#2227 (2/28) "More Than A Motto"

"MORE THAN A MOTTO" - Tony Perkins, Washington Update, Feb. 23, 2018; http://www.frc.org/updatearticle/20180223/more-motto [AS I SEE IT: The writers quoted in this article make points you are likely not to hear reported in the mainstream media. But I think that we should at least be hearing it presented from our pulpits. I also wish President Trump would also take time to state what's noted in this article. - Stan]

Nothing we do will ever bring back the 17 bright lights of Parkland. Children, coaches, lifetimes of promise -- all lost, too soon. As parents, we've watched moms and dads in communities all across America experience an agony we can't fathom. We've cried at the photos of smiling teenagers who will never have another school picture. And we wonder -- when will we make it stop, or at least lessen?

The faceless, nameless crisis that leads people to murder innocent people -- is there a cure? More Americans than ever are desperately seeking one. "What's gone wrong with our culture that produces such atrocities?" Peggy Noonan asked before answering her own question. "It's a very long list." In a country so numb to violence, what happened in Florida feels different. Gun control is back on the table, but so is the longing for something deeper.

"It is not a secret that we have some gun issues that need to be addressed," said Florida Rep. Kimberly Daniels, a Democrat, "but the real thing that needs to be addressed are the issues of the heart." Following nearby Arkansas, she is sponsoring a bill to bring the conversation back to what matters: God. This week, her legislation to require "In God We Trust" in every school shows how quickly the environment is changing. By 97-10, state leaders agreed, it's time to address the real problem. Daniels was just as heartbroken as any American when she heard the news of the school shooting. But, she believes God spoke to her and said, "Do not politicize what has happened in Florida, and do not make this a thing of division." So, she worked on a different solution -- reminding people to do good. "God is not a Republican or a Democrat. He is not black or white. He is the light and our schools need light in them like never before."

What's wrong, Noonan writes, deep down we all know.
     "The family blew up -- divorce, unwed childbearing. Fatherless sons. Fatherless daughters, too. Poor children with no one to love them. The internet flourished. Porn proliferated. Drugs, legal and illegal. Violent videogames, in which nameless people are eliminated and spattered all over the screen... The abortion regime settled in, with its fierce, endless yet somehow casual talk about the right to end a life... So much change, so much of it un-gentle. Throughout, was anyone looking to children and what they need?"

The questions after Parkland are the same ones we've had since Columbine. But now is the time for honesty. We can harden the targets, but we need to soften hearts too. Nothing we do will matter if we don't acknowledge that America has lost its way – that we've reject the creator, and creation has turned on itself. Our children are our future, and they're far too valuable to keep drawing political lines and standing on one side or the other. If we want to talk about access to guns, we've got to talk about access to God. And it's not happening in our schools today.

We need Americans from both sides of the aisle who are willing to look for real solutions that fill the cracks in our families and our hearts. I'm willing. "It starts," Ken Blackwell told me yesterday on "Washington Watch, "with how we value life. I know there are a lot of intellectuals on the political Left who don't see the connection, but when you start to destroy innocent human life because of unwantedness, you in fact begin to cheapen the value of life. As a consequence, it's been manifested in our culture, and it makes it easier for people to become insensitive to the loss of innocent life... As we've all said for decades, you can't run God and faith out of the public square and not expect to have these sort of consequences."

Noonan, who sees the world crumbling all around us, thinks our kids are watching.
    "I'll tell you what I think a teenager absorbs about [abortion], unconsciously, in America. He sees a headline online, he passes a television in an airport, he hears the quick story and he thinks: 'If the baby we don't let live is unimportant, then I guess I am unimportant. And you're unimportant too.' They don't even know they're breathing that in. But it's there, in the atmosphere, and they're breathing it in. And it doesn't make you healthier."

[italics and colored emphasis mine]

"The Parkland Massacre and the Air We Breathe" - Peggy Noonan,  The Wall Street Journal: February 22, 2018; http://www.peggynoonan.com/

#2226 (2/27) "Why the Left Opposes Arming Teachers"

"WHY THE LEFT OPPOSES ARMING TEACHERS" - Dennis Prager: Feb 27, 2018; https://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2018/02/27/why-the-left-opposes-arming-teachers-n2454716 [AS I SEE IT: Like this writer, I too can't understand why no one is talking about requiring any teacher to carry a gun but those who are willing to, have a background check themselves, and who are well-trained. If a teacher is willing to put his/her life on the line to protect a student, why shouldn't they be equipped to do so as effectively as possible. A shooter will always hesitate (I agree with the President that such people are basically cowards who want to target the innocent) when they think someone they confront might have a gun just as a robber will hesitate if they have any idea that the clerk might have a weapon (which many now do). Of course, there will be details to work out and their should be. But to simply dismiss the President's suggestion out of hand makes no sense. - Stan]

Why does the left oppose allowing a small number of highly trained teachers and other adults who work at schools to arm themselves?

When asked, their response is consistent: "It's a crazy idea." And "We need fewer guns, not more guns." A New York Times editorial offered the following argument against having any armed teachers: "Nationwide statistics on police shooting accuracy are not to be found. But if New York is typical, analyses show that its officers hit their targets only one-third of the time. And during gunfights, when the adrenaline is really pumping, that accuracy can drop to as low as 13 percent."
But if that is an argument against armed teachers, why isn't it an argument against armed police?

And that argument was Aristotelian compared to this one from a Los Angeles Times editorial: "If a pistol-strapping chemistry teacher had grabbed her .45 and unloaded on today's gunman after he killed, what, one student? Three? Five? That would be good news?" Of course, no murder is "good news." But to most of us, one or three or five as compared with 17  murdered is good news. Only those who think it isn't good news think permitting some teachers and other school staff to be armed is a bad idea.

Beyond such arguments, the left rarely, if ever, explains why allowing some teachers and other adults in a school to be armed is a crazy idea. They merely assert it as a self-evident truth. But, of course, it's not a self-evident truth. On the contrary, having some adults who work at schools be trained in the responsible use of guns makes so much sense that the left's blanket opposition seems puzzling.

It shouldn't be. On the question of taking up arms against evil, the left is very consistent.
The left almost always opposes fighting evil and almost always works to disarm the good who want to fight. This is as true on the national level as it is on the personal.

Those old enough to remember the Cold War will remember that the left constantly called for a "nuclear freeze," including a unilateral freeze by Western countries. Likewise, the European left mounted huge demonstrations against America bringing Pershing 2 missiles into Western Europe. No matter how violent the Soviet Union was, the left always opposed a strong Western military. The left mocked then-President Ronald Reagan's call for an anti-ballistic missile defense system; it couldn't understand why Americans would think being able to protect America from incoming ballistic missiles was a good and moral idea. The left so effectively derided the idea, mockingly dubbing it "Star Wars," that few knew its real name: the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).

So, too, the left universally condemns Israeli attacks on those who seek not merely to defeat Israel but to exterminate it. The left around the world condemned Israel's military responses to Hamas launching missiles at Israeli civilian targets. They declared Israel's counterattacks "disproportionate" -- because more Gazans were killed than Israelis. Never mind which party was the aggressor or which party targeted civilians. Had the left been as active in the 1940s, it surely would have condemned the Allies for their bombing of Germany and Japan; after all, far more German and Japanese civilians were killed in Allied bombing raids than Allied civilians were killed in German bombing raids. Now that was really "disproportionate."

Fighting evil is the left's Achilles heel. As I have repeatedly noted, the left fights little evils, or even non-evils, rather than great evils.

With regard to fighting communism in the 20th century and today fighting radical Islamic terror and Islamist treatment of women, the Stalinist North Korean regime, the Holocaust-denying and Holocaust-planning theocracy of Iran, the Syrian mass murderers and the violent crime in America, the left is either silent or appeasing. And, of course, it works constantly to weaken the American military, the world's greatest force against evil.

But the left does direct its fighting spirit against Confederate statues, schools with the name of slave owners (including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson), carbon emissions, income inequality, "microaggressions," "white privilege," any limitation on abortion, Columbus Day, "Islamophobia," Israeli settlements, "Russian collusion" and the like. Against these minimal or nonexistent evils, the left is ferocious.

That is why the left opposes enabling some teachers and other adults in schools to carry arms in order to possibly stop a mass murderer: The left doesn't fight evil; it fights those who do. Just as the left hated anti-communists, hates opponents of Islamism and hates Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (far more than the Iranian ayatollahs), it hates those who wish to see teachers and others voluntarily armed take down the murderers of our children.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

"Scores Of Ohio Teachers Sign Up For Free Gun Training Lessons For Concealed Carry" - Matt Vespa Matt Vespa |Posted: Feb 26, 2018; https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/02/26/scores-of-ohio-teachers-sign-up-for-free-gun-training-lessons-n2453816
     "...Sheriff Richard Jones added that most school shootings are over in three-and-a-half to four minutes; police response time is usually around five minutes.  It’s one of the few reasons why he’s pushing these courses to make schools safer in his jurisdiction, though many disagree with the initiative. Another one that’s being floated is hiring military veterans as armed security in schools."

#2225 (2/26) "Do Not Let Children Lead the Gun Debate"

"DO NOT LET CHILDREN LEAD THE GUN DEBATE" - Michelle Malkin / @michellemalkin / February 22, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/22/do-not-let-the-children-lead-gun-debate/ [AS I SEE IT: I overall agree with this writer. The media does a good job of highlighting the most articulate (usually) but too many make emotional statements that are not thought through nor can they be with so little life experience. It's sad that so many do not realize they are being used by the media, certain academics, and special interest groups to push their agenda. I just hope enough Americans are discerning well whose voices are worth our consideration and whose are not. - Stan]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where are all the grown-ups in times of crisis and grief? Don’t bother searching America’s prestigious law schools.

Two adult men, occupying lofty perches as law professors, argued this week that the voting age in the U.S. should be lowered to 16 because some high school survivors of the Parkland, Florida, shooting who want gun control “are proving how important it is to include young people’s voices in political debate.” That was the assertion of University of Kentucky law professor Joshua Douglas on CNN.com. He praised some student leaders at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who’ve been making the rounds on TV, shouting at President Donald Trump, Republicans in Congress, and the National Rifle Association “to demand change”—which Douglas defines obtusely as “meaningful gun control,” whatever that means. Because these children are apparently doing a better job at broadcasting his own ineffectual political views, Douglas asserts, “we should include them more directly in our democratic process” by enfranchising them now.

Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe similarly tweeted, “Teens between 14 and 18 have far better BS detectors, on average, than ‘adults’ 18 and older.” On what basis does Tribe make such a claim? On a foundation of BS.Undaunted, gun control advocate Tribe urged: “Wouldn’t it be great if the voting age were lowered to 16? Just a pipe dream, I know, but … #Children’sCrusade?”

This is unadulterated silliness. It’s hashtag hokum from a pair of pandering left-wing profs exploiting a new round of Democratic youth props. I have called this rhetorical fallacy “argumentum ad filium”: If politicians appeal to the children, it’s unassailably good and true.

This is not compassion, but abdication. America is not a juvenilocracy. It is a constitutional republic. There is a reason we don’t elect high school sophomores and juniors to public office or allow them to cast ballots. There are many, many reasons, actually.

Pubescents are [generally] fueled by hormones and dopamine and pizza and Sonic shakes. They’re fickle and fragile and fierce and forgetful. They hate you. They love you. They need you. They ignore you. They know everything. They know nothing. All in the span of 10 seconds. I know. I have two of them.

If you’re lucky, they’ve only Googled “Should I eat Tide Pods?” or “What happens if I snort ramen powder?” and not actually attempted the latest social media stunt challenges.

But that’s what kids do. Because they’re kids.

Many may be exceptionally smart, passionate, and articulate beyond their years, but they do not possess any semblance of wisdom because they have not lived those years. Their knowledge of history, law, and public policy is severely limited (Common Core certainly hasn’t helped). And their moral agency and cognitive abilities are far from fully developed.

Most are in no position to change the world when they can’t even remember to change their own bedsheets.

Yet, Tribe relishes the opportunity to hide behind the young Parkland activists headed to CNN’s propaganda town halls and Washington, D.C.: “NRA will meet more than its match in these amazing kids,” he gleefully cheered. “[I]t’ll meet its master and will be brought to heel. At long last.”

President Barack Obama employed this very same kiddie human shield strategy to ram his federal health care takeover through Capitol Hill and down our throats. Immigration and education lobbyists use it, too. Their cynicism is unbounded.

Human prop-a-palooza infantilizes public discourse and renders measured, mature dissent impossible. Those who question the logic, efficacy, and wisdom of the latest left-wing “children’s crusade” face accusations of “hating” the children. Refusing to acquiesce to their tears and protests is tantamount to letting them die.

Showing resilience and resolve in the face of horrific adversity deserves the highest praise and attention. Juvenile victim status, however, does not warrant absolute moral authority or the unfettered powers in the political arena that ideologically stunted law professors are so eager to bestow upon them.

It’s fine to listen, but do not let the children lead.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Michelle Malkin is the senior editor of Conservative Review. She is a New York Times best-selling author and a FOX News Channel contributor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Opinion Laundering in Parkland’s Wake" - by Kyle Smith, National Review, Feb.26, 2018; https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/opinion-laundering-in-parklands-wake/

#2224 (2/21) "Liar, Lunatic, Legend, or Lord?"

"LIAR, LUNATIC, LEGEND, OR LORD?"[Sign up for the J. Warner Wallace Short Course] - by John Stonestreet/Stan Guthrie, Breakpoint.org, Feb.15, 2018; http://www.breakpoint.org/2018/02/breakpoint-liar-lunatic-legend-lord/

If someone asked you whether we can really know who Jesus is and what He accomplished, could you give a convincing answer?

Well, Easter is just around the corner. And that means so are those annual TV specials and magazine articles that cast doubt on the biblical account of Jesus, wondering aloud whether he even existed or not. It’s amazing how many mainstream media outlets still posit that fringe theory as if there’s a serious, scholarly debate. There isn’t.

Even so, what are we going to do with this opportunity in front of us? Because that’s what it is…a great opportunity to tell friends and neighbors the truth about Jesus. After all, the events surrounding the life of Jesus, especially the crucifixion and the resurrection, either happened or they didn’t. We’re not talking about merely issues of personal belief; we’re talking about real events of history, and if they happened, change everything.

When Christians say that Christianity is true, we’re not saying that we think it’s true. Or that it’s true for us and not for “them.” Or that it’s true if you believe. No, we mean that it’s true whether you believe it or not. We mean that Christianity is just flat-out true: that Jesus actually lived, that you could have seen Him, that the crucifixion actually took place, that He really did rise from the dead.

Had you been there, you could’ve eaten the fish and loaves that were multiplied by Jesus from the little boy’s lunch. The water that Jesus walked on would have gotten you wet. And had you been in that upper room with Thomas, you could have seen the wounds on Jesus’ hands and placed your finger in His side.

These historical events are not just matters of personal faith; they’re matters of public truth. And you and I, especially in this cultural moment, have a responsibility, a task, a calling even, to articulate and defend these truths when called upon.

Now if you can’t, I’ve got some great news. You can learn to do this. I’m always troubled when Christians act as if there are not reasons that back up their faith. Folks, we live in the golden age of apologetics. And one of the most effective equippers of others is Colson Center Senior Fellow J. Warner Wallace.
     Wallace, who’s written such great books as Cold Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, is offering an exclusive four-day online short course called “Jesus: Liar, Lunatic, Legend, or Lord?”
     The course begins next week on February 21, and will run for four consecutive Wednesday nights beginning each week at 8pm Eastern. If you enroll, you’ll receive a recording of the entire course to review again and again, even if you happen to miss one or more of the live sessions.

J. Warner Wallace’s first career was as a cold-case homicide detective. Today, he’s a best-selling author and nationally known speaker, who also serves as an adjunct professor of apologetics at Biola University. He knows his stuff, and he’s as good as it gets in equipping others to make the case for Christian truth. A former atheist himself, Wallace put Christianity to the test in an investigation that finally led to his conversion. And he had to face the same question we all hear every Easter: who is Jesus?  “Many faith traditions lay claim to famous religious leaders and founders,” Wallace says, “but Jesus is different… the New Testament leaves little room for doubt: Jesus claimed to be God and taught this truth to His followers.”

While the prophets usually said, “This is what the Lord says,” Jesus said, “I tell you the truth.” Wallace adds, “Prophets spoke for God, but Jesus consistently spoke as God. In addition, Jesus claimed God’s title, “I am,” and other significant characteristics of God—such as the ability to forgive sins.”

That’s what Jesus claimed, but the question is, was He telling the truth? Or maybe he was crazy. Or maybe the Gospel accounts are fairy tales. Or maybe…

Come to BreakPoint.org to sign up for this short course with J. Warner Wallace. Be prepared to make the case for Jesus this Easter. Take this opportunity to sign up for the short course with J. Warner Wallace. Click here to register and to find out more about this nationally known author and speaker.

[italics and colored emphasis mine]

RESOURCES- Colson Center presents J. Warner Wallace: "Liar, Lunatic, Legend, or Lord"
Webinar description and sign-up - https://www.eventbrite.com/e/colson-center-presents-j-warner-wallace-liar-lunatic-legend-or-lord-tickets-42788166558
"J. Warner Wallace: A Cold-Case Detective Weighs the Evidence for the Gospels" - John Stonestreet | BreakPoint.org podcast | January 8, 2018; http://www.breakpoint.org/2018/01/j-warner-wallace-a-cold-case-detective-weighs-the-evidence-for-the-gospels/
"Christmas is Christmas Because Jesus is God" - J. Warner Wallace | December 22, 2017; http://coldcasechristianity.com/2017/christmas-is-christmas-because-jesus-is-god/
"10 Reasons to Accept the Resurrection of Jesus as an Historical Fact" - Brian Chilton | Crossexamined.org | April 11, 2017; https://crossexamined.org/10-reasons-accept-resurrection-jesus-historical-fact/
Mere Christianity- C. S. Lewis | HarperOne - http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/Product.asp?sku=0060652888

#2232 (2/17) PRO-LIFE SAT: "Florida House Committee Passes Bill to Ban Dismemberment Abortions Tearing Off Babies’ Limbs"

"FLORIDA HOUSE COMMITTEE PASSES ILL TO BAN DISMEMBERMENT ABORTIONS TEARING OFF BABIES' LIMBS" - Micaiah Bilger, FEB 16, 2018| http://www.lifenews.com/2018/02/16/florida-house-committee-passes-bill-to-ban-dismemberment-abortions-tearing-off-babies-limbs/ [AS I SEE IT: It was seeing this horrid procedure about to be performed in a sonogram image that caused me iver 30 years ago to realize how abortion was not just a "political" issue but a truly evil practice that Christians esp. needed to oppose. That ANY group of people - in this case those of Planned Parenthood and NOW - could support such a procedure speaks to me of how these groups must be continually opposed as well. We (esp. those in Florida) need TO PRAY that this bill makes it to our pro-life Governor's desk ASAP. -Stan]

     Florida House lawmakers advanced a bill to protect unborn babies from brutal dismemberment abortions Thursday. [2/16] The Health and Human Services Committee approved the bill in a 13-6 vote, moving it to the full House for a vote, News 4 JAX reports.

Florida House Bill 1429 would prohibit the practice of dismemberment abortion, a method typically used in the second trimester to kill nearly fully-formed, living unborn babies. It is a barbaric and dangerous procedure in which the unborn baby is ripped apart in the womb and pulled out in pieces while his or her heart is beating. Abortionists who violate the law could face felony charges.

A similar bill is being considered in the state Senate.

Here’s more from the report: 
     “Often the process begins while the fetus is living, and fetal death occurs due to or as a result of the trauma caused by the procedure,” said Rep. Erin Grall, a Vero Beach Republican who is sponsoring the bill. She said the legislation, which has cleared two other House committees, “expresses respect for the dignity of life by prohibiting a physician from performing this brutal procedure and tortious dismemberment on a living fetus.”

But Barbara DeVane, representing the Florida National Organization of Women, opposed the bill and complained that some House members on previous committees had unfairly criticized the bill’s opponents. The abortion chain Planned Parenthood also is fighting against the bill.

During the committee hearing, Kathi Aultman, a former abortionist who now is pro-life, described the brutal way dismemberment abortions destroy unborn babies.
    “I support this bill because it prevents the infliction of needless pain and suffering on an innocent human being with only minor inconvenience to the mother and the abortionist,” she said.

A handful of states already have passed dismemberment abortion bans. In 2017, a federal judge blocked the Texas law, claiming it is unconstitutional. Planned Parenthood is involved in the lawsuit; however, the state is appealing.
     The law made Texas the eighth state to protect developing preborn children from such a heinous act. Earlier in 2017, Arkansas enacted the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act joining Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and West Virginia.

The dismemberment abortion ban embodies model legislation from the National Right to Life Committee that would prohibit “dismemberment abortion,” using forceps, clamps, scissors or similar instruments on a living unborn baby to remove him or her from the womb in pieces. Such instruments typically are used in dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedures.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

#2231 (2/16) "Media Fawning Over North Korean Envoy Does No Favors for an Oppressed People"

"MEDIA FAWNING OVER NORTH KOREAN ENVOY DOES NO FAVORS FOR AN OPPRESSED PEOPLE" - Jarrett Stepman / @JarrettStepman / Feb. 12, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/12/media-fawning-north-korean-envoy-no-favors-oppressed-people/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

When North Korea announced it would be participating in this year’s winter Olympics in South Korea under a joint flag with the South, it was clear that some would attempt to “normalize” the regime. The speed at which the American media lapped up North Korean propaganda in the first weekend of the Olympics was stunning. Almost all of the major news networks and publications ran glowing profiles of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un’s sister, Kim Yo Jong, who has attended the games. CNN, Reuters, and others jumped in on the North Korea love fest.

It’s amazing that the same media that is so quick to slam the Trump administration for attacks on the press has apparently been clamoring to show the sunny side of an actual autocracy that allows no press freedom at all.

A Pew study released in October showed that only 5 percent of media reports portrayed the Trump administration in a positive light during his first year in office. Kim Jong Un’s sister, who is the regime’s deputy director of propaganda, apparently merits better treatment.

Perhaps even worse than the glowing profiles, members of the media lambasted the few voices who called out the charade and labeled the North Korean state exactly what it is, an almost unfathomably ruthless dictatorship.
     A Washington Post columnist actually demanded that conservative commentator Bethany Mandel “apologize” to North Korea for calling it the most brutal regime in history.
    According to CNN, the “senior diplomatic source close to North Korea” said that Pence “degraded the image of the United States as a superpower” by meeting with North Korean defectors and Fred Warmbier. Fred Warmbier is the father of Otto Warmbier, an American student who was nabbed by the North Korean government, imprisoned for years, and was finally released in a comatose state, a result of his brutal treatment. Warmbier died shortly after returning to the U.S.

Plenty of ink’s been spilled about this shameless media fawning and anti-Americanism of the North Korean Olympics coverage. These sad overtures will do little to soften the brutal whip of oppression that exists in that Stalinistic relic of the 20th century.

Instead, we should follow the path of President Ronald Reagan at the end of the Cold War and point out the real victims in North Korea, and what the Kim dictatorship does to the poor souls who suffer under it. 
     One of the most profound moments in that half-century struggle was when Reagan stood in front of a microphone in 1983 and described the Soviet Union exactly as it was. Reagan said of the USSR in his so-called “Evil Empire” speech, “[W]hile they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.”
     Predictably, the media castigated the speech as overly bombastic. Journalist Steve Talbot wrote for Time magazine on the eve of the 1984 Olympics that Reagan had “made a bad situation” regarding the Soviet Union worse “by challenging the legitimacy of the Soviet regime, calling the USSR an ‘evil empire’ doomed to fail.”
     But the dissidents buried deep in the Soviet gulags received the speech quite differently when word of it reached their ears. Natan Sharansky, a physicist who had been unjustly imprisoned and spent over a decade rotting in a Siberian prison, explained to The Weekly Standard in 2004 what a world-shaking moment the Reagan speech was for those living under the yoke of oppression. It is worth quoting him at length:
     "It was the great brilliant moment when we learned that Ronald Reagan had proclaimed the Soviet Union an evil empire before the entire world … This was the moment. It was the brightest, most glorious day. Finally a spade had been called a spade. Finally, [George] Orwell’s Newspeak was dead. President Reagan had from that moment made it impossible for anyone in the West to continue closing their eyes to the real nature of the Soviet Union."
     Less than a decade later, the Berlin Wall fell without a shot being fired, in no small part due to an administration’s willingness to confront oppression head on and rhetorically undermine the legitimacy of Soviet rule

The real hope for the people of North Korea is in American leaders, and in the free people of the world unequivocally calling out a monstrous evil when they see it. It is in showing those ignored by the sight of cameras and gaggles of reporters that they are not forgotten, and that the most powerful nation on earth is on their side.This is why it was so important for the vice president to meet with the father of an American killed by the North Korean regime, and for the president to host a North Korean defector, on crutches, at his State of the Union address. 

The words and actions of American leaders must serve as a rebuke and a stumbling block to tyranny, despite our media’s obnoxious and embarrassing paeans to dictators.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Jarrett Stepman is an editor for The Daily Signal.

"Don’t Fall for North Korea’s Winter Olympics Trap" - Harry J. Kazianis / @grecianformula / February 08, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/08/dont-fall-north-koreas-winter-olympics-trap/
"Problematic Women: The Media’s Infatuation With Kim Jong Un’s Sister" - Ginny Montalbano / Feb. 15, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/15/problematic-women-the-medias-infatuation-with-kim-jong-uns-sister
"Who Was the Daring Defector Who Raised His Crutches High, Defying the Kim Regime During the State of the Union?" - Ryan Pickrell / @rwp2011 / February 01, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/01/who-was-the-daring-defector-who-raised-his-crutches-high-defying-the-kim-regime-during-the-state-of-the-union/
"What Is Life Really Like in North Korea? One Woman’s Story" - Chelsea Scism / @chescismlsea / July 28, 2015 / http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/28/escaped-refugee-hyeonseo-lee-reveals-what-life-is-like-in-north-korea/
"In 7 Tweets, the Media’s Strange, Glowing Coverage of North Korea at Olympics" - Lyndsey Fifield / @lyndseyfifield / Chrissy Clark / February 12, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/12/in-8-tweets-the-medias-strange-glowing-coverage-of-north-korea-at-olympics/

#2230 (2/15) "Polygamy, Robot Sex Are Consequences of the Sexual Revolution"

"POLYGAMY, ROBOT SEX ARE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION" - Bruce Ashford / @BruceAshford / February 13, 2018 / http://dailysignal.com/2018/02/13/polyamory-robot-sex-consequences-sexual-revolution/ [AS I SEE IT: I've long thought that our culture was going over the deep end in the "sexual revolution" but the extent to which people are doing truly bizarre things is stunning and so sad and scary. - Stan]

Recent media articles have shone the spotlight on polygamous and polyamorous relationships. (Photo: igor_kell/Getty Images)

Not for nothing, but the latest fruits of the sexual revolution are even more bizarre than most of us imagined. We knew things would get a little freaky, but maybe we didn’t know it would involve an upswing in polygamy, amorous activities with plastic women, or cuddling sessions with electric candelabra. But that is the state of affairs as we [note]Valentine’s Day this year.

We shouldn’t be surprised. When a society deifies sexual expression, it deifies a jealous god who will not be satisfied until every biological, social, and moral norm is overturned.

Consider the upswing in open marriages. In a recent edition of The Chronicle Review, Carrie Ichikawa Jenkins, a British-Canadian philosopher, argues that polygamy should be normalized. Jenkins practices polygamy (which she calls “polyamory”) with her husband, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, and her boyfriend, Ray Hsu. Jenkins and her husband have been open about their polygamy since July 2011, shortly after their wedding. Jenkins notes that people are judgmental, “lecturing” her for taking part in something they consider unnatural and immoral.
     But Jenkins responds that polygamy is quite natural and moral. She argues that polygamy is the most natural relationship of all, as can be seen in the fact that very few animal species are monogamous. “Not even swans are monogamous,” she says. Not even swans.She argues that polygamy is a moral way of life, with open marriages consisting of nothing more than ethical individuals being faithful to their multiple true loves.

Or, consider the emergence of sexual love with multiple sex dolls. Recently, The Guardian ran a story on James, a 58-year-old from Atlanta, Georgia. James, it turns out, is married to a human woman, Tine, but is also the owner of four life-size silicon sweethearts. Two years ago, James’ wife left the home briefly to care for her ailing mother. Months later, she returned to find her husband surrounded by four new “ladies,” remarkable for their physical dimensions and their willingness to remain silent.
     In short order, she learned that James had been “dating” the robots—taking them for picnics, watching television together, and engaging in, er, nocturnal activities with them. James’ plastic princesses are the fruit of an emerging industry of animatronic, AI-enabled silicon sexbots. These sexbots are custom-made, complete with silicon body parts, heating and lubrication systems, and changing facial expressions.

The idea of sex robots is not new. In 2007, futurist David Levy published “Love and Sex with Robots,” in which he argued that robotic love would soon be embraced in the West. In a recent interview, Levy argued that robotic love has many merits, as it could make prostitution obsolete, teach humans a greater variety of lovemaking positions, and provide pedophiles an outlet for their desire. “Look. One has to accept that sexual mores advance with time, and morality with it,” Levy said in a recent interview. “Nothing can be ruled out.”

Finally, consider the curious case of erotic love with multiple light fixtures. Recently, Inside Edition ran a story on Amanda Liberty, 33, of Leeds, England, who “married” her favorite chandelier. Liberty, who identifies as objectum sexual, says she just “knew” she would marry “Lumiere” the moment she first saw “her” on eBay last year. In spite of the marriage, Liberty remains in an open relationship with her collection of more than 20 other lighting fixtures. "None of my chandeliers are jealous of each other. They understand that I love them all for their different personalities. For example, I love kissing and cuddling Lumiere, but I sleep with Jewel every night, as she is portable and very nice to cuddle."

Relentlessly true to the inner logic of the sexual revolution, polygamy, sexbots, and object-sex are part of the relentless drive to redefine marriage, sex, and romantic love. We are hard-wired for sex, according to this logic, but society must not cast judgment on our choice of sexual union.
Other trends include Ivy League attempts to normalize sex with animals (bestiality) and dead people (necrophilia).

But make no mistake. These latest iterations of the sexual revolution are unnatural and immoral. Their public emergence might tell us what “is” happening culturally, but it cannot tell us what we “ought” to do.
    For the “ought,” we must turn, as our Founding Fathers did, to the Judeo-Christian view of humanity and sexuality. From it, we learn that God created human beings in his image and likeness, providing us with spiritual and moral guidance so that we could flourish and experience life’s goodness.
    Central to this moral guidance is the truth that marriage and family are the core social units of society. Together they form the most important context in which children are shaped to understand themselves and their relationship with the world.

So, on Valentine’s Day this year, let’s make clear to our children and to society that marriage is between one man and one woman, and that any departure from that norm will leave us empty and pitiful in our attempts at sexual fulfillment.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Bruce Ashford is provost and professor at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is the co-author of “One Nation Under God: A Christian Hope for American Politics,” and blogs at “Christianity for the Common Good.