Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.

Withdraw the NYTimes credentials?

June 30th, 2006 Viewed 1655 times

The New York Times seems to be doing everything in its power to uncover concealed information– information that would help terrorists more than it would protect Americans. This raises the issue again of just what do we expect from the media.

To a degree, we want the media to examine the government. We want them to inform us about what the government is doing, about possible corruption, about how our money is being spent. We want media to be somewhere that we can’t be or don’t choose to be. We want them to have information that we can sit and digest. We want some opinion because we don’t always have one well formed.

Part of the problem may be that the current environment that the media is in is one that celebrates the scoop. To a degree this has always been the case, but not really to the extent that it is today. This is why you have news organizations rushing on Election night to declare a winner. You have different news magazines trying to find an angle you haven’t read before.

So, what’s a news organization to do? Well, one option is to get more risque or show people’s dark side. So you have Cops shows and newsmagazine nights devoted to online predators. Then you have those that push to find secrets or secret names, and then pass judgement on whether those things should actually be secret.

This is where the Times made their mistake. They should not have published (or continue to publish as you would have it) secrets that could be used against us. It doesn’t matter if “the terrorists are aware of this and have adapted” or not. The point is that it is a way to track some of this and if it gets us even one terrorist captured then it is worth it.

Tony Snow described the great lengths Congress and the Administration went to explain to the New York Times why they shouldn’t publish this information. He details the reasoning, and explains that there was no reason this should have been published. I tend to agree with the National review that the Times should have its credentials to the White House withdrawn as a symbol of protest. If they are out to get this administration, or just out to get a scoop, they need to be shown that this kind of leaking will not be tolerated.

Video Games vs. TV

June 30th, 2006 Viewed 1588 times

Mindclearer compares different forms of entertainment in this followup post to the benefits of reading.

Reading: Definitely something we do all the time. I find myself reading less fiction all the time. I think the only fictional book I’ve picked up in a while was the latest book in the Left Behind series. (BTW, I think that the powers that be over there have started just seeing how much money they can make, but they make an interesting story if you know the characters.) I am reading through a commentary on Psalms which I find fascinating not just because of the history of the Psalms but because of the stories taken from real life applications of them. Reading the Bible is definitely a plus.

T.V.: The only time that I end up watching T.V. is if there is a specific show that I’m interested in seeing or someone’s sick and bored of the DVDs that we have. A long time ago we kicked cable to the curb for everything but high-speed internet. Even if a given T.V. show is decent you have to deal with commercials that are either trying to shock you or sell sex. It seems that there are not a lot of decent shows left!

Video Games: Who has time?! If you do, I suggest you help some young family with their kids or get some kind of job or something! 🙂 I’m partly joking– had I the time I might play something that tested my mind, but I don’t think I’d play something I had to pay money for.

What are your thoughts?

Buffett and Gates

June 30th, 2006 Viewed 1498 times

A big deal was made Tuesday about Warren Buffett giving a bunch of money to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. It was mentioned multiple times and lead off the ABC nightly news. They made a big deal about the amount of money that would be available to stop AIDS, etc. There were questions about what other charities would do as the BillMelindaWarren charity would be the biggest.

There weren’t any comments about what kinds of things the charity supported. It turns out that

Gates and Buffett are birds of a feather, having both been long time supporters of population control, giving large sums of money to groups that advocate abortion, contraception and sterilization, usually in the name of stopping AIDS or poverty.

As American Princess goes on to list,

Buffett has funded Planned Parenthood of America, the Population Council, NARAL, and Catholics for Choice, and the Gates Foundation is a primary supporter of International Planned Parenthood, to the tune of millions–$5 million in the past three years alone.

It actually is a time for mourning for the lives that will be lost because of what these men will do and support.

Heavy Rains Flood the Northeast

June 30th, 2006 Viewed 1015 times

It’s amazing what power water has. In Upstate New York, some truckers lost their lives as bridges gave way. (All of these pictures originally from Yahoo, archived locally.) Our hearts and prayers go out to the families.


Barbie competes with Paris Hilton and Bratz

June 30th, 2006 Viewed 2557 times

Is it time for Barbie to say, “Bye, bye?” Some think so. It appears the the most villified doll of a generation is getting even more degenerate. It was enough to have a doll that showed off an impossible figure and had boys stripping it (I had one of those on the school bus). Now this doll isn’t radical enough and must be replaced with dolls with the name of “Bratz”. Don’t even make me go the route of Plastic Paris Hilton.

American Princess suggests that the only way that Barbie might be saved is to introduce “Ugly Feminist Barbie.” I guess the idea would be that she would then have supporters in the feminist movement that wouldn’t let her die.

You know we are in trouble when bloggers and news agents talk about Barbie promoting a conservative and wholesome image. Wasn’t this line that had her leave Ken for some surfer dude?

Anyway– I’m glad we’re not into that in the MInTheGap house. If Thomas the Tank Engine ever gets risque, I might be in trouble, though.

Jolie Birth Experience Terrifying

June 29th, 2006 Viewed 1311 times

Angelina Jolie cracks me up. Here’s a woman that is instrumental in breaking up a marriage, is known for playing a game heroine in a movie, and has two adopted kids and then goes to have one of her own and when you boil it all down she has the same fears as every first time mom– will the child breath? do they have all their fingers and toes?

Of course, not every mom can afford a trip to an African country and have optional C-Section instead of going through the natural child birthing process. That would have really impressed me if she could be just a normal woman for once. Oh well.

The Dying Breath of Feminism?

June 29th, 2006 Viewed 1841 times

After all of the effort feminism put forth in order to give women a choice about what to do with their lives, they are now appalled to find out that women would choose to stay at home and raise their kids in ever increasing numbers. In fact, I’ve seen women after they’ve had a child stay home longer than the family leave act allows, and I don’t know that I’ve heard many (if any) women say that they liked leaving their child at daycare, or that they weren’t seriously considering leaving their job once a baby was born.

I find it amusing how people ask about what Virtuous Blonde does. The usual question is “does she work?” or “what does she do for a job?” And I’ve been known to respond with: “Yes she works, harder than I do, but at home.” At the hospital the other night she asked, “Is she employed?” To that I had to say, “No.”

But seriously, women that work at home have a greater impact on the next generation because they are imparting their values to the next generation. Those who send their children to daycare end up producing kids with the daycare’s values.

Women as Authority Figures in the Church?

June 29th, 2006 Viewed 2269 times

I’ve been brought up that women were not to serve in positions of authority in the church.  Some clear teaching has told me that God designed for a man to be in a position of authority– not because of any inherent quality of man that was better, but because of God’s choice.  One only has to look at Paul’s statements regarding the leadership pattern of the family to see God putting the headship of the family (and the responsibility of it) in the father’s hands.  Why?  Paul states that it’s because Eve was tempted first.

Jill Stanek, however, has some interesting points that at least make me think.  I’ve often wondered how the office of Deacon, for example, could only be a position for a man since there were deaconesses in the Bible.  Since I don’t base my belief only on the passage about husband of one wife (but usually default to that one because it’s the easiest!), I don’t have to follow her logic to its complete end.  For example, though Priscilla may have taught Apollos (one wonders where Aquila was), I don’t think that directly equates to having a female pastor/bishop.  It’s one thing to lead a flock, it’s another to train individuals.

I don’t know of any Biblical examples of Paul or someone meeting up with a New Testament church with a female head.  One would think that if the Holy Spirit wanted to say that was an acceptable idea, Paul would have sent a female aid somewhere to be the pastor or came into a church with a female leader.  The Holy Spirit chose not to give us such an example, which people could interpret many ways.

So, I still wonder about female deacons (especially if their mission is to serve), but I continue to believe that the Lord gave the man the position (one that I’m not sure he should have because he was just as complicit in the fall) and take these things under consideration.

Media Bias – Inside Edition Style

June 28th, 2006 Viewed 2252 times

So, I was watching Inside Edition Monday because of circumstances beyond my control, and I was– I want to say amazed, but pretty much nothing amazes me on T.V. any more– amused.  One of the feature articles (if you could get past the 6 year old cheerleaders, Donald Trump’s house selling, and the celebrity weddings) was this whole long segment about two ladies that were taken off of an airplane in hand cuffs.

So, they featured these two ladies in segments long enough to get your interest, giving them professional sounding titles, and then they add during the segment, “Oh, and by the way, they were miss online Playboy girl of the month for april and january” or something to that effect.  Is that a plug for Playboy right there?

Then came the bias– they display the girls individually talking about the horrors they went through because they were sexy or whatever.  The only response came from the anchors or the man at the airport.  Knowing what kind of piece it was going to be, I wouldn’t blame the actual officers or police department from avoiding this like a hot potato.

So, the piece was totally biased against the officers doing their duty, and every accusation that was read by an annoucer got the girls air time to not only show off their stuff but to verbally deny it.  This was in no way balanced, and reminds me again why I don’t go to the media for my information.

Woman shoots her unborn child with a gun, not held accountable

June 27th, 2006 Viewed 1606 times

Here’s one for you, a woman in Virginia killed her child, but because of abortion statutes she was not held liable.  In the latest in bizarre cases, this woman was found in a downtown parking lot with a wound to her abdomen.  She was due to give birth that day!  Instead, she shoots herself, and the state Supreme Court determined that should could not be criminally liable for killing the baby because it was her own and she had a “right” to an abortion.

I don’t know about you– but this is getting rather crazy!


Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.