It has come to this: I’m blogging about oatmeal

Oatmeal directly from the packing.
Image via Wikipedia

No, I haven’t run out of things to write about.  I have over 100 partial drafts and ideas and wish I had time to write more. But this topic is so important it couldn’t wait.

First, I’ve been on an oatmeal kick lately for my 9:00 P.M. feeding.  I learned a trick from my wife, which is to put frozen fruit in with the milk and oats before I heat it in the microwave.  I have a variety of frozen fruit around for my shakes (blueberries, strawberries, mixed berries, cherries, peaches), and it adds some natural sweetness to the cereal.  Super healthy, filling and tasty.  Oh, and very inexpensive.

Then there’s this about McDonald’s new product: How to Make Oatmeal . . . Wrong.  They managed to mess up something as simple as oatmeal.  I just tried it the other day before I read this article.  I figured they had done something right in offering a healthy alternative, but instead of three ingredients (oats, milk, fruit) they end up with more than 15.

The oatmeal and McDonald’s story broke late last year, when Mickey D’s, in its ongoing effort to tell us that it’s offering “a selection of balanced choices” (and to keep in step with arch-rival Starbucks) began to sell the cereal. Yet in typical McDonald’s fashion, the company is doing everything it can to turn oatmeal into yet another bad choice. . . . “Cream” (which contains seven ingredients, two of them actual dairy) is automatically added; brown sugar is ostensibly optional, but it’s also added routinely unless a customer specifically requests otherwise. There are also diced apples, dried cranberries and raisins, the least processed of the ingredients (even the oatmeal contains seven ingredients, including “natural flavor”).

A more accurate description than “100 percent natural whole-grain oats,” “plump raisins,” “sweet cranberries” and “crisp fresh apples” would be “oats, sugar, sweetened dried fruit, cream and 11 weird ingredients you would never keep in your kitchen.”

. . .

The aspect one cannot argue is nutrition: Incredibly, the McDonald’s product contains more sugar than a Snickers bar and only 10 fewer calories than a McDonald’s cheeseburger or Egg McMuffin. (Even without the brown sugar it has more calories than a McDonald’s hamburger.)

It is so filling that I imagine it would be great for people trying to lose weight.  Eat oatmeal first then you won’t be as hungry for other things.

Finally, it occurred to me that for people on limited budgets – and definitely for people on welfare – oatmeal is one of those perfect foods: Inexpensive, filling, tasty (enough) and nutritious.

Recycling: Good for newspapers, bad for lousy pro-legalized abortion arguments

Last week I taught a session on pro-life reasoning and the biblical basis for the sanctity of life to a group of Care Net volunteers.  One of the points was debunking the canard that pro-lifers don’t care about kids after they are born.

With perfect timing, false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie (who is pro-legalized abortion and wants taxpayer-funded abortions but hypocritically mentions Jesus’ concern for the “least of these” in many of his posts, including this one) published “The G.O.P.’s Abandoned Babies”.  Apparently Charles M. Blow (is that a real name?) and the NY Times thought they could get some more mileage out of that fallacious reasoning.

The GOP – the “pro-life” party – has shown their hypocrisy on the political wedge issue of abortion with the adoption of the GOP-controlled House budget.

Some may use it as a wedge issue, but many people authentically disagree with Chuck and other pro-abortionists who believe it is completely moral to crush and dismember innocent human beings just because they are unwanted — and worse yet, that Jesus is pro-legalized abortion.

And false teacher Chuck and the author don’t anticipate the obvious counter-title: “The Democrats’ Dead Babies.”

To recap, the argument used by the pro-aborts fails in three ways (And yes, if someone is pro-legalized abortion and pro-taxpayer-funded abortion then I refer to them as pro-abortion.  I wouldn’t consider someone to be pro-choice on slavery if they thought slavery should be legal but didn’t want to own slaves):

1. Objecting to a moral evil doesn’t obligate you to take complete ownership of it forever.  Can these pro-aborts protest infanticide without having to adopt all of those children?  Can they oppose spousal abuse without having to marry all the women?  Can they oppose the (hypothetical) destruction of homeless people without having to personally house them?  Can they oppose animal abuse without having to adopt all the cats and dogs?  And so on.  It is ridiculous to claim that pro-lifers have to go along with every nanny-state proposal for those outside the womb to avoid the hypocrisy charge.

2. In addition to the irrefutable logic of item 1, pro-lifers do a lot more for the unborn with their own time and money than the pro-aborts do for the women before or after they are born.  There are more crisis pregnancy centers than abortion clinics, and most operate completely on donations (the Care Net Pregnancy Center where I am a board member refuses to take taxpayer funds).

And it is well established that Conservatives give more than Liberals, especially when you check the “giving” of people like Obama, Biden, Kennedy, etc.

So even though we aren’t obligated to help outside the womb just because we oppose abortion, we help because we want to.

3. Unless someone concedes to being truly pro-abortion (i.e., they expect women to always have abortions or raise the children with no help from the public), then the pro-choicers are obligated to adopt the children as well.  Either that, or give up espousing their pro-choice views.  After all, if you claim to be pro-choice and the women choose life, then the same care giving obligation falls on you.

—–

If false teachers like Chuck, the UCC and other pro-abortion organizations really cared about women and children they’d be funding their own crisis pregnancy centers (they couldn’t volunteer at Care Net because our statement of faith requires that they believe the Bible and hold pro-life views, among other things).  But why couldn’t they use their own money to carry out their goals and to reduce the abortions as they claim they want to?  That’s what the pro-lifers do!

Another irony in the faux compassion of the pro-aborts is that they want to spend the money of people who can’t vote or aren’t even born yet.  We have to borrow every dollar that they want to spend.  It is just irresponsibility piled on irresponsibility.

Here’s another example of the morbid irony of the false teachers pretending to hold life sacred:

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ, which has taken pro-choice positions on the issue of abortion, is also deeply concerned about life.  Our General Synod has affirmed, for example, “the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular”

You can’t claim to care about the sacredness of all life and wanting to defend human life “in particular” if you favor legalized abortion, including partial-birth abortion, taxpayer-funded abortions and if you fight crisis pregnancy centers.  But that’s the shameless hypocrisy you’ll get from them.

Don’t let people use the lousy arguments that pro-lifers don’t care about those outside the womb.  That is a recycled cheap trick that pro-aborts use over and over to silence us.  Get informed and set the record straight.  We give our own time and money before and after birth to help, whereas they support killing the unwanted with the taxes of pro-lifers and they want to confiscate your money to “give” to their pet projects.

Roundup

Best. Pro-life ad. Ever. Don’t worry, it isn’t graphic.  But if you think the message is harsh, the reality is a million times worse.  Make it viral, please!  HT: Jill Stanek

 

“Only they’re not bunnies.” Priceless.  Hey, if they were bunnies, it would be illegal already.

Ask your Congressional representatives to de-fund PP now.  It isn’t just the abortions, it is the serial hiding of statutory rape and sex crimes.  Don’t listen to the fear-mongering about the other services they provide.  There are many places that can provide those that don’t commit the atrocities that PP does.

Barely twenty-four hours after her inauguration as America’s first woman chief executive, President Sarah Palin announced today that Attorney General Mark Levin has been instructed to stop defending Roe v. Wade and abortion in a wave of fresh lawsuits filed in federal courts around the country.

~Jeffrey Lord, American Spectator, February 24

From Jill Stanek’s quote of the day.  Those cheering Obama’s refusal to do his job and support the Defense of Marriage Act have no idea what precedent it sets.

Wisc. and Ind. Democrats: Union Cash Driving Democrats to Run and Hide

By far unions are the largest donors that Democrats have all up and down the line from local and state to federal. Unions spent over 50 million dollars on Barack Obama’s campaign back in 2008 and they spent another 50 million for the 2010 midterm elections.

Most specifically public employee unions are Democrats biggest supporters.In the last week of the 2010 election, for instance, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) spent over a million dollars to help elect Democrats. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) spent almost $400,000.

So when these Democrats run away and try to hide in a neighboring state it is because their biggest donors are demanding that they “do something.” And since Democrats in these states have lost all power due to the will of the voters, they feel that their last ability to stop legislation that hurts donor’s interests is to shut down government.

There is no parallel for this in the actions of Republicans who have spent decades as powerless onlookers in state government. No blocks of Republicans have run away like cowards to nearby states to avoid doing their jobs. Republicans have been essentially powerless in the face of unions since World War II yet in that almost 80-year span where Democrats have been in the pocket of Big Labor no blocks of Republicans have wallowed in such childish petulance. Republicans continued to go to work in their state capitols despite being virtually powerless to affect unions.

The insidiousness of media bias — Democrats, Media Keep ‘Birther’ Story Alive

The nagging issue of “Birthers” raises a chicken/egg question: It is an issue that lingers of its own accord, or does it linger because the media won’t let it go away?

Republicans appearing on cable to talk about important issues of the day — unemployment, the national debt, Egypt, Wisconsin, etc. — can bet the “Birther” question will come up. And there appears to be nothing a Republican can do to satisfy an interviewer on this question. It is not enough to state a belief in the president’s Christianity, or that one takes the president at his word. In question after question, interviewers call on Republicans to condemn, repeatedly, rumors they neither believe nor spread; then they condemn the condemnation for not being condemnatory enough.

And so the issue keeps coming up. It’s self-perpetuating. Twice in the past week, George Stephanopoulos has asked Republican guests on Good Morning America about it. David Gregory routinely does the same on Meet the Press.

I saw this comment that was trying to refute John’s excellent response to a HuffPo fluff piece by a false teacher promoting pro-gay theology:

Christians loudly opposing homosexuality are being really interrested in the personal sins of others, are they not? Or is it only a few particular sins, that they happen to be blameless for themselves? So, the question arises, are they doing what their religion demands of them? Wether christians should be good and forgiving people or should they be on the lookout for their “neighbours sins”? Is it really what Jesus demanded of them? If that is a part of being a christian, I am especially happy I am not one. It must be a burden to try and watch for ones fellow man, for him not to “sin” in his bedroom…

My response to the commenter:

Go check your history.  Was pro-gay theology the dominate view of the church for 2,000 and then these awful conservatives came along to try and change it?  Did both Christian and non-Christian cultures always celebrate (oxymoronic) “same-sex marriage” and then conservative Christians decided to change that?

Of course not.  The apostate pro-gay theologians brought it up and part of their playbook is acting like we’re the ones obsessed with it.

And when one of the logical consequences of making sexual preferences into civil rights is that young children will be forced to learn that these perversions are “normal,”  that is definitely worth fighting.

Lara Logan, Islam and Women’s Rights – Why the media silence on the Islamic gang-rapes?  Too scared to mention it?  Doesn’t fit in the the PC-memes?  Why aren’t the feminists going insane over this?  More from the Wintery Knight about the Koran’s teachings on this.

Roxanne On that whole “teachers work long hours during the school year” thing — Nice.

All Teachers Unions Must Fall, Not Just Wisconsin’s – just read it all.  Great overview of how awful they are and why they should be illegal.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

LOL of the day: False teacher makes personal attacks while saying personal attacks are bad.

Typical drivel from false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” CurrieI Love Michelle Obama.  He is still intimidated by Sarah Palin and makes various petty digs at her, while boo-hooing that people would criticize Michelle’s hypocrisy and nanny-state behavior.

And considering Chuck’s appearance, you’d think he wasn’t aware that Michelle is trying to prevent people from looking like him.

Does Planned Parenthood provide “critically needed health care services that prevent the need for abortion and promote the common good?”

False teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie, who is pro-legalized abortion and wants taxpayer-funded abortions but hypocritically mentions Jesus’ concern for the “least of these” in many of his posts, thinks they do.  See Mall Abortions? GOP Budget Thinking Explained.

Perhaps Chuck could explain why it is good to reduce abortions.  After all, if they are as safe as he and Planned Parenthood claim then they are cost effective methods of birth control.

And how does he rationalize the hiding of statutory rape and sex crimes as being part of the common good?  Oh, what a perverted worldview these progressives have!

And does passing out condoms and other forms of birth control qualify as “critically needed?”  Is he saying they can’t be provided by a group that doesn’t crush and dismember innocent but unwanted human beings for a living?

What if a Republican President decided not to enforce a law he didn’t like?

Anyone on the Left cheering President Obama’s dropping of legal support for the Defense of Marriage Act isn’t thinking even 30 minutes into the future.  Do they really like the precedent that a President can pick what laws to enforce?  (BTW, DOMA passed by huge margins in the Senate (85 – 14) and House (342 – 67) and was signed into law by President Clinton.)  Will they just sit there when a Republican President does ignores laws he opposes?

Let’s turn to our one-stop-heresy shop, Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie, for the typical response of the theological Left (i.e., false teachers):

President Obama Does The Christian Thing In Dropping Legal Support For Defense of Marriage Act.

Really?  Got any Bible verses for that?  In addition to Jesus specifically stating that marriage was designed for one man and one woman:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

President Obama today directed the U.S. Department of Justice to stop defending theindefensible: the so called “Defense of Marriage Act” which bars federal recognition of same sex marriages.

“Indefensible?”  That’s beyond hyperbole considering what both Christian and non-Christian cultures have determined through history.  Same-sex unions by nature and design do not produce the next generation.  Marriage, by definition, is the union of a man and a woman.

This was an act of moral courage on the part of the president

That’s odd, when a Republican like Rick Perry spends time passing a sonogram law to reduce abortions and make them safer for women the Lefty criticism is that he should be working on the budget or other bigger problems (Bigger than saving lives?!).  But when Obama does something like this to cater to certain sexual preferences it is courage. Check.

The prohibition of gay marriage is the twin evil of the legal prohibition that not long ago existed that barred interracial marriages.

For the 100th time, skin color is morally neutral, sexual behavior is not.

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ made history by becoming the first mainline Christian denomination to endorse full marriage equality in 2005.

Yes, we know you are a band of apostates.  As Glenn noted, “The United Church of Christ has again demonstrated it is more involved with the social gospel than the true gospel, and that they assist those who behave illegally.  In Chicago a UCC has given sanctuary and protected some of the Wisconsin Democrat lawmakers who are hiding from the State Patrol rather return to do the job they are being paid to do.”

The U.S. Department of Justice “will now take the position in court that the act should be struck down as a violation of same-sex couples’ rights to equal protection under the law,” according to The New York Times.  This action on the part of the president moves our nation closer to being the Beloved Community.

“Beloved community” is a classically nauseating false teacher-ism.  He’s got no Bible verses to back it up.  He makes up the phrase then pretends that his false god makes that the highest goal.  Then again, what do you expect from a “reverend” who brags about taking 6 year old girls to gay pride parades?

“That’s interesting, but what does the Bible say?”

I urge you to respond with the quote in the title when people make claims about Christianity.  Today’s example: A pro-gay theology fluff piece by the Houston Chronicle about “Bring your gay teen to church day.”  It was pure propaganda-masquerading-as-news.  Of course I’d like to see everyone in church on Sunday, including gays.  I just want them to go to churches that teach the truth.

Ebie Hussey’s first reaction when her son announced that he is gay was to offer unconditional love.

Finding a new church was a close second.

That is a recurring lie they weave into their messages: If you say that sin is sin then you are being unloving.  Christianity may not be Ms. Hussey’s strong suit.

“His first question was, ‘Am I going to hell?’ ” Hussey said of that conversation with her son, Jaxn. “Mainstream Christianity and fundamental Christianity really pushes that homosexuality is a sin, and he had caught on to that.”

Actually, the Bible is pretty clear on this topic:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Even a lot of pro-gay theology folks will concede that.  They just claim that the Bible isn’t really God’s word or that he has changed his mind.  Run, don’t walk, from “Christians” who claim those things.

Jaxn, now 15, knew his parents didn’t think that. “But I had always heard people saying that kind of thing,” he said.

Note how he and his parents are the arbiters of God’s truth.  The article never even hints that we’d look to the Bible for the answers.

In an effort to counter the message, almost two dozen Houston-area churches have designated Sunday as Bring Your Gay Teen to Church Day.

I wish they would have published a list.  They would be churches to avoid.

“We think it’s important for families to know there’s a safe place to go to worship,” said Jim Bankston, senior minister at St. Paul’s United  Methodist Church. “Families who have gay members want to make sure they feel welcome in church and aren’t bashed in any way.”

There’s that falsehood again: If you say that sin is sin then you are “bashing” people.  Hey “Reverend” Bankston: Is bashing a sin?  Then aren’t you bashing the bashers and committing that sin yourself?  Why aren’t you open and affirming towards “bashers?”

Joanna Crawford, a seminary student at the Houston Graduate School of Theology, said the idea came up after the suicide last fall of Asher Brown, a Cypress-area eighth-grader who killed himself after what his parents said were years of bullying and taunts that he was gay.

Did you catch the non sequitur?  They try to say that teaching biblical truths cause suicides.  The facts show otherwise: These suicide tragedies are usually very complicated.  It isn’t people who just left Focus on the Family “Love Won Out” conferences that are doing the bullying and taunting.

It is a project of the Houston Clergy Council, formed last year to allow churches to work together on shared concerns.

“None of us knew Asher, but we felt if we could get families into our churches, where they have support, where they feel loved for who they are, not in spite of it, something good could come of that,” Crawford said.

They get love backwards.  Yes, love them for who they are: Human beings.  Don’t love them because of a particular sin.

Organized religion has had a complicated relationship with homosexuality.

Mainly because fakes have crept in and polluted the teachings of the church.

Joel Osteen, pastor of Lakewood Church, waded into the fray last month when he told CNN that homosexuality is a sin, although he doesn’t preach on the topic and a number of people who attend his church, the largest in the United States, are gay.

Joel finally spoke the truth?!

A survey last fall by the Public Religion Research Institute found that fewer than 20 percent of Americans believe places of worship do a good job on the issue. Almost half said religion’s message on the topic is “negative,” and 40 percent said the messages contribute “a lot” to negative perceptions of gays and lesbians.

This is where surveys prove to be meaningless.  The question shouldn’t be whether the messages contribute to negative perceptions but whether the messages are biblical.

Almost two-thirds said the messages contribute to higher rates of suicide among gay and lesbian youth.

That’s because the wildly biased mainstream media has been telling them that.  It doesn’t mean it is true.

Mainline Protestant churches — including the Episcopal, Lutheran and Methodist churches — began wrestling with how to interpret biblical writings on the issue several decades ago, he said.

That’s only because those churches went soft on keeping apostates out and exercising church discipline on false teachers. But just because some want to ignore the Bible doesn’t mean the teachings aren’t still there.

“Younger people are much more supportive on rights for same-sex couples than the older generation,” he said. “They also were much more likely to see these connections between negative views in the churches and negative views in society and with the higher rates of suicide.”

Wow, they keep working in that false connection, don’t they?  Almost as if the Chronicle wants you to believe it.  One of the tragedies in the last year involved a kid who, among other things. took a stuffed animal to school and insisted on a chair for it.  This kid was deeply trouble and not helped.  To blame his suicide on Bible-believing Christians is ridiculous, but the pro-gay theology ghouls love a good victim story.

Hussey did a computer search for “gay-friendly churches” and discovered Plymouth United Church of Christ in Spring.

“It’s been a huge blessing,” Hussey said. “It has brought me so much closer to God and to my spirituality, having a gay child, because it puts me in the position of Jesus’ message, which is unconditional love.”

Really?  Where did they get this news about Jesus?  If it was the Bible, why do they ignore what He says in the rest of it, including his claim that God’s design for marriage is for one man and one woman?  Why do they pick and choose which parts of Jesus they want to listen to?  Seems to me they are just making up their own version of Jesus.

The Rev. Ginny Brown Daniel and members of the congregation “showed me God doesn’t hate you because you’re gay,” he said.

God hates sin, and He wants to save you.  But you have to repent and believe.  I wonder how often the “Reverend” Daniel teaches that?  The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

That was important to his parents.

“When a child tells you they’re gay, you don’t want to change your plan for him,” Ebie Hussey said. “I still want him to be a doctor. I still want him to marry a doctor. I still want him to be Christian.”

She should start by being a Christian herself and trusting the word of God and following God on his terms.  As it stands, she is making up her own god.

If you really love those identifying as GLBTX you’ll seek to share the truth with them.  Propping them up with lies to make yourself more popular in our politically correct culture is just loving yourself, not your neighbor.  Here’s one of my experiences sharing the Gospel with someone identifying as gay.