Today's anniversary is particularly interesting because of the increased media attention directed towards the Palestinian perspective. This is important because it signals that the media is becoming increasingly comfortable with making a distinction between the Jewish people and the Jewish state of Israel.

Now this is a tricky topic. For the last 60 years, since the Holocaust, Jews have rightfully held the sympathy of much of the West. The Jewish people were subjected to the greatest genocide the human race has ever know. There are no words to describe what that trauma must have done to the Jewish psyche and I don't pretend to understand. However, events in Jewish history do not give license to the current actions of the Jewish state against the Palestinian people.

In the West, it is generally considered socially unacceptable to criticize Israel. People are very wary of being cast a racist or as antisemitic. Yet today we see that times are changing.

Some have argued that Israel is an apartheid state. Others make the case that this is simply not true. I am not qualified to make a declaration in favour of either argument (sorry, not gonna go there - I won't lie, I'm Chicken!). Both sides have legions of passionate advocates that can recall any number of incidents to prove their point - Who was there first, who fired the first rocket, who fired the most recent rocket, the humiliation at the road blocks, the massacres of civilians by suicide bombers - the themes are unending. The whole argument is a powerful and divisive topic. So instead of arguing a side, I'll stick with my thoughts on the argument itself, and leave the nuances to the experts.

I find PM Harper's recent remarks, equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism, very troubling. His words have been big news in Canada during the past few days and, ironically, they have probably served to call more attention to the plight of Palestinians than to the defense of Israel.

The PM's comments were a murky mix of political pandering and political correctness gone terribly wrong. It points back to the importance of distinctions. Obviously, if one criticizes the actions of the Jewish state, one is not antisemitic. Yet clearly, in this era of political correctness (and fear of being labeled a bigot) there needs to be a continued distinction made between the Jewish people and the policies of the Jewish state. (in the same way that there needs to be a distinction between American people and US policies, I might add. There is far too much offside American bashing in Canada. It is poor show and inaccurate - but I'll save that for another post). Distinctions might at least serve to give the Palestinians a voice, without alienating Jews. Well, in theory anyways...

During a campaign stop in Sterling Heights, Michigan, a reporter, Peggy Agar tried to ask Obama a question, he told her to "Hold on Sweetie." If Barack is trying to be smooth, this isn't it. I haven't heard anything like this since a drunk Mel Gibson called a female police officer "Sugar Titties." Well, at least it wasn't Helen Johnson he was calling Sweetie. He did call and apologize via voicemail: "Second apology is for using the word 'sweetie.' That's a bad habit of mine. I do it sometimes with all kinds of people. I mean no disrespect and I am duly chastened on that front. Feel free to call me back. I expect that my press team will be happy to try to make it up to you whenever we are in Detroit next." He still never answered her intitial question which was "How are you going to help the American autoworker?" Barack has continously proven how unsmooth he is. Shooting pool in West Virginia in a shirt and tie, not smooth. Bowling in Pennsylvania, this wouldn't have even gotten him one of those cheezy bleached blonde bowling alley babes, not smooth. Once again Obama is proving his inexperience as a politician. Is this an example of his future diplomacy?  When he meets a female diplomat, is he going to call them "Honey" or "Darlin'?"  Just what we need is more blundering in the White House after the last eight years from someone else who doesn't have a clue about how to do the job. Not Smooth!

LET'S GO TO THE VIDEO TAPE! OBAMA IN STERLING HEIGHTS:

 
 

DOLLY PARTON TAKES ON HOWARD STERN

Dolly Parton is going to sue Howard Stern for well, being Howard. He took some clips from her audio book and cut them up so that they say some absolutely digusting statements. The cutting was pretty poor and you can easily tell that the clipping is a hack job. "I have never been so shocked, hurt and humiliated in all my life," Parton said in a statement on Wednesday. "I cannot believe what Howard Stern has done to me. In a blue million years, I would never have such vulgar things come out of my mouth. They have done editing or some sort of trickery to make this horrible, horrible thing. Please accept my apology for them and certainly know I had nothing to do with this." She concluded: "If there was ever going to be a lawsuit, it's going to be over this. Just wanted you to know that I am completely devastated by this." This is a bit that Howard has done on his satellite radio show and she's not the first to get the treatment. I think she should leave it go, because she's just giving Howard more publicity. He'll make more this way than the suit will be worth. The best thing to do with Howard is ignore him.

 TEXAS MAN SHOOTS HIMSELF SCRATCHING HIS BACK

Jorge Espinal had an itch he had to scratch. He left the table where he had been drinking and playing poker with his buddies. Yes alcohol was involved here. Go figure. Something possessed him, I'm guessing stupidity, to use a revolver as a back scratcher. It was loaded, like he was and he shot himself in the back. He was taken to a Fort Worth hospital and treated for non-life threatening injuries. Can he prosecute himself for assault? His friends though he was joking until they saw the blood. I guess they couldn't believe he was that stupid either. 

WORLD'S SMALLEST HELICOPTER HONORS DAVINCI

Seventy-five-year-old Gennai Yanagisawa says he will fly his one-man helicopter in the city of Vinci, near Florence, Italy, on May 25. Yanagisawa describes the demonstration as a tribute to the Renaissance-era visionary's original idea of an "aerial screw." It looks like something you'd expect from a James Bond film. "Italian people seem to welcome my realizing of DaVinci's idea in his birthplace," he said. "I want to make my best flight so that I can live up to their expectations." Vinci Mayor Dario Parrini offered him an opportunity to fly his helicopter when the two met in the Italian city. I think old Leonardo would have loved this and would have wanted to go for a ride. I can just see him buzzing around giggling his butt off, that hair and beard blowing behind him.

Let us, in Heaven's name, drag out the divine drama from under the dreadful accumulation of slipshod thinking and trashy sentiment heaped upon it, and set it on an open stage to startle the world into some sort of vigorous reaction.  If the pious are the first to be shocked, so much the worse for the pious -- others will enter the Kingdom of Heaven before them.  If all men are offended because of Christ, let them be offended; but where is the sense of their being offended at something that is not Christ and is nothing like Him?  We do Him singularly little honor by watering down His personality till it could not offend a fly.  Surely it is not the business of the Church to adapt Christ to men, but to adapt men to Christ.

It is the dogma that is the drama -- not beautiful phrases, nor comforting sentiments, nor vague aspirations to loving-kindness and uplift, nor the promise of something nice after death -- but the terrifying assertion that the same God who made the world lived in the world and passed through the grave and gate of death.  Show that the the heathen, and they may not believe it; but at least they may realize that here is something that a man might be glad to believe.   (pp 35-36)

Another eason I chose this novel, rather than the two other ones, is that I felt I wanted to know more about the Jewish community which was expelled by Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain in 1492. The Edict of Expulsion was issued against the Jews of Spain on March 31. All Jews of whatever age were ordered to leave the kingdom by the last day of July, (one day before Tisha B'Av), the "saddest day in Jewish history" and a traditional day of mourning.

It is estimated that 165,000 emigrated, 50,000 converted and 20,000 died en route. This is a low estimate; people disagree on the actual figures.

In today's French Jewish community a lot of people are the descendants of the Spanish Jews who settled around the Mediterranean Sea, mostly in Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Turkey and Greece.

During the twentieth century they were forced out of the countries where they had settled but their Spanish roots is reflected in their surnames; they are called Toledano, Bitton, Cardozo, Malka, Marciano...

In fact the novel is not so much about the Jews who left than those who stayed on, one teenager in particular Yonah. The book deals with his attempt at remaining a Jew when everything and almost everyone was against it. As in The Physician, its author manages to convey historical authenticity and the story rings true.

blind prisoner

of heaven's

rythm, torn

by disparate

ideas, perfection

laid out

by imperfect

beings. Heaven's

gat shaped,

reshaped, colored

by generation,

creed, endless

ideas, until

meaning collapses

into fighting,

until nobody

wins.

Obviously, they are wrong.

I doubt anyone who wrote that document, nor anyone who signed it, nor anyone who voted to sustain it as the law of the land had any intent to grant homosexual couples the same rights and privileges as married couples. I am justified in this because the entire idea of putting homosexual couples on the same level as married ones is a very modern invention of the 1990's. It was unthinkable before then--absurd, something we would call crazy.

How can a document, written in a time when only marriage between one man and one woman be considered marriage at all, how can such a document have hidden in it a right for homosexual couples to pretend to be man and wife? Impossible.

The judges in California invented this so-called right (which is really a wrong), just like the federal supreme court invented the right to murder babies in the womb and the right of governments to take property away from private citizens for private purposes.

Folks, there is no reason why we have to defer our own conscience and interpretation of the constitution to judges. They are no more human than you or I because they wear a black robe and are officials in our government. We granted them the right to speak on matters of law for the government, to arbitrate between two parties within the parameters of that law.

We never granted them the right to interpret our rights, or grant us new rights, or take away our existing rights. Look closely. It is not in the constitution. Not in the federal one, not in the state ones, nowhere. They cannot do this anymore than I could declare war on Timbuktu. The moment a judge steps out of his duty, out of his lawful jurisdiction, then he is unlawful as much as a president who wrote law, or a congress who conducted a war, or a policeman who enforces non-existent laws would be.

To place judges in a position of superiority is the same as making the president a King, or the congress a heavenly messenger of law. These are not gods, these are not kings nor emperors, these are citizens who have no more nor fewer rights than you or I or Bill Gates or the bum who lives on the street. They are not blessed with any divine power to discern any more than you or I. Don't cede your moral right to judge between right and wrong to them.

There are obviously some remedies that the Californian people have available to them. First, they can amend their own constitution. That is their right. They wrote the document, they get to fix it. Second, they can have the members of the Supreme Court removed from office for violating their oaths to uphold and sustain the constitution of their state. Third, they can elect a new government that will represent them, and not a tiny minority of sexual deviant bent on perverting the natural laws of God in a vain effort to justify their own sinful natures.

I hope the people of California wake up and remedy this mess immediately. It is not the social conservatives who made this an issue. Never forget that.

The decision in California has massive repurcussions in our home state of Washington. Don't think that our justices see this and don't imagine themselves writing new laws or amending the constitution or inventing new rights out of thin air. In fact, our Supreme Court is just as deviant as the Californian one. Any difference would be one of degrees. Don't be surprised to wake up to more foolish decisions.

Folks, it is vitally important that you pay attention to whom you elect as judges in our state. This is not a matter to be left to the judges and lawyers and judicial activists. It is not a slot to be passed over because the issues are too hard to think about. It is our law, we wrote it, and we must enforce it upon our government when they break it. The government is a creation of our hands, not the other way around. If we refuse to keep our own government in check, we must live with the lawlessness and tyranny it will bring.

To all those homosexual activists out there who imagine a day when marriage means nothing more than a sexual union between two parties, I challenge you to think carefully about what you are doing. You imagine a universe where there is no living God, where he is just an abstract concept invented by weak-minded individuals like myself to console ourselves in our own stupidity. As you remove God from our society, what do you plan on replacing him with? What will we worship and adore and strive to emulate in place of the Christian God? Do you think our society will be so tolerant of its deviants if we remove the Christian God who preaches love and mercy instead of violence and hate? Think carefully, because in other countries, countries that don't worship Christ as the Savior of mankind, homosexuals are branded and executed without mercy. Diversity is not tolerated in these places, and only homogenity is acceptable.

Many, of course, drop out along the way, try to take a shortcut to Nirvana through drugs, or cop out, come home and take over their family's corporation, reentering the West and leaving the East behind with little more than a beard left to show for it (That gets trimmed before the first board meeting and removed before the second.)

Who says academicians are humorless people? For a pre-board meeting example of what Sire might be talking about, see below:

STATS
to draw you a picture...... I am Australian, average height and weight, been married but always fucked with men... so I have seen the front and back of many a man...not to mention women (but we aint gonna mention them again:ok)
Having been a adolescent of the late 1960s you have to imagine a time when it was acceptable to have sex with anything that moved...or didn't.... I am still living that time.

I have a fuck buddy... or more correctly I had this fuck buddy up till 2 months ago when the best sex I have ever had just disintegrated in front of my eyes one evening.. maybe I will blog about this sometime, BUT this mate and I used to talk about how much time both of us spent trying to chase up sex. He was of the opinion that he spent way too much time thinking, on web sites, chasing obsessing, hanging round beats, doing....and he said but 'hey you know what it is like you are the same'. "Whoa! gross generalization"....... I thought. This became an ongoing topic pre, post and during rooting. We discussed whether all men were as fucked on fucking or were we just weird?. Well I didn't think it weird, even tho' when we first met he would turn up at my place at 4.00am after a 3.30am wake up 'are you up for a root' phonecall. We were doing dope + everytime we got together so I didn't think it that important, and the sex was good!!!!... why analyze it?...... a bit like killing the chook to see how it works ...... we killed the chook.

I started a blog a couple of weeks ago, and quickly became aware that in an effort not to scare the horses or freak out the neighbors I soft peddeled on the way most important part of my life.. the time I spend with men for sex or looking for sex. Inspiration hit in the form of 'let's do an Adults Only version of my blog.

Now I have decided to follow it up and just see where I'm at. So this is about the more private me. AND you might ask why don't you keep it to yourself, but I think it worthwhile to note the odd oddity down AND hey there maybe some of you out there that think... I got something to add to this wankers thoughts. Any of my life I imagine it is gonna include the odd drug or three legal and not so, drinking, sex acts that may not appeal to all, friends, enemies, my bizarre take on things and the odd bit of old personal history.

As I blog to you blogee......This is my usual computer set up.
I have three gay dating web sites open in the background on my computer and one of them has a gay chat room open. In front of that I am usually trying to solve a problem of rendering of a sculptural piece I am trying to design... One week days in front of that I have my day trading account open for the ASX.
The gay pages open automatically when I wake up my computer as does my share trading platform.
Today that is my set up.... and as I work I am hoping some-one will hit me up for a root.

The next post will be a flash back to earlier this week... seat belt fastening...and put that fag out (this is a no smoking flight).

PS As an Australian I will be using the local vernacular so if you want a translation at anytime...just ask

I think of it like a jigsaw puzzle. You have a beautiful picture on the outside of the box, which all the small pieces put together should make. We have, in the Bible, the picture of the purpose and life that God would have us to live. When we pray and seek God and put each one of those elements, seasons, gifts, talents and abilities together in the right place it culminates in the picture that is our God purposed life. The thing about the pieces to a puzzle is they have one place to fit. We can try to force a piece in but it will ruin that piece and the pieces around it, and ultimately the picture will not look like the front of the box.

Being out of place can bring loneliness, confusion, heartache, and apathy to the forefront in our lives. Moses is the biblical person I think of in this scenario. I think sometimes we put his life in a theatrical box and don’t really understand how he felt. The picture of Moses overall life is definitely the picture of a deliverer. The components of his life put together depict his purpose. His personality, his raising, his very name meant “to deliver” or to draw out.

He was raised in Pharaohs household, God’s way of training him for leadership, however because he was a Jew and Identified with his people, he felt out of place. His frustration and zeal combined to push him to act out that frustration. He struck a blow against tyranny and slavery, but was out of place and time for that blow to be struck. This forced him to run. He knew his actions were ill timed and as a result his life begin to spiral out of control. Was he to be Israel’s deliverer? Yes, but this was not the place or the time. God had not finished training him. Inexperience and immaturity will Cause us to act out of frustration even in the direction of our purpose it will put us out of place, as it did him.

Moses, then found himself on the back side of the desert. Even then we see him trying to be a deliverer. There were some young women trying to water their father’s flocks and were being bullied out of the way. Moses stepped in and stood up for them and brought them to the front of the line. He met his wife in that interaction and married, and took on the trade of his father in law. He became a shepherd.

It seems that Moses had resigned himself to his new life. The zeal to deliver seemed to be lost to him, and his people dead to him. We can deny our purpose, we can act like “our life is fine,” but in truth we are hurting and miserable. The way you see it in Moses is in the name of his child. In their culture your name many times held great meeting. Moses named his child just as his mother named him, except she named him in faith. She named him the future deliverer of his people. He named his child to declare his miserable state. He named him Gershom which means Expulsion, or a stranger there. He was practically screaming “I am out of place!” My life was not supposed to turn out like this. It’s not that he wasn’t happy with his wife, or his child, or even his life or occupation, what was missing was the God component, purpose.

It’s very interesting to me that he knew he was out of place, but when God called him, he made excuses, and asked God to get someone else. Sometimes even when we know we’re out of place and in our heart of hearts we’re miserable, missing that one God component, we still make excuses. I think we get comfortable. After all, my life’s not so bad; I have a great life, a good career, a great spouse, wonderful children, and good friends. No more excuses! It’s not about whether or not I have a great life or whether or not I enjoy my life, it is about whether or not I am fulfilling my purpose. We can’t get comfortable with life in the wrong place.

When Moses finally surrendered God gave him the courage to act on his purpose by delivering the Israelites out of the hand of Egypt. He broke the generations free from the shackles that held them. What significant thing is yet to happen as a result of your purpose or dream? It’s going to happen if we get in place. Moses wasn’t meant to be pharaoh’s son, nor was he to be just Jethro’s son in law the shepherd, He was meant to be Moses, the deliverer of the people of God. He found meaning when he found his right place. Find satisfaction, peace and the realization of God’s purpose in your life as you take your place.

David

Only when it was discovered to be rich in natural resources was appreciation shown to Secretary of State William Seward, who was born MAY 16, 1801.

Serving under Abraham Lincoln, William Seward was wounded by an accomplice of John Wilkes Booth the same night Lincoln was shot.

Seward stated:

"I do not believe human society...ever has attained, or ever can attain, a high state of intelligence, virtue, security, liberty, or happiness without the Holy Scriptures; even the whole hope of human progress is suspended on the ever-growing influence of the Bible."

As the vice-president of the American Bible Society, 1836, William Seward stated:

"I know not how long a republican government can flourish among a great people who have not the Bible; the experiment has never been tried; but this I do know: that the existing government of this country never could have had existence but for the Bible."

Seward concluded:

"I...believe that if at every decade of years a copy of the Bible could be found in every family in the land its republican institutions would be perpetuated."

Stiff Right Jab, contributing editor, William J. Federer, is author of “Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance no Longer Tolerates Religion.” A frequent radio and television guest, his daily American Minute is broadcast nationally via radio, television, and Internet.

But my point here is this, the girl in this article, Emily, she is asking for advice on her atheism, she is caught between telling people that she is an atheist, and not. Her fear is this, she is afraid to tell her friends because most are religious, and she thinks she will lose friends over it, well the sad thing is this if she does "com out" she will lose some, but if they leave her over something like that in my opinion they weren't very good friends anyway, right?  And her fear of telling her parent seem to be typical considering her age. But this article in particular sparked my intrest because it made me wonder why is it that some atheist fear "coming out"? Well what i think is this our society has such a negative view on atheists that it is a bad thing to be one, the religious freaks out there would try to have you either feel like a good for nothing "godless heathen" or make you out to be a villain of some sort. So it really is no wonder why some of us are afraid to reveal our beliefs. But i suppose the question (you know me i have to ask at least one) here is why are Christians so harmful to young atheists? We are just trying to find ourselves and you try to make us feel guilty. What the hell, man?

Note that when i say that Christians are harmful to young atheists i mean that they are constantly trying to brainwash them into thinking what they want they want, that is manipulation, and unfair. I think it is a crime that they would try and coax them into church just to convert them.

Evangelicalism must be defined theologically and not politically; confessionally and not culturally. Above all else, it is a commitment and devotion to the person and work of Jesus Christ, his teaching and way of life, and an enduring dedication to his lordship above all other earthly powers, allegiances and loyalties. As such, it should not be limited to tribal or national boundaries, or be confused with, or reduced to political categories such as "conservative" and "liberal," or to psychological categories such as "reactionary" or "progressive."

For The Guardian's Alan Wolfe, the authors' rejection of liberalism is not surprising. But

Their harsh words toward fundamentalism are. Fundamentalism "tends to romanticize the past, some now-lost moment in time, and to radicalise the present, with styles of reaction that are personally and publicly militant to the point where they are sub-Christian." Jerry Falwell is dead. One wonders, were he still alive, how he would react to other religious conservatives calling him "sub-Christian."

On the Baptist Press website, at least one evangelical, Albert Mohler, explained why he didn't sign the document: basically, while agreeing with it on many points, he found it too "inclusivist" (in his words, "the door is not adequately closed" to inclusivism) and theologically weak:

Do all of the signatories announced on May 7 affirm that sinners must come to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved? This is one of the most crucial questions for evangelical identity.

A summary of the Manifesto is available here. The authors appear to hail from the conservative end of the Evangelical spectrum (regardless of whether they want to wear that label), which, for what it's worth, sounds promising.

Seems that one person's smut is another person's morning latte. A Christian group based in San Diego found grounds for outrage over the new retro-style logo for Starbucks Coffee.

Seems that one person's smut is another person's morning latte.

A Christian group based in San Diego found grounds for outrage over the new retro-style logo for Starbucks Coffee.

The Resistance says the new image "has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," Mark Dice, founder of the group, said in a news release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves Slutbucks."

Does not this observation by by Mark Dice of The Resistance speak far more loudly about his state of mind than it does about the moral fabric of Starbuck's? If little tiny ink engraved nipples on the side of a coffee cup send Mr. Dice into an outrage, imagine what apoplexy a casual flip-through of this week's TIME magazine must cause him. Or perhaps he is the type who takes a Sharpie pen to the library each month when the new National Geographics are delivered, to "protect the children" of course.

Thus, Chapter 8,397 in the continuing saga of the bending of the gospels into nothing more than a set of hare-brained, silly doctrinal stances, taken by whatever group wants to claim "Watchman on the Wall" status this week. There are so many such groups! This one- The Resistance- claims 3000 members nationwide. Imagine being a person who is starved for the love Jesus can bring, and asking the only Christian in his/her vicinity for help..and it turns out to be a Resistance member with a big Bible in one hand and an empty Starbuck's cup in the other!

I'd run from such nonsense. And I would urge anyone else to run, too. Because what they're about to get pounded with is 21st century, American, Western, doctrinal Churchianity that seeks to bend human will into the image of whatever false idol that group has erected at the moment. They, no doubt, will hear much more about Satan than Jesus, and a whole lot more about God's imminent and angry justice than about Jesus' immediate and compassionate love.

"This is a work of God in the most unlikely place. Isn't it just like our God to do something extraordinary like this so that no man can share in the glory? Community leaders would have to work for decades to bring peace to this community. Our God desires to bring the peace of Jesus into individual lives and this community now."

(Jena, La.)—Baptist Press (BP) has reported on a revival that's broken out in the small town of Jena where, on Sept. 20 of last year, more than 20,000 people from across the nation gathered to protest an outbreak of racial tensions at the local high school. The outbreak of spiritual revival started on February 17 at Midway Baptist Church in Jena; the most unlikely church, according to the report, for revival to happen since the church was in a state of transition and didn't have a pastor at the time. Much prayer preceded the meetings. At first everything went along as normal. But then something "spectacular" happened.

"There was a sense that the Holy Spirit chose to visit this church," said interim pastor Bill Robertson. "We had a sense of the awe and wonder of God at work but we were too amazed to do anything about it."

As the meetings continued, the racially mixed crowds grew. One night a woman stepped forward to repent of her disobedience to the Lord; soon the altar was flooded with people doing the same. Another night, Robertson asked an African American pastor, Jimmy Young, to come preach and bring his church's choir. And the crowds continue to grow.

"It's amazing to watch the work of God during the invitation," said Craig Franklin, editor of the local newspaper, the Jena Times.

"There are people present who don't know why they are there. At invitation time, you can see the power of the Holy Spirit breaking over their lives and they are miserable ... and lost. Yet they keep coming back."

"This is a work of God in the most unlikely place," Robertson said. "Isn't it just like our God to do something extraordinary like this so that no man can share in the glory? Community leaders would have to work for decades to bring peace to this community. Our God desires to bring the peace of Jesus into individual lives and this community now."

This morning my partner and I planned a conference call to talk about acquiring an existing website. God was definitely on the call and guiding it all.  We were blessed beyond measure to acquire the website which will allow the KBJ to market in our local area more effectively.

We have had a series of Tele-Seminars and today was the day to do two calls.  The call this morning with Larry Ingracia and it was an anointed and a real blessing.

Tonight we had a Tele-Seminar with John Garfield about marketplace ministry.  It was an awesome call and we were able to address some issues that millions can benefit from.

To listen to these calls I encourage you to go to:  http://kingdombusinessjournal.net/v

Have a blessed day Friday.  I am tired and I am going to bed.

Lowell Lane

  For example, while the bikini on the left looks like one from an episode of girls gone wild, it is actually a toddler bikini marketed to myself and my two year old daughter who would adore it b/c she is obssessed with all things pink.  When I had a girl, once she grew out of the 12 mos. old clothing range, there was a distinct shift in the style of clothing.  Suddenly, I was digging through miniature Lindsay Lohan outfits searching for something a bit more "ladylike." Her first summer, even as a 6 mos. old, I went to 4 stores before I found her a one piece bathing suit. 

  A male family member of mine was really mocking me on this b/c, as he rightly pointed out, she's a baby and doesn't know the difference! But, here's the problem; I was once a middle school girl and I know how they can and will use every piece of ammo they can find to dress and act how they would like.  I obviously do not have a middle schooler yet, and have not yet made or not made clothing rules for them, as styles do change, but if we don't want her skimpy at 12, why would I allow her to be skimpy at 2? I can picture my already very verbally advanced daughter making the logical argument... but you let me wear a bikini when I was 2! the picture is right behind your head on the wall? why do boobs make a difference?

   I had a similiar experience this week shopping at Target for summer clothes for my kids.. I had to buy shorts for her that were a full size bigger so that they would not be hoochie short.  Consequently, they ended up being the same size I bought for my son, and his were literally 3 inches longer.  This begs the question...(and for any of you moms out there, please weigh in and comment) where does the line lay between fashion and promiscuity?  It is not as simple as saying, yes you can wear spaghetti straps, or no you cannot. 

  I am honestly less concerned with trying to legislate the morality of my daughter's clothing as I am in the message they are sending.  For instance, my biggest issue with mini versions of sassy middle school clothing is the way they objectify women.  It's as though I am training my little girl from toddlerhood that her function is as a sex object.  This is not my prudishness, this is about the value of women, who are made in the image of God.

    Check out the difference in the boys and girls in this ad from GAP...

Notice how the boys are showing much, much less skin than the girls are.  The boys look as though they are dressed for that cool 70 degree night at the end of the beach day, and the girls are dressed for 85 degree weather at the shore.  Even though these kids are modeling clothing for pre-pubescent kids, the model of "sex sells," is being used.

 It's not enough though to make the mistake of simply decrying how horrible the world is today, you need to really go further and ask about motives, b/c a poor motive is being used to sell all clothing, promiscuous or not.  I really do not want my daughter to be the one everyone assumes is homeschooled b/c she has never seen American Idol, looks like she never met conditioner, and wears an ankle lenth skirt in 90 degree weather!  But, It will not be enough for me to control her every fashion decision, that will last as long as she realizes she can hike up her skirt once at the bus stop. 

I, instead, need to be teaching her, AND my son about the value God places on women and sex throughout her development.  We will have to do the difficult work of asking what fashion is just fashion? and what is a violation of God's values?  There is no bright line as much as I would like there to be.

Lorenzo Ruiz was born in Binondo, between 1600 and 1610. He was baptized shortly afterwards. His parents who were devoted Catholics brought him up and influenced him to have a strong faith in God. Lorenzo's father and two siblings died in a battle between the Spaniards and Chinese. Lorenzo and his mother were then placed under the Dominicans.

Several years later, his mother died. Lorenzo grew up under the care of the Dominicans who gave him Christian education. He was much trusted as a sacristan in the Church. But, one day, a friar suspected that Lorenzo stole an envelope with cash from his table. To this, Lorenzo could only pray to the Blessed Mother. The following day, the friar told him that the money he was looking for was taken by his assistant. He was later on appointed as an "escribano". After a few years, Lorenzo got married and was blessed withe three children.

One night, a Spaniard was murdered, but nobody could testify to the murder. But, before the day ended, somebody had testified that Lorenzo was the murderer. Aware of the injustices that often happen against the Filipinos, Lorenzo was advised to flee for his life.

Lorenzo did not want to die for a crime he never committed. He sought help from the Dominican friar, He was advised to join the expedition to Japan together with some missionaries. They buried all their Christian objects and liturgical ornaments in a deserted place. In Japan these missionaries were able to gather a good number of Christians and Lorenzo began to like being sacristan again. But a spy spotted them. They were captured easily and were imprisoned.

The friars were tortured to death. Fr. Antonio Gonzales was tortured before the very eyes of Lorenzo and Lazaro. Lazaro denied his faith but was also tortured. Lorenzo professed his faith: " I am a Christian and this I profess until the hour of my death; and for God, I shall give my life." For the second thime, he was brought to the judges and was offered life if he apostatized. But, Lorenzo said: " That I will not do, because I am a Christian and I shall die for God! And for Him, I will give many thousands of lives if I had them." At the death of Fr. Antonio, Lazaro repented and resolved to offer his life to God too. They were finally executed to death in 1637.

Naturally, there are groups whining about it and attempting to put an amendment on the November ballots.

Of course, we all know they're hypocrites.  Even assuming gay marriage really is some great evil that hurts "traditional marriage", let's be realistic.  The LGBT community is just slightly more than 1% of the Californian population.  It's insignificant.

If these people truly cared about protecting the institution of marriage, they should be going after adultery and divorce.  The percentage of Californians who are married is 48.5%.  About 1/3 to 1/2 of those marriages will end in divorce.  From various figures I've seen, the adultery rate is about 50%.  There are some lower bounds on adultery rates based on paternity tests done, but they also vary, hence the 5-30% figure that I mentioned in my review of Wedding Crashers.  The book I got it from mentioned a specific study showed a 10% non-paternity rate in the 1940s.  There's another study mentioned at the Canadian Children's Rights Council from the 70s, where 30% of the students in a class discovered their dad was not their biological father, so 50% is probably a fair number to use for adultery rates (as not all adultery leads to children)

Since adultery also often leads to divorce, some of these numbers will overlaps, but I think it's a good estimate that at least 25% of the population will be in adulterous and/or divorced marriages.  That's over 20 times greater than any possible "threat" that could be caused by allowing the LGBT community to marry each other.

Shouldn't these "protect marriage" people be going after all these heterosexual people instead?  Much more bang for their buck after all.

Several things have been becoming more apparent to me in the last few months that I thought I'd mention.

I think my attitude towards religion is rounding out a little. I've read other experiences of deconverted individuals who often go through a time of backlash at organized religion, but before long many of them come to terms with the fact that the underlying cause of most weirdness is just human nature. I think that I'm getting near, if not at, that point.

It's not that I am accepting any particular type of religion. I haven't found Christ, if that's what you're wondering (though I think he may be hiding under the sofa).

It's rather that I'm getting past that initial shock of finding out my core beliefs growing up were false, and that I've got to figure everything out from a fresh perspective. That initial shock has lasted several years. As I have found personally and through hearing others' stories, this ordeal can often turn someone into what you might call a Fundamentalist or Asshole Atheist. That's not who I want to be. I don't want to trade one sort of dogmatic fundamentalism into another.

I think the asshole phase is something that a lot of us deconverts go through. Can you blame us? Growing up and being taught that the core of your being is something you find to be a lie is tough. No wonder many of us turn into assholes bashing religion.

That deep-seated fact that many of us have grown up in fundamentalist environments aimed at telling the world the "good" news and converting your neighbor never really leaves you. It's always going to be there, right below the surface. Trying to convert others to your viewpoint because you think yours is the only way to go is no better than what the fundies are trying to do. Plain and simple. It's hard to suppress that inner evangelical asshole.

The theory that seems to be growing in my mind lately is one of the good and bad of human nature. As my fiance points out, there are often times that my arguments against religion sound very much like the arguments the religious use against the nonreligious. I no longer find that strange. I think it's just human nature.

I used to get upset when the religious tried to rail against atheism because of the atrocities caused by atheists in the past, all the while ignoring the facts that the religious mindset has caused countless atrocities. Yet, the same argument can be used against the religious when stated by the atheist.

You end up getting into the same old debates about how "Oh well, they weren't a true Christian," or that "They didn't understand the responsibility of being atheist," and so on. When it comes down to it, neither the belief in gods or the unbelief in gods has a great track record for supporting humanity. Claiming to believe in a certain god or denying beliefs in all gods isn't enough, by any means. There has to be some other belief (whether innate or conscious) to be an active member of society. To be human. To be humane. You don't need a god for that. Though, if some people think they do, then so be it.

Sure, certain versions of each belief system always tend to be more humane, but there are so many types of beliefs in gods or without, that it all just boils down to human nature. Religion or nonreligion proves to magnify human desire and endeavor. It provides a central focal point around which social circles can congregate. I hate to say it, but religion is almost like a necessary evil.

We're social animals, and religion often gives the social cohesion and in-group separation that people are looking for, albeit unconsciously. It gives people who need it a sense of purpose and wellbeing in life. Not everyone needs that constant assurance that religion can give. Many people don't mind being told what they want to hear. And there are always those types of people that want to be martyrs, whether their cause is for or against a god.

And it is hard to find the same sort of social group outside of the socially acceptable and binding version of religion that's so prevalent today, with their accountability groups and social events. I guess in a way, religion is able to overstep that awkward boundary and bring people together in situations they normally wouldn't find themselves in. Although, this really only happens in the more touchy-feely, Promise Keeper types of groups. Y'know, the ones that are trying to turn men into pussies?

Where am I going with this? Hell, I don't know. I just drank nearly a full bottle of wine because my fiance is in bed already and I can't get to sleep. But besides that, I think I wanted to try to get a few of these thoughts on paper. The farther along I go in my journey, the more I realize that it isn't about religion, as much as it is about rational thought and healthy skepticism in all aspects of life. I find myself appreciating philosophy, psychology, art, and all sciences much, much more.

I'm still very much atheist, yet I'm finding that this term really only applies to religion. There's so much more to life than identifying oneself on purely religious terms. So anyhoo, I think it's time to hit the sack. Hope this entry wasn't too incoherent.

1.  i had forgotten how responsive teenagers are.  i had no fewer than a dozen kids come up to me after the meetings (i spoke twice--in the high school and young adult services) with tears in their eyes and ask me to counsel/pray with them.  kids are so open and vulnerable with their feelings, and they are not at all hesitant about making huge, life-altering sacrifices (it makes me wonder if i exploited that quality when i was a youth pastor).   they were very gracious and complimentary toward me.  you just don't get that kind of response with grown-ups.

2. kids are not afraid to dream big dreams and make big plans.

3.  kraig mewbourne has grown up to be a pretty amazing young man.  i was surprised to run into kraig (he was in lawton visiting his cousin, matt weiszbrod) and i guess i haven't seen him since he was in high school.  his dad and i are best buddies, so i've been around kraig for years but it always kind of shocks you when they are suddenly so grown up.  kraig just got back from a india and egypt ("just bummin' around...seein' the sights," he claims) and is planning to go to uganda for an internship with a missions organization called "invisible children."  he wants to help african children who are being abducted and sold into slavery.  and i thought he was "just an athlete."  it was fun catching up with kraig, and i can't wait to see what the lord has in store for him.

4.  ministry, at its most basic level, is still about relationships.  i haven't heard jamie preach, but he is a scary-good administrator/organizer.  even with "mix" running like a well-oiled machine, however, there is nothing there that would explain why eight-hundred kids gather on the outskirts of lawton, oklahoma every wednesday night.  nothing, that is, except that jamie is madly in love with kids and they know it.  the kids also seem to really enjoy each other.  there were tons of cool toys (video games, air hockey, ipods, etc) but the kids mostly ignored them.  they just stood around and talked to each other.   makes me think that youth minsitry isn't nearly as hard as we make it out to be.

5. the energy/passion draws adult volunteers like flies. jamie has dozens and dozens of volunteers gleefully working behind the scenes.

6.  jamie has lots of clones (and that's a good thing).  his ministry is built on what he calls "downward discipleship."  he pours his life into young men and women with potential, and then he holds them responsible for their gifting (as in 2 timothy 2:2).  i even heard these kids talking like jamie--using the same phrases.  with a mentoring philosophy like jamie demonstrates, his ministry cannot help but be self-perpetuating.

thanks, jamie, for allowing me to be involved in what you're doing in lawton. what i saw makes me believe there may actually be hope for the next generation. i'm praying for your continued success.

Segun noticia publicada en MADRID, 12 May. 08/ 12:05 pm por (ACI).- El periodista e informático Carlos Mencos lanzó un nuevo portal católico llamado Buigle.com, que tiene como objetivo ayudar a financiar la Iglesia en España con los ingresos que se obtengan por publicidad.

Así es como piden en su página web que divulguemos la noticia

 MENSAJE IMPORTANTE PARA TODOS LOS QUE CONFÍAN EN LA LABOR DE LA IGLESIA CATÓLICA

Una iniciativa de varios católicos ha creado un buscador para ayudar a la autofinanciación de la Iglesia Católica. Funciona igual que Google (de hecho utiliza su tecnología) pero los ingresos que se generen por la publicidad en su buscador irán a parar como donativo a la Iglesia Católica para el sostenimiento de sus actividades. La iniciativa surge tras la modificación de las ayudas directa a la Iglesia en 2007 en España, como una herramienta provisional más para ayudar a la autofinanciación y así lograr la nula dependencia de los poderes políticos de turno.

La web  buigle.com se ha convertido además, en un punto de encuentro para internautas de todo el mundo con sensibilidades comunes. 

Trabajando con Internet puedes ayudar también a la iglesia. Visita www.buigle.com y conviértela en tu página de inicio.

¡¡¡Pasa también este mensaje a tus contactos!!!

Foreign Ministry Spokesman here Friday expressed deep regret over prevailing chaotic status in Lebanon, emphasizing US-Israeli adventurism there is main cause for lingering crisis and instability there. Mohammad-Ali Hosseini who was reflecting Iran's basic stands on recent clashes between political forces in Lebanon, repeated that Iran's stand on Lebanon has always been based on non-interference in a matter that is entirely related to the Lebanese nation, alone. He added, "The Islamic Republic of Iran also believes under the current conditions the Lebanese nation and various political groups there should maintain full alertness about the plots hatched abroad for their country." 

Hosseini further reiterated, "Unfortunately, a part of the political scenario planned for Lebanon abroad, whose aftermaths were easy to predict well in advance, and warnings about which had been issued in time, has now been put to effect." According to Foreign Ministry Media and Information Office, he expressed hope that the responsible sides for the emergence of the ongoing crisis in Lebanon would now take necessary steps aimed at restoration of peace and stability to that country.

He further emphasized, "Those who failed in achieving their goals in the course of the 33-Day War against the Lebanese nation aimed at Lebanon's political independence and national unity ever since then, to take revenge." Hosseini expressed regret over the ongoing chaotic conditions in Beirut, reiterating, "Incessant efforts made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to make up among various political groups in that country have not been accompanied with the assistance of the other countries. The Foreign Ministry Spokesman said that the Islamic Republic of Iran would all the same continue such efforts, believing they are to the benefit of the Lebanese nation.

Website Administrator.