Archive for the ‘Morals & Values’ Category

One Thing to Do Before Giving a Child a Bible

Friday, May 11th, 2007

“Brother Maynard” details his thought process for buying a new Bible. The following idea really convicted me:

Once when he was giving a concert, I heard Michael Card say that he was reading his daughter’s Bible, which he explained that he bought each of his kids a Bible and read it before giving it to them. And as he read it, he made notes in the margins, speaking directly to whichever child’s Bible he was reading… so that years later as they read it, their father would be speaking to them in the margins concerning the text and its application for their lives.

I find that my quiet time is inconsistent at best, and usually the excuse comes down to how busy my life is. When life gets busy, God gets cut out. However, the added incentive of having something to pass to my children is certainly food for thought!

Tags: [, , , , , , ]

God is With the Poor

Tuesday, March 6th, 2007

Rousing speech by Bono.

Tags: [, , , , , , ]

Cloning the Soul

Saturday, January 27th, 2007

Dolly Cloned Sheep

An interesting idea is starting to percolate over at WIRED. What happens to a person’s soul if their physical body is cloned? Frankly, my quick take is that although physical characteristics are identical (much like that in identical twins), souls are obviously separate.

Your take?

Tags: [, , , , ]

This is How We Love one Another

Thursday, July 27th, 2006

Pearls Before Swine

Romans 12:14-16

“Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[a] Do not be conceited.”

Do Not Take the Onion Seriously

Thursday, July 13th, 2006

I applaud Pete for taking the issue of life seriously, but I think he needs to understand that an opinion piece in the Onion is not meant to be taken seriously. Find serious opinion pieces to pick apart.

The Onion is entertainment only. If you read the site more often, you’d find that this humor site is meant to be equal opportunity offensive, even if it does lean to the left. If you link to the Onion for credible news, then I wonder if you would have something to say about this recent opinion piece in the Onion: “There’s no way I’m saving that guy” by Jesus Christ.

Tags: [, , , , ]

Super Columbine Massacre

Friday, July 7th, 2006

Super Columbine Massacre RPG

On April 20, 2005, the sixth anniversary of the Columbine massacre, Danny Ledonne released Super Columbine Massacre RPG, a free old-school style RPG that lets you roleplay this tragic event from Eric Harris’ and Dylan Klebold’s perspectives. Although it’s been out for a little over a year now, it recently has gotten a lot of media coverage [see here and here].

My first reaction is that of horror. Why would someone create such a game? I’m still wondering if there’s any value to such a game. Certainly there are other games that reenact horrible events, such as war. Although usually targeted for entertainment, war games may give players a greater insight into the motivations and strategies implemented during the actual event. Could this Columbine game provide any higher-level introspection? I guess I’ll only find out by playing the game. Perhaps it may be attempting to provide a sobering commentary on humanity much like recent movies about 9/11 are trying to do.

Update

Now that I’ve reflected a little, I’m feeling more uneasy about the game. I watched a news program today that talked about Eric Harris and how he had written how the video game Doom had influenced him. My concern with a game like this is that it won’t feed introspection, but rather the same disassociated feelings towards violence that Eric and Dylan felt.

Tags: [, , , , , , , ]

Why Misuse the Lord’s Name?

Wednesday, December 28th, 2005

Exodus 20:7 reads

“You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.”

I should probably take the time to conduct some scholarly research, but I’ve been thinking about this commandment for some time. It is often overlooked and considered a “lesser” infraction of the ten commandments.

What does it mean to misuse the name of the Lord? Does this include the derogatory use of Jesus’ name? Why is it that people use Jesus’ name as a filler or a curse during normal discourse? Is it a coincidence that it is His name that is used in this derogatory way as opposed to the use of another religious figure?

No use of Buddha, or of Mohommad, or Joseph Smith…is this a coincidence? I guess I’ve been troubled by this because it seems I’ve been hearing the third commandment broken routinely. Any thoughts?

Tags: [, , , , ,

The CWA is Wrong about XXX

Wednesday, December 14th, 2005

Rare is the occasion when I agree with John C. Dvorak, columnist for PC Magazine and contributor to TWIT podcasts. Usually I disagree with him because he bashes Mac products.

However, the rare occasion has arisen - and a surprising one at that. As a conservative evangelical Christian, I am familiar with the Concerned Women for America. They would be the conservative counter women’s organization to NOW.

Using his partisan biting wit, Dvorak argues that the CWA is wrong for opposing the creation of an .xxx top-level domain to the Internet. He argues that

“The idea behind the .xxx domain is to make it brain-dead easy to keep porn out of the American family home. That’s the reason it was proposed. So why do these people oppose it? The argument against the .xxx proposal seems to indicate either an incredible naïveté regarding the workings of networks and computers or an extreme distrust of computer users themselves. Perhaps it’s a combination of both. Concerned Women for America claims that the .xxx domain will increase porn by giving the pornographers a “new platform.”

On the other hand, the CWA argues

“Creating a .xxx domain exclusively for pornographers would just be giving them a new platform to spread their smut,” said Jan LaRue, CWA’s Chief Counsel, who met with top officials at the Department of Commerce to block the domain. “Not only would smut-peddlers retain their current pornographic Web sites on all other domains, they would have been granted their own exclusive one.

“Porn site operators are the only ones who stand to gain from having a .xxx domain. Families across America realize that this outrageous scheme would only provide children with more opportunities to view hard-core porn images, and help legitimize an illegitimate industry,” LaRue concluded. “

I have to say, I agree with Dvorak on this one. What better way to oversee and manage Internet content than to force pornographers to register their domain in the .xxx level? I liken this to having pay-per-view pornographic television channels versus letting random pornographic shows populate traditional terrestrial television airwaves.

The CWA are leaning a bit too far right on this one.

Tags: [, , , , , , , , , , , ]

Privacy or Not?

Monday, October 24th, 2005

On October 11, it was National Coming Out Day, a day encouraging GLBT persons to proclaim their sexuality to family, friends, and loved ones.

While I see benefits of sharing such an intimate aspect of oneself to loved ones, I also respect a person’s decision for privacy. For instance, do I need to tell my loved ones if I struggle with heterosexual lust? Should there be a campaign that encourages me to share these thoughts with my loved ones? The point is, I have a right to privacy and I have the right to keep such intimate details of myself to myself.

So although I understand some of the tenants of National Coming Out Day, it appears that the GLBT community contradicts itself by browbeating persons to disclose their sexual identity. Take a recent editorial from the Washington Blade

The author, Kevin Naff, suggests that it is shameful that celebrities have not come out of the closet and proclaimed their sexuality to - not just their loved ones - but to the world. Kevin attempts to out persons such as Anderson Cooper and Shepard Smith, which may be true or may only be speculation. Kevin, on one hand, the GLBT community argues for sexual equality because each person should have a right to privacy. On the other hand, you appear to browbeat persons to disclose their sexual inclinations for the good of the cause. It seems rather hypocritical to me.

It’s one thing to encourage persons to be proud of their sexuality, still another to browbeat disclosure, even to the point of outing persons to the world, only to advance your cause.

Tags: [, , , , , ]

WWYD?

Friday, October 21st, 2005

Hat tip to Vincent at WorldMag Blog for this one:

“You are married and had a one-night stand last weekend during a business trip. One night, your spouse asked you out of the blue, “Would you ever cheat on me?” What Would You Do?

This may be one of those rare instances where lying is, regretfully, the right thing to do. (You might argue that since you would never consider cheating again, it is not a lie, strictly speaking.)…”

What!? What makes this story even more shocking is that the author has the title of “ethicist” and sabotages (me too!) the famous WWJD acronym in the title of his article.

Tags: [, , , , , , ]