What if Saeed Abedini were a gay rights activist?

 

Saeed Abedini is the American pastor who is imprisoned and being subjected to torture in Iran because he is a Christian. To date, the White House has neither contacted nor offered assistance of any sort to Saeed's wife, Naghmeh, despite her repeated pleas for help. Very little, if anything, has been reported on this case in the mainstream media.

 

Until the last day or so, we hadn't heard a word from the State Department either. But new Secretary of State John Kerry, I'm sure, has the Iranians quaking in their boots with this forceful statement released only a day ago:

 

"I am deeply concerned about the fate of U.S citizen Saeed Abedini, who has been detained for nearly six months and was sentenced to eight years in prison in Iran on charges related to his religious beliefs. I am disturbed by reports that Mr. Abedini has suffered physical and psychological abuse in prison, and that his condition has become increasingly dire. . .I am also troubled by the lack of due process in Mr. Abedini’s case and Iran’s continued refusal to allow consular access by Swiss authorities, the U.S. protecting power in Iran. I welcome reports that Mr. Abedini was examined by a physician and expect Iranian authorities to honor their commitment to allow Mr. Abedini to receive treatment for these injuries from a specialist outside the prison. The best outcome for Mr. Abedini is that he be immediately released."

Well, isn't that nice? John Kerry is "concerned" and "troubled" and "welcomes" reports that Abedini has been seen by a physician. And just what, may I ask, does that do to accomplish Mr. Abedini's return to his family?

Do you think that if Mr. Abedini had been imprisoned for protesting for gay rights instead of being a Christian, that the White House and the State Department and the media would be even more concerned and troubled and would be going bonkers trying to get him out? I suspect so.

What am I missing?

 

Texas State Representative Naomi Gonzalez was driving drunk last week. She crashed her BMW into another car, pushing it into a bicyclist. Though the driver of the other vehicle and the cyclist were taken to the hospital, fortunately, no one was seriously hurt.

 

Gonzalez made a public apology from the House floor early this week. Well, she sort of made an apology -- instead of saying, "My friends, I made the choice to drink too much and get behind the wheel of the car, and I am very ashamed of my inexcusable behavior," she said she "made a mistake."  No, Naomi, a mistake is something you do inadvertently. Deliberately drinking and driving isn't a mistake -- it's a choice. That being said, here's the part I really don't get: She received a standing ovation from her colleagues and flowers appeared on her desk -- for driving drunk and injuring two other people. Don't you think a "We appreciate your apology and it is accepted" would have sufficed? Heck, for standing ovations and bouquets, she might decide "making mistakes" is the way to go!

 

Oh -- and here's the kicker. Naomi serves on the House Ethics Committee.

 

"Lawmaker charged in DWI case tells House: 'I made a mistake.'" The Dallas Morning News; March 19, 2013; p. 3A.

 



How many brain cells are missing?

 

William Coleman used to be a Dallas firefighter. In October 2004, his girlfriend called police to report that he had hit her because he thought she had been seeing another man. He was given a one-day suspension from the Fire Department. On the day he served his suspension, the girlfriend invited him over for dinner. Duh! The man is being punished for hitting her, and she's cooking him a meal? What's wrong with this picture?

 

He drank a bottle of wine, took some kind of drugs, and again accused her of cheating on him. He grabbed a hammer and a screwdriver and put the screwdriver to her head, threatening to kill her. She managed to escape, but Coleman (who was nude) followed her out. When he caught up with her, he assaulted her with the hammer. He was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and sentenced to four years in prison. He was released in November 2009.

 

This past Monday night, a woman walked into the Frisco Police Department. She said her fiance had threatened her with a handgun and tried to run her off the road. When police arrived at her house, William Coleman was barricaded inside with a rifle in each hand and wearing a pistol. He was smoking meth. He set the house on fire, but eventually, he came out.

 

My question is: how many brain cells is this woman missing? What kind of idiot moves in with a man who has served a prison term for beating his previous girlfriend with a hammer? Maybe it's just me, but I find it very difficult to have a great deal of sympathy for this woman. The sad part is, after Coleman serves whatever sentence he's given this time, there will probably be another goofy woman move in with him, and we'll repeat the same thing over again -- only she might not be as lucky as the first two idiots.

 

"Man arrested after standoff, fire." The Dallas Morning News; March 20, 2013; p. 1B.

Uhhhh, Ta-Nehisi, I think you and your wife are guilty!

 

I don't know all the particulars, but actor Forest Whitaker was accused of shoplifting at a deli in New York. It turns out he was innocent. Ta-Nehisi Coates (if that's the name his mother gave him, she must have been high on painkillers at the time!) says that's just another example of "invisible racism." He says that if Forest Whitaker had been white, this incident would not have happened. But Ta-Nehisi has no evidence whatsoever to back that up. He doesn't provide any examples of other black men being accused at the same deli. In fact, he admits that the owner of the deli was profusely apologetic, saying that it was an honest mistake by a good man just trying to do his job.

 

I suggest that Ta-Nehisi, himself, is an invisible racist. Without knowing all the circumstances, he automatically assumes that anytime a white person makes an accusation against a black person, it is racially motivated. Ta-Nehisi says his wife has had a grudge against white people since she was 6 years old. Why? Because a little boy called her cousin a nigger. My, my, my! She holds a whole race responsible for an unkind taunt made by one little boy decades ago. Who do you think is the highly visible racist in this bunch?

 

"Invisible racism." The Dallas Morning News; March 8, 2013; p. 25A.

Steve Blow has blown it!

 

I used to enjoy Steve Blow's columns. He seemed to have a down-to-earth common sense coupled with a strong spiritual foundation. However, in the last few years, he's gone off his trolley!

 

In the latest goofball column, he declares to us how enlightened he has become. He says, ". . .only 27 percent of Protestants said their faith was the only path to salvation. I certainly have come to believe the world is just too wide to say that God cannot move and work in many ways." You have fallen victim to the devil's lies, Steve. God can move anyway He chooses, and He chose to save by the blood of His only begotten Son. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life, and no man cometh unto the father but by me." He also said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. . ." Then said Jesus unto them again, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep." That's pretty darn clear. Do you think Jesus is a liar, Steve? If you believe what you say you do, then you must answer that He is.

 

Steve facetiously "defends" Dr. Robert Jeffress, for "he truly seems to believe everyone is headed to the pits of hell without a good old Baptist-style born-again experience." So, Steve says, we need to "cut a little slack for Jeffress." In other words, Steve doesn't think Dr. Jeffress has had his eyes opened to the new theology that proclaims you get to heaven any way you want. Steve says Dr. Jeffress's faith is "a relic that is fading fast." He accuses First Baptist Dallas of having a big sanctuary but keeping God in a little box.

 

No, Steve, God isn't in any box. He is the Almighty Creator of the Universe, and He gets to decide what to do with His creation. And He decided there would be one way to get to heaven. Even if God is, as you describe it, in a little box, I'd suggest you figure out ASAP how to cram yourself into that little box with Him, or you'll face a very rude awakening one day!

 

One more thing: the title of this column is "Fear of hell shifts with times." Maybe so, but "God is the same yesterday, today, and forever." So is the reality of hell.

 

"Fear of hell shifts with times." The Dallas Morning News; March 10, 2013; p. 1B.

 

 

Does it work both ways?

 

The police chief in Coopertown, Tennessee, requires applicants for positions in his department to take a polygraph test to see whether or not they are racists. I have several questions about this policy, but my main one is this: Are black and hispanic applicants required to take the polygraph? If not, who's the racist in the department?

 

"Chief using polygraph to keep racists off force." The Dallas Morning News; March 9, 2013; p. 8A.

Queers are a queer lot!

 

Would your church allow its facilities to be used for a winter solstice celebration that included "a chant to Shiva, the Hindu deity representing destruction necessary for growth and rebirth"? How about "weirdly costumed stilt-walkers, sensual belly-dancing, a man playing a horn duet by himself, folk music, French opera, Japanese drum solos, allegorical poetry, mythic story, broadly framed prayer . . ."?

 

Well, the queer folk seem to think all that's a great thing, because they let a bunch of Wiccans or whatever they are use what is supposed to be a Christian church facility, the Cathedral of Hope, for their pagan celebration. The event drew "people representing a broad spectrum of spiritual ideas: Buddhist, Hindu, Wiccan, Pagan, Unity, New Thought and American Indian as well as 'a couple of flavors of Christianity.'" Sounds like it was all nut-flavored to me! But what can you expect from a "church" whose foundation, instead of Jesus Christ and Him crucified and risen again, is gay pride?

 

Christians everywhere should stand up and proclaim that the Cathedral of Hope is not ANY "flavor" of Christianity! It 100% pure Satan.

 

"Solstice event ends 20-year run." The Dallas Morning News; December 23, 2012; p. 1B.

 



Well, Duh!

 

I guess you've heard about the six teenagers who were killed early Sunday morning in Ohio. The driver of their SUV lost control of the vehicle and it landed upside down in a pond. Two of the passengers survived. Oh, yes -- the SUV was stolen, the driver didn't have a drivers license, and none of them was wearing a seatbelt. I haven't heard, but I'd feel pretty safe in betting that they had all been drinking.

 

On Monday, investigating authorities said they were trying to piece together what the teenagers were up to before the crash. Well, duh! They were stealing cars and endangering others by swerving around all over the road. I wouldn't think it would require much of an investigation to come up with that.

 

"Teens in fatal crash were in stolen SUV." The Dallas Morning News; March 12, 2013; p. 4A.

 



It's getting worse and more of it, Folks!

 

We've been told we must accept gays, lesbians, transgenders, transvestites, and bi-sexuals. Now there's a new classification, and we have one serving in our Texas legislature.

 

El Paso Representative Mary Gonzalez says she is a pansexual. That's people who are "attracted to people of different gender identities." I guess that means she'll have sex with anybody.

 

Heaven, help us!

 

"Capitol rally seeks equality for gays." The Dallas Morning News; March 12, 2013; p. 3A.

Does it eliminate the perversion factor if there are more of them?

 

Demographics on how many perverted people are in the U.S. were detailed in an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court which is hearing a case on the constitutionality of California's queer marriage ban. The argument seems to be that because there are more and more of them, it makes homosexuality OK.

 

Gary Gates wrote the brief. He said, "As a political and cultural issue, it's very important for us to understand how big and visible this population is." Unfortunately, I think we all understand how visible it is! I would counter Gary's argument with this one: "As a spiritual issue, it's very important for us to understand how wide is the gate and broad the way that leadeth to destruction and how many there be that go in thereat."

 

"Statistics on lesbians, gays poised to expand." The Dallas Morning News; March 4, 2013; p. 5A.

 



Who's Carly Rae Jepsen?

I may live a sheltered life, but I never heard of Carly Rae Jepsen until I read an article in the news this past week. It seems Carly Rae was scheduled to appear at the 2013 Boy Scout Jamboree. But she's "making a statement."

She's cancelled her appearance because, "As an artist who believes in equality for all people . . .I always have and always will support the LGBT community on a global level."

While I have never heard of Carly Rae, God certainly knows who she is, and He will remember her actions and her words. And I don't think He will view them as a stand for equality. I think He will view them as a stand for perversion. And I think He will require an answer from her for what she's done.

"Singer won't perform at Jamboree." The Dallas Morning News; p. 1B.

Oh, really?

 

Scientists are all atwitter about their latest "discovery." Camels originated in Canada, they say, citing ancient camel bones dug from the tundra in Canada's High Arctic.

 

Gosh, if they had just asked me, I could have told them where camels originated, and it wasn't in Canada. It was in the Garden of Eden. "And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

 

Now, I'll concede that after Adam named the camel, God may have transported them to Canada, but they didn't originate there.

 

"Camels originated in Canada, scientists say." The Dallas Morning News; March 6, 2013; p. 12A.

From the WIST File

 

Amanda Collins is a brave woman. She is also a victim of "gun safety" regulations.

 

Amanda was raped at gunpoint on a college campus in Nevada. Though she had a permit to carry a gun, she was not allowed to bring it on campus because the campus was designated a "safe zone." Amanda knew martial arts, but her attacker was so much larger than she was, she didn't have much of a chance.

 

Amanda testified before legislative hearings on gun control in Colorado this past week about her experience. She says that if she had been allowed to carry her gun on campus, she is almost positive she would have been able at some point in the attack to have effectively defended herself. In the process, she would have prevented the rapes of two more women and the murder of a third by this man.

 

But state congresswoman Evie Hudak disagreed. "Chances are that if you would have had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you,” she lectured.

Amanda's response was brilliant in its simplicity and logic: "He didn't need my gun. He already had one."

 



Laughable But for the Eternal Implications

I've written recently about amateur theologians. Perhaps one of the most misguided I've ever come across is Gordon Keith. Some of what he writes would be laughable if it were not for the serious consequences of his Biblical illiteracy.

He says that nobody really knows what God is like (except he seems to think he does). . . that we all judge Him by the clothes we expect He wears. He says proof of that is that each person's God seems to hate the same people he does. I, for one, don't hate anybody, so there's a bit of a fallacy there. It seems, however, that Mr. Keith's definition of hate and mine are two different things. By Mr. Keith's reckoning, if you point out someone's sin, you hate him. "Show me a person who emphasizes the judgment of God, and I'll show you a person who likes making judgments," he says. You mean like John the Baptist? Elijah? The Apostle Paul?

"Show me a person who goes on and on about God's view on sexuality, and I'll show you someone who is very interested in the goings on of sexuality," according to Mr. Keith. Mr. Keith needs some perspective. When I was a child, I don't recall a pastor ever preaching on homosexual behavior. There wasn't much need, because most homosexuals were rightly in the closet then. But now, they march in the streets and proclaim that God approves of their sin. So those who take seriously their calling from God have no choice but to preach the bad news along with the good. As the Apostle Paul said, "Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God."

He says Dr. Robert Jeffress of FBC, Dallas, thinks his "portrait of God" is the correct one because it's biblical. Well, Duh! You think so? He says the problem with that is that the Bible is just a collection of men's stories. So, Mr. Keith, if you don't base your "portrait of God" on the Bible, just what do you base it on? He says he doesn't know why people are scared to question the Bible. Maybe it's that part in there that says, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Or maybe it's that part that says, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?"

He says if we believe the Bible, we "fetishize antiquity." Guess he didn't read that part that says that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He says that if God still speaks, why is it a stretch to think that we can no longer write our own Bible? Probably that other part you didn't read, Mr. Keith. . . The part that says, "As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Or the part that says, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life . . ." Mr. Keith says that if we would lose our allegiance to the Bible, we would gain "a more useful portrait of a meaningful God through fresh Scripture." We don't need "fresh" Scripture, Mr. Keith. The only reason you want "fresh" Scripture is because you don't like what's been clearly laid out in the old.

Mr. Keith's summation is that one should "Work out a portrait of God that you can love and that can love you back." You're allowed to do that, he says. Yes, we're allowed to do that, but it will land us in the pits of hell if we do. God doesn't change to suit your wants. He will not condone sin no matter how much you may enjoy it.

On one thing Mr. Keith and I can agree. He says he may not be a scholar. I can assure you, Mr. Keith, you are not!

"Breathing room." The Dallas Morning News; March 1, 2013; p. 19A.

Add this dangerous criminal to the "Most Wanted" list!

 



Josh Welch is a second-grader in Baltimore. Like many other 7-year-old boys, Josh sometimes plays with his food. While eating his strawberry Pop Tart the other day, he nibbled off the edges until it was shaped like a gun. Josh was suspended for two days. Josh claims he was trying to make a mountain, but the teacher saw a gun (maybe the teacher is the one with a fixation on guns, and maybe she's the one who should be suspended). The parents of the other students were notified by letter that this dangerous criminal act had occurred.

Josh Welch now joins little Madison Guarna (Madison threatened her classmates with Hello Kitty soap bubbles) in the "armed and dangerous" category. If you encounter either of these maniacs, do not try to disarm them yourselves!


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/02/boy-7-suspended-for-shaping-pastry-into-gun-dad-says/?test=latestnews#ixzz2MTuXOa2w

Evolving, Liar, Forgetful, Wishy-Washy, or Politically Correct?

 

When Obama says he believes something, can we believe him? Let's look at his timeline on his stance on queer marriage.

 

1996 - “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

 

2004 - Obama said he believed marriage was between a man and a woman.

 

2006 - Obama said decisions on same-sex marriage should be left to the states "as they always have been."

 

2010 - Obama said that positions evolve, including his own, but that he was unwilling to support homosexual marriage at that time.

 

2011 - Obama's staff distanced him from his 1996 stand for queer marriage by saying that statement had been filled in on the document by "someone else." Then in a flip-flop in the same year, Obama said, “I think what you’re seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians, and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our coworkers, and that they’ve got to be treated like every other American."

 

2012 - Influenced by Malia and Sasha and the same-sex "parents" of their friends, he says that it is "imperative" for him to affirm "personally" his support for homosexual marriage. "There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table, and we’re talking about their friends and their parents, and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”

 

2013 - He files a brief with the Supreme Court urging the overturn of California's Proposition 8. In addition, he says all laws regarding homosexual marriage should be given "heightened scrutiny," and if there is not a good reason for the law, it should be struck down.

 

I have the best reason of all -- God hates homosexual behavior, and the nation who endorses it will fall. Obama's mantra is that queer marriage is necessary in the name of fairness and equality. I want to know when he's going to take a similar stand for consenting adults in incestuous relationships. After all, one is just as repugnant to God as the other.

 

http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-video/timeline-of-obama-s-views-on-same-sex-marriage-pictures-20120509

How many chances should Michael get?

 

Michael Jerome Marble was arrested for burglary of a habitation in 1981. He was arrested for burglary of a building in 1985. He was arrested for aggravated robbery in 1987, convicted of 3rd-degree robbery, and sentenced to life in prison.

 

He served that life sentence pretty quickly, because he was out of prison and on parole this past January when in broke into 60-year-old Roberta Moore's apartment in the complex where he lived. He tied her up and strangled her to death. Her television and her emerald ring were found in his apartment.

 

Roberta's sister said they knew Marble was the murderer as soon as they found out her sister was dead. She says that Roberta was a  Christian, and their last conversation was about the Lord. "So I do find comfort and peace in that," she said.

 

Roberta's sister hopes they find justice, and I do, too. Justice, in this case, is nothing short of the death penalty quickly administered. Then, Marble won't have another chance to kill other innocent people just to take their possessions.

 

"Police: Woman was strangled by neighbor." The Dallas Morning News; February 27, 2013; p. 10B.

Uncle Obama wants your daughters.

 

Are you ready for Obama to send your 19-year-old daughter to Afghanistan or Pakistan or some other country to fight on the front lines of battle? It could happen, and it probably will.

 

One of Leon Panetta's last acts as Obama's Secretary of Defense was to change the policy so that women may now serve on the front lines of battle in combat units. The decision was hailed by women's rights groups. But here's what they didn't tell you.

 

A Supreme Court decision some thirty years ago held that the only Constitutional reason to exclude women from the draft was that the purpose of the draft is to provide combat-ready troops, and women could not serve on the front lines. Now they can; therefore, they cannot be excluded from draft registration because of their gender.

 

Greg Jacob, policy director for the Service Women's Action Network, said, "We see registration as another step forward in terms of equality and fairness." Really? I guess that means Obama's little girls will be first in line to be shipped out when they reach their 18th birthdays. If you believe that, then I know this Nigerian prince who'll send you a million dollars to hide for him, and you can keep $100,000 of it and only send him back $900,000.

 

"Next draft likely to have women." The Dallas Morning News; February 26, 2013; p. 4A.

What if we substituted Christian for Muslim?

 

A Richland Hills clinic doesn't want Muslim children in the foster care system to have to pray in a bedroom with a cross on the wall. Kathy Ledesma, project director for AdoptUSKids, a taxpayer supported organization, says, "It's really a disservice to children . . . to be in a home that has different traditions . . ." To place a Muslim child in a non-Muslim home violates their religious freedom, she says.

 

I have to wonder how many Christian children have been placed in non-Christian homes. Or how many children have been placed in homosexual homes? Would Kathy say that not allowing a homosexual couple to foster a child was a violation of their rights? I suspect she would. Would Kathy stand up for a Christian child who was being place into a Muslim or Buddhist or atheist home? I doubt she would.

 

"Muslim foster parents sought." The Dallas Morning News; December 30, 2012; p. 1B.

Is the whole world nuts??

 

North Carolina is now issuing illegal aliens drivers licenses that state "NO LAWFUL STATUS." I can't for the life of me figure out why ICE isn't called when they apply for the licenses. If they're illegal, why are we helping them out?

 

The illegals don't like this because it "brands them." Cinthia Marroquin, an illegal, said that she is worried about showing the license at a police roadblock or while writing a check at the grocery store. If she doesn't already have a drivers license, what is she doing driving by a police roadblock? Don't you think someone taking a check from her has the right to know that she's illegal? That just could have a bearing on whether or not he's willing to risk taking a check from her.

 

Cinthia says, "We just want to be able to get a job and drive to work. Having that license is just going to show everybody you're here illegally." Well, yeah -- isn't that the point?

 

By the way, the headline for this article is erroneous. The DMV plan would ID illegal aliens, not legal immigrants.

 

"DMV plan would ID immigrants."  The Dallas Morning News; February 22, 2013; p. 6A.

You're neither clever enough nor cute enough, Daniel.

 

Daniel van Rooyen of Colleyville thinks he's really clever and cute. He asks if those who advocate the continued selling of AR-15's and high capacity magazines could point out where in the Constitution they are given that right.

 

Sure, Daniel, it's in the Second Amendment -- The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. In case you don't know what infringed means, Daniel, it means that the government can do nothing to make it complicated or impossible for a law-abiding citizen to have whatever sort of gun he wants.

 

Then he says that conservative Justice Scalia is on record as saying that the Constitution is dead, meaning that it is frozen in time. So, Daniel says, that means that we can only have single-shot, front-loading muskets, because that's the only kind of guns they had in 1791.

 

Sorry, Daniel, but, in the vernacular, that dog don't hunt, either. The Second Amendment does not specify what kind of arms -- it just says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Are AR-15's arms? If so, then the right of the people to keep and bear them is protected.

 

"Where do gun rights end?" The Dallas Morning News; December 29, 2012; p. 20A.

Could it be because . . .

 

The Centers for Disease Control conducted a study on fast food consumption in the U.S. They found that over the past few years, fast food consumption has dropped off a couple of percentage points compared to a similar previous study. Why is that, they wonder.

 

Could it be because people have lost jobs and/or had their hours reduced, and they are cutting back on eating out? Nooooo - that couldn't be it, because Obama assures us that things are better than when he took office. And he wouldn't lie, would he?

 

"Study: U.S. fast-food consumption slows." The Dallas Morning News; February 21, 2013; p. 6A.