Tuesday, February 28, 2006

The Vibrant, Evangelical Counterculture

An interesting article recently appeared in U.S.A. Today. How rare that a newspaper that usually doesn't present Christian-friendly articles, suddenly allows conservative Michael Medved to have his say. I thank my friend Rocky for sending me an email copy of the article, otherwise, I would have missed it!

Rocky mentioned that perhaps it is a sign that "they are starting to take notice and wonder what it is we've got going for us!"


Power, maturity steer Christian movement

The so-called religious right's muted reaction to 'Brokeback Mountain' reflects a self-assured shift among the faithful - as opposed to the false, but popular, stereotype of intolerant fanatics.

By Michael Medved

The publicity blitz surrounding Oscar front-runner Brokeback Mountain not only challenged stereotypes about gay relationships, it simultaneously cleared away persistent misunderstandings about the nation's Christian conservatives. Instead of reacting with outraged calls for censorship or condemnation, the much-reviled minions of the so-called religious right have mostly ignored the movie, allowing it to collect every sort of honor with shockingly scant controversy. While derided by prominent liberals as "the Taliban wing of the Republican Party," conservative Christian leaders have displayed a new sense of security and confidence, in dramatic contrast to the paranoid Muslim mobs that riot across the globe over a dozen disrespectful Danish cartoons.

This doesn't mean that cultural traditionalists in the USA have abandoned their principles and suddenly embraced the much-discussed "gay cowboy movie": People who revere biblical strictures against same-sex relationships can scarcely commend a film that provides a lyrical celebration of a homosexual affair that wrecks two marriages.

Nevertheless, the publicists and activists involved in promoting Brokeback Mountain seem almost disappointed that religious conservatives have expressed so little indignation. No major organizations called for a boycott of the film, or threatened its producers, or made any serious attempt to interfere with those who might enjoy this artfully-crafted motion picture (it has become a modest commercial success). In the heartland of Evangelical America, Brokeback has generated more ho-hums than howls of protest (or hosannas).

The muted reaction to the film from religious communities strongly disapproving of its themes gives the lie to the common characterization of cultural conservatives as intolerant, incurably homophobic and implacably determined to impose their values on society. It's actually the film's adoring advocates who push for universal acceptance for their point of view regarding homosexuality, with newspaper ad layouts featuring the tag lines "Love is a Force of Nature" and "One Movie Has Connected with the Heart of America."

Though most conservatives continue to resist the radical redefinition of traditional male-female marriage, that doesn't mean they seek to punish every sort of same-sex relationship. The marriage debate centers on questions of public policy and governmental endorsement; Brokeback depicts a private, even secret, connection between two ranch hands. Conservatives might not offer Jack and Ennis (the two thwarted lovers in the movie) a Main Street parade and a legally sanctioned wedding ceremony in front of City Hall. Even so, that hardly means they'd send a posse up the slopes of Brokeback Mountain to arrest the two guys in the privacy of their pup tent.

This live-and-let-live attitude, plus an uncompromising commitment to personal principle, reflects an increasing sense of power and maturity on the part of religious conservative activists. They enjoy unprecedented influence in government at all levels (not just in the Bush administration), a fresh, dazzling array of educational alternatives (with the nationwide growth in Christian education and soaring enrollment and prestige for evangelical colleges), and startling success in the world of entertainment (with huge sales for religious music, novels, radio programming and even motion pictures such as The Passion of the Christ and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe).

Rather than worrying over industry-insider awards for Brokeback, conservative Christians flocked to see the recent movie End of the Spear, an audacious adventure that tells the true story of five heroic missionaries in Ecuador. Despite the fact that the leading actor in the film (Chad Allen) had publicly identified himself as a homosexual and even posed as a cover boy for The Advocate, a magazine dedicated to gay and lesbian issues, the great majority of churches and religious organizations remained supportive of the film.

Instead of railing helplessly about the degradation of secular culture and its decadent entertainment offerings, religious believers can increasingly immerse themselves in a vibrant counterculture and thriving church communities.

Eighteen years ago, Christian conservatives felt unsure enough about their position in society to react with horror and pain to The Last Temptation of Christ; 25,000 protesters rallied at Universal Studios to plead against the film's release - a response in no way echoed by religious organizations preparing for the arrival of The Da Vinci Code. Though Ron Howard's high-profile new project tells a story that contradicts Christian teaching about Jesus at least as thoroughly as The Last Temptation, even the Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei, portrayed by name in the film as a violent cult, pointedly plans to take "a less confrontational approach," according to The New York Times. Similarly, the recent NBC series The Book of Daniel, featuring a hippy-surfer Jesus as confidante to its drug-addicted Episcopal priest hero, collapsed after a few weeks because of low ratings - without significant assistance from major boycotts, petitions or demonstrations from the faithful.

This new confidence on the part of conservative Christians highlights the vast gulf between this nation's religious conservatives and the vulnerability and hysteria of Islamist militants in the rest of the world. Widespread rhetorical and real-world violence in response to rude caricatures in an obscure Danish newspaper doesn't express religious strength or zeal but reflects, rather, an underlying sense of powerlessness and desperation. With the spread of democracy even in unlikely Middle Eastern locales, Muslim fanatics sense they are losing the struggle; on the other hand, religious conservatives in the USA who take a cleareyed look at their own position of influence see themselves as part of the nation's most dynamic social and cultural force.

The refusal to launch a battle royal against the pro-gay messages of Brokeback Mountain doesn't show the weakness or defeatism of religious conservatives. Instead, it displays their strength and optimism as a maturing mass movement currently more interested in creating than complaining.


But not all evangelicals are willing to sit back and just say, "ho hum" over the controversial movie.

According to a recent WorldNetDaily article, there is a Christian clothing company that created a T-shirt which presents an entirely different message using the title of the movie Brokeback Mountain and presenting a biblical message about it in a unique way:

A Christian clothing company is riding into the controversy over "Brokeback Mountain," the film about "gay" cowboys in love, by selling a T-shirt featuring Moses, the Ten Commandments, and homosexuals joining ancient Israelites dancing around a Golden Calf idol.

The T-shirt carries the bold slogan, "The Original 10 Commandments, BrokeBack on the Mountain."

It has a Bible reference to Exodus 32:19, which states "... he saw the calf and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and broke them beneath the mount."

"In his anger, Moses BROKE the two tablets of stone that the Ten Commandments were written on while walking BACK down the MOUNTAIN," noted the official release of the Florida-based Second Coming Clothing Co.

"The message is the same now as it was at the time of Moses," said CEO Rick Wade, "that God's covenant is broken with His people, God's heart is broken for His people, and that judgment is coming prior to the return of the Lord, which is soon."

"Our faith in Jesus Christ needs to be taken out of our hearts and worn on the sleeves of our daily walk in life as we witness to others and take an affirmative stand in controversial issues before it is too late," said Wade.

The company says 100 percent of its net profit will go toward humanitarian aid worldwide.

Lastly, I received an email invitation from the Christian Film and Television Commission (tm) to a conference being sponsored by Vision America in Washington DC. It is an event that I certainly would love to attend.

The letter said:

Dear Friend,

Jesus said, “All men will hate you because of me...” (Mark 13:13), so it should come as no surprise when His followers face resentment and persecution. The war against biblical Christianity in America rages on, and no group flaunts its disdain for Evangelicals more conspicuously than the Hollywood left.

As the nation’s largest identifiable voting bloc, Evangelical values are major obstacles to the political agenda of many in Hollywood, and movies such as BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and SYRIANA are part of its backlash against America’s recent conservative voting record.
Fortunately, Christians can impact the culture wars in small ways. Regarding Hollywood movies, we’ve done just that, by voicing our concerns with our wallets.

Despite the latest popular trend of leftist movies, Hollywood will be marketing to families more than a dozen computer animated-movies in 2006, a record amount that doubles the output of any past year. Furthermore, many other movies with pro-Christian content will be released this year, including THE SECOND CHANCE, SOPHIE SCHOLL, MERRY CHRISTMAS, and THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN.

For years, MOVIEGUIDE® has proved the case that family-friendly movies with strong, positive pro-Christian content earn the most money at the box office, on average, and many Hollywood moviemakers seem to be hearing our message.

The lesson here is that Evangelicals can make a huge difference despite the left’s growing contempt for biblical values when we stand together and stay informed. One great way to do this is to attend Vision America’s conference: The War on Christians and the Value Voter 2006, March 27-28 in Washington, D.C.

I will be speaking on the topic “Hollywood: Christians Through a Distorted Lens,” and will be joined on the panel by Rebecca Hagelin of the Heritage Foundation, Don Feder of Vision America, and Tristan Emmanuel of Equipping Christians for the Public Square Center. Other speakers at the conference will include Rick Scarborough, Alan Keyes and Congressmen Tom DeLay and Todd Akin. Please stand with us and stay informed by joining us at this conference.

Yours In Christ,

Ted Baehr MOVIEGUIDE®, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief

For more information and registration, visit Vision America.

Monday, February 27, 2006

Jerusalem Countdown

Biblical history shows all too well why radical Islam and Israel cannot dwell peaceably together. The ancestors of the two nations that came from Abraham (Isaac and Ishmael), and later, Jacob and Esau, had lived in conflict with each other from the time of Genesis. The rivalry and conflict continues to the present day. You can visit the God's Creative Call blog and my former post Witnessing Biblical Prophecy to read about these rivalries and conflicts.

I picked up a fascinating book called, Jerusalem Countdown written by Pastor John Hagee. As I read it, I am finding how closely biblical history and prophecy matched and predicted the present day conflicts between Israel and it's Arabs neighbors. One day, it will reach the point where several Arab nations (especially Iran) could inevitably partner with Russia and attack Israel.

Anyone who has heard the rantings of Iran's fanatical leader Ahmadinijad, knows that his goal is to wipe Israel off the map. Can anyone actually believe that these Islamic fanatics presently in charge of the Iranian government would not use nuclear weapons on Israel, America and the world?

I have been concerned for some time about the "Roadmap For Peace" and it is one issue that I am in total disagreement with the Bush Adminstration. When I read a portion of Hagee's book on this topic, I see that many others agree with my concerns.

John Hagee writes:

"Let's talk about the present battle for Jerusalem, which is really the Roadmap for Peace. It began in the fall of 2002, presented by what the media call "The Quartet" - America, Russia, Europe, and the United Nations. There are three stages in this Roadmap for Peace.

The first stage of the Roadmap for Peace requires Israel to withdraw from Gaza. You have seen that happen before your eyes on the evening television news.

The second stage is that Israel is required to withdraw from the West Bank. The third stage is a requirement for Israel to give a portion of Jerusalem to the Arabs as a capital for the new Palestinian state.

Islamic fundamentalists will not honor or abide by any Roadmap for Peace. They are using this Roadmap for Peace as a weapon of war. They want peace with Israel one piece at a time. Now they have Gaza. Next they are asking for the West Bank. And the ultimate plum is the city of Jerusalem, which they will make the capital city for a Palestinian state that will be a terrorist state, whose objective will be the destruction of Israel.

The battle for Jerusalem has already begun. And Israel, desperate for peace, is negotiating itself into the greatest war Israel has ever seen. That was will affect every nation on earth, including America, and will affect every person on Planet Earth.

In world history, peace agreements poorly conceived led to an even greater war. A case in point is the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I. When the Treaty of Versailles was written, it was so brutal toward the German people that it created the platform through which Adolf Hitler came to power. Had it been written with an ounce of compassion, Hitler would not have had a possibility of surviving. But that Treaty of Versailles made it possible for the Nazis to come to power in a fanatical revival of nationalism, which produced the Third Reich.

The Roadmap for Peace is an ill-conceived document, one that has Israel giving up Gaza, then the West Bank, and then Jerusalem. It clearly violates the Word of God. How so? Joel 3:2 says, "I will also gather all nations (this includes America], and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; and I will enter into judgment with them there on account of My people, My heritage Israel...they have divided up my land."

When America forced Israel to give up Gaza, it was clearly violating Joel 3:2. We are giving the enemies of Israel the high ground in the coming war for Israel's survival. It's time for our national leaders in Washington to stop this madness.

I was invited to Washington DC to meet with Condoleezza Rice and other national leaders concerning this Roadmap. When I asked about Jerusalem, this was the answer I received: "Jerusalem is so controversial. It is so sensitve that it's not even on the table for discussion."

So let's put Jerusalem on the table, because Jerusalem is the City of God. "I {God] have chosen Jerusalem, that My name might be there...in this house and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen...I will put My name forever" (2 Chron. 6:6; 33:7).

Jerusalem is the city mentioned in Scripture 811 times. Jerusalem is the city where Solomon built his temple, which was one of the Seven Wonders of the Word. Jerusalem is the city where Jeremiah and Isaiah uttered moral and spiritual principles that shaped the standards of righteousness for the nations of the world.

Let the evangelical Christians of America stand in absolute solidarity with the State of Israel and demand that our leaders in Washington stop saying, "This [the withdrawal from Gaza] is the beginning of Israel's withdrawal."

Fact: Israel should not give another inch of land to the Palestinians until every terrorist organization operating under the Palestinian covering lay down their wapons of was and prove they are willing to live in peace side by side with the State of Israel. The Palestinians should revise their charter calling for the destruction of Israel. Jerusalem is not to be divided, again, for any reason with anyone regardless of the requirement of the Roadmap for Peace."

I remember well how outspoken Benjamin Netanyahu (and others) were when they expressed their concerns against the Roadmap for Peace idea in the book The Jerusalem Alternative: Moral Clarity for Ending the Arab-Israeli Conflict
I think we should have listened to Netanyahu, Pipes, Aikman, Gaffney, Keyes, Thomas, Perl, and Landau. They knew what they were talking about and saw how this ill-conceived "Roadmap" would endanger Israel even more than ever before.

More analysis to come...

Sunday, February 26, 2006

Morality is not Ideology

Morality is not Ideology

February 25, 2006 05:44 PM EST

Marxists and other liberals place religious or ethical dictates about the sanctity of life under the negative category of 'ideologies.' They believe that there is no reality beyond the material conditions of society controlled by the regulations of the political state.

Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro contends that religion and morality are "an ideological agenda that undermines science and the public health."

The quotation appears in a February 22, 2006, article in the Hartford Courant and my local newspaper, The Stamford Advocate, headlined "Advocates, Officials Want `Morning-After Pill' Widely Available."

The lead paragraphs tell us, "The culture war over emergency contraceptives has heated up on several fronts in recent weeks, with battles fought in pharmacies, state legislatures, political campaigns and Congress."

On Tuesday, advocates for sexual assault victims called on Connecticut lawmakers to require that all Connecticut hospitals - including the state's four Roman Catholic hospitals - provide emergency contraception to rape victims."

Further along in the article we are informed, "In Washington, meanwhile, lawmakers such as Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District, have urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to adopt recommendations made by its own advisory committee more than two years ago and make Plan B available without a prescription."

Democrats say the FDA bowed to pressure from conservative groups in delaying approval of over-the-counter emergency contraceptives."

There is no reasonable medical evidence to support the FDA's delay, only an ideological agenda that undermines science and the public health," DeLauro said Tuesday. "The FDA must not allow ideology to supersede public health."

DeLauro is saying that belief in the primacy of human life undermines science and the public health. How does this square with the Hippocratic Oath, the classical version of which contains the following paragraph?"

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art."

Moreover, the Wikipedia describes the Hippocratic Oath as, "...an oath traditionally taken by physicians, in which certain ethical guidelines are laid out." In other words, ethics lie at the heart of the practice of medicine. because sick people are in varying degrees at the mercy of the physician.

Additional light on this aspect is found in Dr. Sherwin B. Nuland's "Maimonides," a biographical and doctrinal interpretation of the life and teachings of the Jewish world's most towering figure of the Middle Ages. People know of Maimonides as an authoritative interpreter of the the Talmud and other Jewish scriptures. Less well known is that he was also a justly famous medical doctor.

Dr. Nuland is a clinical professor of surgery at Yale University Medical School, where he also teaches bioethics and medical history. He writes that, in the "Ethics of the Fathers" sections of his "Commentary on the Mishnah," Maimonides articulates a theme that appeared repeatedly in his writings:

"...[the purpose of wealth] should be to expend it for noble purposes, and to employ it for the maintenance of the body and the preservation of life, so that its owner may obtain a knowledge of God, in so far as that is vouchsafed unto man. From this point of view, the study of medicine has a very great influence on the acquisition of the virtues and of the knowledge of God, as well as on the attainment of true spiritual happiness. Therefore, its study and acquisition are pre-eminently important religious activities."

Congresswoman DeLauro's diametrically opposed use of the term ideology to dismiss the ethical side of medicine, one may conjecture, derives from its usage by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels to represent metaphysical, or spiritual, concepts as fictional ignorance, in contrast to the materialistic forces of the atheistic world of socialism.

DeLauro is an apostate Roman Catholic who, after graduating from Marymount College, migrated to the London School of Economics and Columbia University, both major institutions for the advancement of socialism and other doctrines arising from atheistic materialism. Subsequently she became executive director of EMILY's List, an organization open only to women who are members of the Democratic Party or the Australian Labor Party and who are advocates for abortion.

Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.

His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776

Hat Tip: The Conservative Voice


The following is a link to another good article on this topic that asks a most pertinent question. There are also many comments to read:

Abortion Challenge to the Left: Why do you feel it’s ok to kill our children via abortion?

Saturday, February 25, 2006

A Touch of Glory

A Touch of Glory

A brief shinning moment
Radiant, glorious

It was a moment I'll never forget
A moment I'll always treasure
A moment I'll always yearn for
It was a privilege
An honor
And a pleasure

I can only pray for similar moments
To be allowed to be a conduit like that again
To be that earthen vessel through whom God lets His light shine

2 Cor 4:6-7 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us.

I know that each time I am somewhat changed
That just as He wraps Himself in light
That as He passes His light through me
Something of it remains, a residual shine, a touch of glory

I could put forth a false humility saying
I am just the vessel
While that is true it is much more than that
I am a vessel that yearns!
I yearn for the privilege, the honor and the pleasure!
For there is none like it!

O to be saturated with the Spirit of God
O to be permeated with the anointing of Christ
O a touch of glory

What an awesome gift from God
What an honor and privilege
What a pleasure

Yes, it is an honor and a privilege for me that God has done this
But somehow the pleasure of knowing Him this way seems even more valuable
I feel akin to Moses asking, "Lord, show me your glory"
I yearn for it

Written by Rocky Chambers


Another gem by Rocky that shows there is nothing greater in our lives than the awesome privilege of knowing Jesus Christ our Lord! The glory of our Lord shines eternal light that pierces the darkness!

Friday, February 24, 2006

The Crisis Of No Sexual Rules

The Heteroflexible, Pansensual, Bi-Curious Teenager—The Fast Lane in the American High School

by Albert Mohler
February 24, 2006

Teenage sexuality has been a perpetual concern for parents--and for good reason. In our own times, American teenagers have unprecedented opportunities to experiment sexually and they are bombarded with cultural messages that encourage sexual experimentation and promiscuity. In a very real sense, the chickens have come home to roost as this nation faces the inevitable result of a breakdown in sexual morality.

A shocking portrait of the new shape of teenage sexual activity is provided in a cover story published in the February 6, 2006 edition of New York. In "Love and the Ambisexual, Heteroflexible Teen," Alex Morris introduces us to the "cuddle puddle" of New York City's Stuyvesant High School. Brace yourselves--this is a shocking form of reality therapy.

Morris first introduces his readers to Alair, a sixteen-year-old junior at Stuyvesant High School. Alair is dressed in a tight white tank top that is cut off above the hem in order to expose her midriff. She accessorizes with a black leather belt that features metal chains and studs, and she attracts a great deal of attention as she walks down the halls of her very selective high school.

Alair is on her way to the "cuddle puddle" that takes place during the students' free tenth period of the day. As Morris describes the scene, "There are girls petting girls and girls petting guys and guys petting guys." Alair quickly connects with Jane and Elle, fellow juniors at the high school. "All three have hooked up with each other. All three have hooked up with boys--sometimes the same boys. But it's not that they're gay or bisexual, not exactly. Not always," Morris advises. The boys and girls of the "cuddle puddle" are experimenting with sexuality in all of its varied forms--and this will stretch the imagination of most adults.

"With teenagers there is always a fair amount of posturing when it comes to sex," Morris admits, "a tendency to exaggerate or trivialize, innocence mixed with swagger. It's also true that the 'puddle' is just one clique at Stuyvesant and that Stuyvesant can hardly be considered a typical high school. It attracts the brightest public-school students in New York, and that may be an environment conducive to fewer sexual inhibitions. 'In our school,' Elle says, 'people are getting a better education, so they're more open-minded.'"

In other words, the "cuddle puddle" at this New York high school is not fully representative of adolescents across the nation, but it may soon be. Indeed, data released by the National Center for Health Statistics indicates that eleven percent of American girls age fifteen to nineteen reported same-sex sexual encounters.

As Morris explains, "More girls are experimenting with each other, and they're starting younger." Many analysts believe that these numbers are actually under-reported. One researcher indicates that as many as twenty percent of teenage girls experiment sexually with another girl during their teenage years.

"Go to the schools, talk to the kids, and you'll see that somewhere along the line this generation has started to conceive of sexuality differently." No kidding. The teenagers at this high school greet each other sexually, grabbing various body parts, the way students used to slap each other on the back or the way adults shake hands.

The difference in the way these teenagers conceive sexuality has led some child-development specialists to identify them as the "post-gay" generation.

Homosexuality--lesbianism in particular--is seen as a developmental stage or as a completely valid lifestyle choice. The participants in the "cuddle puddle" tend to think of themselves as more than heterosexual or homosexual. As they have collected and coined words to describe themselves, they use terms like "polysexual, ambisexual, pansexual, pansensual, polyfide, bi-curious, bi-queer, fluid, meteroflexible, heteroflexible, heterosexual with lesbian tendencies" or "just sexual." As Morris concedes, "The terms are designed less to achieve specificity than to leave all options open."

Alair, for example, admits to frequent sexual hook-ups with both boys and girls. She is featured on the front cover of the magazine holding on to a half-naked boy named Jason and cuddling next to Molly, another girl.

Her parents are only mildly concerned, if at all. Morris describes Alair as "one of the lucky ones whose parents don't mind her bisexual tendencies." He goes on to describe Alair's father as the president of a company that manages performance artists and her mom as a "professional organizer." As Alair sees it, her parents are "awesome." She reflects: "I think they've tried to raise me slightly quirky, like in a very hippie little way, and it totally backfired on them." She now understands that she has gone "further than I think they wanted me to go."

Speaking to Morris, Alair's mom said: "I can't say I was pleased . . . . But I can't say that I was upset either. I like that she's forthright about what she wants, that she values her freedom, that she takes care of herself. But I have all the trepidations a parent has when they learn their child is becoming sexually active."

The "cuddle puddle" is a puzzle of complicated relationships. Many of the girls have hooked up with each other in the past and some continue to do so in the present. They caress each other's hair and bodies and do so in front of boys who may be hooking up with each other as the girls watch. Occasionally, the girls and boys hook up with each other, but this seems to be less frequent, at least for the girls, than same-sex activities.

For these kids, the only sin is repression. They consider any opposition to homosexuality--any notion that any form of consensual sexual activity among these teenagers could be morally wrong--to be evidence of nothing more than psychological repression and intolerance.

"To these kids, homophobia is as socially shunned as racism was to the generation before them," Morris explains. "They say it's practically the one thing that's not tolerated at their school. One boy who made disparaging remarks about gay people has been ridiculed and taunted, his belongings hidden around the school. 'We're a creative bunch when we hate someone,' says Nathan. Once the tormenters, now the tormented."

As it turns out, the "cuddle puddle" is only a warm up for what follows. The real action for these teenagers takes place at parties, most often held in their own homes. With parents distracted by work and their own interests, these kids are given a free reign in empty houses and, as this account makes graphically clear, this leads to all kinds of sexual activity that takes place in the bedrooms and bathrooms of the homes.

When the group shows up at Nathan's home, the guys begin to hang out in Nathan's room. Before long, they are joined by some of the girls and making out begins. The group orders Chinese food and passes an ice cube around the room, which everyone is expected to put into their pants.
"It's just another afternoon of casual flirtation. The boys showing off for the girls, the girls showing off for everyone. No strings attached. In theory, anyway."

The industrial revolution and the other massive social changes that have so reshaped American life led to the development of what we now call adolescence--an extended (and growing) period of time in which sexually-mature young persons are largely congregated together without a great deal of adult supervision. They are not expected to accept and fulfill adult responsibilities, and the sexual boundaries and rules that had at least defined and restricted teenage sexual behavior in the past have largely evaporated.

Stuyvesant High School may be somewhat atypical, but the "cuddle puddle" is not. The development of the American high school has produced a social context for teenagers that separates them from parental oversight, gathers them together in one place, and privileges their own social structure, friendships, and peer morality above all others.

Anyone who doubts the impact of the sexual revolution needs only to read this article in order to see our present crisis--much less the future. Of course, there are some who, like Alair's parents, will celebrate teenage sexual liberation, even to the point of ambisexual and heteroflexible sexual experimentation.

Missing from this entire picture is any notion that human sexuality is a stewardship to be protected and a gift to be respected, rather than simply a physical capacity to be used in personal experimentation and polymorphous gratification. This is what a world without sexual rules looks like--a giant "cuddle puddle" of sexual experimentation. Can we even imagine the life-long and eternal consequences of the "cuddle puddle?"

Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., serves as the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary - the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.
Widely sought as a columnist and commentator, Dr. Mohler has been quoted in the nation's leading newspapers, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Atlanta Journal/Constitution and The Dallas Morning News. He has also appeared on such national news programs as CNN's "Larry King Live," NBC's "Today Show" and "Dateline NBC," ABC's "Good Morning America," "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" on PBS, MSNBC's "Scarborough Country" and Fox's "The O'Reilly Factor."

Click here to contact Dr. Mohler, or visit his website at www.albertmohler.com.

© Copyright 2006 Business Reform. "All Rights Reserved." Reproduction of any portion of the Business Reform magazine is limited to bulletins/newsletters published by local churches, businesses, or individuals at no-cost distribution. All other uses require written permission from The Business Reform Foundation, unless noted otherwise (some authors hold copyrights on certain articles, in which event written permission to reprint should be directed to their attention). Each copy must include the following statement: "Reprinted with permission from the Business Reform magazine, a bimonthly magazine published by The Business Reform Foundation (http://www.businessreform.com/), Ashland, Ohio."

Another excellent resource by Albert Mohler:
Homosexuality and the Bible

Spiritual Checkup

Saw this poll over at World Net Daily and thought I'd bring it over here. Any readers willing to reveal their answers? Anyone willing to share their idea of what it means to be holy? I think it is a very intriguing question for both Christian believers and non-believers. I hope that many who visit here will have the courage to share their answers and any additional explanation for the choice they have made.



Do you consider yourself holy?

No, there's no such thing as God or holiness
No, nobody could live up to God's concept of holiness
No, but it's a goal I strive for daily and I'm making progress
Yes, I attend church regularly
Yes, I'm a very spiritual person
Yes, but the closer I get to God, the further I see I still have to go
Yes, I'm covered by the blood of Jesus

Thursday, February 23, 2006

River Of Love

He changes rivers into deserts,
and springs of water into dry land....
But he also turns deserts into pools of water,
the dry land into flowing springs.
Psalm 107:33, 35 (NLT)
Dry to wet or wet to dry, God changes the world at His will, ruling over it in ways we often don't understand. Though scientists spend time in labs or the environment seeking to understand creation, we lag distantly behind the Lord who commands it. Much in His incredibly complex world eludes our understanding.
But deserts and rivers aren't the only things God rules. Though we may question or rebel against this truth, God also rules our lives.
Even the most wicked of us cannot go farther than God allows, and even the best of us only has so many years to do good works.
What's true of creation is true of us: We, too, are incredibly complex. Our hearts may hurt for years over a series of wrongs; as they work deep into our souls, they work on our spirits and thoughts in convoluted ways. We may not even understand why we hurt, yet we see the results in our lives.
But just as God perfectly understands our world, He sees into our hurt hearts and spirits. And He can alter a river of hate or doubt into springs of faith and trust. Though that heart change may not happen overnight, with faith and determination to follow God's Word, we can see amazing changes.
As God's healing water seeps into our lives, the trickle touches our souls and change becomes possible. But as we open ourselves to His will and way, the trickle springs up, becomes a stream, a pool, then a river of love.
And all of it started in God's hand.
From Daily Wisdom to Satisfy the Soul, published by Barbour Publishing, Inc. Used by permission.
Added on at 11:30 a.m. Pacific Time -
I have just listened to one of the most powerful testimonies that I have ever heard at StraightTalkRadio. It is the testimony of my friend, Christian mentor, and dear sister in Christ, Susan Smith.
Thank you for sharing all that you did today on STR, Susan. As I listened, tears flowed for the pain you had endured. Yet, they turned to tears of joy as I listened to how God carried you through the tragic events in your life and with the extraordinary help of your Christian mentor, turned them into loving triumph through Jesus. The Lord is now working His river of love towards many in your life in a mighty and powerful way!
I dedicate this "River of Love" encouragement devotional to you, Susan! God bless you greatly this day and always...
Love from your West Coast sister,

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

An Explanation

After the "Maureen" pseudo-blogger had been exposed, I had hoped that the matter would end there. Unfortunately, things do not always go as planned in the world of blogging. It is for this reason that I feel that it is important to explain.

After much thought, I had decided to join the Technorati Search website. It has many features that enable me to quickly find former blogposts in my blog, as well as locate any blogs that directly, or indirectly link here. An additional feature that I enjoy is typing in keywords and finding other blogs that link with the same keywords. There is a ranking of "authority" that is determined by Technorati. Thought that was cool.

I found one drawback, however, and it involves the blog name formerly held by "Maureen." Apparently, a person who used to argue with Maureen at her blog decided that he would keep her blogname for himself. When you click on "Dying in Christ," you will go to his new blog.

Sadly, he is a humanist who seems to delight in the mockery of Christian faith (more specifically, the Catholic faith) and has chosen to exploit the mistakes of a few aberant homosexual pedophile priests with a picture of a stained glass window that includes a disgusting parody-type posting of a priest blessing a child kneeling before him.

Obviously, the pain and suffering of all the child victims don't seem to faze a person like this who would blatantly and unthinkingly make fun of such an awful ordeal. The seriousness of child rape is something to mock and make fun of? What is wrong with this person?

In addition, taking something that is supposed to represent a holy blessing of a child and turning it into this kind of filth as this guy did at his blog is beyond disgusting. It's just plain stupid. To coin a phrase from Forrest Gump, "stupid is as stupid does." Seems quite fitting in describing this depraved person.

At first, I was going to ignore it. Didn't want to draw any additional attention to it. Then, I decided that if someone goes to my links page, clicks on that link and surmises that I approve of such derogatory "humor," then it might make the person seeing that think that I do approve and thus spoil the original intentions that I had for this blog's existence. Just wanted to assure anyone who regularly visits here that approval of such an insulting message as this is definitely not the case.

I will find a way to eliminate the links to that blog. But I also thought it was necessary to post this explanation here so that if any of you have already clicked over to it, you would know that I found his post despicable and insulting to our decent Catholic brothers and sisters.

One more point. Mockery like this just reiterates what the Bible refers to as a perfect example of the reprobate mind.

Romans 1:28-32

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, *sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, *unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Note: I have bolded the words that I see as specifically applying to this individual's case of reprobation.

A fitting portion from David Guzik's commentary:

iv. Our rebellion against God is not only displayed in our actions, but in our thinking; we are genuinely "spiritually insane" in our rebellion against God

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Huge Marriage Win

TO: Christine
FROM: Alan Sears, President

Two for Two! Another HUGE Win for Marriage (And Defeat for the ACLU) in the Empire State…The New York Yankees baseball team may field a team of all-stars, but attorneys defending marriage are now batting .1000 – by the grace of God -- in the legal battle to defend, protect, and affirm marriage in New York State.

In the latest case, the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, ruled 5-0 that preserving the definition of marriage as the union between one man and one woman is legitimate and permissible under the New York Constitution.

The court wrote:

“this case is not simply about the right to marry the person of one’s choice, but represents a significant expansion into new territory which is, in reality, a redefinition of marriage. The cornerstone cases acknowledging marriage as a fundamental right are laced with language referring to the ancient recognized nature of that institution, specifically tying part of its critical importance to its role in procreation and, thus, to the union of a woman and a man.”

ADF attorneys filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case representing Family Research Council, in which 12 same-sex couples were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The full text of the opinion can be read at Samuels Opinion.

This was the second win in five marriage cases presently on appeal, and the positions advocated by ADF attorneys have won in the remaining three at the lower court level.

In December, an earlier challenge to marriage between one man and one woman was rejected by a state intermediate appeals court, which ruled that same-sex “marriage” is not a constitutional right and would not provide the same benefits for society as traditional marriage. The court also stated that the union between one man and one woman is the “cultural, social, and legal ideal in an effort to discourage unmarried childbearing and to encourage sufficient marital childbearing to sustain the population and society.”

ADF Senior Legal Counsel Chris Stovall says: “We’re pleased that another New York court recognizes that same-sex ‘marriage’ is not, and never has been, a “right.” This victory will provide momentum in the fight to preserve marriage in the state and across the country.”

We praise God for this tremendous victory. They have been made possible in part because of earlier victories elsewhere that you enabled. Please be in prayer for the remaining New York cases and all remaining appeals as well across the nation to defend, protect, and affirm marriage.

Stay tuned for my March letter with more details…Read the ADF press release...

Prayer Requests

"Without Christ, we can do nothing." - John 15:5

Please pray for ADF's upcoming Regional Litigation Academy attorney training events.

Please pray for wisdom in the many legal battles ahead.

Alliance Defense Fund
15333 N. Pima Road Suite 165
Scottsdale, AZ 85260 (480)444-0020

Stand Firm In Your Faith

In this current day and age, we are seeing liberal-left ideological movements creeping into many Christian denominations. If you are a Christian, then you must ask yourself an extremely important question. Is what they are teaching (on any particular subject of your choice) considered in agreement with the relativistic beliefs of those 'of the world' or, are they genuinely standing on the absolute truth that is of God and His Word?

The book of Jude is a personal letter to one or more of the congregations dispersed throughout the Roman empire. The dangers facing the church at this time are not those of outright persecution but of heretics and distorters of the faith. Although Jude is eager to write about salvation, he must instead warn his readers about immoral men who are perverting God's grace. The letter advises believers to strengthen their relationship to God with prayer and mutual support.

Today, we need to recognize and know the truth from God's Word more than at any other time in history. Why? Because we are on information overload. Turn on any TV talk show, news show or analysis program and you must weigh what you are hearing by asking yourself, "Is this really true? Am I hearing correct information?"

Christians need to be constantly and consistently engaged in the quest for truth. With the conflicting messages being received through the bombardment of information that the secular media and worldview desires for us to believe, the quest for truth can be a difficult and daunting task. So, where do we go? You know where I am going with this. Yes. We go to the Bible.

But even then, there are those who would twist, distort, dismiss, ignore and even blaspheme the truth about God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit and His unchanging character and timeless message that is recorded in the Bible.
So, how do we recognize truth from error? I think that the book of Jude is the one book that motivates Christians everywhere to recognize the truth as God intended in the Scriptures. This book motivates us into action because we have the uncompromising duty to fight for God's truth. We need to diligently study the Scriptures so that we can avoid the danger of false teachers.

The megathemes of the book of Jude include exposing false teachers and warn against heresy and apostasy. It also contains a warning against living a nominal Christian life.

My friends, false teachers are rampant in the liberal-left ideological churches. How do I know this? Because I am currently staunchly involved with combating their false teachings and defending the genuine Christian faith and worldview in the blogosphere. In other words, there is a battle looming where one is engaged in defending the truth of the Bible or defending man's subjective and changing ideas.

I urge my fellow Christian believers who may be in such a church to step back and examine whether or not they are engaging in doctrine that is not only man-made, but is probably also steeped in sin. Ask yourself, "are the teachings that I am hearing and following in agreement with, and/or more in step with, the secular worldviews of our time? If your answer is yes, then you need to worry.

Don't think you need to worry?

Don't want to listen to what I am saying here? Then don't listen to me...listen to what God's Word says:

James 4:4 - Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

I know what you might be thinking. That's harsh! But let's look at this matter in context. There is nothing wrong with wanting a pleasurable life. God gives us good gifts that he wants us to enjoy (see James 1:17; Ephesians 4:7; Timothy 4:4,5). But having 'friendship with the world' involves seeking pleasure at others' expense or at the expense of obeying God.

An important distinction to keep in mind when "choosing your pleasures" is to realize that pleasure that keeps us from pleasing God is sinful; pleasure from God's rich bounty is good!

The cure for evil desires is humility (see Proverbs 16:18, 19; 1 Peter 5:5,6). Pride makes us self-centered and leads us to conclude that we deserve all we can see, touch, or imagine. It creates greedy appetites for far more than we need. We can be released from our self-centered desires by humbling ourselves before God, realizing that all we really need is His approval.

When the Holy Spirit fills us, we see that this world's seductive attractions are only CHEAP SUBSTITUTES for what God has to offer!

Don't let yourself be involved in a cheap substitute! How would you be able to recognize a "cheap substitute" from the real God-pleasing truth?

It is crucial to make sure that you avoid leaders and teachers who distort the Bible to suit their own purposes.

False teachers and leaders who reject (either openly or secretly) the lordship of Christ in their own lives, tend to undermine the faith of others and lead them astray. Jude warns that these leaders and any who follow them will be punished.

Why is this so very important? Because those who do not seek to know the truth in God's Word are susceptible to apostasy. Christians must guard against any false teachings that would distract them from the truth preached by the apostles and written in God's Word.

The book of Jude was written for a time such as this. Look around and see that the truth in God's Word is being attacked from many secular groups.

These days, truth is often hidden and false teachers abound. Sadly, there are those who either knowingly, or unknowingly are following these false teachers. Jude encourages us to ground ourselves in faith and prayer. For it is God who guides us into truth (Psalm 25:5) and who reveals his truth in his son Jesus (John 1:17) and in his Word, which is truth (John 17:17).

There are many people who live in opposition to God and his followers. They twist God's truth, seeking to deceive and destroy the unwary. I urge you wholeheartedly don't allow yourself to be one of their victims!

God's truth must go forth and we are the ones to share it. God's truth can only be carried and defended by those who have committed their lives to God's Son.

Of course, this is an awesome task and huge responsibility that should never be taken lightly. Therefore, only those who are committed to building up their own faith through prayer and Bible study, commited to keeping close to Christ, commited to helping others, and committed to hating sin (not the sinner) are prepared to "contend for the faith" (verse 3) by rejecting all falsehood and immorality (verses 4-19).

So. You may be asking, "How do I know when I am ready to contend for the faith?" Ask God to show you. Pray and fervently ask Him to show you! No matter how long it takes to get your answer, continue to pray fervently and ask God to show you!

For me, it took 3 years of constant, consistent Bible study. My prayer life improved tremendously during that time. Over the past 18 years, my constant vigilance to keep strong in the faith no matter what opposition I might get from others, has helped me tremendously in spotting and opposing heresy.

I am totally aware that I have not arrived yet to the point where I would like to be; however no one ever completely 'arrives' in their Bible study on this side of heaven.

But you can look at several tests to determine if you are ready for the battle against heresy and false teaching. Ask yourself these questions.

1. How much do you value God's Word?

2. How much do you value the fellowship of the church? (Note: this not only includes the individual church where you personally fellowship, but the body of born-again believers that the Lord has brought into your life.)
3. How much do you value obedience to Jesus Christ?

Next, consider the following comments and accompanying questions. These may also help you to determine your readiness in this battle between falsehood creeping into the churches and the truth of God's Word.

1. There are many false teachers waiting to destroy your Christ-centered life. Have you seen any evidence of this in your life and Christian walk?

2. There are many who seek to undermine the credibility of God's Word. Have you seen any evidence of this in your life and Christian walk?

3. There are those who attempt to cause division and (knowingly or through blind adherance to a false teacher) destroy the body of Christ.
Have you seen any evidence of this in your life and Christian walk?

One contemporary example of this is the current craze over The DaVinci Code heresy. A fictional book is being slyly promoted as the "real" truth about Jesus.

A more subtle method for blinding people to the truth of God's Word is the current "seeker sensitive" movement. Why is such a movement popular these days? In the current politically correct mantra of "tolerance," we don't want to offend anyone in the church pews now do we?

But this is so dangerous, people. The crucifixion of Jesus Christ on the cross does not appear to be central to the "seeker sensitive" teachings and the belief that God sentences people to "eternal fire" for rejecting him isn't even on their radar screen!

Yet, Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross and subsequent resurrection is essential to the Christian faith. Plus, during his 3 year ministry on earth Jesus talked more about about avoiding hell than he did about the eternal reward of heaven.

What is clearly taught in Scripture? Sinners who don't seek forgiveness from God will face eternal separation from him. Jude gives this warning to all who rebel against, ignore, or reject God.

Jude 7 - In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of thsoe who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Solomon once said, "there is nothing new under the sun." How true this statement is as it relates to the first-century false teachers and is subsequently applied towards the false teachers of our current day. Those first-century teachers were teaching that Christians could do whatever they liked without fear of God's punishment. They had a light view of God's holiness and his justice. Paul refuted this same kind of false teaching in Romans 6:1-23.

Even today, some Christians minimize the sinfulness of sin, believing that how they live has little to do with their faith. But what a person truly believes will show up in how he or she acts. Those who truly have faith will show it by their deep respect for God and their sincere desire to live according to the principles in his Word.

Christians are called to determine to stand firm in their faith and defend God's truth at all costs. No one told us that someone would never be offended when we do so. In fact, the Bible tells us to expect it!

Mat 11:6 And blessed is [he], whosoever shall not be offended in me.
Mat 13:21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.
Mat 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
Mat 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
Mat 26:31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
Mat 26:33 Peter answered and said unto him, Though all [men] shall be offended because of thee, [yet] will I never be offended.
Mar 4:17 And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.
Mar 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Mar 14:27 And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.
Mar 14:29 But Peter said unto him, Although all shall be offended, yet [will] not I.
Luk 7:23 And blessed is [he], whosoever shall not be offended in me.
Jhn 16:1 These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended.

Stand firm in your faith and defend God's truth at all costs. Nothing is more valuable!

Monday, February 20, 2006

Difference Between 'Sick' and 'Evil'

"No child is capable, emotionally or legally, of consenting to being photographed for sexual purposes. Thus, every image of a sexually displayed child --be it a photograph, a tape or a DVD -- records both the rape of the child and an act against humanity. We must stop the hurt." - Andrew Vachss

Mr. Vachss' article Let's Fight This Terrible Crime Against Our Children appeared in this Sunday's (February 19, 2006) Parade magazine.

"PARADE Contributing Editor Andrew Vachss has made the protection of our most vulnerable citizens his life’s work. He is an attorney whose practice, for nearly four decades, has been devoted exclusively to the representation of children, many of them victims of sexual abuse. This experience has made him an outspoken advocate for the dignity and rights of children, a theme he also has pursued through his best-selling novels. This week, we ask readers to join Vachss’ call-to-arms against a despicable crime that is growing at an alarming pace."

Andrew Vachss believes that with higher penalties some predators will be deterred. Those who aren't can be locked away for a long time. I think that if he and Bill O'Reilly of Fox News The O'Reilly Factor joined forces, much would get done regarding the necessary passing of Jessica's Law in all 50 states.

There is absolutely no doubt that the marketing, viewing and use of child porn is not only sick, it is evil. The problem is that we have judges in this country who refuse to acknowledge the labeling of 'evil' on such predators.

When I located Mr. Vachss' article at PARADE online, I also clicked on an article that he wrote back in 2002, which was written at the height of the pedophile priest scandal. Although the article doesn't discuss child porn extensively, I think that it is related to the current sexual predator crisis and how many of these cases are being sorely mishandled in certain liberal left-leaning courtrooms throughout our country. It discusses, and reveals, the difference between labeling a criminal as 'sick' or 'evil.'

Portions (in quotes) from that article are included in the discussion below:

"The shock waves caused by the recent exposures of so-called “pedophile priests” have reverberated throughout America. But beneath our anger and revulsion, a fundamental question pulsates: Are those who abuse positions of trust to prey upon children—a category certainly not limited to those in religious orders—sick...or are they evil?

We need the answer to that fundamental question. Because, without the truth, we cannot act. And until we act, nothing will change.

But whatever the venue, the truth remains constant: Some humans intentionally hurt children. They commit unspeakable acts—for their pleasure, their profit, or both. Many people who hear of my cases against humans who rape, torture and package children for sale or rent immediately respond with, “That’s sick!” Crimes against children seem so grotesquely abnormal that the most obvious explanation is that the perpetrator must be mentally ill—helpless in the grip of a force beyond his or her control. But that very natural reaction has, inadvertently, created a special category of “blameless predator.” That confusion of “sick” with “sickening” is the single greatest barrier to our primary biological and ethical mandate: the protection of our children.

The difference between sick and evil cannot be dismissed with facile eye-of-the-beholder rhetoric. There are specific criteria we can employ to give us the answers in every case, every time.

Some of those answers are self-evident and beyond dispute: A mother who puts her baby in the oven because she hears voices commanding her to bake the devil out of the child’s spirit is sick; and a mother who sells or rents her baby to child pornographers is evil. But most cases of child sexual abuse—especially those whose “nonviolent” perpetrators come from within the child’s circle of trust—seem, on their surface, to be far more complex. That complexity is an illusion.

The truth is as simple as it is terrifying:

Sickness is a condition.

Evil is a behavior.

Evil is always a matter of choice. Evil is not thought; it is conduct. And that conduct is always volitional.

And just as evil is always a choice, sickness is always the absence of choice. Sickness happens. Evil is inflicted."

I see the current wave of liberal left judges giving light sentences to child predators as a result of them turning around the reality of that last concept. They have fallen into the incorrect mindset that predators are only "sick" and thus "have the absence of choice" rather than facing the truth of the matter that such predators are clearly choosing to inflict pain and suffering upon their victims for sexual pleasure due to evil behavior.

Thank you Andrew Vachss! Finally someone has had the courage to call it like it is!! It's about time!

If you watch The O'Reilly Factor and have been following the case of the Vermont judge who originally gave an outrageously lame 60 day sentence to a child rapist (who continually raped a 6-year-old girl for four years until she was 10), then you have seen the debates going on between Bill and his lawyer guests who have tried to arrogantly support the judge's terrible, lenient sentencing decision.

What it boils down to is this: can men like this Mark Hulett be rehabilitated?

According to Mr. Vachss research, the answer is a big fat no!

"Until we perceive the difference clearly, we will continue to give aid and comfort to our most pernicious enemies. We, as a society, decide whether something is sick or evil. Either decision confers an obligation upon us. Sickness should be treated. Evil must be fought.

If a person has desires or fantasies about sexually exploiting children, that individual may be sick. (Indeed, if such desires are disturbing, as opposed to gratifying to the individual, there may even be a “cure.”) But if the individual chooses to act upon those feelings, that conduct is evil. People are not what they think; they are what they do."

Our society distrusts the term “evil.” It has an almost biblical ring to it—something we believe in (or not) but never actually understand. We prefer scientific-sounding terms, such as “sociopath.” But sociopathy is not a mental condition; it is a specific cluster of behaviors. The diagnosis is only made from actual criminal conduct. No reputable psychiatrist claims to be able to cure a sociopath—or, for that matter, a predatory pedophile. Even the most optimistic professionals do not aim to change such a person’s thoughts and feelings.

Such hopes ignore the inescapable fact that the overwhelming majority of those who prey upon children don’t want to change their behavior—they want only to minimize the consequences of being caught at it. "
This is what is at the crux of the debate. Those who do not want to change their behavior are not going to cooperate. They may take a plea deal that involves rehabilitation attempts along with jail time, but psychiatrists admit that sociopaths who act upon evil behavior(s) are often never cured. So, what do we do? Jessica's Law! Lock them up so that they can't hurt another child!!

But we have those bleeding heart judges to contend with now, don't we? Years ago, light sentences for child predators were unheard of. So what happened?

"Psychology has given us many insights of great value. But it also has clouded our vision with euphemisms. To say a person suffers from the “disease” of pedophilia is to absolve the predator of responsibility for his behavior.

Imagine if an attorney, defending someone accused of committing a dozen hold- ups, told the jury his poor client was suffering from “armed-robberia.” That jury would decide that the only crazy person in the courtroom was the lawyer.

When a perpetrator claims to be sick, the timing of that claim is critical to discovering the truth. Predatory pedophiles carefully insinuate themselves into positions of trust. They select their prey and approach cautiously. Gradually, sometimes over a period of years, they gain greater control over their victims. Eventually, they leave dozens of permanently damaged children in their wake.

But only when they are caught do predatory pedophiles declare themselves to be sick. And the higher the victim count, the sicker (and therefore less responsible) they claim to be."

Mr. Vachss describes what we can do to fight the monstrous danger that child porn poses and inflicts upon children throughout the world. Here is his list. You can to to the article to read the detailed descriptions of each step:

1. First, we must raise the stakes.

2. Second, we must abolish the statute of limitations, both civil and criminal, on acts involving the production of child pornography.

3. Third, to further deter criminal syndicates, we must enact federal laws to allow the United States to sue on behalf of any as-yet-unidentified children depicted in seized child pornography.

4. Fourth, we must recognize that child pornography is an international crime.

5. Finally, we must acknowledge that a war cannot be fought without resources, and then demand that our legislators commit those resources.

Child pornography is a multi-victim crime and a multibillion-dollar business. We already know what children are “worth” to predatory pedophiles and criminal syndicates. Now is the time to show the world what they are worth to us."

Speak out now! Contact your elected officials at Congress.org

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Delight in His Presence

Count Your Blessings
Surely you have granted him eternal blessings
and made him glad with the joy of your presence.
Psalm 21:6
Count your blessings is a popular phrase I've never related well to. The moment I try to list all God has done for me, I realize how woefully short my efforts fall. I can thank Him for my salvation, for the blessings of home, relationships, work, and ministry. But I know His grace extends far beyond that. Even if I spent a week, I could hardly cover everything adequately. And when I come to the end, all I'd have would be a mechanical list - the exercise itself would take the delight out of my praise.
Yet even joy-filled David didn't attempt to cram all God's wonders in a single hymn. Though he rejoices throughout Psalm 21, he hardly describes everything God has done for him. The king's adulation rings through much of the psalter - as if he couldn't contain it in one place or time. But his masterful adoration is more than a list of thank-yous. David knew a secret of thanks it took me awhile to uncover: Real thanks are tied to the nature of God. Here David offers gratitude to his Lord for specific blessings in verses 1-6 and ends describing God's eternal gifts. All the psalmist's joy cannot be separated from his Master's presence. Without God, the king understands, even the richest gain would be empty. To know Him deeply is the greatest blessing of all, and intimate knowledge comes with a lifetime of loving Him.
So instead of detailing every benefit God provides, like David I'll thank Him for a few big ones today and spend time basking in His love.
As I look closely into my Lord's face, I can't help but delight in His presence.
From Daily Wisdom to Satisfy the Soul, published by Barbour Publishing, Inc. Used by permission.

PSALM 21:1-7 (NLT)
How the king rejoices in your strength, O Lord!
He shouts with joy because of your victory.
For you have given him his heart's desire;
you have held back nothing that he requested.
You welcomed him back with success and prosperity.
You placed a crown of finest gold on his head.
He asked you to preserve his life,
and you have granted his request.
The days of his life stretch on forever.
Your victory brings him great honor,
and you have clothed him with splendor and majesty.
You have endowed him with eternal blessings.
You have given him the joy of being in your presence.
For the king trusts in the Lord.
The unfailing love of the Most High will keep him from stumbling.

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Prophecy & Probability of Fulfillment by Chance

There are many prophecies that were written in the Bible about the coming Messiah which were then fulfilled by Jesus Christ. Most prophecies were such that they could not have been humanly arranged in advance of the event. When you examine the Old Testament (OT) prophecy references with the New Testament (NT) fulfillment by Jesus Christ, you will see the enormous odds against such events occurring by chance. I wish I had the time to list them all. But you could research them in Scripture. It is actually quite gratifying to follow the references, find them on your own within the pages of the Bible, and if your Bible has them, read the application/study notes.

I will list the references for 17 incredible prophecies about the Messiah as predicted in the Old Testament (OT), fulfilled in the New Testament (NT)and, according to the laws of probability, how they were precisely fulfilled in the life of Jesus of Nazareth.

1. His birth in Bethlehem from the tribe of Judah

(see OT Micah 5:2; Genesis 49:10) then (see NT Matthew 2:1)

Probability: 1 chance in 2,400

2. He would be preceded by a messenger.

(see OT Isaiah 40:3) then (see NT Matthew 3:1,2 )

Probability: 1 chance in 20

3. He would enter Jerusalem on a colt.

(see OT Zechariah 9:9) then (see NT Luke 19:35-37)

Probability 1 chance in 50

4. He would be betrayed by a friend.

(see OT Psalm 41:9) then (see NT Matthew 26:47,48)

Probability 1 chance in 10

5. His hands and feet would be pierced.

(see OT Psalm 22:16) then (see NT Luke 23:33)

Probability: 1 chance in 100

6. He would be wounded by His enemies.

(see OT Isaiah 53:5) then (see NT Matthew 27:26)

Probability: 1 chance in 10

7. His betrayal for 30 pieces of silver.

(see OT Zechariah 11:12) then (see NT Matthew 26:15)

Probability: 1 chance in 50

8. He will be spit upon and beaten.

(see OT Isaiah 50:6) then (see Matthew 26:67)

Probability: 1 chance in 10

9. His betrayal money would be thrown in the Temple and then given to buy a potter's field.

(see OT Zechariah 11:13) then (see NT Matthew 27:5-7)

Probability: 1 chance in 200

10. He would be silent before His accusers.

(see OT Isaiah 53:7) then (see NT Matthew 27:12-14)

Probability: 1 chance in 100

11. He would be crucified with thieves.

(see OT Isaiah 53:12) then (see NT Matthew 27:38)

Probability: 1 chance in 100

12. People would gamble for His garments.

(see OT Psalm 22:18) then (see NT John 19:23,24)

Probability : 1 chance in 100

13. His side would be pierced.

(see OT Zechariah 12:10) then (see NT John 19:34)

Probability: 1 chance in 100

14. None of His bones would be broken.

(see OT Psalm 34:20) then (see NT John 19:33)

(Added note: in Biblical times, it was common practice to break the leg bones of those condemned to die on a cross).

Probability: 1 chance in 20

15. His body would not decay.

(see OT Psalm 16:10) then (see NT Acts 2:31)

Probability: 1 chance in 10,000

16. His burial in a rich man's tomb.

(see OT Isaiah 53:9) then (see NT Matthew 27:57-60)

Probability: 1 chance in 100

17. The darkness covering the earth.

(see OT Amos 8:9) then (see NT Matthew 27:45)

Probability: 1 chance in 1,000

The combined probability against these 17 predictions occurring is equal to:1 chance in 480,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000


1 chance in 480 Billion x 1 Billion x 1 Trillion

Consider the fact, also, that only 17 of the 48 major prophecies given in the Old Testament about the promised Messiah are included here. If we were to calculate the odds against all 48 predictions occurring by chance we would arrive at a number so large that it would exceed our capacity to comprehend it.

Some Bible critics have suggested that Jesus of Nazareth, as a rabbi, knew about these predictions and simply arranged the events of His life to fulfill these specific predictions. However, consider the impossibility of any normal human arranging the fulfillment of these specific predictions.

How could you arrange to be born in Bethlehem and manage to be descended from the tribe of Judah?

How would you arrange the price of your betrayal to be precisely thirty pieces of silver?

How would you arrange to be crucified with theives and then, to be buried in a rich man's grave?

If you could arrange to have these remarkable events fulfilled you are the Son of God. Obviously, only God could either foresee these events in advance or arrange to fulfill these precise predictions in the life of Jesus Christ.

Source: The Signature of God by Grant R. Jeffrey, Sept. 2002, Frontier Research Publications, Inc.

Friday, February 17, 2006

Women Allowed to Teach or Not?

There have been several instances where people (both Christian and non-Christian) have used a certain passage of Scripture written by Paul in 1 Timothy 2:9-15 in order to compel me into silence (or to discourage me) from teaching about God's Word here at my blog and my message board. I thought it appropriate to post a Scripturally-based answer as to why they should not hold to such criticisms and misconceptions.

A few years ago, I was involved in an in-depth Bible study of 1st and 2nd Timothy. Here are some of my notes on the issue of women teaching in the church:

To understand the verses in 1 Timothy 2:9-15, we must understand the situation in which Paul and Timothy worked. In first-century Jewish culture, women were not allowed to study. When Paul said that women should learn in quietness and full submission, he was offering them an amazing new opportunity.

[Note: We see how some religions still don't even allow women to learn nor enter into a place of worship with men!]

Paul did not want the Ephesian women to teach because they didn't yet have enough knowledge or experience. The Ephesian church had a particular problem with false teachers. Evidently the women were especially susceptible to the false teachings (2 Timothy 3:1-9), because they did not yet have enough Biblical knowledge to discern the truth. In addition, some of the women were apparently flaunting their newfound Christian freedom by wearing inappropriate clothing (2:9).

Paul was telling Timothy not to put anyone (in this case, women) into a position of leadership who were not yet mature in the faith (see 5:22). The same principle applies to churches today. (See the expansion of this thought in 3:6).

Some interpret this passage to mean that women should never teach in the assembled church; however, commentators often use additional Scripture to point out that Paul did not forbid women from ever teaching.

Paul's commended co-worker, Priscilla, taught Apollos, the great preacher (Acts 18:24-26). In addition, Paul frequently mentioned other women who held positions of responsibility in the church. Phoebe worked in the church (Romans 16:1), Mary, Tryphena, and Tryphosa were the Lord's workers (Romans 16:6, 12), as were Euodia and Syntyche (Philippians 4:2).

Paul was very likely prohibiting the Ephesian women, not all women, from teaching.

In Paul's reference to women being silent, the word 'silent' expresses an attitude of quietness and composure. (A different Greek word is usually used to convey "complete silence.")

In addition, Paul himself acknowledges that women publicly prayed and prophesied (1 Corinthians 11:5). Apparently, however, the women in the Ephesian church were abusing their newly acquired Christian freedom.

Because these women were new converts, they did not yet have the necessary experience, knowledge, or Christian maturity to teach those who already had extensive Scriptural education.

Verses 2:13 & 14 help us to realize the further context of the passage.

In previous letters Paul had discussed male/female roles in marriage (Ephesians 5:21-33; Colossians 3:18, 19). Here he talks about male/female roles within the church.

Some scholars see these verses about Adam and Eve as an illustration of what was happening in the Ephesian church. Just as Eve had been deceived in the Garden of Eden, so the women in the church were being deceived by false teachers. And just as Adam was the first human created by God, so the men in the church in Ephesus should be the first to speak and teach, because they had more training.

This view, then, stresses that Paul's teaching here

Other scholars, however, contend that the roles Paul points out are God's design for his created order - God established these roles to maintain harmony in both the family and the church.

In light of the fact that Paul did allow certain trained women to teach, it makes more sense (IMHO) to agree with the view that Paul's teaching within the verses of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 was not a universal statement, but should be applied towards churches that had (or currently have) similar problems with new or baby Christian women being deceived by false teaching.

1 Timothy 3:6 mentions that new believers should become secure and strong in the faith before taking leadership roles in the church. Obviously, new faith needs time to mature. New believers should have a place of service, but they should not be put into leadership positions until they are firmly grounded in their faith, with a solid Christian life-style and a knowledge of the Word of God.

Eighteen years ago, when I re-dedicated my life to Christ and began to diligently study the Scriptures, I studied for over three years before I began to share what I was learning from God's Word. Fifteen years later, I still diligently study the Scriptures, but I now consider myself equipped to share what I have learned.

No one ever knows it all. Only God does. Studying the Bible for many years often makes one realize that "we will never completely arrive" in our Biblical education! In fact, the more I study the more I realize how much more there is to learn!

But what the Lord has provided for me thus far is enough to share the gospel with others.

I may not have every answer. No one does. But I have found that what I have learned through Knowing the Person of Jesus Christ (and the gospel preaching mission that he has assigned to every believer) needs to be shared with those who have not heard and/or still do not believe.

The study, prayer, application and the sharing of God's Word is sufficient for confidence in steadfast faith through Jesus Christ, our Lord.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Oh, satisfy us early with Your mercy,
That we may rejoice and be glad all our days!
Psalm 90:14 NKJV
You've probably bought items that guaranteed you'd be satisfied. If you weren't, the manufacturer promised, you could get your money back. But how many people bought an item, weren't satisfied, and found the company didn't live up to that promise? Instead of money, all the customers got were irritation responses or rejection. A promise is only as good as the person or group who make it. We've often found, to our encouragement, that people aren't what they seem and disappear as soon as they've cashed the check or processed the credit card information.
But God isn't like that. He's always what He says He is, and He's gone to great lengths to tell us about Himself. He sent prophets, who wrote pages and pages about Him and His character. He ven sent His Son to clearly show us what He's like. Jesus died for us to give a clear picture of how much He wanted to share our love.
Earthly guarantees often don't give us satisfaction, but when we read His Word and get to know His Son, we quickly comprehend the difference between people's promises and God's. His mercy doesn't fail us or make us miserable. As we accept it and live according to His promises, our joy increases, whatever turns life takes. Even when the rest of the world disappoints us, we can cling to Jesus and be glad to the very end.
Have you experienced God's mercy and responed to His love? Then your satisfaction is guaranteed. He promises you'll never be left or forsaken (Hebrews 13:5). Joy in Him will be your portion for the rest of you life.
From Daily Wisdom to Satisfy the Soul, published by Barbour Publishing, Inc. Used by permission.
Hebrews 13:5 - [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

Abortion Kills Babies, Hurts Women

The reasons to oppose abortion are so numerous these days. I have been witnessing an increasing tide of public opinion turning towards the pro-life side each and every year. After 33 years of this American holocaust I certainly pray that it won't take much longer to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Any thinking person realizes that abortion kills unborn babies. That is a fact that medical science has proven and liberal ideology cannot hide or suppress. Even with their catchy slogans like, "a woman's right to choose," the fact is that what she is actually choosing when a woman goes through with an abortion is death for her baby. And, as the article below and dozens of articles at the after abortion website shows, a woman who undergoes the trauma of an abortion is probably choosing a host of additional problems (e.g. physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual) for herself.

The following article reveals how even scientific research into the subject of abortion and its effects on women who endure them can, and usually is, completely ignored because of ideological leanings. After reading this article, how can anyone even think that the APA (American Psychological Association) is a neutral, objective organization that bases it's decisions, studies, and recommendations on reliable scientific research? How can anyone in their right mind trust such an organization? They are proving themselves to be led by liberal leftist political ideologues who resemble those who make up the ACLU (a.k.a. Anti-Christ Loves Ungodliness) and their ilk.


"Evidence Doesn't Matter" -- APA Spokesperson Says of Abortion Complications

Studies Showing Emotional Problems Not Relevant to American Psychological Association's Pro-Choice Advocacy

Springfield, IL (Feb. 15, 2005) -- According to a spokesperson for the American Psychological Association, the APA's pro-choice position, first adopted in 1969, is based on a civil rights view, not on scientific proof of any mental health benefits arising from abortion.

The admission that ideology, not science, governs the APA's support for abortion came in response to a request by a Washington Times columnist for the organization's reaction to a new study linking abortion to mental illness. The study tracked 25 years of worth of data on women born in Christchurch, New Zealand.

The researchers had expected that their data, drawn from one of the largest and most comprehensive longitudinal studies in the world, would definitively refute a recent series of studies linking abortion to higher rates of mental health problems. The Christchurch team, led by a self-professed "pro-choice atheist," Prof. David M. Fergusson, expected to find that any mental health problems occurring after abortion would be fully explainable by prior mental health problems, which some believe are more common among women who have abortions. Instead, the New Zealand research team found the opposite. Even after the researchers controlled for this and numerous other alternative explanations, abortion was clearly linked to elevated rates of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and suicidal behavior.

The findings so surprised Fergusson's research team that they began reviewing the studies cited by the APA in its claims that abortion is beneficial, or at least non-harmful, to women's mental health. The researchers concluded (1) that the APA's publications defending abortion are based on a small number of studies that had major methodological shortcomings (a view that echoes former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop's complaint in 1987 that the research on abortion was too inadequate to draw any definitive conclusions), and (2) that the APA appeared to be consistently ignoring a body of studies published in the last seven years that have shown negative effects from abortion.

The Christchurch team's criticism of the APA's selective and strong assurances of the mental health benefits of abortion prompted Warren Throckmorton, a psychologist and newspaper columnist, to call the APA for comment on Fergusson's criticisms. He was referred to an APA expert and spokesperson on abortion and women's issues, Dr. Nancy Felipe Russo. Russo was among the leaders within the APA who, in 1969, led the organization to adopt an official position in favor of abortion as a civil right. She has subsequently been active in research and advocacy efforts opposing parental notification and mandatory informed consent statutes related to abortion.

APA Is Not Neutral On Abortion Science

When asked to comment on the New Zealand study and the pro-choice authors' criticisms of the APA, Russo told Throckmorton that the APA's position on abortion was established on the view that abortion is a civil right. As quoted in Throckmorton's Washington Times column, Russo explained that the Christchurch study would have no effect on the APA's position because "to pro-choice advocates, mental health effects are not relevant to the legal context of arguments to restrict access to abortion."

In the first draft of Throckmorton's column, which he sent for comment to another expert on abortion research, Dr. David Reardon of the Springfield, IL-based Elliot Institute, Russo was quoted more bluntly, saying, "it doesn't matter what the evidence says." Throckmorton and Russo subsequently agreed to the clarification of her statement as it appeared in the Washington Times
According to Reardon, an author of several of the studies on abortion that have been ignored by the APA, Russo's statements "confirm the complaint of critics that the APA's briefs to the Supreme Court and state legislatures are really about promoting a view about civil rights, not science. Toward this end, the APA has set up task forces and divisions that include only psychologists who share the same bias in favor of abortion."

Reardon believes the APA's task forces on abortion have actually served to stifle rather than encourage research. "When researchers like Fergusson or myself publish data showing abortion is linked to mental health problems, members of the APA's abortion policy police rush forward to tell the public to ignore our findings because they are completely out of line with their own 'consensus' statements which are positioned as the APA's official interpretation of the meaningful research on abortion," he said.

When is Relief Not Relief?

Reardon is especially disturbed by what he decries as the "one note" optimism found in position papers by the APA, Planned Parenthood, and other organizations supporting abortion.

Among the studies most frequently cited by abortion supporters are those that have asked women to check off a list of feelings they have after their abortions, often within just a few hours, a week, or a month of the procedure. The list may include words like "relief," "regret," "guilt," and "happiness." These studies have found that the most commonly reported reaction after abortion is relief. Indeed, the phrase, "the most commonly reported reaction is relief," frequently shows up in information and consent forms for abortion.

"All the emphasis on women experiencing relief is misleading because most women reporting relief also report negative reactions," Reardon said. "Indeed, when you add up the number of women reporting negative reactions, it regularly exceeds the number of women reporting relief."
The problem, Reardon says, is that while statistics on "relief" may have value in marketing or lobbying for abortion, they have little or no value as a scientific measure.

"Women are simply presented with this single word," he said. "So women who feel relief that they survived an unpleasant surgery, relief that they will no longer face their boyfriend's badgering to have an abortion, relief that they are no longer having morning sickness, or relief from any number of other stresses, are all lumped into the same category, even though their experiences are different. Lumping all forms of relief together helps to makes it sound like most women are reporting that abortion has fundamentally improved their lives, but it's a sloppy and misleading data variable. In fact, when you really look at the data, most of the very same women who are reporting 'relief' are also reporting grief, shame, traumatic reactions, or other negative feelings."

"Thirty-five years ago, when the APA joined in the effort to legalize abortion, they were promising more than just 'relief,'" he added. "They were insisting that abortion would fundamentally improve women's mental and physical health by sparing them the burden of unwanted children. But 38 million abortions later, there is still not a single statistically-validated study that has shown that abortion has actually improved the lives of women who abort compared to those who carry to term.

"Instead, if you look at the data instead of consensus opinions, depression rates are up, not down, among women who have had abortions. Suicide and substance abuse are up, not down. Premature deliveries are up, not down. But instead of including this data in their statements on abortion, the APA's self-selected panels of abortion advocates continue to distract the media from the all hard evidence linking abortion to higher rates of suicide, substance abuse, depression and anxiety by promoting meaningless statistics about relief."

Reardon says he is thankful that Russo has finally helped to call attention to the fact that the APA's position on abortion is principally based on a commitment to defend abortion as a civil right.

But this admission, he says, "should be weighed in light of criticisms against the trend toward 'consensus science' as a means of influencing politics. As one critic, best-selling author Dr. Michael Crichton, creator of Jurassic Park and ER, has succinctly observed: 'The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics.'"

Outside the context of the abortion debate, best selling author Michael Crichton, M.D., a 1969 graduate of the Harvard Medical School, described the disturbing trend of "consensus science" at a Caltech lecture in 2004, a brief portion of which is excerpted below:

I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

Excerpted from Michael Crichton, Aliens Cause Global Warming," Caltech Michelin Lecture, Jan. 17, 2003. (available online)

# # #
David M. Fergusson, L. John Horwood, and Elizabeth M. Ridder, "Abortion in young women andsubsequent mental health," Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47(1): 16-24, 2006.
Warren Throckmorton, "Abortion and mental health," Washington Times, January 21, 2005.
David, H., " Retrospectives" From APA Task Force to Division 34," Population & Environmental Psychology Bulletin 1999, 25(3):2-3.

Elliot Institute, PO Box 7348, Springfield, IL 62791-7348

Additional material is posted at www.afterabortion.org