Tag Archives: judge

Here’s Some Verses Christians Need to Stop Taking Out of Context

Posted on August 3, 2017 in Theology by

The lost world often takes Scripture out of context in order to make it mean what they want it to mean. Verses are twisted and little to no exegesis is ever used in the effort to justify sin. This is completely understandable, as lost people do not have the Holy Spirit to guide them in understanding the Bible.

What about Christians that seem to do the same thing? How do we make sense of a professing Christian that holds to an unbiblical view or takes verses out of context? That’s a big conversation reserved for another day. For today, let’s focus on some of the most abused verses in the Bible and see if we can gain some clarity on their proper, contextual and biblical meaning.

Here’s a short list of some of the most misused, abused, and taken out of context verses in the Bible.

Obama Administration Bathroom Policy Blocked by Federal Judge

Posted on September 7, 2016 in Public Policy, Sexuality by

For some reason the Obama Administration thought it would be a good idea to let school students to use whatever bathroom and locker room they choose. This means that boys that “identify” as girls can use the girls’ facilities and vice versa. Anyone with a little common sense can clearly see what a bad decision and policy this is.

Texas, along with 12 other states agreed that such a decision is not safe for students. So a challenge to the mandate began as greater public outcry against the mandate continued. U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor agreed with the challenge and blocked the mandate saying the Obama Administration did not follow the law in issuing the mandate. Specifically, the judge said the Obama Administration failed to give adequate notice of the impending law and allow for a comment period.

Is There Any Good Reasons to Defend Traditional Marriage?

Posted on September 24, 2014 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by

Though I am a Christian and would eagerly defend traditional marriage on theological grounds, I understand that others would not. I recognize that some would say marriage laws should not be based on religious convictions. Fine, but let me warn that all laws are based on morality. The question then becomes whose morality they are based upon. Is it better to base our laws on the morality of the atheist, the agnostic, the progressive liberal, or the conservative Christian that hold the same views our Founder’s did?

But, putting religion aside there is still plenty of reason to support traditional marriage.

In a very informative article at the Daily Caller several of the arguments in favor of same-sex “marriage” were presented and refuted. Arguments such as procreation and sterile couples, interracial marriage, and adoption were shown to be weak arguments in favor of same-sex “marriage.” Furthermore, those same arguments were shown to support traditional marriage.

West Virginia May Have Marriage Redefined Thanks to Court Ruling (UPDATE)

Posted on August 8, 2014 in Marriage by

Federal judges have been redefining marriage in conservative states at an alarming rate. I’ve been watching the dominos fall and keeping up as court after court strikes down voter approved marriage protection amendments. (Click here for my first post on the subject, or click here for my previous update.)

The first post centered around 13 states – conservative states – where marriage was being threatened by judicial activism. Since that first post, much has changed. Of those original 13 states where marriage was being threatened, all of them have had their marriage protection amendments struck down. Two others, Georgia and Wisconsin have been added to the list.

This means that 15 conservative states where marriage laws protected natural, one man one woman marriage by a vote of the people have now had those laws wiped out by a single judge, or a panel of judges. That fact should trouble every freedom loving American that believes our Constitution stands as a barrier to such radical activism.

What does this mean for West Virginia?

More Judges. More Marriage Amendments Struck Down. More Confusion Over the 14th Amendment.

Posted on August 5, 2014 in Marriage by

So here we are, reading the news that yet another judge has struck down another voter-approved marriage protection amendment. This time both Virginia and Florida watched as judges simply tossed the voters’ voice aside and decided for the entire state what the definition of marriage will be. And the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, another group of judges, has decided that Oklahoma’s marriage protection amendment is unconstitutional struck it down.

That’s three more traditionally conservative states where LGBT activists and politicians alike had little chance of getting a voter-approved measure legalizing gay “marriage” past the people. So, they circumvented the people, trampled both the Constitution and the voter-approved marriage protection amendments, and forced their will on the entire state.

Judge Says Incest is Okay Because: Abortion

Posted on July 24, 2014 in Life, Sexuality by

Do you want a picture of the liberal, Utopian society they are seeking to achieve? Here it is:

Incest is acceptable because abortion will rid the world of any deformed children caused by the relationship.

What? Does that shock you? Does that sound absurd? Are you under the impression that such an idea would never be offered by any sane person in our society? Think again.

A judge in Australia offered that exact idea while presiding over a case recently. A man was being tried for repeatedly raping his sister over the course of eight years. When evidence was presented the judge refused to allow it because, he said, incest is a taboo that people are willing to accept these days. A recent article shares the judge’s thoughts:

UPDATE: The Latest States to Fall: Utah, Indiana, Wisconsin

Posted on July 10, 2014 in Marriage by

I’ve been following the judicial activism in states with traditional marriage laws as federal judges, acting alone, usurp the will of the people and enact sweeping changes unilaterally. For previous comments on states that have had marriage redefined for them within the past year or so, scroll down to see an earlier post. (Or click here for my first post on the subject.)

The first post centered around 13 states – conservative states – where marriage was being threatened by judicial activism. Since that first post, much has changed. Two more states were added, Georgia and Wisconsin. Of the original 13 both Utah and Indiana have now had marriage redefined for them – along with Wisconsin.

All in all this means that 15 conservative states where marriage laws protected natural, one man one woman marriage by a vote of the people have now had those laws wiped out by a single judge. That fact should trouble ever freedom loving American that believes our Constitution stands as a barrier to such radical activism.

For news regarding the decision in Indiana you can click here. For news on what is happening in Wisconsin you can click here. For news on what is happening in Utah you can click here.

Another One (Three Marriage Protection Laws) Bites the Dust

Posted on May 26, 2014 in Marriage by

Judge strikes down Idaho marriage protection law.

Judge strikes down Arkansas marriage protection law.

Judge strikes down Oregon marriage protection law.

The disturbing trend of judicial activism that continues to plague our country has claimed more victims. I’ve previously written about what is happening in a number of states regarding marriage. The previous article centered on 13 states: Pennsylvania, Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Kentucky, Colorado, Oregon, Texas, Michigan,
Tennessee, Indiana, Florida, and Ohio.

In each of these states federal judges or a combination of federal judges and state legislatures (in cooperation with attorney’s general) have either overturned voter approved laws or simply refused to defend state laws from attacks. Or a state was on the list because a challenge was in place and an outcome to the challenge was pending; as in the case of Oregon which has now “fallen” and had marriage redefined by a federal judge.

Daily Roundup: Texas Marriage Amendment Struck Down by Federal Judge

Posted on March 1, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by

In yet another shocking display of judicial activism, a judge has ignored 76 percent of the state’s voters and struck down a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Following a disturbing trend of judicial and attorney general decisions the federal judge, Orlando Garcia said the voter approved law has no standing in the lone-star state.

This trend of lawless behavior is not surprising when you have a president that does the same thing. Once President Obama decided he would not defend the laws of the United States and instructed his Department of Defense to ignore national law, it was only a matter of time before others did the same thing. Now, as a result of his reckless example we have attorney’s general taking the law into their own hands and making decisions outside their legal purview. As well we have judges ignoring the will of the people and striking laws that they don’t like, much like the Obama administration has done.

America truly is in a state of alarm as lawlessness and immorality are running rampant in an attempt to overwhelm the nation. If good people continue to ignore what is happening we can reasonably expect to lose many of our cherished freedoms in the coming years. Consider this your daily roundup of articles on the situation in Texas:

Government Gone Wild: Will West Virginia Be the Next State to Fall to Judicial Activism?

Posted on February 17, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by

I recently wrote about the trend of attorney’s general refusing to defend the laws of the states that elected them to defend their laws. I commented that this trend was accelerated by President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder refusing to defend DOMA. Once the president starts deciding which laws he will and will not defend it is just a matter of time before everyone else decides they can do it too.

Over the last year we’ve seen numerous attorney’s general decide not to defend state laws, while activist judges decide to strike down other laws. The latest in this trend comes from Kentucky where a judge said the state must recognize foreign gay marriages from other states. His declaration is in violation of Kentucky law, but that didn’t stop the judge from deciding to strike down the law and rewrite it according to his opinion. He reportedly ruled:


%d bloggers like this: