Has Dallas really been set back 50 years?

I wrote earlier this week about Dr. Robert Jeffress' s sermon on "Why Gay is not OK" and the handful of wannabe gay activists who showed up to try to tell a man what he can and cannot preach in his own church. I was not the only one with an opinion on that incident.

Keeping in mind that Ed Davis of Dallas wasn't there, so he has no idea what Dr. Jeffress said, he comments on the sermon: "This type of ranting has taken us back at least 50 years and reeks of gay hatred. It's 2008, not 1958. Dallas must be the laughingstock of the nation."

Would that Dr. Jeffress did have the power to take us back to 1958 when immorality was still something to be ashamed of and even those deep into sin still had some semblance of respect for God and His church!

"Sermon sets Dallas back years." The Dallas Morning News; November 12, 2008; p. 12A.

Would you let her babysit your children?

Dena Schlosser cut off her 10-month-old baby's arms in 2004. She was found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to Rusk State Hospital.

Last week, State district Judge Chris Oldner ordered her released. He says that "her needs and the safety of the community can be met with outpatient services." The Collin County District Attorney's office feels that Mrs. Schlosser needs to be hospitalized longer, because her last psychotic episode was less than two years ago.

Her attorney says that reports and testimony from mental health professionals who have been treating her convinced the court that she's not a threat to herself or to others. I'm not convinced that a woman so mentally ill that she thought God told her to cut off her baby's arms can be cured in the two years she's been at Rusk. I kind of doubt the judge really is convinced of it, either. If he allows her to babysit for his children or grandchildren, I'll eat my words.

"mom who killed baby to be freed." The Dallas Morning News; November 8, 2008; p. 1A.

What does it take to be smart?

Joel Stein, a columnist for The Los Angeles Times, has a theory. He says that people today (some of whom have difficulty finding their own home countries on the map) are not any less smart than their elders. They just know different things. He says people concerned about our growing Idiocracy are just insecure about their own intelligence. Thinking he's just as smart as anyone else, he asked Adam Winer, the author of How Dumb Are You?: The Great American Stupidity Quiz, to write a test so he could challenge Susan Jacoby, author of The Age of American Unreason.

One of the questions was to quote the third line of our national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner. Mr. Stein's answer? "Who brought stripes and bright stars through the perilous night." Mr. Stein defends his answer -- "at least my version, unlike the real one, makes sense and has a verb in it." Is he kidding? We learned all the words to the national anthem in the second grade. Our teacher made sure we understood the history and significance of the song. Mr. Stein might be interested to know that there is, indeed, a verb in the "real one," and it does, indeed, "make sense." The part he quoted is only the beginning of the question, "Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight, o'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?" Mr. Stein should understand that Mr. Key was overwhelmed at the sight of the U.S. flag still waving over Ft. McHenry after a night of fierce fighting. What is the "sense" of Mr. Stein's version?

Mr. Stein contends that his generation knows how to "problem-solve and filter information better than our grandparents ever did." Tell that to Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Eli Whitney, Marie Curie, Clara Barton, Helen Keller, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Queen Victoria, George Washington Carver. . .
if Mr. Stein has ever even heard of these people.

Mr. Stein has certainly not convinced Essie May he is smarter than she is. By the way, Mr. Stein failed Mr. Winer's test. Ms. Jacoby missed only two questions.

"Are Americans getting dumber? Not exactly." The Dallas Morning News; November 5, 2008; p. 31A.

God bless Dr. Robert Jeffress!

Dr. Robert Jeffress is the pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas. He took a very bold step when he planned his current sermon series. The title of the series is "Politically Incorrect," and this past Sunday's sermon was "Why Gay Is Not OK." I hope God raises up more pastors like Dr. Jeffress, who will not water down the truth because of the feared public reaction. It really doesn't matter what the public thinks -- it matters what God thinks.

A small group of gays and lesbians saw Dr. Jeffress' sermon title on the church's marquee and staged a protest Sunday morning in front of the church. Patrick Hancock, one of those protesting, said, "Most of the people here are Christians, and they're taking offense at the Baptist Church trying to say how Christ's love should be interpreted." Well, Patrick, I'm pretty sure God is taking offense at your promotion of a lifestyle He deems perverted.

The crux of the matter is this: those close-minded gays and lesbians would have been much better off inside the church learning why gay is not OK than outside the church trying to cause a ruckus and using the Lord's Day to promote their sin.

"'Gay Is Not O.K.' sermon draws fire." The Dallas Morning News; November 10, 2008; p. 1A.

Free love ain't so free

Normandy High School in St. Louis, Missouri has a serious problem. According to the health department, as many as 50 of their students may have been exposed to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. The school has sent a letter to parents and guardians informing them that epidemiologists have reason to believe that the virus might have been transmitted "among some Normandy Senior High School students."

The health department offered free testing. What is astounding to me is that 97% of the 1,300 students went in for testing. If there is an HIV scare in my community, I'll feel extremely confident that I don't have it. If I've had a recent blood transfusion, or been accidentally pricked with a tainted needle at the doctor's office, I'll go for testing. Otherwise, I won't be worried. So why are all these students concerned? Well, it could be because they don't have abstinence only sex education and they are promiscuous. Or it could be that their sex education curriculum is woefully deficient as demonstrated by this quote: " . . .students awaited their test results and tried to guess how it was that this deadly virus intruded on their high school years." High school students don't know how HIV is spread? It appears their sex education curriculum doesn't teach much besides it's OK to have sex!

"AIDS scare puts students on edge." The Dallas Morning News; November 9, 2008; p. 10A.

Darned if you do, darned if you don't!

After a recent tragic accident involving a police chase in Dallas, the Dallas Police Department instituted a new policy of calling off car chases deemed too dangerous. I had mixed emotions about the policy change. Certainly, the law-abiding public should not be subjected to unnecessary risk; however, are they not subjected to risk if the criminal element is given a bye?

Unfortunately, this policy proved to be ineffective this past Thursday night. Eric Austin, on probation for a DWI offense, was spotted driving erratically by a police officer. The officer tried to pull him over; Austin fled. The officer took down the license plate number and did not pursue. When Mr. Austin reached Mockingbird Lane and Maple Avenue a short time later, he broadsided a car driven by Clay Cornutt of Morgan, Texas. Mr. Cornutt was killed.

We'll never know if the policeman would have been able to safely stop Austin if he had pursued him. But I somehow believe the Cornutt family wishes he had been able to try. I also somehow believe they, like I, wonder why this man wasn't in jail instead of driving drunk on city streets on a suspended license.

"Driver in fatal crash was on DWI probation." The Dallas Morning News; November 8, 2008; p. 2B.

A double standard at work

In September of this year, Marine Sergeant Jan Pawel Pietrzak got married. He and his bride bought a home and began their life together. October 15, Mrs. Pietrzak did not show up for work. Her worried mother called the police. When the police arrived at the Pietrzak home, they found the front door open. Inside the house, they found the couple bound, gagged, and shot. Mrs. Pietrzak had been raped.

Investigation led them to four suspects, all marines. Two of the marines were Sergeant Pietrzak's men. The police theorize the motive was robbery, because some of the Pietrzaks' belongings were found in the the possession of the suspects. I had another suspicion. When I saw the photos of the suspected murderers, my suspicion was reinforced.

You see, Sergeant Pietrzak was white. His wife was black. At least three of the four men who murdered them are black. I think the fourth one is as well, but it was hard to tell from his photograph. I think this was a race crime. Yet the news media has not breathed one word or intimation that that may be the case. If the perpetrators were white, don't you think Al Sharpton, the Black Panthers, and all the rabble-rousers would be shouting, "Hate crime"? (See my post of October 29, "Hate crime or 3 thugs hanging out together").

Why do I think it was a racially motivated crime? Why would a group of four men plan to rob their own sergeant? Being in the Corps themselves, they would know that a sergeant's pay is certainly nothing to brag about. And certainly their own sergeant would be able to identify them. If they didn't expect the couple to be at home, why the brutality of the murders? They could have just shot them and left it at that, but evidence indicates this couple was tortured. That sounds more like an emotional motive than a material one. I think they didn't like the fact that a white man married one of "their" women.

So where are the Black Panthers demanding justice for this crime? They seem to be mysteriously absent.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=6204853