Are government schools really so desperate that they are hiring felons as principal? In one case, the answer is yes.
A convicted felon and abortionist responsible for the deaths of at least two women has been hired at a Chicago public school as the new principal. A spokesman from Mildred I. Lavizzo School in the greater Roseland area told a pro-life advocate that the Lavizzo school council were apprised of the full background of their new principal, Dr. Arnold Bickham.
Just another sad example of those who should be shamed by the community being honored instead.
And just another reason to homeschool if you live in Chicago.
If you want to read the whole story, go to LifeSiteNews.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Triumphant Good Friday
As we think on Jesus' Crucifixion, let's remember that God can turn anything Satan intended for evil into a blessing. He can use a seeming weakness to bring Himself much glory.
And let's remember "that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death. We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin--because anyone who has died has been freed from sin." (Romans 6:3-7)
So let's live like we are alive.
And let's remember "that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death. We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin--because anyone who has died has been freed from sin." (Romans 6:3-7)
So let's live like we are alive.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
It's Not About Bunnies
This is a great video made by a homeschool family that really spotlights the commercialism of Easter and reminds us of the real meaning of Resurrection Sunday. I thought you might enjoy it as we head to Good Friday. I found it here.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Your Fired! (But You Deserve a Medal)
Thank God for Brenda Biesterfeld. She worked at a library in California (are we surprised?) and saw a man looking at kiddie porn on the computers. She told the police, the man was arrested (more kiddie porn at his house), and she was fired.
I fear for a country where those that try to protect the innocent are fired. God, please bless Brenda Biesterfeld.
On the bright side the community of Lindsey, California has rallied around Ms. Bisterfeld. Also, Liberty Council has taken her case.
For more on the story, go to LifeSiteNews.
I fear for a country where those that try to protect the innocent are fired. God, please bless Brenda Biesterfeld.
On the bright side the community of Lindsey, California has rallied around Ms. Bisterfeld. Also, Liberty Council has taken her case.
For more on the story, go to LifeSiteNews.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Obama's Afro-centric Church
Many of you may have heard that Obama attended an anti-American/anti-white sermon at his church. He has tried to distance himself from it, of course. I say that whether or not he was there for that particular sermon his church is rather unnerving.
From the About Us section of their website.
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
Check it out for yourself here.
From the About Us section of their website.
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
Check it out for yourself here.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Further Down the Slippery Slope
With the sexual liberation movement, we started down a slippery slope. In Germany they may slide a little further by legalizing consensual incest. The story behind the case is very sad; my heart really goes out to them. But legalizing incest is unthinkable in my world. These people need help not affirmation.
The brother was put in foster care at an early age because his alcoholic father threatened to kill him with a knife. As a grown up, he found his birth mother. She had a daughter (mentally slow) and a son by a different man. She invited her biological son to stay with them. Family starved, he left his job and moved in with them. The mother had him stay in the same room as the sister. Then she died suddenly. They clung together in grief and one thing lead to another. They now have 4 children together (3 in foster care). They have both been tried. The brother has served time. Now the German Supreme Court is hearing his case and may well move in his favor. You can read the whole story at Speigel Online.
The brother was put in foster care at an early age because his alcoholic father threatened to kill him with a knife. As a grown up, he found his birth mother. She had a daughter (mentally slow) and a son by a different man. She invited her biological son to stay with them. Family starved, he left his job and moved in with them. The mother had him stay in the same room as the sister. Then she died suddenly. They clung together in grief and one thing lead to another. They now have 4 children together (3 in foster care). They have both been tried. The brother has served time. Now the German Supreme Court is hearing his case and may well move in his favor. You can read the whole story at Speigel Online.
FL Acacdemic Freedom Law
I heard today that there is a bill in Florida that would ensure academic freedom for students and teacher who bring up contrary opinions to Darwinian evolution. I was doing some research on the web about it and came across this post. If anyone knows where I can read the text of the bill myself, I would love to do so.
Florida Darwinists Can’t Get Story Straight about Opposition to Academic Freedom Act
Darwinists in Florida are in a tizzy trying to figure out why they oppose the proposed Academic Freedom Act in their state. Sometimes they claim the act isn’t needed because no one who questions Darwin is being denied academic freedom. Other times they insist the act should be rejected because academic freedom is nothing but “smelly crap.” Still other times, they insist the act is bad because it supposedly authorizes the teaching of religion in science class, even though the text of the act clearly says the exact opposite (“This section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.”)
Many times, of course, Darwinists simply declare that no scientific evidence challenging Darwinism exists for academic freedom to protect. But in an article Wednesday in the Miami Herald, even pro-Darwin reporter Marc Caputo had to concede that “indeed, natural selection is under active challenge from evolutionary-developmental biologists, who say multicellular organisms can dynamically change form under certain environmental conditions, producing major evolutionary jumps.” In point of fact, there are lots of scientific criticisms of Neo-Darwinism made by credentialed scientists. Yet teachers and scientists around the country have been harassed and fired for discussing them. That’s the situation the Academic Freedom Act is designed to remedy.
The Florida Darwinists’ latest gambit to scuttle the bill is to refocus the debate on intelligent design. This was the main point of Caputo’s article. Misrepresenting the words of Casey Luskin at Wednesday's press conferences, Caputo insinuates that the point of the Academic Freedom Act is to push intelligent design, despite the fact that the bill doesn’t even mention the term. The bill simply protects the right “to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection.” Does this language protect information about intelligent design? The bill does not decide that question.
Right now, as Luskin correctly pointed out at the press conference, there is a debate raging over whether intelligent design is science. Scientists and philosophers who support ID certainly think it is scientific in precisely the same way Darwinism is scientific. But the proposed Academic Freedom Act does not wade into the design debate one way or another. If and when ID supporters are able to win the debate over whether ID science, then by definition any scientific information about it that pertains to biological or chemical evolution would be protected—just like any other scientific information relevant to those topics. But, again, the bill doesn’t decide the debate over whether ID is science. It leaves that debate alone.
So who would decide what is scientific under the bill?
The same people who currently must make that determination: science teachers themselves in consultation with their science curriculum staff and their school boards. And if they happen to promote something that isn’t science, we can be sure that groups like the ACLU will be ready to police their activities—just like they do now.
Ironically, the only reason Florida Darwinists would have to fear that this bill might protect intelligent design somewhere down the road is if they already have concluded they cannot win the debate over whether ID is science. Indeed, by insisting that intelligent design must be covered by the bill, Darwinists in Florida seem to have admitted that despite their rhetoric, they really believe that intelligent design is science after all! And that may be the most telling admission in the entire debate.
Posted by John West on March 14, 2008 5:38 AM
Florida Darwinists Can’t Get Story Straight about Opposition to Academic Freedom Act
Darwinists in Florida are in a tizzy trying to figure out why they oppose the proposed Academic Freedom Act in their state. Sometimes they claim the act isn’t needed because no one who questions Darwin is being denied academic freedom. Other times they insist the act should be rejected because academic freedom is nothing but “smelly crap.” Still other times, they insist the act is bad because it supposedly authorizes the teaching of religion in science class, even though the text of the act clearly says the exact opposite (“This section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.”)
Many times, of course, Darwinists simply declare that no scientific evidence challenging Darwinism exists for academic freedom to protect. But in an article Wednesday in the Miami Herald, even pro-Darwin reporter Marc Caputo had to concede that “indeed, natural selection is under active challenge from evolutionary-developmental biologists, who say multicellular organisms can dynamically change form under certain environmental conditions, producing major evolutionary jumps.” In point of fact, there are lots of scientific criticisms of Neo-Darwinism made by credentialed scientists. Yet teachers and scientists around the country have been harassed and fired for discussing them. That’s the situation the Academic Freedom Act is designed to remedy.
The Florida Darwinists’ latest gambit to scuttle the bill is to refocus the debate on intelligent design. This was the main point of Caputo’s article. Misrepresenting the words of Casey Luskin at Wednesday's press conferences, Caputo insinuates that the point of the Academic Freedom Act is to push intelligent design, despite the fact that the bill doesn’t even mention the term. The bill simply protects the right “to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection.” Does this language protect information about intelligent design? The bill does not decide that question.
Right now, as Luskin correctly pointed out at the press conference, there is a debate raging over whether intelligent design is science. Scientists and philosophers who support ID certainly think it is scientific in precisely the same way Darwinism is scientific. But the proposed Academic Freedom Act does not wade into the design debate one way or another. If and when ID supporters are able to win the debate over whether ID science, then by definition any scientific information about it that pertains to biological or chemical evolution would be protected—just like any other scientific information relevant to those topics. But, again, the bill doesn’t decide the debate over whether ID is science. It leaves that debate alone.
So who would decide what is scientific under the bill?
The same people who currently must make that determination: science teachers themselves in consultation with their science curriculum staff and their school boards. And if they happen to promote something that isn’t science, we can be sure that groups like the ACLU will be ready to police their activities—just like they do now.
Ironically, the only reason Florida Darwinists would have to fear that this bill might protect intelligent design somewhere down the road is if they already have concluded they cannot win the debate over whether ID is science. Indeed, by insisting that intelligent design must be covered by the bill, Darwinists in Florida seem to have admitted that despite their rhetoric, they really believe that intelligent design is science after all! And that may be the most telling admission in the entire debate.
Posted by John West on March 14, 2008 5:38 AM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)