Tidbits

Articles Worth Reading:

Darwinian Meltdown Over Intelligent Design - by Nancy Pearcey

Confronting Slavery in Today's World - by Kristin Wright




Global Warming Scary Movie

I'm not talking about Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" either! I now understand why all the media play about global warming. It turns out that the greatest danger to the planet is... the return of "The Blob." They just reran the movie on cable and I was fortunate enough to see SteveMcQueen's exceptional acting convince me that a creature made of either tar or molasses was going to devour the whole world!

But it was the end of the movie that sealed the deal. You see, "The Blob's" only weakness was that it couldn't stand the cold. So to defeat it they froze it with CO2. Then they transported it via military transport plane to the Arctic (why Canada allowed this I don't know). They parachuted this monster into the supposedly permanently frozen continent believing that they would never have to worry again.

Does Al Gore know about this? If so, is there another movie in the works? Perhaps he and David Suzuki should get together on this. In order to make it a more credible "scientific" movie, they could get James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici to produce it for them. It sounds like a sure-fire Oscar winner to me.

No Justice In Haiti

The young man in the picture was 19 years old at the time of the picture. He's since turned 20. He's a Canadian citizen and he's in jail in Haiti. He has not been charged, has been denied due process, and has been in a Haitian jail since July of 2006. His name is Max Charbonneau.

Max came to Haiti to visit his missionary parents in June, 2006. While there he received a call from an old school friend asking for her help. In a strange series of events he ended up being questioned by police and held on suspicion of kidnapping. Eight months later he has not been charged and the judge has presented no evidence to keep him in prison. he has not been able to defend himself in a court of law.

Here's the question of the day. How is it that a Canadian citizen can be sitting in a filthy jail cell for eight months without charges and our government has not been able to get him out - or at least be able to examine evidence? The latest word is that our Federal government is about to announce a $500 million aid package to Haiti!?! I think maybe we demand they first return him safely to Canada.

This would be a good time to get involved and try to put some pressure on our government to get Max out. The two issues to emphasize are these:

• That Max, a Canadian citizen, is being denied justice and due process. He has never been charged and to date has never been able to defend himself in any court of law.
  
• That if we are going to give Haiti financial assistance then we expect them to treat our citizens justly and fairly. Is it right to give Haiti $500 million when they do not accord our citizens justice and due process?
  

In addition, get your friends to phone and write the Department of Foreign Affairs and express their desire for the government to advocate for Max. Please have them copy their letters to their own MPs so that we can maximize the pressure on the government.

Here are the addresses and phone numbers that you can use:

Department of Foreign Affairs E-mail: enqserv@dfait-maeci.gc.ca

Mr. Gordon Peter MacKay
Minister of Foreign Affairs
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, ON Canada
K1A 0G2
E-mail: http://ca.f883.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=MacKay.P@parl.gc.ca

Ms. Josée Verner
Minister of International Cooperation
House of Commons
Ottawa, K1A 0A6
E-mail: http://ca.f883.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Verner.J@parl.gc.ca

Department of Foreign Affairs Phone: (800) 267-8376

Peter MacKay: (613) 995-1851

Josée Verner: (819) 953-6238

Here is a web link that will help you to find your government representative:

http://canada.gc.ca/directories/direct_e.html#mp

To follow this story you cancheck out his parents web-site.

5 Stories You Likely Haven't Heard About

1. David Suzuki and Charitable Tax Status

During the last Federal election a number of outspoken critics of the moral stance taken by the Liberal Party of Canada received calls from Revenue Canada bureaucrats. At least one, Bishop Fred Henry, was warned that his organization could lose its charity tax status if he continued to criticize the government's stance on issues such as "same-sex marriage," abortion and divorce. Henry was critical of any and all politicians who took opposing views. He was reminded that the charities act requires that he abstain from partisan political activism.

Suzuki, Canada's leading voice for environmentalism, has been traveling the country, speaking at schools and other functions. In a Calgary school he attacked the Federal Conservatives in front of an assembly of sixth-graders, admitting he was directing his comments more to the adults in the room. The question is whether it's okay for the left to participate in partisan politics while keeping their charity status, or if they will be held to the same standard as Christian organizations. We'll let you know if Revenue Canada takes any action. Follow this link to read the original story.

2. Founder of Lesbian Magazine Goes Straight and Becomes a Christian.

This story is the height of political incorrectness and flies in the face of everything we hear about in the press. I've been told on numerous occasions that gays and lesbians are born that way and that it's genetic, etc... The evidence for that is still forthcoming, by the way.

Now we hear of Charlene Cothran, founder and editor of VENUS magazine, not only "coming out," but inviting others to join her. It's created a firestorm of criticism around her from the usual suspects, but you need to read the story for yourself. She wrote an article in her own magazine about her experience.

3. German Authorities Take Child Away From Parents Because of Homeschooling.

This story is another bizarre one, I first talked about it a few months ago. It's hard to believe, but homeschooling is illegal in Germany, under a law enacted by none other than Hitler himself. The law was designed to enable the Nazis to indoctrinate children into their way of thinking. For some reason it is still on the books, and has been used to remove 15 year old Melissa Busekros from her home and place her in an undisclosed location. Her siblings may face the same fate.

An organization named "Parents of the World" has launched a boycott of German companies to try to bring pressure on the local government to reverse its decision. It raises the whole question of parental vs. state authority. Check out the article by Gudrun Schultz on the subject.

4. Former ACLU Leader Arrested On Child Porn Charges

I include this for purposes of fairness. We all heard ad nauseum of the events surrounding Ted Haggard's fall from grace. It was featured repeatedly on all of the major networks, newspapers and news websites for weeks and became the subject of many a comedian's routine. He came under special criticism because of the hypocrisy of heading a Christian organization espousing morality while leading a private life that opposed it.

Charles Rust-Tierney, 51, the former president of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU, was arrested late last week by federal authorities and charged with receipt and possession of child pornography in violation of federal law. He has previously lobbied against internet filtering of web sites in public libraries and pushed for "maximum, unrestricted access to the valuable resources of the Internet." Easy access to pornography is fast becoming one of the greatest social problems families face. Read the full story here.

5. Iraqi Christians - Does Anybody Care?

The Christian community in Iraq is one of the oldest anywhere in the world. They have survived generations of persecution and somehow learned to survive in an often hostile environment. Now there is a war in Iraq, largely fueled by the animosity between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims. What both groups can agree on, though, is that Christians are a common enemy.

How bad is it? The latest figures from the UN estimate that around 3.7 million Iraqis - 1 in 8 - have been forced out of their homes by the violence since 2003. Christians, who made up only 3-4% of the population of Iraq, account for nearly a quarter of the refugee population. The number of Christians left in Iraq has fallen from 1.4 million in the 1980s to less than 500,000 now. Those who stay often face violence and/or death. An e-petition has been launched in the U.K. to help protect the rights of Iraqi Christians. For more of the story click here.

Let me know if you found this helpful - I might make hard-to-find news stories a regular feature.

Money, Money, Money...

There was a quote that I noticed in a Toronto Star article today that caught my eye. The article was dealing with the growing gap between rich and poor in Canada, and the seemingly insatiable desire for more - even among those who would be considered wealthy. It was written by Rita Daly and the quote was attributed to Kalle Lasn, an "outspoken critic of consumer excess..." He called this "hyper-capitalist" trend in society a "social virus" and thinks that "it's eating at our culture." I don't know the guy's politics; I'd probably disagree with him about many things, but I think he has a point here.

In my dealings with people I've found a growing number who find themselves falling further and further behind. I don't mean that they can't afford the latest toys; I mean they can't afford their house or apartment; can't keep up with their bills and can't keep their car on the road. In another article in the same edition, Daly and Laurie Monsebraaten quote statistics that show that the average Canadian family with children worked 200 more hours in 2004 than in 1996 yet found themselves no further ahead. On the other hand, the top ten percent of income earners worked less, yet found their salaries growing exponentially.

For example, in 1996 the 10% richest families earned 31 times what the 10% poorest lived on. By 2004 they earned 82 times more. That's quite a change - even without a careful study of the statistics. We've all heard about the incredible salaries of CEOs both in Canada and the U.S. Here's just one example: John Hunkin stepped down from his position as CEO of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) in 2005. He now receives more than $1.3 million yearly in retirement benefits. He also received more than $25 million in stocks. His salary in 2004 alone was $1 million. His bonus for the year was over $3 million. That's just one example.

Now, let me first say that I believe in free enterprise. I also believe in social responsibility. In 2004 three of the big Canadian banks earned profits of: $2.2-billion (CIBC), $2.9-billion (Bank of Nova Scotia) and $2.83-billion (Royal). Yet my non-scientific poll and my personal experience reveal that customer service is actually declining. You receive no interest on deposits, high service fees and no tellers when you want service. This is only one sector of business. We could look similarly at the oil companies and others. We could also look at our own Federal government.

The point is that there is a grossly disproportionate share of resources being channelled into fewer hands, creating, soon, a permanent underclass. Perhaps the most telling symptom of this "social virus" is one that is hard to measure, because you can't see it. It's a growing sense among a generation that they will not be able to achieve their dreams. Not only that, but there's a growing fear that they cannot even take care of their own. It's been a while since our culture has known that fear on a wide scale.

I think that there's a reason (or reasons) for the insatiable greed on the one hand and the fear on the other. We've made money and things the measure of our success; yet things can never satisfy. I remember at Christmas waiting for the new toy and then merely days later forgetting all about it. The more we have the more we want. We also have advertisers telling us all of the things that we need because they will make us happy.

There is something very wrong with a culture where, even though the very poor are wealthy by the world's standards, there remains such a high level of dissatisfaction. If you're looking to be the richest on the block there's always a Jones (or a Trump) with more.

Wouln't it be great if more people lived the way that Mother Teresa lived? She said: "I try to give to the poor people for love what the rich could get for money. No, I wouldn't touch a leper for a thousand pounds; yet I willingly cure him for the love of God." She understood that what really matters is not what we have, but what we do with what we have.

The Biblical word for that is stewardship. It's a recognition that God is the one who has provided for us, and He intends for us to use our resources to help others; to make the world a better place. One of the best examples I've seen of this was when Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in California, became a best-selling author. His book, Purpose Driven Life, has sold millions of copies and brought in millions of dollars. What does a man do with that kind of money in light of Scripture? That's what Larry King asked him. Warren and his wife decided not to buy a bigger house; to stop taking a salary from the church; to pay back the church every penny he had received in salary; to set up charitable foundations to distribute the money; to give 90% of it away and to live on only 10%. He and his wife, Kay, are now heavily involved in fighting the AIDs epidemic.

He might not be perfect - I'm sure he's not. But I think I prefer his example to that of John Hunkin. We are not accountable for what we don't have; we are accountable, however, for what does come into our possession. If each of us could keep that in mind, we could make the world a better place. Just a thought.

Setting the record straight on "Amazing Grace."

Another Jesus Conspiracy Theory

Easter must be around the corner because here comes yet another conspiracy theory around Jesus. This time it's about a tomb that supposedly contains the bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalene and their family and... we've heard it all before.

Canadian director James Cameron, of Titanic fame, and another Canadian director, Simcha Jacobovici, are responsible for this latest bit of irresponsible journalism. The Discovery Channel is being criticized for its sensationalism and lack of ethics in airing the documentary.

So, what of the claims? Israeli archeologist Amos Kloner, who was in charge of the 1980 investigation of the tomb which is the subject of the new claims by Cameron-Jacobovici, said "The claim that the burial site has been found is not based on any proof, and is only an attempt to sell." Archeologist Joe Zias, who spent a quarter-century at the Rockefeller University in Jerusalem, said "Simcha has no credibility whatsoever."

If you recall back in 2003, it was broadly reported that the remains of James, the brother of Jesus had been discovered - a claim that was disproven and demonstrated to be a fraud (see picture above). Jacobovici is still a believer in the fraud - likely because it helps with this current deception.

This is all so repetitive and typically inflammatory. Two years ago we had ABC's special that challenged the facts of the resurrection; last year we had NBC's "Dateline" featuring Michael Baigent and his claims in "The Jesus Papers;" and let's not forget "The Davinci Code." Now this from the Discovery Channel. I've also got a collection of magazine covers from "Time" and "Macleans," etc... with cover stories with titles like "The Shaman Jesus." Anybody see a trend. It's interesting that all of these "breaking" stories happen to coincide with the Easter season. No coincidence there I'm sure.

Why the media wants to jump on the bandwagon with these fringe players is beyond me, especially when their claims fly in the face of evidence. You can check out some more commentary at "The Point," if you like. Let's leave the last word to archaeologist Amos Kloner, who made the find in the first place: "I refute all claims and efforts to waken a renewed interest in the findings. With all due respect, they are not archeologists."

Kyoto - Less Than Useless

I've been listening to the continuing discussion about the whole global warming debate and, I've got to say, the whole thing is kind of sickening. The Canadian scene has its clowns in the Liberal party who admit that they never intended to fulfil their commitments when they signed on to the Kyoto Accord, and yet pushed through a bill in parliament, along with the NDP and the Bloc, to try to force the Conservatives to do just that. Sheer hypocrisy!

In the U.S. you've got the grandstanding Al Gore, making political hay out of the issue with his movie/documentary "An Inconvenient Truth," while living the life of luxury in a greenhouse gas producing mansion. One of a few he owns. I'm just waiting for his announcement that he's running for President again. He was treated like a rock start during his recent speech in Toronto, with $20 tickets going for up to $750. One young ecofan breathlessly declared that she would be willing to give all she had for the privilege of hearing him speak.

I think my new hero is Lorrie Goldstein, a columnist I've admired for years. He's been going against the grain on this issue for quite some time, not concerned about how many enemies he makes.

Let's cut to the chase, though, on global warming, or, even better, pollution and the care of the environment. Is there a problem? Yes, there are many problems. We have been happily polluting our planet for generations and we need to change. We need to adapt our lifestyle so that we are not contributing to the problem. We need to find and take advantage of alternate forms of energy. We need to invest in scientific means of reversing the damage caused. We also need to calm down and stop being foolish.

As I stated in an earlier blog, immediate drastic action would not result in any improvement in greenhouse gases for a hundred years. It would, however, devastate our economy and likely produce a fallout which would inevitably hurt the poor in our societies more than anyone.

I agree with Goldstein that "We should withdraw from Kyoto and set our own course. Yes, let's address greenhouse gases but, even more important, smog, which really is killing us right now, end multi-billion dollar tax subsidies to Big Oil and Big Auto and use that money to help average Canadians retrofit their homes for maximum energy efficiency."

We need to stop jumping on bandwagons and think. The Kyoto Accord is a disaster, designed merely to give publicity to the problem. Fine - now we see the problem. Kyoto is not the solution. How can we expect to fix it when the worst offenders are not required to lower greenhouse gas emissions? It's unfair and stupid for Canada to be expected to meet its requirements when the real offenders are making the problem worse. It's like plugging a small leak while blowing a big hole in the other side of the boat. Let's use tax incentives to encourage individuals and businesses to lessen emissions and to find scientific solutions to the problem. But first of all, let's stop lying to the public - the Kyoto targets were never going to be met, and the signers knew it.

The Agony Of Defeat

Ouch! I had the privilege of coaching my son's Senior High School basketball team this year. Tonight we were eliminated from the playoffs with a 1 point loss. It's one of those defeats that stays with you for a while. You know - the "woulda, coulda, shouldas."

Watching the reactions of the team, and even thinking about the emotions I was experiencing, makes for an interesting study. Some get angry, some seem emotionally devastated, some try to laugh it off; some point fingers, others take responsibility; some look for reasons, some shrug their shoulders. It really is a microcosm of life.

It got me thinking of how people react to the failures and disappointments in life. We all have them, or will have. How people respond to failure says a great deal about them and also has a great deal to do with the kind of person we become. I'm reminded of a leadership development lesson I listened to quite a few years ago called "Failure Isn't Final." I believe it was one of John Maxwell's Injoy Life Lessons.

What I remember from the lesson is that many of the greatest leaders in history endured failure after failure and defeat after defeat and yet used those experiences as building blocks for future success. Look at Abraham Lincoln as an example. His mother passed away when he was only 9; he was a part of some failed business enterprises; he lost more elections than he won; he endured seasons of unpopularity, and yet he is remembered as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

Someone said that when you fall, you might as well pick up something while you're down there. A wise person does that. They are able to look objectively at their own failure and learn. What was the cause? Was it lack of preparation? Was it bad timing? Was it a character issue? Was it simply an unfortunate series of circumstances? What difference does it really make in the big picture of things?

Someone else said that "It's not what happens to you, but what happens in you that matters." There's a lot of truth in that statement. The best that we can do with failure is to let the wounds heal and then look for the lessons; improve ourselves and prepare for the next time. It doesn't change the fact that losing hurts, though. Ouch!

Video - Regrets of a Father

I found this video on-line that I wanted to share. It speaks for itself of the pain and regret that many fathers feel who have chosen abortion. This clearly and painfully illustrates one of the biggest social issues of our time.

Anna Nicole Smith

By now everyone would have heard of the premature passing of Anna Nicole Smith at only 39 years of age. She's shown (at left) with her most recent companion, Howard K. Stern, and her now 5 month-old daughter Dannielynn. She died on February 8 from as yet unknown causes. Her life is a sad story that just keeps on getting sadder - even after her death.

She went from a small-town girl in Texas to topless dancer, to Playboy Playmate of the Year, to the bride of oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall, who was over 60 years older than she was. A law-suit is still ongoing over how much money she will receive from Marshall's estate. At issue is a lower court's ruling that she receive $474 million. This is where the story turns very sad, very fast.

Anna's son, Daniel, passed away in September at the age of 20. A jury inquest is still under away over the circumstances surrounding his death. So, Anna's death has left a 5 month old as the potential heir of an estate approaching half a billion dollars - now here come the vultures. So far three different men have lined up to say that the child is, or could be, theirs. First is the obvious one - her most recent companion Howard K. Stern. Next was Larry Birkhead, an ex-boyfriend who has gone so far as to obtain an injunction holding Anna's body for ten days in case DNA evidence is necessary to prove that no-one switched babies! The latest in the story is 59 year old Prince Frederick von Anhalt, Zsa Zsa Gabor's husband, who claims a ten year affair with Anna. Let the lawsuits begin.

"People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction."

- 1 Timothy 6:9

Why do people think that money buys happiness? What is it that convinces us that more is better? If we look around and ask some questions, we find that the wealthiest people are often the most miserable. Jesus said in Luke 12:15: "Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions."

The Bible teaches us that money and possessions are means to an end, and not an end in themselves. A worldview which sees this life as all there is tends to keep us focused so much on what we're trying to get that we forget, or never bother to think about, why we're here. It reminds me of the old Epicurean philosophy "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die."

This is the dark side of the American Dream, that a beautiful young lady like Anna feels that she has to do whatever is necessary to "make a name for herself." Sadly, she died young and seemingly unhappy, much like her heroine and role model, Marilyn Munroe. Now the drama being played out around her resembles a tragic comedy - but there's nothing funny about it. Let's hope that this baby grows up with someone who actually will love her, and not simply see her as a meal ticket. The odds don't seem very favorable right now.

Jesus taught in "His Sermon on the Mount" that we shouldn't amass treasures on earth, but should lay up treasures in heaven. It was the martyred Christian missionary Jim Elliot who said, "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." We'll end with these words of advice from Albert Einstein: "Try not to be a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value."

Superbowl XLI

Coach Tony Dungy leads his Superbowl champion Indianapolis Colts in a prayer of thanksgiving after their victory on Sunday night. I figured I'd post the picture since it didn't make it into any of the newspapers I've seen. Congratulations!

I thought you might like this link to the top ten Superbowl ads of all time. After all, don't most people watch the game for the ads anyway? Here it is: SUPERBOWL ADS!

"Yes - But Is It True?" - The Global Warming Debate

Ever since the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change the rhetoric on Global Warming has reached a fever pitch. Even the fire-breathing "Global Warming Deniers" - the Conservative Party of Canada - are now making noises that something must be done to protect the environment. I guess that the dramatic increase in crazy weather patterns is pushing people over the edge.

Canada is in for a tidal wave of (dis?)information on the subject over the next little while. The challenge for all of us is to discern truth from alarmist propoganda and prudent response from knee-jerk reactionism. There are a number of issues and questions involved.

1. Is global warming occurring? The answer to this is obviously "yes." Science has demonstrated that the average temperature has increased by about .6 degrees Celsius over the past 30 years.
2. What causes global warming? This is where the debate begins. Scientists know that greenhouse gases are a major cause of global warming, and greenhouse gases are caused by Carbon Dioxide and Methane, as well as other factors. Solar activity has also had an effect on global warming.
3. Who is responsible for the greenhouse gases? Good question. Much of the blame has been placed on the burning of fossil fuels, which produces carbon dioxide. Methane is also a chief cause. So, the lion's share of the blame is laid at the feet of the developed nations who have been pumping it out since the Industrial Revolution. there are other natural causes, of course, such as peat bogs and cows producing methane.
4. What to do? Here's the big question. Experts admit that even if we were to eliminate emissions immediately, the effects would continue to worsen for 100 years. This is due to the fact that these gases take so long to dissipate. The Kyoto Protocol aims to reduce emissions through a "carrot and stick" approach of rewarding countries who meet their targets and penalizing those who fail to do so. Criticism of the protocol includes the claim that the "Carbon Credit" transfer system amounts to a transfer of wealth to the developing world by the industrialized nations. Then there's the question of effectiveness. The U.S., which hasn't ratified the Kyoto Protocol, has done far better with its targets than Canada, which did ratify.

Let the debate begin. Al Gore's surprise blockbuster "An Inconvenient Truth," which some claim plays fast and loose with the truth, has certainly helped to bring this to the forefront of public consciousness. In Canada, Stephane Dion became the leader of the Liberal Party largely on the basis of his emphasis on environmental causes. This even though Canada's environmental record worsened while he was environment minister and his party was in power.

The noises being made by the Liberals are that they are planning to take some radical steps to change things in Canada. Charles Adler managed to extract a picture of the future from Mark Holland, a Liberal MP and adviser to Dion. Apparently the Liberals would place severe limits on the Alberta oil industry in order to meet targets. There's no mention on how the economy might recover from such a shock to the system, nor what difference this would make in the long run since China is now preparing to open scores of new fossil fuel-burning plants. (China is not considered a developed nation under Kyoto.)

I think it's important to take a step back from the precipice here and look at a more balanced approach. It will do no good to destroy the world's economy with reactionary policies, especially since there is a great deal of disagreement out there (see Larry King debate) about what the right solution may be.

We are in this boat partly because we have been bad stewards of the planet. We've been belching out pollutants for 300 years without thought to the consequences. Add to this the destruction of the rain forest, clear-cutting of timber and pollution of our waterways and it's no wonder we're in the mess we're in. We've built our economies by allowing industry to profit without responsibility. Having done so, it's equally irresponsible to turn this around on a dime. Prime Minister Harper stated the obvious recently: "The problem is enormous. It's large, it's long-term and there are no quick fixes to this," Harper told reporters in Ottawa last Friday. "You can't just snap your fingers and reduce Canada's energy use by one-third in the space of a couple of years."

The Liberals are being hypocritical in pushing this issue, seeing that emissions rose to 27% above 1990 levels while they were in power. Yet something obviously must be done. Is nuclear power safe enough for its use to be expanded? Does that create a whole other range of problems? What pressures or rewards can be brought to bear on industry to eliminate unnecessary waste? How can processes be refined to be as fuel-efficient as possible? Is there any scientific research promising solutions to this issue? Questions, questions, questions.... There are no simple answers.

Deserved Praise

"Learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow." (Isaiah 1:17)

I came across a natural follow-up on the last few blogs with the latest recipient of the Wilberforce Forum Award. Each year since 1989 Prison Fellowship has given the William Wilberforce Award to that one person who has made a substantial difference in the face of formidable societal problems.

The winner this year is a man of whom most people would likely never have heard. His name is Gary Haugen, founder of the International Justice Mission and champion of the ongoing struggle to end human trafficking.

Like Wilberforce, Haugen found himself face-to-face with an issue from which he could not retreat. In 1994 he was on temporary reassignment from the U.S. Department of Justice working with the United Nations genocide investigation in Rwanda. The horrific scenes which he visited as he collected evidence would not allow him to return to normal life. The more he read his Bible, the more verses like the one above would speak to him. He decided he had to act.

He surveyed more than sixty-five organizations representing some 40,000 overseas missionaries and relief workers and Haugen found numerous examples of modern-day injustices for which there seemed to be no remedy. Issues like child prostitution, the murder of street children, persecution, etc... abounded, yet those who were aware of the problem lacked the resources or the power to affect change.

So, in 1997 Haugen formed the International Justice Mission (IJM), a human-rights organization founded to seek justice on Christian principles. the organization includes lawyers, criminal investigators, and government relationships workers who defend and rescue victims of violence, sexual exploitation, slavery, and oppression around the world. Their four-fold purpose is:

• Victim Relief - Relieve the victim of the abuse currently being committed.
  
• Perpetrator Accountability - Bring accountability and just consequences under the law to the specific perpetrator(s) of abuse.
  
• Structural Prevention - Prevent the abuse from being committed against others who are also at risk by strengthening community factors that are likely to deter potential oppressors, reduce the vulnerability of at-risk populations and empower local authorities to stop such abuses.
  
• Victim Aftercare - Provide access to services to help victims transition to their new lives and to encourage long-term success.

Haugen is an author of two books: Terrify No More and Good News about Injustice. The advice is not to read them unless you're prepared to do something with what you learn. You will be changed.

Congratulations to Gary Haugen. I hope we hear a lot about the success of his organization. they're helping to make the world a better place.

Change Your World

I've been thinking about politics this week. I watched part of President Bush's "State of the Union" address last night; I was reading about Stephen Harper's reflections on his first year as Prime Minister of Canada today, and I just finished reading about William Wilberforce (shown at right).

I guess I tend to be an idealist. I like to think that there are people who mean what they say and live their lives with integrity. I want to believe that people, ordinary people who care, can make a difference. Yet what I so often see is the politics of compromise and posturing for the photo-op. Is it possible today to rise above partisan politics and actually just do the right thing on a consistent basis?

That's why I included William Wilberforce. He served in the British Parliament in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and made as profound an impact as anyone in his time. He was born to privilege and position and yet risked both by embracing unpopular causes, simply because he believed in them. Along with an, at first, small group of sympathizers, Wilberforce took on the most powerful cartel in the British Empire in defence of the weakest.

A lifetime of labour enabled him to see not only the end of the slave trade in the British Empire, but the advancement of many worthy causes that ultimately changed the course of history. What causes a man to work tirelessly for almost forty years in parliament? It certainly wasn't the money - he already had that. In fact, during difficult times for the country, he gave away, in at least one year, more than he earned in order to help relieve the suffering.

Something had shifted in the psyche of this man who was elected at the ripe old age of 21. An old schoolmaster of Wilberforce's joined him on a trip to the continent and, over the course of time, led him to commit himself to the study of the Bible. Later that year he sought counsel from none other than John Newton, author of "Amazing Grace," and somewhere in those events he committed himself to follow Christ, whatever the cost.

He saw the corruption in politics, which he'd seen first hand, he'd witnessed the vulgarities of British society. (Some estimates claimed that up to 1 in 4 women in London at the time were engaged in prostitution. One-eighth of the deaths in London were blamed on excessive drinking. Animals were tortured for entertainment and frequent executions drew huge crowds.) He wrote in his journal: "Almighty God has set before me two great objectives, the abolition of the slave trade and the reformation of manners."

His story is inspiring and, thankfully, will be told in a movie being released soon called appropriately "Amazing Grace."

Here's the question. What are the causes today which are worthy of a life-long commitment? What is it that can make your eyes shine with passion? Wilberforce, with his Biblical worldview, believed that he could succeed in spite of all of the odds because it was God Himself who had given him this task. The lives of thousands and the destiny of millions was changed for the better because of it.

Perhaps you and I were not born to privilege like Wilberforce. We may not carry the same influence as he did. Yet each of us can affect the lives of those around us in a positive way if we will.

That's what I believe that the church is: it's a community of people who have decided to follow Jesus Christ - wherever He leads. Jesus was a revolutionary who refused to use physical force, but rather, the power of truth. The church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15). In spite of its failings - and they have been many and well-documented - God changes the world through the transformed lives of ordinary men and women.

I believe that there is a generation of people who are looking for something or someone to believe in. Are you tired of being let down and disappointed? Take this challenge. Search for the Christ that Wilberforce found and see what that does for your perspective!

Heroes

Wesley Autrey was simply waiting for the train with his two daughters. He wasn't planning on risking his life, he just reacted. A young man nearby began to have a seizure and staggered backwards, falling onto the tracks of the New York subway. Death appeared certain, as a train was already coming out of the tunnel and into the station.

What happened next shocked a city. Wesley, a construction worker and navy veteran, leapt onto the tracks, situated the man between the two rails and flattened himself down on top of him. The train cleared them by less than an inch. the young man is recovering in hospital and Wesley is trying to get used to his new found fame. You can watch a video of an interview with him by clicking on this link.

Understandably, Autrey is being hailed as a hero for his actions. We hear stories like this and we hope that, if placed in that situation, we would do the same thing. But, the question is, what makes us, as human beings, applaud actions such as these? This is obviously a worldview question.

Stark materialism can't provide a satisfactory answer for it. Neo-Darwinists call acts like this the result of "enlightened" selfishness. So, a Neo-Darwinist would say that parents care for their children and family as a way of guaranteeing that their "selfish genes" get passed on to the next generation. But, even if this explanation were reasonable, it certainly doesn't explain why someone would jump in front of a train to save a stranger.

In a worldview in which meaning is limited only to this earthly existence, self-sacrifice in acts of heroism are actually the peak of stupidity. What possible selfish purpose would it serve for someone to lay down their life for another if that would end their opportunity to perpetuate themselves.

On the other hand, for a person with a Biblical worldview, this type of act makes complete sense. Jesus said that "Greater love has no-one than this, that a man lay down his life for a friend."

Since this life is a pre-cursor to an eternal life with God, and since each human being was created in God's image, heroic acts like this are to be admired. It's hard to deny that we know this intuitively. That's why we all look up to heroes!

Worldview continued...

We've now looked at the easy part - the four questions that a worldview needs to answer: the questions of origin, meaning, morality and destiny. Obviously, anyone can throw out an answer to these questions, so we need more than the four questions in and of themselves. Ravi Zacharias uses three tests to verify any statement's claim to truth. I think you'll find them helpful.

The first of these tests is the test of logical consistency. Is what is being claimed logically consistent or are there obvious contradictions? Many people's worldviews fall apart at this first question - they simply contradict themselves.

The second test is the test of empirical adequacy. In other words, is there any evidence to support what is being claimed? Anyone can make a claim, but that doesn't make it true. What facts or datum back up those claims? This test separates mythology from the historical claims of Christianity.

The third test is experiential relevance. The question here is does it work in real life? For example, atheism would have to make the claim that there is no real basis for values - and therefore they don't exist in reality. But this leads to some ridiculous claims. Ravi Zacharias recounts a speaking engagement at a university. One young man wanted to argue that there was no such thing as evil. Ravi asked the following question: "If I were to place a live baby on this table; take a sword and proceed to cut that baby in pieces, would that be evil?" The student was obviously pushed into a corner and stated, "I would not like it, but I could not call it evil." Yet, instinctively, none of us can live with that conclusion. We know that evil exists. So, in this case, atheism fails the experiential relevance test.

So, in review. The three tests are: the test of logical consistency, the test of empirical adequacy and the test of experiential relevance. I hope that you will find these tests helpful in your search for truth.

Worldview - Part 4 - Destiny

The final question in helping to define a worldview is "what is our ultimate destiny?" Once again, from a Biblical perspective, man's destiny springs from the fact that God created us in His image. His original intension for us was to be in relationship with Him. Man's disobedience brought about a separation between us and God. This precipitated the coming of Jesus Christ as a sacrifice to build a bridge back to God.

Herein lies the choice. The Bible teaches that the eternal life God offers is available to "whoever believes in Him (Christ)..." The word "believe" in the New Testament is not simply an intellectual assent but it implies a commitment, a reliance on Jesus as Saviour. On the other hand, those who choose not to accept God's offer of reconciliation will face an eternity in that condition. Hell has been called "God's ultimate compliment to man's freedom to choose."

So, in summary, the Bible teaches that man was designed with a soul that lives on after the body dies. His destiny stretches far beyond the confines of earthly experience.

Conversely, an atheistic view of man ends at the grave. Since he is simply a product of a blind evolutionary process, he has the same ultimate destiny as a dog, a cat or even a bug. This view of man diminishes his value and ultimately leads to despair.

One of the byproducts of a Biblical worldview is the concept of hope. Failure does not have to be final. Redemption is possible. Even the worst reprobate can have the hope of a better eternity as demonstrated in the promise of Jesus to the thief dying beside Him - "Today you will be with me in paradise."

Worldview - Part 3 - Morality

Today we're dealing with the third issue in the examination of a worldview, and that is morality. The question is, "how do I determine right from wrong?" Again we'll begin with the perspective of a biblical worldview.

The Bible teaches that morality flows from the very character of God Himself. We learn that God is a righteous God, and that He demands the same of us. The Ten Commandments have provided the framework for the legal system of the Western world for centuries. Those commands are not arbitrary, but are reflections of who God is.

For example, God is the life-giver, the Creator; therefore, we are not to commit murder. It is wrong because each person is created in the image of God and, therefore, valuable. God is faithful, He keeps His commitments; therefore, we are not to commit adultery. He ordained marriage and designed it for one man and one woman for one lifetime. We are to be faithful to each other in that relationship because God is faithful. The same is to be said of God's commands regarding not lying; not coveting, etc... There is a reason these things are wrong - they violate God's character.

In our society today we see the result of decades of moral relativism as our secular culture has done away with a fixed moral compass. As non-Christian influence has expanded we've seen a growing disregard for human life with abortion on demand and an increasing tendency towards euthenasia. If we are simply the products of time and chance and a blind evolutionary process then who is to say what is right or what is wrong.

It was the Nazis after World War II that were being tried for war crimes who clearly demonstrated the difficulty when we declare there are no absolutes. They asked who we were to judge them, by what standard were we going to hold them to account? If there are no absolutes, who judges what is right or wrong? This is where modern man runs into difficulty. On the one hand we know that some things are right and some things are wrong; on the other hand, without an absolute standard we don't know why. We're left with standards that float on the whim of public opinion, watching a legal system make decisions which make us scratch our heads. Much of this stems from the secular worldview embraced by much of Western society.

An argument I've heard from some is that you don't have to believe in God to be moral. This is true. There are, I'm certain, a great number of moral atheists. However, logically, they have no reason to be moral. If they believe that there is no higher authority, and that there are no absolutes, therefore morality is simply one choice among many. They have no reason to be moral unless it is of some personal benefit to them.

Ultimately the question boils down to this: Is there such a thing as right and wrong? Most people, regardless of their religious beliefs, come to the conclusion that there are some things that are simply right or wrong. Where does that realization come from? Scripture would tell us that all humans are born with some sense of right and wrong because they are created in God's image.

Tomorrow we'll look at the final question and then look at some cultural examples.

Worldview: Part 2 - Meaning

Sorry for the delay - it was a busy New Year's Eve. But here we go with part 2 of our series on Worldview. If you're just tuning in, you may want to go back and start with the introduction. The last edition dealt with the question: where did we come from? Today's question is: what is the meaning of life?

From a Biblical perspective, the meaning for which we were created springs from our Creator. God made us to have relationship with Him. As Augustine said, "Everlasting God, in whom we live and move and have our being: You have made us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You."

Throughout Scripture we find many references to the fact that God calls us to co-operate with Him in His plan of redemption. Simply put, the Bible speaks of an originally perfect creation, defined by a deep and loving relationship between God and mankind. This was followed, however, by man's disobedience and rebellion against God, which led the human race into spiritual separation from God. God's ultimate answer to this rebellion was the willing sacrifice of His Son to pay the price for our rebellion, and to satisfy the demands of justice. Jesus Christ became the way back for all of us into relationship with the Creator.

Those who come to God in Christ and are restored to relationship with God become a part of the community called the church. The church has been described by the Apostle Paul as "the Body of Christ." We are His agents in the world, with the expressed purpose of being "ambassadors" for God, helping others to be reconciled to God. As people created in the image of God we are called to reflect His nature by using our creative gifts to make the world a better place. The Bible teaches us that, as Christians, everything we do reflects on God. For that reason, Christians, though not perfect, ought to be exemplary in whatever enterprise they find themselves engaged.

Following a secular worldview would lead to the conclusion that there is ultimately no meaning in life. We are simply here to have a good time while we can. There is no real purpose to help others other than it may make us feel better about ourselves. Some secularists would counter that meaning comes from perpetuating the species and becoming a part of the ongoing process of evolution. But that is only cold comfort when at the end of your life you simply face oblivion and non-existence.

Other religions, such as Hinduism, would tend towards fatalism, as demonstrated in the Indian caste system. According to that religion, you were born as you were as a direct consequence of karma - the cause and effect of how you lived in a previous incarnation. They view it as bad karma to interfere with this process. Therefore, outcasts (lower caste people) in India are unable to rise above their lot in life and are faced with a lifetime of poverty in the hopes that their actions might provide for a better life in their next go-around.

What is your purpose? Is there meaning in your life? Why? All questions worth asking. As Plato said, "The unexamined life is not worth living."

Worldview - Part 1 - Origin

The first question to be dealt with in a worldview is that of origin - where did we come from? The answer to this question has a lot of implications for how we live our lives.

From a Christian perspective, the answer is that we were created by a personal God who loves us and has a purpose for our lives. Using the Bible as our frame of reference, we see from Psalm 139 that God was intimately involved in the smallest detail of our formation. Genesis 1 tells that God gave each human being a living soul, designed for relationship with Him. This applies to every human being, and so affects the way Christians are to treat others. Jesus stated that all of God's law can be summed up in two commandments: to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and then to love our neighbor (our fellow man) as ourself.

This view of origin changed the way that people treated each other right from the first days of Christianity. Christians cared for the outcasts of society, not because they could contribute anything, but because they were people created in the image of God. It was Christians like William Wilberforce and John Newton who eventually brought an end to the inhuman slave trade for the same reason. Today, still, Christians minister to the poor and the outcast of society because, in each of them, we see the "Imago Dei" - the image of God.

Critics would quickly point to the pogroms and the persecution of which the church has been guilty over the centuries - and that criticism is valid to a point. However, those who would perpetrate such evil in the name of Christianity go against the teachings of the God they claim to serve. In other words, they are living in a manner that is inconsistent with a Biblical worldview. Jesus said, "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21). It would be akin to a medical doctor who, rather than healing, contributes to someone's illness, breaking his hippocratic oath.

On the other hand, a secular worldview would take as its view of origin that mankind evolved from a series of random occurrences in amindless universe. We are here simply because we survived while other species didn't. We are merely highly developed animals, whose final destiny is the dust. The logical outworking of this belief is the devaluing of human life. What, after all, is the justification for helping the disadvantaged when they have nothing to offer back to the species?

If we are only flotsam and jetsom in the universe and have no purpose beyond this life, why keep the unwanted child - abortion makes sense; why care for the severely disabled - they serve no purpose. It was this reasoning that led Hitler to destroy millions in the gas chambers of World War II. He was a staunch believer in the superiority of the Aryan Race and set out to destroy the "mongrel races." He believed, as he learned from evolutionary theory, in the survival of the fittest. He was merely helping nature along. The Nuremberg Trials were an eye-opener in that they had to appeal to a "higher law" in order to find the Nazis guilty of crimes against humanity.

While the criticisms of a sometimes violent church history are somewhat valid, as admitted above, what about the atrocities committed by those with a non-theistic view of the world? The worst tyrants in the history of the world have been those who denied the existence of God and therefore lived as though there was no-one to whom they must ultimately give account. I speak of men like Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, Chairman Mao and those who have inherited his office. If you believe that we are all the products of a mindless process, on what grounds do you say that they were wrong?

What I've tried to demonstrate here is an example of how worldview does shape the way we live our lives and affects culture at large. We need to think about what we believe and why because ideas have consequences. We'll pick up on the second question tomorrow.

Worldview - an introduction.

Yesterday we looked at the question of worldview and its importance in helping us find the truth. Today we're going to continue in that theme and look at exactly what a worldview is and how to frame the discussion.

Simply put, a worldview is a lens through which we view the world and by which we interpret events, information and experiences. Each of us has one, whether we have thought it through or not.

I have found Ravi Zacharias, a prolific Christian author and speaker, very helpful in his work on this subject. He says that a worldview has to answer four basic questions: Where did I come from? What is life's meaning? How do I define right from wrong and what happens to me when I die? These can be categorized as Origin, Meaning, Morality and Destiny. The catch, and the reason that Christianity rises above other worldviews, is that these four categories must be coherent: they must make sense together. The answer to each question must also stand on its own - it has to conform to reality.

Nancy Pearcey has taken a slightly different approach in her book Total Truth. She gives three categories: Creation, Fall, and Redemption. The questions are basically the same. I would highly recommend her newsletter for an example of how a solid grasp of worldview can help you to make sense of the world. Understanding this subject can also help you to better identify the biases and prejudicial tendencies of news outlets and academic institutions. As already stated, we all have a worldview. What we need to do is be upfront about that fact. Tomorrow we'll begin with the first question and look at the different answers we might get from various viewpoints.

Christianity & Science

There's a theme that keeps being repeated over and over again in the popular media which basically states that there is a war between religion (particularly Christianity) and science. Time magazine recently did a cover on just this subject. A British television station went one further, airing a two-part special titled "The Root of All Evil?". Both Time and the TV series featured Richard Dawkins, arguably the most famous apologist of Darwinism.

One of the most consistent myths being perpetrated by Dawkins and his ilk is that Christianity promotes ignorance and superstition. He may have some scientific qualifications, but his grasp of history could certainly be improved.

As Rodney Stark outlines in his book, The Victory of Reason, it was Christian Europe that provided the fertile soil for modern science. As he states, Christianity "embraced reason and logic as the primary guides to religious truth." It was, in part, the understanding that God was an intelligent being who created in a logical and orderly manner that encouraged scientists to look for the order in nature. There were laws in nature because there was a law-giver.

I think it's a given that there are many, if not most, religions which are anti-science, but Christianity is not one of them. What Christians object to is pseudo-science: making outlandish faith claims and calling it science. Retired Berkeley law school professor Phillip E. Johnson, among others, have pointed out the propensity of some members of the scientific community to make truth claims without the required evidence.

The Discovery Institute is an organization established by well-known scientists such as Michael Behe, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer and Jay Richards who also happen to be Christians. So was Isaac Newton, by the way. All of these men - and countless other men and women - have found that their Christian faith and scientific investigation are mutually compatible.

What intellectually drew me to Christianity was the fact that it is based in history and has a comprehensive view of the world. It has as its central tenet an historical event - the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It presents a view of the world that makes sense at every level. As C.S. lewis wrote: "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."

Over the next few posts we're going to look at the idea of worldview, and how the Biblical worldview compares with that of other faiths - including atheism. Your comments are welcome.

Merry Christmas!

It's Christmas season again, and once again the debate is raging all over post-Christian North America. Do we say "Merry Christmas" or are we infringing on someone's rights? Do we put up a Christmas tree or is it now a "Holiday Tree?"

Walmart has done its polling and decided that its good for business to dare to say the "C" word. Most others will stick with the politically correct "Happy Holidays." All of this foolishness has once again got a lot of Christians up in arms and writing letters in defence of Christmas. I was tempted to do the same with this blog.

However, the fact is this: we no longer live in a Christian society, and we need to stop pretending that we do. It is not our job to try to make everyone celebrate our Christian holidays just because we do, and just because everybody used to. It's our job to make the way we celebrate so attractive that they want to join us. I love Christmas - it's a great time of year. I like the fact that we can turn our attention to the coming of Jesus Christ into this world. He is the greatest gift ever given, after all.

So, what can you do to demonstrate the real meaning of Christmas? Put up your own nativity on your own lawn. Take a neighbor to see the new movie "The Nativity Story" and talk about it afterwards. Invite a friend to a Christmas Eve service. Take some carolers to a Nursing Home or a street-corner. Give a secret gift to someone who needs it and do it in the name of Jesus. Celebrate Christmas and let your good works point people to our Father in heaven.

Surprise! Hollywood Influences Children.

I know that some of you are shocked by this, but a recent study has confirmed what many have been saying all along, graphic movies have a negative impact on our children. According to an article in the Washington Post and re-run in the Toronto Star, there was a substantial difference in risky behavior between 9-12 year-olds whose parents allowed them to watch 'R' rated movies and those who didn't.

Remember that in Canada the ratings system is quite different, so many movies rated 'R' stateside are actually '14A' here or even 'PG13.' According to the study done by researchers at Dartmouth Medical School, children with permissive parents were 40% more likely to consider using cigarettes or alcohol than their more restricted peers.

This simply confirms what many parents have already assumed to be fact - GIGO "Garbage In, Garbage Out." There have been voices speaking up for years but they have largely been ignored by the mainstream media or dismissed as crackpots. Movie critic Michael Medved has been an especially articulate spokesman in favor of some self-control from Hollywood (don't hold your breath). A couple of books have spoken specifically to this issue, incuding: "Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values" and one he co-authored with his psychologist wife: "Saving Childhood: Protecting Our Children from the National Assault on Innocence."

We live in a complicated age. Technology has enabled us to have instant access to news and entertainment from anywhere in the world to wherever we happen to be. This new freedom is not necessarily a good thing if we haven't learned how to discern. This is particularly important for the age group mentioned in this study. We've focused a lot in our society on the unhealthy diets which our fast-food culture has inflicted on our kids, but what about the junk food for the brain that passes for entertainment. Regarding the morality of the movie and music industry the question seems to be "how low can you go?"

I guess the good news coming out of this study is that parents who took an active role in the viewing choices of their children were actually able to make a difference. Don't give up on being parents. Your kids may fight you, your friends may criticize you, liberal media may mock you, but your kids need you. Hang in there!

Stephane Dion's Big Adventure

So, it looks like all of the prognosticators and seers of the future missed the boat. The little guy from Quebec (Oh, Oh!) has surprised everyone with an upset win in the Liberal leadership race. There will be no "Rae days" for Canada and Iggy and Stephen Harper will not have to wrestle over who gets to be the conservative. Instead, it appears that the environment will be front and center in the next general election if Mr. Dion has his way.

Will this be a new day for the Liberals? Can they put the scandals and infighting of the past behind them? Will Dion be electable West of the Ontario/Manitoba border? Time will tell but now the clock is ticking on the next election.

It's an interesting time in Canadian politics. We now have a Conservative minority government which appears willing to take principled stands on issues such as human rights and yet is terrified of allowing their own MPs to comment on moral issues. Bloggers are even now leading a charge in an attempt to force them to declare themselves on abortion and other contentious issues.

There's no such ambivalence from the Liberal camp. With very few exceptions their party is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, pro-marijuana, etc... They do live up their name, don't they?

The problem that many have with politics in Canada is that, in spite of all of the media hand-wringing about the Liberals, our real party choices seem to start in the Center and move Left from there. There are policy differences, but not on many of the issues which resonate with moral conservatives. For us, it appears that the long walk through the political wilderness will continue for the foreseeable future.

Who Cares? Our fascination with celebrity.

Today's blog is more of a rant. I guess I'm just tired of our culture's fascination with the rich and famous. I'm not one of those who waited breathlessly for the wedding photos from Tom Cruise and his new wife, Katie somebody. Isn't he the one who was recently vilified for his criticism of Brooke Shields taking medication for her post-partum depression? And then he invited her to the wedding. How nice.

Then we get the big debate over whether or not Kelly, the hostess of Good Morning America, is homophobic because she didn't like the fact that Clay Aiken put his hand over her mouth. By the way, Clay has never come out and said that he's gay. Rosie O'Donnell, however, has claimed him as a part of the homosexual community. Not sure yet what Clay thinks of that.

So - how exactly does Rosie end up on a talk show? Because a lot of people actually care what she thinks. I don't get it.

I really don't get it that all of this stuff makes the front page of the newspaper, over and over. Britney whats her name files for divorce from Kevin and everybody's supposed to be shocked? What's the average life span of a marriage in Hollywood anyway - six months? This is Tom Cruise's third already, isn't it?

Anyway. Pardon my rambling. But I think it speaks to the shallowness of our culture that these are the opinionmakers, the molders of minds, to many in our society. We live in a time of celebrity cults - witness the impact that Christopher Reeves and Michael J. Fox have had on recent elections. I think it's indicative of the fact that so few want to take the time and the energy and do the work necessary to actually inform themselves on things that matter.

I think I'm going to try my hand at a few movies and then take a run at the Governor's mansion in some warm state somewhere. After all, I wasn't born in the U.S. either. Maybe, eventually, they'll even change the rules and I can run for President. I'd better sign off for now. I think I'll go and look for a few celebrity endorsements. Hey! Geena Davis once made a movie here, I'm sure she must remember me. With her on my team, who knows...

Remembrance Day

Today is November 11, Remembrance Day, a day set aside to honour those who paid the supreme sacrifice on behalf of our nation. As the child of a Dutch immigrant who was in Holland when Canadian troops liberated that thankful nation, this day has always meant something to me.

We very easily take for granted the freedoms that we enjoy. We do live in a different time and age, albeit with its own challenges. However, try to imagine, if you can, what the world could have been like had Canadian soldiers not willingly placed their lives on the line to try to stop a European tyrant named Hitler, or if all of Korea were ruled by the communists.

There have been other conflicts as well - including the current war in Afghanistan against the Taliban. I'm proud of our soldiers, many of whom are younger than my eldest son. More than forty of them have lost their lives on foreign soil in this current engagement. Each of them have left behind those who love them - spouses, children, siblings, parents and friends.

This Remembrance Day will surely be an especially poignant one, in light of the fact that, for some, the memories are only a few months old. So, take a couple of minutes, at 11:00AM, to remember. It's certainly the very least we can do as a grateful nation. We enjoy today what they sacrificed to provide.

Good News!

Over the last few weeks there have been a number of news reports and op-eds about the videos "Bum Wars" and "Ghetto Fights" and the like. If you look elsewhere on this blog you'll find a couple of articles as well as a response from one of the stores which sold the videos. The good news is that a reversal in policy was just announced. The stores have voluntarily pulled them from the shelves and the Ontario Film Review Board has also announced that they may slap a 'R' rating on the offensive DVD's.

If you recall, the videos included graphic images of thugs beating defenseless people half to death - all for profit. Some teens were actually going out and making their own violent videos in the hopes of cashing in on the new craze.

Brodie Fenlon, who originally broke the story in the Toronto Sun, announced the decision in an article today. Sometimes public outcry can make a difference. If you sent an e-mail or letter or made a phone call, thanks. Let's hope the review board does its job.

What To Do When You Fail

I was deeply saddened upon hearing the news recently of the moral failing of Pastor Ted Haggard. Not all of the details have emerged, and I'm not sure I really care about them. The facts are simple. Ted Haggard admitted to sexual immorality and has resigned as Pastor of New Life Church in Colorado and as President of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). Aside from the obvious political motivations of the whistle-blower, there are some very important issues raised.

Te Haggard is the latest in a list of high-profile preachers who have had moral failings, including Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart. The saddest part of the whole sordid affair is the damage that is done to the church, both local and general, not to mention his family. Trying to repair the damage that is done in one of these situations is like trying to unscramble eggs. The best that can be done is often to simply try to learn from the experience. So, what can we learn from this?

• Don't put people on pedestals. Ted Haggard founded a church and nurtured it to a weekly attendance of 16,000. That is no mean feat. But it doesn't make him superman. He was a sinner saved by grace, just like any other Christian. He is subject to the same temptations and challenges that anyone else faces. That being said, the greater the leadership role, the greater the responsibility. A Christian leader must take care of his or her personal life, recognizing the impact that they have on those who look to them for leadership. I'm sure that Ted Haggard thought that dealing with his problems would be painful and embarassing, perhaps even career-threatening. However, I'm also sure that the pain he is going through now is much more severe.
• Leaders need accountability. From all appearances, New Life Church did have a system in place to provide for just this type of a situation. However, there doesn't appear to have been anyone in his life in whom he could confide and who could have helped him to deal with his problem before it became a public mess. One of the greatest challenges for leaders is living up to the expectations of their followers. That can lead to being more concerned with our reputation than our character. Integrity means being, in fact, what we say we are. Maintaining integrity requires accountability relationships with people who know you well and who have permission to ask you the hard questions. While this is challenging, prevention is always better than the alternative.
• Churches should avoid becoming a "personality cult." It looks as though this has not been a huge problem with New Life as another Pastor has stepped in and can hopefully lead the church through this dark time into better days. It was the problem with Jimmy Swaggart though. His was the face and the voice of Jimmy Swaggart Ministries and so he refused to receive the discipline of his superiors because he didn't think his organization could survive without him for three years. The Bible teaches us that, in the church, while all are important, none are irreplaceable. When we think that we can't be replaced, we should be.
• Failure does not have to be final. While I'm sure that Ted Haggard and his family feel as though they're living a nightmare, life will go on. Back when Jim Bakker went through his disgrace and imprisonment he became the butt of many a comedian's jokes. But I was impressed with his sincerity in his confessional book, "I Was Wrong." People are generally forgiving if they sense real sincerity. While, quite obviously, things will never be the same for Ted, my hope for him and his family is that they are able to work their way through this and demonstrate the power of God to heal. Someone said that if you've fallen, you might as well pick something up while you're down there.

Life is hard sometimes. People do stupid things. When we've failed we must own up to it; take the consequences. It's not easy to do, but whoever said life would be easy? It's in days like these that I remember what Jesus said: "In this world you will have trouble. But be of good cheer! I have overcome the world." If you believe in prayer, remember to pray for the Haggard family and all of those affected by this.

Stem Cell Research & The Media

You likely haven't read it in any of the major newspapers or seen it covered by the CBC, ABC, CBS, Global, CTV, etc..., but there's been a major breakthrough in stem cell research. According to an article by Gudrun Schultz, Scientists in Britain have grown a human liver from stem cells taken from blood from an umbilical cord. In other words, no embryo had to be destroyed; no ethical lines had to be crossed. It was simply good science.

You won't have heard this story likely because there seems to be a very real media bias as regards stem cell research in favor of the mantra that embryonic stem cells provide the "best hope" for scientific breakthroughs. You've likely seen video or heard audio clips of Michael J. Fox's impassioned plea for the passage of a bill that would allow for the expansion of this type of research in order to treat diseases like Parkinson's, from which he suffers. Michael's sincerity is obvious, which makes it all the more important to look at the facts.

Regardless of why those embryos were created - another debate entirely - how do you morally justify their destruction when other alternatives are available? Perhaps the question of the day would be this - why would the mainstream media ignore a scientific breakthrough of this magnitude? This "eureka" type of discovery was covered in London's Daily Mail. These scientists foresee a day when "cord blood from millions of babies born each year is banked, creating a world-wide donor register for liver transplant and dialysis."

Rush Limbaugh's crude accusation that Michael J. Fox was "acting" and exaggerating the effects of his illness are simply a distraction from the real issue: is it a good idea to open a door to questionable scientific practices? My answer is a firm no! Just because we can do something does not mean that we ought to; especially when there is a safe and non-destructive alternative.

According to Schultz: "Research using embryonic stem cells is highly controversial because it requires the destruction of embryos in order to 'harvest' the cells. Further, to this date there has been no success in using embryonic cells to treat any disease or disorder. In contrast, the use of adult stem cells or of cells harvested from umbilical cord blood shortly after the birth of a baby have already been used successfully to treat multiple conditions, including spinal injury and blindness."

The point is this: while Michael J. Fox's condition does tug on the heart strings, it is not a valid argument. Emotion should not - cannot - be allowed to override sound reasoning. One of society's main responsibilities is to defend those who cannot defend themselves. In order to do that we must preserve a healthy respect for human life. Embryos ought not to be created to be destroyed; the U.S. should not open that door, and Canada should not have.

During the reign of our previous Liberal government, Bill C-6 was passed, allowing research on frozen embryos created for in vitro fertilization (IVF) but no longer wanted by the donors. The language of the bill was clear that testing was limited to these embryos. However, already the line has blurred and IVF donors are now being asked to consent to allowing their embryos to be harvested for research - exactly the type of abuse that was feared in the first place. The argument that such legal changes are a "slippery slope" is not mere conjecture, it's history, as Rory Leishman argues in his recent article.

Our culture needs to move off of its trendy pragmatism, and look once again at a moral framework that protects those who are the most vulnerable. We need to stop being lazy intellectually and work through the implications of the decisions we make. The consequences of doing otherwise are frightening indeed.