Saturday, February 28, 2015

# 1157 (2/28) "Pro-Life Group’s Graphic Signs Spark Debate Over Images of Abortion"

"Pro-Life Group’s Graphic Signs Spark Debate Over Images of Abortion" Kate Scanlon / @scanlon_kate / February 17, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/17/pro-life-groups-graphic-signs-spark-debate-images-abortion/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=saturday&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuqjKZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ERcJhI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D [AS I SEE IT: I applaud this group of teens who stand up for the unborn at their high schools. I also support the use of graphic photos as the reality of abortion sometimes gets lost in people just regarding it as a "political" rather than a moral issue. You don't have to be a Christian to speak against any atrocities of today or of the past, and certainly abortion is the greatest atrocity of our day. However, I would not be in favor of ever placing such images where those younger than those of high school age could view it. Also, I would be in favor of having signs only on walkways away from oncoming traffic so that you could place signs warning people of the images that they will encounter so that they would be free to avoid them if they were particularly sensitive to those images. I only wish more high school students would take such bold stands as these students are doing to stand up for life. - Stan]

Beechcroft High School outreach. (Photo: Created Equal Facebook)

A recent pro-life protest in Columbus, Ohio, drew a heated response from a neighbor upset by the group’s graphic depiction of aborted fetuses on signs across from his house. It’s also sparked questions of how far is too far when it comes to showing images of abortion.

The signs of demonstrators, led by pro-life group Created Equal, were destroyed by an unidentified man outside Beechcroft High School in Columbus earlier this month.“Get them off or I’ll take them,” says the man, who identifies himself as a homeowner across the street from the school. A video released by the group shows him kicking, bending and breaking the corrugated plastic signs, then throwing them into the street, despite oncoming traffic.

In the video, the man can also be seen shouting at demonstrators, and taking the group’s signs out of the hands of Jami Beer, Created Equal’s director of campus outreach. He can be heard objecting to the graphic nature of the signs, which depict what Beer called “the aftermath of abortion”—the remnants of aborted children.

Beer said that she doesn’t like looking at the graphic images either, but they need to be shown so people can see what abortion really looks like.“There is no way to make abortion look pretty,” said Beer. “The nature of abortion is disturbing. High school students are old enough to have abortions. They have a right to know what it looks like.”
Photo: Created Equal Facebook
Photo: Created Equal Facebook

While many pro-life organizations are united in their desire to peacefully protest, the use of graphic images is a point of debate within the movement.

Janet Morana, executive director of Priests for Life and the co-founder of the Silent No More Awareness campaign, told The Daily Signal that she supports “showing the victims of abortion” during pro-life demonstrations.“These images have value,” said Morana. “As Father Frank Pavone says, ‘America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion.’”

Morana said that she has participated in demonstrations similar to Created Equal’s outside of high schools. She’s witnessed firsthand students’ reaction to the images. “Young people respond to it,” said Morana. “When they are shown the truth, they no longer support abortion.”

Morana stressed that free-speech rights allow all causes to peacefully protest. “You can disagree, you cannot censor,” she said.

Mallory Quigley, communications director at Susan B. Anthony List, told The Daily Signal she could only think of one instance in which her organization used a graphic image. The group sent an email using a crime-scene photo from the murder trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, and that they did include a disclaimer in the subject line.“In that particular instance it was valuable,” said Quigley. “Sometimes people need to see it to believe it.”

Abby Johnson, a former abortion clinic employee and founder of And Then There Were None, a ministry that helps abortion workers leave the industry, generally discourages the use of graphic images. In her experience, they do more harm than good.

In remarks printed on Patheos.com, Johnson writes: "I watched them be ineffective for many years … from inside the abortion clinic. A perspective that most do not have. I watched for several years as women would literally run away from those holding graphic signs. They would come into my office and ask us why those people were holding them. We used that as an opportunity to point out how crazy the prolifers were and that they would do anything to prevent women from making the choices they felt they needed to. It was an AMAZING way for us to build camaraderie inside our clinic."

Created Equal, the group at the center of the Columbus incident, stands by its use of the graphic images—and even got an apology from the man who destroyed its signs.

“In a culture killing its children, unfortunately sometimes abortion advocates act violently against those who defend the children. Nevertheless, we refuse to be intimidated into silence,” Mark Harrington, the executive director of Created Equal, said in a statement.

In an interview with The Daily Signal, Beer, the woman who was confronted in Columbus, said the mission of Created Equal is to “raise a generation of 21st century preborn defenders,” which includes ministering to high school and college students.

Beer said Created Equal frequently exercises its First Amendment rights to protest abortion on public property.

Not showing the graphic images, she said, “silences the voices” of the 2,900 children the Guttmacher Institute estimates are aborted every day in the United States.

Beer said that during the incident, she did feel that she and her group were in danger, and called the man’s behavior “threatening” and “angry.” Columbus’ 10TV declined to identify the man in the video, but reports that he describes himself as neither pro-life nor pro-choice but rather offended by the graphic images used. The news station reports he is willing to financially compensate Created Equal for the damage. Beer said that the signs destroyed were worth about $120. Beer said that charges had been filed against the man, but were “on hold” because of his apology.

Kate Scanlon is a news reporter for The Daily Signal and graduate of The Heritage Foundation's Young Leaders Program.

Friday, February 27, 2015

# 1156 (2/27) "Obama Skirts Real Issue with Transgenders"

"Obama Skirts Real Issue with Transgenders" - By Tony Perkins. Family Research Council's Washington Update, Feb. 24, 2015 

President Obama may not be able to say "Christian," but he has no trouble with "transgender." While almost 100 Assyrian Christians were kidnapped by Islamists in a dawn raid in their villages in Syria, the President's mind is obviously elsewhere.

As he plots an assault on people's values, the Middle East is in a full-blown meltdown. Terror is ripping through small towns, and in this case, hitting a crucial piece of land in the conflict on the Iraqi border where the Yazidis were also targeted. Although the Christians fled to Syria for refuge, that safety is made more fragile by the day thanks to their faith. Syrian militia tried to strike back, but the fate of the Christians is unknown.

Meanwhile, President Obama is focused on more important matters -- like opening up the military to transgenders. At a press conference Monday, Press Secretary Josh Earnest dropped this bombshell: "I can tell you that the President agrees with the sentiment that all Americans who are qualified to serve should be able to serve and for that reason, we here at the White House welcome the comments of the Secretary of Defense."

Those comments from Ash Carter came as a surprise to several people, who didn't think the first item on the new DOD chief's agenda was social engineering. "I don't think anything but their suitability for service should preclude them," Carter told reporters earlier in the day. "I'm very open-minded about (it)???what their personal lives and proclivities are, provided they can do what we need them to do for us. That's the important criteria. Are they going to be excellent service members?"

Unfortunately, the new Defense boss wasn't asked about the issue in his Senate hearing -- an oversight conservatives wish they could correct now. The world is facing some of the greatest evil ever unleashed on innocents and the President's plan for combatting it is letting men transition to women (and visa-versa) in our fighting force? Is this his plan for striking fear in ISIS's hearts?

The terrorists are mocking us as it is. Imagine the laughingstock America will be if it injects gender anarchy into the front lines. Are we to assume that taxpayers would be hook for their hormone therapy, sexual reassignments, psychological counseling, and whatever facilities changes would need to be made to accommodate transgenders on base?

Despite how casually the White House seems to treat the matter, these are serious and complex issues that directly affect the national security of the United States. Let's not forget -- transgenderism is at its root a serious mental disorder. If these men and women are confused about their gender, what's to keep them from being confused about their mission?

Sexual assault, rape, and suicide are already sky-high in the military. Surely, the President's answer isn't introducing gender chaos to an already dissatisfied military. The military can't afford to waste more time and energy on political distractions that aren't just detrimental for people in that lifestyle -- but for our nation's security as well.



Thursday, February 26, 2015

#1155 (2/26) "As US Grapples With Global Threats, This Is How We Should Approach National Security"

"As US Grapples With Global Threats, This Is How We Should Approach National Security" - Brian Slattery / @BrianSlattery22 / February 24, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/24/u-s-grapples-global-threats-approach-national-security/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuqvKZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ERcpqI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D"

U.S. Marines practice "combat gliding" during an Integrated Training Exercise 2-15 at Camp Wilson in California. (Photo: U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Kathryn Howard/Released)

In one of his first actions as secretary of defense, Ashton Carter met over the weekend with top U.S. officials to determine a path forward in the fight against ISIS. While threats have clearly grown, the president has sought to shrink military capability.

This radical Islamic group has increasingly shown the gruesome lengths it is willing to go to achieve its goals, and has also shown a knack for expanding its reach with atrocities such as a recent mass execution of Egyptians in Libya.This alone is enough to consume much of the defense secretary’s time and effort, but it is only one of the threats the United States faces all over the globe.

Stability in Yemen has almost completely collapsed. Russia continues to push further into Ukraine. Tension mounts between China and its neighbors over territorial disputes. With these growing threats around the globe, the challenges facing the U.S. military are daunting.

One would think this has inspired the White House and Congress to take their commitments to national security more seriously, but the opposite has actually occurred over President Obama’s tenure as commander-in-chief. While threats have clearly grown, the president has sought to shrink military capability. Congress has followed this with spending cuts such as those required by sequestration.
It’s clear that policymakers aren’t fully understanding their constitutional responsibility to provide for the common defense.One possible reason politicians have failed to maintain the strength of the U.S. military is because they have misunderstood what problems our security posture is facing.

Before looking at what programs to dedicate more or fewer taxpayer dollars to each year, the executive and legislative branches should be asking the following question: What does the United States need to defend its security and interests at home and abroad in a constantly changing political and global escape?

That’s a question that Congress, the American public, defense analysts and even the military are challenged to determine the correct answer to.One reason for that is while many publications assess pieces of the security puzzle, there is no consistent, accessible reference that enables people to comprehensively understand the status of U.S. military, especially on a year-to-year basis.

Today, The Heritage Foundation releases its first-ever Index of U.S. Military Strength.[see link below.] This publication assesses in a new way America’s ability to uphold one of its primary Constitutional responsibilities—to provide for the common defense.

We see as central to all U.S. military activity the protection of three critical interests: safeguarding the homeland from external attack, preventing a major power threat in key regions that would be devastating to U.S. interests, and maintaining the freedom of the commons, or the sea, air, space, and cyberspace that facilitate the free flow of goods and services.

The index provides insights on the threats and opportunities around the world, as well as the direction our military is headed in terms of providing for our security. Here are a few of the broad findings of the index:

[1] America’s allies, though stable, are less capable than before, in part because many of them have also lost sight of maintaining robust security forces. This means the U.S. will be less able to rely on its allies for military support.
[2] Nations and actors who pose a threat to the U.S. are growing in capability. America’s adversaries are investing in weapons and systems intended to achieve their goals that potentially threaten U.S. interests.
[3] The U.S. military is aging and shrinking in size, with a marginal ability to handle one major war and sustain other current presence and engagements around the globe. The armed forces are currently stretched to meet current demands, which in turn consume limited resources at the risk of the long-term health of the military.
[4] All these conditions are ripe for exploitation by competitors and enemies. These trends are worrisome—it is far easier to continue to decline than for Congress and the president to make hard decisions that could nevertheless rapidly improve U.S. military strength.

It has become increasingly clear that the world is not becoming a safer place. If the United States wishes to provide U.S. security and enable free societies and economic prosperity to flourish around the globe, the government needs to find a new path toward maintaining a strong national defense.

>>> Read the Index of U.S. Military Strength- http://index.heritage.org/militarystrength/

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

Brian Slattery is a research associate for Security Studies at The Heritage Foundation. In this capacity he advocates for a strong national defense and robust security enterprise. Brian focuses particularly on maritime security, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Arctic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"The History of Defense Spending in One Chart" - Thaleigha Rampersad/ @dotnotfeather80 / February 14, 2015; http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/14/history-defense-spending-one-chart/ 
“...Consecutive years of across-the-board budget cuts have significantly weakened the U.S. military,” Salmon wrote. “The military will likely need several years of reinvestment to return to a sound footing, and a higher defense budget for fiscal year 2016 would be an encouraging start.” For a closer look at defense spending through the years, The Daily Signal offers this chart from 1948 into the future."
"Obama’s National Security Strategy Favors Wishful Thinking Over Reality" - Max Meizlish / @Maxmeizlish / February 12, 2015; http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/12/obamas-national-security-strategy-favors-wishful-thinking-reality/
"What You Need to Know About Obama’s War Authorization Against ISIS" - Kelsey Harkness / @kelseyjharkness / February 11, 2015; http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/11/what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-war-authorization-against-isis/

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

# 1154 (2/25) "Patricia Arquette’s ‘Make Believe’ on Women and Equal Pay"/ My Comments Onpresentp the Oscars

"Patricia Arquette’s ‘Make Believe’ on Women and Equal Pay" - Genevieve Wood / @genevievewood / February 23, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/23/patricia-arquettes-make-believe-on-women-and-equal-pay/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuqvKZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ERcpqI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D
[NOTE: This article is a follow-up to yesterday's post #1153. If you've not read it, you will find some incredible truths revealed. Please check it out. AS I SEE IT - The diatribe referred to below was even read like the reader was given a script by the National Organization for Women. I also found it ironic that the 2 ladies in the audience shown to be cheering most for the speech was a recording star (in her dress costing thousands of dollars) and an actress who were probably among the highest paid people in the country. Were they so supportive because somehow a male colleague lived in a $20 million dollar house while they only lived in a $15 million house? Just wondering. (: - Stan]

The political diatribe from actress Patricia Arquette about “equal pay” during the Oscars showed Hollywood’s talents for “story-telling” and “make believe” are alive and well.  Sadly, instead of a passionate speech filled with facts, Arquette followed the same old left-wing script that just doesn’t measure up to the truth. Audiences deserve better.

Interested in more details? Here’s some from my 2014 column on the so-called “wage gap” between men and women:

1. How many cents on the dollar? When you compare women and men who are doing the same job and have similar educational backgrounds and experience, the wage gap all but disappears. The whole “women make 77 cents for every dollar men make,” line, no matter how many times the Left says it, is absolutely false when you compare apples to apples.

2. Women who earn more. Twenty-something women without children, living in metropolitan areas, earn 8 percent more on average than their male counterparts, according to 2008 Census data. This is not surprising, since they’re better educated than their male counterparts.

3. No educational gap. More women than men are attending and graduating from college today, and they are receiving the majority of associate, bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees.

4. Women making choices. When it comes to college majors, women and men choose different areas of study. Not all areas of study have the same earning power. According to a Georgetown University report, of the top 10 most profitable majors, men greatly outnumber women in all but one. Among the 10 least profitable majors, women outnumber men. Want to make more? Major in petroleum engineering. Want to make less? Major in visual and performing arts. Women and men are both free to choose either path. Obviously, they have different preferences.

5. Need to borrow a dollar? The number of wealthy women in the U.S. is growing twice as fast as the number of wealthy men. And some estimate that by 2030, women will control as much as two-thirds of the nation’s wealth.

Democrats clearly think the best way to motivate women is to continue to have them believe they are under assault—that the “war on women” rages on. But the fact is that President Obama’s policies have left Democrats with little choice: Due to Obamacare and other misguided policies, fewer Americans either have, or are looking for, jobs than at any point since 1978. That’s bad for women and men. Equal pay rhetoric means nothing to people who can’t get a job in the first place.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Genevieve Wood advances policy priorities of The Heritage Foundation as senior contributor to The Daily Signal.

"My Comments On the Oscar Ceremony"-  Stan

     As there was nothing in this years awards ceremony that interested me, I originally sought to watch a movie about America's elite Seal Team warriors on another channel. However, my curiosity got to me and I ended up going back and forth between that great movie ("Act of Valor") and the awards. The following are my comments on what I viewed:

1) There were 3 highlights for me. The first was the unexpected performance by Tim McGraw of Glenn Campbell's farewell song to his daughters as he slips into Alzheimers; it was the most moving moment of the evening for me. I also found the screenwriter who shared about his suicide attempt at 16 to be quite moving. The best highlight for me, though, was the performance by Lady Gaga (known for her flamboyant outfits) saluting the 50th year since "Sound of Music"won best picture. On a personal note, the movie was the ONLY movie my parents and brother ever went to see. Because my father didn't speak English (and there were no subtitles when we saw it), it was a special occasion I will always remember the movie with fondness. But as spectacular as the perfomance was (go to: http://www.glennbeck.com/2015/02/23/genius-glenn-was-blown-away-by-lady-gagas-oscar-performance/) I was emotionally moved when it's star actress Julie Anrews walked onto the stage. That was a lasting memory for me.

2) The rest of the program was filled with low-lights.
     a) For me, the host's at humor was continually pathetic was continually pathetic, highlighted by his appearance on stage dressed only in underwear briefs (to recreate a scene from the movie that eventually won for best picture). It seemed obvious the audience felt more embarrassed than entertained. It was probably more so as the host is an open homosxual. I'm sure that this attempt at comedy didn't go over well among the Muslims in the world who might have been watching among the estimated one billion world-wide audience.
b) The liberal rants by several recipients - though expected at Hollywood ceremonies - was truly tiresome. As noted by this article, they tend to be full of misinformation or outright lies in order to present a slanted viewpoint. 
c) When seen in the context of the audience filled with individuals who in some cases have a net worth of several billion dollars, to see them give their loudest praise for the speech about women suffering from unequal pay most outlandish. 
d) While I appreciated those who played roles that highlighted those suffering from Alzheimer's and ALS pleading for more research to be done for those diseases, I kept waiting for one of the presenters to volunteer to donates their gift bag remuneration towards those causes. (Did you know that one of those bags contained gifts worth around $160,000?! (That's about what I paid for my house!) Did any recipient somehow need that for themselves?) Being liberal in their political views, I can only assume they only see the government providing such money.
e) I have to ask how they decided the winner for best  picture was the best. It is really hard to find someone who has actually seen the movie. You have to wonder if the anti-military bias of so many of the political left in Hollywood made it easy for them to be dismissive of the movie "American Sniper," which has grossed over $400 billion in ticket sales, more than any other war movie in history. 
and f)The absence of any recipient actually thanking God was not surprising but continues to be disappointing. It's hard to remember that there used to be a time when people expressed their thanks to God - if but in a perfunctory way. You have to wonder if God has left Hollywood as much as it seems to now ignore Him.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

# 1153 (2/24) "What Patricia Arquette Got Wrong About the Founders and Women"

"What Patricia Arquette Got Wrong About the Founders and Women" David Azerrad / February 23, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/23/patricia-arquette-got-wrong-founders-women/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailydigest&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuqrPZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ERcRiI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D [NOTE: This article has some amazing revelations that had me going "Wow" many times.  Also, pease be sure to check out THE NEXT POST - Lord willing - for my comments on this diatribe and other happenings at this past Sunday's Academy Awards program. - Stan]

Actress Patricia Arquette (Photo: ACE Pictures/Newscom)

In a harried Oscar acceptance speech which culminated in a hackneyed call for wage equality, actress Patricia Arquette blamed the Founders for the so-called gender pay gap.“It’s inexcusable that we go around the world and we talk about equal rights for women in other countries when we don’t have equal rights for women in America,” Arquette, who won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress, said. “And we don’t because when they wrote the Constitution, they didn’t intend it for women.”

Like many Americans, actress Patricia Arquette doesn’t understand the Constitution (she also doesn’t understand basic economics as The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway pointed out).If the Framers didn’t intend the Constitution for women, they sure did a fine job of concealing their intention. Nowhere in the original Constitution are citizens classified according to sex. As Tiffany Jones Miller explains in the “Heritage Guide to The Constitution” essay on the 19th Amendment:

"Contrary to popular belief, the United States Constitution of 1787 is a gender-neutral document. Throughout the original text, the Framers refer to “persons”—as opposed to “male persons”—and use the pronoun “he” only in the generic sense. The word “male” did not even appear in the Constitution until the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868."

While we’re at it, it’s worth pointing out that the Declaration of Independence also doesn’t take into account sex in proclaiming that we are all created equal and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights. The Declaration speaks of “all men” and not “all human beings” because the former is a more rhetorically powerful way to describe mankind.

Neither one of our founding documents classifies people according to sex—or according to race or religion for that matter. Therefore, contrary to what many civics textbooks incorrectly teach, the original Constitution did not restrict the right to vote to white, property-owning males aged 21 or older.

The Constitution defers to the states on voting eligibility in federal elections. As is plainly written in Article I, Section 2: “the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”

As a result, voting eligibility varied by state. Certain states denied blacks the right to vote—but a majority did not. And—here comes the whopper—women were voting in New Jersey at the time of the Founding! For the first time in recorded history, women voted alongside men in elections. And it happened right here in America—the first country in the world dedicated to the proposition that all men and women are created equal.

The 19th Amendment, therefore, did not give women the right to vote. It guaranteed women the right to vote. By the time it was ratified in 1920, more than three-fourths of the states already allowed women to vote in some or all elections. Ultimately, the seeds of women’s suffrage were sown in the Declaration of Independence’s dedication to equality.

Whatever the state of remuneration in the workplace may be today, Patricia Arquette and others should leave the Founders out of it.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

David Azerrad devotes his time and research to increasing public understanding of America’s founding principles. As director of The Heritage Foundation’s B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics, he teaches the tenets of the American political tradition to policymakers, political leaders and the public at large, while connecting our founding principles to the thorny questions of the day. Read his research.

Monday, February 23, 2015

# 1152 (2/23) "5 Facts About Cohabitation You May Not Know"

"Facts About Cohabitation You May Not Know"Caitlin Thomas/ February 13, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/13/5-facts-cohabitation-may-not-know/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiu6nBZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ES8BnI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D [NOTE: This would have been more appropriate to coincide with Valentine's Day 10 days ago. However, the subject is still something worth noting. Also, obviously, there are always exceptions to the points made below. Just consider them as generally true.]

In the 2009 hit movie, 'He's Just Not That Into You,' Beth Bartlett, played by Jennifer Aniston, and her boyfriend of seven years, Neil played by Ben Affleck, live together. Mid-movie, Beth comes to the conclusion that she doesn’t want to continue their relationship if Neil has no intentions of marrying her, and he moves out. (Photo: Screenshot from 'He's Just Not That Into You')

More young adults are opting to cohabit rather than marry or to delay marriage for financial reasons, such as debt, according to a recent study published in Demography. However, National Marriage Week [Feb. 7-14 - http://www.nationalmarriageweekusa.org/] presents a good opportunity to review how rigorous, long-term studies have measured the substantial impact of marriage on financial stability, as well as relationship longevity and health outcomes.

Here are five additional facts you may not know about cohabitation:

1. Cohabiting couples are more prone to break up (and break up for good) than married couples.  In the May 2003 issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family Study, Georgina Binstock and Arland Thornton found that, in the first year of living together, couples who cohabited were eight times more likely to end their relationships than those who were married.  In the second and third years, those rates decreased to four and three times more likely, respectively.  And when it comes to getting back together after a breakup, cohabiting couples were about a third less likely to get back together again.

2. Even after marrying, women who cohabitated prior to marriage are more apt to separate or divorce than those who did not.  One study demonstrated that for women who lived with their partners before marriage, it was 33 percent more likely for their marriages to result in separation or divorce.

3. Men who cohabit tend to make less money than their married counterparts.  Married men tend to make more money than their unmarried guy friends, according to a study based on the 1990 U.S. Census.  Once husbands and wives reach pre-retirement age, another study found never-married cohabiters had less wealth than married couples—78 percent less.

4. Among young mothers, married women are more financially secure than cohabiting women. A 2004 study demonstrated that married mothers of six-month-olds report an income-to-needs ratio—the proportion of her income relative to how much her minimum needs or basic life essentials cost her—higher than that of cohabiting mothers with children the same age. Single mothers fare the worst of the three groups, a fact that is especially troubling given the continuing decline in marriage rates among American adults.

5. Cohabiting couples report more depression and more alcohol problems than married couples.  Even when controlling for race, age and gender, cohabiting individuals reported higher levels of depression than married ones, 2.8 points according to one study. In another study, cohabiting individuals were three times more likely to report having problems with alcohol consumption than those who were married, as well as 25 percent more problems than single people who did not cohabit. Cohabiting women indicated more alcohol problems than married women—and men who cohabited said they had more alcohol problems than both married and single men.

For both women and men, marriage remains the best route to achieve a healthy and stable relationship. National Marriage Week is a good time to consider the efforts needed at every level to help restore a culture of marriage.

[bold,italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Caitlin Thomas is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

"What’s the Real Story on Marriage and Family Trends? Here Are 11 Findings" - Rachel Sheffield/ @RachelSheffiel2 / January 19, 2015; http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/19/whats-real-story-marriage-family-trends-heres-11-findings/

"...While Americans continue to desire to be married and to have children, today many of the trends surrounding these practices fail to support successful relationships, putting both adults and children and society at risk. The good news is trends can change. In 2015, policymakers and leaders at every level should work to strengthen marriage and family."

Sunday, February 22, 2015

# 1151 (2/22) SUNDAY SPECIAL: "...THE COUNTER-CULTURAL SEASON OF LENT"

"We Are Not Our Own - THE COUNTER-CULTURAL SEASON OF LENT"By: John Stonestreet| Breakpoint.org: February 18, 2015; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/26898?spMailingID=10671525&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481350736&spReportId=NDgxMzUwNzM2S0
daily_commentary_02_18_15
Is it all about us, or about Jesus and Him crucified? Today [ Wed., Feb. 18], we enter what may be the most counter-cultural season of the church calendar.

In many ways, today is one of the strangest days of the year. Everywhere—at work, the grocery store, shopping, exercising—we’ll see all kinds of people walking around with dark smudges on their foreheads.
Now whether or not their own church participates in this ritual, most Christians will know that the smudge is the sign of the cross, and that today is Ash Wednesday, the beginning of the season of Lent.

To the unbelieving world, Ash Wednesday is at best quaint (it’s sort of cool to have traditions, you know). At worst, it’s somewhere between bizarre and even anti-social. After all, to a culture committed to the pursuit of self-fulfillment and feeling good about oneself, this whole fasting and self-sacrifice stuff is an existential smack in the face.

Think of how these words contrast with our contemporary illusions of autonomy and self-determination: I am not my own. And I will die one day. And so will you. As the minister tells us when he rubs the ashes on our foreheads, “remember thou art dust and to dust thou shalt return.”

And here’s the bolder statement still, a way-more-weird and counter-cultural claim—We are rotten to the core. We are sinners. So much so that God became a man and died on a cross in our place. He loved us that much! And then, get this: He came back to life. His body wasn’t eaten by worms in a tomb. He was resurrected from the dead.

What happened on that Resurrection Day, which we’ll commemorate 40 days from now, is the most important event in the history of the world. As Russell Moore has said, “Christians from all over the world, despite all this science and all this progress and all this technology, [still confess] what the earliest believers in the catacombs of Rome cried out: ‘Christ is risen indeed.’”

We confess it because what it says about God, the universe, and us is TRUE. On Ash Wednesday and during the season of fasting, prayer, and almsgiving called Lent, we redouble our efforts to heed Jesus’ call to pick  up our crosses and follow him. We meditate and remember with Paul that we have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us.

Crucified with Christ! Our hopes, desires, politics, intellect, and yes, even our sexuality—crucified with Christ. What a thing to say! Jesus, who redeemed us by His blood, lays claim to all of these things.

This is not the God of what sociologist Christian Smith has dubbed “moralistic therapeutic deism,” a god who demands nothing more than that people take it easy on themselves and be nice and fair to one another.

This is a God who says the two greatest commandments are to love Him with all of our hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and to love our neighbors as ourselves. And as Jesus said, to love Him is to obey Him (talk about counter cultural!) and to believe in the One He has sent. To love our neighbors, we preach the Good News of Jesus’ death and resurrection and His triumph over sin and death. We feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the prisoner, take care of the widow and orphans.

Friend, what could be more authentic, more relevant, than to conform our lives to Jesus, who is the Way the Truth and the Life? Jesus did not and will not conform Himself to the culture. Why would we? How dare we urge others to? As Paul says, we were called to freedom in Christ, which is a freedom from conformity and from the desires of the flesh and a freedom to serve one another in love, joy peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5).

Now that’s a lot to swallow, which is one reason that for nearly two millennia, Christians have taken this long season of Lent as an opportunity to repent of our conformity to the world, draw near to Jesus, and prepare ourselves to celebrate the day that changed the universe.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

RESOURCES - Lent serves as a reminder for us to conform our lives to Jesus, who is the Way the Truth and the Life. Check out the links below for resources that can encourage you as you follow Christ.
He Has Risen: The Worldview of EasterJohn Stonestreet, T. M. Moore | BreakPoint.org; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/product.asp?sku=2191_HHRISEN
Devotions for Lent - Tyndale House | December 2009; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/product.asp?sku=9781414335810
Lent and Easter Wisdom from G. K. Chesterton - G. K. Chesterton, The Center for the Study of C. S. Lewis | Ligouri Publications | January 2008; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/product.asp?sku=0764816985
"The Heart of Lent: 40 Days of 4-giveness" - Laura Waters Hinson |BreakPoint.org | February 25, 2010; http://www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/articles/entry/12/9711?spMailingID=10671525&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481350736&spReportId=NDgxMzUwNzM2S0
"Ashes of Affirmation: Lent and Worldview" - Jim Tonkowich | BreakPoint.org | March 19, 2010; http://www.breakpoint.org/features-columns/breakpoint-columns/entry/2/8358?spMailingID=10671525&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481350736&spReportId=NDgxMzUwNzM2S0
"One of the Great Rarities of Our Time: The Virtue of Humility" - John H. Armstrong |BreakPoint.org | April 30, 2007; https://www.colsoncenter.org/features-columns/articles/breakpoint-features-archive/entry/12/9781?spMailingID=10671525&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481350736&spReportId=NDgxMzUwNzM2S0

Saturday, February 21, 2015

# 1150 (2/21) "THE TRAUMA OF REGRET"

The Other Side of the Abortion Story - "THE TRAUMA OF REGRET" - By: Eric Metaxas, Breakpoint.org: February 20, 2015; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/12/26900?spMailingID=10689541&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481480560&spReportId=NDgxNDgwNTYwS0 [AS I SEE IT: One of the most frustrating things I experience is trying to convince pastors to speak on the subject of abortion. No, I don't believe you can speak on the subject too often when you consider that in every worship service there is always a chance that someone will be there who has never heard the truth of this evil. By this I am not only talking about what happens to the obvious victims - the unborn - but of the women (and girls) who've aborted a child at some time. I will never forget many years ago listening to a radio broadcast in which the well-known Bible teacher Chuck Swindoll spoke of giving his first pro-life message after serving as pastor for many years. He told of how he shared of the forgiveness of Christ available to those who had abortions. He shared that after the service, he noticed that there was an unusually long line of people waiting to speak to him and that most of them were women. After awhile he realized that each of them were there to tell them how they had struggled with guilt over their abortions for many years and his message was the first time they had heard of God's forgiveness for THAT sin. I remember being moved greatly when Pastor Swindoll began crying as he said that in all the years he had been a pastor, he had never realized that week after week there had been women sitting in the church pews who carried such a burden and that he had not spoken to lift that burden till then. I also know of a church deacon who confided in me how he struggles on how to tell his sons how he had their oldest sibling aborted while he was a college student. I would ask every pastor how many such women and men are possibly sitting in his church pews? P.S. - I hope you'll make a point to see the incredible movie, "October Baby" that illustrates the pain carried by women who've had abortions.  - Stan]
sadwoman17
To get to the truth of a matter, you need to hear both sides of the story. And that’s especially true with abortion.

Last week on BreakPoint, I told you about the convocation address I gave at the University of the South in Sewanee. The theme of my talk was the importance of civil discourse and freedom of speech, and how without them, we cannot have a healthy and free society. I told my audience that I do in fact see efforts, especially on college campuses, but also in the media, to silence opposing voices on a whole host of issues.

And nowhere is this more evident than with abortion. And it’s not just that pro-life advocates are often shouted down or kept off campuses or the airwaves. No, what really concerns me—actually, what really pains me—is that we don’t hear about a whole class of people who suffer deeply from the wounds of abortion. And that is the women who deeply regret terminating the lives of their babies.

Instead, we are treated to accounts of just how wonderful abortion is. The daughter of a friend of mine attends a chic-chic school here in Manhattan and she was made to watch a video of women raving about what a great decision it was to have an abortion—with no opposing viewpoint. It is heartless propaganda.
And you may remember the story last year about an abortion counselor who filmed her own abortion, saying it was so “positive” and empowering. She posted a video on YouTube, to the wild cheers of the pro-abortion lobby.

Yet the truth is, many women who get an abortion do not feel heroic at all. They feel devastated. My wife, Susanne, who directs a pregnancy center here in New York, sees these victims all the time.

In my book, “Miracles,” I write about a friend of mine named April who had an abortion and who was emotionally devastated by it. She found herself pregnant and thought, like many women facing the same predicament, that abortion was her only option. So she went to the abortion “clinic.” They gave her a paper gown and flimsy slippers, but zero compassion or emotional warmth at all. No one encouraged her to keep the baby, by the way, and when the “procedure” was done, April wept.

Eventually, thank God, April found healing and forgiveness. But when was the last time you saw a sympathetic portrayal in the so-called “mainstream” media of one of these victims? Why won’t Oprah have a show on these women? Why can’t we hear both sides of this story?

Like April, many women face regret, guilt, and depression over the child that died. Some women experience physical repercussions, such as sterility or disease. The fathers or siblings of the baby who died can feel a tremendous sense of loss over the child that they’ll never know. These are real heartaches we never hear about.

Happily, there are organizations trying to rectify the situation. Since 2002, for example, the Silent No More Awareness campaign has sought to make the public aware of the devastation of abortion for women and men. It has held 1,400 gatherings in 17 countries and 48 states, with nearly 6,000 women and men sharing their abortion testimonies. Silent No More has even gone into nearly a hundred high schools and universities—not enough, but a great start. Like Life Services, another great organization, it provides practical help to men and women suffering from post-abortion trauma.[Find the weblinks to Life Services and Silent No More following this article.]. And if you know of an organization that helps people dealing with abortion, leave a comment, and let your fellow BreakPoint listeners know about them.

So until abortion is a sad memory in America, let’s speak up for these silent victims of abortion. If we don’t, who will?

[bold and italics emphasis mine] 

RESOURCESDo you know other organizations that provide assistance to those suffering in the wake of abortion? Leave a comment and let our readers know about them. Is your church involved in ministry to those who have participated in abortion? Consider lending a hand!

The Silent No More Awareness Campaign - http://silentnomoreawareness.org/
Life Services - http://www.lifeservices.org/

Friday, February 20, 2015

# 1149 (2/20) "State Says 70-Year-Old Flower Shop Owner Discriminated Against Gay Couple. Here’s How She Responded."

"State Says 70-Year-Old Flower Shop Owner Discriminated Against Gay Couple. Here’s How She Responded." - Kelsey Harkness / @kelseyjharkness / February 20, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/20/state-says-70-year-old-flower-shop-owner-discriminated-gay-couple-heres-responded/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuq7LZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ERMBiI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D [AS I SEE IT: After reading this story, you have to ask: 1) Am I willing to lose everything I have (materially, at least) in order to stand by what my faith teaches me, what I believe is right before God?, and 2) Are we here in America that far away from the state taking away our freedom (imprisonment) because we take a stand for what we believe God is calling us to do? (Too far-fetched, you say. Actually, I spent 4 days in jail 26 years ago for doing what I still believe God called me to do. And so such a question is not beyond the possibility. - Stan]

A judge in Washington state ruled this week that a 70-year-old florist who declined to make flower arrangements for a gay couple’s wedding violated the state’s anti-discrimination and consumer protection laws. In a phone interview with The Daily Signal, Barronelle Stutzman said the decision—and its accompanying fines—will put her flower shop out of business, or worse.

After the fines and legal fees, “There won’t be anything left,” Stutzman said.“They want my home, they want my business, they want my personal finances as an example for other people to be quiet.”

Stutzman owns Arlene’s Flowers, which is a small flower shop in Richland, Wash. She has been in the industry for over 40 years, for the most part serving customers regardless of their sexual orientation.

Barronelle Stutzman, owner of a flower shop, says she is being sued for staying true to her faith.
But in March 2013, when Robert Ingersoll asked Stutzman to design floral arrangements for his same-sex wedding to Curt Freed, she declined, citing her Christian faith. “I put my hand on his and said, ‘I’m sorry Rob, I can’t do your wedding because of my relationship with Jesus Christ,’” Stutzman said. “We talked a little bit, we talked about his mom [walking him down the aisle]…we hugged and he left.”

Stutzman enjoyed a close relationship with Ingersoll, serving him for many years, and never expected what would happen next. Following their conversation, Washington’s attorney general told Stutzman that her decision was in direct conflict with a state law that ensures citizens freedom from discrimination, and pursued a lawsuit against her.

The anti-discrimination measure prohibits places of public accommodation—which officials say includes Arlene’s Flowers—from refusing service to customers on grounds of race, creed, sexual orientation and physical disability. After Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed a lawsuit against the florist, the American Civil Liberties Union filed another suit on behalf of the couple.

The suits, since consolidated into Arlene’s Flowers v. Ferguson, were filed in Washington’s Benton County Superior Court. “Religious freedom is a fundamental part of America. But religious beliefs do not give any of us a right to ignore the law or to harm others because of who they are. When gay people go to a business, they should be treated like anyone else and not be discriminated against,” said Sarah Dunne, American Civil Liberties Union of Washington legal director.

On Wednesday, ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in both cases, Benton County Superior County Judge Alexander C. Ekstrom agreed, stating in his 60-page opinion: "No court has ever held that religiously motivated conduct, expressive or otherwise, trumps state discrimination law in public accommodations. Religious motivation does not excuse compliance with the law."

Contesting the decision, Stutzman said the state is taking away one of her “basic rights, and feels that she is being used as a case example after the state of Washington legalized same-sex marriage in 2012. She and her attorney, Kristen Waggoner of Alliance Defending Freedom, plan to appeal the court’s decision within the next 40 days.

In the meantime, Stutzman faces a fine of up to $2,000 for violating Washington’s anti-discrimination law and a separate fine of $7.91 (which Ingersoll and Freed say is the cost of driving to find a new florist).

What’s likely to cripple her, though, are attorney costs and fees, which Alliance Defending Freedom estimates to be seven figures. “They’re taking everything because I disagree with their stand,” Stutzman said."That’s not constitutional, nor is it right. They basically want to strip me [of my rights] so it’s an example to other people to be quiet."

Stutzman’s lawyer told The Daily Signal that the ruling violates her client’s right to free expression and speech.“She’s having to use her heart, her mind and her hands to create something that’s unique to celebrate same-sex marriage,” said Waggoner, adding:

"The government telling you that you have to be quiet is one thing. It’s not a good thing. But the government telling you that you must speak—that you must express a message—that is frightening. And it will affect everyone whether they’re religious or not."

In a joint statement to press, Freed and Ingersoll said they felt betrayed by Stutzman’s decision not to serve them.“We were hurt and saddened when we were denied service by Arlene’s Flowers after doing business with them for so many years,” they said, adding: "We respect everyone’s beliefs, but businesses that are open to the public have an obligation to serve everyone."

When asked her response to the couple’s statement, Stutzman said:“I did serve Rob. It’s the event that I turned down, not the service for Rob or his partner.”If she could speak with Ingersoll again, Stutzman said, “I would love to give him a hug and tell him things are going to be OK.”

Indeed, while she stands by her decision, Stutzman said she still thinks “the world” of her friend and longtime customer."I had a good relationship with Rob and I served him for years. We did have a personal relationship, and I think the world of him. We just disagree on what marriage is."

[bold, italic, and colored emphasis mine]

Thursday, February 19, 2015

# 1148 (2/19) "‘We Love This Land': Iraqi Christian Men Fight to Keep ISIS Away From Homes

"‘We Love This Land': Iraqi Christian Men Fight to Keep ISIS Away From Homes"Josh Siegel / @SiegelScribe / February 18, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/18/iraqi-christian-men-take-arms-fight-isis/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiu6XBZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ES8prI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D [AS I SEE IT: This is a follow-up to yesterday's post #1147. Reading of these ordinary Christian citizens - including a high school teacher - fighting to defend their country reminds me of how the American colonists must have felt the need to defend their homes and families in the face of the overwhelming British forces. - Stan]

A battalion of Assyrian Christian men train at a former U.S. military facility outside the city of Kirkuk, Iraq. (Photo courtesy: Kaldo Oghanna)

Athra Kado had never shot a gun before, let alone seen a battlefield.Until recently Kado, 25, spent his young career in a classroom, teaching high school students how to speak Syriac, his native language.
But Kado is one of hundreds of Assyrian Christian men—many with no military experience—taking up arms to protect their towns from ISIS terrorists who invaded this part of Iraq early last year.

“If we don’t have land to live, what’s the purpose of teaching a language?” Kado tells The Daily Signal in a Skype interview from a former U.S. military facility outside the city of Kirkuk, where he is finishing up a training camp with 500 or so amateur fighters.Recruits to the new Christian militia, or battalion, say their villages and families were abandoned by Iraqi government and peshmerga forces last summer, letting the terrorists seize control. Since then, some 30,000 Christians have fled the Nineveh plains—an area inhabited by minority groups such as Iraqi Christians, Yezidis and Shabaks.

Without official government support, and with minimal equipment primarily funded through donations, the young Christian men—most in their early to mid 20s—feel a responsibility to defend their own.
“We saw that nobody was doing anything for us,” says Kado, whose home town, Al Qosh, is the only Christian town in the Nineveh plains free of ISIS control. “We know that we don’t have another chance if we don’t fight for ourselves. No one is protecting us. We want to make a change.”

Last summer, Iraq’s most prominent Christian political party, the Assyrian Democratic Movement, issued a call for volunteers from minority groups to form a local defense force to fight ISIS, the Sunni militant group also known as the Islamic State or ISIL.In late January, the Kurdistan Regional Government’s peshmerga—a leading force fighting ISIS that receives American support—offered up the Kirkuk training facility as the grounds for the Assyrian Christian battalion to learn military might.

“This is our right as human beings and as indigenous people: to protect our people and ourselves,” says Kaldo Oghanna, a party official from the Assyrian Democratic Movement who oversaw the training. “It is not logical for people south of north [of here] to secure this area.”Kado, the young fighter, said at least four Americans—volunteers with military experience—are helping train the men to use weapons such as automatic rifles, mortars, machine guns, AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades.

Fighters acquire skills fast, because they have to. They train from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. every day. “When someone wants badly to do something, everything is easy for him,” Kado says. “Me and my friends are getting this information so fast. We want to do that. We will go to our villages and towns and protect them so ISIS can’t come to our families.” The training wraps up Thursday, when the civilian fighters are expected to be able to defend their turf. “I know I am ready,” Kado says.

Help Wanted Oghanna says the training of Iraqi Christian fighters has occurred without financial support from the Iraqi, Kurdish or U.S. governments. Donations, mostly from Assyrians abroad, fund everything from guns to bullets to food. He hopes the United States steps forward—help that may be on the way.

The U.S. National Defense Authorization Act, approved in December, includes language to train and equip fighters against the Islamic State. As part of the legislation, up to $1.6 billion should go toward support for units such as the Iraqi Army, Sunni tribal fighters, peshmerga and local forces protecting “vulnerable” minority groups in the Nineveh plains.“The U.S. supports many groups [fighters], especially in Syria, where many of them convert to join ISIS,” Oghanna says. “We know it’s complex [to decide who to support], but we are for sure not going to convert to ISIS.”

‘My Land’ - The Assyrian Christians, who consider themselves the indigenous people of Iraq, want to survive on their terms. For Kado and the battalion fighters, that means staying in their villages, no matter that ISIS militants want to wipe Christianity out of Iraq. Oghanna says there are currently less than 400,000 Christians living in Iraq, down from about 1.6 million in 2003. Most have fled.

Kado will not. His family’s roots in Al Qosh date back 400 years.

More than 400 families from other Christian villages have come to Al Qosh to seek shelter. So Kado stays.
“We don’t want to be refugees in another country,” Kado says. Adds Oghanna, “It would be bitter for us to migrate to Europe and the U.S.” Kado has great respect for America.He listens to American music, and he learned English through the songs and lyrics of Whitney Houston.Two of his brothers live in Detroit.

“I want to vacation in the U.S.,” Kado says, smiling sheepishly, listing Las Vegas as a spot he hopes to visit. “But I want to stay and live here.”

Kado is risking everything to stay—to be the guardian of his religion, his land“I have thought about dying,” Kado says. “But the most important thing I’ve learned in the camp is discipline. It’s not just Christianity. If it was just Christianity, I could be Christian in Europe. It’s a matter of … this is our land. We want to live on it. We love this land.”

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

If you wish to donate to the Assyrian Christian militia, click here.- https://www.grouprev.com/restoreninevehnow

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

# 1147 (2/18) "Edge of Extinction.."

"Edge of Extinction - IRAQ’S CHRISTIANS NEED HELP NOW" - By: John Stonestreet| Breakpoint.org: February 16, 2015; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/12/26880?spMailingID=10646499&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=481088840&spReportId=NDgxMDg4ODQwS0
daily_commentary_02_16_15
Ecclesiastes says there is a time for war and a time for peace. If Christianity is to survive in the Middle East, the time for war may have come.

You’ve probably heard by now that President Obama has asked Congress to authorize military force against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS. The decision to go to war should never be done lightly. In fact, we should drop to our knees right now and pray for our elected officials, as well as our armed forces, as they prepare to take action.

The measures President Obama is proposing go beyond the air-strikes he’s already ordered. This time, boots on the ground are a possibility. And that’s understandably a tough sell for war-weary Americans. But Islamic extremists seem determined to force our hand as they butcher and burn their way across the Middle-East, leaving entire communities in ashes. And the brutal executions of four American citizens—not to mention other foreigners beheaded or burned alive on video—put ISIS’ evil on full display for the world. Someone must confront these barbarians—especially in light of what they’ve done and are doing to Iraq’s Christian

Ever since ISIS crossed the border, they’ve been leveling the homes of ethnic and religious minorities, including some of the world’s oldest Christian communities. In the process, they’ve massacred civilians, torched historic churches and mosques, and dragged women and girls into sex slavery.“We don’t have much time left as Christians in this region,” said Bashar Warda, an Archbishop of the ancient Catholic Chaldean Church. In a plea to British lawmakers on Tuesday, Archbishop Warda insisted that western nations must forcibly intervene against ISIS if the region’s religious and ethnic minorities are to survive.

“As a Catholic,” he admitted, “I find it hard to say, but I want military action. There is no other way now.”
He’s not alone. Retired Rep. Frank Wolf, a longtime friend of Chuck Colson’s, recently helped establish the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative, an advocacy group for global religious freedom.This week, a delegation of the Wilberforce Initiative issued a grim report.

“A decade ago, Iraq’s Christian population numbered 1.5 million,said the group’s president, Randel Everett. “Today, roughly 300,000 remain, and most have no jobs, no schools, and no places of worship.”

And with last summer’s conquest of Mosul by ISIS, the historic home of many Kurds and Christians, refugees are running out of refuges. As ISIS tightens its noose, vulnerable groups left in the region face nothing less than complete “extinction.” “If the Islamic State is not defeated and ultimately destroyed,” said Congressman Wolf, “there will be no future for these ancient faith communities.”

Last year’s recipient of the Colson Center’s Wilberforce Award, Baghdad’s Canon Andrew White, heads a team bringing relief to those who’ve chosen to flee rather than to die. His tender words put a human face on the misery in Iraq: “The situation…remains terrible,” wrote White on his blog recently. “The refugees displaced from [their] homes and towns have been suffering so much in the cold of winter. Our team up there has been doing a great job continuing to provide food and warm clothing to the hundreds in distress.”

But folks, these kinds of provisions mean nothing if no one stops the onslaught of ISIS. And whether we like it or not, America is not without responsibility.
As Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Sako pointed out last year, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, (and our precipitous withdrawal in 2012), was precisely what destabilized his country and paved the way for ISIS. To refuse to act now and abandon Christians who have lived and worshipped there since before our nation existed, is unthinkable.

Folks, there is a time for war. And as Congress decides whether this is that time, we need to pray—not only for our leaders’ wisdom and our troops’ safety, but for those on the edge of extinction—our brothers and our sisters in Iraq.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

RESOURCES
"Edge of Extinction: Plight of Iraqi Christians" - 21st Wilberforce Initiative Report; http://www.21wilberforce.org/
"Debate Opens on New War Powers" - Carol E. Lee and Michael R. Crittenden | Wall Street Journal | February 11, 2015; http://www.wsj.com/articles/obama-asks-congress-to-authorize-military-action-against-islamic-state-1423666095
"Iraq’s Christians ‘do not have much time left,’" -  says leading cleric Ishaan Tharoor | Washington Post | February 11, 2015; http://tablet.washingtonpost.com/world/iraqs-christians-do-not-have-much-time-left-says-leading-cleric/2015/02/11/82e1079104698c17b48c5fcbc9cf7bff_story.html?tid=kindle-app
"Church patriarch in Iraq blames U.S. for Christians’ misery" - Ishaan Tharoor | Washington Post | September 4, 2014; http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/04/church-patriarch-in-iraq-blames-u-s-for-christians-misery/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is from Liberty Council, Feb. 18 - "ISIS is in the midst of a brutal rampage across northern Iraq that is killing and displacing hundreds of thousands of Christians and other minorities. President Obama doesn't want to call this a religious war. But it is a religious war, at least according to ISIS. … in late June on the first Friday of Ramadan, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi  stood in a pulpit at a Mosque in Mosul and announced his religious war and declare this new "caliphate."
Why Mosul? Why that mosque? Al-Baghdadi chose the location because that mosque in Mosul was built in honor of an Islamic war leader who, 900 years ago, led the triumphant slaughter of Christians in that region. Al-Baghdadi stood on that "sacred ground" in Islam's religious war and announced a triumphant next phase in Islam's war against Christians and Jews. And that is why ISIS continues to strongly defend Mosul and rule that entire area with an iron fist as this war continues.
ISIS is advancing with purpose in its religious war, and the victims are the hundreds of thousands of Christians and other persecuted minorities who are suffering so greatly.


Tuesday, February 17, 2015

# 1146 (2/17) "What French McDonald’s Restaurants Tell Us About the Pros and Cons of a Minimum Wage Hike"

"What French McDonald’s Restaurants Tell Us About the Pros and Cons of a Minimum Wage Hike" Jack Wilson / February 03, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/03/french-mcdonalds-tell-us-pros-cons-minimum-wage-hike/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRols6nIZKXonjHpfsX56eguXa%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ESMpjI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D


Photo: Brian Kersey Credit: Newscom

... Many think the answer to helping Americans thrive and get ahead is to increase the minimum wage—and [President] Obama has often talked about his support for hiking it. But it’s a mistake to think hiking the minimum wage will help. In fact, a hiked minimum wage could harm people, not help them thrive.

The Heritage Foundation’s James Sherk says  that raising wages would have a particular impact on the fast food industry, where many low skilled and young workers get their start in a journey to better and higher paying jobs.  Sherk states that by raising worker wages, “many fast-food restaurants would respond by restructuring dramatically in order to use less labor.” In other words, there would be fewer jobs as a result of the mandated higher wages—and fewer opportunities for low-skilled and young-workers to be employed.

Recently, McDonald’s, one of the world’s largest fast food chains, has been struggling. Citing fewer customer visits, tough competition and increased expenses, McDonald’s reported decreased sales and decreased operating income for the fourth quarter of 2014. McDonald’s states that “results were impacted by higher selling, general and administrative and other expenses associated with positioning the business for the future.” According to McDonald’s President and CEO Don Thompson, these negative trends are expected to continue into January.Now, imagine the effect having to pay workers the increased minimum wage the president demanded in his state of the union address would have on McDonald’s.

The president only has to look at McDonald’s restaurants in France to see the impact a higher minimum wage would have. France’s minimum wage is $10.60 an hour. Not surprisingly, every McDonald’s has resorted to using touch screen ordering rather than workers. It simply doesn’t make sense, when minimum wage starts that high, to employ people when machines can do the job.

This is reality. When faced with high operating costs, corporations such as McDonald’s will find ways to cut costs, whether by substituting technology for labor or forgoing improvements and investments in the company’s future. Companies substituting machines for employees is just one potential outcome of raising the minimum wage.

[Also] If companies choose not to eliminate employees, they’ll make up costs in a different way, often by passing the costs to consumers by charging higher prices. Ultimately, top businesses such as McDonald’s operate on thin margins that require efficiency and operational optimization that an artificial wage raise would undermine.

Ultimately passing a minimum wage hike would provide fewer, not more, opportunities to Americans. If Obama wants to see all Americans thrive, he should make sure they have as many opportunities to do so as possible—and stop promoting a minimum wage hike.

Jack Wilson is executive assistant to the vice president in the Institute for Economic Freedom and Opportunity at The Heritage Foundation.

Monday, February 16, 2015

# 1145 (2/16) "It’s Time to Rediscover George Washington’s Greatness"

"It’s Time to Rediscover George Washington’s Greatness" - Carson Holloway/ February 16, 2015 / 
http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/16/time-rediscover-george-washingtons-greatness/ [AS I S IT: When you ask people who they consider was America's greatest President, many if not most will say it was Abraham Lincoln. Remarkably few realize how Washington's greatness and invaluable service to his country spanned decades before he became (possibly the only President who truly did so reluctantly) President and who could have served till he died in office if he chose to. I do hope one day they will finally produce a motion picture that does him full justice, as that may be the only way that most Americans will (unfortunately) be truly made aware of his greatness. P.S. - Did you know that originally, his birthday, Feb. 22nd, was celebrated each year and before the third Monday of each month made to honor all Presidents (just so we could have a three-day weekend)? - Stan]

Photo: Getty Images

What’s so great about George Washington?

I don’t mean this as a rhetorical question, implying that Washington really was not great—as such a question might be intended by many modern scholarly debunkers of great men. I intend it, rather, as a real question from which we can gain some valuable insight: what exactly made George Washington great? What was it about him that makes him one of the greatest American presidents and perhaps even the greatest?

It is altogether fitting and proper to ask this question on the anniversary of Washington’s birth.[Feb. 22nd]  By asking and answering it, we do justice to him and do good for ourselves. Exploring the question does justice to Washington because it compels us to honor him intelligently.

Honor is what we owe him, but the honor is empty, and therefore the debt is really left unpaid, if we do not try to reflect on his virtues. At the same time, exploring the question does good to ourselves because it compels us to admire him intelligently, such that we might hope to imitate his virtues and therefore make more secure the political order that he and the other founders gave to us.

Those who admire the founding generation—whose numbers thankfully still outstrip the debunkers—sometimes speak of them as a generation of geniuses. The word genius is overused and thus undervalued these days, but it is probably not inappropriate to apply it to many of the American founders. At least we can say without exaggeration that it is very, very rare for the affairs of a nation to be in the hands of men who were both able statesmen and rigorous political thinkers—men like Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

Washington stands out, even among the founders, for the greatness of his character. Indeed, for that reason, he was a better president than any of them were or probably could have been.

Here we encounter a kind of paradox. We are apt to praise the founders for their genius, yet the greatest man among the founders, the indispensable man, was remarkable in a different way. George Washington was certainly an intelligent man who had understood and reflected on the natural rights doctrine that informed the founding. He was clearly an astute observer of American politics who came to understand sooner than some that the government created by the Articles of Confederation was incompetent to preserve the Union and so would have to be replaced by something better. But his greatest virtues lay outside the theoretical realm.

What, then, made Washington the greatest man of this great generation? It was his character. George Washington stands out, even among men of the caliber of the founders, for the greatness of his character. Indeed, for that reason, he was a better president than any of them were or probably could have been. For example, for all of his stupendous mental energy, Alexander Hamilton was somewhat wild and politically impulsive when he was not under Washington’s influence. For all of their genuine commitment to the nation’s new government, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison at first insisted on an unrealistically narrow interpretation of its powers from which they later had to backtrack. For all of his sincere patriotism and powerful intelligence, John Adams was irascible and could not get along with his own cabinet.

These men showed repeatedly that they were capable of making mistakes that Washington would never make. This means that in the decisive sense he was the better statesman, the one who could more safely be entrusted with the nation’s care.

He was better because of his character—specifically, his self-command, which prevented his ever taking any political step on impulse, without carefully weighing its consequences for the country. The missteps of these other great men have a common root: undisciplined passion, whether a personal passion, like pride, or an intellectual passion, like prideful attachment to one’s own theoretical opinions about government, unqualified by a practical attention to the country’s needs.

George Washington had trained himself from young manhood in the discipline of his passions. They were always well-governed, and this made him uniquely qualified to govern others, even when compared with the intellectual luminaries of that intellectually luminous generation.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

Carson Holloway is currently a visiting fellow in American political thought in the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics at The Heritage Foundation.

Sunday, February 15, 2015

# 1144 (2/15) SUNDAY SPECIAL - "The Radical Demands of the Gospel.."

"The Radical Demands of the Gospel - DAVID PLATT’S 'COUNTER CULTURE'" - By: Eric Metaxas|Published: February 12, 2015; http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/26864?spMailingID=10631623&spUserID=MTMyMjM2ODE5OQS2&spJobID=480965627&spReportId=NDgwOTY1NjI3S0
daily_commentary_02_12_15
In the past few decades, we’ve watched as Christianity has moved from a major public force to more of a social outlier. Equally disturbing is the apparent moral divide we’ve seen between liberal and conservative Christians, with some choosing to focus on a social justice Gospel and others focusing on personal and social morality. More recently, we’ve seen traditionally conservative evangelical leaders and churches downplay the moral guidance of the Bible while emphasizing a narrower focus on poverty and racism.

But Dr. David Platt, who wrote the book “Radical” and who now heads up the Southern Baptist Convention’s International Missions Board, is saying, hold on; it doesn’t need to be either/or. In fact, it can’t be. As he writes in his new book, “Counter Culture: Radically Following Jesus with Conviction, Courage, and Compassion,” to be serious about the Gospel of Jesus Christ is to also be concerned about the whole range of social and moral issues impacting culture.

According to Dr. Platt, problems arise when Christians pick and choose which issues to address and which to ignore. By way of example, he shares that many Christians vocally oppose racism and sex trafficking, but remain strangely silent about marriage and pornography.

This softening on moral matters comes about when Christians grow fearful of being divisive. However, as Dr. Platt shared with John Stonestreet on “BreakPoint This Week,” Christians need to realize that “Without question, the most offensive claim in Christianity is that there is a God who is the Creator, and owner, and judge of every person on the planet.” These issues we argue about in the public square are secondary to the fact that God created and rules over all.

Rather than making us more timid in the public square, this central truth of Christianity should give us courage to face the divisive issues head on. Dr. Platt explains that from the beginning, God created marriage between a man and a woman in order to foreshadow the marriage of Christ with His Bride, the Church, and to display the Gospel to the world. So when we avoid defending traditional marriage we practice a kind of “selective social injustice” by denying the fullness of God’s plan to those who desperately need it.

Of course, if you know anything about David Platt, you know he isn’t just trying to change people’s opinions. He wants to change their behavior; radically, if need be. To do that, he lays out a three-fold response for creating a Christian counter-culture, his Three P's.

The first is Prayer. To pray is to begin the process of impacting culture wherever we are. The second is to Proclaim. We can proclaim the truth about important moral and social issues with Gospel clarity and Gospel compassion. But he also encourages us to be “aggressive about the proclamation of the Gospel because the Gospel brings redemption.”

Finally, we need to be ready to Participate in the cultural issues of the day. That is, we come prepared to join in with what God is already doing in the world.

Christians will always be tempted to conform to the prevailing culture, but when we do, we lose the heart of the Gospel and the foundation of what we believe. The bittersweet aspect of this cultural moment is that while we may live in tough times, the world is ripe for a Gospel that marries moral concerns with social justice.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

RESOURCES
Counter Culture: Radically Following Jesus with Conviction, Courage, and Compassion - David Platt | Tyndale House Publishers | September 2014; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/product.asp?sku=9781414373294

Saturday, February 14, 2015

# 1143 (2/14) "No Greater Love: Putting the Life of Her Unborn Baby First, Mother Dies After Giving Birth"

"No Greater Love: Putting the Life of Her Unborn Baby First, Mother Dies After Giving Birth" STEVEN ERTELT   FEB 12, 2015   |  http://www.lifenews.com/2015/02/12/no-greater-love-putting-the-life-of-her-unborn-baby-first-mother-dies-after-giving-birth/ [AS I SEE IT: I've heard people who advocate abortion say that it should be allowed when the mother's life's in danger. Of course, what they usually refer to is the mother's "psychological"life, her well-being emotionally. Yes, there are cases like these when the mother's physical life is in danger - at least as best as doctor's can determine it (which is sometimes proven wrong). But those times are in the one percent range of all pregnancies. That's why every day when I pray for the over 3,000 girls and women EVERY DAY who have scheduled abortions , I pray that whether by seeing a sonogram or having a dream or vision from God they will realize they are about to end the life of their unborn child, not merely ridding her body of some tissue. May they then have a mother's love towards her child. As this story illustrates, a mother's love is a life-giving love. - Stan]

Suzanne Mazzola, a special education teacher from Tamarac, Florida, was told during her pregnancy that giving birth to her son could cost her her life. She could have decided to have an abortion — after all, most people believe abortion is permissible in cases when the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life. But Mazzola proved that there really is no greater love than laying down’s one life for someone else. The 34-year-old died last week after giving birth to her fourth child, a beautiful little boy named Owen.

During her pregnancy, Mazzola suffered from placenta accreta, a rare condition that causes the blood vessels in the placenta to attach too deeply to the uterine wall causing severe bleeding. She knew that carrying Owen to term could potentially endanger her life but she made the decision to risk her life to save his. After delivering her healthy baby boy via Cesarean Section, Mazzola began hemorrhaging and a team of 15 doctors rushed her to emergency surgery. Despite their best efforts, they were unable to save her.

“She often mentioned how scared she was,” Mazzola’s coworker, Grace Duran, told the Sun-Sentinel newspaper. “We always told her to have faith and be positive. But we never thought this would be the outcome.” “As with many of us, we never think the worst will happen and don’t plan well enough for something like this,” wrote Mazzola’s aunt, Janet Free, on the family’s You Caring page. “Suzanne’s four children and husband Joe need our support, as there isn’t any financial safety net. Please honor Suzanne by helping support her family in their time of need.”[See link below]

Family friends are now raising funds to help the Mazzola family. Suzanna left behind her husband Joe, and their four children Matteo, 7, Ella, 5, Luca, 2, and Owen.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine] 

The following is from their You Caring page:

“Children are a gift from the Lord, a reward from a mother’s womb.”  -Psalms 127:3

A Mother’s Love

Is something that no one can explain,

It is made of deep devotion and sacrifice and pain,

It is endless and unselfish and enduring, what may

For nothing can destroy it or take that love away…

It is patient and forgiving when all others are forsaking,

And it never fails or faulters even though the heart is breaking…

It believes beyond believing when the world around condemns,

And it glows with all the beauty of the rarest brightest gems…

It is far beyond defining,

It defies all explanations,

And it still remains a secret

Like the mysteries of creation…

A many splendored miracle man cannot understand

And another wondrous evidence of God’s tender guiding hand. -  By: Helen Steiner Rice

Please honor Suzanne by helping support her family in their time of need.-    http://www.youcaring.com/family-fundraiser/pennies-from-heaven-for-suzanne-mazzola-s-little-angels/301429]