Caffeinated Thoughts |
- Circle of Victimization in Crime
- Steve King: Partial Repeal Only Empowers ObamaCare
- A Severe Mercy
- A helpful book, perhaps; just a bit on the academic side for this pastor.
- Biblical families vs. Today’s families
| Circle of Victimization in Crime Posted: 22 Mar 2012 09:39 PM PDT  Charles Starkweather Most people are not aware of the full extent of their actions. They say something that is either positive or offends, but they never see the results of what happens. A kind word can affect not just a single person, but also those persons one is in contact with. Having been a religious coordinator for the Nebraska Department of Corrections I sat on a couple committees dealing with the effects of what criminals do not just to their victims, but the victim’s families, the community, and their own friends and family. There is the effect on the victim of the crime. Certain types of crimes are more hideous such as sexual assault, but assault, robbery, and other crimes can do great damage to the victim. The victim may not be able to sleep at nights without some kind of help. They may be afraid of being alone or going out after dark. They may be afraid at the sound of a loud noise such as a soldier has from post-traumatic stress disorder from being in combat. There are other victims. The spouse or close relatives of the victims can be harmed by blaming themselves for not protecting the victim from the offender. They may struggle with knowing how to communicate or not know how to help. They may be have desires for revenge that cannot be assauged. The children can be harmed, and deal with fear. The community can be harmed by losing its innocence. Growing up in Lincoln, Nebraska there was still talk among the adults about the serial killings by Charles Starkweather in about 1958 some twenty or more years later. People stopped leaving their doors and windows unlocked in Lincoln after Starkweather killed ten people. What I found particularly sad was the harm the offender did to his or her families. There is shame to the family when a relative does something evil. People look at the parents of an offender as if the parents were bad or raised the child wrong. The siblings and kids of the offender can feel shame and take drastic action to separate themselves from the offender. I felt the worst for the spouse of the offender who may have also been a victim and the children who don’t have a father or mother to raise them. The poor kids deal with such injury. I don’t know what society can do as a deterrant to show potential offenders what the harm can be to their families. A lot of offenders I knew had this delusion that they can and will get away with all their crimes and never spend time in prison. I wonder how many of the less hardened would actually reconsider their decisions if they could see the harm their actions would do to the ones they love. Of course there are others who flat out just don’t care, and there is nothing one can do for them. I knew men like that working in corrections and it was truly sad, but there are some people who truly do belong in prison or the grave. Link to this post!        |
| Steve King: Partial Repeal Only Empowers ObamaCare Posted: 22 Mar 2012 10:30 AM PDT
“IPAB is just one abhorrent aspect of ObamaCare- but it is one of the most intrusive,”said King. “It is the heart of Obamacare, because without IPAB, the rationing of access to care is not possible. This unelected board of bureaucrats responsible for shaping the future of our health care must be repealed, but not as an independent piece of the law.”
“We must pull ObamaCare out by the roots because it is an unconstitutional takings of our Liberty. IPAB is not distinct from ObamaCare, it is the essence of ObamaCare and for that reason the law must be repealed as a whole. The American people continue to speak out against ObamaCare’s individual mandate, its attack on essential first amendment conscience protections, and its multitrillion-dollar price tag. Partial repeal only empowers this government takeover of one-sixth of the economy, and until full repeal is realized we will continue to muddle our message.” Link to this post!      |
| Posted: 22 Mar 2012 08:27 AM PDT My oldest daughter is due to deliver our first grand-baby in about seven weeks. The Sorensen household is quite excited about all this; “Future Grandma” is only on the ground because I’ve weighted her pockets with lead; otherwise, she floats about three to four feet above the ground with baby ideas and gifts and visits in her eyes. Rebecca called earlier this week to tell us of her latest doctor’s visit: “Baby” Soule is around 4′ 10″ and still growing. For this we are extremely grateful to God and His mercy. Our culture gets excited about such things, only if it appears that the mother is white, middle-class and above, earning a good living alongside her partner and has plans to resume doing so as soon as humanly possible (or whatever is allowed by work place policies or government mandates). Otherwise, get rid of that “thing”! It’s obviously unwanted, unloved and unplanned. It will grow up with more needs and psychopathic tendencies than any of us are willing to commit to, and heavens knows our government doesn’t need any more mouths on the public dole. In fact, some bozos have come out (okay, granted, “bozo” is a strong and hostile term, but I think ethicist is just crazy considering what these clowns have come up with) and said that infanticide should now become a viable option for mothers in the United States. What? Are you kidding me? I’m not sure what offended me more: that they argued for infanticide right alongside abortion (but when you truly think about it, the argument makes sense, in their sin-sick, illogical and teeny-tiny warped brains; it’s just tissue and placement of said tissue shouldn’t really be a prohibition against what we do with it); or, that these fools (and I mean that in the most vehemently Proverbs-like manner I can state) are actually called ethicists––they study and promote ethics. There’s absolutely nothing ethical about this. And that doesn’t even get me started on abortion. On the blessed side of reason, sanity and sanctity, comes this: Fearfully and Wonderfully Made You really need to read this; please. ______________________________________________________ Okay, so I wrote this post, was moving on and then “Lo! and Behold!” in my newsreader, up pops this (I’m copying this directly from Gene Veith’s blog, Cranach, because I don’t want anyone to think I’m making this up): I had assumed this was just a wild rumor, but Pepsi really is using the bodies of aborted children to make its products–not for cannibalism but in product testing. And the Obama administration has given its approval. FromLifesite: PepsiCo has come under fire from pro-life advocates because it has been contracting with a research firm that uses fetal cells from babies victimized by abortions to test and produce artificial flavor enhancers. Now, the Obama administration is set to face more criticism because an agency has declared that Pepsi's use of the company and its controversial flavor testing process constitutes "ordinary business." In a decision delivered February 28, the Security and Exchange Commission ruled that PepsiCo's use of aborted fetal remains in their research and development agreement with Senomyx to produce flavor enhancers falls under "ordinary business operations." Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director of Children of God for Life, the organization that exposed the PepsiCo- Senomyx collaboration last year, informed LifeNews today that a letter signed by Attorney Brian Pitko of the SEC Office of Chief Counsel was sent in response to a 36-page document submitted by PepsiCo attorneys in January 2012. In that filing, PepsiCo pleaded with the SEC to reject a Shareholder's Resolution filed in October 2011 that the company "adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements." PepsiCo lead attorney George A. Schieren noted that the resolution should be excluded because it "deals with matters related to the company's ordinary business operations" and that "certain tasks are so fundamental to run a company on a day-to-day basis that they could not be subject to stockholder oversight." Vinnedge said she is appalled by the apathy and insensitivity of both PepsiCo executives and the Obama administration. "We're not talking about what kind of pencils PepsiCo wants to use – we are talking about exploiting the remains of an aborted child for profit," she said. "Using human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) to produce flavor enhancers for their beverages is a far cry from routine operations." . . . . "The company's key flavor programs focus on the discovery and development of savory, sweet and salt flavor ingredients that are intended to allow for the reduction of MSG, sugar and salt in food and beverage products," the Senomyx web site says. "Using isolated human taste receptors, we created proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems that provide a biochemical or electronic readout when a flavor ingredient interacts with the receptor."Vinnedge explained, "What they don't tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 – human embryonic kidney cells taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors. They could have easily chosen animal, insect, or other morally obtained human cells expressing the G protein for taste receptors." via Obama Agency: Pepsi Using Aborted Fetal Cells is Ordinary Business | LifeNews.com. Comments from a source that isn't pro-life, as such, focused instead on environmental and food issues: To be clear, the aborted fetal tissue used to make Pepsi's flavor chemicals does not end up in the final product sold to customers, according to reports — it is used, instead, to evaluate how actual human taste receptors respond to these chemical flavorings. But the fact that Pepsi uses them at all when viable, non-human alternatives are available illustrates the company's blatant disregard for ethical and moral concerns in the matter. Pepsi is not the only corporation doing this sort of thing. Senomyx's other customers include the pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and Merck. So it has come to this: the commodification of aborted babies. Will Republicans go along with this, since it's a matter of corporate practice and they are committed to being pro-business? Will Libertarians defend this practice, since it's all free enterprise? Will Democrats who are normally critical of big business support these corporations, with pro-choicers not seeing a problem since they think fetuses are not human beings and since using fetuses as commodities reinforces a woman's right to choose? Link to this post!      |
| A helpful book, perhaps; just a bit on the academic side for this pastor. Posted: 22 Mar 2012 08:20 AM PDT
Now that that’s out of the way, I think there are some who would find this book helpful. Those in Christian leadership, especially for those in “missional” churches, mission organizations and, of course, college students will probably find Christina Contours helpful. Huffman does a fine job stating, at the outset, what this book is meant to do: to call all to a biblical worldview through Christianity. To say this is a large task might be to understate it just a bit. From there, the book is divided into two parts. Part One seeks to give the reader an understanding of what “worldview” is and what a biblical worldview is all about. Part Two gets more practical and helps the reader to know how to develop a Christian worldview. There are also sections devoted to helping one with this worldview to take on personal responsibility and carry it out. Huffman also provides some very good appendices for clarification. I wish I had more to say about this book; I just don’t. I am obviously, either not the intended target audience or I am the intended audience, but just didn’t “get it.” Many others will, no doubt. I can neither recommend this book or not recommend it. You’ll simply have to determine that on your own. You can download a pdf of the Table of Contents here. Christian Contours may be purchased from Kregel Publications. About the Book––What does it mean to think and live Christianly in a world of competing worldviews? Christian Contours answers this question by inviting readers to consider the understanding of reality proposed by the Bible. Though it is easy to divide life into separate compartments (religious and secular, theological and practical), faith invites us to view all of life in the light of that Biblical understanding. Presenting a clear, compelling case for unity in essential Christian tenets, the authors of Christian Contours guide the reader through developing, internalizing, and articulating a biblical worldview. This robust worldview enables the Christian to be a critically-thinking participant in culture and to be a faithful disciple of Christ with both heart and mind. About the Author––Editor Douglas S. Huffman is professor and chair of the Department of Biblical and Theological Studies at Northwestern College in Minnesota. He is the coeditor of God Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents God. You can read more about him here. Link to this post!      |
| Biblical families vs. Today’s families Posted: 22 Mar 2012 06:19 AM PDT  How are families different today? As Christ followers, we often have a difficult time relating God’s Word to our modern culture and families. So, in what ways has the concept of “the family” changed from Biblical times until now? In what ways do conservative Christians view “the family” similarly and differently than they did in the New Testament era? In what ways are these changes good and in what ways are they not so good? The definition and make up of family has changed drastically over the centuries – and it is hard to put labels on those, but here are a few: 1) Extended Family vs. Nuclear Family – in NT extended families living in the same abode (or on the same compound) was common place. Aunts, Uncles, G-parents, cousins grew up and often stayed in the same area their whole life. Nowadays, in CC circles, extended families are the exception and not the norm. Of course, nuclear families in the “traditional sense” (mom, dad, kids in one house) is quickly becoming the exception as well. This is not a statement of good or bad, just one of observation – but one that does carry implications for ministry. 2) Transience – families today are far more mobile than they were in the OT. Simply b/c of the inability to cover vast areas of land easily and quickly, families in OT and NT times most often just stayed together. Today, children are often living in different states and different countries than where they grew up and where their parents may be. 3) Individual vs. Corporate – Families are far more isolative today than in Biblical times. When we lived in Colorado, the neighborhood I lived in looked like cattle stockyards b/c everyone had a 6 ft privacy fence keep their own piece of land separated from everyone else’s. Also, with the invention of the garage and garage door opener, families never even have to come in contact with others if they choose to. They simply press a button to open and close their home without ever being seen. 4) Family size – Families today are far smaller than in Biblical times as well. I couldn’t venture a guess what family size was back then, but I would imagine it is far more than the 1.8 kids per families today. On the surface this doesn’t seem like a big deal, but when you understand the reasons behind having numerous children back in OT & NT times, it becomes a bigger issue: kids for working the family business/farm, kids to carry on the beliefs and values of the Spiritual family are just 2 of them. 5) Priorities & Values – Overall the values and priorities of the family has changed drastically. It seems one of the main thrusts of the family in the OT & NT was to promote certain values or at the least maintain certain priorities – maintaining a certain level of livelihood was one of them (i.e., you grew crops and raised cattle to make a living and to be able to eat vs. going to the grocery store and buying whatever is needed). The priorities and values of our families today show a very different culture. With the rise of entertainment – music, sports, computer technology, etc. – families have shifted into focusing on things that they believe will benefit their kids more in the long run. Not that these things are BAD in and of themselves, but I often wonder what is being left out to make room for all of these things? 6) Outsourcing – We have become a nation that outsources just about everything. We get our kids lessons for sports, music lessons, tutoring, spiritual training, etc. We buy our groceries at a store rather than grow them ourselves. We use technology to outsource our entertainment so kids don't have to entertain themselves. In part, this has been driven by necessity – working 40-70 hours a week doesn't leave a lot of time for other things. But there are also choices the family has made to value certain things over others; so to make time for those things we see how we can cut time to "make room" for it all. 7) Maturity & Rite of Passage – By and large, in European and American cultures, the age of maturity and marriageability has risen since OT & NT times. We tend to think of young people not being adults until they reach 18-21 years of age (or even beyond more males), and even then they not really ready to be married until much later in their twenties. This wasn’t the case for a LONG time! A Rite of Passage typically took place (Bar Mitzvahs, Bat Mitzvahs in Jewish culture) took place at age 13-16 – and it is then they were marriage eligible. You still see this in various cultures around the world – Quinceanera, for example – but by and large has gone by the wayside. Honestly, there is a lot that appeals to me about the way families were set up and run before the Industrial Revolution. I think we have a lot to learn from history… Link to this post!      |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Caffeinated Thoughts To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
If you are interested in earning cash from your websites by running popunder ads, you can embed one of the biggest networks: PopCash.
RăspundețiȘtergere