Would Someone Please Just Tell Me!?!

Here's a scenario: You love doing backflips on your quad using a wooden ramp. However, unbeknownst to you, this made some of your friends, even close friends, nervous because some of the boards looked loose. None could muster the courage to tell you directly (perhaps because you've not taken reproof well in the past), so they eventually brought their concerns to your parents, who intended to relay those concerns to you. However, they hesitated for some time while waiting for the right time to tell you so as to not offend you. However, while they were waiting, the top board of your ramp finally gave way, your quad went flying through the air in an uncontrolled spin, and broke your arm in the landing. So now, you are lying in a hospital bed recovering from reconstructive surgery, and your dad strolls into your luxurious room, sits down in the chair, and this dialog follows:

"Well son, how's your arm feeling?

"Better, but it still smarts somethin' fierce.

"The Doc said that the pain meds should be kicking in soon. Listen, there's something that your mother and I should have told you awhile ago. You see, a couple of your friends expressed concern about the integrity of your ramp, and we were going to tell you, but we didn't want to hurt your feelings, so we waited for the right time to tell you. But it looks like we waited too long."

"What? You were worried that my feelings would be hurt? I think I'd rather been offended than have this broken arm."

"Hmm, good point. Well, what could we do differently in the future?"

"Maybe if I didn't let my feelings be hurt or get defensive when someone comes to me with advice or a reprimand, people would be more likely to voice concerns to me?"

"Son, I think you've hit the nail on the proverbial head."

•  •  •

Ok, now I know that this is NOT one of the best analogies ever devised (nor even close), but I think it gets the point across. If you think that someone else is in error, bring your concern to him. Even if he gets upset, you will have the knowledge that you did the right thing, and then it's up to the Lord to change his heart. Proverbs 24:25: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them.

So, there are two morals to this story. Moral 1 is for the recipient of reproof:

Proverbs 15:31: The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise.

Proverbs 15:32: He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding.

Moral 2 is for him that offers the reproof:

Titus 2:6: Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded.  

Hebrews 3:13: But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

Here's the clearest one: 

Proverbs 27:5: Open rebuke is better than secret love.

 This verse, I think, carries a lot of weight in and of itself. Basically, it's saying if you really love someone (as in brotherly love), then you will do what's best for him, rather than what simply makes you both feel good. And in the long run, if he isn't a fool, in the future he will thank you for it.

Overpopulation

Well, I guess that settles it! There's just too many people on this planet! How do I know this? Why, because Jacques Causteau said so! And Al Gore! And we all know that the poler ice caps are melting right? I mean, wasn't florida supposed to be like a third underwater by now?

If you recall from my China post, I am of the opinion that overpopulation is a fictional creation of those with power who would like to gain more power (or money). Nothing will get people to act irrationally than pending disaster.
Overpopulation is also directly related to global 'climate change.' Most of the videos, articles, and books you will find on either subject will inevitably touch on the other.
Here's the video that I found which sparked this post.

On it's face, this video seems to make sense, but there are several fundamental flaws with it's logic (or lack thereof). What do you think that they are?
In the coming days, I'll probably post some more videos on both sides of the argument.
And the list just goes on and on!

Overpopulation in China

And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly

in the earth, and multiply therein.

Genesis 9:7: 

My Cousin (who is a really good writer) is on a site called "Figment," which is kind of like facebook for writers.
Anyway, she is also ardently pro-sanctity-of-life, and has been fairly vocal on Figment about her views, and has gotten some flack for it (imagine that!). So Bravo Sara-Anne!!
One of the threads that she brought to my attention, and eventually got me to join Figment so that I could respond to it, was one someone had started about China, and it's "overpopulation" problem.
I did some research to make sure that my facts were accurite, and then wrote a response on that thread addressing the myth of overpopulation. You can see the thread here. Start at the beginning, and then read to the end. It's only two pages at the moment.
I got some of my quotes from this video, which gives a really good 30,000 feet overview of the whole "running out of food" issue.

Here's my response on Figment:

@acrosstheuniverse1211, Poverty is not caused by over population. Poverty is brought about by a plethora of different sources. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (U.N.), and the World Food Programme "There is enough food in the world today for everyone to have the nourishment necessary for a healthy and productive life." The problem as they state it is "The world currently produces enough food for everybody, but meny people do not have access to it."

(Quick fun fact: Africa, if cultivated using modern farming techniques, could feed the whole planet, according to some experts.) 

The Word Food Programme lists key causes of Hunger, and they are:
*Poverty
*Conflict (War)
*Natural Disasters
*Over-Exploitation of the Environment
*Poor Agricultural Infrastructure
No where on that list is overpopulation.

I find it interesting that China gets all of the attention when it comes to overpopulation, considering that their density of people per square mile is actually not that high, Just 363, according to the UN World Prospects Report 2005. Lets compare that to a few other countries.

Taiwan: 1,660
The Netherlands: 1,460
India: 953
Japan: 873
Germany: 593
Italy: 518
And just for fun, let's throw in Singapore, coming in at a whopping 18,513 people per square mile!!

So why isn't there an uproar about those countries?
There are three main reasons:
*The population is well distributed over the land mass
*The supply chain of food is modern and well established
*They have more personal liberty (Thus allowing them to make more money, allowing them to buy more food)

 Now, whenever you read about overpopulation in China you undoubtedly see pictures like this:

 

I highly doubt they show you pictures like this:

 

That is southwestern china. Not a lot of people there. Chinas real problem is population distribution. A very large portion of their population is crammed into cities! Now If I were to show you a picture of Time Square such as this:

 

I could write a very compelling piece about how overpopulated N.Y.C. is. Or I could show you a picture like this:

 

And I could talk about how the population in N.Y.C. has dropped dramatically in the last few years.

China is not overpopulated, it's population has simply been packed into large metropolitan areas. The fact that it has a communist government which forcibly keeps their currency undervalued (which, by the way is why almost everything here in America is made there), thus making them less able to trade with other countries for things like food.

Which brings me back to the quote from the Food and Agriculture Organization (U.N.) "The world currently produces enough food for everybody, but meny people do not have access to it."

~Paul

The Gimme Generation

We live in an entitlement culture.

I doubt that any of you balked at that statement.

Everyone feels that they 'deserve' something or other.

"I deserve a well paying job."
"I deserve to go to college."
"I deserve a break."  

Or my favorite, which I saw on a billboard for a grocery store recently:

"You deserve fresh."

Whenever I see a billboard that says something like, "You deserve fresh produce," my first reaction (and one that I often make out loud while I'm driving), is WHY?
WHY do you "deserve a well paying job?!" Did you work hard? Are you industrious?
WHY do you "deserve to go to college?!" Because you got good grades in preschool?
WHY do you "deserve a break?!" Because you are just sooo awesome? WHY!?!?

The feeling that we are owed anything, just because, is a huge problem in our society. It can come from a lot of different places, and things like allowances are probably about the worst.
Think about it, Dad goes to work everyday, and brings home a paycheck because he has been productive ( <-- key word there). But now, little Johnny and Sally want their part of it, so Daddy kindly gives them a portion of his salary. "Why" you may ask? He may have any number of reasons:

"Because they're not old enough to earn money themselves."

Let me get this straight, because he's not old enough to earn some money, he deserves to have it handed to him on a silver platter? So when he's old enough to earn money himself, is he just going to stop taking the free money from you?

"Because they've just been so good this week,"

Hmm, I sure didn't get paid to behave. Good behavior was expected of me. I was punished for bad behavior.

"Because they deserve it."

No comment.

Etc, etc, and etc.

We need to develop an earned mentality. Don't give me something because I deserve it. Give it to me because I earned it by doing something! Live so that you can say:

"I earned the privilege of a well paying job." Because I worked hard to get there.
"I earned the privilege of a college education." Because I studied hard, and can afford it.
"I earned the privilege of taking a break." Because I've been working hard. (Just make it a short break.)

~Paul


P.S.
And whatever you do, please, Please, PLEASE do NOT give your kids an allowance. Ever. Being on the parent dole is just one step from being on the government dole, and we know where that leads. Just say no! (And make that little guy rake the leaves or something. So what if he's only 3. Trust me, he'll thank you for it later.)

True Chivalry by Sophia Smithe

Here's a really good poem by Sophia over at Sophias Siege. May we all in this generation work to restore the concept of Godly chivalry.

“Let the women and children be first”

Rose the courageous cry

From the throngs of men aboard the ship

Who were destined that day to die

Their hearts were saddened by the grim proposition

Yet they clung to their manhood and stood

Willing and ready to give their own lives

As a man of true chivalry should

Nary a word of dissent was heard

Upon the forlorn decks

As scores of men boldly met their deaths

And were buried at sea with the wreck

A century past, and the men of our day

Have all but forgotten the call

Of “Women and Children first, Gentlemen;

Let not one of them fall”

 The sacrifice of Titanic’s heroes

Must shine out to the end

“Greater love hath no man than this:

That he lay down his life for his friend”

 ~Paul

The Bride of Christ

"I do."

Those are two words which I look forward with great anticipation to saying, to know and be known through and through by a woman with whom I can share everything that I am, every hurt and every joy, every laugh and every cry. And yet, how much more should we long for that kind of relationship with our Lord? Ultimately, that's the purpose of marriage; to portray to the world the kind of relationship that we will have with the Son. He is the ultimate Bridegroom, and we, The Church, are the Bride of Christ.

This is one of the reasons why divorce is so destructive . It's not just two people breaking a convenient that they made before the Almighty God, but because their marriage is so much more then that. God didn't institute marriage simply as a means to propagate the human race, nor to make us happy. He designed it to be a picture of something that is much more, something beyond us. Marriage is a picture of the relationship that the Son will have with his Church! This is the reason why there are such harsh punishments for people who divorce and who commit fornication, it's a blatant violation of the marriage covenant, and what the marriage represents!

The culture has really lost sight of the holiness and sanctity of marriage in our day and age. So let us be the shining lights in this dark world of what marriages should really look like!

Paul

It was Monumental

"Hmmm, maybe I should post this on my blog" I thought as I wrote in my journal, the sound of tapping key's filling my ears. So here it is. Let me know if you have any thoughts on this subject! I'd love to hear from you!

March 17, TuesdayMonumental.That’s the name of the movie that we saw tonight, Kirk Cameron’s new movie about the founding of America. Not the founding fathers, but before that: the Pilgrims. It was a very though provoking film and centered around the reasons why the Pilgrims left England for America. There were quite a few that I didn’t know about, like the fact that King James had tripled the national debt and had declared that he had the "divine right of kings," a phrase that he invented. I won’t go into all the details here because there were so many but it’s a movie well worth watching, and a subject that I will have to study in more depth at some point in the near future.The point that I found to be the most intriguing actually didn’t have to do with the Pilgrims but with the economic and moral state that England was in during the early 1600s. They had what would now be called a "church-state." King James (The successor to Queen  Elizabeth) controlled the church, and thus, wouldn’t allow people to diverge from its teaching. Having the Bible in English was capital crime, and punishable by death by tortuous means. On top of that, he tripled, yes, tripled the national debt! After hearing about all of these things, it really makes our situation look pretty rosy. Not saying that we’re on an upward slope, but we certainly don’t have it as hard as they did back then. People who say “Oh it’s never been this bad, the end must surly be near!” obviously have not been a student of history. It’s good to keep things in perspective. Our nation is sick, and we as christians need to reclaim our Christian heritage. The Lord has greatly blessed this nation because it was founded in the fear of God. Yes, some of the founders were not God-fearing men (Some of them were flat opposed to him!), but that doesn’t mean that we are not a nation built on godly principles! We as Christians should be shining lights in this time of darkness, the salt of the earth, if you will. God doesn’t work through majorities (usually), but through dedicated minorities. It doesn’t take much leaven to leaven the whole loaf (Galatians 5:9). 

So get out there and be the light, salt, and leaven of the world!
"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid" (Mat 5:14).

Extinguished Churches

“Stop by.No one’s burst into flames yet.”

I read that as I leafed through the few items in the mail today. I was like, “Huh?!?” so I flipped over the large card stock ad to read the back side. The last part of it said,

“Come to [our church] this Easter, wear whatever you want, and be yourself. We really want to show you how much fun getting to know God can be!”

It was a flyer for a church in our area. I still haven’t figured out how the front relates to the back, though maybe it served its purpose: to get me to flip it over and read the back. Though I have to wonder, by "No one's burst into flames yet," are they implying that they're just luke warm? Anyway . . .

I think that this is probably the most watery presentation of why one should come to church that I’ve ever heard (though I haven’t been around for very long, so I guess that that’s not saying much). Where’s the command to repentance? I don’t recall any section of the book of Acts in which the apostles told everybody how much fun getting saved was going to be. If “fun” is the only reason why people should “get to know God”, than I can see why it would be lower then a football game in most peoples lives. 

~Paul

Liberty vs. Safety

A while back, I was going through security at the airport, and I remember a lady thanking one of the security officers for "keeping us safe". "Because we're too incompetent and weak to do it ourselves" I thought.
Benjamin Franklin said this nearly 300 years ago, and it's exactly what's happening today:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"

The Government can't be everywhere at once (Thank goodness!), so they can't protect you in every circumstance. The purpose of the law isn't to catch criminals in the act as much as it is to bring them to justice afterwards. It's the citizens responsibility to protect himself, his family, and look out for those around him.
So the next time you hear a politician talking about how we should "give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety", think of this quote.
~Paul

Civil War Era Quote

So I've given you the time period, but do you know who said this? The answer will surprise you. Take a guess in the comments, but don't look it up and then answer, I'll tell you in a few days.

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

Ladies First

Those are two words I don't hear very often in the outside world (I.E. outside of the Christian homeschooling crowds that I live in). The feminists have done a very good job at what they think is equalizing women, namely, elevating women, because according to them, working a 9 to 5, is so much more prestigious then being a homemaker. But what they've really done, is pull men down, and try to make them switch rolls. They may say that they simply want equality, but if that were really the case, then you would expect that at least half the time, they would be holding doors for men. But no.

In they're minds, 'equality' means 'identical', or ('congruent' to use the math term). Yet you can ask any doctor, any counselor, or any married person for that matter, and (if they're honest) they will have to admit that there are differences. Try as one might to mask it, their always will be. But is that Bad? Let me ask you this, is an ax head more important then the handle which holds it? Is the trim on a house more important then the studs which support it? They are both vastly different, and yet, they both need each other. If the studs in a house decided that they wanted to be trim as well, then the whole house would come down. Yet if it had no trim, the house would simply be a building. neither would be very comely to look upon. If the ax handle decided that it wanted to be a head, then both would be useless. They both need each other. God designed the genders to be complimentary. Equal, yet distinct. 
This blog has some really good insights into feminism, I've found it to be really helpful, he has some really good insights.


Anyway, Back to the title of this post. I thought about all of this because I was at a business lunch the other day, and when the waiter came to take our orders, she said "Ladies first" and started with the woman at the table. I was pleasantly surprised when she did so, it's not something I hear often at restaurants, probably because the waitress's are concerned that they might offend the feminist demographic. But I think that the lady at the table was appreciative.
So go hold a door, offer your umbrella, and be generally courteous to the women in your life, wether they're 5 years old or 85 years young, they'll appreciate it.
~Paul

Ron Paul for President!

I support Ron Paul. (and with that statement, I offend many people)
There is a plethora of reasons why, his constitutional consistency, his Christian beliefs, his workforce experience (as a doctor, OB, having delivered over 4,000 babies). Even if I disagreed with him on more things (and I do disagree with him on a few things), all of the other options on stage right now are much less appealing. (with Gingrich being the worst of the lot).
Voddie Baucham gives a very concise, to the point explanation of why he will vote for Ron Paul, and I think that it's very helpful, plus it has lots of footnotes (I'm a sucker for footnotes. There just something about being able to show where you got your info that is so reassuring).
http://americanvisionnews.com/1278/voddie-baucham-answers-why-ron-paul
Give it a read. I'd love to hear what your thoughts are.

Family Economics Conference 2012

This is the first conference that I have been to of my own free will (as in, one that I wanted to sign up for, rather then just going along because mom and dad were going), and I'm really looking forward to it!!! I would humbly suggest that you consider (or ask your parents to consider) signing up for this event. Click  Here to go to they're website. We have problems on the national scale (big ones) and problems on the state level, and on down, but one of the problems that isn't being widely addressed in the media (other then by Glen Beck) is that the family is breaking down. So this is a very timely conference, and I'd love to see you all there!

~Paul

Spanking = hitting?

My intentions with this post are not to get a bunch of people riled up (not that many will even see it), but to bring to view a common misconception among Christians Today. If you have an opinion on this subject, and I'd imagine that you do, please let me know in a Comment!!! 

Norman rockwell

I was reading a post over at Always Learning about spanking, and finding some of the comments rather interesting. One of the commenters said

Spanking children only teaches them to hit to get what they want. As a child, I was spanked before the age of 5 as well...and I remember it all. I remember watching my brother get spanked too. It only taught us anger, and I have had to work through my anger in many therapy sessions due to this. . . . Children should be taught by example, and certainly hitting, (yes HITTING and spanking are the same things), is not a way to teach your children respect. 

I bet that she was spanked in anger, which can, and will cause children to resent the spanker.
It's amazing how often Hitting and spanking are equated to being the same thing.

"Yes, little Jonny got a spanking.
(Gasp!) You hit your children?!?!
No, I said he got a spanking.
Violence begets violence!
I agree, that's why I spanked him.
~Unknown Author.  (Ok, I admit, I wrote that)
~ Known Author

Now, if I were to hit my brother with something, even on the rear, he probably wouldn't run to Mom yelling "MOM!!! Paul spanked me!!!!" Kids know the difference, and from a very early age too. I think Lori got it right by saying that children need to get understand that sin and pain to hand in hand. A young'n will only touch a stove once or twice before they realize that every time they do, they feel the surging pain of a burn on they're hand. Some things, on the other hand, don't have immediate consequences. Stealing for example, doesn't always have an immediate negative repercussion, hence, a young child might not equate a later punishment with a much earlier act. Even if they're caught, pain is a much stronger motivator then a lecture (while they're younger) on the wrongs of stealing, and how it might harm society, and how it's just not nice. If a boy hits his sister (Violence) and Mom sees him and responds with a quick, non emotional spanking (Discipline), he will eventually, depending on the thickness of his head, learn that "violence begets discipline, and discipline can hurt!"

And just a side note, I'm not going to delve into "time out's" because they simply don't work (accept on an extreme minority of children). I remember being sent to time out, and the whole time I was sitting there, steaming about how I was going to get back at whoever made me get that time out, and how I was going to get them back. Don't ever let a child stew on his anger. It's the same as with adults, only faster.

Just as important as the punishment, is how that punishment is carried out. If Dad flies into a rage when ever billy does disobeys, and then proceeds to spank him profusely in anger, then I would call that abuse. Billy might be more obedient for a short time, but he will soon come to resent his father, and he might become violent as he gets older, and will probably be an abusive parent.
However, if when Billy does disobeys, his Dad calmly administers a spanking on his bottom or upper legs, billy will come to equate disobedience with a slight amount of pain.
Now of course, all children are different, and some may need more spankings (like me) then others, but I do believe that all children, will need spankings at one time or another. I don't believe that this is a matter of opinion because in it says to use the rod quite a few times in the bible:

Proverbs 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
Proverbs 22:15: Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.
Proverbs 23:13: Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
Proverbs 23:14: Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

I think you get the idea.
And God didn't say anything like: "If sound reasoning, and lecturing fail, then use the rod", or "If all else fails, and it's legal, spank your child". I find it interesting that parents often think that spanking is a topic that the bible leave up to their discretion. But it's clear that the bible not only recommends it, but requires it!

A Book that is epistemologically accurate

Something I've been thinking about lately is how inconsistent people are when they are trying to prove evolution, or that there is no God. So they write books about it, and make TV shows to show how right they are, and how it's impossible for there to be a God. Because if there was a God, "Then why would he let 'so and so' happen?", or "Why is there sin in the world?" Wait; What did he just say? "Sin"?  Well, if we all are cosmic dust, then what is sin? Who determines what is right and what i wrong? If there is no standard of ethic, then there is no absolute standard.
So, I've been thinking: "What if I wrote a book about a world where there was no God, and made it completely accurate?" What would a book like that look like.
Well, if some one was reading it, and skipped the preface, and jumped straight to chapter one, this is what they'ed see:
Chapter one:
Chapter two:
Chapter three:
Chapter four:
Then End.

And after that maybe they'd read the epilogue, and it'd say something like this:
Epilogue:
When I decided to write this book, I was stumped about how to start it. I couldn't use "In the beginning", or, "Once upon a time", or "Long, long ago" because all of those are referencing time. And time is something invented. This seems foreign to us because we can't imagine life any other way. We've never experienced anything where there was no time. It would be like trying to explain a fourth dimension. We simply cannot comprehend it because it's so unnatural for us. Our brains just don't understand it.  Whether or not there is a forth dimension is not in the scope of this book, the point of this book is to make you think, and ask questions.
(And you can now brag that you read a whole book in under five minutes)

Paul T. Leavitt