On Coffee and Slavery

What does one of the latest statements on slavery have to tell us about our knowledge of history? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Those who know me know I can’t stand coffee. I am a tea guy. I remain loyal to my beverage of choice. However, that doesn’t mean that anything said against coffee is right automatically. Consider this, one example of how ridiculous our culture is getting thinking they are making a powerful point by resisting something.

So let’s consider a few points here.

First off, let’s be clear that slavery is wrong. I can’t believe I have to say this, but unfortunately, I do. If I don’t say it, someone is going to think that I am defending slavery. They’re going to think that anyway, but I fully agree with the wrongness of slavery.

However, that being said, it’s time to list other facts.

For one, if we were to eliminate anything that has anything to do with slavery at any point in time, we will have to likely eliminate nearly everything that there is. (Which could include those tennis shoes you’re wearing.) Pyramids of Egypt? Gone. Great Wall of China? Gone. How many other great monuments from history would vanish?

Second, slavery has happened with every race out there practically and every race has enslaved every race and every race has even enslaved their own race. The word slave itself comes from the Slavs. Who were they? White Europeans. Who were white Europeans and others buying slaves from in Africa? Other Africans.

Third, the only slavery most people know of today is the slavery in antebellum America. Outside of that, no clue. It’s ignored that it was the West that ultimately did so much to end slavery.

Fourth, many people today who are against slavery, and rightly so, could likely not give a good defense of why they are. If you went back to the Roman Empire and asked anyone if slavery was wrong, even the slaves themselves, they would likely look at you stunned as if society could be any other way. Today, it’s the exact opposite.

Fifth, no matter what we do today, we can never erase history. Not buying coffee today will not change that slavery took place. There is no need to punish the industry today for something that happened before anyone in the industry today was even born. We are living with a fool’s errand if we think we can redeem ourselves this way.

Sixth, we can be redeemed, but only by Jesus. Our nation can make things right best by turning to the God who bought all of humanity for a price in the person of His Son. We will not do it by any other action.

Finally, today, we need to learn history again. So many people think they’re being activists by not buying coffee or something like this. Want to do something about slavery? It still exists in some parts of the world. Go there and do something about slavery in those parts of the world. Our ignorance of history leads to repeating it. Learn instead from slavery that we do have scars in our past, but the good news is we have changed the way we used to do things and become a beacon of freedom for the world.

Real change will take more than this. Avoiding anything that has anything to do with slavery, even antebellum slavery in America, will not do anything. It will only hurt people today who had nothing to do with what happened and are just trying to provide for themselves and their families.

As a tea lover, there are plenty of good reasons for not buying coffee. This is not one of them.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Safe Christianity

How can you be safe in Christianity? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

As a resident of New Orleans, I imagine what I would think if I heard a couple together one day talking in their house if a major hurricane was coming.

Wife: Honey. There’s a level 5 hurricane heading towards New Orleans.

Husband: Predictions for us?

Wife: Likely to destroy the entire city and leave few survivors.

Husband: Sounds terrible. What do you want to do that evening?

Wife: Thought we’d stay home and watch TV.

Husband: That sounds good.

It seems nonsensical to think about it. If there is that disaster situation coming, shouldn’t you do something about it? I thought about that today reading J. Gresham Machen’s book Christianity and Culture. The book is inexpensive on Kindle and you can read it in less than an hour easily.

In the last section, he speaks about how the time might seem dark, but this is the time that we can shine the brightest and where we can rise up with excitement knowing the grand task before us and that God is with us. He has also spoken in the book about how you can be safe instead. Is it possible, for instance, to be a soldier and find a definite way to avoid dying in combat? Machen tells us that there definitely is.

Don’t go into combat.

Sure, you’ll be safe, but you won’t do anything to the enemy really. Now today, we understand someone could operate a drone from a distance or something of that sort, but we can all understand Machen’s point. The easiest way to stay safe is to just not do anything risky. That is how many of us approach Christianity.

How many of us talk about people who are dying without Christ and then go about our lives like it’s not a big deal. The atheist Penn Gillette even said that he encourages Christians to proselytize. After all, how much do you have to hate someone to know that there is an eternal judgment for them somehow and yet not want to do the work of evangelism?

Now keep in mind, I’m not saying our whole lives are 24/7 doing evangelism. Not even Jesus did that. I am saying that we should consider doing more for the lost and for our fellow Christians who need encouragement and yes, that means we are putting ourselves in dangerous situations at times.

However, that’s part of the deal of Christianity. We have Christians who are afraid to share the gospel because they might hurt someone’s feelings or someone might make fun of them. Our earlier ancestors would not be afraid to go to the lions for Jesus and in Muslim nations today, as just one example, getting baptized can practically be a death sentence, and they do it anyway.

If you want to know why our country is the way it is, it’s because we are a people who value safety so much that we don’t do anything. Picture the semis on the interstate that say “Safety is my goal.” No, it isn’t. If safety was your goal, you wouldn’t even be out here driving. The surest way to stay safe is to not drive. Your goal is to get your goods to their destination. The means you want to do is a safe means, but your goal is not to be safe.

This doesn’t mean that we knowingly go into dangerous situations just because they’re dangerous. If a hurricane is heading towards you and is likely to kill you if you stay, it is just foolish to not move. You can’t reason with the hurricane after all. Even those skilled in martial arts are told to only use it as a last resort.

Being safe hasn’t even kept us safe in the long run. It’s put us even more on the defensive. Why does the world listen so much to Muslims and to the LGBTQ community? Because they know these people have power and will speak out and go after them if they disagree. They know they can’t run roughshod over these people. What do they know about us? They can say whatever we want and we’ll just stay there and take it. No. This is not what turning the other cheek is about. It’s not about being a doormat. It’s about not escalating tension in the private sphere, not the public one.

Years ago, before the 2016 election, my former father-in-law asked me what I think it will take to change America. My answer has always been the same. The church has to be the church. The gospel doesn’t need America, but America needs the gospel. If we believe Jesus is the only one who can change society and save the souls of men and we do nothing, we either do not care about Jesus, the souls of men, or both.

Choose where you want to go. You can play it safe or live dangerously. If you play it safe, you might be safe indeed, but you sure won’t do anything to make a difference in the world.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Forgiving Sins and Forgiving Student Loans

Are these the same? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

The big news now is student loans and who is going to have to pay for them. Sadly, I see a lot of Christians trying to compare this to the atonement. Jesus forgave me of my sins! Should i not rejoice in getting to forgive student loans?

There are three possibilities I see here.

Someone does not understand the economics of the situation.

Someone does not understand the atonement.

Or both.

Let’s consider an example with credit cards. A credit card is not a blank check such that if I want something, I whip out the card and use it and someone else pays for it. I am essentially telling the company “If you give them this money now, I will pay you back for it at the end of the month.” (I always do. No carrying over a balance.)

Suppose I wasn’t like that. Suppose I went out and bought a PS5 and a bunch of games and bought all the books I wanted and wanted to take a girl out on a fancy date and when the bill came, I just made any minimal payments. Over time, that escalates more and more. I have built up a debt and you could say that debt is “forgiven”, but you could also have grounds for saying I did not handle the card properly and wasted it and now am seeking more of a bailout.

Suppose though I have a really rich friend who says “I think you can turn your life around and get your debt under control and I am going to give you a start by paying your bill for you.” He pays it off. Now in a sense, my debt is cancelled, but he has still taken a hit in some way. If he can afford it and do so, great. If not, he and those he cares for will suffer. In either case, he has done so voluntarily.

What is going on in this situation is that this is being called forgiveness, but that doesn’t make it forgiveness. In the news, one must always watch what words are being used. He who controls the meaning of the language will have a hand-up in the game. Being opposed to what is going on can sound like you are opposed to forgiveness. What Christian would be opposed to that?

This is not forgiveness. This is transference. The government, which already has a huge deficit in a country with intense inflation, is taking on the hit. They will respond by doing nothing, which is not likely, or by increasing taxes, or increasing the price of goods and services somehow, or by decreasing benefits in other areas. Keep in mind that 80,000+ IRS agents have just been added who are told to carry a gun with them.

Also, we don’t have exhaustive records, but true forgiveness also requires repentance. If there was someone who made a mistake in taking out a loan and wasted their money and time and realized they made a mistake in that and needed help, I think the church should be willing to help. That could entail paying the debt, but not necessarily. Sometimes, one of the worst things you can do to help someone is give a handout. You can be enabling.

As an example, when I worked at Wal-Mart, I sometimes worked in the money center. I remember a customer coming in and wanting to transfer money and I could tell he was upset. I asked why and he said he doesn’t have a lot of money, but he has to keep sending money to his son. This son was constantly making mistakes and if he didn’t get the money, he would go to jail.

I told the father bluntly that one of the best things to do would be to let the son fail.

“Then he’ll go to jail.”

“So he’ll go to jail.”

What the father was doing was just enabling and the son had no reason to change his life and not live off of his parents who were eating away at all they had while their son took advantage of them. This father was not really helping the son in that case. He was telling the son by his actions to keep squandering the money and if there was a problem, he would bail him out. The father was willing to because going to jail would just be awful. In reality, it might have been just what the kid needed. Perhaps he needed to hit rock bottom so he could really examine his life.

Now there is not to be joy in that at all. However, proper boundaries means not rescuing people every time they make mistakes. Love sometimes has to be tough.

There are plenty of people also who did the hard work of paying back their loans. Why? They made an agreement to do that. Everyone of them has been slapped in the face. Good behavior has been shown to be not worth it. Bad behavior has been punished.

Of course, this will be on a case-by-case basis. Suppose someone gets a student loan and gets a degree and yet gets in a car accident and can’t work to pay off the loan. I have no problem with the church showing compassion and helping out.

In the atonement, God doesn’t transfer our debt to other people who can’t afford it. He takes it on Himself in Christ and pays it in full. He alone has infinite resources. He can do that. However, unless you are a universalist, you will agree that the only people who it applies to are those who really submit to Christ. (Those who never heard is a separate issue, though I think some of them can be saved by the light they have.)

Are Christians supposed to be people of charity? Yes, but as said, charity can be less than beneficial sometimes. Good motives does not mean good results. I recommend a book such as When Helping Hurts. This is where wisdom comes in. Are you giving to someone who will really use what you give them wisely or someone who will be enabled with a handout?

How do we personally respond? As Christians, we can still rejoice in all things because we know Jesus is still in charge of the story. If we are wronged, which most of us have been with this, we can take it and realize God will give justice someday and He still has infinite resources to provide for us. As a seminary student now, I am living out what it means to believe God can provide as is said in the Sermon on the Mount.

Ultimately, to say this is just the same as the atonement is an insult to the atonement. Something more akin would be if God took the sins of His chosen people, the Jews, and made all the Gentiles suffer judgment to pay for them. Thankfully, He did not. The debt was not transferred. It was paid.

Thanks be to God.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: Cynical Theories

What do I think of James Lindsay and Helen Pluckrose’s book published by Pitchstone? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Woke is a word that has shown up regularly in the past few years. Now we regularly hear about social justice warriors and of course, constant cries of racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, and fat phobia. Our world has become more divided than ever as everyone is assumed to be a closet racist and if you deny that, well, you’re a bigot and that just demonstrates what a racist you are.

I was eager to get this book to see what Lindsay and Pluckrose had to say about the topic. They do bring a lot of excellent academic work here, but the problem is they also seem to be fighting battles on two fronts. Their main emphasis is on the Woke and how that hurts scholarship and academia, but there’s a dose of mild scientism as well as any chance to take a jab at religious people.

That’s ultimately unhelpful for their work. After all, if they want to reach Americans and a large number of Americans are still religious, this will turn a lot of them off, which would be a shame. I kept seeing my position as a religious believer being misrepresented. I am able to see past that, but how many people out there will not?

The scientism is also a problem as too many times, the impression comes across that science is the only way to know truth. Science is a great way of knowing some truth, but not all truth. There are plenty of things we all believe that do not come through science. While I am an empiricist, I hold that while all scientific knowledge is empirical, not all empirical knowledge is scientific.

Another problem is the way that they talk about progress and liberalism. Much of what they call liberalism looks nothing like liberals I see today. I also definitely disagree with them on the approach to the LGBTQ+ community. I am not opposed to progress, but too often we get to a place and say “This is progress” when in many cases, I can see it as regression.

However, time should be spent on the positives. One of the biggest walkaways you should get from this book is that for the Woke, disagreement is not allowed. Yes. You are allowed to ask questions and you should ask to understand, but not to challenge. Theory, their name for anything like Critical Race Theory or any idea that goes with a political identity, cannot be questioned.

This is no way to do academia. Questions and challenges should always be welcome, even if a theory has stood the test of time for hundreds of years. Questioning allows us to grow and shows cracks where a belief needs to be examined. Perhaps in some cases, it could show the whole paradigm is flawed and we have to move to a new paradigm.

Also, there are health consequences in many cases. Consider the idea that being fat is not a risk to one’s health. Yes. This is being taught and some people can even find doctors that won’t treat obesity like a problem. As I write this, MonkeyPox is something big and yet many of us are noticing that while Covid was around, people were told they had to shut down gathering places, including churches, but no one is saying that about bathhouses. Everyone is just being told “Act responsibly.” Would that we had all been told that during Covid.

I can also remember that when 9/11 happened, one of the first matters of importance to get out there was that this did not represent true Islam. After all, we had to deal with Islamophobia. We have become a culture that wants to protect peoples’ feelings more than the people themselves.

So this is a book with a lot of important material, but keep in mind the caveats. Take the wheat and throw away the chaff. Get the good and embrace it and use it. We are in a real battle with Woke.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: Live Not By Lies

What do I think of Rod Dreher’s book published by Sentinel? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Dreher’s book is asking the question of what Christians in the West are meant to do in an age of increasing totalitarianism. Now this does not mean anything like what happens today in China or what happened in the Gulag, but it could be likely to happen in the form of a soft totalitarianism where control comes through social means more than government means. As I write this though, it is about a week after the raid of Trump’s place in Florida and a lot of questions are being raised.

The theme of the book comes from Alexander Solzhenitsyn who said that one thing we have to do is even if we don’t go out with a megahorn shouting the truth everywhere, we can choose to not believe the lies. For us today, these lies are being placed on us regularly by a culture calling into question truths we never would have dreamed being called into question a few years ago and too many people go along for the ride easily. I was stunned enough when I realized I had to defend that marriage is a union of a man and a woman. Today, I have to defend the idea of what a man and a woman is. We have a woman sitting on the Supreme Court who couldn’t answer the question of what a woman is.

More and more, if you disagree with this ideology, you can be shut down. How many people do we know who have been removed from Twitter because of this? How often have we seen cancel culture dig up something someone said ten years ago and shut them down because of it? Keep in mind that before these people were culturally on top, they also insisted on tolerance. That didn’t last long.

Dreher’s book looks at people who went through the rise of Communism and survived in countries where it was. Their examples are often powerful and convicting. These aren’t superhuman people. These are simple ordinary people who did something unique. They lived out their faith in a world where it was condemned.

The repeated advice in the book is to see, judge, and act. Christianity when lived out can overcome any evil that is brought to bear against it. As our country comes closer and closer to more and more government control and government going in a war against reality, this is something we should all keep in mind.

Governments can push control in many ways, but we are in control of our minds and our attitudes. We can make it a point to say that we will live not by lies. We will choose to live the path that Jesus lived.

If I had any criticism of the book, it would be that the book is long on examples, but not long on suggestions. This is how people lived in hard totalitarianism, but I would have liked more that could be done by those of us in a soft totalitarianism or at least a growing one. I recommend Christians read this one and read it along side either Strange New World or The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self by Carl Trueman.

And live not by lies.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Of Marriages And Diets

Is this a valid reason to abandon marriage? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

As I was writing yesterday’s blogpost, I had a number of people tag me on Facebook and ask “What do you think of this?” and this was the very picture I was writing about. Today, I’d like to tackle another one that has been making the rounds. It’s another one that sadly convinces me those on the left in this debate really don’t bother to listen to what their opponents say.

First off, the opening claim is just false. Even if you are a skeptic, it should be easy to accept that a redefined marriage of two men or two women is against someone else’s religion is a fact. That doesn’t say anything about the emotional state of the person who holds that religion. The anger is already imposed. (This happens all too often as those of us who are conservative are often accused of having hate towards the other side.)

I don’t go to bed at night steaming about homosexual couples. The issue matters to me, but I have many other things to think about. It’s on the other side unfortunately that if we are told we don’t agree, well here come the hounds out to shut down our businesses and demand our freedom to operate be taken away.

That’s only the start of the problem.

The majority of the real argumentation on the right is not going “The Bible says X, therefore Y should be forbidden.” Most of us are making arguments based on the nature of marriage and a natural law understanding of marriage. Yes. I am sure Pastor Bob down at the local Southern Baptist Church is getting up in the pulpit screaming about what the Bible says and doesn’t have a clue about these natural law arguments, but note I stated the real argumentation. I am not against the Bible, but if one side doesn’t believe it, it has no authority for them, at least in the sense that it doesn’t change their thinking.

Ultimately, when I have seen this debated online, it comes down to what a marriage is. It has always before been understood as two adults of the opposite sex coming together in a union generally with the goal of bringing about and raising children. Now we are told that it doesn’t matter what two consenting adults do.

But why should this be the case?

First off, consider the case of Armin Meiwes. He was a cannibal who was convicted for eating someone. Here’s the relevant part. This person wanted to be eaten. He fully consented to everything. Thus, we have an action between two consenting adults. To make this wrong, you will need another qualifier then. Two consenting adults is not sufficient.

Second, what exactly is an adult? In Biblical times, as was much of the world back then, as soon as the kids hit puberty, it was time to marry them off to someone else. Teenagers in the past would be forming families. Today, having a relationship with a teenager can get you hit with a statutory rape charge. There is nothing magical about the age of 18 that makes someone an adult. We’ve all known adults well over 18 who are essentially children and we’ve all known children younger than 18 who have been forced through circumstances to grow up early and practically function as adults. Also, consider how many children who commit crimes can be tried as adults.

Consent is also not good enough. This is supposed to protect it from applying to children as well, but we constantly make children do things without their consent that is for their good. They go to school, do chores, go to bed, eat healthy, and get vaccinations and medical treatment they don’t like, without their consent. Loving parents who genuinely love their children do this.

Third, we might as well ask about the number two. Why should marriage be limited to two people? The Mormons held to polygamy for some time and were brought before the government for that one. If we are removing the requirement that the people be of the opposite sex, it would be far easier to remove the number. Not only that, there is a much greater historical basis for polygamy than for the redefinition of marriage.

What is being asked is what marriage is and what is the purpose of it. It is not just a union for the happiness of two adults. It is a nation building institution in the sense that these people are the ones capable of bringing about the next generation. The state has all reason to want to promote that as it kind of needs new people to survive. Hypothetically, imagine how much damage we could do to China and Russia if we could launch a biological attack somehow over those entire nations that would sterilize everyone in those nations.

And if marriage is about the continuing of the species, then the state has an interest in promoting the type of union that can do that job. The state has no interest in promoting a same-sex couple as they can never do that. Marriage is not to be meant about the affirming of the people involved, but why the people are coming together in the first place.

Now suppose someone says “Well, Christians can really say that these are the reasons, but we know the real reason is what the Bible says!” Let’s suppose 100% that that’s true for the sake of argument. That doesn’t change the fact that the natural law based arguments are on the table. Those still have to be addressed.

Suppose someone makes a powerful argument to me for atheism and I don’t know how to answer it. It does not work to say, “You only make that argument because you want to be free to live your life sexually however you want.” That could even be 100% true. I am sure there are Christians who hold to Christianity just for the benefits they want to receive and I am sure there are some atheists who hold to atheism because of the sexual freedom.

The argument still has to be addressed.

This meme is not addressing any real arguments. It is not even making one. It is just pointing to motives and trying to read emotions into the other side.

It’s a shame so much has to be written to deal with something because so many do take it seriously.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Grounding of Abortion Laws

Is an executive order what pro-abortionists should really want? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Right now, abortionists are wanting to pull out all the stops. Biden, a supposedly devout Catholic president, is considering an emergency health crisis in support of abortion. There’s also been an executive order issued. To an abortionist, this might sound really good, but is it really the right way to go.

Roe v. Wade was simply put, poorly based at the start. Ginsburg thought it was. While Alan Dershowitz doesn’t agree with what Dobbs did, he also thought Roe was not done right. Just like I can be a Christian while thinking there are some bad arguments for Christianity, and there are, you can be an abortionist and even think the case in Roe was weak.

An executive order to save the day might seem like a good idea, but is it really? Carl Trueman in his book The Rise and Triumph Of The Modern Self, bases some of his work on Philip Rieff. Rieff argues that with regard to laws, countries are either first, second, or third world. First world countries do have a transcendental basis and it’s usually fate or some other power, It could be the Oracle of Delphi or some other sort of otherworldly source.

Second world is what is in line with monotheistic theism today where the laws are rooted in the character of God. This could apply to Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or even Deism. This is why some people like Clarence Thomas use a lot of natural law reasoning.

Third is a secular world. In this world, the laws are rooted in society. Whatever the society says, that is what is good. The problem with this is ultimately that might makes right. It also has the problem that whatever you do, your opponents can do the same thing eventually.

Suppose a liberal president makes an executive order in support of abortion. What is stopping a conservative president from doing the opposite? If the government can give a right, it can take it away too. This is why our government has it in our founding documents not that government gives rights, but rather it recognizes the rights humans have.

This is also why these rights are things that are restrictions on everyone else. The government doesn’t give me ilfe. It is meant to tell everyone else they can’t take away my life. The same applies to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

So if you are an abortionist what are you to do? Simple. Come up with better arguments. Look at Roe and see where it was weak and do what you can to improve it. Shows of power will be at best temporary havens of salvation for the side of abortion.

Meanwhile, those of us who are pro-life need to familiarize ourselves more and more with why we are pro-life. At this, I do want to give a plug to my friend Clinton Wilcox, who has recently started a substack on defending life and answering abortionists. If you want a good place to get the information you need, this is a great one and you can see it here.

Also, to those on the left supporting abortion, the reactions are showing many of us what we always thought. Abortion has always been a back-up way to deal with pregnancy and it was never about safe, legal, and rare. People react in proportion to how much a loss effects them and if a loss effects people this much, we need to ask why.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Mark Hamill Is A Slimeball

What is Mark Hamill trying to accomplish? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

We have all heard it several times. Pro-lifers are not really pro-life. They are pro-birth. Once a child is born, they don’t really care. Never mind that we are the ones that run the centers to help mothers who have children and don’t abort. Never mind we have so many adoption agencies out there as well. The facts really don’t matter. The rhetorical punch is all that matters.

One such example is Mark Hamill who is known for playing Luke Skywalker as well as voicing the Joker on Batman: The Animated Series. On Twitter recently, he decided to make a post and who knows what he was really trying to accomplish. It makes less and less sense. Anyway, here’s the link.

If you can’t access it, it’s basically a picture of the Joker and Harley Quinn saying “We will adopt your baby.” Apparently, the idea is that if you go with adoption, well you could get an evil pair of parents so you might as well kill the child just to be safe. It’s always in the best interest of the child to kill it apparently.

Now if Hamill wants to stick with the comics, we can do that. I am not a reader of the comics, but I do know how to do some research. I decided to look and see if I could find any superheroes in the comics adopted by evil parents. As it turns out, it was not hard to find.

It is not good in itself for anyone to be adopted by parents that are evil, but that won’t always be the end of the story. People if they want to can overcome a great deal. Fortunately, there are plenty more people who adopt children for the good of the children.

What looks like what is going on more is a sort of attack on adoption. Yet why should this be? What is accomplished by this? Perhaps the elimination of adoption somehow or having it presented as a less than noble alternative is a way to make abortion the best option. This does ignore what kind of option abortion is, but who cares?

Apparently, the abortion side wants it where you can’t win either way. Want to adopt? Well what kind of twisted people could adopt a baby? That’s too risky! Want to run a pro-life center? They will be attacked then. Yeah. It hasn’t been breaking news for some reason, but that has been happening.

Hamill meanwhile can deal with all the people who are ready to give pushback who have been adopted by loving parents. While I have shown there are superheroes who were adopted by supervillains, some superheroes were adopted by good parents as well. One such example Mark Hamill should know about is Luke Skywalker himself. Of course, none of this information that is more factual in nature is of any interest when one just wants to push emotional strings.

One aspect that should definitely happen in this country is that adoption should become easier. To adopt a child is much more expensive than is feasible for many people beyond the ordinary costs of raising a child. Perhaps if adoption was made to be as easy as possible, like abortion has been, then we could see more adoption.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

I Don’t Celebrate The 4th of July

Why do I not celebrate the 4th? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

Some of you might be surprised to see that I don’t celebrate the 4th of July. After all, I am a strong conservative Christian. I make frequent posts on Facebook about political issues and have my own strong opinions on the matter. Surely, I would celebrate the 4th of July.

I don’t.

I celebrate Independence Day.

When we talk about Christmas, we don’t call it the 25th of December. We don’t call a day for lovers the 14th of February. When we go out getting candy, we don’t call it the 31st of October. Somehow, we changed this day to make it the calendar date instead of the real meaning of the day.

We are celebrating independence. We are celebrating freedom. We are celebrating the establishment of our nation.

Unfortunately, I have seen some people, not just on Facebook but even in person, asking what there is to celebrate today. Why? Because Roe v. Wade was overturned, therefore America should not be celebrated today.

Yet this says that we only celebrate America when America does what we want. It’s a love that is dependent on actions. When this country had Roe v. Wade as the law of the land, I still loved it. I still disagree with the redefinition of marriage, but I still love the country.

There are ways I think America has gotten off track and mistakes that have been made, but what country has not had this. There will be no perfect countries this side of eternity, but I fully believe that thus far, this is the best one. This is the country that I am thankful to live in and it is a gift of God that I got to be born here.

It’s easy for people to think of the evils that have happened in the past in this country. It’s easy to think of the evils going on right now. However, let’s not lose sight of the goods. Most of us do not live in abject terror throughout our lives. We don’t have to fear a government coming to kill us. We who are Christians have the freedom to worship.

We can all work to continue making this country the best that it can be. I especially am thinking about the men and women who gave their lives and continue to serve today to make sure that we are free. Whenever I see a soldier or a veteran, I stop and thank them for their service.

I don’t know how you’re celebrating today. For me, I might just enjoy the day off and while I am with my folks, my Dad and I could continue catching up on the Flash tonight, to which I multitask and get in some good gaming then. (Thank you, Nintendo Switch.) There could be patriotic music today and perhaps reading such works as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as well.

Happy 4th of…..no, no no.

Happy Independence Day!

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

To Lysistrata: Your Terms Are Acceptable

Will the move of Lysistrata work? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

There is a Greek play called Lysistrata where the women get sick of the men fighting in wars all the time so they decide to hit them where it hurts. No. I’m not talking about a well-placed kick, but a much harder hit to the body part in reference. They agree to have a sex strike. Now the women are unsure of this idea at first as they don’t want to give it up, but that is what they do. It does get the attention of the men and I leave you to read it to see how it turns out.

And in the world today, that idea is seeming to be popular.

Women are now saying that they will have a sex strike until “Women’s rights” are restored. Not only that, they are including a number of radical ideas.

These include ideas such as being extremely selective about who you have sex with as that person could be the father of your baby. This means practicing abstinence. (That idea that we were told will never work.) This means also not participating in the hook-up culture. This will get men all around the world to champion women’s rights to abortion.

To which many of us pro-lifers to this Lysistrata strategy of something to say.

Your terms are acceptable.

Seriously. For many of us, this is what we’ve been telling women all our lives. Take responsibility for your lives and your bodies. You’re demonstrating to us that abortion has made it easy for men to use you. (And you’re also showing us that all along, abortion has been a form of birth control.) If there are serious consequences to illicit sexual encounters, then strangely enough, people might become more responsible with sex and make wiser choices about who they sleep with.

This might sound strange, but maybe sexual joy could be found in not treating sex as if it was a casual activity.

Now I suppose someone could come along to me and say “Okay. Are you willing to avoid sex too?”

Yeah. Been doing that since I got divorced. Plan to do that until I marry again.

Women have said that sex is practically the holy grail for men. Well you know what? If you make it harder for men to receive that prize, you know who it will eventually go to? It will go to the men who prove themselves worthy. It will go to the men who show that they can provide for you and any children that they have with you.

Maybe also you will find a guy who doesn’t want you for just sex, but wants you for you and has decided that he only wants you. Maybe you will find a guy who isn’t saturated with porn and will treasure every time he gets to see your body. Maybe you will find that real joy doesn’t come from casual hook-ups, but it comes from being in a commitment with someone who really loves you and isn’t interested in using you and doesn’t have to make the consequences go away if you get pregnant.

Abortion is not enabling to women. It’s disabling. It allows women to be used by men who don’t want to take responsibility.

You see, the ideas in this sex strike, they are actually what many of us have told you all along. We have told you to take sex seriously, take your bodies seriously, and take yourselves seriously. We have told you abortion is not your ally. Pregnancy is not a weakness for you. It is what sets you apart. A woman should not want to be equal to a man in every way. She should want to be a woman because being a woman is something unique for her and what sets her apart.

Not only that, but with the transgender movement, women forgot that if they think that they are equal to men automatically, well, that means men are equal to women. This is why we have transgenders winning at women’s sports easily and then using the women’s facilities and locker rooms. Women have not been the victors here but have been the victims. Feminism has not uplifted women but torn them down. Men and women are different, but neither one is superior.

Women. Please take your sex strike. Go super far and declare that you won’t have sex until the man commits to you and provides for you and shows he can provide for a family. If you think sex with you is a holy grail, treat it like that. You’ll find who the real men are. They are the ones willing to do the work because they consider the woman a prize worth fighting for and working for. They will be the ones who are self-sacrificial.

Here’s to Lysistrata!

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)