"We all make mistakes," said Michael Vick. "Dogfighting is a terrible thing and I reject it ... I found Jesus and turned my life over to God. I think that's the right thing to do as of right now."
I'm not going to speculate here about whether this is a genuine decision or a calculated sympathy ploy. The timing is suspicious, but that's a matter known only by God and Mr. Vick.
What I can say with complete certainty is that it came a bit late. No one is beyond the reach of God's grace. Just look at Saul, who hunted down and killed Christians before meeting Jesus and being transformed by God into a great missionary. But if Vick had been similarly transformed a year or two ago through a genuine, life-changing encounter with the Living God, his life would be very different today.
Some people think that being a Christian is just about going to heaven when you die, but they are missing out on the fact that eternal life starts the moment you accept Christ as your savior, and at that moment God takes your old messed up life and supernaturally turns it around into something exceptionally good. Living life today in fellowship with God is just as much a benefit of salvation as going to heaven when I die.
I am thankful that God saved me when I was young, because He spared me from many of the stupid choices that people make when they try to live without Him.
The truth about Michael Vick will be seen in his life ten years from now. But how much better would it be if he had turned his life over to God ten years ago, and not had to lose so much to be forced to "find Jesus" in prison, watching his NFL career crumble before his eyes?
It is wise to learn from other people's mistakes, because it helps you to avoid making them all yourself. Perhaps Michael Vick could have avoided this calamity in his personal life by learning from other people's experience. And maybe you can learn from Michael Vick's experience. Don't wait until your life is ruined to turn to God. Do it now. Ask Jesus to be your Savior and Lord, and allow Him to turn you into a new creation. Do it today.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
Bush did it
President Bush is to blame for a lot of bad stuff that has happened in the past years.
He pulled some strings to get Katrina to hit New Orleans, right in the spot where a bunch of environmentalist wackos prevented the Corp of Engineers from building a better sea wall. And if that's not enough, Al Sharpton says that Bush actually put dynamite under the levies to make sure that they would fail.
Bush caused the I-35 bridge to collapse into the Mississippi river in Minneapolis.
And Bush lied and got all of our dumb troops stuck in Iraq to profit his contractor buddies. That certainly was not about terrorism -- after all, Bush was behind 9/11 too!
But this one tops them all.
Now we have the bombshell revelation that President Bush got a 20-year-old pregnant and denied her the entitlement of drinking mai tais on a tropical beach.
A 20-year-old Illinois college student is whining because she won’t be able to vacation in Costa Rica, because she got pregnant, because she couldn’t get birth control anymore, because it cost $20-a-month more at the university clinic, because its federal funding was cut, because President George Bush signed the Deficit Reduction Act.
I can't make this stuff up, folks. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that
The cost of Harris’ birth control -- NuvaRing, a monthly contraceptive, at the UIC clinic was $35, up from $15. “She said that even though UIC provides free condoms she would only use them ‘once in a while.’ Other times she and her partner were feeling spontaneous and ‘it just happened,’ she explained”.
The story portrays Harris as the helpless victim of Bush's budget cuts and makes the case for more Federal funding of birth control: “Harris, coming from a low-income home, said she cannot afford to pay so much more for birth control.”
Sure. And what is the cost of the cell phone she was shown holding in the newspaper photo? She could afford a trip to Costa Rica, but couldn't afford $35 for birth control? Maybe if she can’t afford to protect herself, she should -- perish the thought -- abstain from sex.
How does anyone get the idea that taxpayers are required to pay for her birth control? That spontaneous sex excuses reckless behavior? That extra-marital sex is no problem, ethically or morally?
This is not just a case of one girl publicly sticking her foot in her mouth over her irresponsible behavior. It reflects a society which has lost its mind.
He pulled some strings to get Katrina to hit New Orleans, right in the spot where a bunch of environmentalist wackos prevented the Corp of Engineers from building a better sea wall. And if that's not enough, Al Sharpton says that Bush actually put dynamite under the levies to make sure that they would fail.
Bush caused the I-35 bridge to collapse into the Mississippi river in Minneapolis.
And Bush lied and got all of our dumb troops stuck in Iraq to profit his contractor buddies. That certainly was not about terrorism -- after all, Bush was behind 9/11 too!
But this one tops them all.
Now we have the bombshell revelation that President Bush got a 20-year-old pregnant and denied her the entitlement of drinking mai tais on a tropical beach.
A 20-year-old Illinois college student is whining because she won’t be able to vacation in Costa Rica, because she got pregnant, because she couldn’t get birth control anymore, because it cost $20-a-month more at the university clinic, because its federal funding was cut, because President George Bush signed the Deficit Reduction Act.
I can't make this stuff up, folks. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that
Last spring, 20-year-old pre-med student Elizabeth Harris had only Costa Rica on her mind. She was hoping to wine and dine there while taking a few biology courses.
But the Waukegan native and University of Illinois at Chicago junior had to skip her trip. Having gone off birth control, Harris found she was pregnant. She said she quit when the cost of her prescription at the UIC clinic more than doubled. "[The price] steered me away," said Harris. "I don't blame them [UIC], but I might not be in the situation I am in now."
The cost of Harris’ birth control -- NuvaRing, a monthly contraceptive, at the UIC clinic was $35, up from $15. “She said that even though UIC provides free condoms she would only use them ‘once in a while.’ Other times she and her partner were feeling spontaneous and ‘it just happened,’ she explained”.
The story portrays Harris as the helpless victim of Bush's budget cuts and makes the case for more Federal funding of birth control: “Harris, coming from a low-income home, said she cannot afford to pay so much more for birth control.”
Sure. And what is the cost of the cell phone she was shown holding in the newspaper photo? She could afford a trip to Costa Rica, but couldn't afford $35 for birth control? Maybe if she can’t afford to protect herself, she should -- perish the thought -- abstain from sex.
How does anyone get the idea that taxpayers are required to pay for her birth control? That spontaneous sex excuses reckless behavior? That extra-marital sex is no problem, ethically or morally?
This is not just a case of one girl publicly sticking her foot in her mouth over her irresponsible behavior. It reflects a society which has lost its mind.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Two years
Two years ago today I launched "One Nation Under God" onto the internet with great fanfare. Since then, I have taken the blogosphere by storm, accumulating almost a dozen avid readers. In memory of the two year anniversary of this blog, I am going to repost the guiding principles I laid out two years ago. I believe that they apply now as much as ever, and I believe that each of the 161 posts in this blog have worked to advance these principles.
1. America is great in spite of its government, not because of it
2. The earth is not fragile. Capitalism is not a threat to the environment.
3. Without the Second Amendment, the rest of the Bill of Rights is meaningless.
4. Budget deficits are caused by excessive spending, not insufficient taxation.
5. Parents are responsible for raising their kids, not villages and certainly not Hillary Clinton or the Federal Government.
6. Entrusting your retirement to the stock market is less risky than entrusting it to Congress.
7. Terrorism is an evil which must be wiped out, not appeased.
8. Most of the things that Congress does are outside of its Constitutional authority.
9. Free Market forces are better at improving society than government regulations.
10. Subsidizing irresponsibility is a very bad policy.
1. America is great in spite of its government, not because of it
2. The earth is not fragile. Capitalism is not a threat to the environment.
3. Without the Second Amendment, the rest of the Bill of Rights is meaningless.
4. Budget deficits are caused by excessive spending, not insufficient taxation.
5. Parents are responsible for raising their kids, not villages and certainly not Hillary Clinton or the Federal Government.
6. Entrusting your retirement to the stock market is less risky than entrusting it to Congress.
7. Terrorism is an evil which must be wiped out, not appeased.
8. Most of the things that Congress does are outside of its Constitutional authority.
9. Free Market forces are better at improving society than government regulations.
10. Subsidizing irresponsibility is a very bad policy.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Vick's mistake
Michael Vick, star NFL quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, is looking more and more guilty of the charges that he not only participated in the barbaric "sport" of dog fighting, but that he also exercised extreme cruelty in killing poor-performing dogs in inexcusably inhumane ways.
But what really stands out to me is the stupidity of this case. Its not just that this guy was making $13 million per year on a ten-year NFL contract, and he threw it all away for less money than he made in a week. It is pretty clear that Michael Vick was not into dog fighting just for the money. He got a sick thrill out of torturing, mutilating, and killing.
And that is where Vick's ultimate stupidity shows through. Michael Vick chose the wrong victims to take out his viscous tendencies upon. He picked dogs -- animals who society hold up as cute cuddly pets. Animals upon which the animal rights movement has bestowed rights and protections on the same level as adult humans. In fact, the outrage in this case seems more far-reaching than the outrage over American citizens tortured and murdered by terrorists.
Michael Vick should have been more selective in choosing his victims. Instead of dogs, Vick should have unleashed his violence on a group which society has reduced far below human level -- one which no one will care about, no one will be outraged over, no one will defend. He should have taken up dismembering a form of life so low that the death and carnage will seem commonplace.
Michael Vick should have chosen a hobby of ripping unborn babies limb from limb. It would have satisfied his sick blood lust and his thirst for profit, and we would all have yawned and gone back to watching our football. No one would have wondered why we care about dogs more than about human babies. There would be no criminal charges, no media uproar, no calls for years of incarceration. If Michael Vick were just a bit smarter he could have avoided all of this hassle, and instead of being demonized, he would be held up as a hero of the left, defended as a champion of women’s rights, and praised for having the courage to end a defenseless human life weighing less than the steak he eats for dinner.
That is the senseless stupidity in it all. All Michael Vick had to do was pick on someone who no one cared about.
But what really stands out to me is the stupidity of this case. Its not just that this guy was making $13 million per year on a ten-year NFL contract, and he threw it all away for less money than he made in a week. It is pretty clear that Michael Vick was not into dog fighting just for the money. He got a sick thrill out of torturing, mutilating, and killing.
And that is where Vick's ultimate stupidity shows through. Michael Vick chose the wrong victims to take out his viscous tendencies upon. He picked dogs -- animals who society hold up as cute cuddly pets. Animals upon which the animal rights movement has bestowed rights and protections on the same level as adult humans. In fact, the outrage in this case seems more far-reaching than the outrage over American citizens tortured and murdered by terrorists.
Michael Vick should have been more selective in choosing his victims. Instead of dogs, Vick should have unleashed his violence on a group which society has reduced far below human level -- one which no one will care about, no one will be outraged over, no one will defend. He should have taken up dismembering a form of life so low that the death and carnage will seem commonplace.
Michael Vick should have chosen a hobby of ripping unborn babies limb from limb. It would have satisfied his sick blood lust and his thirst for profit, and we would all have yawned and gone back to watching our football. No one would have wondered why we care about dogs more than about human babies. There would be no criminal charges, no media uproar, no calls for years of incarceration. If Michael Vick were just a bit smarter he could have avoided all of this hassle, and instead of being demonized, he would be held up as a hero of the left, defended as a champion of women’s rights, and praised for having the courage to end a defenseless human life weighing less than the steak he eats for dinner.
That is the senseless stupidity in it all. All Michael Vick had to do was pick on someone who no one cared about.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
The horror!
You can rest assured that this intersection in Dalhart Texas is the only place where Dodson and Liberal intersect.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Who is the artist?
Our family spent the last week in Yellowstone National Park.
We hiked through the mountains and along the brink of a mind-boggling canyon, watched the wildlife, and observed many different aspects of the interactions between rock, water, heat, and time. We saw the energy from the molten core of the earth unleashed by the Yellowstone Volcano in the form of geysers, hot springs, steam vents, and boiling mud pots. We were dwarfed by mountains formed by the collision of massive plates of the earth's crust.
At the West Thumb Geyser Basin, on the shore of Yellowstone Lake, Ranger Steve led us on a ranger-guided walk through the thermal area. A professor of geology, specializing in hydro-geothermalogy, he is highly intelligent and very qualified to discuss the scientific basis for the geysers and hot springs in that unique region.
Ranger Steve
Ranger Steve described the constant change seen in the thermal features as the work of an artist. This great artist works in the mediums of rock and water interacting with the heat from the magma intrusion of the Yellowstone Volcano. This artist's tools include earthquakes which alter the "plumbing" system deep in the earth, thermophile bacteria perfectly adapted to feed off of the energy of the scalding water and convert the sulfur into sulfuric acid, and the occasional cataclysmic volcanic eruption which "wipes the slate clean" so that the artist can begin an entirely new masterpiece of creativity.
As you experience Yellowstone, it is easy to see it as the work of a great artist. However, when Ranger Steve identified the artist, he got it completely wrong. He said that the artist whose creativity was seen at Yellowstone was “Mother Earth.” But the earth screams with signs of an active creativity, intentional design, a purposeful application of power, and a delight in beauty and variety of creation. None of these are traits of a chunk of rock orbiting a star in the outer fringes of an inconsequential spiral galaxy. Creation is evidence of the existence of a creator. Design points to a designer. Purpose is proof of a higher intellect directing the course of existence.
The artist of Yellowstone is not an impersonal one. Even Ranger Steve admits this by personifying the earth with the name “Mother”. But the earth and the forces of nature which Ranger Steve lifts up as the artist are themselves the creations of God. If you exclude the possibility of God as the source of creation, then Ranger Steve’s naturalistic view of Yellowstone being a product of chance is the only option left, but that doesn’t make it scientifically sound. There is nothing scientific about rejecting the one explanation which best fits the observed facts without any basis other than a refusal to admit the existence of a creator with the authority to define moral boundaries.
Only God could be the great artist of Yellowstone, artist of the universe, and artist of our lives. An honest look at Yellowstone confirms without a question the truth of God’s existence, his role as creator, and his continued care for his creation. Everywhere I looked I saw proof of God’s greatness. I am awed to serve a God who could conceive of the things I witnessed, intelligent enough to design them to work in such perfect harmony, powerful enough to create them by his Word alone, and loving enough to let me experience the results of his creativity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
