Mangling the First Amendment

Cal Thomas published yesterday,

Intellectually, I understand the Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision that the First Amendment protects the most violent of video games.

Well, I don’t understand.

Because I thought the First Amendment was intended to protect political speech.

But I can’t see that it says so expressly:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So we’re “stuck” with going by what it actually says.

I still say the modern-day usage of the First Amendment has become mangled, perverted, and distorted.

And inconsistent. For example, how does the government get away with fining broadcasters for using certain language on the air waves? And for another example, how come imaginary hate speech isn’t protected?

Politics.

Humanity.

Imperfection.

Oh well.

I must say, though, that I’m very thankful for the First Amendment.

And I’ll also say that I agree with Mr. Thomas’ closing statements:

In a perfect world, children would listen to, respect, and obey their parents. But this is far from a perfect world and parents could use occasional help from the state in preventing violent culture from undermining what’s in the best interest of the child, and the country. This ruling by the Supreme Court does not achieve that end.

Ultimate Blue-Collar Praise?

In it’s full version, this statement is a dumb-yet-telling (and elitist) proclamation:

the ultimate blue-collar acknowledgment of a job well done

And that would be what, according to a major mainstream magazine?

Were Quayle and Gore as foul-mouthed as the current and previous Vice Presidents?

What makes people use profane and vulgar words?

And why has such speech crept into the hearts and mouths of Christian men and women?

HT on the quote: World Magazine

Monitoring Your Eyeballs

I need to remember to do this. And if you’re reading this on a monitor, so should you.

Reduce Computer-Caused Eye Strain with the 20-20-20 Rule

Repetitive stress injury RSI and eye strain are common ailments among computer users, and there’s no silver bullet for avoiding them beyond taking regular breaks to relax. Following his doctor’s advice, tech blogger Amit Agarwal suggests a simple 20-20-20 rule.

To help you deal with this problem, the 20-20-20 rule suggest that after every 20 minutes, you the computer user should take a break for at least 20 seconds and look at objects that are 20 feet away from you.

“Rule suggests” — isn’t that so…modern?

No wonder people treat the 55 mph rule as a suggestion and not a…well…rule.

But in the case of the 20-20-20 rule, I’m glad it’s only a suggestion. Otherwise, I need to be punished.

Well, that aside, apparently there are eyeball-rolling exercises to help eyestrain. But they shouldn’t be done just anywhere.

Timo Miller Update

Here are some excerpts from the first page of an Associated Press piece I read a few minutes ago:

Now, what started as a custody battle over little Isabella Miller-Jenkins has turned into a global manhunt, with indications that Mennonite pastors and other faith-based supporters may have helped hide the two in Nicaragua and are now coming to the aid of one who the FBI says helped Miller.

Eager to keep the girl away from Jenkins and what they consider a dangerous and immoral lifestyle, they liken their roles to that of underground helpers aiding runaway slaves.

“God’s Holy Law never recognizes a gay marriage,” said Pablo Yoder, a Mennonite pastor in Nicaragua, in an email message to The Associated Press. “Thus, the Nicaraguan Brotherhood felt it right and good to help Lisa not only free herself from the so called civil marriage and lesbian lifestyle, but especially to protect her nine year old daughter from being abducted and handed over to an active lesbian and a whole-hearted activist.”

[…]

In 2009, two months before the judge ordered the custody change, [Lisa] Miller and the girl flew to Central America and took up residence for an unknown amount of time in Nicaragua before vanishing again.

So says the FBI, which revealed in April that it had arrested Nicaraguan missionary Timothy David “Timo” Miller and charged him with abetting an international kidnapping by helping arrange travel and lodging for the two. He is awaiting trial.

[…]

Timo Miller has pleaded not guilty and is free on $25,000 bail, awaiting trial.

[…]

Yoder, who works the remote village of Waslala, 161 miles from Managua, told The Associated Press she celebrated her daughter’s birthday in his house last year. He wouldn’t say more.

Read the two-page story here A fight over a girl, and God’s law.

At this point, I have no further comments to add to those I’ve already made here.

Fog, Fog, Burn Away!

I stood at the kitchen sink.

Early this morning — just before (or was it just after?) five.

Carefully slurping hot coffee.

Looking out the window.

Drearily considering the circumstances.

Pleading with God.

Trying to have faith.

(Drearily, God, faith — is something out of place there?!) 😯

When I noticed what I was seeing:

Fog in the Pudding River bottoms

Somewhere down there in the Pudding River bottoms are cows.

In the fog.

They can’t see clearly.

For all they know, the whole world is foggy, bleary, dreary.

But the rising sun will fix that in short order.

Can I believe that God sees me and my fog in remotely similar fashion?

Can I believe that the Risen Son will fix my problems?

Sure.

I’m thankful.

Is Secularism Imaginary?

Which do you see as the greater threat to Jesus Christ’s Church: Islam or secularism?

Which do you fear more?

Evangelicals, according to survey research conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life, view secularism as a greater threat to Christianity than Islam. It seems, on the surface, like a great question for the cultural curmudgeon, at least from this relatively uncultured curmudgeon’s point of view. Will Christianity rot from the inside, or instead be overrun by the heathen hordes?

[…]

Or maybe what respondents meant, the 71 percent of them who chose “secularism” as the major threat to Christianity, is that what they fear most is a falling away, a slow boiling of the frog. Maybe it’s the gradual relaxation of standards that frightens them, the willingness of more and more self-professed Christians to pick and choose which doctrines they believe, if they care to countenance doctrines at all.

Wouldn’t it be something if the reason for this creeping secularism, if it exists, is the very notion of secularism itself?

[…]

In other words, maybe the greatest threat to Christianity is not that people abandon it for other things, but rather our own tendency—or mine, at least—to imagine that it has a limited domain, that there are the things of Christ and then there is all the rest of it. It’s not that a man goes to pornographic sites, it’s that he forgets every woman he sees is crafted in the image and likeness of God. It’s not that a woman goes cold in the marriage bed, it’s that she believes a Christian union is only a spiritual one. It’s not that our children go to where Christ is not, it’s that they imagine there is such a place.

How often I have imagined myself going to a “Christless corner,” some place in real life where God isn’t.

Such foolishness to attempt so impossible a task!

Let’s banish from our heads and from our living the dangerous notion that life has separate Christian and secular dimensions.

May God’s people be revived to such a degree that every dimension of our experience and environment becomes a living reality of acknowledging God in all our ways.

“In all thy ways acknowledge him.”
Proverbs 3:6

Well, please read Tony Woodlief’s full article over at World magazine: Christless corners.

Private
Above all, love God!

since November 9, 2005