things churches do well,” while the other detailed the “internal barriers to growth in a church.” What makes these two articles so interesting is their relationship to one another.
The things one church does well, resulting in growth, is often the same thing another church does poorly, resulting in declining attendance. For this reason church leaders ought to make it a point to pay attention to their cultural context in order to determine what things need done, what needs changed, and the difference between the two.
Let’s look at several examples:
I’m so tired of seeing the Planned Parenthood videos. I don’t want to watch them. I wish they didn’t exist. I wish we lived in a world where people did not think it was acceptable to harvest body parts and organs of murdered children for research.
But they do exist.
And I do watch.
I watch to remind myself that this evil exists and needs to be stopped. I watch to remind myself that this issue is a major factor in who I vote for; you can bet I won’t vote for any person on any level if they don’t have a strong pro-life history. I watch because I agree with Fr. Frank Pavone, who has said on more than one occasion that “American won’t reject abortion until America sees abortion.”
We’ve been given a glimpse inside the world of the largest abortion merchant; a place where money and killing are the priorities. It’s a very dark place where people can laugh and eat lunch while they talk about dismembering babies and mailing heads to laboratories. Such discussions should evoke shock and horror in people. And yet somehow people still manage to defend Planned Parenthood and their barbarity. So until the time when they are defunded and begin closing doors and abortion is ended…
I’ll keep watching.
You can see the latest video in this undercover series exposing Planned Parenthood below. Also you will links to the first 8 videos. I say share them. Share them with as many people as you can until there is enough of an outcry that Congress takes decisive action. If we aren’t willing to protect and defend the most vulnerable people on our planet, no one is safe.
So Daniel refused to compromise his convictions, even while working for the king (a secular entity). That decision led to his punishment; a punishment Daniel was fully prepared to accept, even to the point of death. At no time did Daniel plead his case or demand his “religious convictions” be honored. The end result was that Daniel’s accusers were thrown into the den of lions where they all perished, and the king decreed that only the “God of Daniel” was the true God.
Does this biblical account relate to the Kentucky clerk that now sits in prison for refusing to compromise her convictions?
I think there is a relationship between the account of Daniel and this Kentucky clerk refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The relationship is that Ms. Davis – the clerk – is living according to her religious convictions despite the laws of the land. The current law makes it illegal to deny a marriage license to any couple seeking to be married, refusing to comply with that law is an act of disobedience to the law.