Facebook Posted Thoughts: School Board Debate

 Okay, don't read on if you get easily offended. You may want to watch the school board debate as you may think I am absolutely off base. I invite you to do your own research on the topics below.

School Board Debate Rebuttal:
**I couldn’t address all the questions but here the ones that hit my nerves the most.

Read Feely-Indigenous blah blah blah active ally-history of lands you occupy-every student recognized, respected, and included (while only pointing to one group).
-I am done with a white woman speaking on behalf of Indigenous people. Let an Indigenous person come and speak on this occupied land acknowledgement. If a group you are speaking for is offended let them speak for themselves. We do not need lectures from puffed up “we know what is best for you” people to speak for a group that is perfectly capable of making their voices heard. If they are not saying anything then take a seat.

Lie # 1: How are you going to address book banning?
-No one is asking for a book to be banned, but are asking that books be vetted for age appropriateness.
-Just because a book is not on the shelves of public schools doesn't mean it is banned (ban means all places like public libraries, homes, etc..not to exist in society).
- Parents can go to the public library and check out all the porn they want for their kids.
- It is the access to porn that is being disputed and should not be found on public school library shelves. If the book has an explicit sexual scene in it then it should not end up on the shelf in the 1st place.
-No one is banning books on indigenous history-that is an outright lie on the part of these school board members answering that question.
-It is not regulation 6150 that required librarian teachers to be certified but it is regulation 6160.
-Regulation 6150 was an addition to regulation 6160. It was made on purpose to be an anti-parent anti-community regulation. The opposition is not about the diversity of authors but the issue is if the book is sexually explicit.

Ex. from a book on the shelf at Arbor View High School, “The Court of Mist and Fury”

"His tongue swept my mouth again, in time to the finger that he slipped inside of me. My hips undulated, demanding more, craving the fullness of him, and his growl reverberated in my chest as he added another finger. I moved on him. Lightning lashed through my veins, and my focus narrowed to his fingers, his mouth, his body on mine. His palm pushed against the bundle of nerves at the apex of my thighs, and I groaned his name as I shattered. My head thrown back, I gulped down night-cool air, and then I was being lowered to the bed, gently, delicately, lovingly."

-If librarians are vetting books then how are books that include sex scenes being allowed on the shelves?
-Just because you ignore it, gloss over it, or try to mask it as racism, the promotion of word and picture pornography is occurring in our public schools.
-If veteran school board members were part of writing regulation 6150 then that exposes those who are anti-parent and anti-community involvement.
**Be honest that regulation 6150 has been and may continue to be anti-parent.
-The focus of the policy is to protect the librarians and the school? Why is that?
-Why do we need a policy that has protocols for parents to follow? Shouldn’t it be the reverse?
-Are we going to see in legislation a revival of AB445 that protects librarians from civil or criminal liability on what is going on in these public school libraries?
-Are we going to see in legislation a revival of AB416 that punishes a parent or community member with a Class E felony for asking that books and curriculum be vetted for age appropriateness? It outlined that objections would have to go through the courts for materials to be removed.

Lie #2 Lower income neighborhoods get nothing
-Pitting neighborhoods against each other is not the function of a school board member.
-School board members are lying when they claim that lower income Title 1 schools don’t get the same educational opportunities as those in Summerlin.
-Claiming certain demographics who have no access or opportunity is untruthful and pits people against each other.

Here is how I know this is a lie:
-truth: My husband worked in tech and Title 1 schools received the best technology 1st.
-truth: Summerlin schools had to do upgrades and tech upgrades with their budget. My son went to the school that did not get upgrades in Summerlin while my husband was upgrading all Title 1 schools.
-truth: Title 1 schools get more money per pupil (Summerlin schools don’t get extra money per pupil).
-truth-Title 1 schools get more money to pay teachers (incentive pay to work in Title 1 schools).
-truth: More money is poured into Title 1 neighborhood schools, so if there is no change then it is the leadership and waste of funds that is the problem, not the socioeconomics of the neighborhood (the poor vs. rich argument is just that placating optics).

Bragging about how many times one has been elected says a lot when in that seat nothing has changed. Just keep reverting back to pitting neighborhoods against each other as the strategy to keep winning the seat. Just repeating the disparities of black and brown is placating to what people may want to hear, but doesn't make it truthful.

Stop voting for people who hide behind excuses, take no responsibility, use race as the dividing factor of everything, proclaim they are the saviors for every group labeled as oppressed, and are blatantly anti-parent while spouting how pro-parent they are.

"Much of the self-righteous nonsense that abounds on so many subjects cannot stand up to three questions: 1. Compared to what? 2. At what cost? 3. What are the hard facts?" (Thomas Sowell).


"Not since the day of the Hitler Youth have young people been subjected to more propaganda on more politically correct issues. At one time, educators boasted that their role was not to teach students what to think but how to think. Today, their role is far too often to teach students what to think on everything from immigration to global warming to the new sacred trinity of 'race, class and gender.'" (Thomas Sowell)

dreamsdontfade.com

Facebook Posted Thoughts: Thoughts on Memorial Weekend

The best memory I can share is when I was a 6th grade teacher and my dad, Marine, would come to my classroom to present. He would dress in a suit with his medals in a case ready to tell the most amazing stories. To me heart wrenching stories of survival of young men just trying to live through a war. The kids would listen and then pelt him with all kinds of questions. The kids would then ask me when he would be returning. It has always been a special time of remembrance of those he honored through the stories he told eager young kids willing to listen who would make thank you cards I would deliver to him. Brightly colored patriotic drawings and words scrawled on construction paper. The most beautiful cards I could ever have given myself. I always wonder if those kids still remember him when Memorial Weekend comes around each year. 

“Soldiers and authorities are described as God’s servants who bear the sword to keep peace, maintain justice, and protect the innocent” (Romans 12: 3-4).

Did you know that Psalm 91 is called the “Soldier’s Psalm” because it is uniquely tied to military history and personal protection.

Why it was called the “Soldier’s Psalm”:

-the 91st brigade during World War I, the U.S. Army 91st Infantry Division 

-the brigade commander, a devout Christian, gave every soldier a small pocket card printed with Psalm 91

-the entire unit agreed to recite the “Soldier’s Psalm” together daily

-the miracle according to the account shared by veterans is that other neighboring units faced up to 90% casualty rates, but this specific brigade did not suffer a singe death (historians note this can be disputed, but the story is cemented in the psalm’s military legacy)

-the text is filled with combat imagery that specifically mentions military threats, such as the “arrow that flies by day” and “deadly pestilence”

-there is a “band of brothers” connection where troops throughout history have carried printed copies of Psalm 91 in their pockets or helmets as a physical reminder of safety

 

There are key verses of protection:

Verse 2: “I will say of the Lord, ‘He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.”

Verse 4: “He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.”

Verse 7: “A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand to your right hand, but it will not come near you.”

Verses 11-12: “For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways…so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.”

The miracle of Dunkirk (World War II):

-during the evacuation of Dunkirk in 1940, 300,000 Allied troops were stranded on French beaches, entirely vulnerable to German air attacks

-according to testimonies archived by groups like Kinship Radio, a young chaplain on the beach recalled that large pockets of stranded British soldiers began shouting Psalm 91 at the top of their lungs as bullets rained down

-all the sudden, unusual dense fog rolled in to ground the German Luftwaffe, and the waters of the English Channel became miraculously calm, allowing hundreds of civilian boats to successfully rescue the troops

Pocket Bibles and Personal Shields:

-beyond entire units, individual service members have carried the psalm as a literal and spiritual shield

-Jimmy Stewart, the famous actor, enlisted in the U.S. Army Air Corps as a bomber pilot in WWII. His father famously wrote him a letter enclosing a copy of Psalm 91, which Steward carried on every dangerous flight.

-The “Bullet-Stopping” Bible is a military lore involving a soldier being shot in the chest, only to survive because his pocket Bible absorbed the impact. In a famous account shared by Kenneth Copeland Ministries, a lieutenant’s life was saved when a bullet wedged into his pocket Bible–stopping precisely at Psalm 91:7: “A thousand may fall at your side….but it will not come near you.”

Modern Conflict (the Iraq War):

-May 23, 2017 Chaplain Hardie Higgins testimony 

-Army Chaplain Hardie Higgins utilized the psalm for convoy operations

-he ordered thousands of Psalm 91 cards and physically placed one inside the windshield of every single military vehicle before they went out on patrol

-his brigade completed its deployment with zero casualties

-even surviving an RPG strike directly to a command vehicle tail light that miraculously failed to detonate into the cabin

These are just some special stories during this time of remembrance. Here is the whole Psalm 91. As you read it, try to envision it through the eyes of a soldier. Let us lift our prayers to those serving today. Let us be thankful for all who have served. May we honor those who have given their lives for our freedom.

Psalm 91

1 Whoever dwells in the shelter of the Most High
    will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.

2 I will say of the Lord, “He is my refuge and my fortress,
    my God, in whom I trust.”

3 Surely he will save you
    from the fowler’s snare and from the deadly pestilence.

4 He will cover you with his feathers,
    and under his wings you will find refuge;
    his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5 You will not fear the terror of night,
    nor the arrow that flies by day,

6 nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness,
    nor the plague that destroys at midday.

7 A thousand may fall at your side,
    ten thousand at your right hand,
    but it will not come near you.

8 You will only observe with your eyes
    and see the punishment of the wicked.

9 If you say, “The Lord is my refuge,”
    and you make the Most High your dwelling,

10 no harm will overtake you,
    no disaster will come near your tent.

11 For he will command his angels concerning you
    to guard you in all your ways;

12 they will lift you up in their hands,
    so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.

13 You will tread on the lion and the cobra;
    you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

14 “Because he[b] loves me,” says the Lord, “I will rescue him;
    I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

15 will call on me, and I will answer him;
    I will be with him in trouble,
    I will deliver him and honor him.

16 With long life I will satisfy him
    and show him my salvation.”

Danny Gokey has a tribute song called “My America.” Just beautiful

Danny Gokey - My America (Official Music Video)

When Culture Hates You: Persevering for the Common Good as Christians in a Hostile Public Square by Natasha Crain Chapter 4

 Chapter 4: Should Christians Impose their Views on Others?

Objections to public Christian influence 

-key principles on the nature of government and some relevant historical context are important foundation for thinking rightly about advocating for the common good in the political realm 

-the Establishment Clause says nothing about how individuals should or should not use their religious beliefs to inform their participation in the political process

-Christians aren’t in a special category of people who can’t or shouldn’t participate in the political process just because their views are religiously motivated

***Our country isn’t committed to the authority of a particular religion, but individuals who are have very right to bring their views into the public square and vote accordingly

Christian objections to political involvement:

-Christians shouldn’t impose their views on others

-Christians shouldn’t seek power

-Getting involved in politics harms our witness

-Political divisions disrupt unity in the church

-Christians shouldn’t be partisan

Responding to Objections:

1-Christians shouldn’t impose their views on others

-culture regularly tells us that one of the highest virtues is tolerance and that separation of church and state is central to our democracy

Ex. “I’m firmly pro-life, but I don’t think I should impose my views on other people.”

Ex. “Women have to decide what’s best for them.”

Wrong:

-to impose means to force something to be accepted by someone else

-politically, we are talking about the legal force of policy decisions

***In every matter of policy, someone is imposing their view on  someone else

Ex. if we pass laws against speeding, we’re imposing the view that speeding is harmful on those who don’t think 

Ex. if we pass laws against theft, we’re imposing the view that theft is wrong on those who would like to shoplift consequence-free

Ex. if we pass laws against pedophilia, we’re imposing the view that pedophilia is wrong on those who believe it’s a natural and harmless orientation that should be fulfilled

**It is not unkind or intolerant when you advocate for laws that reflect your viewpoint

-That is the NATURE of PUBLIC POLICY

-doesn’t the Constitution prohibit imposing religious views on others?

-it depends on what you mean by imposing religious views

The First Amendment of the US Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

***the Establishment Clause ensure that the government will not establish state-supported church and will not force individuals to practice a specific religion

-it cannot “impose” religious views in that way

-we’re not committed to the authority of any particular religion in public life

2-Christians shouldn’t seek power:

***there is not a problem with power; the problem is those who abuse it 

-the word power has come to have a negative connotation today that it is used as a frequent objection to Christian political involvement

-when Christians seeks political positions or political influence they are accused of being power-hungry or power-worshipers like power is inherently bad

-power is just the authority and ability to execute a governing role

-government, by definition, is the body to which we give the power to make, enforce, and judge the laws of this country

-as long as we have government, someone will be in power, and those in power sought out that power

-power is necessary for public influence

***Christians should give power to those who will steward it well

By:

-promote what’s good and restrains evil

-be mindful of Christians who seek power for the wrong reasons or use power in ungodly ways

-careful when the church takes on a theological nature

Ex. Jesus gave up His power on the cross, so we should give up our power as well

This is problematic reasoning:

-it is not an accurate characterization of the cross

-Jesus willingly laid down His life for mankind

“No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again” (John 10:18).

-Jesus was not defeated by the cross

-Jesus atoning death and subsequent resurrection were the greatest victories of all time

-Jesus was and still is sovereign over all things 

“It’s the consistent witness of Scripture that God cares about the just and righteous functioning of societies–the godly application of power by the rulers God has sovereignly put in place.” 

3-Getting involved in politics harms our witness

-culture won’t  like us if we’re involved in the public square

-if they don’t like us, they won’t want to hear the gospel

-the gospel is of primary importance, we should avoid political subjects 

-if the church is focused on politics then they are not focused on Jesus

-culture dislikes Christians in politics if they have Conservative views

****culture indeed despises when Christians advocate for policies consistent with a biblical worldview and in opposition to the popular moral consensus 

-culture doesn’t like it when Christian advocate for what are typically considered to be conservative causes

***culture will accept Christians who advocate for what are typically considered to be

progressive causes 

-culture accepts politicians in government who identify as Christian and promote progressive causes 

-culture do not like Christians who advocate for politically unpopular positions out of concern for the gospel

-cultures do not like Christians to draw clear positions 

“If these positions logically follow from a biblical worldview, are we not downplaying the significance of the gospel itself by refusing to speak to how the gospel transforms our entire view of reality?” 

-people will be offended by the gospel alone

-people will be offended by the truths that flow from the implications of the gospel

***We cannot separate to minimize offense

-we cannot hide parts of the truth in hopes that people will like us enough to hear the rest is cowardly

-silent complicity with some of the greatest evils is the greatest evil

***We are to do what’s right and leave the results to God 

4-Political divisions disrupt unity in the church

-in an increasingly polarized culture, many Christians have experienced “disagreement fatigue”

-it is essential to have peace and unity within the church as followers of Jesus

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one. I in them and you in me so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me” (John 17: 20-23).

-we must acknowledge that unity is vital

“I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought” (1 Corinthians 1:10).

“Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one spirit and of one mind” (Philippians 2:1-2).

“But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless” (Titus 3:9).

-the problem is when Christians  strive to pursue unity at all costs, including the cost of truth

-the Bible never suggests that we should sacrifice truth in order to achieve some kind of polite collective agreement in the vague name of unity

-the Bible teaches to divide from those who are not holding to truth

“I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them” (Romans 16:17).

“They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit” (Jude 1:18-19).

-some divisions resulting the removal of error within the church is good

-do not divide on trivial issues not on doctrine

Ex. I believe Jesus rose from the dead, and I’ve accepted His forgiveness of sin. But I believe we should be able to kill whomever we want.

-do you think that Paul’s church would have allowed Drag Queen Story Hour

-we cannot delineate between doctrine and its applications 

-we can disagree on the particulars of a policy but not on the underlying doctrinal principles

-sinful pride can lead to division in the church

***division itself isn’t the problem

***wrongful division is the problem

-there must be clear biblical positions on political issues of great significance for the common good

-Biblical unity revolves around truth, not polite agreement where no agreement should be found

5-Christians shouldn’t be partisan

-people tend to express concerns of partisanship only when they think Christianity is associated with unpopular conservative positions

Christians are partisan to the world when:

-we do not put our political party before it’s placed in Jesus

-we support a given party that mostly reflects biblical positions

-we do not automatically support everything put forth by a party just because it’s the party we often vote for

-we do not think politicians associated with a given party are necessarily of better character

-we do not think the party we typically vote for has its own problems with blind spots or corruption

-we do not believe you aren’t saved if you vote for a different party

- we do not believe you are saved if you support the party Christians are typically associated with

***We recognize that it’s entirely possible b biblical positions will line up more with one party than the other. And if we appear to the world as politically one-sided then so be it. 

Politics: Christians involved in ending slavery

-universal agreement in Western cultures today is that slavery was a devastating and evil institution 

-thanks to abolitionists in 19th century America, slavery was eradicated in 1865 through the 13th amendment

-the process of passing an amendment was political in nature 

“No one objects to modern-day Christian political influence would claim that Christians should not have sought to end slavery just because it required involvement in the political process.”

-this is a great test case for the validity of popular objections to political involvement today

***when you encounter an objection, restate it using the preface, “Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because……”

1-Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because we shouldn’t have imposed our views on others

-Public Policy: one groups’ view was being imposed on another

-slavery is evil and we don’t want to live in a society where an evil institution is legal

-we recognize that people who do not see slavery as evil are objectively wrong

-in this matter it is important to impose the morally correct view on them

You wouldn’t say, “I’m antislavery, but I don’t want to impose my views on other people.”

**The question is what is the right moral position?

2-Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because that involved seeing the power to do so

-slavery was able to exist and thrive because it was legal in several states

-in order to abolish slavery, people in power–through the House of Representatives and the Senate–were able to pass the 13th amendment

-we don’t question their government power because we know that was the morally and politically correct position to take 

***Absurd to say “that because Jesus ‘gave up” His power by dying on the cross, we shouldn’t have used power to save millions of people from slavery.”

3-Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because getting involved with a political issue harmed our witness 

-slavery treated people as dehumanized property

-Christian abolitionists witness to the world was to boldly proclaim the objectively evil nature of slavery given that all people are image bearers of God 

-we mourn today that there were Christians who didn’t recognize the truth at the time

-just because pro-slavery Americans didn’t want to hear the truth about injustice of slavery didn’t stop anti-slavery Americans from eradicating slavery through their witness in society

-they proclaimed the gospel plus the advocacy for truths that flowed from the gospel

4-Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because it disrupted unity in the church

-historically, the issue of slavery disrupted unity within the church

-denominations permanently spit on the issue of slavery

-no one today would chastise the churches who continued to speak out against slavery

-freedom should have unified the church but even in the church there were pro-slavery stances 

**it was essential that we recognized the unity of antislavery and proslavery positions should have disrupted the church as one of these positions was in serious error

5-Christians shouldn’t have worked to end slavery because Christians shouldn’t have been partisan

-no one is concerned with whether the antislavery position resulted in Christians taking sides with one particular party or not

-we don’t accuse the abolitionist Christians of political idolatry for their one-sided involvement against slavery 

***we have to evaluate the issue itself: the morality of holding image bearers as property

-we see it through the lens of what the Bible teachers

-we took sides because we realized there was only one morally correct side to take

***Christians must take sides–but only through the lens of the Bible

Christian Political Engagement Facilitates the Common Good:

-some say “you can’t legislate morality”

-this is twisted because someone’s morality is always being legislated 

-some say “Christians shouldn’t impose their views on others”

-this is twisted as someone is always imposing their views on others

-some say “Christians shouldn’t seek power”

-this is twisted because we don’t seek human power but God’s power

-we seek humans who will steward the power well in this world

***we are called to be politically involved on issues of great moral significance for the common good

***take every opportunity to advocate for righteousness and against evil

***we have the responsibility of  doing so out of our love for others whether it’s an issue considered political or not