"The Social Justice Living-Learning Community is ‚Äúdesigned for students who are involved in promoting a more inclusive and just society,‚ÄĚ and promises to provide such students with opportunities for ‚Äúcreating and leading positive social change"
Define "positive." Only a free society can be a just society. There is nothing just or positive about manufactured social change, that has as its intent the inclusion of corruption as part of the change sought.
From the news: "Even before the FBI identified new cyber attacks on two separate state election boards, the Department of Homeland Security began considering declaring the election a "critical infrastructure," giving it the same control over security it has over Wall Street and the electric power grid."
Yes this is certainly the age of redefinitions, isn't it? Why not? It's a good way to drag State-based elections under national control, while pretending it's about "security."
Funny thing is, there couldn't be cyber attacks on elections if the powers didn't go to electronic voting. I have yet to hear of a mechanical voting booth being cyber attacked.
GSMontana wrote: Sounds like they're getting their excuses ready in case Trump wins. The government wasn't too concerned with all the voter fraud for Obama like dead people miraculously voting for him.
Just because they identify as dead people doesn't mean they shouldn't vote.
"The Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2).
Note the "provided"? No 2/3 consent, no authority, no treaty. Once again our illustrious anti-American prez shows his true colors.
Connor wrote: --- R.C.Sproul is a great man of God, loves the Lord, but I don't know how he justifies being paid over 100,000 dollars a year, I can't conceive of ever allowing anyone to be paid that much, and why these ministries charge 130$ to go to a conference is beyond me, Kent Hovind didn't charge for any of his seminars, that's a good example to follow. We are to test the spirits, examine, how the church ever got to selling a DVD series for 120$ I don't know, all I know is that the Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil.
The love of money isn't the root of all evil, but that's a subject for another day.
When you suggest no one should be allowed to be paid over 100k, and you say you care what the bible says about the matter, where in the Bible do we find maximum wage, and who in the Bible decides what it is?
The Bible allows the payer and the payee to come to agreement about wages. Therefore biblically you should be ok with whatever others have agreed do pay and work for.
Rodney K. wrote: No different? Then how do you explain the outcome? Were you wiser than those who do not respond? Were you more sensitive to spiritual things? Were you exposed to greater stimuli? Have you a greater strength of will? How do you explain the fact that while others turn away, you ran to the Savior? If so, who provided the greater strength of character, sensitivity, wisdom, spiritual stimuli, etc.? Who made you to differ? Do you claim this for yourself? Or were even those things gifts of God? If the gift of salvation is aquired by clearing the hurdle of belief and repentance, where is the grace in that? How is that not a wage? No, grace is only grace when it's freely and sovereignly dispensed.
Bro Rodney, if I might play devil's advocate and be annoying for a moment, I'll ask questions from another direction:
Since we know it is by God's grace that we are saved, and we are certainly unworthy, at what level of unworthiness is the application of grace made? Is it the more unworthy, or the less unworthy that are saved by grace? Or are all equally unworthy, but some are just lucky enough to be selected for salvation, while the rest are just unlucky slobs who are damned for eternity?
What's wrong with redistribution of wealth? It's called stealing. When a robber robs a bank, he wants to redistribute the wealth to himself. When a govt robber robs the people, he wants to redistribute the wealth to himself, but gives a token amount of it to potential voters, to keep them coming back for more. Just enough to keep them dependent.
Wayfarer Pilgrim wrote: Sorry about that, I was being adolescent in the view that Obama is preoccupied with homosexual behavior. Robert Gates said in a book written by himself that planning and discussions about Isis, the Taliban, or Russian or Chinese military modernization was never on Obama's radar. But, what got him up in the morning was ending don't ask don't tell and ending the band for females in combat and transgender things to fight along side of other combat soldiers. In order for that to happen you have too lower the physical requirements for the golden children Obama is so I enamored with. Men not being men and women not being women is not the banner we salute.
No need to apologize, WP. If you see something that walks, talks, and quacks like a duck, and demands that horses, cows, lions and tigers and bears do the same, it's quite reasonable to suggest it's a duck doing what ducks do.
Rodney K. wrote: (Revelation 21:13) On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates. I'm a-guessin' the Southern gates greet with a "Howdy, yall". Yea, but at the other gates, even those to the north, and those to the east, and those to the west, it shall not be so. For at those gates it shall be given to them to speak in King James English. Of course, I could be wrong...
Hmmm. Could be a problem. How will it be decided which gate is King James English only? Can't have more than one only, don't you know.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Because, Mike, we are a secular state not a theocracy. If all of the people under his command were Christians no problem. I would suppose if all the people under his command were Mormons, he could have the Book of Mormon on his desk, etc. Since there are quite a few Mormons in the military, this would be a more likely happening than the a Qur'an ---
The written Word was written for man, not religionists. Have you read Genesis? The country was founded upon biblical, not multi religious principles. It is quite clear about what man should be and what man should do. It also has some things to say about false religions. The Quran is a book of false religion. There is no equivalency between it and the Bible. There is no biblical basis for telling anyone the Bible can't be displayed. Everyone be nice and sing kumbaya and just get along isn't how we are to live as Christians, even in a culture that's changing. Your United Methodist roots may be leaking through, Jim.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- As I said this was not a win for anybody. the officer didn't put the Bible back on his desk. I would also say what if he was a Muslim? would we be appreciative of a Quran sitting open on an officer's desk?
Of course not. But then why do you think the Quran and the Bible are equals, that they should be viewed the same way?
Penny, they don't need to foment wars, though there may be profit in them. The descendants of Isaac and Ishmael are quite able to do it with or without help from latecomer neocons. A long time for a family squabble, isn't it? Makes the Hatfields and McCoys look like amateurs.
Fortunately for us, the Constitution defines treason only in a very limited sense. Else the govt might have grounds to think it means being opposed to govt actions, when in fact it could mean those actions themselves meet the definition.
Ed wrote: I want a farm. Maybe I could leave the USA and then come back. I'm pretty sure this isn't what our ancestors fought for.
It might help in your quest if you leave and come back through Mexico, preferably in the night. Then find a sanctuary city. Once there you have it made. Or come in disguised as a refugee from Syria. That seems to be very popular. Whatever you do, don't enter the country as a home-schooling family from Germany.
Not only that, but people giving up on God make no sense. It isn't like giving up a pair of comfortable shoes. But then if they held God to be a comfortable old man in the sky somewhere, it does make sense that they have given up on it.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Since Obamacare is underfunded (guess whose the fault on that one) Republicans certainly like the idea and of some Demos like it as well. Yes, it will be interesting to see how things are sorted out in the November election. ---
Underfunded? When is anything govt does underfunded? When the most inefficient of us does something, there are always "unexpected" cost overruns. Not because of a lack of funding, but from getting involved in things they shouldn't be involved with, and know nothing about. They think an official title conveys knowledge. Silly inept people, hiding it behind their self view of importance.
A little more straight-forwardness would help, Jim. Perhaps the latent reason you are opposed to Christians being salt and light in the direction the country goes, is because it won't go in the direction you want if they come out of their "church" buildings and be salt and light?
Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
I don't see an exception clause for political issues there, do you?