Islamania boils over. Again.

Okay get this.

Pope Benedict said that Islam is a violent religion.
He caught a lot of flak behind it, especially from those fearful of radical Muslims. And just how did the Islamaniacs respond to the Pope's assertions? If you guessed peacefully, you are dead wrong. Ever the rage-mongers, they spit back with predictable violence, anger and palpable agression.

The Pope was right. So why is he apologizing?

Independent Conservative covers the Glenn Beck TV special "The Extremist Agenda."

Should whites get race based scholarships?

**Updated**
Being an independent conservative, I found very little to agree with the Republicans on during the last election.

However, a clever group of College Republicans at Boston University have found a way to emphasize the ridiculous nature of race based scholarships. In a country so race conscious and race sensitive, why emphasize race in academia? I am only a marginal supporter of "affirmative action".

In response to a Hispanic schorlarship at BU with the same criteria, the president of the CRs said, "There are plenty of poor, white, academically gifted students who need that money just as much."

I agree. And if there's nothing wrong with offering it to Hispanics or Blacks with a race based criteria, then why is it "outrageous" to offer it to white students?

What do you think about what the CRs are doing?

LaShawn Barber weighed in on this yesterday with some excellent commentary. She writes in part:

"These days, affirmative action is a euphemism for dropped standards.
Black students with lower grades and test scores are admitted in place of non-black students with higher grades and test scores. Under affirmative action policies for hiring, black people with lesser qualifications and credentials and/or lower quality credentials are hired in place of non-blacks with better qualifications, more credentials, and higher quality credentials.
I wish a black person somewhere would be honest and tell the truth about why they support race preferences despite the illegality and immorality of such policies. Until someone can articulate why race-based, government-sanctioned considerations are morally wrong, they’ll continue to exist. Here’s a challenge for black readers who support preferential treatment based on race, should they wish to accept it:
If “whites only” scholarships, policies, and programs are obviously wrong, why are “blacks only” scholarships, policies, and programs not wrong? What’s difference between the races justifies lowering standards for one and discriminating against the other?"

U don't know me, do you?

So you think you know me right?:
anti homosexuality, conservative black preacher man from Atlanta. Well, yeah but that's just part of my life.

I'm sure there is more to you, too. Whoever you are.

Here's seven things about me, feel free to share seven things about yourself that I or others reading might not know. Let's pretend we're at Starbucks and having a great cup of coffee.

1. I have the Carpenters (Karen and Richard) greatest hits CD. My wife gave it to me for a birthday present. I love 70s lite rock.
2. I love a good Scrabble smackdown.
3. I don't like hospitals.
4. My youngest son DJ makes me laugh hysterically when he acts like Curly of the 3 Stooges.
5. I had a bad childhood experience at a circus and to this day will not go to amusement parks.
6. I will eat my dessert before my meal if I can get away with it.
7. I have a collection of Andy Warhol's Interview Magazine from 1986-1988.

So what about you?

Are we wrong about homosexuality?

In USA Today, Oliver Thomas, a Baptist minister posits that question with a hypothetical announcement: "Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God's followers."

Thomas' premise is that one day the church (or religious leaders as he puts it) will find out that we were wrong about homosexuality and due to "science" lose its credibility. He compares the controversy over homosexuality to Galileo's persecution when he revealed the earth's place in the solar system. Now, he says "millions" are being persecuted. Therefore, he concludes, we are wrong about homosexuality. In addition, Thomas builds his ludicrous preposition on the favorite cliche of gay activists of the religious stripe.

"For those who have lingering doubts, dust off your Bibles and take a few hours to reacquaint yourself with the teachings of Jesus. You won't find a single reference to homosexuality. There are teachings on money, lust, revenge, divorce, fasting and a thousand other subjects, but there is nothing on homosexuality. Strange, don't you think, if being gay were such a moral threat?"

"Jesus said nothing about homosexuality." I put that one in the same trash can as the "Adam and Steve" cliche of the opposing side. But let's take a brief fantasy ride with Rev. Thomas.

Maybe we are wrong about homosexuality. We are wrong about a lot of things. Man's emerging knowledge is at best seen darkly though a glass as the Apostle Paul put it. That is the frailty of the human condition. Certainly, we do not possess nor equal the omniscience of God. But isn't that the precise reason we should rely on God to tell us what His standards are for sexual conduct and thought? And without a concise, written record from God we are left to determine on our own what God does and does not want. In a word: tragedy. There are two immutable qualities about God which must influence everything we do and say regarding moral issues, especially sexual.
1. God does not change. He is the same today, yesterday and forevermore (Heb 13:8).
2. God's word will not change. He has spoken it, confirmed it and settled it.

Three headed church monsters like this minister are very easy to spot. Their allegiance is never to God, Christ or the Word of God. It always focuses on the airbrushed opinions of humanity. Its very telling that these ministers (who they are helping remains to be seen) quickly divert your attention away from what the Bible says and instead superimpose humanist ideology. They are like Aaron in the Old Testament who in the absence of Moses gave the people what they wanted: A new god which would allow them to act out the lustful and depraved excesses of their hearts (See Exodus 32:1-22)

But God's commands challenge us to reach for the best in thought and deed. Why would we not want to please our Heavenly Father? Why wouldn't we want to conform our ways to align with his Word? I can think of only one reason. Like the rebellious people in the wilderness, some people want a new god. This god doesn't care about who you have sex with, he or it only cares that you loosely categorize it as "love". The truth is that sexual immorality ---whether homosexual or heterosexual--- is far beneath the perfect plan of God. Jesus even said to engage in thinking of sexual activity with someone else (other than your husband or wife) is unacceptable. As the old saints used to say "its tight but its right!"

Thomas' Galileo's statement is clever, but nothing more. The shape or position of the earth is not an equitable comparison to sexual behavior. The question should not be are we wrong about homosexuality, but is God wrong about homosexuality? The answer to that is a resounding, eternal no. Never.

The reason for the Season

Remember, thanksgiving is not a day but a life lived to the fullest in gratitude. Psalms 107:1-9:

Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures forever.

2 Let the redeemed of the LORD say this— those he redeemed from the hand of the foe,

3 those he gathered from the lands, from east and west, from north and south. [a]

4 Some wandered in desert wastelands, finding no way to a city where they could settle.

5 They were hungry and thirsty, and their lives ebbed away.

6 Then they cried out to the LORD in their trouble, and he delivered them from their distress.

7 He led them by a straight way to a city where they could settle.

8 Let them give thanks to the LORD for his unfailing love and his wonderful deeds for men,

9 for he satisfies the thirsty and fills the hungry with good things.

Cash strapped? Call in the gays!

Send me your tired, your poor your money laden gays? What's this? A new immigration policy?

No, but cities across the country have the discovered that great American cash cow named the gay community. And they are falling over themselves to get paid. Atlanta was one of the first to develop a gay tourism aka get the gay money scheme. Now Dallas has jumped onboard the bandwagon. The equation is simple: Gays have plenty of excess capital. Huge sums of disposable income just waiting to be had. So if you are a city overrun with illegal aliens, unresolved crime issues and perhaps declining popularity among normal tourists, you just call in the gays to save you.

The site proclaims "Our Secret is Out" and features images of same-sex couples enjoying the local sights.

Phillip Jones, president and CEO of the Dallas tourism bureau said gay travelers spend an average of $100 more per day than other travelers and plan four to six trips a year.

WOW! I wish that I could plan or take 4-6 trips a year! And these are the hapless victims of discrimination? Jones also marveled at the "diversity" aka gayversity of Dallas which he claims he stumbled upon while doing marketing research.

"One of the things that most surprised me about Dallas was the incredible diversity. We have 120,000 GLBT (Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) households in the Dallas area." We'd be foolish not to position Dallas as a destination for this market, which spends a lot of money on travel."

Gee, Jonesy, with all those thousands of rich, diversified gays living in Dallas, one wonders why you would need to attract more gays to Dallas. Oh wait...I forgot. Its that cash cow thing.

Fashionista Failures

Some others have been talking about gay's negative influence on the fashion industry.

I made the assertion that homosexuals dominate the fashion culture. I was right and to me that translates to major influence of the models who suffer with anorexia. I for one am not a name-brand addict so I could care less about the latest fashionista news and trends that these people dish out. But I found this disturbing listing of the major gay players in the fashion world. That's right all the big names, along with their history.

And then there's Austin Silver's humorous-but-true commentary which asks (and answers) the question Is there anyone straight in the fashion industry? A sample of the madness:

"If anyone ever saw a flamboyantly gay man walking down the street sporting a pink feather boa and sparkles over his eyes, they'd probably cringe and cross the street. But put the same gentleman as head of a fashion design collection and suddenly he's an "artiste" and not some gay Jose from around the way. If you've ever watched Karl Lagerfeld speak at a fashion show or the like, it would become abundantly clear that he's been sleeping with the enema on occasion. As well, Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana of the famed Dolce & Gabbana collections could also receive the Oscar for bending over backwards (and I don't mean the award)."

The Columnist Manifesto discusses (a little old) the Bravo show Project Runway and the gay-straight-gender intersects that affect the women wearing the clothes of these brilliant but unbalanced people.

Elton John tired again

The Rainbow Knight, Sir Elton John wants organized religion banned. He didn't say where he would ban it to , nor did he say what should be done with the multiple millions of people who think it is a good thing. After public tirades against photographers, heterosexual twin sister Madonna, the Catholic Church, John admitted his neurotic outbursts, bad temper and irrationality emerged only when he was tired.

Sigh. It seems like he needs to take a long, long rest.

Americans For Truth has the more serious take on Elton's problems with the rest of the world.