Sep 14, 2011

America's Economy Is Interwoven With Its Morality

2 comments
By: Christopher G. Adamo

With this week’s Republican debate having gained a major position in the media spotlight and actually a delay in Barack Obama’s over-hyped “Jobs” (read: Deficit spending and pork) speech, it is inarguable that the 2012 presidential campaign season is in full swing. And though the public is usually loath to once again face all of the pandering, self-absorption, and half-truths of modern campaigning, this election cycle is one that could not come soon enough.

As America watches in horror, its socio-economic foundation is being systematically undermined and dismantled. The very concept of a free market is being forcibly mutated into the nightmarish image of European socialism, with all of its overbearing bureaucracies, crushing deficits, and impending financial calamities. The situation must be reversed, and soon, if the nation is to have any hope of eventual restoration.

Amid such circumstances, the defeat of Barack Obama next fall would seem to be an imminent certainty. And in a sense, it may well be. It is hardly an overstatement that, even at this early date, the 2012 presidential race is already the Republicans’ to win or lose. Unfortunately, given the past track record of GOP fumbling at critical junctures, in and of itself, the current state of affairs offers no guarantee that the Republicans might not obliterate their own chances through ineptitude, cowardice, and a general inconsistency of guiding principle.

To that end, an ongoing movement is once again underway that could ultimately deliver a liberal triumph where the best efforts of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and the whole liberal Democrat cabal would most certainly fail. That this movement emanates from the innermost circles of the Republican National Committee is, without a doubt, the most abominable aspect of the entire situation. Since it is merely the same old “strategy” of centrism with a little new window dressing, conservatives should be easily able to recognize it and reject it outright. Yet it is not enough to merely be wary of it. The temptation to succumb to it on the basis that it might somehow enhance the possibility of defeating Obama is more seductive now than ever before. And that is the primary reason to shine the light of truth on it whenever the political “experts” attempt to extol it in its latest incarnation.

Once again, the two major factions comprising this Trojan Elephant are the squishy “moderates” who allow their positions on the issues to be defined by wherever they are convinced the “safe” center can be found, along with the RINO Republicans who secretly venerate the liberal agenda but believe they can do more to advance it by claiming the GOP mantle. The single mote of “common ground” shared by these to groups is their abhorrence for true conservatism.

In the past, the key issues they sought to expunge from the Republican philosophy were the right to life for the unborn and the radical homosexual agenda, particularly same-sex “marriage.” Despite the profound motivating and rallying effect that these issues have on grassroots Americans, and all of the ongoing proof that they constitute a net positive at the ballot box, “experts” from inside the Beltway incessantly assure us that their political ramifications are incontrovertibly harmful.

So, once again, in an election season in which such matters can serve to sharply define the contrast between the morally bankrupt left and the traditional morality of the right, conservative America is being told to abandon them until some mythical “later date” when it will suddenly and inexplicably become expedient to address them.

Yet the picture gets worse still. Along with these items, the whole subject of illegal immigration is similarly being shuffled off to the sidelines. So fearful are the “establishment Republicans” of confronting anything deemed “controversial” that they are willing to find reason to sit the fence on this issue as well. Apparently, outside of the admittedly abysmal economic straits in which the nation currently finds itself, the whole gamut of topics that have historically divided the right from the left are now to be tabled until sometime after 2012.

The underlying theory is this: If a majority of Americans can agree to the premise that the economy is in dire straits and pull the appropriate levers at the ballot box on that basis alone, then the nation’s governance will surely shift decidedly right as a result, and those problems will certainly be addressed in a worthy manner at that point. But, once again, history and reality must be ignored in order for this fanciful construction of the upcoming election cycle to bear any pretext of credibility.

First of all, the economic condition of this nation is, and always has been, a direct result of the morals and ethics undergirding it. When the nation aspired to goodness and greatness, its economic engine hummed. The recent downturn can be tied directly to the abandonment of those principles and their substitution by the twisted precepts of Marxism, the grim reality behind the euphemism of “social justice,” and the whole concept of government confiscating and redistributing private property.

From the very beginning American government, even with all of its flaws, was specifically empowered to protect and secure the “life, liberty, and property” of the individual who, on his own, was otherwise powerless to do so. But the perverse notion eventually became acceptable that government could arbitrarily abdicate its role in protecting human “life” among the helpless, as was the true implication of “Roe vs. Wade.” Should anybody then be surprised that respect for individual liberty and private property could just as easily be trivialized and trampled in its wake?

More significantly, those candidates who would abandon any public discourse on these defining moral and social issues, even under the auspices of sound and necessary political strategy, are telegraphing their willingness to cut and run from controversy in general. At a time when the nation needs leaders who will recognize and honestly assess the nation’s looming problems and, more importantly, brave the inevitable firestorm of liberal opposition in order to effectively deal with those problems, retreating to the contrived security of the politically “safe” ground will only ensure that nothing of importance ever gets fixed. And that is a possibility that the nation can no longer afford.

It is true that no conservative candidate can or should construct an entire campaign on any single issue, even including abortion, traditional marriage, or restoring the integrity of the nation’s borders. But the candidate who claims that the country can be restored in its greatness without properly contending with these issues, or who seeks to find a short cut towards doing so while quietly ignoring them, is someone who is neither intellectually honest nor sufficiently ethically grounded to be trusted with the reins of leadership in this dangerous time.


Growing up during the turbulent decades of the ‘60's and ‘70's, Christopher Adamo saw, to his dismay, the nation's moral foundations being destroyed before his very eyes. But even then he was a staunch Conservative at heart, and rejected outright the tenets of America's counterculture revolution.

After a hitch in the Air Force, where he specialized in airborne electro- optical systems, he pursued a career in the field of aerospace, working for major defense contractors in California, Florida, and Colorado. But his career plans abruptly changed during the industry-wide downsizing that followed the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster.

Presently he is working in the field of industrial instrumentation in the state of Wyoming. Concurrently, he has become involved in that state's political process, attending state GOP conventions as a delegate, and serving as a member of the Wyoming Republican Central Committee. He has also aided in the candidacies of local legislators and state senators, as well as a U.S. Senator and Congresswoman.

From 1993 to 1996, he edited and wrote for “The Wyoming Christian”, the state newsletter for Christian Coalition of Wyoming. During that period, he developed an acute awareness of the harm being done to Conservatism by liberal activists within the Republican Party as well as the Democrats. This remains a favorite theme of his articles, which now appear as a regular feature on GOPUSA.

Sep 9, 2011

Neuroscience and the Power of Speech

0 comments
 By Robin Phillips | Published Date: September 05, 2011


"Whoever guards his mouth and tongue keeps his soul from troubles." Proverbs 21:23 (NKJV)


The power of speech
Scripture often refers to the tongue or lips as the gateway to the heart. Proverbs 21:23 tells us that “Whoever guards his mouth and tongue keeps his soul from troubles.” Similarly, Jesus said that it was out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaks (Luke 6:45) while James compares the tongue to a rudder on a ship, capable of defiling the whole body (James 3:3-6).
These verses seem to suggest that speech has an important function in defining who we are. The words that come out of our mouth are formative in determining the spiritual health of our very heart and soul.
Recent discoveries in neuroscience and cognitive psychology support the Bible’s teaching on this subject. Scientists are only just beginning to appreciate the incredible power that speech has in forming both our self-identity and our perception of the world. These discoveries underscore the premium the Biblical writers place on responsible speaking.
Speech and thought
What scientists are finding is that speech does not merely proceed from our thoughts like a one-way street. There is also traffic flowing in the other direction: how we speak effects how we think about the world on a level that our conscious minds may never even be aware.
In a fascinating Wall Street Journal article last year, Lera Boroditsky wrote that “the structures in languages (without our knowledge or consent) shape the very thoughts we wish to express”. Boroditsky gave some examples to illustrate this point. One of the examples showed how the different ways of conjugating verbs effected how people perceived situations:
“For example, English likes to describe events in terms of agents doing things. English speakers tend to say things like ‘John broke the vase’ even for accidents. Speakers of Spanish or Japanese would be more likely to say ‘the vase broke itself.’ Such differences between languages have profound consequences for how their speakers understand events, construct notions of causality and agency, what they remember as eyewitnesses and how much they blame and punish others.
In studies conducted by Caitlin Fausey at Stanford, speakers of English, Spanish and Japanese watched videos of two people popping balloons, breaking eggs and spilling drinks either intentionally or accidentally. Later everyone got a surprise memory test: For each event, can you remember who did it? She discovered a striking cross-linguistic difference in eyewitness memory. Spanish and Japanese speakers did not remember the agents of accidental events as well as did English speakers. Mind you, they remembered the agents of intentional events (for which their language would mention the agent) just fine. But for accidental events, when one wouldn't normally mention the agent in Spanish or Japanese, they didn't encode or remember the agent as well.”
The point of this (and many similar experiments) is that, to quote again from Boroditsky: “if you change how people talk, that changes how they think...”
The history of communication technology points to this same conclusion. In his book The Shallows, Nicholas Carr gave a fascinating bird’s eye view of the entire history of human communication technologies beginning with clay tablets and finishing with the Internet. Carr shows that each of the different tools for communicating alters not only what we say and how we say it, but how we think about the world on a precognitive level. Carr draws on recent discoveries about the brain’s malleability to show that our view of the world is conditioned largely by the tools we use to communicate, and this includes language itself.
Other authors have also testified to this same point. For example, in his book The Brain that Changes Itself, Norman Doidge shows that the way we speak affects the actual neurocircuitry in our brains. Or again, in his bestseller Outliers: The Story of Success, Malcom Gladwell explores how the way we speak from infancy has an effect on how we view the world and even how well we can compute numbers (clickhere to read an extract of Gladwell’s fascinating discussion). Or, to quote James Davison Hunter from his book To Change the World, “Language, the most basic system of symbols, provides the primary medium through which people apprehend their conscious experience in the world.”
While this is all the rage in neuroscience at the moment, Christians shouldn’t be surprised. After all, the Bible has always emphasized the formative power of speech.
If it is true that little things like verb conjugations and communication tools can exercise a subliminal effect on how we perceive the world and other people, this is even more the case when dealing with language loaded with moral and spiritual implications. Think of the different views of humanity subtly implicated by describing a baby as a “fetus” vs. calling it “a human being created in the image of God.” Or even consider the implication of calling a baby an “it”, as I just did in the last sentence. While these alternative ways of talking about a baby may be equally true on a purely factual level, they convey an entirely different sense. Or again, in an article I wrote for my blog last April titled “A Festival Not a Machine”, I compared the differences between the medieval way of talking about the universe and the modern way. (Medieval man tended to speak about the cosmos as a great dance, a festival teeming with anthropocentric life. By contrast, after the scientific revolution, the universe began to be described as a cold impersonal machine.)
My point is simply this: language doesn’t just describe what we think about the world, it is also a lens by which understand and interpret the world around us and the events which occur.
Speech and worldview
Again, this should come as no surprise to Christians. The Genesis creation account seems to specifically link naming with dominion-taking. We also see throughout the Biblical narrative that when God wants to set a person, city or place aside for a special task, He will often call that person or place by a new name. How we speak about something changes how we view it.
This behooves us to think carefully about how we speak. In Psalm 39 we read about how David wrestled with guarding his tongue. When in great distress, he muzzled his mouth so that he would not sin, and only after “musing” (careful reflection) did he dare open his mouth and speak what was in his heart. That remains a great example to us. We all know from personal experience that our words have the power not only to build others up but to tear them down; they can comfort, heal and soothe, but they can also discourage, damage and hurt.
Do you glorify God in how you speak? Have you taken seriously the way language alters the way we view ourselves and the world?
For more insight into this topic, buy Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, edited by Melissa Bowerman and Stephen Levinson. Also read my articles "A Festival Not a Machine" and "Reading Scripture in the Age of Google."
For more insight to the importance of good discipline, get the book,The Spirit of the Disciplines,by Dallas Willard, from our online store. Or read the article, “Repertoires of Discipleship,” by T. M. Moore.

Sep 8, 2011

Every Thought, Every Word

0 comments
Only the truth can set us free.
By T.M. Moore | Published Date: September 05, 2011


He accepted neither indifference nor heresy.
Dallán Forgaill, Amra Choluimb Chille (Irish, 7th century)
We destroy arguments and every loft opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ... 2 Corinthians 10:5
Zealous for truth
Colum Cille, the great 6th century Irish missionary/scholar, was known by all to be zealous for truth. By some accounts, it was his love for the Gospel that got him exiled from Ireland. As an aspiring monk he made a copy of a gospel book and refused to give it up when he was discovered. The local magistrate got involved, and Colum was required to forfeit his treasure (since it was not lawful for monks-in-training to own property). The subsequent melee which Colum initiated left him humiliated and disciplined – sent packing from Ireland.
He sailed to Iona and climbed the highest hill to make sure he could no longer see Ireland. Then he wept. But then he got busy. He studied the Word of God exhaustively. He learned the great works of His Christian forebears. He mastered the Law of God. He became the greatest missionary trainer of his generation.
But he was not zealous merely to know the truth. He lived it, and he taught it, and he caused everyone who came into his presence to deal with the truth, for many of them, as they’d never had to before. In Colum’s company no one was allowed either to misrepresent the truth or to ignore it, as Dallán makes clear in his lamentation.
Colum would not abide heresy. He would challenge it, expose its falsehoods, and assert the truth of God against it. Neither could he abide indifference – not when truth could be known. He made people make up their minds about the truth. In Column’s presence, amid a discussion of just about anything, one could not simply plead, “No opinion.” He made you think. He led you to reason. He insisted that people confront and respond to the truth.
Colum was a very serious Christian. He understood that only the truth can set us free, and he worked in all his ministry to ensure that those in his charge dealt with the truth, understood the truth, taught and proclaimed the truth, and lived in the truth every day of their lives.
And us?
What about us? Are we serious about the truth? Or do we simply stand by as people rattle off the most ridiculous, absurd, or inane positions about this, that, or the other? The Word of God speaks to every area of human life and interest. Nothing can come up in any conversation concerning which God does not have a Word of truth to offer.
And He has commissioned us to set forth His truth in every situation.
The extent to which our society is awash in lies, deceit, and half-truths is becoming clearer each day. Where are the bearers of truth in this thicket of lies? Who will challenge the heresies – every false worldview – and who will confront the indifferent, so that they at least have the opportunity to hear the truth? Who, like Colum, will cherish the truth so much that he is willing to risk his personal wellbeing to own and establish it?
This is our calling, friends, just as it was Colum Cille’s. The people to whom God sends us each day need to hear His truth. If we’re serious about the truth, we will press it upon them with grace, but also with urgency.
Only the truth can set people free from sin and the Lie. Christ would have all men be taken captive by His grace, for His truth, and unto His glory. And He has sent us, as He was sent, and as He commissioned Colum Cille, to pursue this mission day by day.
You and I bear God’s truth in earthen vessels. But, earthen vessels though we be, let us bear and distribute the truth with confidence, challenging the heretic and the indifferent alike, to consider the truth that is in Jesus.
Because only the truth can set us free.
Join the conversation as Chuck Colson and Gabe Lyons discuss the truth that is in Jesus in The Faith DVD. You can also purchase student guides for group discussion. You should also read the article, “Truth in Love,” by T. M. Moore.


Sep 6, 2011

Idealease, Inc. blasted for involvment in abortion holocaust

1 comments
National Truck Leasing Company Remains Medical Waste Giant's Top Enabler in the War on the Preborn 



PHILADELPHIA - Campaign to Stop Stericycle (CSS) is blasting the nationally-known truck leasing company Idealease, Inc. for being the top supplier of trucks to the nation's leading medical waste company, Stericycle, which is also the premier "waste" service to the abortion industry. CSS urges a national outcry to Idealease to exhort the company to cease facilitating Stericycle's widespread involvement in the abortion holocaust.

According to their website, Idealease, Inc. is "one of North America's largest full service transportation companies," and maintains over 400 affiliate locations in the United States, Canada and Mexico. The company leases its trucks to thousands of businesses each year, including the medical waste giant Stericycle. Stericycle then utilizes the vehicles to service its waste collection routes, which include innumerable abortion facilities nationwide. During these service stops, not only does Stericycle collect the tools used in abortions, but also the fetal remains of the aborted children themselves. These murdered children are then taken to Stericycle's incineration plants, where they are burned with the trash. Stericycle relies heavily on leased trucks to be able to collect "waste" from abortion facilities, including a reported 586 Planned Parenthood locations. 

Following the decision by Penske Truck Leasing Co. and Ryder System, Inc. to stop Stericycle from using their trucks to service the abortion industry, CSS is calling upon Idealease, Inc. to do the same. Futhermore, due to the loss of Ryder, it is likely that Stericycle will approach Idealease to obtain additional lease agreements in its place. However, while Stericycle currently maintains a national contract with the multi-million dollar truck leasing company, its affiliate locations within the franchise have the ultimate say on what lease agreements they will sign. Therefore, CSS is urging citizens to contact their local Idealease office as well as the corporate office and encourage them to not sign any contracts with Stericycle that involve servicing abortion facilities.    

"It is sick beyond words that while thousands of children a day are being ripped apart in their mother's womb in the name of 'choice,' companies like Stericycle and Idealease are callously continuing to profit from their murder," campaign director Michael Marcavage stated. "We will not rest until Idealease stops allowing their trucks to be used by Stericycle to collect aborted children and the tools used to kill them," he continued. "We urge Idealease and its affiliates to immediately follow the lead of Penske and Ryder to avoid being subjected to national public resistance," Marcavage concluded. 

CSS will be providing information at Idealease's annual meeting of affiliates this week in Chicago to call upon the company to stop allowing Stericycle to use their trucks to service the abortion industry, and will be contacting each affiliate by email and phone. 

"And [they] shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and daughters ... and the land was polluted with blood." - Psalm 106:38

Sep 1, 2011

The Gay ''Marriage'' Debate

0 comments
Substance and Style
By: Chuck ColsonPublished: September 1, 2011

When it comes to debating so-called gay “marriage,” how we argue is just as important as what we argue.

In a debate, you are judged in two main areas: substance and style. In the debate about so-called gay “marriage,” we believers are winning on the substance. But we’re not doing very well on style.
Study after study has shown that gay “marriage” undermines the institution of marriage. In those societies where homosexual “marriage” has been tried, traditional marriage is increasingly discarded. Furthermore, the research is nearly unanimous that children do best when they grow up with a mother and a father — which gay “marriage,” by definition, denies them.

Based on all this, you might think that we are winning the debate. And yet, the tide of public opinion appears to be turning against us. According to columnist Michael Barone, “In 1996, Gallup found that Americans opposed it by a 68 percent to 27 percent margin. Last May, Gallup found Americans in favor by 53 percent to 45 percent. That's a huge change in 15 years.” And a new Pew Research poll confirms this, finding those in favor are in a dead heat with those who oppose it.

Much of that new support is coming from young people, who increasingly see marriage in terms of civil rights and fairness. That’s a demographic factor that makes winning the debate in the coming decades that much harder.

That’s why, given current sensitivities, we’ve got to be very careful about how we frame the debate. Take the case of social studies teacher Jerry Buell in Lake County, Florida. Mr. Buell was named “teacher of the year” in 2010. He has a spotless classroom record. And he was suspended and placed under investigation for criticizing gay “marriage” … on his Facebook page!

Outrageous, you say? A violation of his right to free speech? Absolutely. However, listen to part of what Mr. Buell posted on his Facebook page: “I’m watching the news, eating dinner when the story about New York okaying same-sex unions came on and I almost threw up. … If they want to call it a union,” he wrote, “go ahead. But don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool… God will not be mocked.”

However much we sympathize with the substance of Mr. Buell’s comments, I hope you’ll agree that he earned a zero on style points. Of course it’s ridiculous — and alarming — that Mr. Buell’s livelihood and religious freedom came under threat. But that’s nothing new with the gay-rights movement, which frequently attacks one person’s rights to gain someone else’s. That, I’m afraid, is the world we live in.

As frustrating as this debate can be, prudence dictates that we Christians be especially mindful of our responsibility to remain civil. First of all, it’s the right thing to do. Secondly, the supporters of gay rights are waiting for any opportunity to pounce on their opponents if we give them any opening.
But there’s another point I want to make here, one you’ll hear me to return to again and again. We Christians are very good at saying “No.” We’ve got to better saying “Yes”: showing how God’s plan for humanity is a blessing: That His ways — including faithful, live-giving marriage between one man and one woman — lead to human flourishing, physically, emotionally, and spiritually.
And that’s a message I’d be happy to post on Facebook or anywhere else.
 

Copyright 2009 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner | Blogger template converted & enhanced by eBlog Templates