Welcome to the weekend from Forth Worth Texas! Here is the best of what I read this week – I hope you enjoy!
Let’s get started with the news that Harriet Tubman will replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. I’m still processing this a bit, but Tubman seems like a good fit – and almost everyone agrees. The best (and mercifully short) story I read on this was from National Review called ‘What They Didn’t Teach You in School about Harriet Tubman’ – fascinating stuff and worth every minute of your time. Here’s an excerpt:
In short, Harriet Tubman was a black, Republican, gun-toting, veterans’ activist, with ninja-like spy skills and strong Christian beliefs. She probably wouldn’t have an ounce of patience for the obtuse posturing of some of the tenured radicals hanging around Ivy League faculty lounges. But does she deserve a place on our money? Hell yeah.
In addition to that short story, Joe Carter over at the Gospel Coalition has his ‘9 things you should know’ about Tubman. Some of this is overlapping info, but still a good scan.
Since we’re sort of on pop-culture, you probably saw that Prince died this week. Drudge had made all his links purple in honor of the former rock star. Jon Bloom over at DG has a good and short perspective on the death.
Continuing in the genre…the Wall Street Journal had an interesting piece this week called ‘Star Wars’ Fans Feel the Force Calling Them Back to Original Cuts. The crux of the piece is how many fans hated the tinkering that Lucas did to the original three SW films, and have (on their own dime) made their own “fixed” versions.
Sometimes I link stories to the weekend reading from authors I don’t agree with much, but they may have something interesting (ahem…that’s you Jennifer Rubin over at WaPo). Other times bloggers have a great point and I enjoyed it. But one savvy reader pointed out to me this week that maybe I should say something of a disclaimer? After all, some of these folks can be a bit weird when your back is turned. Well, this week a perfect example cropped up. Last week I linked to Joel Miller’s blog – he was talking about on books, and reading etc. But this week he wrote a crazy piece of messed up theology called ‘How God uses angels to assist our prayers’. I read through it – he heavily relies on two scripture verses – taken out of context with a ton of assumptions built in – and tradition. There is a rule of interpretation for the Bible that says the implicit is governed by the explicit. Makes sense doesn’t it? Well a lot of people like to ignore it in order to build their case. I have many good Catholic friends (I think Miller is also a Catholic), but I would beg them to read and think on this scripture verse which is explicit:
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. (1 Timothy 2:1-6 ESV)
So that’s my little FYI/Disclaimer. I don’t always agree with everyone I link to 100% of the time!
I’m not much of a science nerd, but two weeks or so ago, Ken Ham came under fire for supposedly embracing the theory of evolution. Now, I will tell you right now that having studied a fair amount on this (not nearly as much as some), and having simply taken logic courses growing up, the theory of evolution itself seems so fraught with issues that I’m under why the scientific community still embraces it. Maybe its an anything but theism sort of attitude? Well, in this article from Tim Challies, it seem that Ham has not embraces full throated evolution. But the article was a helpful little guide/refreshed on the topic. And, it wasn’t too long!
I finally got to scan through this little beaut: When Ben Franklin Was Against Vaccines – fascinating stuff here, historically speaking!
Ligonier had something I enjoyed called ‘Attending the School of God’ – some good perspective here.
Best article I keep meaning to read but haven’t yet: Sunday Morning with the Simpsons
Okay – on to politics!
I found this run down of the presidential campaign in PA really insightful: Republicans fight for Pennsylvania’s free-agent delegates —- you can sense a little hostility in the air among the grassroots there…more on that here: Delegates face death threats from Trump supporters.
If you’re into the campaign process-style stories, then you need to read these ones that I found helpful:
Donald’s New York win might not be that big of a game-changer – the funny thing about this one is that its written by a NY Post reporter…since when did they ever write anything serious? Kasich Camp in No Rush to Woo Delegates – if you’re a Kasich fan, this is disconcerting if its true…Underdog presidential candidates spend heavily to catch up —- follow the money honey! RNC Rules Roadblock May No Longer be a Hurdle for Kasich…Graphing the Delegates – the vile Libs (and this site really is vile sometimes) over at Daily Kos have some interesting graphs on the delegate race for both parties. Donald Trump’s false claim that there have been no negative ads against Kasich —– obvious title and conclusion to this story, but interesting numbers breakdown…still I am amazed at how willing Trump is to lie about anything – even the obvious stuff. I mean, the guy doesn’t even just obfuscate like a normal politician, he just says whatever he wants about anything he wants.
Okay – that’s enough of the process stuff. But keeping on the theme of Trump saying stupid stuff…
John Kasich found himself in a world of hurt for saying he wouldn’t have signed the North Carolina bathroom bill (here’s a NY Times story on the Bill itself and the controversy). He was making a (very poor) libertarian style argument about not writing these things into law and using the government to over litigate social affairs blah blah blah. Al Mohler rightly blasted him for using that as a way to avoid taking a stand on the issue. Well, this week Donald Trump went even further saying that Donald Trump Says Transgender People Should Use the Bathroom They Want. Not out of some libertarian or conservative bent, but because his a liberal on this issue.
How far are we going to go in this country on issues like this? I think its SUPER obvious to say that as a dad I don’t want a transgender “woman” in the bathroom with my two young daughters. This ought to be a no-brainer. But in the country we have a proud history of protecting the minority in order to create a civilized society where no one’s rights are undermined or excluded. However, we have come to a point that reaches past that protection into a sort of tyranny of the minority. The LGBT community – which is a tiny fraction of the population – has wielded such fear among politicians, media types and now the average business owner, that their perverted lifestyle (I think that is an accurate term) affects every aspect of our society. They will not be happy until every aspect – every public entity and every private entity – not only accepts their lifestyle, but celebrates it.
This is not a docile movement, it is not a silent revolution, it is not a peaceful sit in, these people are not the new Martin Luther King’s of our day. If you are a Christian, then you know that celebrating the perversion of God’s creation is not something you can do. Christians must learn to be more than civil in this debate – they must be loving, gracious, and explicit in their explanation of the gospel and how it transforms our lives and perspectives. New laws probably will protect our society for a little bit, but what is needed is wholesale change on an individual level – a heart level. Lots to chew on there…
New Topic….Media types really need to not endorse anyone. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Another example of why – here we have Sean Hannity blowing a gasket on Ted Cruz on live TV. TV personalities and reporters are often separated into two types of categories – those who are true journalists and those who are opinion writers/commentators. Clearly Hannity is in the latter category, but that doesn’t mean its a good idea to endorse a candidate – how can you objectively interview any of the others? —– before you question my own objectivity, I will remind you that I get paid to work on campaigns, its what I do for a living. I’m literally paid to be biased…although I try not to be so much so that I’m blinded to the flaws of those I work for.
I hope you had a great week, and have a great weekend! Thanks to all who wrote to me during the week, or sent me articles, CD’s, letters and more (I’m getting a lot of stuff these days from readers!). I don’t print everything up here on the blog, but appreciate the insights and discussions (corrections!) from my friends.