Skip to main content

Zee ----------

Zee ----------'s Public Library

Aug 13, 15

"First of all, the Bible does not support stupid business practices and irresponsible spending of other people's money. Proverbs 22:29 “Have you seen a man who is expert in his business? He will take his place before kings; his place will not be among low persons.”"

  • First of all, the Bible does not support stupid business practices and irresponsible spending of other people's money. Proverbs 22:29 “Have you seen a man who is expert in his business? He will take his place before kings; his place will not be among low persons.”
  • First of all, the Bible does not support stupid business practices and irresponsible spending of other people's money. Proverbs 22:29 “Have you seen a man who is expert in his business? He will take his place before kings; his place will not be among low persons.”
Aug 08, 15

"“Why,” she asked, “are Christians openly against racial discrimination but at the same time discriminate against certain types of sexual behavior?” (She made more specific references to the types of behavior she felt we discriminated against.)

I said this to her: “We are against racial discrimination because one’s ethnicity is sacred. You cannot violate the sacredness of one’s race. For the same reason we are against the altering of God’s pattern and purpose for sexuality. Sex is sacred in the eyes of God and ought not to be violated. What you have to explain is why you treat race as sacred and desacralize sexuality. The question is really yours, not mine. In other words, our reasoning in both cases stems from the same foundational basis. You in effect switch the basis of reasoning, and that is why you are living in contradiction."

  • For every life that is lived at a reasonable level, these three questions must be answered. First, can I defend what I believe in keeping with the laws of logic? That is, is it tenable? Second, if everyone gave himself or herself the prerogatives of my philosophy, could there be harmony in existence? That is, is it livable? Third, do I have a right to make moral judgments in the matters of daily living? That is, is it transferable?

     

    None of these levels can exist in isolation. They must follow a proper sequence. Here is the key: One must argue from level one, illustrate from level two, and apply at level three. Life must move from truth to experience to prescription. If either the theist or the atheist violates this procedure, he or she is not dealing with reality but is creating one of his or her own.

  • “Why,” she asked, “are Christians openly against racial discrimination but at the same time discriminate against certain types of sexual behavior?” (She made more specific references to the types of behavior she felt we discriminated against.)

     

    I said this to her: “We are against racial discrimination because one’s ethnicity is sacred. You cannot violate the sacredness of one’s race. For the same reason we are against the altering of God’s pattern and purpose for sexuality. Sex is sacred in the eyes of God and ought not to be violated. What you have to explain is why you treat race as sacred and desacralize sexuality. The question is really yours, not mine. In other words, our reasoning in both cases stems from the same foundational basis. You in effect switch the basis of reasoning, and that is why you are living in contradiction.

  • , he acknowledges that sadly much of his life was characterized by avoidance: “I had always wanted, above all things, not to be ‘interfered with.’ I had been far more anxious to avoid suffering than to achieve delight. I had always aimed at limited liabilities.”[4]
  • We often swing between belief and unbelief because deep down, like C.S. Lewis, we don’t want to be “interfered with.” We want freedom and truth on our own terms, because we recognize, as one author remarks, “The truth makes us free but first it makes us miserable.”

  • Interpretation is what the decadent civilization does best. While vigorous civilizations discover new things, decadent civilizations endlessly categorize and re-categorize them to accommodate intellectual fads.
  • Decadent civilizations are less interested in discovering new things than in disproving old things. The corruption of the decadent civilizations handicaps its advancement. The middling talents at the helm rewrite history while justifying their misrule by denouncing the achievements of their vigorous ancestors.

  • No civilization has been able to establish human rights without first establishing property rights. Where brute force can seize property, where there is no rule of law, human rights are an impossibility. By abandoning the property rights of the small business people of Ferguson, the politicians had taken an enormous step backwards in the evolution of civilized society.

     

    His majesty the mob ruled Ferguson. To the people who built and owned these businesses, this was far more than property. It was their livelihood, the consequence of years of building and sacrifice to create a business.

  • Those who believe that if you are successful, you did not build it, to follow Obama’s insipid mantra, had no problem sacrificing other people’s property to the predatory behavior of a bunch of barbarians who believed that breaking into a liquor store was somehow an expression of civil rights.

  • it’s “driven by progressives looking for reliable left-wing Democrat voters, that’s a driving force,” she said, “I think there’s a certain amount of just wanting to rub diversity in the noses of conservative communities and places where there isn’t a lot of diversity and just bringing them in and push the whole multicultural meme on us.”
  • A Texas congressman has introduced legislation that would halt the resettlement of United Nations-certified refugees in the U.S. pending a full study on the program’s impact on the nation’s economy and national security.

     

    Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, introduced the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act, or HR 3314, which places an “immediate suspension on allowing immigrants into the United States under the refugee resettlement program, until the Government Accountability Office (GAO) completes a thorough examination of its costs on federal, state and local governments.”

1 - 20 of 23697 Next › Last »
20 items/page

Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »

Join Diigo