Sometimes Women DO Sit Around Making These Things Up

According to Senator Mazie Hirono during her interview on “MSNBC Live” yesterday, the new standard of justice when it comes to sex crimes in America is that “Women do not sit around making these things up”.  She made this statement regarding the sexual assault accusations of Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Christine Blasey Ford’s Story

So here is Christine Blasey Ford’s story in a nutshell.

A woman claims that a man attempted to rape her 36 years ago.  She claimed to have repressed the memory and only recovered it during a 2012 couples’ therapy session with her husband whom she married in 2002.  Brett Kavanaugh’s name was never mentioned in the therapy session notes.

She has offered no physical evidence of the attempted rape.

She does not remember where the house was.

She does not remember what day or month it was in.

She said she received medical treatment but does not remember where or when.

Every person she has put forward as witness denies any knowledge of such an event.

There is No Evidence of a Crime According to American or Biblical Law

Whether this attack happened 36 years ago, or 36 weeks ago there is no evidence according to our legal system that a crime ever took place.  An accusation by the alleged victim of a crime is not evidence. There must be physical evidence, circumstantial evidence or witnesses to a crime to convict someone of a crime.

One of our American founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, stated this about how our justice system should work:

“That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.”

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, letter to Benjamin Vaughan, March 14, 1785.—The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert H. Smyth, vol. 9, p. 293 (1906)

The concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is not just the bedrock of American justice, but it was also the concept of Biblical justice as well. The Bible required multiple witnesses to establish the guilt or innocence of a person accused of a crime in Israel:

“One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.”

Deuteronomy 19:15 (KJV)

In other words – you can’t accuse someone of a crime, including assault, simply based on your own witness of the event.  Where are the other witnesses, where is the physical evidence?

Yet many in our court of public opinion have already assassinated the character of Brett M. Kavanaugh based on these allegations by Ford.

Sometimes Women DO sit around making these things up

Contrary to the assertions of Senator Mazie Hirono, sometimes women do sit around making these things up for a variety of reasons.   It can be for reasons of pride, fame, spite, revenge or other political motivations. In the Bible we find a famous story of a woman “making these things up”:

“11 One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. 12 She caught him by his cloak and said, “Come to bed with me!” But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house.  13 When she saw that he had left his cloak in her hand and had run out of the house, 14 she called her household servants. “Look,” she said to them, “this Hebrew has been brought to us to make sport of us! He came in here to sleep with me, but I screamed. 15 When he heard me scream for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house.”

Genesis 39:11-15 (KJV)

Women making up claims of sexual assault is as old as men committing sexual assault itself.  Both of these sins have occurred throughout history and our legal systems must recognize the very real possibility of both of these things occurring.

A lot of Ford’s defenders will say “Well she talked about him doing this way back in 2012 in a therapy session long before he became a nominee and there is documented proof of her making this claim to a therapist.  Why would she make up the lie before ever knowing who would be President in four years or that he would nominate Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court?”

Well first and foremost there is no documented proof of her making a claim that Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape her.  She never gave the therapist any names.  Her husband alleges she told him afterwards that it was Brett Kavanaugh but spouses lie for each other so he is not a reliable witness.

So, this leaves us with two other likely possibilities of what actually happened.  Ford could have been sexually assaulted by someone other than Brett Kavanaugh and she may not even remember who it was.  But she chose to put Kavanaugh’s name in as her attacker when she saw him announced as Trump’s nominee because she wanted to stop him from being nominated.

An even worse scenario would be and could be that she made the entire event up in therapy as an excuse to deal with problems in her own marriage and then filled in Brett Kavanaugh’s name as the attacker as an added bonus. And of course, her loving husband supports her in her lies.  This is a very real possibility as well.

But what about the second or third woman?

A second woman, Deborah Ramirez, has claimed that Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself in her face when he was Yale University. So, if we have two women accusing him then both these claims must true right? That is the sad standard for many in our society.  If you can’t take the man down with one flawed accuser, just throw in another for good measure.

This second woman even admitted to not being sure it was Brett Kavanaugh who exposed himself to her until after a democratic lawyer helped coach her and convince her that it was.

Then of course we have the trashy lawyer Michael Avenatti claiming he has yet another woman making claims against Brett Kavanaugh.

Conclusion

Senator Mazie Hirono was partially right in some advice she gave to men the other night when she stated:

“I just want to say to the men in this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.”

The only part of her advice that was wrong was when she said “shut up”.  I would simply change this part of her statement and give this advice to all men including Brett Kavanaugh in the face of the rampant misandry going on in American culture today:

“I just want to say to the men in this country: Speak up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.”

The Bible gives us as men this admonition:

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”

1 Corinthians 16:13

I was so pleased to see Brett Kavanaugh make the forceful defense he did in his interview with Martha MacCallum from Fox News.  I was pleased to see him speak up and step up to the corrupt political forces that would see him step down.

I pray that God will give the Republican senators the wisdom to see that this is truly a smear campaign against a good man and a good judge and I hope they will have the courage to help him win this nomination.

Is Donald Trump making America masculine again?

Could Donald Trump have been elected because a large group of Americans believe America has become “too soft and feminine”? Could Donald Trump’s strong masculine persona have been a major driving force in his appeal to millions of Americans? Some surveys suggest this might be the case.

“Right now, a large group of Americans are feeling very hopeful about Donald Trump’s presidency. In polls, they show up in different demographic categories: They’re Republicans; they’re Trump voters; they’re of all different ages and from every geographic region…

America has been experiencing intense gender anxiety in recent years, and this is particularly true in conservative evangelical communities. White evangelicals’ ambient concern that the country is becoming “too soft and feminine” speaks to that anxiety, and to a deeper concern that the foundations of life in the United States are changing.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/trump-white-evangelicals-communities/509084/

“The two motivations—conviction and bigotry—are difficult to tease apart. Particularly in the United States, a country that remains more religious that its Western peers, faith and culture are in a feedback loop, complementing, responding, and reacting to one another. This is especially true when it comes to trans people in public bathrooms. Wisdom from the Bible can be brought to bear on any question, but on this issue, the ideas at stake are foundational. They are part of “the way of reading the Bible, going back to Genesis” said R. Marie Griffith, a professor of religion and politics at Washington University in St. Louis. “There’s this belief that God created man, and out of man, he created woman. And these are really crystal-clear categories. There’s something very deep and fundamental about that for the Christians who have … a way of thinking about the Bible as the word of God…

But more broadly, this is also a question about gender roles. In a recent PRRI / The Atlantic poll, 42 percent of Americans said they believe society is becoming “too soft and feminine.” Thirty-nine percent said they believe society is better off “when men and women stick to the jobs and tasks they are naturally suited for,” including 44 percent of Republicans and 58 percent of white evangelical Protestants. These numbers suggest nervousness about fluid gender identities—and that America isn’t even close to a consensus that men and women should choose the way they act.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/americas-profound-gender-anxiety/484856/

While secularists and liberal Christians may see little to no difference between “conviction and bigotry” we as Bible believing Christians know there is a huge difference between the two.  I can’t tell you how many people write me every week calling me a bigot for teaching the following three truths straight from the Scriptures.

Biblical Truth #1 – While men and women are equally human, they are not equally made in the image of God

“For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.”

1 Corinthians 11:7 (KJV)

The Bible is crystal clear – man, not woman is the direct image bearer of God.  This is not say that women do not also bare some attributes of God.  The common attributes of humanity that men and women share like self-awareness, emotions, free-will and creativity are part of the image of God.  But the masculine human nature was designed in the very image and likeness of God and the female human nature was designed to complement and help man to exercise is his duty as an image bearer.

God designed man to need to be the hero, the provider and protector.  So, man needed someone weaker than him, someone who would desire to be lead and desire to be provided for. So, God made woman to desire a leader, a provider and a protector. God knew that man would need someone to bare his children and to care for them.  So, he designed woman to naturally desire children and to naturally desire to care for them and nurture them.  God designed men to desire beauty because he desires beauty. So, he made woman beautiful and he designed her to desire to make herself beautiful for man.

In summary – God made woman, including each and every one of her physical and psychological attributes for man as the Scriptures tell us.

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

1 Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)

Biblical Truth #2 – Because woman was created especially for man, God has determined that man is to be head over woman in all areas of life including the family, the Church and Society

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

I Corinthians 11:3 (KJV)

For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.”

Ephesians 5:23 (KJV)

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV)

“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.”

1 Timothy 2:11-13 (KJV)

Biblical Truth #3 – In those limited times when God has allowed women to be over men – it was a shame to men

“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”

Isaiah 3:12 (KJV)

Those of us Americans who believe in Biblical gender roles are not bigots but rather we have convictions that are based on the very Word of God.  I and every other man have no more value to God than a woman does.  The Scriptures tell us that from a spiritual perspective our souls have equal value to God and we have equal access as men and women to God’s salvation.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

Both men and women are joint heirs of the grace of God and our heavenly inheritance to come.

But just because we are equal spiritually – does not mean we are equal in our roles or in our image bearing status.  God has made men and women physically and psychologically different by design – not by chance.  I gave the reason earlier that he made us different – he made woman for man.

Conclusion

I agree with a large chunk of Americans who believe America has become “too soft and feminine” and that America was better off “when men and women stick to the jobs and tasks they are naturally suited for” or in other words when men and women performed the roles and functions that God designed them to perform.

The prophet Isaiah’s words could not be more true when speaking of how America has been ruled for several decades when he wrote “…women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. (Isaiah 3:12)

Whether it was women in various positions, or men acting like women in various positions our country has been ruled from a feminine perspective for too long and we have suffered the consequences.

What a feminine perspective of ruling our nation has looked like

We are told that it is selfish for hardworking Americans to desire to keep most of what they earn and to expect that they will pay taxes only for the basic services of government and not for a welfare state for those who do not work or do not make as much money.  To do so might hurt some poor people’s feelings.

We were told that we cannot protect our borders and force people to go back to their countries because we might separate families and people from other countries who need our help – even though Americans can’t find jobs and many of these immigrants will be a drain on our social welfare system. To do so might hurt some foreigner’s feelings.

We were told we cannot tell countries that they are treating us unfairly in their trading practices.  We were told we can’t protect our companies and workers and put tariffs on other countries. We were told that we could not inform other nations that we have the most powerful economy in the world and we are going to start acting like it by telling them it is a privilege, not a right for them to sell their products to our citizens.  To do so might hurt the feelings of these nations that we trade with.

We were told that we cannot protect our country from terrorism by calling out Radical Islamists for the enemies that they are.  We are told we cannot control what nations immigrants come from as this is “discriminatory and unfair”. To do so might hurt some Muslim’s feelings.

We were told calling for respect for police officers is racist. Our government would not acknowledge the fact that the black community bears the brunt for the reason that they are arrested and incarcerated at a higher percentage than whites because of the breakdown of the family unit in their community.  Our leaders couldn’t talk about the elephant in the room that 70 percent of black of babies are born out of wedlock and maybe, just maybe, this is the biggest contributor to crime and poverty in the black community.  To do so might hurt some black people’s feelings.

We were told that we cannot bring the full force of America’s military might to bare on cities in Iraq and elsewhere that have large terrorist populations for fear of collateral damage.  We might hurt the feelings of our enemies if we accidentally kill their families in during the bombing of cities.

All of these types of decisions are based on feelings, not logic. This is the feminization of American leadership.

This is why it was so refreshing to me and millions of Americans to see a man stand up and not be afraid to tell people the truth.  A man who is not afraid to make tough decisions that may hurt some people’s feelings.

He was far from a perfect candidate and he will be far from a perfect President.  But for all his faults I believe God can not only use Donald Trump to make America Great again, but he can also help America to be masculine again.

How can we blame Police for having bias against blacks?

50 percent of all murders and manslaughters ,52 percent of all robberies and 40 percent of cop killings are committed by blacks even though blacks only make up 13 percent of the population of the United States.  How could we blame any police officer for having a bias toward blacks under these conditions?

I am sure that most police officers whether they are black, white, asian or another race could confirm that these statistics are not just numbers – this is what they face on a daily basis as they attempt to do their job in protecting our communities as well as protecting themselves so that they can make it home safely to their families each night.

I was watching the Kelly File with Meghan Kelly on Fox last Thursday night and they were covering the relatively peaceful protest of two black men that were killed by police officers early in the week.   I will never forget as the camera caught people running from something only to reveal two police officers laying dead on the ground and Meghan Kelly told them to turn the camera away.  Those images will be seared in my mind for the rest of my life.

It is not about a skin color, it is about a culture

It is about a culture where 67% percent of its children are born to single mothers.  It is about a culture that while being only 13 percent of the population – it produces 50 percent of all murders and manslaughters in the United States.

“Just because you can have a baby, it doesn’t mean you should,” Lemon said. “Especially without planning for one or getting married first. More than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of wedlock. That means absent fathers. And the studies show that lack of a male role model is an express train right to prison and the cycle continues.”

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jul/29/don-lemon/cnns-don-lemon-says-more-72-percent-african-americ/

This “fatherless” black culture has directly resulted in these staggering crime rates:

Even though blacks only account for roughly 13 percent of the population they account for these percentages of crimes in United States:

50 percent of all murders and manslaughters

52 percent of all robberies

33 percent of all aggravated assaults

32 percent of all forcible rapes

So what this tells us is that we have a culture that represents a small percentage of our population, but disproportionately represents a very high percentage of our crime.

“Criminologists we contacted also told us that those absolute figures — when used correctly —  tell only half the story. When talking about risks to society, it is equally important to provide the population-based rate. When we do that, the threat of violent crimes posed by blacks looks larger than that of whites.”

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/02/sally-kohn/sally-kohn-white-men-69-percent-arrested-violent/

Economics are not an excuse for high black crime rates

The usual response from when many American black culture leaders(including Black Lives Matter leaders) are confronted with these statistics is that “this is all about economics”.  If black people just made more money all of these problems would go away – or so we are told.

These crime rates by race and income below prove that the “economics” argument is a faulty answer to problem of disproportionately high rates of crimes among blacks:

https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/99v05n3/9909levi.pdf

Slavery and past injustices are not an excuse either for high black crime rates

One of the biggest problems in the black community is a large percentage of blacks see themselves as victims of injustice such as slavery or racist polices that followed slavery.

Were blacks victimized by whites in America in the past? Absolutely.  I have written about the evils the system of slavery that was practiced in the United States:

“On the other hand, the slavery in practice in America was completely different than the slavery that was allowed by the Bible. Chains were a very a common occurrence with slavery in America. It was based on the false ideology that one race was less human than others and they could be enslaved if for no other reason than their race…

Besides American slavery being based on race – it massively failed the two tests of Biblical Slavery that I mentioned above. Africans were kidnapped from their homes. They were treated worse than animals and loaded on to ships without proper food, clothing and shelter. Many Africans died while on Ships coming to America. Many African women were raped by their owners, instead being given the full status of wives. They were often physically abused and even sometimes murdered. But because they were not considered fully human, no punishments were given.”

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/07/10/why-christians-shouldnt-be-ashamed-of-slavery-in-the-bible/

My point in that post was that while Christians do not have to be ashamed of the slavery that God allowed Israel as a theocracy to practice we should be ashamed of the slavery that America practiced in its earlier days. My larger point though as it relates to this post is that of course we should fully acknowledge as Christians and as Americans the grave injustices committed against blacks in nation’s past.

We should also acknowledge that even after blacks were freed from slavery in America they were often treated unfairly by both government officials and private businesses. This unfair treatment lead to the Civil Rights movement lead by men such as Martin Luther King.

But it is a mistake for any black person today to blame their family, economic or criminal issues past wrongs of the American culture toward blacks. In the decades that followed the civil rights movement the American culture has basically bent over backwards to help blacks in America.

The Liberals War on Poverty actually helped cause the fatherless problem in the black culture

In his article entitled “7 Ways the War on Poverty Destroyed Black Fatherhood” author Nick Chiles writes:

“Welfare programs created disincentives for couples to get married because benefits are reduced as a family’s income rises. A mother will receive far more from welfare if she is single than if she has an employed husband in the home. For many low-income couples, marriage means a reduction in government assistance and an overall decline in the couple’s joint income — a reduction of benefits by an average of 10 percent to 20 percent of their total income. Because so many of the other programs low-income women rely on — such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid and public day care — also carry a means test, single mothers are cut off from a wide range of government services if they decide to marry and subsequently raise their income. Over time, for many Black women in low-income neighborhoods, they see the father of their child(ren) as a less reliable breadwinner and partner than the federal government.”

http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/12/24/ways-war-poverty-destroyed-black-fatherhood/

But can we blame the fatherless family’s epidemic completely on welfare programs that dis-incentivized marriage? The answer is no.  Ultimately black men and women made their own decision based on economic reasons to leave one of God’s greatest institutions in the dust bin. Black women decided they did not need black men anymore to have a family and black men decided they did not need marriage.

So what does this all have to do with the Dallas shootings?

The root causes of heinous murder of five Dallas police officers and the wounding of seven others has been falsely attributed anger in the black community over the police shootings of black men in Louisiana and Minnesota.

The problem is NOT unjust shootings of blacks by police officers.  The problem is rampant out of control crime and a blatant lack of respect in the black community for themselves and for law enforcement officials.

My father always taught me from a very young age to respect my authorities.  I was taught to respect my parents, my pastor, my teachers and also police officers. I was told if a police officer pulled me over to do everything he said and answer him with “yes sir and no sir”.

I actually was arrested as a young man when I was 17 years old. I had many speeding tickets and had an address change and did not receive a notice to retake drivers training.  Because I did not respond to the notice my license was suspended without my knowledge. I was pulled over for speeding and then the officer asked me to get of car and he asked to me to put my hands behind my back and he placed me under arrest.  I submitted respectfully to the officer as my father taught me to do even though I did not understand at the time what was happening.

Today many blacks have horrible and disrespectful attitudes towards police when they are pulled over.  Even if they think the reason is unfair – two wrongs never make a right.  You let the police officer do what he thinks he needs to do and if you disagree you can have your day in court. That is how our system works.

Because blacks often resist arrest bad things happen. That is just the truth of the matter. Many black men might not have lost their lives or been injured by police if they would have respectfully submitted to the police officer’s authority.

Perhaps these two black men in Louisiana and Minnesota were killed unjustly.  But right now we don’t know the whole story.  Could the one man have been resisting arrest? Could the other have been moving his hands around when the officer told him to keep his hands where he could see them? We will find out soon enough.

The ugly truth that the black community and black culture must come to grips with is that even if those two shootings were not justified – Police officers have every right to have a bias toward blacks based on the crime statistics I showed previously as well as the statistics offered in this article from the Wall Street Journal:

“Police officers—of all races—are also disproportionately endangered by black assailants. Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.

Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.

Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myths-of-black-lives-matter-1468087453

How can we blame police officers who may have some bias toward blacks when they constantly hear over the police radio “suspect is black male….”

How can we blame police officers for having even unconscious bias toward blacks in suspicious situations when 40% of cop killers are black even though they only make up 13% of the population?

How can we scream “racist” toward police officers who day in and day out see the utter disrespect that blacks show toward themselves and toward law enforcement officers?

What is the solution to this crisis that we face with the black community and conflicts with police officers?

There are two long term solutions to help reduce crime in the black community.

Long Term Solution 1# – Encourage the rebuilding of the black family unit

“Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

I Corinthians 7:2 (KJV)

We need to support ministries and initiatives that encourage abstinence and marriage in the black community. My church supports black ministers that act almost as missionaries to inner cities to do just this.  By encouraging strong families with father’s present to love, teach and discipline their children we will help to bring about a new generation of black men that will have greater respect for themselves and for their authorities (parents, teachers, and police officers).

Long Term Solution 2# – Discourage dependence on government

“For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.”

II Thessalonians 3:10 (KJV)

We need to discourage dependence on government and instead encourage self-reliance and this applies not only to the black community but to all races in America.  People need to learn the value of working hard for their own money and not expect government handouts.  Blacks, whites and all races need to learn to be content even if they are poorer.

But while the longer term solutions are being implemented we must face the realities of today with broken families and high crime rates in the black community.

Below are two short term solutions that should be implemented now.

Short Term Solution 1# – Get blacks back into church

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Hebrews 10:25 (KJV)

Even if blacks come from broken homes there are solutions we can try to help in the short term. I don’t have the stats handy but I am sure they out there.  I have read before that blacks that are raised in church and faithfully attend church even with single mothers have a much lower chance of getting into crime and other types of trouble.  As Christians we need to encourage our black neighbors to get back to church. The Church I attend while being primarily white does have blacks as well and we encourage all races to attend our church.  This is the way all churches should be.

Ultimately we want to see blacks, as we do all people, come to Christ.   A black man who has accepted Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior in his heart and wants to serve God is going to be far less likely to get into crime than a black man without Christ.  He is going to want to get married and raise his family in a way that honors God.

Short Term Solution #2 – Support law enforcement officers and get tough on crime

Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”

Romans 13:2-4 (KJV)

I don’t care if you are white, black, Hispanic or Asian.  If a police officer tells you to do something – you do it. If he asks you a question – you answer it. If he tell you to keep your hands where he can see them – you do it.  If he arrests you – you allow him to do that.  If you feel you were mistreated – save it for the judge.  If “stop and frisk” measures reduce crime in any city – than we need to support these measures.  And the most important thing is – we need to ALWAYS given our police officers the benefit of the doubt in any use of force situation.  They risk their lives day in and day out for our safety as a culture and we owe them that respect and appreciation for what they do.

Conclusion

The black community does not have an economic problem – it has a family problem and it has a respect problem as a result of breakdown of the family.

I pray that God will be with the families of the five police officers that were killed and the seven others that were wounded by this mad man.

I also pray that our nation and especially the black community will wake up to the fact that the problem is not with police officers – but it is with the black community itself.  The black community needs to look inward and do some serious self-reflecting.

As whites and other races, we cannot go in and fix the black community.  All we can do is support black leaders who want to do the things I mentioned above whether it is financially supporting their ministries or just offering them moral support and of course keeping them in our prayers.

Swiss reject free income plan

Is actually having to work for a living an old fashioned and outdated idea? About a quarter of the Swiss people think it is. Thankfully about three quarters of the Swiss still have their common sense and voted against this revolutionary proposal on their ballot.

Here is more on this story:

“Conservative Switzerland is the first country to hold a national referendum on an unconditional basic income, but others including Finland are examining similar plans as societies ponder a world where robots replace humans in the workforce.

Olivier, a 26-year-old carpenter who works on construction sites and runs a small business designing and building furniture, said he voted “yes”.

“For me it would be a great opportunity to put my focus on my passion and not go to work just for a living,” he said.”

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/swiss-voters-decide-guaranteed-monthly-income-plan-103534182–business.html

But plans like this are being considered in other European countries. What people do not realize is when you give people a free basic income then you take away all incentives for people in lower income jobs to work.

In many ways President Obama has tried to give a free basic income through expanded food stamp programs and other government assistance programs over his two terms in office.

Food stamp recipients up 42 percent under Obama

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/obamas-numbers-january-2016-update/

There is a simple truth in the world – when you give people free food they will work less or not at all.  That is why it is no coincidence that under Obama we also have one of the lowest workforce participation rates since the Great Depression.

The Bible while encouraging us to help the truly poor and needy does not ever tell us to give unending free government assistance to people.   This concept can be found nowhere in the Scriptures.

This is the Bible’s answer to motivating people to work:

“For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. ” – 2 Thessalonians 3:10 (KJV)

As Christians and as Americans while we must help those who are truly in need we cannot in our trying to do good encourage the sin of laziness.

Why women don’t belong in politics

Do women belong in the political arena? Should we encourage our daughters to emulate the lives of women like Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin? Some Christians believe examples of women like the prophetess Deborah in the Bible answers this question with a resounding “Yes!” This was the position taken by a young Christian woman named Justice Forte who recently wrote a comment on my post “How to Help Women Learn Their Place”.

But does the example of Deborah and other prophetesses and prominent women in the Bible show us that God wants women involved in the political arena?

Before we seek to answer this question let me share Justice’s story.

Justice Forte’s Story

Larry Solomon,

While scrolling through my Facebook feed, I came across your intriguing post. Though I usually do not take the time to read articles shared by my friends, as I am a pre-law college student with hundreds of pages of reading assigned to me each night, the striking words “How to Help Women Learn Their Place” piqued my interest. I visited your blog and read the biographical information you provided and several of your comment threads. As a Catholic, made in the image of God, I share many of your beliefs and I have read most of the passages that you listed in your article during my years attending Catholic institutions. I have been fortunate in that I have had numerous mentors that have guided me in my faith, including my father, mother, and several teachers. I have had the opportunity to analyze philosophical and theological works, including those of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas with the great educators I encountered in my time at Pope John XXIII High School in Sparta, New Jersey. I have studied these topics with fervor, and I have strengthened my faith through constant inquiry, as my religion is not something that I take for granted.

However, I believe that your article reflects not only the loving messages given to us by God, but also several sexist attitudes embedded in our society. While it is clear that God created men and women with differing characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses, I do not think that it necessarily follows that the two genders must adhere strictly to narrow roles. While the Bible includes passages that guide women to be reverent and respectful to men, it also offers direction to men to love women and to treat them with kindness and understanding, and to acknowledge them as companions and partners in life.

As an 18 year old woman, I have struggled throughout my lifetime to discover exactly what your article claims to offer an answer to. I have struggled to learn my place in this world with this life that I have been given. The wave of feminism that you readily criticize has afforded me the ability to explore the vast possibilities of who I could be. It has allowed me to receive an education, and to read the works of insightful minds who have contemplated and established their places in life.

Through this education, I have found role models such as Deborah the fifth judge of the Old Testament referenced in Judges 4 and 5 and Hebrews 11:32-34. A thoughtful and effective leader, Deborah lifted the spirits of the downtrodden Israelites as she prophesied the word of the Lord under her famous palm tree. A courageous warrior, she led her army of 10,000 against the 100,000 Canaanites and proved victorious. The mother of Israel, the wife of Lapidoth, and the prophetess of God, Deborah serves as the ultimate example of a woman using her specific gifts to lead and to change the world in which she lived.

My education has also allowed me to ascertain and to ruminate on various attitudes and viewpoints regarding sexuality and gender roles that exist in the present day and to solidify my position on these crucial topics. Before beginning my studies at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, I had always referred to myself as a “traditionalist feminist.” I viewed myself as equal to my male classmates, as I had continually been able to interact and compete with them academically. However, I did not feel that I could properly call myself a feminist and all that this term has come to mean, as I agree with many of the roles set out for men and women. This internal conflict continued until I came across a page in my international relations textbook during my first semester at college which separated feminism into two distinct categories.

The definition of liberal feminism was familiar to me; it was an idea that I had heard recurrently, an idea that I could never bring myself to agree with. The theory of liberal feminism claims that there are no fundamental differences between men and women and that any perceived distinctions are merely the result of societal stereotyping.

To me, this theory seems entirely unrealistic, as I have experienced the inherent differences between the genders in countless situations, specifically during my time playing for the men’s ice hockey team at my high school. It is indisputable that I was not physically equal to the men on the ice, as I was mentally equal in the classroom. But, Authors Joshua Goldstein and Jon Pevehouse offer the definition of another strand of feminism, difference feminism, which focuses on “valorizing the feminine…valuing the unique contributions of women as women.” Difference feminism provides a way for a woman like me to both accept many gender roles and to work to compete academically and intellectually to shape their societies and to learn their places within them.

In your article, you stressed the need for parents, teachers, and pastors to teach young women how to behave as daughters of God and you argued that feminism has resulted in disrespectful behavior by women to their fathers and their husbands. Throughout my life, I have looked to my mother and father for guidance and they have been the measure against which I have evaluated myself. My mother is a devoted wife and homemaker, and she has worked tirelessly to instill in my brother and me values of compassion, kindness, and honesty. However, my mother has also served as my greatest advocate, and she has consistently demanded that I be afforded the same opportunities as my brother. She has taught me to be ambitious, and to embrace every task with passion and diligence.

My father, for whom I have immeasurable respect, has provided me with every possible chance to both better and challenge myself. He supported me throughout my eight year long career as a hockey player, understanding that this activity, though male-dominated, was important to me and would present many occasions for self-growth. It was my father who pushed me far beyond my own perceived limitations and encouraged me to apply to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, a school 1,250 miles from my home, and it was him who all but forced me to accept my full tuition scholarship to attend this institution of higher education. While my mother and father have taught me what it means to be a daughter of God, bringing me to mass, showing me how to present myself in word, deed, and dress, and providing examples through their own lives, they have never allowed my gender to inhibit my desire to learn and participate in my society.

In concluding your article, you offered a list of Bible verses to be used by women to guide their behavior. While I disagree with the connotations of several of your brief summary headings, as I feel you have misinterpreted some of the text due to the gender biases that our society poses, I have tried to model my life based off of teachings and verses such as these. I work hard to be trustworthy, to show discretion when it is necessary, to speak with wisdom kindness, and love, to dress modestly, and to look to my parents and grandparents for guidance when I have needed it.

Though I have copious aspirations, including earning a college degree, attending and graduating from law school, and using all I will have learned to pursue a career in politics, I also hope one day to be a wife and mother.

Like your daughter, I look forward to fulfilling my role in God’s design and I intend to embark on that endeavor with the same ambition that I have put into my education, the same ambition that has been fostered for 18 years by my parents and teachers. I will treat my husband with respect and I will gladly support him in all that he does, and I will expect that he show me the love and kindness that God commands.

However, right now, I am an 18 year old woman, and I am subject and accountable to no one but my parents, educators, and myself. Right now I am a student and I intend to learn all that I can so that I may one day change my world, because my ambitions stretch far past the nuclear family unit and home. I urge you to contemplate my viewpoint, because I have combated attitudes similar to the one you expressed throughout my life. I have had boyfriends who claimed I showed them disrespect by simply having conversations with other males. I have had young men on opposing hockey teams cast disparaging remarks at me such as “make me a sandwich, bitch,” in an effort to help me learn what they think should be my place. I urge you to reflect on the possibility that there is more than one way for a young woman like myself, and like your daughter, to fulfill her role as a daughter of God and to learn their true place. I ask you to cogitate on my position because I feel it is imperative for today’s young women to understand that their faith does not have to stand in contrast with their aspirations, and you and I both have the power to spread this message. I respectfully ask you to take the time to read and respond to my post, as I would be interested to hear more about your perspective.”

My Response to Justice Forte

First and foremost Justice – I want to commend you for what I believe is a genuine faith in Jesus Christ and your belief in his Word.  I also want to commend you for your respect and admiration for your parents as this is something highly lacking in many young people today. I also commend you for listening to wise teachers and being curious about and studying schools of theological and philosophical thought. Being a critical thinker is never a bad thing but unfortunately in most generations there have been few of us that are critical thinkers.

What I want to do next is to zoom in on a few statements that you made and respond to them from the perspective of Christians who believe in a patriarchal view of society and marriage as well as more “strict” Biblical gender roles.

Prominent women in the Bible

First let’s take a look at some female characters that are often used by feminist Christians to assert that God encourages women to take active leadership in political and church arenas and see if any of these women resemble a modern feminist.

Miriam – prophet. – It never specifically says she exercised authority over men.

Deborah – prophet; judge; led the army of Israel into battle with Barak, their commander. She was a spiritual and moral leader. She did not seek to lead with Barak, he begged her to. She shamed him by telling him God would hand their enemies into the hands of a “woman”. It is interesting the Bible says she sat under a tree, and not at the city Gates as leaders typically did.

Hulda – prophet during the reign of Josiah. She served at a time when Israel had forsaken God, one of their darkest hours. Josiah sought to restore worship and the Word of God and sent messengers to her to seek the will of God.

Anna – a widow who became a prophet and pronounced Jesus to be the redeemer of Israel

Lydia – business woman in the Philippian Church, but the Bible never refers to her as a leader or a Pastor.

Priscilla – helped Paul while he was establishing churches at Corinth and Ephesus; with her husband Aquila, corrected Apollo’s preaching and helped him to learn of the new way in Christ.

Junias – contrary to feminist teachings, she was not an Apostle, but she was honored by the Apostles for her work in the Lord.

Phoebe – a servant in the Church at Cenchrea, She was not a deacon as feminists assert.

There is absolutely no Biblical evidence that any of these women sought to raise the social status of women or to challenge the role of a woman in the home and in her relationship with her husband.

Is Deborah a feminist role model for women?

Your Statement:

“Through this education, I have found role models such as Deborah the fifth judge of the Old Testament referenced in Judges 4 and 5 and Hebrews 11:32-34.”

I challenge you to present any Biblical evidence that Deborah was a “warrior”. She was nothing more than moral support and reluctant moral support at that.  If you look at the passage from Judges 5 Deborah only went with Barak because he asked her to and he refused to go if she would not go with him.  She was not the proud feminist that she is portrayed as.   In fact she said God would hand their enemy into the hands of a “woman” and this was not said in a proud way, but to shame Barak for refusing to go without her.  God did eventually give the honor of killing Sisera to a woman (Jael) to shame the men for their cowardly behavior.

The truth is this.  We have no evidence that Deborah neglected her duties to her home in her role as prophetess.  In fact we have no idea how old she was when God called her to this position. She may have been barren or raised her children and taken on this role much later in life after her children were grown and gone.

Women in leadership positions were the exception to God’s design not the norm

In no way does the Bible EVER paint women in leadership roles as a positive thing, but it is something God uses to shame the men into action.

“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” -Isaiah 3:12 (KJV)

God is allowed to make exceptions to his own rules

God made these exceptions to his own design at limited and specific times:

God allowed a donkey to speak to a Balaam in Numbers chapter 22.

God tells the prophet Isaiah to go and prophesy naked for 3 years in Isaiah chapter 20.

God tells the prophet Hosea to go marry a prostitute (something clearly forbidden for priests) in Hosea chapter 1.

God took Enoch (in Genesis 5) and Elijah (2 Kings 2) directly to heaven without them first experiencing physical death.

In the same way that God made these exceptions to his rules God has sometimes allowed women to occupy positions of spiritual authority in an effort to shame the men of their society into action and obedience to God.

Are “sexist” beliefs always wrong?

Your Statement:

“However, I believe that your article reflects not only the loving messages given to us by God, but also several sexist attitudes embedded in our society. While it is clear that God created men and women with differing characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses, I do not think that it necessarily follows that the two genders must adhere strictly to narrow roles. While the Bible includes passages that guide women to be reverent and respectful to men, it also offers direction to men to love women and to treat them with kindness and understanding, and to acknowledge them as companions and partners in life.”

Let me first address the term “sexist”.  This term is often used synonymously with “misogynist” but the two words really mean two different things.

The truth is that while all misogynists (haters of women) are sexists not all sexist people are misogynists.

If by “sexist” you mean a person who believes that one gender may typically excel in certain tasks over the other gender than I and those others who believe that men and women excel over one another in different areas could be labeled as sexists. For example, men generally speaking are better at most physical sports than women and women generally are better at tasks that require nurturing and empathy than men.

This is why if you take the typical woman and throw her in a sports game with men she will get beat.  It is also why if you put a man in a room with toddlers and infants he will not do as well caring for their needs as the typical woman.  Are there exceptions to these norms? Of course there are.  But exceptions do not negate norms.

But based on your belief in “Difference Feminism” I would guess that this is not something you are including in what you think are “sexist attitudes embedded in our society”. You accept these types of differences between genders.  However, you do seem to believe though that it is “sexist” for a person to believe that a woman’s place is in the home.  If that is what you mean by “sexist” then I plead guilty.

To be fair to your position – I recognize that you are not condemning women who choose to be homemakers as your mother was.

But you seem to feel that it is “sexist” for a person to believe God did not give women a choice but instead directly commanded that a woman should spend the majority of her time, talents and energy in direct service to her husband, her children and her home.

Coed Sports force men to violate their natural God given instincts toward women

You reference the fact that you played hockey – a sport you readily admit is dominated by men. The reason that hockey is dominated by men is because it is not only physically demanding but it also a very aggressive sport not unlike football although football is even more aggressive.

I have allowed and even encouraged my daughter to play basketball on a church league in our area – but it was not coed.  They have a separate league for girls and a separate league for boys. I would not encourage my daughter to do what your father encouraged you to do and play hockey with men.  There are two reasons I would not have done what your father did.

The first reason is that men will often instinctively hold back and do not play as aggressively when women are involved.  The second reason is that coed sports can also bring out frustration in men as they realize at a conscious or unconscious level that God meant for men to protect women and not to physically compete with women.  This is why I am firmly against any type of coed sports leagues because I believe anything that causes men and women to go against their God given gender specific design, nature or instincts is not something we should encourage.

This is also one of the reasons women do not belong in the military as men will instinctively afford more protection to female unit members which affects unit cohesion and effectiveness.

The Bible does not call a man’s wife his partner

You talked about a wife being her husband’s “companion and partner”.  While the Bible does refer to man’s wife as his companion it never refers to her as his partner – despite the NIV Bible translation which tries to use “partner” in some verses with no textual support for doing so. I dive into these passages in great detail in these posts.

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2014/05/20/is-marriage-a-partnership-or-patriarchy/

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/03/03/is-christian-marriage-a-master-servant-relationship/

7 Questions for young women with political ambitions

Question 1

How do you explain Biblical characters like Deborah as any more than an exception to God’s design and purpose for woman in light of the fact that God calls it a shame for women to rule over men (Isaiah 3:12), he calls it a shame for women to speak in the church (I Corinthians 14:34-35) and he says the head of the woman is the man (I Corinthians 11:3)?

Question 2

How can a woman occupy a position of political authority which would most like make her an authority over her husband when God calls women to be in subjection to their husbands in “everything” as the Church is subject to Christ in everything? (Ephesians 5:23-24, I Peter 3:1-6)

Question 3

How can a woman be the “keeper of her home”(Titus 2:5) and serve the needs of her husband, her children and her home while being gone 40 to 70 hours a week as most political jobs require?

Question 4

Do you think God is ok with other people raising your children and experiencing all the special firsts those children will have(like walking and talking) while you are gone pursing you political career 40 to 70 hours a week?

Question 5

If a woman pursues a career and her husband must dutifully stand behind her and support her in this career is this not a reversal of the creation order that woman was made for man, not man for woman (I Corinthians 11:9)?

Question 6

Could you honestly say if you pursue this course of action that you would be dedicating the majority of your time, talents and energy to serving your husband, your children and your home if you pursue this course of action?

Question 7

Are you willing to sacrifice seeing your child walk for the first time, talk for the first time and all those other special firsts as you most likely will if you are gone so much from your home?

I would invite you to read a recent post I did “Don’t fall for the feminist lie that women can “have it all”. In that post I show a comment I received from a woman who used to think as you do.  She believed she could have it all and found out years later that she was sacrificing her family and her marriage as well as not fulfilling the role God gave her by following her selfish ambitions. I encourage you to read her story.

Conclusion

Justice – there is nothing wrong with you having a love for studying the Bible and also other great writers in history. You could use your love of reading and desire to impact the world by teaching other women in your local church as Paul exhorts women to do (Titus 2:3-5). You might even consider having a Christian woman’s blog.

Neither of these uses of your talents would contradict with the primary mission God has given you.

For a man PART of his mission from God in this life is to lead, protect and provide for his home.  If he fails to model the love, leadership, provision, protection, teaching and discipline that God does for his people he will fail his mission.  But for a man the other part of his mission is to do what you are presuming to do and make an impact his world through his career.

For you as a woman your husband, your children and your home are not just a part of your mission as they are for a man. Your future husband, your future children and your future home ARE your mission.  Anything that takes away from your service to your husband, your children and you home must be put aside or you will fail your mission.

I encourage you to read my post “Young ladies – If you pursue a career you may fail the Christian race”.

Also see Does the Bible allow for a woman to be President of the United States?

Photo Sources:

Photo Source:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/15142791621
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

By Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46897599

Donald’s Trump’s nationalism and protectionism will rebuild America

I am conservative Christian and despite many differences I have with Donald Trump I have supported him for President since the beginning of his candidacy last year. Donald Trump is neither a conservative candidate nor a liberal candidate but rather he is a populist and protectionist candidate.

First I want to dispel the notion that protectionism is incompatible with free market capitalism and conservatism.

Protectionism is NOT incompatible with free market capitalism and conservatism

Since Republicans began to abandon protectionism in the 1990s and joined the Democrats in embracing a pure free trade ideology some of them have tried to convince Republicans and conservatives that protectionism was incompatible with free market capitalism and conservatism. This could not be further from the truth.

The truth is that since the time of Lincoln the Republican Party has been a protectionist party. In fact even before that most Presidents of either party going back to our first Presidents were protectionists. Even though “tariff” is swear word today in modern politics until the 16th Amendment was adopted in 1913 the majority of the federal government’s income came from tariffs on goods from other nations.

The Democrats lead by FDR in 1932 successfully convinced Americans that tariffs had led to the great depression.  See a larger discussion debunking this myth at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/04/protectionism_didnt_cause_the.html

While free traders like to laud Reagan as free trader purist this is not historically accurate.

“President Reagan often broke with free-trade dogma. He arranged for voluntary restraint agreements to limit imports of automobiles and steel (an industry whose interests, by the way, I have represented). He provided temporary import relief for Harley-Davidson. He limited imports of sugar and textiles. His administration pushed for the “Plaza accord” of 1985, an agreement that made Japanese imports more expensive by raising the value of the yen.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/opinion/06lighthizer.html?_r=0

Our founders as well as most Presidents up until the early 20th century believed in free market capitalism in conjunction with protectionism.  What that means is they believed that within the United States trade should be free and markets should be free but at they believed strongly in protecting the economic interests of the United States from the interests of other nations.

I am glad that Donald Trump is successfully being able to make the case to Americans that we need to bring back the historic protectionism that our nation used to embrace.  Donald Trump is actually the first President since Ronald Reagan to be winning over many blue collar Democrats who are tired of watching their jobs being sent overseas.

Donald Trump’s Nationalism is good for our nation

Nationalism is the idea of rally a people around common historic and cultural values. We need Presidents that will put the American people and the American culture first.  This is why Donald Trump’s immigration message is ringing so true with millions of Americans. We should be able to tightly control the immigrants coming into this nation whether they be from Mexico or Middle Eastern countries and no it is not racist to want to protect cultural balance of your country.

Donald Trump is the natural successor to Pat Buchannan

Most people may not remember but many things on Donald Trump’s platform especially regarding his protectionist and immigration policies mirror that of another Presidential Candidate back in 2000 – Pat Buchannan.  But the reason Donald Trump is succeeding where Pat Buchannan failed is because our nation has actually seen what Pat Buchannan prophesied would come true.  American has seen its manufacturing industry decimated over the last 16 years under Bush’s and Obama’s free trade policies.  Also our culture is rapidly changing because of the lax immigration policies of 16 years of Bush and Obama.

The other reason Trump is succeeding where Buchannan failed is because he has two things Buchannan did not.  He has a powerful persona like Reagan did (albeit very different from Reagan) and he has been extremely successful in the business world where Buchannan was more of a politician.

Why am I voting for Trump even though he is not a strong Christian?

Probably the biggest difference between Trump and Buchannan is the difference in their faiths.  Buchannan is a man of deep faith where Trump is not.  For some Christians this might be an issue but for me it is not.

I am not voting for the Pastor of my Church but rather I am voting for the President of my nation. Often time’s men who make great Pastors would not make great Presidents and vice versa. I do not kid myself that Donald Trump is even a true Christian.  He might believe in God but that is about it. But I am not voting for him based on his faith but rather on his policies and my faith in his ability to protect the economy, security and culture of this nation.

I am also trusting in the fact that while he may not be a strong Christian – he has pledged to protect the freedoms of Christians to worship and conduct their businesses according to their faith.  That is good enough for me.

I encourage my fellow Christians, conservatives and Republicans to join me in voting for Donald Trump tomorrow on Super Tuesday.

Photo Source for Donald Trump:
By Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39399660

John Kasich says he will not fight for the religious liberty of Christian business owners

John_Kasich2

I was watching the Republican debate last night and John Kasich, Governor of Ohio and 2016 Republican candidate for President, made this statement that should send chills down the spine of any believer in religious liberty:

“In regard to same sex marriage I don’t favor it I’ve always favored traditional marriage but look the court has ruled and I’ve moved on and what I have said Hugh is look “where does it end?” if you are in the business of selling things if you are not going to sell to somebody you don’t agree with – today I am not going to sell to somebody whose gay and tomorrow maybe I won’t sell to somebody whose divorced.  If you’re in the business of commerce conduct commerce and if you don’t agree with their lifestyle say a prayer for them when they leave and hope they change their behavior but when it comes to religious institutions they are inviolate in my mind and I would fight those institutions…”

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/02/26/gop-debate-john-kasich-same-sex-marriage-07.cnn

What his answered basically boils down to is – I believe Churches and religious institutions are the only ones who have the right to practice their religious beliefs in their organizations. Business owners do not have that right in John Kasich’s view.

Let me address his gay marriage to divorce comparison.  Some Christians come from denominations that strongly preach against divorce of any kind.  While we may debate this as Christians we must respect those who hold the position that remarriage is never allowed by God even if we may disagree with them.

That means that the answer to Mr. Kasich’s question about if we should allow someone to refuse to participate in a situation involving divorce the answer my friends is “yes”! A person who believes it is just as immoral to participate in a “remarriage” ceremony as someone who believes it is immoral to participate in a gay marriage ceremony may decline to participate. We can argue about other types of discrimination.  But marriage is a religious institution made by God, not by man. Our beliefs as Christians about marriage are a part of the core of our faith and we cannot violate those beliefs even in our businesses.

My divorce attorney and his son have a practice together.  He and his father are Catholic.  His father handled my divorce from my first wife but his son refuses to have anything to do with divorce cases based on his faith.  When his father retires and his son takes over their practice that law practice will no longer take cases of divorce and that is their right to do so.

In the same way a Christian baker, florist, photographer or anyone doing any other business where they would be providing services relating to a gay wedding or any event promoting or honoring the gay lifestyle should NOT be forced to violate their faith by having any participation in these kinds of events.

Except for maybe Ted Cruz, I do not kid myself that many of these politicians actually care about gay marriage but I do want them to care about religious liberty. This battle over gay marriage has now become a battle over religious liberty and we must realize the seriousness of it and we need to look at candidates who will fight for religious liberty.

Mr. Kasich, the Supreme Court may be your final authority for how you live your life but as Bible believing Christians we believe God is our final authority.  While it is true that the Bible tells us to “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake…” (I Peter 2:13) the Bible also tells us as believers that we “We ought to obey God rather than men.”(Acts 5:29) There is a time for Christians to practice civil disobedience and when the government steps beyond its God given authority and violates God’s law we have a right and obligation to disregard that law which conflicts with God’s higher law.