Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS - AT ODDS WITH BLACK REALITY

Jonah Goldberg at the Corner at National Review Online tells it like it is with the Congressional Black Caucus.    Read his article, and lament the failure of black leadership today. 

MAKES SENSE TO ME DEPARTMENT... (ON IMMIGRATION)

The following is a long quote from Phi Beta Cons - National Review for 3/31/06

To Be Or Not To Be Americans
[Candace de Russy  03/31 05:07 PM]

American high school students, the children of immigrants, recently turned an American flag upside down on a flagpole and ran up a Mexican flag above it.   In demonstrations purporting to show that immigrants want to Americans, illegal aliens marched through the streets of our cities carrying Latin American flags and carrying signs with slogans such as “This is stolen land.”

The Hudson Institute's John Fonte calls these blatant displays by their true name: “separatism…a challenge to what Aristotle and Straussian political theorists call a ‘regime’ or ‘way of life.’” And he calls for legislation with rigorous enforcement provisions of our immigration laws, the absolute renunciation of all allegiance by new citizens to their birth nations, the cutting off of all federal funds for bilingual and multicultural education, and strong Americanization programs.

Indeed, as Fonte says, our goal must “be the making of Americans, not placating the foreigners among us.”

EVALUATING THE WAR IN IRAQ - "WHEN CYNICISM MEETS FANATICISM"

Victor Davis Hanson today offers an eloquent analysis of the current Iraqi situation.   His article, When Cynicism Meets Fanaticism:  Critiquing the critique of the war in Iraq, lists objections to the war and his rebuttals.  It is well worth reading.   As I have mentioned before, I regard VDH as one of the premier commentators on the Middle East and the Iraq war.   What will be the ultimate outcome?  We don't yet know.  He concludes his discussion with this question:

. . . put more directly: Can Western enlightenment and power, embedded in deep cynicism, still prevail over ignorance and self-inflicted pathology energized by fanaticism? 

In time we will discover the answer.

JOEL OSTEEN'S PROSPERITY GOSPEL EXAMINED

Professor Ben Witherington, renowned Biblical scholar, offers his take on Joel Osteen and the "Prosperity Gospel" here.   (HT: Smart Christian )   One or two excerpts:

The problem is several fold, and it involves a fundamental replacement of what the Bible actually has to say about wealth, with what our culture says about wealth and prosperity.   And of course when you preach a message that is heard as saying "God wants you rich" or is heard as saying "if you give generously to God (i.e. our ministry) he will repay you many times over"), then of course the implication is that the Gospel message is really all about us, and ways to get God to fulfill not merely our needs and desires but even our conspicuously consumptive dreams.   But is God really a nurturer of a vision of life that says its all about me and my material success?

How very different indeed this message is from John Wesley's Famous Sermon "On the Use of Money" in which he stresses that if you make all you can honestly and save all you can, but do not give all you can to relieve poverty, feed the hungry, make well the sick you may be a living person but you are a dead Christian. . .

Witherington has more to say about Wesley's view of wealth,  and he follows that up with a study of various Biblical passages.   In the midst of all this he writes these challenging sentences:

We need to stop listening to the siren song of our culture about the goodness of personal wealth and material prosperity.  We need to advocate a theology of stewardship which puts other people's necessities before our luxuries.  We need to simplify our lifestyles and get a clear grasp on God's priorities including God's especial concern for the poor and destitute of the world.   We need to realize that what Jesus promised us if we seek the kingdom is not prosperity, but rather 'just enough' to take care of our basic needs.   We need to remember that the Lord's prayer teaches us to pray for daily bread, not for resources today that I could not possibly use in 10,000 lifetimes.   We need to heed all the warnings about how wealth can destroy the soul of an inherently self centered and acquisitive creature-- namely any human being.   We need to renounce the false gospel of wealth and health--- it is a disease of our American culture, it is not a solution or answer to life's problems.

I think Witherington's essay a highly valuable corrective to much current thinking.  Unfortunately, though, it fails to wrestle with the practical element of fear (of nursing homes, doctor bills, etc.) which fuels a perceived need to acquire "enough money" -- a certain degree of wealth -- to meet those unforeseen needs.   Maybe he would recognize that reality (and responsibility) and at the same time quite properly retain his caution against falling into the American trap of more and more and more.  Yesterday, March 29, 2006 the New York Times profiled Joel Osteen.   Witherington used that article as background for his piece. 

QUOTE OF THE DAY - ATTITUDE OF BABIES

The New York Times today printed a surprisingly flattering picture of Phyllis Schlafly, the arch opponent of the Equal Rights Amendment and one of the most influential figures in modern American politics.  Here's the line that caught my eye:

A regular lecturer on college campuses, she is often asked to speak on the subject of balancing work and family.  "Feminism has changed the way women think, and it has changed the way men think," Mrs. Schaflly said, "but the trouble is, it hasn't changed the attitudes of babies at all."

Hat tip: The Corner: National Review

NATIONAL POLLING DATA SAYS PUBLIC WANTS FEDERAL GOV'T TO GET TOUGHER ON IMMIGRATION

Tony Blankley, always worth reading, sees senators who go counter to public opinion asking for trouble.   After citing poll numbers and offering a general discussion, he says the following:

Regarding the Senate's and the president's guest-worker proposals, The Post's Robert Samuelson writes: "Gosh, they're all bad ideas ... We'd be importing poverty.  This isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking, many are.  Nor is it because they don't assimilate, many do.  But they generally don't go home, assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished ... [It] is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico ... The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers ? Far from softening the social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited government benefits ... [Moreover], [i]t's a myth that the U.S. economy 'needs' more poor immigrants.

"The illegal immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor force." (For all Mr. Samuelson's supporting statistics, see his Washington Post column of March 22, from which this is taken.) Likewise, a few days later, the very liberal and often partisan Paul Krugman of the New York Times courageously wrote : "Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the [government] benefits they receive ? As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, 'We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.' " Mr. Krugman also observed — citing a leading Harvard study — "that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants 'do jobs that Americans will not do.' The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants." Thusly do the two leading economic writers for the nation's two leading liberal newspapers summarily debunk the economic underpinning of the president's and the Senate's immigration proposals.

ALGERIA - ANTI-CONVERSION LAW PASSED

"As attention focused on an Afghan Christian convert who faced the death penalty for his conversion, Algeria quietly passed a law that punishes anyone who persuades a Muslim to leave his faith, with up to five years in prison, and banishes house churches."  The WorldNetDaily report continues:

According to the new law, passed March 21, the penalty is imprisonment of two to five years and a fine of up to about $12,000 for whomever "incites, constrains or utilizes means of seduction tending to convert a Muslim to another religion, or by using to this end establishments for teaching, for education, for health, of a social or cultural nature, or training institutions, or any other establishment, or any financial means, makes, stores, or distributes printed documents or audiovisual productions or by any other aid or means, which has as its goal to shake the faith of a Muslim."

  According to the 2001 book Operation World, Christians make up 0.29% of the population.  Nearly 70% of the population is under 30. 

IRAN'S GOAL - TRIGGERING WORLD APOCALYPSE?

In his column today, Charles Krauthammer looks at Iran with unblinking eyes and sees a new phenomenon on the world stage.   Other nations with nuclear bombs haven't used them.    What can we expect from the government in Tehran?   Krauthammer writes:

We're now at the dawn of an era in which an extreme and fanatical religious ideology, undeterred by the usual calculations of prudence and self-preservation, is wielding state power and will soon be wielding nuclear power.

We have difficulty understanding the mentality of Iran's newest rulers. Then again, we don't understand the mentality of the men who flew into the World Trade Center or the mobs in Damascus and Tehran who chant "Death to America"--and Denmark(!)--and embrace the glory and romance of martyrdom.

Krauthammer says Iran's arriving at the threshold of nuclear weaponry is "a signal historical moment."

It is not just that its President says crazy things about the Holocaust. It is that he is a fervent believer in the imminent reappearance of the 12th Imam, Shi'ism's version of the Messiah. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been reported as saying in official meetings that the end of history is only two or three years away. He reportedly told an associate that on the podium of the General Assembly last September, he felt a halo around him and for "those 27 or 28 minutes, the leaders of the world did not blink ... as if a hand was holding them there and it opened their eyes to receive" his message. He believes that the Islamic revolution's raison d'être is to prepare the way for the messianic redemption, which in his eschatology is preceded by worldwide upheaval and chaos. How better to light the fuse for eternal bliss than with a nuclear flame?

Read the rest of this chilling article.

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY ASKS QUESTIONS OF MUSLIM APOLOGISTS

Investor's Business Daily in a March 27, 2006 editorial, asked pointed questions of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).    The questions relate to "whether the Quran does indeed promote violence against non-Muslims, and how many of the terrorists' ideas — about the violent jihad, the self-immolation, the kidnappings, even the beheadings — come right out of the text?   But even more specifically: 

Is Islam the only religion with a doctrine, theology and legal system that mandates warfare against unbelievers?

Is it true that 26 chapters of the Quran deal with jihad, a fight able-bodied believers are obligated to join (Surah 2:216), and that the text orders Muslims to "instill terror into the hearts of the unbeliever" and to "smite above their necks" (8:12)?

Is the "test" of loyalty to Allah not good acts or faith in general, but martyrdom that results from fighting unbelievers (47:4) — the only assurance of salvation in Islam (4:74; 9:111)?

  Are the sins of any Muslim who becomes a martyr forgiven by the very act of being slain while slaying the unbelievers (4:96)?

And is it really true that martyrs are rewarded with virgins, among other carnal delights, in Paradise (38:51, 55:56; 55:76; 56:22)?

Are those unable to do jihad — such as women or the elderly — required to give "asylum and aid" to those who do fight unbelievers in the cause of Allah (8:74)?

Does Islam advocate expansion by force? And is the final command of jihad, as revealed to Muhammad in the Quran, to conquer the world in the name of Islam (9:29)?

Is Islam the only religion that does not teach the Golden Rule (48:29)? Does the Quran instead teach violence and hatred against non-Muslims, specifically Jews and Christians (5:50)?

There are other questions, but these should do for a start. If the answers are "yes," then at least Americans will know there's no such thing as moderate Islam, even as they trust that there are moderate Muslims who do not act out on its violent commands.

ISLAMIST THREAT GREATER THAN THE COMMUNIST OR NAZI THREAT OF THE LAST CENTURY

Dennis Prager  sees the Islamist threat as greater than the Communist or Nazi threat of the last century.

Only four types of individuals can deny the threat to civilization posed by the violence-supporting segment of Islam: the willfully naive, America-haters, Jew-haters and those afraid to confront evil.

Anyone else sees the contemporary reality – the genocidal Islamic regime in Sudan; the widespread Muslim theological and emotional support for the killing of a Muslim who converts to another religion; the absence of freedom in Muslim-majority countries; the widespread support for Palestinians who randomly murder Israelis; the primitive state in which women are kept in many Muslim countries; the celebration of death; the "honor killings" of daughters; and so much else that is terrible in significant parts of the Muslim world – knows that civilized humanity has a new evil to fight.

Just as previous generations had to fight Nazism, communism and fascism, our generation has to confront militant Islam.

. . .  Far fewer people believed in Nazism or in communism than believe in Islam generally or in authoritarian Islam specifically. There are 1 billion Muslims in the world. If just 10 percent believe in the Islam of Hamas, the Taliban, the Sudanese regime, Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism, bin Laden, Islamic Jihad, the Finley Park Mosque in London or Hezbollah – and it is inconceivable that only one of 10 Muslims supports any of these groups' ideologies – that means a true believing enemy of at least 100 million people. Outside of Germany, how many people believed in Nazism? Outside of Japan, who believed in Japanese imperialism and militarism? And outside of universities, the arts world or Hollywood, how many people believed in Soviet-style totalitarianism?

A far larger number of people believe in Islamic authoritarianism than ever believed in Marxism. Virtually no one living in Marxist countries believed in Marxism or communism. Likewise, far fewer people believed in Nazism, an ideology confined largely to one country for less than one generation. This is one enormous difference between the radical Islamic threat to our civilization and the two previous ones.

But there is yet a second difference that is at least as significant and at least as frightening: Nazis and communists wanted to live and feared death; Islamic authoritarians love death and loathe life. . . .

The existence of an unprecedentedly large number of people wishing to destroy decent civilization as we know it – and who celebrate their own deaths – poses a threat the likes of which no civilization in history has had to confront.

THOMAS SOWELL ON THE IMMIGRATION QUESTION

Thomas Sowell cuts through the semantic fog surrounding the immigration question, saying

Immigration is yet another issue which we seem unable to discuss rationally -- in part because words have been twisted beyond recognition in political rhetoric.

We can't even call illegal immigrants "illegal immigrants."   The politically correct evasion is "undocumented workers." . . .    The Bush administration is pushing a program to legalize "guest workers."   But what is a guest?    Someone you have invited.    People who force their way into your home without your permission are called gate crashers.

If truth-in-packaging laws applied to politics, the Bush guest worker program would have to be called a "gate-crasher worker" program.   The President's proposal would solve the problem of illegal immigration by legalizing it after the fact.

We could solve the problem of all illegal activity anywhere by legalizing it.   Why use this approach only with immigration?

Sowell says a whole lot more.    The whole article needs to be read.

THOUGHTS ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE

Lowell Ponte offers an excellent overview of Europe's (non-Muslim) progressive demographic demise.    If a reader hasn't been following this story, Ponte's article will bring one up to speed in a hurry.   It's a must-read to get keyed in on Europe's future.   Ponte begins with the following words, 

Europe’s botched civilization, perverted by socialism and lost faith, seems to have lost the will, the passion to sustain itself. If it continues to practice today’s multiculturalist leftism, Europe’s demographic doom will be sealed. 

Some harbingers:

• In Brussels, Belgium, the most popular name for baby boys is now Mohammad. .
• In France at least 12 percent of the population is already Muslim, the fruits mostly of immigrants from former French colonies in North Africa. . . .

If Europe continues as it is now, the rising Muslim tide will, one at a time, transform the members of the European Union into Islamic Republics under Islamic Shari’a law as Muslims become the majority population.

Already the wealth of traditional Europeans is being bled away and transferred to new Muslim immigrants and their children.   One mechanism for this is the European welfare state.   In Denmark, observed Bawer, only five percent of the population is Muslim, but this minority demands and receives 40 percent of the Danish government’s total welfare payments and other taxpayer-subsidized social benefits. . . .

Another method used to transfer wealth from Europeans to Eurabian Muslims is theft.   Some radical Mullahs have told their European congregations that Islamic Shari’a law justifies shoplifting and other forms of stealing from European merchants and companies as a way to make non-Muslims pay the discriminatory jizya tax that is extracted from non-Muslim citizens in Muslim countries. . . [I find this particularly amazing!]

Forty percent of Muslims living in Great Britain want Islamic Shari’a law introduced into parts of that country, according to a poll reported last month by the London Sunday Telegraph. . .

Ponte discusses Sharia law, lack of religious freedom, the Muhammad cartoons controversy,  press freedom and other matters.   After so much negativity, he allows himself to end on a hopeful note:

In time Islam could collapse, as Communism did.   More likely, this religion now living through its own dark 14^th Century might flower into a Renaissance and follow the enlightened model of Ataturk’s Turkey.   Modern Turkey is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a friend of Israel, and a candidate for European Union membership.   Women had the right to vote in Ataturk’s Turkey before they did in England.   Turkey could become the model for the future Islamic world, besting the medieval ideology of Islamism, narrow-mindedness, hate and violence preached by Osama bin Laden and his ilk.

A courageous European stand against that nest of Islamist vipers and their atomic eggs in Teheran would be a good place for Europe to demonstrate to itself and to the world that it has the will and skill to survive.

DANIEL PIPES SAYS ISRAEL MUST CONVINCE PALESTINIANS THAT THEIR DREAM OF ELIMINATING ISRAEL IS DEFUNCT

In an article  titled "Israel Shuns Victory,"  Daniel Pipes says, "As Israelis go to the polls, not one of the leading parties offers the option of winning the war against the Palestinians.   It’s a striking and dangerous lacuna."

He helpfully summarizes where each party stands on the question of the Palestinian conflict and concludes:  "All manage the conflict without resolving it.   All ignore the need to defeat Palestinian rejectionism.   All seek to finesse war rather than win it."   

And so, they experiment with compromise, unilateralism, enriching their enemies, and other schemes.   But as Douglas MacArthur observed, “In war, there is no substitute for victory.”   The Oslo diplomacy ended in dismal failure and so will all the other schemes that avoid the hard work of winning.  Israelis eventually must gird themselves to resuming the difficult, bitter, long, and expensive effort needed to convince the Palestinians and others that their dream of eliminating Israel is defunct.

Should Israelis fail to achieve this, then Israel itself will be defunct.

UPDATE:  Pipes elaborates his point in an April 5, 2006 article.   It concludes with the following paragraph, though the whole needs to be read.

Ironically, Israeli success in crushing the Palestinian war morale would be the best thing that ever happened to the Palestinians.  It would mean their finally giving up their foul dream of eliminating their neighbor and would offer a chance instead to focus on their own polity, economy, society, and culture.   To become a normal people, one whose parents do not encourage their children to become suicide terrorists, Palestinians need to undergo the crucible of defeat.

KEEP AN EYE ON THE RUSSIAN - CHINA ALLIANCE

I think Peter Brooks is absolutely right when he warns of the The Sino-Russian strategic romance.

PHI BETA CONS - A BLOG ON EDUCATION NOT TO BE MISSED

College and University education is coming under more and more scrutiny, and well it should.   Today I came across Phi Beta Cons, a National Review blog with the subtitle, "The Right Take on Higher Education."   It's excellent, and deserves frequent visits.  Below is a sampling taken almost at random.

High School and College
[Carol Iannone  03/27 01:40 PM]

I agree with both George Leef's Watered Down remarks (that the college degree has become a form of credentialling, more than a sign of real education) and Peter Wood's Majors for Minors remarks (that rather than encouraging all students to go to college, we should concentrate on giving them a good high-school education).    But as long as employers require the college degree, or at least some college credits, and these therefore do correlate with higher income, it seems the universities and colleges have assured themselves of a continuing stream of customers.   Perhaps as efforts to improve lower education yield results, the high-school degree will guarantee more capability and employers will see that they do not need to require (and often pay for) expensive college credits. . .

What started out as a well-intentioned effort to extend access to college to anyone who wanted it, had the unintended consequence of making college a practical necessity, thereby dumbing down both college and high-school curricula.   (As Wood remarks, knowing that college admission is almost guaranteed meant that high schools didn't have to work as hard to prepare students properly.)

LETTER WRITTEN BY THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA MUSLIM STUDENT WHO TRIED TO KILL OTHER UNC STUDENTS WITH HIS CAR

Click here to read the entire transcript of the letter Mohammed Taheri-Azar left in his apartment for police to find after he drove into nine people with an SUV in The Pit at UNC on March 3.  Below are a few excerpts:

I am writing this letter to inform you of my reasons for premeditating and attempting to murder citizens and residents of the United States of America on Friday, March 3, 2006 in the city of Chapel Hill, North Carolina by running them over with my automobile and stabbing them with a knife if the opportunities are presented to me by Allah. . . .

Due to the killing of believing men and women under the direction of the United States government, I have decided to take advantage of my presence on United States soil on Friday, March 3, 2006 to take the lives of as many Americans and American sympathizers as I can in order to punish the United States for their immoral actions around the world.

In the Qur'an, Allah states that the believing men and women have permission to murder anyone responsible for the killing of other believing men and women.   I know that the Qur'an is a legitimate and authoritative holy scripture since it is completely validated by modern science and also mathematically encoded with the number 19 beyond human ability.   After extensive contemplation and reflection, I have made the decision to exercise the right of violent retaliation that Allah has given me to the fullest extent to which I am capable at present.

I have chosen the particular location on the University campus as my target since I know there is a high likelihood that I will kill several people before being killed myself or jailed and sent to prison if Allah wills.    Allah's commandments are never to be questioned and all of Allah's commandments must be obeyed.   Those who violate Allah's commandments and purposefully follow human fabrication and falsehood as their religion will burn in fire for eternity in accordance with Allah's will.

His reasons for believing the Koran (paragraph 3 above) are "interesting."   I will want to revisit that bit of "apologetics" sometime in the future.

CHRISTIANITY IN AFRICA - A NEW FACE FOR THE CHURCH

Here's a New York Times article on the fast-growing (to put it mildly) African (Nigerian) Redeemed Christian Church of God.    (HT: Smart Christian)    As the article rightly points out, the heart and center of Christianity is no longer Europe.   

This is the face of 21st century Christianity: colossal, restless -- and African.   There is no better symbol of it than the Redeemed Church, and the insatiable ambitions of its guiding hand, Pastor Enoch Adejare Adeboye.   The savvy former mathematician leads the fastest-growing Christian movement from a continent that's rapidly putting its stamp on the faith around the world.

The Redeemed Church is a prime lesson in the shifting currents of Christianity.   Centuries after the Gospel was brought to sub-Saharan Africa by colonizers and missionaries, the faith is coming back to the West.   The forms are passionate and powerful.  . .

You want to see where Christianity is heading?'' said Campbell Shittu Momoh, an author on Nigerian religious affairs. ' 'Come look at Nigeria. It's already here.''

No one is clear how deeply the Pentecostal-inspired churches will change the faith. They only are sure that it's happening and Africa is the engine.  . . .

The demographic center of Christianity is now located near Timbuktu in northwest Africa and is drifting south each year.

The "prosperity gospel" this church preaches makes me uncomfortable, but I like the idea of a fresh fervency moving through the Church worldwide.   

CULTURAL ANALYSIS AND BLACK UNDERACHIEVEMENT

Orlando Patterson wrote an Op-Ed for the New York Times which caught my eye today since it is listed as the second most e-mailed NYT article in the last 24 hours.   Some excerpts:

SEVERAL recent studies have garnered wide attention for reconfirming the tragic disconnection of millions of black youths from the American mainstream.    But they also highlighted another crisis: the failure of social scientists to adequately explain the problem, and their inability to come up with any effective strategy to deal with it.

The main cause for this shortcoming is a deep-seated dogma that has prevailed in social science and policy circles since the mid-1960's: the rejection of any explanation that invokes a group's cultural attributes — its distinctive attitudes, values and predispositions, and the resulting behavior of its members — and the relentless preference for relying on structural factors like low incomes, joblessness, poor schools and bad housing.

Let me now skip down to some initial conclusions based on this "out-of-vogue" cultural analysis, which  nevertheless produces promising  and powerful explanatory power:

An anecdote helps explain why: Several years ago, one of my students went back to her high school to find out why it was that almost all the black girls graduated and went to college whereas nearly all the black boys either failed to graduate or did not go on to college. Distressingly, she found that all the black boys knew the consequences of not graduating and going on to college ("We're not stupid!" they told her indignantly).

SO why were they flunking out?   Their candid answer was that what sociologists call the "cool-pose culture" of young black men was simply too gratifying to give up.   For these young men, it was almost like a drug, hanging out on the street after school, shopping and dressing sharply, sexual conquests, party drugs, hip-hop music and culture, the fact that almost all the superstar athletes and a great many of the nation's best entertainers were black.

Not only was living this subculture immensely fulfilling, the boys said, it also brought them a great deal of respect from white youths.  This also explains the otherwise puzzling finding by social psychologists that young black men and women tend to have the highest levels of self-esteem of all ethnic groups, and that their self-image is independent of how badly they were doing in school.

I call this the Dionysian trap for young black men.   The important thing to note about the subculture that ensnares them is that it is not disconnected from the mainstream culture.   To the contrary, it has powerful support from some of America's largest corporations.   Hip-hop, professional basketball and homeboy fashions are as American as cherry pie.   Young white Americans are very much into these things, but selectively; they know when it is time to turn off Fifty Cent and get out the SAT prep book.

For young black men, however, that culture is all there is — or so they think. Sadly, their complete engagement in this part of the American cultural mainstream, which they created and which feeds their pride and self-respect, is a major factor in their disconnection from the socioeconomic mainstream.

All very interesting, certainly.  But there's a deeply sad and tragic element in this picture. . .

LARRY KUDLOW ON THE FRENCH ECONOMIC MALAISE

Larry Kudlow, a very sharp American economist, dissects the French economic mess in his short, to-the-point article.     Stanley Kurtz  of the "Corner" of National Review Online  suggests that for an overview of the situation in France, see “For the French, Joie de Vivre Fades Into Fear.  He also notes Claire Berlinski's article,  "Paris Burning,  Once Again."   Speaking further of her work, he says.

For the best overview of the trouble in Europe, I recommend Claire Berlinski’s wonderful new book, Menace in Europe: Why the Continent’s Crisis is America’s, Too. (I’ve got a blurb on the back of the book.) Berlinski’s book is a tremendous read: very smart, highly informed, and filled with riveting stories about real people.   Berlinski is tough as can be on the problem of European Islamism, yet also speaks knowledgeably about European Muslims she’s known and loved.   It’s rare to find this kind of clear-eyed criticism from an American who knows the continent deeply.  For a glimpse into Europe’s frightening future (and America’s too?) do read Claire Berlinski’s Menace in Europe.

THE MEDIA'S LIES ABOUT ISRAEL

For insights on news coverage on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, see The Media's Lies About Israel by Jamie Glazov.   Glazov interviews Stephanie Gutmann, the author of the new book The Other War: Israelis, Palestinians and the Struggle for Media Supremacy.

SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL CONDEMNS EVANGELICAL RALLY AGAINST TV SEX AND VIOLENCE

Brit Hume's "Grapevine" over at Fox News carries interesting stories, including this one today on evangelicals not welcome in San Francisco:

Twenty-five thousand evangelical Christians demonstrated against TV sex and violence in San Francisco this weekend.   But that didn't go down well with the city council, which passed a resolution condemning the rally as an "act of provocation" to negatively influence what the council called America's "most tolerant" city.

The group, called "Battle Cry for a Generation," uses the Bible to counter what it calls corrupting influences in the media.   But the San Francisco Chronicle  reports that about 50 counter-protesters denounced the gathering as a "fascist mega-pep rally."   And San Francisco's State Representative Mark Leno called the Christians loud, obnoxious, and disgusting, adding, "they should get out of San Francisco."

I wasn't there, so I don't know the character of the demonstration, but the San Francisco city council is really "something else."

UPDATE:  I have learned that the gathering was sponsored by Teen Mania's battle cry movement.

MUSLIM SHARIA LAW OF DEATH TO APOSTATES HANGS OVER THE WORLD EVEN IF ABDUL RAHMAN IS RELEASED

On Islam's decree, "death for apostates", one needs to consult Andrew G. Bostom's definitive article in The American Thinker.    (HT: Michelle Malkin)    One must recognize that Islam's demanding death for apostates  is not unique to Afghanistan.   As Bostom aptly states,

Death for apostacy is part and parcel of Islamic scripture and tradition.  When Afghanistan’s leading clerics endorse his death, they are on solid ground.

He cites chapter and verse of the Koran and learned Koranic commentaries through the ages, including the opinion of the Hadith and contemporary authorities.   

Thus even if Mr. Rahman gets a “dispensation” by the Karzai Government —for “mental health”, or other reasons, unfortunately, he is and remains guilty as per Afghan religious leaders, and Shari’a.   As such, once released from prison, should any pious Afghan Muslim kill him (heeding the calls of local Afghan clerics), according to the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, (which prevails in Afghanistan), specifically the important legal text The Hidaya by al-Marghiniani (d. 1197),

If any person kills an apostate….Nothing [i.e., no punishment]...is incurred by the slayer. . . .

For a decade, three courageous, prescient scholars—Ibn Warraq , David Littman, and Bat Ye’or —have warned about the grave dangers posed by Shari’a-based “human rights” constructs, such as the  1990 Cairo Declaration (i.e., the so-called Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, to which all member states [now 57] of the Organization of the Islamic Conference—including “secular” Turkey—are signatories).   Indeed the intrepid Senegalese jurist Adama Dieng (a Muslim, who subsequently became a United Nations special rapporteur), then serving as secretary-general to the International Commission of Jurists,  declared forthrightly in February 1992  that the Cairo Declaration, under the rubric of the Shari’a,

...gravely threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which the international human rights instruments are based;  introduces, in the name of the defense of human rights, an intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women; reveals a deliberately restrictive character in regard to certain fundamental rights and freedoms, to the point that certain essential provisions are below the legal standard in effect in a number of Muslim countries; [and] confirms the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, that attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.

Bostom quotes Samuel Zwemer's 1924 book, The Law of Apostasy in Islam, as still relevant today.  Zwemer wrote that

" . . . the conscience and the faith of the most sincere and upright Moslems are bound up with the Koran and the Traditions.   Civilization cannot eradicate deep-seated convictions.   Rifles and ironclads, the cafe, the theatre, written constitutions, representative parliaments; none of these reach far below the surface.   A truer freedom…than the one supplied by their own faith, must come before Moslems can enter into the larger liberty which we enjoy.

In other words, Muslims who remain loyal to traditional  Islamic ethics and theology cannot be moved into a "freedom of religion" mode very easily.   One wonders how many Islamic background converts to Christian faith will suffer martyrdom in the years ahead, and whether there will ever be any loosening of the dire penalties demanded by the Koran.  It is reported by several sources that an astounding number of Muslims in various countries are experiencing "dreams and visions" of the risen Christ, thus precipitating a desire to learn more about this man whom Christians recognize as Lord and Savior of the world.   At the same time, European Islamic enclaves continue to push for the enshrinement of local Sharia  law.   To my mind, the Islamofacist threat is the 21st century's equivalence of the Communist - Free World struggle of the previous century.    Only in many ways it is more severe...   

AFGHANISTAN CRISIS DEEPENS OVER DEATH PENALTY FOR CHRISTIAN CONVERT

What are we to make of the on-going crisis in Afghanistan over Abdul Rahman, the Muslim convert to Christianity?    Supreme Court Chief Justice Fazl Hadi Shinwari, once told our National Public Radio that it is his duty as a judge to “behead” those who do not conform to Islamic law.    Western nations are lodging their protests.  Here is a case where American foreign policy and Afghanistan's independence collide.  How will it be resolved?

Nina Shea, the director of Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, has this to say:   

But this is about more than Mr. Rahman.   This will be a persistent, recurring problem under Afghanistan’s sharia apostasy and blasphemy laws.  The administration also needs to do more to ensure the reform Afghanistan’s judiciary.    President Karzai must be encouraged to wrest it from the control of Islamists like Supreme Court Chief Justice Fazl Hadi Shinwari, who once told our National Public Radio that it is his duty as a judge to “behead” those who do not conform to Islamic law.   Americans continue to give billions of dollars, and sacrifice their lives to support the Afghan government.   It not only serves compelling humanitarian interests to use this leverage now, but it would be a betrayal of America’s deepest national values not to.

She is urging the U.S. to initiate pressure on the Afghan government.   But the government is receiving equally strong pressure from influential Muslim leaders to resist such pressure.    I see this as a genuine crisis in American foreign policy.  It is not only Afghanistan about which this issue revolves, but Iraq as well.  "Democracy" as a panacea, as a "cure-all" for what ails the Middle East, is apparently stumbling over the rock of Islamic theology and ethics.

The BBC reports "Mood Hardens Against Afghan Convert."   The report includes such quotes as the following:

The Prophet Muhammad has said several times that those who convert from Islam should be killed if they refuse to come back," says Ansarullah Mawlafizada, the trial judge.

"Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance, kindness and integrity.  That is why we have told him if he regrets what he did, then we will forgive him," he told the BBC News website.   [Hmmm...  peace, tolerance, kindness -- but only for those who convert!!  Death to all others!   That's a unique definition of  'peace, tolerance, kindness"!!]

"We will not let anyone interfere with our religious practices," declared cleric Inayatullah at Kabul's Pulakasthy mosque, one of the city's largest.

"What Rahman has done is wrong and he must be punished."

"What is wrong with Islam that he should want to convert?" asks an agitated Abdul Zahid Payman.

"The courts should punish him and he should be put to death."

"Who is America to tell us what to do? If Karzai listens to them there will be jihad (holy war)."

The BBC commentator explains:

Afghanistan's constitution, written in 2004, enshrines the country as an Islamic state under which no law can contravene Islam.

But it also protects personal freedom and respects international human rights conventions.

It is a deliberately ambiguous document which tries to paper over the cracks and contradictions of Afghanistan," says one Afghan law professor privately.

But now the contradictions have risen to the surface.    [Yes, exactly.  See my post for March 23, 2006)

IS THERE A CLASH OF CIVILIZATiONS? YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!

Western apologists for Islam have their work cut out for them.   If the world didn't know it before, (thanks to the ubiquitous disinformation of "multiculturaists"), the world now knows that Islam demands that a convert to Christianity be killed.   This is nothing new.  This is no novel development.    This is Islam's history.    Now the "religion of peace" can be more clearly grasped in its macabre, vicious, totalitarian reality.   Read Michelle Malkin's post below [my underlinings].   It will make you sick.    The unmasking of Islam (especially for those who have been deluded) has apparently begun . . .   

THE RELIGION OF PIECES

By Michelle Malkin   ·   March 24, 2006 12:39 AM

WAKE-UP CALL (via AP/WaPo):

Senior Muslim clerics demanded Thursday that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity be executed, warning that if the government caves in to Western pressure and frees him, they will incite people to "pull him into pieces."

..."Rejecting Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This man must die," said cleric Abdul Raoulf, who is considered a moderate and was jailed three times for opposing the Taliban before the hard-line regime was ousted in 2001.

...On Wednesday, authorities said Rahman is suspected of being mentally ill and would undergo psychological examinations to see whether he is fit to stand trial.

But three Sunni preachers and a Shiite one interviewed by The Associated Press in four of Kabul's most popular mosques said they do not believe Rahman is insane.

"He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque.

"The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed," Hamidullah said.

Raoulf, who is a member of the country's main Islamic organization, the Afghan Ulama Council, agreed. "The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled."

"Cut off his head!" he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside Herati Mosque. "We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left."

...Said Mirhossain Nasri, the top cleric at Hossainia Mosque, one of the largest Shiite places of worship in Kabul, said Rahman must not be allowed to leave the country.

"If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can too," he said. "We must set an example. ... He must be hanged."

..."We are a small country and we welcome the help the outside world is giving us. But please don't interfere in this issue," Nasri said. "We are Muslims and these are our beliefs. This is much more important to us than all the aid the world has given us."

Australian PM John Howard speaks for me [Michelle Malkin]:

The case of an Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity is ``appalling,'' Australian Prime Minister John Howard said.

``We're putting the lives of Australian soldiers on the line and this sort of thing is allowed,'' Howard told Melbourne radio station 3AW today. ``When I saw the report about this I felt sick.''

AFGHANISTAN AND FREEDOM OF RELIGION

It's obvious that the Afghanistan government will try to wiggle out of their public relations nightmare by declaring the Christian convert from Islam, Abdul Rahman,  mentally incompetent to stand trial.  That will prove nothing.   The lack of religious freedom remains, and the penalty also remains (death).  Professor John S. Ford of the UCLA School of medicine inveighs against using psychiatry as a tool of social engineering.    (HT: Michelle Malkin)

The fact is that the lack of religious freedom in the "new" Afghanistan was an issue the United States didn't want to address explicitly during the writing of the constitution.   Those who pointed out the problematic future of that approach, like Andrew C. McCarthy  and Paul Marshall, were pooh-poohed.   Now we're living with the short-sightedness (dare we say incompetence?) of our U.S. government.    A kind of benign political correctness and naivete concerning the power and potency of religion (including, and especially Islam) bedevils the State department and other areas of "enlightened opinion."   This current crisis could have been avoided.

Andrew McCArthy concludes his essay:

You reap what you sow. What is happening in Afghanistan (and in Iraq) is precisely what we bought on to when we actively participated in the drafting of constitutions which — in a manner antithetical to the development of true democracy — ignored the imperative to insulate the civil authority from the religious authority, installed Islam as the state religion, made sharia a dominant force in law, and expressly required that judges be trained in Islamic jurisprudence.  To have done all those things makes outrage at today’s natural consequences ring hollow.

We can pull our heads up from the sand now and say, “No, no, no! We’re nice people. We didn’t mean it that way. That’s too uncivilized to contemplate.”   But the inescapable truth is: the United States made a calculated decision that it wasn’t worth our while to fight over Islamic law (indeed, we encouraged it as part of the political solution).   People who objected (like moi) were told that we just didn’t grasp the cultural dynamic at work. I beg to differ — we understood it only too well.

STEM CELL RESEARCH, PATENTS, AND MONEY!! THIS EXPLAINS A LOT!

What drives the push for embryonic stem-cell research, especially when adult stem cells show so much more promise?  One word:  MONEY!!    As the St. Paul Pioneer-Press headline put it: "Embryonic stem cells help patents, not patients."

Chuck Colson in his Breakpoint commentary, "Following the Money: Embryonic Stem Cells and Big Bucks" refers to Jean Swenson's observation that what drives the push for embryonic stem-cell research is that it

"provides greater research and patent potentials for scientists, research institutions, and biotech industry."   In other words, it's potentially far more lucrative than research involving adult stem cells. . .

A 1980 federal law allows scientists to “patent the results of publicly funded research.” They can “form biotech companies to develop patents” or “sell their patents to biotech or pharmaceutical firms.” In either case, they have a substantial financial incentive to depict embryonic stem-cell research in the most positive way possible.

That explains it!  That explains why adult-stem research and its amazing breakthroughs get minimal press coverage.  "Follow the money" proves once again to be an indispensable maxim towards a deeper grasp of what's going on. 

Mathematician John D. Barrow wins the Templeton Prize

On March 15th, Professor John D. Barrow of Cambridge was named the winner of this year’s Templeton Prize. The prize is awarded for “progress towards research or discoveries about spiritual realities.”  Barrow is famous for his work on the "Anthropic Principle."

"Simply stated, the Anthropic Principle is an account of the “seemingly incredible coincidences that allow for our presence” in the Universe. The existence of carbon-based life, which is what humans are, is dependent on a series of independent variables, what Astronomer Royal Martin Rees calls “just six numbers.” These include “the particular energy state of the electron to the exact level of the weak nuclear force,” to name but two.

If any of these values were off by even an infinitesimal amount, carbon-based life like us would be impossible—so would science, which is the act of observing nature. Barrows argues that the universe that “emerged out of the big bang . . . was already governed by laws that were fine-tuned to encourage the rise of carbon-based life forms.”

This is what prompted Freeman Dyson, “the best physicist never to win a Nobel Prize,” to say that “it appears that the universe knew we were coming.”

Not surprisingly, this kind of talk makes today’s evolutionary establishment—orthodox materialists, after all—nervous because it suggests that perhaps blind chance and purposelessness don’t govern the cosmos. This prompted evolutionists to look for an alternative to the Anthropic Principle, one that would keep intelligence and purpose out of the picture.

Charles Colson's Breakpoint article, from which the above quotes were taken, needs to be read in full.  It's excellent.  See especially the links at the end of Colson's article.

U.S. POLICY FAILS TO GRASP THE WORLDWIDE POPULARITY OF ISLAMIST THEOLOGY

Daniel Pipes, a man whose analysis of things Middle Eastern and Muslim I respect highly, is not excited about a a major foreign policy document issued last week by the White House, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America.   It is mandated by law to appear every four years.

Among various things that worry him, Pipes says

The report minimizes the threat of radical Islam via the fiction that a “proud religion” has been “twisted and made to serve an evil.”   Not so: Islamism is a deeply grounded and widely popular version of Islam, as shown by election results from Afghanistan to Algeria.   Reliable opinion polls are lacking from majority-Muslim countries but repeated surveys in the United Kingdom give some idea of the harrowingly extremist attitudes of its Muslim population: 5 percent of them support the July 7 terrorist attacks in London and say more such attacks are justified; 20 percent have sympathy with the feelings and motives of the July 7 attackers and believe that suicide attacks against the military in Britain can be justified.  These results are probably typical of Muslim populations globally, as recent polls of Indonesians and Palestinians confirms.

Policy built on illusion can only produce disappointment, if not tragedy.  One could wish the President's optimism and idealism were based on a better grasp of Islamism's widespread popularity and its grounding in Muslim theology.

SOCIALISM - AT THE ROOT OF THE STUDENT RIOTS IN FRANCE

Dennis Prager sees the French student riots as the fruit of socialism.   And it's hard to disagree with his conclusion.    He asks what the French riots are all about, and answers: 

It is all about a new law in France that allows a company to fire a person under the age of 26, without cause, within two years of being hired.

Wow. Imagine that. You might get fired from your first job.

As it happens, the whole point of the law was to encourage companies to hire young people. The unemployment rate among young people in France is 23 percent. And in many suburbs, it is double that. Meanwhile, French companies are understandably loath to hire 22-year-olds when they cannot fire them except "for cause," which under union rules means something like committing mass murder in the workplace. 

What these massive demonstrations reveal is the narcissism, laziness and irresponsibility inculcated by socialist societies.

Enough generations of socialist policies have now passed for us to judge their effects.  They are bleak.   Socialism undermines the character of a nation and of its citizens. In simpler words, socialism makes people worse.

Read the whole article.  It's a great summary of all that's wrong with socialism, but so few seem to grasp.  Economics 101

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR - HOW SIGNIFICANT WERE HER DECISIONS?

In his March 2006 letter, Dr. James Dobson offers a partial list of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's swing decisions.  Wow.   Do take a look at the list below.   As Dobson put it:  "She helped hand down some of the worst decisions in the nation's history."

Here is a portion of the record Justice O'Connor leaves:

1. O'Connor voted to strike down prayer at graduation ceremonies in Lee v. Weisman.   The decision was 5-4.2
2. O'Connor voted to strike down Nebraska's law criminalizing partial-birth abortion (Stenberg v. Carhart).  That terrible procedure — by which brains were sucked out of un-anesthetized and often healthy, late-term infants — continues across the country today.   The blood of thousands of these dismembered babies will forever be on the hands of five justices, with O'Connor providing the swing vote, 5-4.3   She will live with the consequences of that ruling until she, and all of us, have to give an account to the God of the universe whose Word states: "They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters . . . Therefore the LORD was angry with his people and abhorred his inheritance" (Psalm 106:38, 40, NIV).
3. O'Connor also voted against unborn babies by upholding the basic premise of Roe v. Wade in the landmark case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood.   Again, the decision was 5-4.4   One more vote for life could have saved millions.
4. This past June, O'Connor voted to prohibit the public display of the Ten Commandments in two separate cases.5  Both decisions were 5-4, with O'Connor serving as the swing vote.   In the first case, she voted to prohibit the display of the Commandments in a Kentucky courthouse; and in the second, she even opposed the display of the Ten Commandments when there was no intended religious significance implied by the monuments.
5. O'Connor decided against the people of Colorado, who had voted for a referendum to abolish special rights for homosexuals in their state constitution.   Their wishes were summarily overturned by a 5-4 decision in Romer v. Evans.6 Coloradoans were chastised as bigots by the Supreme Court in that ruling.

We can hope that her replacement, Justice Samuel Alito, will help move the court away from the "judicial tyranny" whereby, as Dr. James Dobson puts it, "unelected and unaccountable justices and judges have grabbed enormous power not authorized by the Constitution."

AFGHAN CHRISTIAN FACES DEATH FOR CONVERSION

I have lifted the post below from Andy McCarthy at the Corner of National Review Online.    This is truly serious.  Maybe now the world (and our State Department??) will wake up to the fact that the "peaceful religion of Islam" mandates the death penalty for a Muslim who converts to Christianity.   What will the Afghanistan court system do with this case?    The consequential big question:  has the United States failed to provide "freedom of religion" for countries it has supposedly liberated?    If so, then we must question how real and genuine is the new-found freedom.   I predict the issue of Islam's mandating the death penalty for converts leaving Islam will prove a defining issue for Islam and the world's attitude towards it in the years ahead.   It should also raise a few belated questions among unthinking "multiculturalists" as well.

        IN THE NEW AFGHANISTAN:  DEATH FOR APOSTASY [Andy McCarthy]

Back in mid-August, I was the spoil-sport raining on the Corner parade over the new Iraqi constitution. With key assistance from the U.S. State Department, that constitution installed Islam as the official state religion and made sharia a primary source of law. It also contained some human rights provisions, which is what its enthusiasts said we should be focusing on rather than all that nettlesome religio-cultural stuff.

At the time, I was reminded that we had birthed the same kind of constitution in Afghanistan, and that this was purportedly working out very well. Specifically, the Afghan constitution states that “no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.” But not to worry. The State Department maintained that it also contained strong human rights provisions and was thus becoming a framework for the emergence of a peaceful and vibrant democracy.

Today comes this, from Fox News, via the Associated Press:

Afghan Man Faces Death for Allegedly Converting to Christianity

KABUL, Afghanistan — An Afghan man who allegedly converted from Islam to Christianity is being prosecuted in a Kabul court and could be sentenced to death, a judge said Sunday.

The defendant, Abdul Rahman, was arrested last month after his family went to the police and accused him of becoming a Christian, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada told the Associated Press in an interview. Such a conversion would violate the country's Islamic laws.

Rahman, who is believed to be 41, was charged with rejecting Islam when his trial started last week, the judge said.

During the hearing, the defendant allegedly confessed that he converted from Islam to Christianity 16 years ago when he was 25 and working as a medical aid worker for Afghan refugees in neighboring Pakistan, Mawlavezada said.

Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which states that any Muslim who rejects their religion should be sentenced to death.

After over four years of American guidance, assistance and sacrifice, here is how the Afghan judge explained the situation: "'We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law,' the judge said. 'It is an attack on Islam. ... The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty.'"  (Italics mine.)

For his part, the Afghan prosecutor, too, explained that he had been eminently reasonable: "The prosecutor, Abdul Wasi, said the case was the first of its kind in Afghanistan. He said that he had offered to drop the charges if Rahman changed his religion back to Islam, but the defendant refused."

Now I ask you, does it get any more moderate than that?

CHRISTIANITY ON UPSWING IN JAPAN

The most recent Gallup poll of Japanese youth and adults produced fascinating results, not the least of which is that 7% of Japanese youth consider themselves Christians.   Few would have predicted that high a figure.  Sadly, Japanese teens in general seem far more nihilistic than American youth.

While 22 percent of U.S. teens in previous Gallup surveys often wondered why they existed, the number for Japanese teens was 85 percent.   Similarly, while 76 percent of U.S. teens always see a reason for their being on Earth, only 13 percent of Japanese teens agreed with the statement.   A surprisingly high 11 percent of Japanese teens wished they had never been born, a figure that comes in at 3 percent for U.S. teens.

HINDU PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS IN INDIA ACCELERATING

As this report indicates, persecution of Christians is breaking out all over India in an unprecedented way.

Hindu extremists have launched dozens of attacks against Christians and their churches since January.

GFA president K.P. Yohannan says at the root of the violence is growing concern by Hindu nationalists about Christian outreach to India's 300 million Dalits, an outcaste group whose members are often referred to as "untouchables."

Yohannan says Hindu nationalists want India to be what they would call a "pure Hindu" nation.  "What they're trying to do," he explains, "is say, 'If you leave the Hindu fold or if you become Christian, we're going to treat you badly, and we are going to go after you.'"  In reality, he notes, what these extremists are doing "is a kind of ethnic cleansing, [warning people to] stay away from Christians and don't become Christians."

One example of the accelerating persecution was reported here and here this week. 

Police officers in northwestern India’s Rajasthan state arrested Rev. Samuel Thomas, president of Emmanuel Mission International (EMI) and son of Archbishop M.A. Thomas, EMI’s founder earlier today. Both men had gone underground after Hindu extremists accused them of distributing a controversial book in which the militants alleged that their religion and deities had been denigrated.

EMI’s orphanages, schools and a hospital have been targeted for closure by a wide array of Hindu extremists in the past few months, including some who have offered a reward of $26,000 for the heads of both Thomas and his father.

Tensions increased earlier this week when Rajasthan state’s welfare minister, Madan Dilawar, said he should be “stoned to death” if his government effort to take over EMI’s properties failed.

PEACE ACTIVISTS - EFFECTIVE AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST OR APPEASERS OF EVIL?

Cal Thomas reflects on the death of "peace activist" Tom Fox and says "the likelihood that the presence of Fox and his colleagues [who had gone to Iraq] would change the attitude or behavior of their captors was zero to none."  Thomas says,

    That the "peace activists" believed their brand of Christianity would trump the fanatical Muslims who regard them as infidels and worthy of death meant that Fox and the others would either be used for propaganda purposes by the enemies of freedom, or made to sacrifice their lives like animals on an ancient altar in the furtherance of the fanatics' dream of a theocratic state.  In this instance they were used for both . . .

    Strange thing about these peace movements: they rearely mobilize to oppose the killing, torture and imprisonments practiced by dictators.  It is only when their own country attempts to end the oppression that the activists become active against America, not the initatiors of evil...  Peace happens when evil is vanquished.

In his articleThomas tells the story of Charles M. Brown, who came to see himself and others as part of Baath Party propaganda.  Thomas refers to Brown's essay which appeared in the summer 2003 issue of Middle East Quarterly titled "Confessions of an Anti-Sanctions Activist."

Thomas concludes, rightly in my judgment,

Peace "activism" may make its practitioners feel good, or validate their belief that they are doing the will of God, but evil cannot be accomodated.   Evil must be defeated if peace on earth is to exist.  That Fox and his colleagues could not, or would not see this, is most tragic of all. 

JUDGE GINSBURG DEFENDS CITING FOREIGN LAW IN DECIDING CASES UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION

Mark Levin reports  that "Last month, Justice Ginsburg gave a speech in South Africa defending the Supreme Court's (and her) use of foreign law in adjudicating cases under our Constitution."  His article offers a superb deconstruction of her speech and its arguments.   He concludes:

What Ginsburg and other activists don’t appear to realize is that they are undermining the legitimacy of the judiciary by their refusal to accept the limited role of judges in our constitutional system.

Those following the Supreme court are aware that, as one article summarized, 

"Justices, in some of their most hotly contested rulings, have looked overseas.  Last year, for example, justices barred the executions of juvenile killers on a 5-4 vote.  Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said then that "it is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty."

In an angry dissent to that decision, Justice Antonin Scalia said capital punishment policy should be set by states, not "the subjective views of five members of this court and like-minded foreigners."

Ginsburg said, "Critics in Congress and in the media misperceive how and why U.S. courts refer to foreign and international court decisions."   She said those decisions are used for guidance only.

In addition to which...    it's been noted that Justice Ginsburg was recently caught snoozing  during oral arguments.   Hmmm... 

(See below for Judge Scalia's conviction that judges have  no corner on morality.)

SCALIA - JUDGES HAVE NO CORNER ON MORALITY

Here are some excerpts from a news report on Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia 's recent remarkable comments:

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia railed against the era of the "judge-moralist," saying judges are no better qualified than "Joe Sixpack" to decide moral questions such as abortion and gay marriage.

"Anyone who thinks the country's most prominent lawyers reflect the views of the people needs a reality check," he said during a speech to New England School of Law students and faculty at a Law Day banquet on Wednesday night. . .

"Judicial hegemony" has replaced the public's right to decide important moral questions, he said. Instead, he said, politics has been injected in large doses to the process of nominating and confirming federal judges.

Noting that the Senate confirmed his high court nomination by a 98-0 vote, Scalia said, "You could not get a judge with my views confirmed to the Court of Appeals today."

He said code words such as "mainstream" and "moderate" are now used to describe liberal judicial nominees.

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE... A BIT OF HUMOR

I received the following joke from a friend who in turn received it from someone else.  It originated at   www.mikeysFunnies.com

Years ago, I was a big city boy preaching in a small country town. I wanted
to learn everything "country" so that I could fit in. As I was searching for
Widow Jones' farm, I got lost on the back roads. I saw a farmer walking into
his barn so I stopped for directions.

He was just beginning to milk his cow but took time out to tell me how to
get to the Jones' farm. "By the way, " I asked, "Do you know what time it
is?" He leaned in to the udder of the cow and said, "12:30."

I started to leave but I just HAD to know. I told him, "Hey, I've just moved
from the city and I really want to know the ways of the country. How could
you tell what time it was?"

"Sit right here on this stool, son." I did.

"Now, grab hold of that udder." I did. (Before this, my closest experience
to this was grabbing a milk carton).

"Now lean into the cow and lift up on the udder." I did.

"Lean over and look right over there on that wall. See that's a clock. When
the little hand is on the 12..."

[forwarded by Chris Vidacovich]

I'VE BEEN AWAY . . .

I've been away for several days and not been able to do any posting for awhile.   As it stands at present, it remains to be seen whether I can do as much as I would like during the next few weeks as I have pressing demands on my time.   We shall see...   

ONE OF THE FINEST PIECES OF APOLOGETICS & GOSPEL PRESENTATIONS I HAVE EVER READ

Update 3/22/08 - Here's my post on Keller's new book with links to his video lecture on "Belief in an Age of Skepticism" delivered at the Veritas Forum at UC-Berkeley.  Simply magnificent!

-This essay by Tim Keller, Senior Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, is simply beautiful.   Some days ago I noticed that a blogger found Keller especially helpful, but I had never actually read anything by Keller or even heard of him before.   Tonight I am indebted to Andrew Jackson's blog for pointing me to this particular article.   

The article's title is Deconstructing Defeater Beliefs: Leading the Secular to Christ.  I can't think of a better use of time for anyone than to read -- and absorb -- this article.    Having now read it myself, the absorbing part is what I am setting myself to do.

SOMEONE SENT ME ONE OF THOSE E-MAILS. . .

Someone sent me one of those e-mail items making the rounds in cyberspace. This one, on “values,” I think worth passing along. I’ve condensed it a good bit, retaining those items dealing with the value of time.

    To realize
    The value of four years:
    Ask a graduate.

    To realize
    The value of one month:
    Ask a mother
    who has given birth to
    A premature baby.

    To realize
    The value of one week:
    Ask an editor of a weekly newspaper.

    To realize
    The value of one minute:
    Ask a person
    Who has missed the train, bus or plane.

    To realize
    The value of one-second:
    Ask a person
    Who has survived an accident.

    Treasure every moment you have.

MARCH 10th - NDAAP DAY GOES UNOBSERVED

Signs of the times:  in  past years March 10th has been a Big Thing -- the "National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers" (NDAAP).    This year, however,  its previous supporters (Planned Parenthood, ACLU, NARAL, NOW, National Abortion Federation and others) didn't mention it.   What does this mean?   A guess:  the fizz and pop of popular support for abortion is over. 

BEING OBJECTIVE TOWARDS OURSELVES AND SUBJECTIVE TOWARDS OTHERS

Like many others, I have posted meaningful quotes in my Bible.    Also, like many others, from time to time I actually read them!    The following is a quote, positioned innocently between the Old and New Testaments, that has sat quietly challenging me for over 25 years.

The majority of men are subjective towards themselves and objective towards all others, terribly objective sometimes – but the real task is in fact to be objective towards oneself and subjective towards all others.”      -  Soren Kierkegaard, Journal 

DAVID HOROWITZ TAKES ON LEFTIST PROFESSORS AT DUKE

Conservative activist David Horowitz spoke at Duke University earlier this week.   Horowitz, the strategist behind Students for Academic Freedom and the Academic Bill of Rights, seeks to offset the unbalanced leftist orientation that prevails on university campuses.   Over 500 students came out to hear Horowitz.  The turnout proved to be one of the largest student sponsored events in recent Duke history.  Ben Johnson's informative article covers the speech and the antics of Horowitz's opponents.   The article offers a valuable and illuminating overview of the leftist politics so prevalent on campuses today and that certainly typifies Duke.

THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH - INTO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY

On the subject of euthanasia, Wesley J. Smith gives us an  update on  current trends to jettison the Hippocratic Oath's strictures against the same.  Whereas formerly a doctor took the oath saying "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect,” now we have doctors and "ethicists" [e.g. Dr. Sherwin Nuland, author of the bestselling book How We Die] advocating that doctors be provided “thorough training in [euthanasia] techniques."   

Surveying the revision taking place in medical oaths, Smith notes that

"Cornell Medical School published a rewritten oath for its graduating doctors to take.   Gone, of course, is the proscription against performing abortions.   No surprise there: Doctors ceased foreswearing that particular procedure decades ago (although it is interesting to note that recent newspaper stories complain that very few doctors are willing to perform abortions).

But now, Cornell has cast aside two other crucial affirmations of the Oath: First, the prohibition against euthanasia has been erased ("I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect), and second, Cornell’s oath does not require its graduates to avoid sexual relations with their patients.

Given the nature of medical "ethics" and "oaths" today, a cautious and even suspicious view of doctors need not necessarily indicate paranoia.   Read the whole article.

 

TOP ISLAMIC CHAPLAIN IN HATE-FILLED TIRADE

What are we to make of Muslim leaders in the United States who instill hatred in their followers towards the United States?  The New York Post carries the following story.

March 9, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - The head of Islamic chaplains in the New York City Department of Correction said in a recent speech that the "greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House," Jews control the media, and Muslims are being tortured in Manhattan jails.

The outlandish remarks were made by one of the city's most prominent Islamic leaders, Imam Umar Abdul-Jalil, the executive director of ministerial services for the city Department of Correction. He spoke at a conference of Islamic leaders in Tucson, Ariz., and was secretly recorded by the counterterrorism organization The Investigative Project. . .

"His comments betray an effort to instill hatred of the United States as the enemy of Islam by making a series of false allegations portraying the U.S. as an evil country," said anti-terror expert Steve Emerson, director of The Investigative Project.

"This is a man who is supposed to be spreading words of reconciliation and moderation as head Islamic chaplain - not inciting followers to believe that the U.S. government and 'Zionists' are plotting a conspiracy of persecution against Muslims," Emerson added.

HT: worldnetdaily.com

CAIR: ISLAMISTS FOOLING THE ESTABLISHMENT

The article I've linked to is titled  CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment.   It's disheartening to see how blind the 'establishment' can sometimes be.   The article tells you all you need to know about CAIR - the Council on American-Islamic Relations.   Daniel Pipes, one of the co-authors, is a particularly well-known, distinguished student of Islamic current affairs.  Some excerpts:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), headquartered in Washington, is perhaps the best-known and most controversial Muslim organization in North America.   CAIR presents itself as an advocate for Muslims’ civil rights and the spokesman for American Muslims...    But there is another side to CAIR that has alarmed many people in positions to know.  The Department of Homeland Security refuses to deal with it.  Senator Charles Schumer (Democrat, New York) describes it as an organization “which we know has ties to terrorism.”[2] Senator Dick Durbin (Democrat, Illinois ) observes that CAIR is “unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect.”   Steven Pomerantz, the FBI’s former chief of counterterrorism, notes that “CAIR, its leaders, and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups.” . . .    Tashbih Sayyed of the Council for Democracy and Tolerance calls CAIR “the most accomplished fifth column” in the United States. And Stephen Schwartz of the Center on Islamic Pluralism writes that “CAIR should be considered a foreign-based subversive organization, comparable in the Islamist field to the Soviet-controlled Communist Party, USA.”  ...  CAIR has consistently shown itself to be on the wrong side of the war on terrorism, protecting, defending, and supporting both accused and even convicted radical Islamic terrorists.

Read the entire article.   It sheds light on an organization that employs intimidation and deceit, but succeeds in fooling many.

THE SOUTH DAKOTA BAN ON ABORTIONS IS SHORT-SIGHTED

Not all pro-life folks are enthusiastic about South Dakota's ban on abortions.  The editors at NRO, for example, put up an editorial  today pointing out the downside of that ban.  As things stand now, it will be struck down and Roe further strengthened.    The NRO editorial needs to be read and digested.  The next quote is not enough.  Read the whole editorial.

Pro-lifers have gained ground over the last decade and a half by pursuing a savvy incremental strategy.   That strategy puts the end of Roe within sight.   If Roe falls, pro-lifers should then try to persuade the public in each state to prohibit most abortions.   After that, they should try to persuade them to prohibit abortion in the case of rape and incest.   To try to collapse this multi-stage process into an instant is to ignore social and political circumstances, and to throw away patiently and painfully won political victories for the sake of an emotional gesture.

RESISTING THE "MONOLOGUES"

Tim Graham over at NRO posts the following note.   The WashPost puts female conservative opponents of the "Vagina Monologues" on the front page of the Style section today.  It's not bad, but it does have the same old habit of constantly employing the "conservative" label, and "Vagina" author Eve Ensler is a what?  No liberal label.  She professes to be "baffled" by opposition, because she's pro-sex.  She's good at making straw men.  It's better than having to deal with the real men.

The article reports that "The Vagina Monologues" play appears on hundreds of campuses every February and March.  It has been performed in more than 81 countries and raised more than $30 million over the years.  I am glad to hear that a solid, effective response has come forth  May those involved be empowered to stir up genuine debate!

WOMEN WHO MAKE THE WORLD BETTER

For the UN's International Women's Day, NRO highlights  "women the world should know — some activists, some struggling for their lives and the lives of others, some living lives of quiet grace; most are living, others are memorialized here."     This is a very inspiring page since it includes truly courageous women, "women who make the world better," women who do not necessarily make the news.  If you are like me, you will respond more than once with a lump in your throat to the vignettes presented here.   Don't miss this link!

C.S. LEWIS -- HERE IS A ONE-STOP RESOURCE SITE

Here's  a wonderful listing of C.S. Lewis quotes, bibliographies, and articles about C.S. Lewis.   How convenient and helpful!  And speaking of C.S. Lewis, here's a site that gives us an audio recording of C.S. Lewis speaking over the BBC using the text that would later become part of Mere Christianity.   The site also presents C.S. Lewis in his own voice reading the introduction to The Great Divorce.

Tilda Swinton played the White Witch in the latest movie version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.   In an interview she offers her perspective on how she sought to portray her character saying,

It's not always necessarily the most frightening thing for small children to be shouted at.  Children shout and get hot themselves all the time, and in my experience it's actually a relief if you shout back at them.  Whereas the thing that's really unfathomable for children is a kind of coldness and emotional detachment; that's the thing they don't do.  So it occurred to me it would be more frightening to be faced with something really unaffectable.  You can't affect the Witch; you can't appeal to her; she's incapable of any compassion. Someone who gets angry is emotional; I thought it would be fun to shake up that stereotype.