Jousting With the Wintery Knight

In order to understand this post you should first read http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/07/19/new-scientist-the-force-of-gravity-is-fine-tuned-to-permit-life/

Point one: Facts might be neutral, but only until humans get their hands on them.

All scientists, creationist or evolutionist, have the same evidence; the difference is the presuppositions that are used to interpret that evidence. All reasoning is based on presuppositions.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/what-is-science

As a teacher, I found that whenever I taught the students what I thought were the ‘facts’ for creation, then their other teacher would just re-interpret the facts. The students would then come back to me saying, ‘Well sir, you need to try again.’

However, when I learned to teach my students how we interpret facts, and how interpretations are based on our presuppositions, then when the other teacher tried to reinterpret the facts, the students would challenge the teacher’s basic assumptions. Then it wasn’t the students who came back to me, but the other teacher! - Ken Ham

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/creation.asp

There is no such thing as uninterpreted reality. I understand this to mean that when it comes to any particular fact we are not allowed to assign just any meaning we will. It’s not as if the unbeliever gets to say what he wants and we get to say what we want about “facts” and the one with the most facts wins — when it comes to ultimate issues. If we point to the empty tomb, the irrationalist says, “Weird things happen.” He autonomously assigns a false meaning to the empty tomb. The irrationalist’s refusal to submit to the divine interpretation of the tomb is no reason, however, for denying the existence of facts - R. Scott Clark http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/natural-is-not-neutral/

The reality that facts must be interpreted and those interpretations are not neutral is a reality that we all see in our everyday life. If Mom looks at dirt on the floor and says "Boy did it" and Boy looks at the floor and says "Dog did it" they are both dealing with the same fact, the state of the floor, but they interpret it differently. Now there is a truth behind the fact that is not relative. If Boy did it, boy did it. The fact that he doesn't think he did it is irrelevant to the world. However because of boy's bias he may not accept Mom's interpretation and he may come up with his own reasons why her interpretation is incorrect.

Point Two: Every person will have beliefs which they consider non-negotiable. These may be beliefs in logic, morality, materialism, Christianity, history, or many other categories. Ultimately these beliefs are not infinite regressions of causes. There must be an ultimate foundation which is self-verifying. This may be belief in God, our senses, logic, or something else but it must depend on itself otherwise it is not the ultimate foundation of our belief. (i.e. If someone says that they believe in God because of logic then logic is their ultimate standard. However logic is not self-verifying so they need to believe in God to have a reason to trust logic. In the end either God or logic will be their ultimate standard of proof.) These non-negotiables can also include materialism and atheism. This helps to explain why committed scientists can be bombarded with scientific facts for intelligent design and yet reject it out of hand.

"An alternative way of understanding what it is for a belief to be rational is in terms of what Plantinga calls a person’s “noetic structure.” A noetic structure is a person’s system of beliefs. Some beliefs will be based on other beliefs and so be higher up in the structure. But at the foundation of the structure will be a collection of basic beliefs which are not inferred from other beliefs but are taken immediately to be true in various circumstances in which a person exists. A person is rational insofar as he exhibits no flaw in his noetic structure. An example of a flawed system of beliefs would be one in which a person believed A on the basis of B and believed B on the basis of A, thus exhibiting circularity in his belief structure. Or a person might take a belief to be basic even though that belief is not properly basic for him (say, belief in the Great Pumpkin on no grounds at all); or he might deny a belief which really ought to be basic for him (Plantinga thinks belief in God should be properly basic for most people). A person who has a flawed noetic structure is irrational with regard to the flawed belief. A person who holds a belief without any sort of flaw with regard to it is rational in holding that belief.

Now it’s important to notice how extremely modest it is to say that a belief is rational or reasonable for someone to hold. In order for a belief to be rational for someone, that belief needn’t even be true, much less proven to be true, not to speak of known with certainty to be true. The person just needs to be within his epistemic rights or to exhibit no flaw in his noetic structure in holding to that belief. But the belief could turn out to be false. Isaac Newton, for example, was clearly within his rights in holding to the truth of the physics he founded, even though 300 years later it was discovered by physicists that Newtonian physics would have to be abandoned when it came to dealing with objects traveling at velocities near the speed of light. No one would say that Newton was irrational even though he turned out to be mistaken." William Lane Craig

Point Three: These basic or foundational beliefs are the grid through which facts are interpreted. They are therefore highly immune to attack from brute facts.

"Ultimately, the problem with man is not the absence of evidence, it is the suppression of it."- Ravi Zacharias

Point Four: This is not a purely intellectual issue. Otherwise one would expect all or almost all educated people to be on one side of the issue.

There is intellectual material available for both sides on the issue, and anyone who thinks that he has either avowed it or disavowed it purely for intellectual reasons betrays a prejudice and a lack of understanding of the subject. There have been giants in their thinking capacities who have been sceptics, there have been giants who have been believers - Ravi Zacharias, Why I am Not an Atheist

"A man rejects God neither because of intellectual demands nor because of the scarcity of evidence. A man rejects God because of a moral resistance that refuses to admit his need for God." - Ravi Zacharias

Point Five: The easiest way to destroy this "noetic structure" is to exploit weaknesses or tensions within that structure. This process can, and usually would, involve facts but primarily to illustrate pre-existing flaws and contradictions in their thinking and beliefs. Thus Newton was not irrational to believe in his physics but he would have been irrational to continue believing in his physics if new evidence was brought forward. This is not because of the evidence itself but because one of his noetic beliefs was that evidence procured in such and such a manner was rationally compelling.

There are three tests for truth according to Ravi Zacharias. Logical consistency, empirical adequacy (they must correspond with reality), and experiential relevance.

Point Six: In order to defeat someone's noetic structure we must consider the nature of that structure. Some people find scientific evidence most compelling and for them it is the most poignant means of argument. Some people find philosophical arguments best. Some prefer arguments from morality, experience, logic, or other considerations. To hammer someone with scientific arguments when their foundations are not based on science is a waste of both time and energy.

Point Seven: Not all facts and compelling evidences are scientific. To most people the sorrow they feel at the death of a child or the anger they experience when they are betrayed is more compelling and more real than abstract arguments about the movements of atoms. Therefore using Christianity to interpret the human condition and give answers for the questions that they are really asking as well as giving a rationality for their pre-existing beliefs (or showing that there is a contradiction within their pre-existing beliefs) can be a legitimate form of argument. This is not meant to give undue legitimacy to the automatic trueness of any given person's "felt needs" because such arguments can be used as easily to show how a person's "felt needs" are inconsistent. This does not depend on whether or not someone likes something. We are showing them that in order to believe A they must rationally believe B. We are saying that in order for them to feel outrage at C they must affirm D. It is a logic more than a fact based approach.

Point Eight: About Miracles

In the Bible, I see Jesus constantly providing physical evidence for this claims by employing miracles. We can do something similar to Jesus today, by leveraging past miracles, such as the fine-tuning of the gravitational force, in our public debates. We don’t need to invent new ways of evangelizing based on intuitions and experiences. - Wintery Knight

Jesus did not just rely on miracles. They verified his authority but it was his words that changed the world. The Christian worldview and it's reality. The answers it holds for guilt, sin, death, good, beauty, government, reason, logic, emotion, love, hate, are as profound proofs as evidences from creation.

Point Nine: Our defence of Christianity is not just that it is right about this fact or that fact. We defend it as a system. A system that encompasses the mind, heart, and soul and answers the deepest questions of each.

    "This, therefore, is, in conclusion, my reason for accepting the religion and not merely the scattered and secular truths out of the religion.  I do it because the thing has not merely told this truth or that truth, but has revealed itself as a truth-telling thing. All other philosophies say the things that plainly seem to be true; only this philosophy has again and again said the thing that does not seem to be true, but is true.  Alone of all creeds it is convincing where it is not attractive; it turns out to be right, like my father in the garden.  Theosophists for instance will preach an obviously attractive idea like re-incarnation; but if we wait for its logical results, they are spiritual superciliousness and the cruelty of caste.  For if a man is a beggar by his own pre-natal sins, people will tend to despise the beggar.  But Christianity preaches an obviously unattractive idea, such as original sin; but when we wait for its results, they are pathos and brotherhood, and a thunder of laughter and pity; for only with original sin we can at once pity the beggar and distrust the king.  Men of science offer us health, an obvious benefit; it is only afterwards that we discover that by health, they mean bodily slavery and spiritual tedium. Orthodoxy makes us jump by the sudden brink of hell; it is only afterwards that we realise that jumping was an athletic exercise highly beneficial to our health.  It is only afterwards that we realise that this danger is the root of all drama and romance. The strongest argument for the divine grace is simply its ungraciousness. The unpopular parts of Christianity turn out when examined to be the very props of the people.  The outer ring of Christianity is a rigid guard of ethical abnegations and professional priests; but inside that inhuman guard you will find the old human life dancing like children, and drinking wine like men; for Christianity is the only frame for pagan freedom.  But in the modern philosophy the case is opposite; it is its outer ring that is obviously artistic and emancipated; its despair is within." - G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy

Bits of Stuff

90% of people are annoyed by other people's cellphone habits but only 38% admit to being annoying. Anyone else know how to spell the words i-n d-e-n-i-a-l.

This is one of those examples of the necessity of self-control. If people used their cell phones responsibly and respectably we wouldn't have to talk about banning cell phones while driving or posting no cell phones signs. However because people abuse their cells everyone suffers a decrease of freedom. We will either govern ourselves or we will be governed by others. I know which one I'd rather choose.

Why does everyone assume that young people like stuff that is dumb as bricks? They are in college or highschool, this is the time of their life when they are supposed to be learning and exploring truth. Then they go into the church and get hit with "7 Steps to a Better You" and either blaring music on too small sound systems or "I Come to the Garden Alone, when the dew is still on the roses" (You have to hear it to believe it, especially when sung by a bunch of old ladies). Is anyone surprised when they latch on to something with a history of intelligence?

P.S. Are they still using the "Calvinists won't be evangelistic" chestnut? Still? Still?

P.P.S. The original article putting The New Calvinism as #3 on 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now.

I should be mad at Credenda Agenda. I should be sending off furious letters by daily post demanding that they reinstitute Canadian delivery forthwith. I could bring a human rights complaint for the agony that I am suffering as a result of this terrible deprivation based on nationality. Sure they have the back issues on their website but they are always way behind, the latest one was issued in February. Let me spell this out for the guys over in Moscow in case they don't get it. I-already-read-that-one. It is now July and I am suffering withdrawal. True they seem to have added a few extra back issues that never made it onto the site before so I am okay for the next week or two but then what? A lifetime of Credenda deprivation stares me in the face and they don't care! What was so hard about raising the Canadian subscription rates to cover their costs, eh? eh? I would bring a human rights lawsuit except for the fact that if our HRC friends read their magazine they would reinstitute the death penalty and send in some bounty hunters to kidnap them and bring them to Canada to stand trail for infecting the minds of the youth. (If hemlock grows in Canada they can purchase it locally and that will double as a stimulus package) And yet, who can get angry with Credenda, really. It would be like getting mad at a bunch of koala bears (no I don't know why I choose the metaphor, it just seemed to fit). Anyway just to show how Christian and forgiving I am I will link to them. Maybe affirmative psychology will work better than ranting. And maybe, just maybe, if we are all asks nice enough and we beggs the nice Credendies to give us back our precioussss they will resume their Canadian delivery or at least keep the site up to date. We dream.

P.S. The Credendies are also responsible for the name of this blog. They wrote an article about the Marprelate Tracts and I thought that a Puritan protesting the Star Chamber and religious censorship was a good inspiration for a Reformed anti-HRC blog.

P.P.S. Okay, whose idea was it to put the new issues up using PDF only? Do you have any idea how tough that is on dial-up? I wanted to link to the article about mail-order brides but I can't find it because loading an issue in search of it would take 2 hours according to my computer.

P.P.P.S. Oh yeah, the links. Try here, here, and here, for random samples of their Cave of Adullam column (you know the creepy thing? I think this stuff is all true.) And some from Cretan Times, this one is particularly good (While I'm complaining, where did the Cretan Times go lately?) Just to round it off, The Ethics of Practical Joking (If any of my readers ever visit my house, don't you dare)

Just because I am not Australian and therefore I can.

I could get fined $11,000 a day for this link if I lived down under. At least it reminds us that life could always get worse, we could have Australian laws.

Inexplicably, a forklift/vehicle? (It's not even in English) company in Holland is also banned http://www.vanbokhorst.nl/, were they hiding drugs in tires?

And the big question is, would this post cost me $11,000 or $22,000 a day?

Ecology and Economics trump Christian evangelism. Individual salvation is a heretical myth. Yawn, what else do you expect from the ACLU and the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Oh wait, I got my sources wrong, how about the Presiding (female) Bishop of the Episcopal Church? On second thoughts, yawn again.

So what would saying "Christianity is true, all other religions are false if they don't believe what we believe, and their miracles are either delusions or demonic." rate according to this law?

Fundamentalist Christians and atheists on the same side. Who's left to fight against? Oh, I forgot, the HRCs.

Volition - A film by Tim and Matthew Morgan. Free no less.

How dare those grubby little peasants be "organized and educated". Don't they know that they are supposed to submit unquestioningly to the guidance of their masters, the wise and caring directors of society?

I'm not a student so I can't take the survey but it sounds a very good idea. Ranking schools based on their attitude towards religion would certainly be helpful to many prospective students.

A decent enough article but the real reason I linked to it was that I loved the book picture that goes with it. In the interests of full disclosure I don't know if the book is worth reading or not, but the title is.

How utterly and profoundly tasteless. To mock such a gallant and creative campaign to save those beautiful living darts of silver by calling his sea kitten Spicy Tuna Roll. He should have had the common decency to call it something more sweet and furry. Like Miss Molly's Gourmet Tuna Steak Feline Food.

P.S. I would humbly suggest that Warren Kinsella might have some expert knowledge about the intersection of kitties and fish. Say, on barbecues.

Fetuses found to have memories. Now that is so cute. Mama can talk to her baby before it is born and have reason to hope that it might remember her voice when it is born. Can I say cute again. How about the word alive.

Amazing Grace

A Collection of Amazing Grace Renditions

Leann Rimes, Female Vocalist

Il Divo, Male Quartet with Bagpipes

Link Here

The Von Trapp Children, Accapella Quartet

These are the grandchildren of the Baron and Maria Von Trapp, they only sing the first verse of Amazing Grace before doing "Down to the River"

Group of Children Singing in a Train Station

Josh Wilson Acoustic Guitar

The Cactus Cuties

Amazing Grace/My Chains are Gone Pro-Life

Chris Tomlin

Soweto Gospel Choir

Yolanda Adams

(Slight liberty used with regard to exact lyrics)

The Royal Scots Dragoon Guards Pipe and Drums

Amazing Grace goes....Western?!?

Performed at St. Peter's Presbyterian Church by the Sea in Palos Verdes.

What modern heretical idiot decided that they had the right to change "saved a wretch like me" to "saved a soul like me"? That has so got to be indicitive of the sad state of modern Christianity.

Amazing Grace Western Mass. Style to the tune Fiducia

Unique Version of Amazing Grace in... Spanish?

HRCs or Ts? Divorce? Pesky Questions?

That Pesky Misinformation: May I point out that using the term Human Rights Commission to refer to both the Commission and the Tribunal is a commonly used verbal shortcut. We refer to the government, not to "an authoritative body comprised of judicial, legislative, and administrative branches", and we know very well that judges have different functions from MPs. The HRC people are trying to make a big deal about the distinction but the truth is that no one else cares. We have issues with the whole pack of them and telling us that we should use different names for different sections is a completely irrelevant aside to the free speech crowd. We object to the Tribunal antics almost as much as we object to the Commission ones. Besides, unless I am mistaken in some provinces there is no distinction between the two. Just to confuse everyone some more.

In other news, Ezra responds. Btw, I have a question if anyone wants to take a shot at answering. Lynch says that the media were excluded to protect the privacy and safety of commission witnesses but that was okay because a transcript was made and the respondent was present and not bared from talking to the media. What I would like to know is if the transcript was going to be given to the public? Because that would seem to defeat the purpose of excluding the media unless names were blanked out of the transcript. If the transcript was not public then we would have only the respondent's word for what happened. Hardly reliable evidence. So either there was no need to exclude the media or this would have happened under a media blackout. Besides, free speechers are hardly mafia members. Were the witnesses afraid of drive-by shootings or nasty press? Would this have occurred in a real court? I doubt it.

The wages of sin is death saith the Good Book. It is true that if McNair had not been involved in sin he would not be dead. It is equally true and extremely significant that the media would never minimize the murder of a woman because she was in adultery with an unstable boyfriend. I have to diverge from some of the anti-misandry group on a few points here. I don't believe in pure sameness, at least on a social level. A man who doesn't support his family is in a very questionable moral position. A woman who chooses to stay at home and depend on her husband for support is generally in a morally safe if not superior position. Men should be extra careful to treat women with respect and care as the weaker vessel even if she doesn't deserve it. On the flip side a woman should respect and obey her husband as the head of the house even if he doesn't deserve it. Society has remembered that it is a terrible thing when a man falls short of his duty. What they have forgotten is that it is also a terrible thing when women fall short of theirs. All that said, when it comes to things like murder, all men are equal before the law whether they be male or female. We should also place the same stigma on women who are involved in adultery as men who are involved in adultery. Maybe McNair was not in a morally pure position, but he didn't deserve to be murdered in that fashion. After all, is the press being hypocritical Or do they really support the death penalty for adultery?

I am a homeschooler. I know I graduated a few years ago but I am, and always will, be a homeschooler. Most people are quite accepting of homeschooling now and are more likely to respond with "Oh I knew someone..." or "I've heard homeschoolers do very well..." However for the occasional questioner (is that legal, where do you get your curriculum?), here is The Bitter Homeschooler's Wish List. By the way, just a little protocol education from an unsocialized homeschooler. Don't ever, ever, ask a homeschooled child or graduate how homeschoolers can be socialized. Please realize what you are saying about us if you are talking to us and can't tell if we were socialized. Thankfully most people get that but if anyone was wondering...

Related to the last one. If you meet a big family (say over 5 kids) do not ask them if they know what causes that. They don't like it. It is very embarrassing. You are asking very intimate questions and if you are a complete stranger they met in the cereal isle of the grocery store they don't want to discuss the quality of our sex ed with you. Someday, someone is going to do what my Mom has always wanted to do and say "No, could you please tell me how it happens?" Or as this site suggests "Yes, don't you?" Growing up in a big family is cool. Yes you do get questions. I think that we have personally gotten most of the questions at the above site (Just to clarify I haven't read all the answers given so don't blame me for anything you don't like). Yes you get looks. With a vivid imagination and a considerable amount of chutzpah you can always pretend to be a movie star and give a celebrity wave to more obvious starers. Not being gifted, or cursed, with quite that amount of chutzpah I usually try the ignore routine, which works. I'll bet the other method would be more fun though.

The curse of autonomy and liberalism is that no one really understands the full ramifications of something until they have been through it. Yes you can know in your mind that divorce is hard but you may not realize what that means until you live it. That is why traditions and social mores are so vitally important. Maybe we can't rationally explain to a 15 year old why they should save sex for marriage in a way that they would fully believe and appreciate. Maybe we can't persuade a couple going through a hard time that divorce is worse than trying to stick it out. Maybe we can't make someone going through pain and depression understand that life is better than suicide. Maybe we can't. That is why we have traditions, customs, and laws. So people in tough and very emotional situations where they are not thinking clearly don't have to reinvent the wheel. So that their default position is the one most likely to bring them happiness in the long run even if they don't understand why at the time. We have made everything about choice, but we have forgotten to tell people that some choices should not be made.

I understand what stare decisis means when it says that lower courts can't overturn higher courts. That has got to be valid otherwise we would have no stability in our legal system. However when people say that courts of the same level (in other words the Supreme Court about the Supreme Court) can't (or shouldn't) overturn precedent you have to suspect that there is a bias going on. The Supreme Court can, and has, overturned it's own judgments. If it didn't there would be no significant change in law since the founding of America. Roe is only settled law until the Supreme Court declares murdering children in the womb unconstitutional. Then we will have a new precedent.

Links n' Stuff

I am not a Catholic but I must say, why would the Catholic church want a priest who obviously has no respect for the church she wants to be a part of? It seems no church is exempt from in-your-face feminist activism. (CathCon)

Don't you just hate when all of the alarmists and extremists who warned of terrible evils and oppressions ahead turn out to be right? (SoCon)

I guess I could just reprint my above remark for this one too. So what if the pharmacist is a woman who decides that she doesn't want to use her body to pass out abortion pills? Don't we have a bit of a conflict of rights here even by their definition? (Wintery Knight)

Yes babies do interfere with a woman's freedom but last time I checked so did taxes, parenting, jobs, education, and criminal laws. Anyone want to scrap those? (Eternity Matters)

Ouuuuuch... Scroll to May 15. (Generations)

The CJC is "perplexed". The bloggers are not. Doesn't anyone in the CJC even read Ezra Levant? (national Post)

My dear sir when we do try they call us terrorists and filthy, repressive, bigots. How are we ever supposed to match that? And they want hate speech laws! Only for use against us of course. (NRO)

Why we need more documentaries. (Warren)

"one source that is full of misinformation," Wow, even Steyn and Levant and Blazing Cat Fur seldom dare to go as far as calling the CHRC records "full of misinformation". What does Yes Minister say politicians are to bureaucrats, their "lords and masters"? Even Humphrey faked it better than Lynch. (Levant, yes he's back)

"Only when describing aberrant social behavior do Times writers even recognize what normality is, much less speak of it admiringly." (Coulter)

Every day in every way, you are a victim. So go work like a slave in construction crews and minimum wage jobs to show how liberated you are. Then treat other women like dirt if they don't agree with you. How charming. (EagleForum)

Funny how some people like to call my debates fights too... However I must say that I am always right, at least until I change my mind. For those who are discouraged by all the fire and fury that doesn't even seem to dent our opponent's armour. (Joyfully At Home)

Why comparative statistics about crime aren't always, shall we say, particularly meaningful. P.S. Isn't it just possible that intimidation is a career risk when you decide to break into someone else's house? Just wondering, just wondering. (Sowell)

A bunch of good quotes. For example: "The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false. " (Sowell's Favourite Quotes)

I just want to know, the first time a German Jewish family gets torn apart and the parents put in jail for violating a law passed by the Third Reiche, will the media care? (LifeSiteNews)

Related: If you threaten us we will not back down. The Homeschool Alumni are willing to stand up for the right to give their children the same upbringing they received even if it costs them dearly.

I admit I am not a Constitutional scholar but I was sure that there was something in there somewhere about freedom to peacefully assemble... (LifeSiteNews)

Those who have read my RE: Caring for Karine know what I think about women in the military, but I must agree with the commenter who pointed out that unless this is a rape situation, what did the women really expect from that sort of casual relationship? Not that perhaps, but if those men were honourable gentlemen who cared about women's dignity and emotions they wouldn't have been doing what they were doing in the first place.

What some of us bloggers have to be careful about too unfortunately. (Post-Darwinist)

If you panic every time you break a toenail then adoption is probably not for you. Failing that you might not have as much to worry about as fear would suggest. (Voddie Baucham)

I have heard that some people are not very fond of Chesterton. However I am, so you will now have to put up with regular quotes from him until sceptical parties are converted. For example: "I believe what really happens in history is this: the old man is always wrong; and the young people are always wrong about what is wrong with him. The practical form it takes is this: that, while the old man may stand by some stupid custom, the young man always attacks it with some theory that turns out to be equally stupid." - ILN 6-3-22

I am planning to put together a post of Amazing Grace videos. However as that will have to wait until after my next trip to our high-speed library I will post one now to whet your appetite.

Thank you Wintery Knight!

Thanks to Wintery Knight for his extremely kind feature of my blog on his site. Please go check him out, oh my readers. His focus is on American politics, apologetics, and general cultural stuff. You should have fun.

His blog: http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/

The Miss Marprelate Feature http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/featured-blog-the-miss-marprelate-tracts/

Double Post

Don't even ask.

We Have Not Known Thee

By Team Strike Force of the Mars Hill Church. What kind of a church talks about holy fear and God's awful eye these days? Where can I sign up.

Audio available here.

Lyrics taken from "Check List for a Jesus Christ Disciple in Brazil" with some modifications due to the song's modern arrangement.

We have not known thee as we ought,

nor learned thy wisdom, grace and power;

things of earth have filled our thought,

trifles of the passing hour.

We have not feared thee as we ought,

nor bowed beneath thine awful eye,

nor guarded deed and word and thought,

remembering that God was nigh.

Lord, give us light thy truth to see, thy truth to see

and make us wise in knowing thee.

Lord, give us faith to know thee near, to know thee near

and grant the grace of holy fear.

We have not loved thee as we ought,

nor cared that we are loved by thee;

thy presence we have coldly sought,

and feebly longed thy face to see.

We have not served thee as we ought,

oh, the duties left undone,

the work with little fervor wrought,

the battles lost or scarcely won!

Lord, give a pure and loving heart, and loving heart

to feel and know the love thou art.

Lord, give the zeal, and give the might, and give the might

for thee to toil, for thee to fight.

Lord, give us light thy truth to see, thy truth to see

and make us wise in knowing thee.

Lord, give us faith to know thee near, to know thee near

and grant the grace of holy fear.

When shall we know thee as we ought,

and fear and serve aright?

and shall we, out of trial brought,

be perfect in the land of light?

Lord, may we day by day prepare, by day prepare

to see thy face and serve thee there. X4

Assorted nice and "NICE" peoples

Just imagine the repercussions if people discovered that we didn't really need oh so many government workers after all. (shotgun blog)

You know the more I hear about Bishop Nazir-Ali the more I like. He is one of Britain's last Anglican bishops that understands, well, that he is supposed to be a Christian. However did he get appointed? Related:Your majesty, we thank you. (associated press, Telegraph)

Our God, is government-sanctioned, he reigns in everyone, In wisdom, love, and tolerance, our God doesn't discriminate. Copyright: Liberalism Inc. (TomintheBox)

Wow, just like so, just, like, regressive eh? (LifeSiteNews)

Doctors are against it, disability rights associations are against it, religious groups are against it, many governments are against it, who is for it? (telegraph, ragged edge, telegraph, assistedsuicide)

Okay, okay, but can humans now sue animals for injuring them? And can they collect in forced labour or will "fertilizer" be an accepted monetary substitute? (secondhand smoke)

But meddling with Israel is okay. As long as the Israelis don't like it. (TimesOnline)

With all due respect to the Pope, isn't a global organization with "real teeth" more likely to be anti-Catholic ideals than pro-Catholic ideals? (USA Today)

Who is the authoritarian anti-choice totalitarian now eh? Putting elderly men in jail for distributing pro-life material. Remind me why we don't like Iran again? (Freedom through Truth)

While sewing and doing laundry I listened to some Albert Mohler. "Making the Christian Case for Life" and "A Wicked Deed in Wichita". Supposedly this book comes highly recommended. Albert Mohler, The case for life)

Kevin Swanson also on the death of Tiller. What else can you expect in a nation that is sliding into anarchy, where jurisdictions at the family, state, and church level are continually being violated. (SermonAudio)

You know it is a little suspicious when people agitate to protect under-performing (or non-performing) teachers like this. Someone might start to wonder if they have a vested interest... (Wintery Knight)

Says an atheist on the subject of Atheist Camps, "For if there's one thing to make my blood freeze, it's the thought of my child mutating into some kind of pedantic, humourless, eight-year-old mini-Dawkins." (Telegraph)

Any Ally in a War

Predictably I can’t find our copy of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed just when I need it. So this will have to be a rough quote from memory. “The liberal Christians have been fighting with the conservative Christians for so long that they will side with anyone against (the conservatives).”

I think that this is a fairly relevant quote to an important question. Why are the liberal/atheist/pro-homosexual people who run the HRCs and other liberal organizations and agencies so supportive of ideologies and groups (like Muslims) who are really even more antithetical to their positions then Christians are?

The answer in a few words is that socially-conservative Christians are their traditional enemies. Right now we are the major problem, we are the ones who need to be defeated and marginalized. We have the most societal clout and we could do them the most damage if we had the will and brains to do so.

However that won’t necessarily stay the same forever. Does anyone seriously believe that if Christians become a non-issue and Muslims start to become a powerful force the liberals won’t turn? It has not yet really happened in Europe but I think we have every reason to assume it might eventually. Will homosexuals roll over and play dead when it is Muslims agitating for anti gay marriage laws instead of Christians?

This is why it is important for people to resist this type of censorship law even when they are on the politically correct side of the censorship. You may not be politically correct forever. Just ask Ezra Levant if most people ever thought that Jews could be investigated in Canada for not obeying sharia law.

There is no real sympathy between the fundamentalist Islamic and the radical lesbian atheistic vision of the world. At some point one will have to give. And at that point, I think Muslims will regret the precedents that are being set now, just as many Jews are regretting the precedents that were set in the past.

Random Stuff Mostly Movies

Via SDA "A poll that is asking to go horribly wrong" Did indeed go horribly wrong. Anyone else take a little naughty delight in the fact that the Humane Society can have a poll up for almost two months and get less votes than Kate managed to get them in less than 7 hours? We are currently taking bets about how long this "inconvenient poll" will remain up.

Seems that the Gunn Brothers, not content with making a really spiffy movie, also made a movie trailer. Unfortunately the trailer is not as spiffy as the movie, but it gets the point across. It also generated some "tolerent" and "accepting" comments from assorted sexually-neutral and otherwise feministically inclined persons who probably denounce us for being "intolerent" and "unaccepting"

While we're on the subject of "Tolerence" may I recommend The Right Brothers "Tolerate This". First part goes along the lines of:

I heard you found a new religion that's got nothing to do with God

They're politically correct, a liberated little sect, the self-appointed tolerence squad

You say that you've been enlightened and the problem lies with people like me

You say that you're tolerent and open-minded, well, here's your chance to prove it to me

(Tolerate this) I believe in marriage, (Tolerate this) between a woman and a man

(Tolerate this) I believe in driving (Tolerate this) the biggest car I can

(Tolerate this) A good old fashioned spanking (Tolerate this) is necessary, not cruel

You're preaching tolerence to me while you're standing their shaking your fist

Well , tolerate this.

T-shirt entry I should have sent in to Blazing Cat Fur.

CHRC -

Discriminating so you don't have to.

Because that is what this is about. Censorship is about discrimination. Responsible maturity is about discrimination. That's why parents should actively censor, and the government should be very careful when they do.

Going back to movies for a minute, One of the best sci-fi, utopia movies ever made is "The Island". It has a tremendous theme and and is incredibly pro-life. In fact it is the anti-abortion movie a really clever campus pro-life group should use as a discussion starter event.

Break out the champagne and mint chocolate chip ice cream. The Demographic Winter movie has produced a sequel! Haven't seen it yet since it was only released a day or two ago but I am sure it will be good.

Tedious I know but I want to promote one more movie. This one is just for fun. It is so happy. It is enough to leave you glowing for the rest of the day. Just to see people breaking out of the normal and mundane for four magical moments is priceless.

I Want to Live

I seldom cry at books or movies but sometimes you just have to.

Beating Your Swords into Plowshares...

Or your gunpowder into fireworks.

I think that fireworks are a scrumptiously appropriate way to celebrate independence and peace. To turn instruments of death into instruments, not even of peaceful labour, but of innocent frivolity and delight is a wonderful expression of freedom.

Happy Dominion Day!

So Long and Thanks for all the Mess

They tell us we have to thank them for all the progress that they’ve made. Our parents and grandparents did so much to make the world a better place for us, the youngsters of today. So now we want to write that thank you card and remember the freedoms they won, the trusts they guarded.

Thanks a lot for bankrupting our nation by collecting massive pensions and benefits that you never paid for. We are paying for them, but we will never collect our money because the system will be bankrupt long before then.

Thanks a lot for telling us that kids are a burden. You only had a few because they’d mess up your plans. We don’t know who will look after you in your old age but we don’t really care because we think that you are a burden too.

Thanks a lot for telling us that autonomy is the greatest good and no one else should set our rules. Destroying our bodies, minds, and spirits, with indulgence, greed, and lust. After all, we’re not hurting anybody else.

Thanks a lot for telling us to make love and not make war. Now we are dying of AIDS and killing our babies by the millions. Great help that was. Besides we still are at war, we just got the double whammy.

Thanks a lot for telling us how great birth control was. Comprehensive sex-ed in schools would make STDs a thing of the past, or so the snake oilers said. You just forgot to tell us that condoms aren’t full protection and that abstinence is possible.

Thanks a lot for saying that marriage doesn’t matter. We divorce our partners quickly and shatter our kids lives. Little eyes ask us when Daddy is coming home, they don’t know how to understand never. Till death do us part? We start to laugh, but it becomes a cry.

Thanks a lot for telling us abortion was a right. Leaving broken hearted girls to smother their guilty feelings in silence because what they did was the best option. Wasn’t it?

Thanks a lot for telling us there is no morality and that virtues are old-fashioned. Why didn’t you tell us there was right and wrong before we messed up our lives? Isn’t that what you’re there for? Why did we have to learn the hard way?

Thanks a lot for telling us religion and reason are opposed. Feeding us Chicken Soup for the Soul and tenth-rate rock bands in church while leaving intelligence to the nihilists. You wonder when we leave and think that you’re just an old fool. Could it be because you never told us that great Christians could think too?

Thanks a lot for telling us that a woman’s life is not worthwhile unless she’s like a man. Our kids get warehoused in daycare while we shuffle paper for some boss. They force us to celebrate equal opportunity while we hide our emptiness under the mask of Prozac and fake smiles. Why can’t we just go home?

Thanks a lot for assuming that you are smarter than hundreds of years of legal tradition. You thought that you could throw out laws and conventions left, right, and centre. Now people want assisted suicide, and we’re fighting for free speech. Our foundations are crumbling and we haven’t found what’s underneath.

Thanks for giving us a world where morality is relative, murder is okay, marriage is a joke, divorce is expected, taxes are sky-high, self-control is replaced with force, love is everything but it doesn’t exist, self-fulfilment is the greatest good but we don’t know what fulfilment means, politics is dirty, the economy is crashing, and gangs are roaming further.

I know I’m only twenty but I think I’m old enough to see that something has to change and we don’t have very much time. I know they told you that the youth wanted all this but did we really? Or did we just trust that you had all the answers? Now you’ve made hell trying to find utopia. You wanted free love and free money but we pay the price. You said you were doing it for us, but you did it for yourselves.

Our nation has a hangover after your party, and we live in the morning after. Is there really much left to say except so long and thanks for all the mess?

Dignity of the Person

Essay in answer of the question: What is the dignity of the person and where does it find its source?

The dignity of the person consists of the image of God, intrinsic in the soul and spirit, glorifying the body, and remaining in all men regardless of circumstance or ability.

The dignity of the person is founded in the belief that mankind is unique in creation. We are not merely animals and thus have both rights and duties. Out duties are not a negation of our liberty and dignity but an affirmation of them. We reject the error that rights are the substance of life and happiness but affirm that they are the protection of it. We gain happiness not by demanding that our rights be the most important thing in our world, but by the laying down of ourselves and becoming the servant of all.

The dignity of the person is violated by some limitations and upheld by others. Those limitations which are legitimate, far from infringing on the dignity of man, uphold it by protecting individuals from the sinful passions of others. We establish the difference between limitations that infringe and limitations that liberate based on the revealed and natural law. From whence comes the dignity, also comes the definition of dignity.

All men are created equal. We are equally sinners, equally in need of restraint both internal and external, equally in need of grace, and equally made in the image of God. Our dignity cannot be granted, nor revoked, by any man or group of men because it has a higher source than any possible human construct.

News for Now

I see Britain has never really gotten over it's colonial ambitions. They may not rule the world of arms but they think they can rule the world of thought. Good luck guys.

I am now a World Youth Alliance member. Eat your hearts out pro-choice, feminists, you won't get me. I am now a fighter for the opposite side and if you say that I am a weak minded Barbie doll female prepare to be disproven. Vigorously.

And speaking of feminists... "I should have ditched feminism for love, children and baking" The tyranny of traditions made by bigoted misogynists might not be so tyrannical after all...

Inquiring minds want to know. How can one be prohibited from publishing anything that might belittle someone else, and then say that nothing in this law restricts the exercise of free of expression. Didn't Orwell have a word for that... (Section 14 btw)

"discrimination is about attitudes... and transformation. It's not only about due process." Anyone else feeling a little sick to the stomach? This is not funny. It is sick, it is sad, it is scary. To misquote Chesterton "Our masters could, and probably will, put thought control into an immediate practical programme while we are all discussing the dreadful danger of somebody else putting it into a distant Utopia." - GK's Weekly, 1/17/31

The Ultimate Man's Survival Guide. Haven't read the book myself, but it sure sounds like something I would like my future husband to keep beside his bed. Guess what guys, if anyone wants to court me and forgets to hold the door, he might be wasting his time. If I keep writing provocative articles self-defence and gun know-how might come in handy to.

The Link Master for all the links I didn't post.

Pop quiz: identify ten insanely stupid and evil things

From Orwell's Picnic:  http://anglocath.blogspot.com/2009/05/pop-quiz-identify-ten-insanely-stupid.html

1. UN Committee on Human Rights has no moral credibility whatsoever being recognized as an anti-Israel pro-Islam PR organization. 

2. If they had any credibility they would clean house first dealing with abuses of women in Islamic states. 

3. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights does not include the obvious religious rights which are part of the abortion question.

 4. Abortion is presumably socially and culturally unacceptable in Nicaragua which means that the UN Committee should be opposed to forcing abortion on them. 

5. The Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women does not include elimination of sex selection abortions which is the ultimate in discrimination against women. 

6. Torture is being committed on the babies. 

7. Reversing a ban on abortion denies human rights to babies. 

8. "the prohibition of abortion exposes women ... "to a threat of serious violations of their rights."" actually, walking outside of your house puts you in a threat of serious violations of your rights. You might be rapped, murdered, kidnapped. Maybe the Taliban has a point after all. 

9. Allowing women to get abortions can lead to serious violations of their rights. They may be pressured into getting abortions against their will. If abortions are illegal they would probably be less likely to succumb to such pressure. 

10. Presumably the vast majority of women in Nicaragua are not in favour of legal abortion. Otherwise it would probably be legal. Nagging of husbands can produce excellent results, even in so-called patriarchal societies. 

And if I get a bonus for extra: 

11. Amnesty talks about the rights to be free from "torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment." Abortion is torture, cruel, inhuman treatments that degrades unborn women. 

P.S. I can see for allowing abortion if the Mother is actually about to die from the pregnancy. However that should only be done if there is no viable hope of saving both lives and all other options have been exhausted. 

Ezra Shakes Up Ottawa

Publishd as a Letter to the Editor in the Renfrew Mercury on May 5

    “On January 11, 2008, I was summoned to a ninety-minute government interrogation.” So opens the introduction of Ezra Levant’s new book “Shakedown, How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights” which he spoke about at the Ottawa International Writers Festival last Saturday.

It was a rollicking hour and a half as he talked about his battle for freedom of speech. Pulling no punches, he used his passion and humour to demonstrate the importance of this fight and the folly of Canada’s official censors. 

Canada’s official censors? What censors? The Canadian government doesn’t censor does it? Oh yes it does, says Ezra, and he backs it up. 

Ezra Levant experienced first hand the chill of government censorship when he was the editor of The Western Standard. The magazine published an article about the Mohammed cartoon riots and illustrated it with the cartoons in question. For daring to publish the cartoons, Levant was forced to go through a 900 day investigation by the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Although he was eventually acquitted, the experience inspired him to find out more about the Human Rights Commissions and what he found horrified him. 

In a take-no-prisoners style his book deals with some of the outrageous decisions that have been made by the various commissions. Like the one in B.C. where a Human Rights Tribunal decided that MacDonalds’ staff have a right not to wash their hands. Or the one where a man, who considered himself a woman, demanded the right to counsel rape victims. The Human Rights Tribunal ruled that denying him the right to council rape victims was discrimination. The rights of rape victims to be in environments where they feel comfortable and the right of the shelter to screen counsellors being, apparently, not all that important. 

Levant shows how these are not just a few mistakes made by an otherwise good system, but that the abuses and injustices of the Human Rights Commissions are profound and are rooted deep in the very heart of the agency itself. Their erratic and arbitrary rulings. Their posting of racist material on the internet in an attempt to trap people. The lack of fair play and impartiality. The lack of proper standards of evidence. All of these, and more, should be deeply disturbing to anyone who holds that real justice is important.

This fight is about the freedom of all Canadians, and we should all be concerned. What happens when your priest or pastor gets in trouble for teaching the standards of your church on controversial issues? What about when a man wants to use the women’s restroom in your restaurant?  What if you get in trouble for writing or saying something that your neighbour decides is offensive? What if you get into trouble for firing an employee who breaks your rules? 

Unless we stand for our rights we will eventually find that they are being washed away from under our feet. Edmund Burke said “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Our freedoms will not stay unless we want them to, and unless Canadians who love freedom are willing to stand up to those who would seek to erode it.