Quote Challenge - Resolution on Alchohol

A number of blogs that I have visited in the last few months have occassionally had some interesting little challenges. For instance, Andy Efting over at Unsearchable Riches had a neat little 12-ball challenge and Larry Rogier up at Stuff Out Loud had a good riddle that reminded me of the puzzle books that my mom used to send with me to school so that I had something to do after I was done with my classwork (so that I did not disturb my classmates by trying to talk to them). Over at Paleoevangelical, he has had a number of "Name that Quote" contests.

I found this recently and thought I would try one as well. Of course, I doubt anyone is actually reading this, so it will probably be quiet.

The challenge is:

Who made the following resolution. As per the rules that Ben uses over at Paleoevangelical, you may not enter the text into google (or other search engine)to find out the answer.

"Beverage Alcohol

WHEREAS, we recognize the use of beverage alcohol as a menace to the moral, social and economic life of the nation and assess it as one of the grave problems of our time,

BE IT RESOLVED that we urge our churches and member organizations to accelerate efforts to educate and inform their constituency on this issue. We believe that effective witness against the evils of the liquor industry can best be borne by a thoroughly informed and enlightened evangelical community.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT we encourage our people to aid all govern­mental efforts to discourage by law the sale and use of alcoholic beverages."

Sorry, no prizes yet, just the satisfaction on knowing you won.

Just for fun,

Frank

Media Bias?

There is a lot of talk about media bias. Despite the works of insiders such as Bernard Goldberg's Bias, there are many who still claim there is no bias in the media. Talk about living with blinders! The reality is that all of us have bias. The problem is that the left-wing liberal media continues to report, discuss, and present themselves as though they are unbiased, when their bias shows up throughout their work.

Recently, the bias on the Today show has been almost comical. I don't watch a lot of the Today show, but I found it funny how they covered a couple of recent items.

1. The first example was during the Katie Curic interview with former FBI Director Louis Freeh about his new book in which he says some "not-so-nice" things regarding the Clinton Administration. The nature of her interview was to attack Freeh for writing the book. In one of her first questions she asked "Do you think your personal animus might be coloring your professional perspective so much that you can't be objective about what was really going on during the administration?" A question about his motivation for writing the book is entirely appropriate, but where is the consistency? I don't recall Katie or any of her cronies on the left asking that question of Richard Clarke, Joe Wilson, et al when they were on their media parades promoting their attack books against President Bush.

2. This morning they did a "puff piece" regarding Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. Among the other items that were interesting is the way they praised him for his tenacity for the two years of working on this case. Seems like when Judge Ken Starr was involved in a similar role a few years ago, the common talking point was not his "tenacity" but that it was a "witch hunt."

Just my thoughts,

Frank

In the Presence of Mine Enemies

I recently read a copy of the book In the Presence of My Enemies by Gracia Burnham. This is the story of Gracia and her husband Martin Burnham who were New Tribes Missionaries captured by Abu Sayyaf (a group of Islamic Terrorists associated with Osama Bin Laden) in the Philippines in May 2001.

I had remembered hearing about the story when it happened, but it was interesting to read the book by Gracia and learn what was going on from her perspective and to read of the journey that God took them through during the captivity of over one year.

While there is much that could be said about the book, an unexpected consequence of reading the book is that it makes you want to hold on to your kids a little tighter and it helps you to appreciate some of the modern "conveniences" that we tend to take for granted (such as toilet paper).

While I am disappointed at the direction that New Tribes has taken over the last 15 years or so and that direction shows itself occassionally throughout the book, I think that if you take the time to read it, you will find it a compelling read.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

What do they teach at the University of California, San Diego?

Recently I came across an article by the opinion editor of the UCSD (University of California, San Diego) Guardian Online regarding the University of California system move to reject students who have been taught high school science from books that teach Creationism, such as books from A Beka Books and from Bob Jones University Press.

What I found particularly interesting was the lack of understanding displayed by this particular author.

Imagine walking into a college calculus course on the first day only to have the lecture interrupted by a student who rejects the mathematical tenet that 2+2=4. Or watching your study partner struggling with physics assignments because she refuses to acknowledge the law of gravity. Or listen to your roommate creating a ruckus in his history class when he publicly disavows the existence of Nazi concentration camps.

Sound absurd? Sure it is. It goes without saying that to grasp certain subjects at a college level, one must accept the keystones of various disciplines from which all else follows: the syntax of the English language for a writing class; properties of numbers in a math class; or evolution in a biology class.

First of all, she wrongly equates laws of science and math (gravity, 2+2=4) with the theory of evolution.

Second of all, she assumes that to grasp biology, one must accept evolution. Not only is an acceptance of evolution not necessary to grasp biology, it is not even necessary in order to grasp evolution.

A little while later she offers this gem.

When a student’s high school education is so obviously lacking, the University of California is hardly displaying “hostility towards Christianity” (as the suit alleges) in rejecting such courses or such students. It is displaying hostility toward ignorance and closed-mindedness.

Again, it seems that the University of California is hardly displaying enough hostilitiy towards ignorance and closed-mindedness when this lady has been admitted and allowed such a prominent position.

Talk about ignorance - she does not even consider the fact that many times the students educated with the very textbooks in question actually have a better grasp of evolution that the typical student entering college. A lack of acceptance of evolution does not equal a lack of understanding of evolution. In fact, I would say that in many ways the opposite is true, but that is the subject for another post sometime, perhaps.

Talk about closed-mindedness, she is unwilling to even check out the facts regarding what is being taught in these schools, as she so aptly demonstrates with the following comment.

What, then, are these kids being taught,... A few words of Spanish between Bible study and chapel, perhaps?

It seems that if the University of California system is genuinely concerned about the understanding of its students regarding evolution, they could provide a profiency test for the students desiring to enter the school who have been educated using the texts that they are questioning. Of course, a similar test by all incoming freshman may be very revealing.

Just some thoughts.

Frank

File under Education_, Culture_War, Hot_Issues

Welcome to "A Thinking Man's Thoughts"

Recently, I discovered a frutstration with the type of blogs that I have set-up. I have a blog that is desinged for family information (www.sansonefamilyforums.blogspot.com) and a blog that is designed for thoughts that are related to my role as the Pastor of Messiah Baptist Fellowship in Salisbury, Maryland - called The Pastor's Pen" , but I did not have a place to make comments regarding other things of interest, such as the news of the day, politics, etc.

Thus, A Thinking Man's Thoughts was born. Lest you be alarmed by the title, please be aware that I am not trying to be arrogant in the title. I hope that you will indeed find these thoughts and comments to be made from one that is "A Thinking Man," but in reality I was trying to find something long enough that no one else had already taken it, since the first few that I tried had already been used by someone else.

Hopefully my next post will actually reflect some thoughts from a thinking man, rather than being merely a introduction.