Little League World Series and Saudi Arabia?

What is it with Saudi Arabia don't they do anything for themselves? They hire people from other countries to do their work because apparently, native born Saudis are unable to perform any useful tasks but does that include sports, too? The team from Saudi Arabia playing in the Little League World Series does not contain one native born Saudi. The players are all children of foreigners working in Saudi Arabia, their managers are some of those foreign workers. American citizens representing the Middle East against American teams. Especially in this day that is disgusting. If those Americans like the Middle East so much let them stay there.

Individuals playing for a country should be required to have been, born in that country and be a citizen of that country for five years. It the LLWS does not adopt such a rule one day Saudi Arabia will pay the parents of talented baseball players millions of dollars to move to Saudi Arabia just long enough to allow those players to represent Saudi Arabia in the Little League World Series. Much like the New York Yankees does today.

Two Faith Systems: Intelligent Design vs Evolution

InProcess. Last Updated September 02, 2006

Why do we permit our educators to teach one faith system while rejecting another faith system

On the subject of Intelligent Design versus Evolution, an individual may select from two alternatives.

1. The heavens and the earth just happened.
2. The heavens and the earth were created.

Alternative 1: Over an unknown period, an unknown number of events spontaneously occurred resulting in nothing becoming matter. Then, over another unknown period, that matter evolved into some material that evolved into the universe and all forms of life. The reason and cause of the spontaneous actions are not addressed.

Alternative 2: Someone created matter from nothing. Then the matter was molded into the universe and all forms of life. Cause and why are addressed in the only literature that claims to know, The Bible.

Either our universe is the result of Intelligent Design or it just happened.

If the first alternative is correct then we are all accidents with accidental thoughts and emotions.

In efforts to prove the universe just happened various theories have been developed.

A “Theory” is:

A hypothesis that has been tested by experiments, and to which exceptions have been found. A theory can be used to predict phenomena;
a working hypothesis that is considered probable based on experimental evidence or factual or conceptual analysis and is accepted as a basis for experimentation

A “Hypothesis” is:

A tentative explanation of observed facts. A hypothesis is assumed tenable for the purposes of investigation. Every theory or law in science begins as a hypothesis can e confirmed by experiments, which are observations under controlled conditions. When observations or experimental data do not support the hypothesis, it must be changed or discarded.

Two of these theories are The Big Bang Theory and The Steady State Theory.

The Big Bang Theory
George Gamow (1904-68)

The universe began when a single point of infinitely dense and infinitely hot matter exploded spontaneously. The debris of this explosion began to fly away from the explosion point and is still flying and will keep on flying indefinitely. All the galaxies, stars, and planets were formed from this debris.

Time begins at the Big Bang, which happened about 12 billion years ago or 20 billion years ago. .

In 1927 the Belgian astronomer Georges Lemaite (1894-1966) suggested that at some time in the remote past all the matter in the universe was concentrated at one point. The universe began when this “primeval atom” exploded. Gamow, who showed that as the universe began from a “fireball”; leftover warmth from this primeval fireball still filled the universe, further developed this idea. This leftover radiation should now have a temperature of 3 Kelvin, or -454 degrees Fahrenheit.

Will the universe expand forever? There are two opposing views: the expansion may continue forever, or some day it may collapse back into the “primeval atom.” It is known as the Big Crunch. The name Big Bang was given by Fred Hoyle, who believed in the opposing steady state theory. It was meant to be a put-down when he first used it scornfully in a radio talk in 1950.

Steady State Theory
Herman Bondi (UKL b. 1919) Thomas Gold (US 1920-2004)
Fred Hoyle (UK 1915-2001

The universe has no beginning and will have no end. It is constantly producing matter and is expanding.

This theory is now considered flawed and the big bang theory is widely accepted.

The steady state theory includes the idea of spontaneous creation of matter. On the other hand, the big bang theory assumes that all matter that now exists also existed in the past. New matter is not being created. The steady state theory agrees with the big bang theory on one point: the universe is expanding.

The big bang theory holds that the universe had a beginning and will someday have an end. “The old problem of the beginning and end of the universe does not arise at all in the steady state theory, for the universe did not have a beginning and will not have an end, “ according to Fred Hoyle. “ Every cluster of galaxies, every star, and every atom had a beginning but the universe itself did not.”

Observational and experimental data favor the big bang theory and it is now considered the standard theory of the origin, structure, and future of the universe. Hoyle was a staunch supporter of the steady state theory and never gave up his belief in it.

Any theory that does not address the beginning of matter misses the point of the theory, to explain creation of the universe.

The disbelief in the existence of God is Atheism, defined as the disbelief in the existence of God or other deity, the doctrine that there is neither God nor any other deity. What facts support their disbeliefs? Atheism requires Alternative 1.

Those who believe, that God exists and is the power in Intelligent Design have faith that God is and that the Bible is the best way to know Him.

Those who disbelieve in the existence of God and consider the Bible to be not relevant also have faith. The Big Bang Theory depends on a single point of infinitely dense and infinitely hot matter but does not address its origin. From where did the matter come? Did nothing become this matter, how? How was it hot? The Theory makes major assumptions.

Looking at the second alternative, someone made the universe but who and how and when? If someone exists with the ability to make the universe et al, would it not be prudent to attempt to understand all we can about that someone and if that someone requires something of us?

The Bible is the only literature claiming to address the subject.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

Writers of the Bible consider the existence of God to be a fact. Contrast this with the developers of every alternative only claim “a theory.”

As to how the universe came into existence. Learned educators teach “Theories” as fact something even science does not do. To accept the “theories” requires “faith.”

Without the Bible, we have no documentation of the events that resulted in humankind’s origin. Without the Bible, we have nowhere to go to find out whom, how, and when. We are left with no hope of ever answering the questions.

We have two alternatives:

We can live with our ignorance continuing to search but with no hope of answering our questions.

Or

We can use the Bible to answer our questions.

Human beings do not accept ignorance well and will continue to search for answers.

Accepting the Bible requires faith as does rejecting the Bible. Faith to reject the Bible leads to ignorance and hopelessness. Faith to accept the Bible leads to knowledge and hope. Which is better? Is ignorance or knowledge to be sought? Is hopelessness or hope better to be sought?

God’s will is found in His word. Knowing God’s will is not about being smart. Knowing God’s will stems from a hunger and thirst to discover who He is and to develop a relationship with Him. The best way to know the Father is to read what He has to say in the Bible. There are as many opinions as there are people; however, our opinions about spiritual matters have little substance if they are not rooted in the Scriptures.

Romans 12:1-2 describes knowing God’s will through a lifestyle of living sacrifices. Growing in faith and living appropriately are tied together. The more mature spiritually, the more naturally our lifestyle will reflect it. When our behavior is according to biblical moral standards, our faith grows as we realize that our decorum is rewarding and makes sense. God fills us with spiritual blessings and knowledge of His will so that we can walk with Him and continue to grow closer to Him. As Moses said, "If your presence will not go with me, do not bring us up from here.”

Why would anyone intentionally remain ignorant of a Being powerful enough to create the Universe and all that lives both visible and invisible?

Do you ever wonder if we have any policies that make sense?

The NY Times reported in a news conference this morning ''The United States will do our part,'' Bush said. While the U.S. does not plan to contribute troops, it will provide logistical support, command and control assistance and intelligence.

He said it was ''the most effective contribution we can make at this time.''

Bush also said his administration was pledging an additional $230 million to help the Lebanese rebuild their homes and return to their towns and communities.

Hezbollah has already given each family,whose house was destroyed, $12,000 which somebody said was more than the peons make in a year and much more than the cost to replace the houses and furniture destroyed. We must not forget it is our friend, Israel, who we sell weapons to and support who have destroyed those houses. These people hate us and now we are going to give their government money and how much of that money do you think Hezbollah will enjoy? Surely Hillary or McCain will not do worse, do you suppose? If what we are doing is sanity I vote for a little insanity at least for a while.

Can You Explain The Logic?

Sadaam is on trial for killing some Kurds. Sadaam killing citizens of his own country, of which he is President and ultimate authority is, unacceptable but the United States invading a sovereign country killing its citizens, disbanding the government and imprisoning the legally elected President is acceptable? Of course we may not like the elections but in Iraq it was a legal election.

Clinton signed a UN agreement obligating the United States to abide by it, making it permissible for either the UN or World Court to hold accountable leaders of countries responsible for their actions against other countries. One of these days a smart Islamic Lawyer, educated in the United States of course, is going to test that agreement and come for our President via the World Court. Imagine Bush or another of our leaders showing up on television from the Hague. Won't that be a show worth watching....

Performance Enhancing Substances

It seems that each week brings new reports of a sports figure being accused of using performance enhancement substances. These are not athletes and it is not sport. An athlete would never take illegal substances because that would be to admit they are not good enough to compete. These are business people trying to get an edge on the competition by cheating so they can get the big contract. It may be competition but not sport. Microsoft competing with Google is not sport it is business. Ken Lay cheating was not sport it was illegal and he was going to jail. Cheaters should be banned for life on one offense. Until they are, we know the governing bodies approve of the use of performance enhancers to increase ratings. Until only athletes are competing records are even more meaningless than usual.

Testing

In War There Are No NonCombatants.

The definition of the term civilian is one not in the armed services or the police force. The definition of the term combatant is a person engaged in fighting. The definition of combat is armed conflict, battle; struggle, contest.

In war, there are no noncombatants. Anyone, providing support of any form including moral, weapons, ammunition, transportation, medical, food, etc is engaged in the conflict. Killing people behind the battle lines works. The United States proved that in WWII when we dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. Do we believe our carpet-bombing in Germany and in Viet Nam was selective? We killed men, women, children, pets, farm animals, and destroyed buildings, houses, roads, bridges anything within range of the bombs.

In Viet Nam, the enemy would leave babies in the sun by the roadside booby trapped with hand grenades. If our soldiers attempted to show compassion, they died. Eight-year-old girls can kill as easily as a twenty-five year old man can. No one is exempt. Until we are willing to wage war like our enemy, we cannot win. Until we are willing to kill hundreds of people just to get to one, we cannot win.

In Lebanon, anyone providing support of any form involves himself or herself in the combat and is therefore legitimate targets. The Lebanese people made Hezbollah part of their government therefore as part of the Lebanese government anything Hezbollah does; they do as representatives of the Lebanese people. With Hezbollah acting for the Lebanese people all Lebanese people living within the borders of Lebanon are legitimate targets. Since the government of Israel is synonymous with the Jewish religion, all Israelis, within the borders of Israel, are legitimate targets.

Anyone providing support to the United States' troops in Iraq or Afghanistan or "on terror" are legitimate targets. All citizens of the United States are legitimate targets. As in a knife fight, there are no rules in war. We should understand that and act accordingly. Anyone apprehended within the borders of the United States who has intentions to do harm to the United States or its people is a spy and should be treated as such forthwith. Any citizen of the United States, who attempts to betray their nation by waging war or attempting to wage war is guilty of treason and should be punished as the Constitution allows as quickly as possible.

The people of the United States should understand that war is armed hostility between nations and that includes every citizen of each country. War is not something we send our military off to do while we live on as if nothing is different. The purpose of war is to kill, destroy, maim, injure, WIN. Torture should not be used, not for reasons of humanity, but because it does not produce results that are reliable. War is not to be taken lightly.

For the past 50 or so years, we have permitted our government to engage in conflicts around the world; Korea, Viet Nam through Iraq without following the Constitution. We have allowed our presidents to make war on people around the world. If we would follow the Constitution and require the President to ask the Congress to Declare War our military would be a lot less active and we would be safer and the world more friendly. In cases where congress did declare war, it would not be a republican war or democratic war it would be a United States war. Since WWII, we have not engaged in wars to protect our freedom but to force our will on others and now most, if not all, the world hates us and rightly so. We have allowed our Presidents to sacrifice the lives use our military. It is not the responsibility of the United States to free the people of the world. We are not and should not be nation builders.

War is a terrible responsibility and the citizens of the United States have failed in their responsibilities. And because of that failure, the world is a much more dangerous place.

Abraham Lincoln's Suspension of Civil Liberties and Our Holier Than Thou Attitude

You cannot give people democracy. They must want it and be willing to fight for it and to die for it. We look around the world and see governments doing things with which we disagree. We forget our past and we fail to recognize sometimes the people are not right. Remember Abraham Lincoln:

During Lincoln's presidency, he was criticized for taking what were considered "extra-constitutional measures." But in the end, the verdict of history is that Lincoln's use of power did not constitute abuse since historians rank Lincoln as number one among the great presidents.

Far harsher would have been his denunciation if the whole American experiment of a democratic Union had failed--as seemed possible given the circumstances. If such a disaster occurred, what benefit would have been gained by adhering to a fallen Constitution? It was a classic example of the age-old conflict in a democracy: how to balance individual rights with security for a nation.

Between Abraham Lincoln's April 1861 call for troops--the beginning of the Civil War--and the official convening of Congress in special session on July 4, 1861, Lincoln performed a whole series of important acts by sheer assumption of presidential power. Lincoln, without congressional approval, called forth the militia to "suppress said combinations," which he ordered "to disperse and retire peacefully" to their homes. He increased the size of the Army and Navy, expended funds for the purchase of weapons, instituted a blockade--an act of war--and suspended the precious writ of habeas corpus, all without congressional approval.

Lincoln termed these actions not the declaration of "civil war," but rather the suppression of rebellion. Congress is constitutionally empowered to declare war, but suppression of rebellion has been recognized as an executive function, for which the prerogative of setting aside civil procedures has been placed in the President's hands.

Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a procedural method by which one who is imprisoned can be immediately released if his imprisonment is found not to conform to law. With suspension of the writ, this immediate judicial review of detention becomes unavailable. This suspension triggered the most heated and serious constitutional disputes of the Lincoln Administration.

In April 1861 John Merryman spoke out against the Union and in favor of the South and recruited a company of soldiers for the Confederate Army. He not only exercised his constitutional right to disagree with what the government was doing, but engaged in raising an armed group to attack and attempt to destroy the government.

On May 25, Merryman was arrested by the military for treason. His counsel sought a writ of habeas corpus from Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, alleging that Merryman was being illegally held. Taney issued a writ to fort commander George Cadwalader directing him to produce Merryman before the Court the next day at 11:00 a.m. Cadwalader respectfully refused on the ground that President Lincoln had authorized the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

Taney immediately issued an attachment for Cadwalader for contempt. The marshal could not enter the fort to serve the attachment, so the old justice, recognizing the impossibility of enforcing his order, settled back and produced the now-famous opinion, Ex parte Merryman. The Chief Justice defended the power of Congress alone to suspend the writ of habeas corpus.

The Constitution permits the suspension of the writ in "cases of rebellion and when the public safety" requires it. But it is unclear who has the power, Congress or the President.

Taney relied on the fact that the right to suspend the writ was in Article I, section 9 of the Constitution, the section describing congressional duties. Dean of Lincoln historians Richard Nelson Current believes that it was put in this article because the Committee on Style could find no other place for it.

Taney failed to acknowledge that a rebellion was in progress and that the fate of the nation was, in fact, at stake. Taney missed the crucial point made in the draft of Lincoln's report to Congress on July 4:

[T]he whole of the laws which I was sworn to [execute] were being resisted...in nearly one-third of the states. Must I have allowed them to finally fail of execution?... Are all the laws but one [the right to habeas corpus] to go unexecuted, and the government itself...go to pieces, lest that one be violated?

Two years later, Congress resolved the ambiguity in the Constitution and permitted the President the right to suspend the writ while the rebellion continued. Imagine the reaction of our fellow American citizens today if an anti-war demonstrator was treated as Merryman was in 1861 or if the writ of habeas corpus was suspended.

Blogs and Elections

Blogs should make future elections interesting. With no way to controll them, governments will have no way of restricting them as they restrict 527s and other election tools.


As there are no controlls, accuracy and truthfulness will not be limiting factors. As studies routinely show, when there is no accountability people's behavior is unreliable.

Once, it was advocated that a million monkeys banging on a million keyboards would eventually produce the complete works of William Shakespear but thanks to the Internet we now know that is not correct.

But imagine what a million monkeys banging on a million keyboards will do to future elections.

The Stockdale Paradox

Admiral Jim Stockdale was the highest-ranking United States military officer in the “Hanoi Hilton” prisoner-of-war camp during the height of the Vietnam War. Tortured over twenty times during his eight-year imprisonment from 1965 to 1973, he lived out the war without any prisoner’s rights, no set release date, and no certainty as to whether he would even survive to see his family again. He shouldered the burden of command; doing everything he could to create conditions that would increase the number of prisoners who would survive unbroken, while fighting an internal war against his captors and their attempts to use the prisoners for propaganda. At one point, he beat himself with a stool and cut himself with a razor, deliberately disfiguring himself, so that he could not be put on videotape as an example of a “well-treated prisoner.” He exchanged secret intelligence information with his wife through their letters, knowing that discovery would mean more torture and perhaps death. He instituted rules that would help people to deal with torture (no one can resist torture indefinitely, so he created a stepwise system --- after x minutes, you can say certain things --- that gave the men milestones to survive toward). He instituted an elaborate internal communications system to reduce the sense of isolation that their captors tried to create which used a five-by-five matrix of tap codes for alpha characters. (Tap-tap equals the letter a, tap-pause-tap-tap equals the letter b, tap-tap-pause-tap equals the letter f, and so forth for twenty-five letters, c doubling for k.) At one point during an imposed silence, the prisoners mopped and swept the central yard using the code, swish-swashing out “We love you” to Stockdale, on the third anniversary of his being shot down. After his release, he became the first three-star officer in the history of the navy to wear both aviator wings and the Congressional Medal of Honor.

“I never lost faith in the end of the story,” he said, when I asked him. “I never doubted not only that I would get out, but also that I would prevail in the end and turn the experience into the defining event of my life, which, in retrospect, I would not trade.”

I asked, “Who didn’t make it out?”

“Oh, that’s easy,” he said, “the optimists. The optimists were the ones who said, ‘We’re going to be out by Christmas’. And Christmas would come, and Christmas would go. Then they would say, ‘We’re going to be out of here by Easter. And Easter would come, and Easter would go. And then Thanksgiving, and then it would be Christmas again. And they died of a broken heart.”

“This is a very important lesson. You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end---which you can never afford to lose---with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.”

To this day, I carry a mental image of Stockdale admonishing the optimists: “We’re not getting out by Christmas; deal with it!”

The Stockdale Paradox

Retain faith, that you will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties.

AND AT THE SAME TIME

Confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

Acceptance of Church Family Disagreements

People mumble about how difficult it is to find a "right" church to meet with.

It is disappointing when one finds that a church is doing things they believe to be wrong or makes them uncomfortable but is it worth leaving the assembly? Do you sin by association? As messed up as some of the churches, addressed in Revelation were, Jesus never told those he commended to leave those he was criticizing.

Is the assembly a worship event or hs man decided it is worship?. In Acts the church assembled to remember Jesus, to "break bread." In Hebrews the church assembled to encourage each other to love and good works. No place do we read the church met to worship. Paul encouraged the individuals of the church in Rome to each present their body a living sacrifice which is their reasonable service or worship.

With the recent activities surrounding the "unity" of the Church of Christ with the Christian Church you can almost forget that the a cappella churches have divided over pre-millennialism, pacifism, congregational cooperation, Bible classes, the use of multiple communion cups, the construction of kitchens and bathrooms in church buildings, the indwelling of the holy Spirit, charismatic gifts, hermeneutics, women in public leadership, choruses, and worship teams, cell groups, prayer partners, over/under discipling, and the nature of total commitment, etc.

Our local congregation receives calls from people looking for a "good" church and many times we are found wanting and the caller does not want to assemble with us. Why? We have a kitchen. We have bathrooms. We use individual cups during communion. We have a Youth Minister. We have Bible Classes. For some, those are as or more important than instruments. Human families have disagreements but they are always family. Spiritual families have disagreements and they hate each other and refuse to associate.

Based on Jesus' prayer, recorded by John, the world is not going to believe that the Father has sent Him and that will be because of our actions. The church needs to rethink our responsibilities. Our actions show we would rather let the world enter eternity with no hope than to find ways to get along with our brothers and sisters. And we should make no mistake, anyone who has obeyed the Bible's teaching on what they must do to be saved are brothers and sisters. Is it any wonder the church is not effective?

No Morals, No Laws

In the Declaration of Independance, our founders asserted that the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle the people to exist equal among the Powers of the Earth. That the people’s Creator endows them with certain unalienable Rights among which are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness and with the firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, the signers pledged their Lives, Fortunes and sacred Honor. When the people deny or fail to acknowledge God they undermine the very basis on which the existence of their country depends.

The Rights of the people come from God, not from man. What man gives, man can take away. What God gives, no man can take away. If there is no God, man’s authority controls the people. Religion and morality are essential to the existence of the United States. National morality cannot exist without religious principle. Without morals, laws cannot exist. Nothing is wrong. Anything and everything is permissible. As an example, those who advocate abortion on demand, same-sex marriage, birth control and its active distribution, and divorce for any reason, have as their goal society’s permission to have sex with anyone, anytime, anywhere with no responsibility no accountability. The practice of morality is necessary for the well-being of Society.

The framers of the Constitution never conceived of government being allowed to interfere with the free exercise of the Christian religion in public life. They expected the longstanding religious heritage would remain as the foundation of the Republic the existence of which depends on the public institutions of religion, Christian religion.

For the past fifty years or so individuals with the assistance of the Judicial System have steadily worked to be free from authority and restraint and to rewrite law and make lawlessness legal!

Christian religion, in its purity, is the source of all genuine freedom in government. No government can exist and be durable without the principles of Christian religion. This July 4th I encourage everyone to read the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. The people go into exile for lack of knowledge.