A scientific fact is that there is a difference between males and females. The difference is not just in the reproductive organs but in the makeup of the whole body. Muscles and the distribution of fat are not the same in men as in women. This means that in many sports, men have a natural advantage over women. That applies to boys in girl’s track.
Biological males who say they are females are now competing in women’s sports. One such case is a male who competed in the 400-meter hurdles a year ago and recently won the national championship in the women’s Division II 400 meter hurdles. Men run faster than women because they have greater muscle mass, larger bones, and more heart and lung capacity.
A young lady named Selina Soule has been running track in a Connecticut High School. She has achieved times in the sprint events that might earn her a college scholarship. However, the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) permits biological males to compete with the girls. Two biological males who claim to be females are dominating Selena’s sprint events. One of the boys now holds ten state records in women’s events. It has gone beyond state level as one of the male athletes went on to win the Women’s 200-meter dash at the 2019 New England Interscholastic Track and Field Championships.
Selina’s family and the families of some other girls have filed a complaint with the United States Department of Education. Because of hatred on social media, only Selina is brave enough to go public about the problem. She even appeared on NBC’s Today Show to express her frustration. This is another case where the blurring of genders in today’s society hurts innocent people. Our current concept of political correctness allows boys in girl’s track as well as other places where biological girls face potential harm.
The political arm of the GLBTQ lobby has caused the media and much of the American public to confuse sexual behavior and civil rights. They are telling us that presenting biblical views on moral issues is a violation of someone’s civil rights. But Christians cannot be silent on moral issues since the New Testament says more about moral issues than it says about religious ceremony.
Attacks on the Bible’s position on sexual issues are increasing and becoming more widely accepted by the general public. Sexual behavior and civil rights are not the same. It is totally erroneous to suggest that skin color is the same thing as GLBTQ choices for the following reasons:
1-Skin color is a biological condition that is not under the control of the individual. Whether you are black or white was not a choice you made. Any sexual act is a choice made by the individual. If it was not a choice, then it was rape or a criminal act made by someone else. Sexual behavior and civil rights for people of color cannot be compared.
2-Sexual preferences and sexual acts are two different things. Some men are sexually attracted to men, and some women are attracted to women. Guy Hammond’s book Caring Beyond the Margins (Illumination Press) deals with this problem. Hammond is a man with homosexual tendencies who is not acting on that preference. No matter what the cause of GLBTQ desires, just as any other sexual behavior, the individual chooses to act on those desires.
3-Racial prejudice is wrong and is condemned by the Bible because it is destructive. The fact that a person is black or white does not affect their life expectancy or quality of life unless violence or neglect results from the prejudice. The data is clear that most of the GLBTQ choices are destructive to people’s health and shorten their life expectancy. Transgender surgery, for example, condemns the patient to a life of drugs to sustain the hormonal condition and those drugs shorten life expectancy. Most homosexual acts have a negative effect on life expectancy. The life expectancy of GLBTQ participants is significantly lower than the national average.
God has given us instructions on how to use the gift of sex in the best and most productive way. Condemnation of alternatives to God’s instructions is because those alternatives violate the design God built into our bodies. Instructing someone in the best way to use a gift they have been given is not abusive. The individual still has the right to decide whether they will follow the instructions.
In 1925 a group of people erected a cross in Bladensburg, Maryland to honor 49 local men who died in World War 1. In 1961 the state bought the land and since that time it has maintained it, including the Bladensburg cross. Recently there have been court challenges to allowing a cross on public land.
During the first week of July 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the cross could stay even though it was on public land. This decision is not really a victory for those who want Christian symbols on public land. The justification for the Court allowing the Bladensburg cross to remain is that it had taken on a secular meaning as a memorial, and was no longer a Christian symbol.
It should be evident that this ruling by the Supreme Court would not apply to most situations since most crosses are not part of a secular memorial. Religious people tend to twist the descriptions of their symbols to get around the law. When the Catholic Church objected to using the King James Bible in public schools, people who were pushing for the study of the Bible changed its classification to literature rather than religion.
Sometimes governments pass laws with good motives, but when the law is applied, it has terrible consequences. In recent times we have seen laws threaten Christian ministries. Those who are trying to help people in the name of Jesus Christ should not be punished for doing so.
A classic example is the Downtown Hope Center’s Women’s Shelter in Anchorage, Alaska. The Center serves both men and women in the daytime, but at night it only houses abused women. The women sleep in military type rooms with beds a few feet apart. Because virtually all of the women in the shelter have psychological issues from being, it is essential that no males be sleeping among them. The Center denied access to a man who claims to be a woman. The Anchorage city government told the shelter to get on board with the laws demanding equality or close its doors.
We are getting notice after notice of other Christian facilities who have similar threats. In some cases, they have been shut down by government officials. Washington State Senate Bill 6219 forces employers who offer employee insurance with maternity care to include abortion. The Cedar Park Church has filed a lawsuit against the state of Washington because the church is involved in a maternity care program that provides for foster care and adoption. By its very definition, it would seem that “maternity care” would not include abortion. Laws threaten Christian ministries by requiring them to fund abortion when that goes against their core beliefs.
The number of cases is growing at an alarming rate, much of it initiated by atheist groups. In most cases, churches are merely closing down ministries and shelters where this type of thing becomes an issue.
Today is Memorial Day in the United States. While many people think it is just the beginning of the summer recreational season, it is much more than that. Memorial Day is of extreme patriotic significance, and the concept has biblical origins.
The Memorial Day tradition in this country began after the Civil War when people placed memorials and held services for the 20,000 soldiers killed in the war. It was originally held on May 30 and called “Decoration Day.” In 1967 Congress changed the official name to Memorial Day, and in 1971 changed it to the last Monday in May. Those of us who served in the military are always amazed to find how many people have already forgotten the wars that we were forced to participate in to preserve freedom. American ignorance of the 38th parallel, Bay of Pigs, Viet Nam, etc. is depressing. We too quickly forget the sacrifice people made to keep us free.
In the Christian faith, there is great emphasis on memorial activities. The communion service is a memorial. Jesus said, “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Corinthians 11:24). REMEMBRANCE is the first of three things we see in the biblical instruction about the communion service, and our country’s Memorial Day carries the same ideal. It is essential for us to remember what Jesus did for us both in terms of how we live and our eternal existence with God.
The second purpose of communion and which should e applied to Memorial Day in America is PROCLAMATION. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 says, “We proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes again.” The Christian communion is not just communing with God, but it is also a proclamation to each other and to the world that our spiritual identity is with Jesus Christ. We proclaim vertically to God and horizontally to each other.
The third purpose the Bible gives us for communion is SELF EXAMINATION. First Corinthians 11:28 tells us to examine ourselves. We need to do that regularly. Am I growing? Am I stronger? Am I learning? Throughout the Bible, we see God calling people to memorials. In Exodus 12:13-14 and 13:9-10, God tells ancient Israel to engage in a memorial of all they have been through and how God has blessed them.
We continue to read and hear of abuse heaped upon various conservative and Christian groups by radical clubs and groups on university campuses. In our May 4 post, we mentioned control over commencement speeches in which valedictorians were told that they could not mention God or Christianity or their own faith. As universities give in to the radicals, they are losing control of higher education in America.
The Week magazine (May 24, 2019, page 12) published a report of Harvard University having to knuckle under to a student mob on a different issue. Ronald Sullivan is an African-American lawyer who teaches at Harvard. Sullivan is well known for representing poor clients with his most famous case being the lawsuit of Michael Brown’s family against the city of Ferguson, Missouri.
Harvey Weinstein, the man accused of sexual misconduct by dozens of women, requested that Sullivan work on his defense team. Sullivan accepted saying that in our system of justice, even a defendant accused of heinous crimes is entitled to a robust defense. Harvard students claimed that they were “traumatized” by Sullivan’s decision, and they staged demonstrations attacking Sullivan and the university. Harvard decided that Sullivan’s leadership had become “toxic” and he and his wife, who is also a professor at Harvard, have been banished by the university.
Herman Streitburger is a Vermont resident who was held captive in a German prisoner of war camp during World War II. He donated a Bible to the Manchester VA Medical Center for use on a POW/MIA remembrance table. An atheist group filed a lawsuit demanding the removal of the Bible from the memorial saying the Bible’s presence was unconstitutional and “an outrage.” Are all Christian symbols unconstitutional?
A spokesman for the atheist group said that “the presence of the Bible in the memorial amounted to raising one faith over all the others.” He went on to say that the presence of the Bible was “a repugnant example of fundamentalist Christian triumphalism, exceptionalism, superiority, and domination.”
An organization called First Liberty Institute is representing the veteran’s group that created the memorial. They said: “Since the Vietnam War, our nation has maintained the sacred tradition of setting a separate table in countless Department of Defense and VA facilities to honor POW/MIAs. The table is decorated with several items, each carrying symbolic meaning used to help remember those who were captured or declared missing.”
First Liberty Institute has vowed to fight to allow POW/MIA displays to remember those killed, captured or missing with a display of their choosing. The Manchester VA Medical Center initially caved in to the atheist complaint and removed the Bible. Then it recently put the Bible back because of a letter from FLI and an outpouring of support.
If courts find all Christian symbols unconstitutional and require that they must be removed from anything having to do with the military or the government, then as one local atheist has said, “We need to remove every cross from every military graveyard in the world, beginning with Arlington.”
We are into what should be a joyous time of year as graduating students enjoy a celebration of years of hard work. Whether it’s a commencement, a pinning ceremony, or some other ceremony to acknowledge the completion of their training, students should be free to express their gratitude. Unfortunately, commencement speech freedom is becoming a thing of the past.
The constant attack of skeptics and atheists has threatened administrative officials. They are afraid that a student will make some statement in a speech that will get the school in trouble. The result is not only the censoring of speeches but the insistence that all references to Christianity must be excluded.
A situation like that happened to a young lady named Karissa Langner. She was chosen to speak at her nursing program’s pinning ceremony at Colorado Mesa University. In her speech, Ms. Langner acknowledged the role that faith plays in her life. She closed her talk with: “These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage, I have overcome the world.”
The college officials discovered that this is a quote of John 16:33. They threatened Ms. Langner with “repercussions” if she refused to change her speech. They insisted that their “nursing program will not tolerate any one religious slant.” Ultimately Mesa was threatened with a lawsuit, and commencement speech freedom was granted to Ms. Langner when she gave her speech as she wished.
We were sitting on a rock at the bottom of the Grand Canyon talking about how different the world looked in that setting than it does in the realm of politics and human affairs. My friend told of a statement he heard explaining why democracy without God will not work.
The statement was “democracy without moral underpinnings is simply mob rule.” He went on to say, “Suppose you had a society made up of three men and two women. One of the men proposes a new law which says it is acceptable for men to abuse women. The new law is put up to a vote, and the law passes 3 to 2. Is this a democracy? The answer is, ‘No, it is simply mob rule.'”
It is ironical that in the world today the whole human rights issue seems to be integrated with the idea that democracy is the answer to all political problems. While the United States is pushing for democracy overseas, the basis of making democracy work is being systematically removed in America. The only way a balanced, stable, functional political system can work is for everyone to agree on what is right and what is wrong. There was very little controversy about what was right and wrong 200 years ago because people accepted the Bible as a guide for moral conduct. The system was not perfect because people still did things they knew the Bible condemned both on a personal and a political level. But democracy without God will not work.
Today we can’t decide what is right and what is wrong. Much of our population considers all sexual behavior acceptable. People who murder or steal are excused based on bad childhood experiences or chemical problems. The majority of Americans are close to accepting the idea that it is okay to kill an unwanted baby or elderly person.
If you don’t believe in God and in the Bible as God’s plan for how we should live, then what do you use? The answer is mob rule whatever the majority is willing to tolerate. The majority already tolerates abortion, and a landslide of other behaviors are being forced upon us.
If democracy without God will not work, it becomes vital for us to convince our fellow citizens that God does exist. They need to know that they can logically and rationally believe in Him and His Word. It is also vital that we show our young people that the Bible system is not a negative wall of “do not’s” but a positive guide to happiness and successful living.
In Germany, when you fill out your tax forms for 2019, you are required to mark what religion you belong to. The state then collects a tax which is about 9% of the person’s income tax and distributes the money to the relevant church or synagogue. If you refuse the German religious tax, you will be denied access to church schools or day care centers, and you can even be denied communion or burial services.
The problem with this arrangement is that many religious groups do not register as public corporations, and groups such as Islam or the Church of Christ don’t have a national church system. The founder of a liberal mosque in Berlin, Seyran Ates, wants to establish a “democratic Islamic Council” but conservative Muslims want no part of such an idea. Groups like the Church of Christ which do not have a national board or assembly are opposed to any solution on very much the same idea.