Pro-Life Songs

Alicia at Fructus Ventris has linked to an interesting article about pro-life lyrics in pop songs. (Some of the songs may not be deliberately pro-life, but they do not portray abortion in a positive light.) In the same vein, Old Oligarch also recently posted about a couple of suspected pro-life songs (one of which is also mentioned in the Envoy article).

There are a few other songs I can think of that are pro-life. I remember hearing one by the Galactic Cowboys called "If I Were a Killer". And Steve Taylor has several songs that deal with this subject. If you can think of any other pro-life songs, feel free to post a comment.

Useful Idiots

Just a warning...there is much uncharitable ranting ahead. If you'd rather just skip this, I'll understand. This rant has been brewing for a while, but I've tried to hold it in. However, this post on A Small Victory has inspired me to go ahead and get this out of my system.

In the past, during some very heated discussions on other blogs, I would get so furious that I couldn't see straight when some jerk would say things like, "No wonder they hate you and want to kill you, America has done blah, blah, blah..." These were usually non-Americans. For people who are supposedly so into peace and love, they sure enjoyed pointing their icky fingers at us and sanctimoniously scolding us. I think for all their pacifist affectations, they got quite a bit of gloating pleasure from 9/11.

Then there are those "concerned" American leftists -- those who think the UN can do no wrong and that the US can do no right -- who earnestly bray, "Hasn't America learned anything from 9/11? The problem is not radical Islam. After all, Islam is the Religion of Peace™. No, we must explore the root causes. The root causes are that America doesn't give enough foreign aid and blah, blah, blah..."

These people are nothing more than useful idiots for terrorists. They are spitting on the graves of those who perished that day. This may be uncharitable, but I'm still angry...even two years later. I find these terrorist apologists despicable. As far as I'm concerned, they can take their crocodile tears and their oh-so-earnest platitudes and shove them sideways.

Low Bandwidth Skin

After much tweaking, I finally got the new Low Bandwidth skin looking right in all the browsers. It's a modified version of the default MT stylesheet. It only uses a couple of small image files, so it should be a good skin for people on dial-up connections. It's not in the gallery yet, but it's available on the drop-down menu.

Update: This skin is now on page two of the Skins Gallery.

More Passion Controversy

I've been trying to think of how or if I should respond to the sentiments expressed in this article and this post on Mel Gibson's The Passion. (Links via Andrea Harris.) Well, I'm probably going to get myself in trouble, but here goes nothing...

First, there's the criticism of all the blood and gore. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't crucifixion a rather bloody, gruesome death? If Gibson had played that down, then he would have been criticized for making the crucifixion too sanitized and bloodless. And that criticism would be valid.

Secondly, I think it's unfair and downright offensive to imply that Christians will pour forth from the theaters after seeing this movie and start rioting. Look, it's pointless and stupid to blame any group for Christ's crucifixion. Any genuine Christian knows this...because we all share the blame. We believe that Christ had to die and rise again for us to be saved. Give us Christians some credit. Believe it or not, very few of us are knuckle-dragging Fred Phelps types.

Finally, the Salon article is basically saying that the Gospels themselves are anti-Semitic. (You have to sit through an ad to read the article.) The author speculates that, "'The Passion' will most likely offer up the familiar puerile, stereotypical view of the evil Jew calling for Jesus' blood and the clueless Pilate begging him to reconsider. It is a view guaranteed to stir anew the passions of the rabid Christian, and one that will send the Jews scurrying back to the dark corners of history."

All I can do is shake my head...

While I'm busy...

Go read this post by William Luse now!

(Via Such Small Hands.)

I'll be working in the background...

I'm going to be changing the templates around tonight, so if things look funny or don't work, that's why. The changes should be transparent once finished. Without getting too far into geek territory, I'll just say that I'm making the skinning part a little more flexible...I've got future plans for another skin that will need this flexibility.

When I'm finished with the template changes, I'll have a simple, "low-bandwidth" skin available as well.

Go to Hell! Go directly to Hell...

Do not pass Purgatory, do not collect $200!

(Via laughin.)

Girly Girl

Bene Diction recently linked to The Gender Genie, a site that analyzes your writing to predict if you are male or female. I submitted eight entries...six were correctly identified as female, and two incorrectly as male. So, I guess I write like a girl, for the most part...

Incidentally, I got a referral from this page, which is some sort of web scavenger hunt. My site showed up under "A website with a purple background". That it has...if you're using the default skin. A comment about my site says, "it's purple, but a little girly". Yep, it's girly...not that there's anything wrong with that!

Nothing New Under the Sun

What they said.

Notice on Email

If you get an email with an attachment that uses either my blog email address or the webmail address I use for the iMood thing, it is NOT from me! Delete it and do not open the attachment!

I'm sure you know about this virus that keeps sending .pif attachments. (I can't remember the name of the virus right now.) I've gotten a bunch on my webmail address. Some of them were using the email addresses of several well-known bloggers. Others were using email addresses from Fox News and other media outlets. I also got one that bounced from someone else's mailbox -- it was apparently using my webmail address.

So be careful...update your virus software and just say no to attachments!

In the meantime...

Here's another goofy quiz...

You are a Square. What a weirdo.


What kind of Sixties Person are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

(Via Jay Solo.)

No Brain Cells Left

Between dealing with various household problems and trying to get a project at work finished, I'm too drained to post much of anything lately. Sorry about that...I'll be back as soon as my brain cells regenerate.

Why Misanthropy Works for Me

Because of crap like the incident described here.

The Church of Rainbows and Fluffy Bunnies

Prayer, some guy hanging on a cross, quotes from some old book, all that stuff about sin and salvation...who needs it? How depressing! Church is for socializing, seeing your friends, giving them a big hug, singing the "Hokey Pokey" song, hearing a funny and uplifting speech from the guy or gal up at the front, and then listening to pretty, new-agey music with your eyes closed. All this will lead to a vaguely spiritual feeling, that wonderful glow of caring and sharing...sort of like really good pain-killers for the soul.

Here ends the sarcasm. And the sad thing is, I've been to a churches similar to what is described above and in the linked article.

(Via Bryan Preston at JunkYardBlog, who fisks the heck out of this nonsense.)

Luther Trailer

Here's the trailer for Luther, the forthcoming movie about Martin Luther.

(Via Theosebes.)

Yoda Am I

A venerated sage with vast power and knowledge, you gently guide forces around you while serving as a champion of the light.

Judge me by my size, do you? And well you should not - for my ally is the Force. And a powerful ally it is. Life greets it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us, and binds us. Luminescent beings are we, not this crude matter! You must feel the Force around you, everywhere.

(Via Double Helix.)

Say What?

End-times obsessed minister Jack Van Impe claims that he was asked to give a briefing on prophetic events to the White House.

(Via Joshua Claybourn and blogs4God, which has a whole bunch of fun Van Impe related links.)

Her Lowness

Well, if this is true, it reveals someone who is vile, arrogant and inconsiderate. Someone who has no regard for any inconvenience and harm she may have caused to the other passengers. Missed connections, missed time with family, lost business opportunities, ruined vacations -- it doesn't matter to her. And to think there are people who would like to give this woman more power...

Lileks and Lewis

Some words of wisdom...

James Lileks on marriage and family:

This story has irritated me from the start, and it has nothing to do with Rev. Robinson’s sexual orientation. The guy left his wife and kids to go do the hokey-pokey with someone else: that’s what it’s all about, at least for me. Marriages founder for a variety of reasons, and ofttimes they’re valid reasons, sad and inescapable. But “I want to have sex with other people” is not a valid reason for depriving two little girls of a daddy who lives with them, gets up at night when they're sick, kisses them in the morning when they wake. There's a word for people who leave their children because they don't want to have sex with Mommy anymore: selfish. I'm not a praying man, but I cannot possibly imagine asking God if that would be okay. Send them another Dad, okay? Until you do I'll keep my cellphone on 24/7, I promise.

C.S. Lewis on people putting Eros love (i.e. romantic love or "being in love") before anything else (from The Four Loves):

It seems to sanction all sorts of actions they would not otherwise have dared. I do not mean solely, or chiefly, acts that violate chastity. They are just as likely to be acts of injustice or uncharity against the outer world. They will seem like proofs of piety and zeal towards Eros. The pair can say to one another in an almost sacrificial spirit, "It is for love's sake that I have neglected my parents -- left my children -- cheated my partner -- failed my friend at his greatest need." These reasons in love's law have passed for good. The votaries may even come to feel a particular merit in such sacrifices; what costlier offering can be laid on love's altar than one's conscience?

A Little List O' Links!

• Little Tiny Lies on the gay bishop: "I Don't get it". A couple of favorite parts:

  These days, you can find clerics who don't believe in the immaculate conception or heaven or hell. They will even tell you there is no such thing is sin. My question for them is, "What exactly is it that leads you to conclude that you're a Christian?" And Jesus was no pacifist, anyway. Pacifists don't beat moneychangers with whips.

  With each "progressive" step away from the text of the Bible, a church loses a portion of the justification for its existence. We don't need God or Jesus in the picture if all we want are lessons on being nice. You can get that from Dale Carnegie.

• Dean, you make a good point. Let me just say, "Thank you!"
• California's upcoming gubernatorial recall election is shaping up to be a real circus...or as On the Fritz calls it, "The California Cavalcade of Shame". Be sure to check in with Fritz and Frank regularly, because I'm sure they will give the various candidates all the respect they deserve.
• Amy Welborn links to this piece by Rich Lowry, which accuses Bush of being a pacifist...when it comes to the culture war.

Rush Disses Bloggers

First of all, I'd like to point out that I like Rush Limbaugh and have listened to his show off and on for years. I started listening to him in 1989. He was very different in those days. Back then, he was outrageous and laugh-out-loud funny. I don't listen to him with any regularity now. He's much more staid and toned down now. (That's why I'm puzzled when people make Rush out to be some sort of crazy buffoon. The only thing I can figure is that, if they've even bothered to listen at all, they must not have listened to him recently.)

With that out of the way, I agree with lots of other bloggers that Rush is out of line with his scornful attitude towards blogs.

It all started with this piece from The Hill by Dr. David Hill: "Bloggers won’t match Limbaugh". Rush then commented on what Hill had to say and, of course, gloated about it. James Lileks' latest Bleat has a great takedown of Hill's article. I don't really have much to add to what Lileks has said, but I would like to make a couple of observations.

Hill accuses bloggers of having low production values. For one thing, not everyone is an expert with HTML, CSS and web design stuff. And they may not be able to afford to hire a web designer. However, they might be darn good writers or have interesting subject matter. If their sites look clean and presentable, does it matter if they have all the bells and whistles or not? Then there are some bloggers who love to tinker with their sites, make improvements and learn new things about web design. I'm one of those bloggers. I've learned quite a bit since I started this blog. In fact, I cringe when I think of what this blog looked like in its first few months.

Hill also says that bloggers don't talk about their personal lives enough. It's funny, but I've heard just the opposite charge leveled at bloggers. I mean, haven't we all heard of writers ridiculing bloggers who put pictures of their pets up on their blogs? I admit that I don't talk about my personal life much here. The main reason is that I'm a very private person. Also, I just don't think such details would be very interesting.

Finally, why does this have to be some sort of competition: talk radio vs. blogs? Who said that blogs have to overtake talk radio? In his commentary on Hill's piece, Rush says the following:

Many people write that bloggers are the Next Big Thing. Liberals, forever in search of something to kill talk radio, think Bloggers will return them to their positions of unquestioned power in the arena of ideas. But nothing is going to supplant talk radio because talk radio isn't going to cede the territory it now holds.

It seems like Rush is saying that blogs are part of some liberal plot to kill talk radio. Well, that's ridiculous. From what I see, most of the more popular political blogs are libertarian or conservative. And I don't see how blogs could in any way "kill" talk radio. If anything, the two can complement each other, and there are some talk radio hosts who have figured that out. Cam Edwards is a talk radio host who is also a blogger. So is Hugh Hewitt. And I think that Neal Boortz's Nealz Nuze would definitely qualify as a blog.

If those other talk show hosts have embraced blogging while Rush ridicules it, I have to wonder if Rush is still "on the cutting edge of societal evolution".

A Move to Typepad

Amy Welborn has moved off Blogspot and now has a very nice new Typepad-powered blog. This is the first well-known blogger that I know of who has moved to Typepad.

About the Gay Episcopal Bishop

Everyone else seems to be blogging about this, so I guess I'll add my $0.02. My impression of the Episcopal Church is that, like so many mainline churches, it has been sliding toward liberalism and away from Christian orthodoxy for years. So the election of this bishop does not really surprise me. This incident is the last straw for many Episcopalians. As the theologically conservative members leave for more orthodox churches, the Episcopal Church just might find that it's becoming more and more irrelevant...and not even recognizably Christian anymore. The sad thing is the increasingly apostate leadership of this church probably won't care.

Chosen? Or Free to Choose?

Dean Esmay links to this post by Ben Kepple, where he takes on David Heddle's arguments in favor of Calvinism. Here are the comments I posted on Dean's thread:

I'm not a Calvinist because I don't believe that God only loves and saves certain people. I don't believe we are robots that have been programmed by God to either accept or reject Him. People have the free will to either accept Him or not. When people go to Hell, it is because they chose to separate themselves from God by rejecting Him.

And if I may add one more thing...Calvinists seem to believe that God operates in Time. That is, in order or Him to be all knowing and sovereign, He would have to have ordained from the outset that some would be saved and some would not. However, God is outside of Time and sees all moments -- past, present and future -- the way we see the present. Because He is outside of Time, He knows what choices we will make.

David Heddle then replied to my comments in Dean's post. Here are my replies to his points:

1) You ought to read how the theological titans handled this question.

You are right about that. I realize that I have a lot to learn. So far, I have not been able to accept Calvinism in the ways I’ve seen it explained. The biggest theological influence on me, outside Scripture, is C.S. Lewis. Lewis seems to reject Calvinism, and his reasoning makes sense to me.

2) You say that you don't believe that God only loves and saves certain people-- but what does the Bible say about it? We are not free to assume God is how we want him to be. We have to take him for they way He is described in scripture. If you feel that you are not bound by scripture, that is you do not believe it is inerrant, what makes you think he is "nicer" than the God described there? Maybe He is meaner. Maybe He is dead.

As far as what the Bible says about who God loves, I think of John 3:16, where it says, “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son.” It doesn’t say that God loved and gave His Son for “the elect” or “the chosen”, but “the world”. And no, I do not believe in some sentimental, “nice” version of God. I do not believe in a namby-pamby, watered-down Christianity where there’s no such thing as sin, Satan or Hell. I do feel bound by Scripture and I believe in its inerrancy.

3) The Apostle Paul seems to be anticipating your criticism when discussing the sovereignty of God he writes in Romans 9:

One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--

Notice that Paul talks about vessels prepared *in advance* for destruction or mercy. That is predestination.

I don’t think that belief in people freely choosing or rejecting God contradicts His sovereignty. Perhaps allowing us free will is part of His will. I could just as well argue that some are prepared for destruction because they have chosen to reject God, a choice God knew they would make.

4) Everyone says God is outside of time, and I don't deny it, but where is that taught in the Bible? It is always said as if manifestly true.

I believe it to be true because it would explain God’s eternal presence, His omnipotence and His omniscience. One scriptural example is Psalm 139.

I'm not a theologian and I don't claim to know everything. I'm still growing in my faith. But like I said, I can't accept the Calvinist view as I understand it.

Feelings...whoa, whoa, whoa...

You represent... angst.
You have an extremely cynical outlook on just about
everything. It's okay to sulk and be
depressed, but life is short, and you only get
one. It's only what you make it, and only you
can make it improve.


What feeling do you represent?
brought to you by Quizilla

The result may have been a bit different if I were in a better mood...

(Via Jay Solo.)

Exploiting the 9/11 Victims

Just when I think I cannot be shocked anymore by the depravity to which people can sink, I read about things like this. Some people are absolutely rotten to the core.

(Via LGF.)

Update: Both Michele at A Small Victory and Andrea Harris have posts about this that are well worth reading.

Another Blogger Gets Hassled

On the Fritz (a very funny blog, BTW) is getting threatened by some pr0n peddler because of this satirical post.

This seems to be happening a lot lately. Just a couple of weeks ago, I posted about Theologian Guy getting hassled for calling himself "Bible Geek".