Confederates speaking on Confederate Motives

Statements from the Confederate Constitution:

Article I Section 9(4)
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Article IV Section 2(1)
The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

Article IV Section 3(3)
The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states.

Statements from Confederate States' "Declaration of Causes" for secession.

Alabama:

Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republi­can party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new princi­ples, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized Africans.

Be it resolved, That the State of Alabama, fully concuring with the State of South Carolina, in affirming the right of any State to secede from the confederacy, whenever in her own judgment such a step is demanded by the honor, interests and safety of her people, is not unmindful of the fact that the assaults upon the institution of slavery, and upon the rights and equality of the Southern States, unceasingly continued with increasing violence and in new, and more alarming forms, may constrain her to a reluctant but early exercise of that invaluable right.

Georgia:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. 

An anti-slavery party must necessarily look to the North alone for support, but a united North was now strong enough to control the Government in all of its departments, and a sectional party was therefore determined upon. Time and issues upon slavery were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive; it needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. 

Mississippi:

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."

It [hostility to slavery] has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

South Carolina:

But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.

Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

Texas:

In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

Jefferson Davis, President, CSA:

"If slavery be a sin, it is not yours. It does not rest on your action for its origin, on your consent for its existence. It is a common law right to property in the service of man; its origin was Divine decree." 

"African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing."

"You too know, that among us, white men have an equality resulting from a presence of a lower caste, which cannot exist where white men fill the position here occupied by the servile race. The mechanic who comes among us, employing the less intellectual labor of the African, takes the position which only a master-workman occupies where all the mechanics are white, and therefore it is that our mechanics hold their position of absolute equality among us."

"It [slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts...Let the gentleman go to Revelation to learn the decree of God - let him go to the Bible...I said that slavery was sanctioned in the Bible, authorized, regulated, and recognized from Genesis to Revelation...Slavery existed then in the earliest ages, and among the chosen people of God; and in Revelation we are told that it shall exist till the end of time shall come. You find it in the Old and New Testaments - in the prophecies, psalms, and the epistles of Paul; you find it recognized, sanctioned everywhere."

John C Pelot, Chair, Opening Speech, Florida Secession Convention:

The People of a portion of the States who were parties to the Government were early opposed to the institution. The feeling of opposition to it has been cherished, and fostered, and inflamed until it has taken possession of the public mind of the North to such an extent that it overwhelms every other influence. It has seized the political power and now threatens annihilation to slavery thoughout the Union. 

 At the South, and with our People of course, slavery is the element of all value, and a destruction of that destroys all that is property. 

 This party, now soon to take possession of the powers of the Government, is sectional, irresponsible to us, and driven on by an infuriated fanatical madness that defies all opposition, must inevitably destroy every vestige or right growing out of property in slaves. 

George Williamson, Commissioner of Louisiana, to the secession convention of Texas:

Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery, and of the free institutions of the founders of the Federal Union, be­queathed to their posterity. 

Louisiana supplies to Texas a market for her surplus wheat, grain and stock; both States have large areas of fer­tile, uncultivated lands, peculiarly adapted to slave labor; and they are both so deeply interested in African slavery that it may be said to be absolutely necessary to their existence, and is the keystone to the arch of their prosperity.

The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery, if Texas either did not secede or having seceded should not join her destinies to theirs in a Southern Confederacy. If she remains in the union the abolitionists would continue their work of incendiarism and murder. 

The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and deter­mination to preserve African slavery. The isolation of any one of them from the others would make her the theatre for abolition emisa­ries from the North and from Europe. Her existence would be one of constant peril to herself and of imminent danger to other neighboring slave-holding communities. 

That constitution the Southern States have never violated, and taking it as the basis of our new government we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy that will secure to us and our remotest posterity the great blessings its authors designed in the Federal Union. With the social balance wheel of slavery to regulate its machinery, we may fondly indulge the hope that our Southern government will be perpetual.

Alexander Stephens, Vice President, CSA:

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error.


Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.


One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails.


Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature’s laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system.



Jospeh E. Brown, Governor of Confederate Georgia:

Among us the poor white laborer is respected as an equal. His family is treated with kindness, consideration and respect. He does not belong to the menial class. The negro is in no sense of the term his equal. He feels and knows this. He belongs to the only true aristocracy, the race of white men. He black no masters boots, and bows the knee to no one save God alone. He receives higher wages for his labor than does the laborer of any other portion of the world, and he raises up his children with the knowledge, that they belong to no inferior cast, but that the highest members of the society in which he lives, will, if their conduct is good, respect and treat them as equals.

Discover even more on Confederate motives at this link:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/what-this-cruel-war-was-over/396482/



Between Two Fires

Sometimes we have to make hard choices in life, and often we seem to have to choose between two bad options.  In the US, people say that we are “between a rock and a hard place.”  Here in the region of Tyre, we say that we are “between two fires.” Which one is it better to be burned by?  That’s a great analogy for tough choices.

As Christians, how do we apply a Biblical morality to making those hard choices? This is especially important when other people will also be burned by the fire we choose.

Jesus gave us some important teachings to guide us through times like these.  He was often tested by being given two bad choices.  People wanted to know which bad choice he would prefer.  In these cases he never allowed himself to be blinded by the illusion that there are only two choices.

Here’s one of the best examples of Jesus making an ethical choice when offered two unethical options:

John 8:Jesus returned to the Mount of Olives, but early the next morning he was back again at the Temple. A crowd soon gathered, and he sat down and taught them. As he was speaking, the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in the act of adultery. They put her in front of the crowd. 

“Teacher,” they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?"

They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. 

They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust. 

When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. Then Jesus stood up again and said to the woman, “Where are your accusers? Didn’t even one of them condemn you?”
“No, Lord,” she said.
And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more.”

Notice that the Pharisees brought “a woman” who had been caught “in the act” of adultery. Could they not catch the man?  They then lied and told Jesus that the law of Moses says “to stone her.”  It says, actually, to stone them both.  But conveniently, they only caught the woman.  Was the man one of them?

For the Pharisees, this was never about justice.  They would have brought the man along, too, if they were interested in justice.  This was about forcing Jesus to make one of two bad choices.  These were political choices, to be clear.  He could ally himself with the Pharisees by sanctioning her stoning.  This would anger the Romans, of course, who did not allow upstart locals to administer executions.  Jesus could have allied himself against the Pharisees by repudiating stoning.  He would have been portrayed as an ally of the Hellenistic, liberal left who sold out to the Romans.

Jesus was trapped between two fires.  Neither choice was just or good.  

So Jesus chose goodness and justice.  Was his choice likely to challenge either of the two predominant political parties?  No.  The Romans remained in charge of the government, and the Pharisees remained in control of religious life.  Yet Jesus remained in possession of his own personal moral and ethical values.  He chose neither fire. They both conspired later to burn him together, but he never sold out his moral and ethical beliefs to the lesser of two fires.

If you are sure that your choice of evils is the right thing to do, consider these words of Jesus:

“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

There’s only a small space between those two fires.  Most people won’t find it.  They’ll follow the wide and easy path laid out for them.  They’ll tell you that any path off the wide path is the wrong direction. They’ll tell you that not choosing the first fire is the same as choosing the second one.  Don’t listen to them, listen to Jesus. 

Patriotism: Symbolism vs. Substance

The recent row in professional football about saluting during the national anthem or kneeling in protest has sparked a national debate about what it means to be patriotic.  What does it mean to be a patriotic, loyal, freedom-loving American?

I submit that we are talking about the wrong things.  Our national debate is focused on a symbol.  We are ignoring substance. The slogans and memes abound, and for the most part they are meaningless.

Except for this meme, which is meaningful.

When we say "Blue Lives Matter" and "We support our law enforcement officers" is that really true?  Does saying those words constitute support, or is it just an effortless way to signal our empty patriotism to everyone around?

If you want to support police officers, how about buying a life-saving first aid kit for each officer?  Nothing says "thank you for your service" like doing something to save that officer's life.  When an officer is bleeding from a beating, stab, or bullet wound, ten thousand "likes" on facebook will not stop the flow of blood.

Thanks for the thousands of likes,
that made it all better.

If you want to support homeless veterans, how about picking up a hammer and building a home for a needy veteran?  Nothing says "thank you for your service" like doing something to give that veteran a home.  When that paralyzed veteran can't run his wheelchair down the stairs, ten thousand "likes" on facebook will not get him to the bathroom.

On a national level, "supporting the troops" should mean a lot of things that we often ignore.  It should mean funding the VA well enough that they can all access the health care and benefits they are due.  That means we agree to pay more taxes for that, and vote for people who will fund the VA.  It should mean decent pay for our troops.  That means we agree to pay more taxes for that, and vote for people who will give the raises.  It should mean being extremely reluctant to send our troops on missions where they will be wounded and killed.  That means we agree to pay less taxes for wars, and vote for people who will make fewer wars.

What could explain the recent upsurge in concern
for the plight of homeless veterans?

On a national level, "supporting our law enforcement" should mean a lot of things that we often ignore. It should mean decent pay for our officers.  That means we agree to pay more taxes for that, and vote for people who will give the raises. It should mean funding academy training to provide more than a meager 8 hours of conflict resolution training, compared to the more than 100 hours of combat training. It should mean body cams for all officers, because in most cases body cams provide evidence that protects officers from wrongful accusation. It means we agree to pay more taxes for those ideas, and to vote for people who will enact them.

When people wave the flag, don't assume they are patriotic.  They might just be attention-starved.  When people salute for the anthem, don't assume they are patriotic.  They might just be jingoistic.  When people recite the pledge, don't assume they are patriotic.  They might just be conformists.

Which of these men is a patriot?
Hint: Not the one with the flag.

People are patriots when they are doing something to make the United States of America a better place for all Americans.  They are patriots when they serve, work, and sacrifice for their fellow countrymen. They are patriots when they show the best of America to the world, both in affirmation and constructive protest.

Murica!

Why You Don't Get to Blame the Police.

It’s time to stop blaming the police for a problem that is not their fault.  It's time for the people to own the problem.

Is the problem of police involved shootings of black men real?  Yes.  Unarmed black men are killed in police involved shootings at a much higher rate than other groups.  Who is to blame for this?

We can’t blame unarmed black men for being shot. That’s the moral equivalent of blaming women for being raped.  Even if an unarmed man is not fully cooperative with the police (which he should do) that does not call for the death penalty.

If the unarmed black men are not to blame, should we blame the police?  This may come as a shock to some people, but there’s not an annual national meeting of police officers to decide how many black men they will shoot in the upcoming year. There are plenty of communities around our nation where this is not a problem.  In many cities, police are protecting and affirming the rights of Black Lives Matter and other protest groups.  In many cities the protest groups are showing respect for the police.  

In many cases, we force police officers to choose from several bad options, and then condemn them for choosing a bad option.

Let’s put the blame where it belongs -voters.  Us.  We elect the politicians who set up our city law enforcement structures and appoint leaders who determine the tone and conduct of those police.  Ferguson, Missouri is an example of this problem.  A Department of Justice investigation revealed that Ferguson generated about 20% of city revenues through a Byzantine system of traffic fines, court fees, and charges in a system rigged to prey upon the poor. In Ferguson that mostly means blacks.  At the same time Ferguson voters enjoyed some of the lowest property tax rates in the St Louis County area.  Now that the fines and fees scheme has been exposed, voters are facing unpopular tax increase proposals.

Voters ultimately determine the practices and policies of law enforcement in their cities.  There is not a better example of this than Bull Connor, the infamous former Commissioner of Public Safety in Birmingham, Alabama. This bigot led Birmingham police in some of the most brutal and repressive violations of human rights in the modern era of American law enforcement.  Beatings, shootings, and torture were all carried out in the name of preserving segregation.  Bull Connor ordered fire hoses to be used on black children.  He ordered attack dogs to be unleashed on black children.  Yet Bull Connor remained in his office, and directed Birmingham law enforcement, because voters loved his policies.  Deep down in their racist hearts, they wanted him to hurt those children, to do whatever it took to keep Birmingham “safe.”

Stop blaming the police, voters. Stop pretending that they are somehow doing this apart from the public will.  If your city is killing black men, then your city is the problem.  The problem is not police. The problem was Selma.  The problem was Birmingham.  The problem today is Baton Rogue.  The problem is Ferguson -a city that is 2/3 black but with a majority white mayor/council government paying the city expenses on the backs of poor blacks.

Vote for leaders who will respect the roles of law enforcement officers and stop using them as a source of revenue generation.  Elect people who will establish realistic guidelines for their police officers to engage the public in ways that de-escalate confrontational situations.  Start addressing the problem in your home town.

The truth will set you free

Truth or Fiction - Snopes - Google Reverse Image Search

Truer words were never spoken than when Jesus said "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." It is important for everyone to guard the truth. As a follower of Jesus, I believe it is crucial for his followers to go the extra mile in operating in the truth.

Facebook is wasteland of lies. Somewhere out there in that wasteland is a sinister lie machine, turning out vast quantities of false memes. Why do so many of them get posted on Facebook? Intellectual laziness, partly, but also because most people don't think they need to verify the truth of something if they already think it is true.

There is no truth here, just a wasteland of lies.

We naturally believe things that agree with our views. We look for things to confirm what we believe. Confirmation bias is at the root of how Facebook works. It is designed to show you more of what you want to read.  Just as in the final days preachers will tell people "what their itching ears want to hear" now Facebook shows us what our itching eyes want to see.

So in the wasteland of lies, how do you know whether to post that awesome-looking meme?  You could do what most people do and post it without caring about the truth, or you could verify it.

Here are two good and easy methods:

1-Google Reverse Image Search.  Instead of searching for an image, you search with an image.  Click on the photo and select "search google for this image. You can see for yourself where it came from. This might require sorting through a lot of links and re-posts.

2-Consult a fact checker. turthorfiction.com and snopes.com are both widely used and reputable sites. If you don't like one, then use the other.

You could also simply pull a keyword or two out and research it.

The Apostle Paul praised the Bereans because they did not just take him at his word.  They tested his words against the scriptures to see if they were true. 

Truth matters. The truth will set you free.

Below is a graveyard of false memes drawn from the wasteland of lies, along with a simple way of disproving them.

Google his name, he has a Wiki.

Nidal Hassan is actually a natural-born US citizen born in Arlington, Virginia.  This one takes ten seconds.  He is infamous, and has a Wiki.  Google his name and read the Wiki.

Google Reverse Image Search

This one has no key words, and no famous people in it.  While it might otherwise be impossible to bust this lie, Google Reverse Image Search makes this one a snap.  Liars usually steal their photos, it turns out. In this case these photos were taken years ago in Australia.

Keywords for a fact checker

This false meme has enough key words in it for an easy search on a fact checker. A quick search on snopes.com with the keywords "ISIS flag Germany" reveals that the photo is from 2012, before there was an ISIS.  Black flags are common in the Muslim world, and have different messages written on them.

Are refugees an invading army of terrorists?

"This is my country now," said Abu Abdullah. "No one can say I am Iraqi. I am an American. If I need to defend my country, even to attack Iraq, I am ready to do that."



A Muslim father buries his son with honor at Arlington

On a recent visit to Nashville, Tennessee, I visited newly arrived refugees from the Middle East.  I was reminded how important it is that Americans understand this situation clearly so that our nation can respond in a way that reflects our national values. There's so much false information being hyped by merchants of fear and politicians desperate for votes.

Rest in Peace, Humayun Khan, American Hero

Najib is a recent immigrant from the northern Iraqi region of Kurdistan. "I'm tired, I've been working ten hours every day, six days every week," he said. "But freedom takes work. If you want the freedom you have to go out there and work for it." He is excited that his children are in school and learning English. He's hoping to bring over many of his brothers and sisters who still live in the war-torn region.



These immigrants are hoping for their children to fit into the new culture. "We want the children to learn English," said Mohammad, who arrived from Baghdad less than a month ago. "It's the language of the world. Arabic is limited." He described the situation in his area of Baghdad as being so bad that one could not safely leave the house.



This facebook meme sums up the anti-Muslim arguments.

"I am looking for work. I am ready to work, I just need help to get my social security card." Ahmad has been in the US less than two months. He is hoping to get work and establish himself so that he can bring over his family. It is normal for the young men to come first, and brings wives, sisters, and parents later.



There are many political pundits decrying the dangers of accepting these Muslim refugees. There are supposed plots to infiltrate America and Europe with terrorist cells who will impose Sharia Law on unsuspecting westerners.


This is the question before us. Are they coming to kill us and then take over? Is this a cloaked Islamic invasion?

Myth#1 They are coming here to Islamize the West.

I spend a lot of time in the homes of Syrian refugees, talking to them about their despair and hopelessness, and also their hopes and dreams.  They hate radical Islam.  They are fleeing from it. One family that I know well fled specifically to keep their children from being radicalized in school. One father described to me his desire to live in any area that is not under the rule of Islam. Instead of flooding to the Islamic State, Muslims are fleeing it by the millions, and their rejection of the Islamic State is a major embarrassment and challenge to the legitimacy of the Islamic State.

The reasons that they are fleeing to the West are not surprising.  UNHCR lists many of the major reasons, including poverty and loss of hope. My Syrian friends often express that they no longer see a future in Syria even if the war ends soon. Whole cities are laid waste.  Families are broken apart by death and division.  Many people are injured both physically and psychologically from the war.


Myth #2 The Islamic State is sending a "secret army" to infiltrate the West

Traveling to join the Islamic State is the example of Abraham

People are spreading this because they are ignorant of the beliefs and practices of the Islamic State. The Islamic State preaches "Hijrah" which is the call of all Muslims to come and live in the Islamic State. It is preached as a religious duty for men and women to move to and live in the Islamic State, just as the early Muslims all flocked to Medina to join the first Islamic State in the days of Mohammad. They devoted an entire edition of their online magazine to describing how important it is to come and live in the Islamic State.  They want the refugees more than the West wants them, but the refugees don't want to live under their oppressive rule. The Islamic State wants you to fear and reject refugees so that they will be forced to return to the domain of the Islamic State. Don't let them manipulate your fear and use you for their evil purpose.

Myth #3 The US will be overrun by chaos like Europe

Europe is not being overrun by chaos, but even if that were the case, it will not happen in the US.  When people use what is happening in Europe to predict what will happen here, they forget something very important: The Atlantic Ocean.  Europe is working to control an immigration situation that is building at their borders.  Refugees who come to the US will do so on an airplane, as part of a tightly controlled process. The Muslim population in the US is less than 1%, and taking on an additional 200,000 refugees will raise it to -still less than 1%.  Muslims are dispersed throughout the US population and have shown very little tendency to form enclaves.

These men are not imposing Judaism on anyone

Myth #4 They will establish Sharia Law

The Constitution does not allow any religious law to be imposed on people.  If Muslim immigrants want to live under Sharia court ruling, they can do what numbers of Jewish and Catholic citizens already do -voluntary arbitration.  It's not legally binding unless both parties agree for it to be so.  Are there any areas in the US where citizens are forced to live under Jewish of Catholic law? Again, most of them have no desire to live under Sharia Law anyway, and the ones who do cannot ever force it on anyone else.

Myth #5 They will stay on welfare

Muslim Americans are middle class and main stream. They are well educated, well integrated into society, and at least as affluent as the national average.  This is especially true of immigrant Muslims.  Poor Muslims are often converts from the spread of Islam among poor, black Americans in prison populations.

Myth #6 We should send them back

This is an evil idea. Sending refugees back into a war zone is wicked.  We look back now in horror at the stories of Jewish refugees who were turned away.  We recoil at the idea that ships had to return Jews to their deaths because no one wanted them, or trusted them.  The voices of fear and bigotry caused our nation, and others, to commit an evil act.  We must not listen to those voices again.  We must rebuke them.  For the people fleeing the Islamic State, ad the butchery of the Assad regime, this is life and death.

Veterans vs. Refugees: A False Dichotomy

In the debate over whether the US should welcome Syrian refugees, a meme has emerged on Facebook pitting veterans against refugees.  The argument made is some version of "We should take care of our veterans before taking care of refugees." While that statement taken as written may be true, it presents a false dichotomy.

Do we really have to choose between them?

What is a false dichotomy?  It is when someone tries to convince you that there are only two choices, when there are actually more than two.  It is a false ethical dilemma. People who post memes like the one above may not know that they are creating a false ethical argument, and hopefully this post can help them see that.  Plus, I've replied to it so often that I am tired of typing it out every time.  Now I can just link this blog post.  So can you!

First, I am a veteran, and the son of a veteran. My wife and I are both from families with traditions of military service.  If anyone calls me anti-veteran for this post, I will call that person an idiot. Publicly. I am very pro-veteran and it annoys me to see veterans exploited as a tool of argument by people who are anti-refugee or anti-immigrant.  People who exploit veterans in that way are the ones being anti-veteran.

What are our other, and hopefully better choices?  I'm glad you asked. There are plenty, but I especially like this one:

How about we start here?

The US gives out corporate welfare to the tune of  $100 billion a year. Some estimates are much higher, depending on what is considered welfare.  These figures should outrage conservatives. How can we claim free enterprise when the government is feeding corporations?  That's not the free market.  I have many friends who are small business owners and the government is not lining up to subsidize their luxury jet, or even just their fishing boat.

I will use this conservative estimate because there might be some cases where building a road to a plant is a good idea.  In fact, just to be safe, let's cut it down to half and just eliminate 50 billion in corporate welfare.  What can we do with 50 billion?

Current expenditures on veterans=@ $27 billion

We could take just 27 billion dollars of that and double our expenditures on veterans.  That's right! If we eliminated subsidies for luxury corporate jets, we could help homeless veterans find somewhere to live. Instead of handouts to Royal Dutch Shell Corporation, we could provide better medical care for wounded or disabled veterans.  Instead of a $13 Billion subsidy for Boeing we could provide a higher pension for our retired service members.

So let's take just half of the $100 billion in corporate welfare (leaving half of the welfare for the super-rich) and spend $27 billion to double our payouts for veterans.  Double!  That thought ought to make every patriotic American stand up and salute while eating apple pie.

Why aren't we already doing this?  Why has there not been an outcry that homeless veterans should come before corporations and billionaires?

Because this meme is not at all about veterans.  It just uses veterans.  It exploits them to play on patriotism to pit them against refugees.

There's plenty of money to do whatever we need for our veterans, and to help refugees in need.  Are we will to take our corporations and billionaires off of the government dole?  If not, why do you favor giving money to rich corporations instead of helping our veterans and refugees?

What to Do When You're Married to an Abuser

For most of us, our marriage is our most important relationship. It builds friendships, social networks, and may even give us children. What do we do when it turns rotten at the core? What does one do with an abusive spouse?

The first and most important question is whether he's hitting you. If he is, stop reading this now, grab what little you can, and get out. Finish reading this later. Go to your Mom. Go to your Pastor. Go to a trusted friend. You are living with an ungodly man. Don't let him hit you or your children. When Jesus said “turn the other cheek,” he was teaching against violence. Jesus lived in an age where people responded to insults with violence. He was teaching that insult and injustice do not merit a violent response. They do merit a response. Find a better way to respond. Jesus never, ever meant that your husband can hit you. Now go, get out of the house if you haven't already.

If he's “just” being a manipulative, mean-spirited jerk who treats you like trash, then don't take that either. I want to talk specifically in this blog about a situation where a man claims to be a Christian, but mistreats his wife. If you have married an unbeliever, against the teachings of the scriptures, then I do pity you just as much but I have far fewer answers for your situation.

First, much evil has been taught from Ephesians 5:22-33. It does not mean “shut up and take it because he's the man.” Much of this false teaching can be undone simply by backing up one verse (to verse 21) and reading that into the context of the passage. “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Christians must live lives of submission to one another -in every facet and relationship of our lives. We submit to the authority of the Church, we submit to our parents, and we submit to one another. What follows in Ephesians teaches the path of submission for husbands and wives, but do not forget that both submit.

Starting in Ephesians 5 verse 22 we read:

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

This is usually all we get to hear, and even that is poorly taught. The scripture tells wives to submit to their husbands as you do to the lord, and as the Church submits to Christ. How do we make that submission? Do we submit ourselves to God because he is harsh with us, and unjust? Do we submit ourselves to God because he hurts us and dominates us? God forbid! This would make us morally superior to God! The Bible tells us exactly why we submit to God. In 1 John 4:19 we read that “We love because he first loved us.” We cannot love God, we cannot submit to God, except that he loved us first. Wives, submit to your husbands in that same way -because he loved you first. If he does not treat you with love -not just words, but deeds also- he has no claim on your submission.

In Ephesians 5 verse 25 we read:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word...

How has Christ loved the Church? How much did Christ sacrifice himself for his beloved? Don't we sing hymns of praise to Him for these things? Isn't he our Lord because of how he loved us and sacrificed himself for us? Has anyone shown greater love than laying down his life? Don't you dare to show your wife Ephesians 5:22 until you are living this example of love.

In Ephesians chapter 5 verse 28 Paul continues:

In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church—for we are members of his body.

If you are abusing your wife emotionally, physically, verbally, or in any other way, you are doing it because you hate yourself. If you loved yourself you could love her. You should hate yourself. You are a mean-spirited, selfish, violent, self-serving, manipulative sinner. You need to experience what real love means before you can love yourself or love her. Quit pretending you're a religious man and run to Jesus. Run now. Learn from Him how to love so that you can be the man she should respect.

What do I do if he won't listen?

Jesus taught a simple formula in Matthew 18:15-17. Remember, if he is hitting you, this is moot. You do not have a marriage. You should be out of the house.

1) Talk to him yourself in private. Let him read this. Pray that he will be convicted. This is the hardest step, but don't skip it. If he won't listen go to step 2.

2) Take someone with you to talk to him. It might be a family member, friend, counselor, you need a third party involved. If he still won't listen, go to step 3.

3) Take it to the Church. This might mean your Elders, your Pastor, trustees, a bishop, or some other leader or leadership group. It doesn't mean that you get on the phone and start calling people and spreading gossip. Use whatever accountability structures that you can find. If your Church does not have any accountability, then it is not a Church, it is a cult.

I don't know if this will help you in your situation, I pray that it does. Hopefully it will at least encourage you that you should not live in misery. The truth will set you free.

Thank You, American Workers

Labor Day is a day when we typically just think about a good barbecue.  

This really does merit a holiday.

Trust me, I haven't had them lately.

If we're going to find meaning in the day beyond a rack of ribs, however, then it might be this:  

We live in a society that was built with many hands -some of them sewed socks, some welded bridges, while some others changed diapers.  Some of them taught me to read, while others forced me to learn mathematics against my will -but to my great benefit.  Somewhere along the line, some of them taught me to love writing, and to love sharing the Gospel of Jesus.

I have driven on roads built by the hard labor of workers both native and immigrant.  I have done some great fishing, swimming, and canoeing in a lake built by the sweat of our grandfathers.  Many people have invested in my life.

This canoeing fun would not be possible if not for:

This incredible investment of labor.

To all of you who have lent a hand in the building of a nation that we all enjoy, and that I treasure:  

Thank you!

Heretics Hall of Shame II

Event organizer Rev. William J. Collier and  keynote speaker Rev. Mel Lewis.

Newest inductees into the Hall of Shame

I had to lead with the photo, it was just too appropriate.  These two yokels from Lamar County, Alabama are the driving force behind this monstrosity:

Collier defends why only white Christians are invited.

"We don't have the facilities to accommodate other people. We haven't got any invitations to black, Muslim events. Of course we are not invited to Jewish events and stuff," Collier said.

This is what he means by "facilities to accommodate other people"

You can't make stuff like this up.  It boils my blood to think that they are claiming and desecrating the name of my Lord Jesus.  Speaking of which, guess who will not be invited:

That's Right, I'm not a White Christian!

They'd better hope that the Lion of Judah doesn't show up to their meeting.

Heretics Hall of Shame

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 

I can tell you from personal experience that it's very, very difficult to get your congregation excited about feeding the poor.  It's almost impossible to get them convicted about the sin of gluttony.  If you want people to volunteer for the BBQ at the Fire Department, that's like shooting fish in a barrel, even the Deacon's wives will be there.  Looking for volunteers to walk through a drug-infested neighborhood and invite people to a community Church service?  That boils it down to the few.


So, it should come as no surprise that many so-called preachers of the Gospel take the easy road out.  Instead of inspiring Christians with the message of Jesus Christ, they preach fear and hatred.  Getting people angry at homosexuals, illegal immigrants, or some other supposedly evil, society-destroying force is simple.  You yell, wave around the Bible a bit (don't open it too much), froth at the mouth, and tell people that God approves your message.  They'll lap it up like a dog returns to lap up his own vomit.  


The last few weeks have brought to light some of the worst cases of this in recent memory.  Several Baptist pastors have made national news with comments that are so shocking they simply defy belief.  It would be easy to dismiss them as obscure lunatics, but can we afford that luxury?


No, we cannot, because the stakes are too high, their ideas are too evil, and the response is too mute.  I will not sit silently while evil men pretend to preach the Gospel and put the name of my Lord Jesus on their hatred and bigotry.  Jesus publicly mocked and ridiculed such evil men, for it is what they deserve.  So, I present for your scorn:

The Heretics Hall of Shame

Inductee 1

Curtis Knapp

New Hope Baptist Church

Seneca, Kansas

Knapp called for the death of gays in a sermon.  "Oh, so you're saying we should go out and start killing them? No, I'm saying the government should. They won't, but they should."

Fear not, preacher.  Your morally corrupt government may not be willing to kill all those homos but there's one that had the moral purity to do it.  Between 1933 and 1945, the Nazis arrested tens of thousands of homosexuals and about ten thousand died in the death camps.  What we need are some good old-fashioned family values like those.  Of course, there was a man like you there to lend God's blessing on the horrific murders:

Reichsbishop Ludwig Müller believed strongly in purifying his country.

The Heretics Hall of Shame

Inductee 2

Charles L. Worley
 Providence Road Baptist Church
Maiden, N.C.

"Build a great, big, large fence -- 150 or 100 mile long -- put all the lesbians in there," Worley said. "Do the same thing for the queers and the homosexuals and have that fence electrified so they can't get out...and you know what, in a few years, they'll die out..."

Rev. Worley's vision becomes reality.

You're late to the game, Rev. Worley. Smarter men than you made big fences. Now admittedly they made them mostly for the Jews, but they were also good for queers, retards, negroes, and other undesirables. They even managed to score a few pinko-commie liberal Christians, which should just set your holy heart aglow.

Raising their hands in worship
...but to the fascist god of national socialism.

There's one more group to mention, and that's the leaders of the Churches.  Do they have no Elders capable of discerning false doctrine?  I mean, I'm not asking for a dissertation on the nuances of the Holy Trinity.  This is murder and death camps.  That's Deacon 101 stuff.


Every Church leader who sat in silence is guilty.

Nazi Deacons.  No, the real, card-carrying Nazis.

Every one of these so-called ministers should have been pulled off the pulpit by the Elders the moment they spoke these blasphemies.  They should have been shouted down from their position by angry teachers of scripture.  Deacons should have bum-rushed them out the door.


Silence is consent.

The Heretics Hall of Shame

Inductee 3

Sean Harris
Berean Baptist Church
Fayetteville, North Carolina

Jerry Pittman
Grace Fellowship Church
Fruitland, Tennessee

"Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch."

No mockery of heretical, godless, hateful false prophets would be complete without this pair.  They go together like bacon and eggs, so they're inducted together into the Hall of Shame.  You may have heard of Sean Harris in the blogosphere because of his endorsement of child abuse.  Jerry Pittman took it a step further.  When a homosexual couple showed up to his Church, ole' brother Jerry sent the greeters out to the parking lot to beat them up.  You read correctly.  Reichspastor Pittman sent his SS troops, I mean Deacons, out to beat the men.  The unbelievable part is that one of them was his own son.  Really, at Grace Fellowship.

Allow me to preach for a moment.  All of you so-called Pastors on this page of shame have blasphemed the Holy Spirit of God.  Your hearts are hard and there is no hope for you.  You have heard and taught the Gospel, so you have no excuse.

Repent now and make amends.  Go wash the feet of those whom you have oppressed.  Protect them from men like you who are devoid of the love of God, whose evil hearts sow wickedness, violence, and hatred.  It was you that Jesus meant when he said: 

And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” (Matt. 11:20-24)