Tag Archives: image
The Oregon school principal is apologizing after angry parents demanded to know why their kids had access to the book; especially when they were told it had been pulled from school shelves. Perhaps a better question is why has such a book been approved for 10 year olds in the first place?
Let’s do a very simple review: any image depicting people engaging in sexual activity is considered “explicit” and/or pornographic (depends on who you talk to). To view any such image a person is supposed to be at least 18 years old; as every pornographic website makes perfectly clear. So why is a school allowed to show explicit/pornographic imaged to our children and call it “health class”?
According to one article, some of the images in the book include:
What are the consequences for the church (and Christians) to accepting homosexuality as a legitimate sexual orientation and lifestyle?
Wouldn’t it be easier and more pleasant for us all if the church would simply recognize that it made a mistake on the issue and embrace the “love” of Jesus in accepting people? That seems to be a dominate talking point in our culture currently as liberal Christians increasingly call for other Christians and churches to accept and affirm homosexuality as a good and right lifestyle. Their conclusion is that the church has interpreted Scripture all wrong for centuries. But – hallelujah – Scripture has finally been properly interpreted and homosexuality is no longer a sin.
Just imagine how much easier life would be for everyone if the church and Christians would embrace these new interpretations of Scripture. No more lawsuits. No more media smearing’s that ruin people’s lives. No more death threats by activists. Our society could join hands under a rainbow banner and finally come together for a common cause.
But exactly what are the consequences for the church of accepting what – historically – the Bible and the church have taught is sin?
Writing at The Stream, John Zmirak seeks to have a conversation with a pro-gay Christian and answer that very question. He starts laying some ground work:
Wouldn’t it be a good idea to teach impressionable children that gender is just a construct of society and is really as fluid as they want it to be? In fact, we should teach them that there are many genders, perhaps a dozen, and let them pick and choose which they want to be.
That’s what one of the nation’s largest public school systems is preparing to teach its students via a new health and sexuality curriculum.
At a time when gender is suddenly a debatable topic – because apparently we’re not content with just boys and girls – this school system wants to further confuse the situation by affirming that people can be more than just male and female. No longer is your anatomy the definer of your gender identity, now you can choose; you can even choose to be something other than male and female! (Could someone please explain that one to me!?)
The Fairfax County Public School system is preparing to implement changes to their family life curriculum which includes teaching on gender identity that can only be described as disastrous and unscientific. A report describes the curriculum for middle school this way:
The largest picture ever taken has been released. It is an astounding 1.5 billion pixel image (69,536 x 22,230) requiring 4.3 GB of disk space. The picture just happens to be the Andromeda Galaxy!
The image was released on January 5 by NASA of our closest neighboring galaxy: Andromeda. The image was comprised of 411 Hubble Space Telescope images spanning an incredible 100 million stars and covering more than 40,000 light years. And that is just one section of the image!
See the amazing video and image below.
Far too few people are concerned about the saturation of graphic sex and violence that has become common in our culture. Images that were once considered pornography are now teased by middle school kids. Technology has made almost certain that by the time a child leaves elementary school he or she will have seen many sexually and violently explicit images.
Take for example a video aired in Sweden aimed at kids between the ages of 3 and 6. The video shows a dancing penis (named Willie) and vagina (named Snippan) in a light-hearted cartoon. Some of the lyrics of the song that accompany the video include:
It seems that with each new attack on marriage by those seeking to redefine it Christians resolve all the more to stand for the true, traditional definition and image of marriage that has been foundational throughout civilization for centuries.
This fact draws the ire of activists that can’t understand why Christians are being so stubborn and resistant to change. After all, at times in history Christians have changed their position on issues that were controversial in culture (think slavery). And even issues that are not contentious in society have been debated by Christians (think alcohol). So if Christians have changed their views on various issues at times, why won’t they change their view on marriage?
A recent article ponders this very question:
To be honest I would be almost apathetic to the discussion were it not for what I believe is a clear Biblical mandate in favor of the death penalty. As much as possible I seek to base my life, my worldview, on the Bible and what it teaches. At times this means adhering to views that are not culturally popular (one man one woman marriage) and defending positions that are hotly debated (abortion is murder).
The same can be said for the death penalty. While some Christians – though they are admittedly few – believe any form of violence against a human being is wrong, most understand the clear biblical teaching in support of the death penalty.
Is it possible that there is a deliberate anti-Bible element to the effort to redefine marriage and sexuality? More than just some cultural shift or some desire for equality, what if this effort is really about destroying a vital aspect of biblical doctrine.
Central to the biblical teaching on sexuality and gender is the belief that men and women are “equal but different.” Within this teaching is the very simple concept that men and women are inherently different in their physical, emotional, and sexual construct, but are equal in their worth and value. That’s not a hard concept to understand when looking at a man and a woman.
Liberal ideology however is rapidly opposed to this concept and is seeking to replace it with the belief that there is no difference between men and women. Now, to be fair, the idea that there is no difference between men and women is logically absurd. One look at a man and woman will quickly reveal the obvious physical differences, the emotional differences are well documented, and the sexual differences go hand in hand with the physical differences. But, that doesn’t stop the effort to erase those inherent differences.
What, if any biblical teachings would be harmed in the effort to erase the differences between men and women?
If you’ve ever wondered whether a pastor should discuss abortion church, or if the pastor should use graphic images of aborted babies as illustrations, you must watch this video.
John Piper and Francis Chan discuss how to discuss abortion while being sensitive to post-abortive women in your church. They further discuss the use of graphic images depicting abortion within the church. I think a lot of people will be surprised by this discussion an the positions taken by the two prominent pastors.
If the video doesn’t appear automatically, please refresh your browser.