Archive | June 2013

#7 June 26 2013 ramblings on SCOTUS and Gay marriage

First, does anyone still believe this is a “Conservative court”. In between this, the recent DNA ruling and Obama care one thing is clear. The Ideologues on the court are the leftists (Kagen, Breyer, Sottamieyer, and Ginsberg) who NEVER break with far left ideology, no matter what the issue. It’s the “conservatives ” Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, and Allito that cross over and seem to make decisions based on the legal issues not an agenda. There’s a novel idea, Judges making decisions based on law. Silly me, to think that is the very definition of  what a court should do.

Second, I’m not surprised that DOMA got thrown out. It was mediocre Law pushed by Clinton to gather moderate support at a time when the thought of Gay Marriage wasn’t popular. It was unenforcible from the beginning. The idea that someone who is legally married by a state, and that marriage can’t be recognized by the Federal government is a disaster. And it made about as much sense as “Don’t ask, don’t tell.”

Third, in both the DOMA case and the Prop 8 case the government chose not to enforce the law. Now excuse me but don’t Presidents and Governors take Oaths TO ENFORCE THE LAW OF THE LAND? What if a President Rubio decided not to enforce Obamacare? Or a President Paul decided that Federal Gun laws weren’t worth enforcing?  If the government choses not to have legal standing, like it did in Prop 8 and DOMA, are there any limits to that?  It use to be that Governors and Presidents who didn’t like laws had to go thru the messy step of going to their respective legislatures and getting them changed. Now they just hand down edicts to their minions.

Fourth, Prop 8 was a troubling case. I really would prefer that these kind of social issues stay out of the courts. I don’t see Gay Marriage as a civil rights issue, I see it as a community morality issue. But the prop 8 case was unique in that it had two elements. One, it had a right taken away, two it had the courts over riding the will of the people. And enshrining a “right” handed down by the Elites in black robes won’t resolve the question any more than Roe V. Wade resolved abortion. Having said this, If the gay marriage proponents respect the First Amendment and don’t require religions to recognize and accept gay marriage. I doubt this will be near as contentious as Roe V. Wade.

OTOH, I am more troubled with the fact that increasingly in a country that is supposed to be governed by the very plain words of the Bill of Rights and the Rule of Law we are increasingly sitting on the steps of SCOTUS waiting for the tablets to come down from the mountain of life time appointed unaccountable black robed elites to define or redefine who we are as a people.  The Bill of Rights put forth the principles of a limited government, what happened today is by it’s very definition the exercise of an increasingly unlimited government.


Sunrise Recife Brazil

Sunrise Recife Brazil

#6 June 25, 2013 A quick thought on Snowden

“Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in the government is an existing government employee, committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government.” President Barack Obama-2008

“We expect the Russian Government to look at all options available to expel Mr. Snowden back to the US to face justice for the crimes which he is charged” Catlin Heyden, Obama National Security spokesperson.

I tend to to think of Snowden as a “misguided criminal”, and I’m certainly at this point not ready to call him a traitor. There are some things he didn’t do, he didn’t go to N Vietnam to proclaim his support for them while they were torturing US prisoners of war.  He didn’t plot to bomb the Pentagon, or proclaim “America’s Chickens are coming home to roost” after 9/11, and he didn’t spend the night getting ready for a Las Vegas fundraiser instead of responding to terrorist attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi.

And for those who do call him a traitor, what great harm has he caused to our National Security? So far, according to Obama what was happening was ” no big deal”. And for the record, don’t you think the previous administration deserves at least one apology on this one?  Considering Obama has blamed them for EVERYTHING that has gone wrong in his administration, couldn’t he just once say “Bush got this right?” That would require grace and character something the President seems seriously deficient in.

And does anyone believe the standing of the US in the world is improved today over the days of the previous administration? I think Putin saying “Nyet” on Snowden pretty much answers that question for us. Putin along with much of the rest of the world clearly holds Obama with much of the same contempt that Obama reserves for his political enemies or those who dare question him or blow the whistle on his abuses.

#5 June 22, 2013 That is really gay

“In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. In Iran, we don’t have this phenomenon.  I don’t know who has told you that we did”  Mahmoud Ahmadinajad speaking to students at Columbia University in 2007

“Revisionist gay theology takes the movement for the legitimization of homosexuality a step further by attempting to redefine homosexual behavior as God ordained and morally permissible”  Focus on the Family from their website

And then we have this bit of news:The Ex-Gay movement.webloc

The President of the Ex-Gay movement Alan Chambers has apologized for his position, the hurt, and the harm he has caused to many by promoting “Reparative Therapy” (the teaching that homosexuality is a choice and that this “immoral” choice can be reversed by therapy), And that it is possible for Christians who commit to it to become “Ex-Gays”. He has effectively shut the ministry down and is looking for ways for Christians to reach out to gay members of the Evangelical community.  For the most part mainstream Evangelical Christian media has been strangely silent on the events at Exodus with the exceptions of some fairly conventional reader comments on the Christianity Today without editorial comment report.

My own church which avoids politics and has certainly not taken what I would call an Anti-Gay stance (we even engaged in a counter protest against Fred Phelps) still promoted what we considered the “love the sinner, hate the sin” approach of Exodus international and even had them in for a seminar several years ago.

Now a few thoughts, first from the beginning I DON’T KNOW, while I’m no theologian and certainly can’t reasonably debate the original language or the place of context in the scriptures concerning the subject.  I am a student of Church History, Theology, and I’ve been brought up in the church. So I do have some experience with the Christian views on the subject. And yet I find it very hard to reasonably expect people with a certain clear sexual orientation to be expected to live in celibacy or revolt against their nature to be accepted into the faith.

As a point of background, I am not a homosexual, and really don’t have any dogs in this hunt. While it may be easy to be suspicious of someone who has been single for 55 years, I can assure my sexual lusts and proclivities are clearly of the adult heterosexual variety. While I have some acquaintances who are gay I don’t really have anyone at this time I would consider a close friend who is gay.

Now a few observations: One, we live in an over sexed society on every level. There is almost no place weather it be the Internet, the local mall, a magazine rack, or even the Disney channel where sexuality isn’t promoted. If you are an adolescent, an exploding hormones Jr Hi kid, a frat boy looking to hook up, Bi, gay or wait until you’re getting married evangelical if you get outside the bubble of a monastery you are exposed to purposely lust promoting stimuli. If we spent as much time as a society looking at pictures of food as we do being sexually stimulated either intentionally or by accident we’d all be sitting on a couch weighing about 600 pounds waiting for the biggest loser to provide us with salvation.

Personally I believe the acceptance of this has done far more to harm our culture then the “Homosexual agenda” that James Dobson is constantly warning us about. When we look at the HIV epidemic, the 70% out of wed lock birthrate and 50% divorce rate, along with the close to a million and a half abortions born out of the hook up society we are left with a big mess.

And I must admit one of the things that bothers me about the “: gay community” is that they seem to take this even greater levels. I just recently had to take myself off of one of my gay acquantincences facebook feeds because he kept inviting me to gay “spring break” type parties and just recently “liked” a face book page called “hot gay a–”.  Even the gay pride parades look more like gay get horny parades to me. And this is from a fifty something gay man in a committed relationship with a daughter who has a respectable career. I don’t have any heterosexual friends who are as public about their lust.

This brings me to my second point. Are gays born that way? I have not seen serious scientific evidence supporting that point of view. Now before you take out the pitchforks and assign me a place in Westboro church. It does seem that most gays are born with a strong genetic tendency to choose a gay lifestyle. And there is no doubt in my mind that in this over-sexed environment, that tendency is nurtured.  I don’t see evidence that being gay is irrevocable but it sure seems to be damn close.

Of the four gays that I knew well growing up who were brought up in Christianity, one married and appears to have a good marriage, one got married and I lost track of him, and two have continued in the faith but clearly come out as gay.  One went through the “Exodus experience” himself and has nothing (from what I’ve heard) but bad memories of it.  The track record isn’t that good to see the least. Exodus has had numerous repudiations by former EX-gays.

I think we can successfully say that in this over sexed society, we can’t as Christians continue to expect gays to abandon their homosexuality, certainly not any more than we can expect an obese person to lose a hundred pounds before we accept them as “real” Christians.  Obesity is a sin against your body too. And how many fat pastors have you heard preaching against the homosexual agenda and then seen them at Big Boy after the service? For the record eating that crap is really sinning against your body.

And this brings me to my third point. Why is homosexuality such a point of attention by the church? There are plenty of “sins” mentioned in the scriptures. And for the record I know very few Christians who stayed a 100% free of any sexual sin before they got married. I can only come up with two reasons. One, most Christians aren’t gay. The reality is while some gay activists and researchers claim 10% of the population is gay (except in Iran LOL), I’m not buying it. Nothing against gays, and nothing against the fields they are over represented in like Hollywood but I suspect the number is far closer to 5%. Still a big number but not a big number in the relatively cloistered community of evangelicals. So it’s far easier to pick on a sin you don’t struggle with and attack it’s practitioners than one you struggle with like materialism or obesity?

Second, from the opposite extreme many of the Christians who are gay like Ted Haggard almost found it cathartic to preach against the “gay menace” while they are hooking up with gay hookers. Much like Jimmy Swaggert, preaching against sin can be a great attention diversion when you’re drowning in your own lusts

Now I realize many will make the argument that the personal failures of our leaders doesn’t excuse sinful behavior. No doubt this is correct. Jim Bakers failing doesn’t excuse us if we’re cheating on our wives. My only point is that I find it awfully ironic coming from one church where the Pastor had affairs, his sons (all three pastors) had multiple affairs including some that should have resulted in jail time for statutory rape but everyone is relieved because they saved us from the gay agenda hoard that was pounding on the Cathedral doors like the Barbarians of Rome. I guess we fear what we aren’t familiar with.

One other thing is clear, there are far more passages on the sins of materialism, adultery, and not loving our neighbors than there are passages about the sin of homosexuality in the scriptures. And one thing we are not sure about is what was the nature of homosexual behavior during scriptural times? From what I have read for the Romans most gay relationships were pedophile slavery relationships, not consensual adult relationships. I can certainly understand how some theologians could argue that the homosexuality Paul was so adamant about wasn’t the homosexuality we see today. But even that interpretation doesn’t condone gay sexuality (more about that and gay marriage at some other point).

So what should the Church (the community of Christians) do when it comes to the gay question?  This comes back to the earlier part of this post. I frankly don’t know.  One of the things I have learned in arriving at the ripe old age of 55, just short of my AARP card, and the eventual breaking of my hip, is how little I know and how many things I was confident of years ago and not so confident of today. I do know that we shouldn’t be promoting discrimination against gays anymore than we promote discrimination against obese people.  And I do know that the world needs to hear far more about what we are saying yes too, (intact families, others centered lifestyles, helping to relieve real poverty) than what we say NO too.

I also know a people that asks gay couples to sit in the back, or informs them that they aren’t welcome will not be a people that are “known by their love”. And a church that preaches against them especially while it ignores other sins in it’s own community needs to call a construction company for beam removal. The reality is we are all in this together weather we are gays trying to follow Jesus or straight Christians battling lust (pretty much all straight Christians) trying to follow Jesus.

One other thing I know, Jesus wasn’t too interested in political activism. He was interested in the individual not the State. While he lived under one of the most oppressive regimes in history, he didn’t support reforming the State, or legislation to deal with the immoralities of the state. He was much more concerned with the personal lives of his followers than their political affiliations or for that matter religious affiliations. And the only revolution he promoted was in the religious establishment, not the political establishment.

He was not, despite the proclamations of many on the left, a “community organizer”. Jesus was trying to destroy the community to replace it with a Kingdom.

#4 June 17, 2013 Odds and Ends

Odds and Ends, and a little housekeeping.

Here are just a few random thoughts and a bit of background for those who have bothered to follow.

The name: Godmanyale came from two sources. One, William F. Buckley’s first book was God and Man at Yale. It was a fitting expose of the extreme leftists and anti-Christian tilt in American higher education in what was considered to be a relatively conservative institute of higher learning at the time (1952). The Irony is the extreme leftist ideology that is presented today at almost every level of our educational establishment would have probably made those professors blush.

It is also a reference to South Park’s Manbearpig. Manbearpig was an imaginary creature that Al Gore was determined to warn South Park’s elementary students about the dangers of. There was no limit to Al Gores commitment to present the dangers of Manbearpig to these not so innocent children including dressing up as Manbearpig with blood dripping from his mouth and surprising the kids at recess.  One of my intentions of this blog is to warn us that we have much more to fear from the Al Gore types than we do from the dangerous creatures floating around Al Gores sanctimoniously vivid imagination.

Speaking of which, if the administration is going to send “small arms” anywhere why not to the citizens of Chicago where they might do some good instead of Syria where they will be used vainly to fight missiles, tanks, and fighter jets? At least in the conflict in Chicago where 41 were wounded and 7 were killed over the weekend the citizens would stand a fighting chance with “small arms”, just saying.

OTOH, I’m glad the Administration at least announced they would be sending bullets with the small arms. Small arms are fairly useless without bullets; most gun owners in America are discovering the reality of that right now.

Should educators be suspending kids for chewing pop tarts into gun shapes and making gun noises when the president tweets this photo  (see below) for Fathers Day? Talk about something that is out of hand. The zero tolerance for anything that can be imagined into a gun policy that our educational leaders have instituted is prima fascia evidence of mass stupidity. It’s no wonder we can’t keep up with almost any industrialized nations in our K-12 education. Judging from this policy it’s amazing we can keep up with primitive tribes in New Guinea. How about zero tolerance for stupid educators?

This reminds me that one of Buckley’s biggest complaints about the leftist’s educational establishment was its dismissal without debate of Conservative (Small Government) ideals. For instance while Yale’s Economic textbooks in the 50’s gushed fervently about the glories of Socialism and Keynesianism, they didn’t even acknowledge Von Misis, or Hayek. I see this in many of my liberal friends. While they will refer to many so-called conservative politicians they never want to talk about the history of policy or issues. The issues aren’t even debatable to them. Well, so much for the caricature of the  “open minded” leftist?

When it comes to Civil Liberties these same liberals will attack the Patriot Act with fervency and call it “Conservative”, and they love to decry the “Gestapo” like tactics of the Bush presidency. In fact whole groups of mainstream American liberals made a living going “Goodwin” on Bush. These same liberals fail to acknowledge that the most successful big government of the Twentieth century was indeed Nazi Germany. It was a government that dictated Health, Social, and Industrial policy to its citizens, because they knew better.  Sound familiar?

And the GOP gets no pass on this. I’m not ready to call Snowden a hero, but I’m also not ready to proclaim him a traitor without a real honest debate and trial for that matter. If KSM deserves a trial, than the Snowden case case certainly deserves a careful examination of civil liberties and can’t be solved by a drone strike.  Dick Cheney and Mike Rogers may argue a “wartime” footing. But anyone who trusts this administration falls right in there with the stupid educator crowd. The argument for the NSA surveillance was that we were at “war” with Islamic terrorism. And war necessitated some suspending of civil liberties. But Obama has declared the war over.

Al Quada has been “neutered”, the actions of 9/11/12 in Benghazi were the result of reaction to a You Tube video, and Nidal Hassan shouting “Allah Akbar” murdering US Servicemen who were safe in a “gun free zone” and were as disarmed as the citizens of Chicago was “workplace violence” . If the war on Terrorism is indeed “over”, to quote the President there can be no argument for wartime suspension of civil liberties.

One thing is obvious; there are very few Mensa candidates within the administration considering this stuff. I fear like the leftest educators who they were indoctrinated by, they simply dismiss the alternatives, or don’t acknowledge there existence. Does anyone seriously believe we have a coherent foreign policy right now?