Category: Moral Issues

Posted in Moral Issues

The original intent of The Second Amendment

Posted on by James

What was the intent of the authors of The Second Amendment? Would they modify the language if they could’ve foreseen the availability & lethality of modern weapon systems?

Guns are one of the most controversial & polarizing issues in our country. Some people passionately oppose guns; some passionately defend them. While there are undoubtedly corrupt people who seek to disarm citizens to secure their power, the vast majority of gun opponents are sensible & responsible people who are rightly disturbed by gun violence. Likewise, while there are certainly lunatics who would use guns for evil, the vast majority of gun proponents sincerely believe they are a primary means of ensuring personal safety as well as political liberty.

 

The Language of the Second Amendment

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”


The central piece of legislation regarding firearms is The Second Amendment to the Constitution. It’s language, albeit aged, is clearly and strong, giving uninfringeable power both to regulated (i.e. exercised) militias (as opposed to a national army) and the individual person. One objection that might be the limiting factor in gun rights is – “What did the founding fathers have in mind?” What kind of weapons did they know about, and would they have wanted the populace to have the high-powered, fast-firing weapons that are available now?

 

 

The Authors of the Second Amendment

What did they have in mind when crafting & ratifying The Second Amendment? That the life of an individual, though it be costly, is a worthy sacrifice for the freedom of the nation.


While it’s enlightening to learn about specific contemporaneous weapon systems (e.g. canons, bombs, the Belton automatic rifle), it’s also revealing to consider the context of the founding fathers. The Second Amendment (along with the rest of the Bill of Rights) was passed in the first session of the first U.S. Congress. Some of the men of that first U.S. Congress were delegates to the First Continental Congress which adopted the Declaration of Independence. When they signed the Declaration of Independence they were putting their lives in jeopardy. If captured by the English, they would have been executed for treason. Other congressmen fought in the War for Independence – voluntarily laying their life on the line for the chance at freedom. Without exception every congressmen suffered personal loss in the war. The hearts of American Revolutionaries is well summarized in the closing line of the Declaration of Independence, “…We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

What did the founding fathers have in mind when crafting & ratifying The Second Amendment? That the life of an individual, though it be costly, is a worthy sacrifice for the freedom of the nation. That value wasn’t just rhetoric; it was forged in the war that vaporized possessions and that robbed parents of their sons, children of their dads, and wives of their husbands. They experienced the steep price of freedom (from tyrants foreign & domestic) and boldly legislated their belief that freedom is worth the cost.

I’m not saying all gun legislation is bad. I’m suggesting that we place a high premium on liberty, and we thank God for it. I’m suggesting that we hold our nation’s founders in high esteem, and we critically examine each legislation, policy or directive that affects it. I’m suggesting that we soberly count the cost of freedom and find it worthy. 

 

I want to know your thoughts:

  • Where would you draw the line for what weapons are available to the public?
  • And what legislative boundaries could be enacted without infringing on the rights of the people?
  • What (if any) role should militias play in our society?

Abortion is sometimes humane… right?

“Abortion for a fetus with congenital disease or abnormality is the responsible and humane option.” Is this view consistent POST-birth? Is it humane to murder an infant diagnosed with Down’s Syndrome, a toddler with Multiple Sclerosis, or child with Muscular Dystrophy? Can God not heal? Can God not give grace? Does God not have a purpose?

If God takes special interest in the weak & helpless people of the world (Exodus 22:21-24; Psalm 68:5; 82:3-4; 94:6-7,23), shouldn’t we stand up for those who cannot protect or even speak for themselves?

Welcome to the family

Yesterday my son attended church for the first time. He didn’t understand any of it then, and he won’t remember any of it later. But it was a special day. I saw David surrounded by a church family who had been praying for him before he was even born. It gives me peace to know that in David’s future, he’ll see examples of people serving the Lord, hear caring adults teach Him God’s Word, receive encouragement from people who love him, and have a place to serve others. 

Everyday I pray that like the David of the Bible, my son will have sure mercies, be a man after God’s heart, and be a vivid portrayal of Jesus Christ. His church family will play a critical role in how God answers that prayer, and I’m so thankful for their willingness to play that role. I don’t want to imagine living life without the support of my church family. 

What about you?

What do you enjoy most about your church?
What are top ways that your church family provides support for families?

Posted in Family

Punishing children – is it unchristian?

Posted on by James

As a foster family, we’ve received lots of mandatory training. My most recent training was on behavior management. Our Christian organization’s disciplinary policy is inherited from the state Department of Family & Children Services (DFCS); since I’ve received multiple training sessions, I’m familiar with their forbiddance of corporal discipline. I expected to hear alternative disciplinary techniques, but I DID NOT EXPECT this…

The Christian organization enlisted a Christian teacher who opened the Bible and taught that punishing children (in any way) is unchristian. Instead of punishing, parents should discipline their children. He began to describe how he & his wife stopped enforcing rules and allowed their daughter to decide in what time and on what terms she wanted to obey; he celebrated that she often chooses to do right on her own – not because she was forced to but because she chose to. The teacher further explained that if you let the child have control, there are fewer power struggles.

I fully anticipated skeptical (even critical) feedback, but parents (foster & otherwise) praised this philosophy of parenting. After scouring a dozen contemporary parenting Bible studies, I’ve realized this teaching is becoming mainstream.

Could it work? If we stopped enforcing rules that make the child HAVE TO do right, could it prompt the child to WANT TO do right? Is paddling unchristian? Is punishment unchristian? I contend that the mainstream is incorrect, and that the Bible clearly teaches paddling as the preeminent method of behavior correction & character development. Although you weren’t privileged to hear the training, this post will address the teacher’s two primary arguments from the Bible.

 

The “rod” was not to beat… but to guide.

Many people misquote Proverbs 13:24, but what is the “rod?” The teacher immediately read Psalm 23:1-4 and explained that the shepherd’s staff was not meant to BEAT the sheep (as it was his livelihood) but, as the text says, to COMFORT the sheep. The teacher explained how the staff was used to guide and almost embrace the sheep. 

Not so fast… How did we get from ROD to STAFF? Creative hermeneutics, I guess. A better Bible study method would be to search other uses of ROD in Proverbs and the Bible as a whole.

  • Proverbs 10:13 says the rod is for the fool’s back. That does tell us how the rod is used, but since it’s not about children, let’s move along.
  • Proverbs 22:15 says that the rod DRIVES foolishness from a child’s heart by the rod. That doesn’t sound like a guide or embrace.
  • Proverbs 23:13-14 were conveniently omitted from the Bible study because it clearly says the rod is for BEATING children. While I would be careful with that terminology in our day & time, it is an undeniable fact that the Bible commands parents to paddle their children.

The teacher also revealed that the Hebrew word translated “chasten” simply means instruct; he assured the class that parents weren’t meant to cause pain (physical or emotional) to their children but to comfort them. 

But wait… In Job 5:17-18, the Hebrew word is translated chasten again, but it is obviously painful, physical punishment. In Deuteronomy 11:1-7, the same Hebrew word is translated chastisement, and each example is not of verbal instruction but of painful, physical punishment.  And if chasten simply means instruct, then why would it cause children to cry so severely that it tempts parents to “spare” the rod (Proverbs 19:18)? 

 

Jesus didn’t paddle… He discipled.

At times, the disciples failed, made mistakes, and let pride take control, but Jesus didn’t paddle them, nor did Jesus take away their belongings, restrict their privileges or put them in timeout. Instead Jesus gave them room to repent in their own timing. Jesus didn’t PUNISH them; He DISCIPLED them. The teacher revealed how “disciple” is the root of discipline, and therefore the parental responsibility is to demonstrate the desired behavior not to enforce it.

First, it is imperative that parents model the same behavior they desire in their children. You teach what you know, but you reproduce who you are (Matthew 7:17-18). Respect, submission, repentance (and many more) is better caught than taught, but it is not either-or but both-and. Remember that God has only prescribed one thing that will drive foolishness (disobedience) from a child’s heart; it’s not a good example but the rod of correction.

To be sure Christ is our greatest example, but the analogy is all wrong. The church is not the child of Jesus but the bride of Jesus. God the Father is the parent (of course Jesus and the Father are one, but they are distinct persons and have particular relations to the believer). Of course God punishes the lost/wicked/unsaved. The real question is, does God the Father punish His children? Not only does Hebrews 12:6-9 affirm that God punishes all His children; it also declares that if you don’t experience punishment, you are not His child.

 

What’s the big deal?

It’s critical to follow God’s command & example because parents (ideally fathers) are a child’s introduction to God the Father. Dads, you have a high calling – to illustrate God the Father. He has even shared His name, Father, with you. Intentionally portray Him. Bless your children as He blesses us. Charge your children as He charges us. Trust your children as He trusts us.Love your children as He loves us. And punish your child as He punishes us.

A child needs to learn submission to his human father, so that He may learn submission to his Heavenly Father. A child needs to learn cause & punishment from his human father, so that He may be spared greater consequence from his Heavenly Father.

 

Give me your thoughts:

  • How did your parent’s correction (or lack thereof) promote or hinder your relationship with God? 
  • What has being a parent taught you most about God?

Is paddling children moral?

The Immoral Accusation

“Striking a child is always wrong” Or, “How can you expect to teach children to refrain from violence by exercising violence on them?” The allegation of psychologists & social workers is that paddling children is immoral.

This contemporary view stands in opposition to every major world religion (except New Age): Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Christianity – all endorse corporal discipline as a good & essential way to raise & build character in children. The detractors of paddling accuse every major religion of being immoral.

 

The Underlying Premise

Why New Age? It’s necessary to acknowledge the link between New Age religion and modern psychology. While diverse in its details, the central tenet of New Age is that self is god. Therefore its ultimate worship is pleasing self, and its chief sin is displeasing self. This doctrine (and more) of New Age permeate modern psychology, where the primary pursuit is the happiness.

 

See a previous post concerning the alleged inefficacy of paddling

Posted in Abortion

Abortion VS Life: What are the facts?

Posted on by James

My previous post compared 19th century slavery with modern abortion. Both atrocities were justified by de-humanizing the victims and defining them as property. As the previous post clearly demonstrates the Pro-Life position is MORALLY superior, this post intends to demonstrate the Pro-Life position is also FACTUALLY superior.

 

“The fetus is not alive.”

Abortion advocates famously label the fetus as “just a clump of cells,” but this claim does not hold up to scientific scrutiny. A fetus performs living, human functions – like heartbeats or measurable brain waves (every legal abortion stops both). Modern medical science now knows that a fetus can feel pain, be startled, respond to his mother’s laughter, dream & even begin learning his mother’s language.

Although recently discovered by science, these facts were well known in the ancient world. When God gave Moses the laws for the nation of Israel, He calls the fetus “life” (Exodus 21:22-23). The fetus is not an amorphous clump of cells but a complex, functioning, living being.

 

“The fetus is not a human being.”

In a feeble attempt to save face, abortion advocates fall back to the untenable position that the fetus is not a human being. Yet the Pro-Choice advocate never establishes of what species he believes the fetus belongs? Is there a zebra or aardvark in the woman’s uterus? This position, of course, also crumbles under factual scrutiny. A simply DNA test reveals that the fetus is absolutely human. And there’s more; science reveals that preborn babies feel human emotions – like fear, pain, connection, and love. 

Once again, we find Holy Scripture revealing facts long before science can explain them. According to Job 3:11, an unborn baby has a living soul (ghost), and even before the prophet Jeremiah’s organs were formed, God knew him as a living person with a unique plan (Jeremiah 1:5).  And consider this… the first person to recognize Jesus as Messiah, was an unborn baby (Luke 1:41-43).

 

“The fetus is part of the mother’s body.”

THE TRICK QUESTION: Shouldn’t a woman have the right to choose what she does with her body? This sneaky question is the premise of the Pro-Choice (Pro-Abortion) position, but A FETUS IS NOT THE WOMAN’S BODY. Having received 23 chromosomes from each parent, a fetus has its own distinct DNA. A fetus also has its own distinct blood. And no woman has 2 hearts, 2 brains, 4 arms, 4 eyes, and 4 legs.

THE REAL QUESTION: If our society deems it immoral & unlawful to murder babies after they’re born, why should we allow babies to be murdered before they’re born? It is a society’s responsibility to restrict behavior – even in regards to one’s own body; that’s why there are laws restricting self-mutilation, suicide and heroine abuse. But science confirms the plea of our conscience, that a fetus is a distinct living, human person. 

Posted in Family

Is paddling children effective?

Posted on by James

Is paddling even effective? The pervasive answer is a resounding NO. Ask a psychologist, a social worker, or a school administrator; read a textbook or a parenting book. The public scorn, the condescending knowledge of the professionals, the findings of “research,” and even the fear of legal repercussions leave most authorities silent on the matter… sadly, even pastors. I write this post in defense of this most critical practice of parenting. This is not meant to be exhaustive; there will be multiple more posts on this subject, but here I submit 4 challenges to the professionals.

1) The Historical Conflict

One author & outspoken adversary of corporal discipline, notes:

“There seems to be not a single exception. From Sumer to Egypt to China, from ancient India to pre-Columbian America, from Athens to Rome, children were hit.”

By exposing the widespread use of corporal discipline, the author’s intent is to explain the difficulty of eradicating its practice, but consider the facts of his statement. Without exception, every great civilization practiced corporal discipline. Here are a few:

  • The Sumerians were a highly intelligent, urban civilization who pioneered the earliest writing form, controlled the flooding of the Tigris & Euphrates rivers, and developed a base-60 numerical system which is still employed today in our time (60 seconds and 60 minutes) and geometry (360 degrees).
  • The Egyptians made scientific, agricultural and mathematical achievements. We are still amazed by the mathematical precision and puzzled on how Egypt’s Pyramids intersect with the planets and stars.
  • The Babylonians excelled in astronomy – predicting planetary movements, tracking Haley’s Comet, and creating the world’s earliest star catalog. The “Hammurabi Code” is still regarded as the first major, defined legal system of the world.
  • The Greeks remain renowned for their philosophy.
  • The Romans were industrious, innovative & powerful.

All cultures, including these great civilizations, practiced corporal discipline. Paddlers and spankers were not uncouth, cave-dwelling cannibals; they were philosophers, engineers, humanitarians, philanthropists, scientists, mathematicians and lawyers. So when someone poorly portray paddlers, remember – every great civilization in the history of the world valued corporal discipline as the preeminent way to instill character and raise children.

Now consider the audacity of the author’s conclusion – that it is ineffective to paddle children. After revealing that all humankind accepted corporal discipline, the author now asserts that all civilizations – including the mathematical Sumerians, the scientific Egyptians, the astronomical Babylonians, the philosophical Greeks, and logical Romans – were all horribly, foolishly wrong. If only all civilizations of all times knew what he knew about raising children.  The claim is especially absurd when you observe…

2) The Contemporary Contradiction

For decades, psychologists, governments, schools, & social workers have been demonizing corporal discipline and recommending alternate “learning” techniques; accordingly, we have seen the percentages of paddling homes decrease. If these opponents of corporal discipline are correct, we should be seeing a dramatic drop in hate crimes, domestic violence, school shootings, riots, murders, rape, greed, bullying, crime rates; defense attorneys should be going out of business; prisons should be near empty. Is that what you see? 

Over the past 30 years, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the federal prison population has jumped from 25,000 to 219,000 inmates, an increase of nearly 790%. (compare to 36% U.S. population growth).

According to the World Prison Brief – U.S. local jails are occupied at 86.4%; state prisons 115%; federal prisons 136%.

An even more clear indicator is Sweden, who passed a no-spanking law in 1979. The Akron Law Review provided its findings from 2010 research (in 30 years, the first generation of no-spanking is now raising the second generation).

Child abuse rates increased 500%.

From 1979-1994 Swedish children under 7 endured an almost 6-fold increase in physical abuse.

Teen violence skyrocketed in 90s (first group of teenagers since the law was passed). Youth criminal assault had increased by 6 times the 1984 rates.

3) The Authority Concept

“You can’t teach a child not to hit… by hitting them,” or “You can’t correct violence with violence.” At first paddling seems counterproductive, even hypocritical, but there’s an element that’s not being considered – authority. Authorities are granted punitive powers over their subordinates. It’s why governments wield power to search, sieze, detain, imprison, and even execute citizens who commit the exact same actions on their fellow-citizens. 

When a government exercises its punitive power to imprison a rapist, society does not mourn the innate hypocrisy, it celebrates justice. It is naturally perceived as a moral good. So it is with parental discipline; as the authority, parents wield corrective and punitive rights. Children do not see hypocrisy in healthy, family paddling; they see justice. They don’t learn violence; they learn obedience. 

If this principle of authority is dismissed, psychologists should fear that “Timeout” will cause a child to grow up and falsely imprison people in his basement; that “Taking away privileges and toys” will precipitate theft from children who don’t do as they want; that “Assigning chores” will justify forced labor or slavery on others. The accusation is illogical.

4) The Divine Construct

The previous three sections speak historically and logically to the arguments of “secular” (more accurately, New Age Religion) psychology. We simply cannot trust the new fads or false logic of modern parenting. If anyone knows how humans operate, it’s their Creator. If anyone knows how families should operate, it’s their Designer. What does God say in His Word?

Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.
One thing breaks the chains of disobedience – the paddle, and it does the job so well it drives disobedience from the child.

Proverbs 23:13-14 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
Paddling your child will not kill him, but withholding paddling will cripple their future and damn their soul, since they will lack an accurate view of a Just & Holy God.

Proverbs 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
Paddling is an expression of love. Like AFFECTION, CORRECTION is a primary expression of love. A parent that cares more about the moral development, spiritual health, and eternal salvation of his child is motivated by love to paddle his child. The parent who cares more about harmony with and acceptance of the child is motivated by hate to withhold paddling. 

Hebrews 12:6-7 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
The intermediate goal of paddling is to teach the child to obey his human authorities – parents then teachers, governments. The ultimate goal of paddling is to train the child to submit to the Divine Authority. As holy & just, God must punish sin; parents teach their children about the Heavenly Father by paddling. That’s why corporal punishment is important to God and so necessary for our children.

 

What questions do you have about corporal discipline? 
What is your experience?
What strikes you about the above verses?

 

Posted in Abortion

Property or Person – the greatest atrocity of our time

Posted on by James

The Atrocities

150 years ago, a moral atrocity plagued our country – SLAVERY. The moral conflict was so intense, it incited our nation’s bloodiest war. In hindsight it’s virtually impossible to justify slavery, but contemporaneous proponents based their justification on the argument:

  1. Africans were sub-human
  2. Therefore they should not be afforded basic human rights, and
  3. Therefore they are inferior to the RIGHTS of the property owners (masters)
    **In other words, slaves were merely property to be abused, sold or killed at the whim of the owner.

Today, a new moral atrocity plagues our country – ABORTION. Its justification (though irrational, unscientific, and inhumane) is congruent to salvery’s:

  1. Fetuses are sub-human
  2. Therefore they should not be afforded basic human rights, and
  3. Therefore they are inferior to the RIGHTS of the property owners (mothers)
    **In other words, fetuses are merely property to be killed at the whim of the owner.

In both cases, the stated position is contrary to scientific fact (e.g. DNA, heartbeats, brain waves) and void of moral decency. Alleging that a person is merely property and therefore subject to the whims of the property owner is equally contemptible today as it was 150 years ago.

 

The Resolutions

On the issue of slavery, there were 3 primary roles:

  1. The Slaveowner rejected facts and stubbornly held the insolent position that slaves were merely property.
  2. The Passivist accepted facts and/or morals, but while he personally would not own slaves, he felt guilty about denying the slaveowner’s “legal right.” He did nothing in the face of the great atrocity.
  3. The Abolitionist vehemently urged their representatives, fought in the war, housed fugitive slaves, and worked diligently to rectify the atrocity of slavery. History books are rife with their honorable stories.

On the issue of abortion, there are 3 similar roles:

  1. The Slaveowner advocates for abortion. He is either ignorant or defiant of scientific fact.
  2. The Passivist is personally opposed to abortion yet fails to deny the mother’s “legal right.” In the face of this great atrocity, he does nothing. 
  3. The Abolitionist is the hero. Despite pressure, sacrifice, and inconvenience he fights against the greatest atrocity of our time. To future generations, he will be the only respectable character of this age.

When we reflect on slavery, we disdain the Slaveowner as evil; we judge the Passivist as indifferent, but we celebrate the Abolitionist as a hero.  In the not-to-distant future, the world will view abortion in the same light. Which role will you play?

Let’s talk about this – what are ways to become an Abolitionist of abortion?