Happy Saint Patrick’s day! Believe it or not, he wasn’t the patron saint of green beer. He had quite a life as a Christian missionary.
Christian belief a “hate crime” under proposed act – it has happened in other countries and will happen here if we aren’t careful. Think I’m kidding? The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals considers references to family values to be “hate speech.”
The Myth About Creation Myths – Believe it or not, this isn’t about Darwinian evolution or Intelligent Design. It is a short piece on myths about some high visibility success stories like Apple.
Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion” gets slammed by his own kind.
Ahmadinejad’s Threats to Destroy Israel – a handy chronological list (though keeping it up to date will be a full-time job)
More abuse of children and parents’ rights – “Officials at Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Ill., have ordered their 14-year-old freshman class into a “gay” indoctrination seminar, after having them sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents.” Here’s a good parody which tells the same story only inserting Christian evangelism instead of homosexual indoctrination.
The myth of moral neutrality – good article by Greg Koukl about the flaws of moral relativism.
Filed under: Weekly roundup
The Ninth Circuit decision wasn’t overly wacky. It’s unpublished (which means that it is not binding precedent), as are 90% of judicial opinions. That’s good news, because it can’t be cited by other employers who seek to curtain speech.
Generally, restrictions on Christian speech as “religious” speech (ergo, disruptive) can be used against atheist speech (as atheism is, in many ways, a religion – or at least a belief system), Jews, or any minority of choice. That worries me (and should worry anyone interested in a free society).
Loved the “Myths about Creation Myths” article!
The Townhall piece on moral neutrality reminds me very much of Ayn Rand. One of her protagonists continually challenged a young man who claimed that there were no absolutes by pointing out that such a statement is an absolute. Logic alone dictates that there is such a thing as an absolute, and, as experience dictates that humans have a concept of “moral,” there must be a moral absolute.
*I wonder if she takes this approach with her daughter. Does she “inflict” Felicia with moral obligations about bedtimes, homework, drugs, cheating, etc., or is she “tolerant” of Felicia’s divergent opinions on these issues?
As I’ve often said to feminists on another site, parents always inflict values upon their children. Christian parents inflict values about chastity and service to others; Leftist parents inflict values about anti-homophobia, anti-racism, etc. (Not to say that each must be mutually exclusive, of course.) There is a great mistake in refusing to acknowledge atheism as its own belief system and a larger one in refusing to acknowledge a conviction as a moral value.