BULLYING WEDDING VENDORS by Penna Dexter

As the list of wedding vendors losing their rights to do business unless they agree to serve same sex couples gets longer, their stories are just getting sadder.

In addition to wedding photographers, flower shops and bakeries, we can now add to the list of victims of this bureaucratic bullying — believe it or not — an actual bridal boutique.

Victoria Miller owns W.W. Bridal Boutique in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania. She politely declined when a lesbian couple asked for an appointment to shop for wedding gowns for themselves and — get this — bridesmaids dresses for their cross-dressing groomsmen. Victoria explained that her store doesn’t service same sex weddings. She stated that, “providing these girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law.”

The lesbian couple then began a campaign of retaliation. And now the Bloomberg Town Council is considering passing a law that could be used to sue W.W. Bridal and other businesses whose God-fearing owners refuse to lend their skills and creativity to same sex weddings and commitment celebrations.

It’s surreal to think a bridal shop could be put out of business for refusing to participate in the complete redefinition and deconstruction of marriage.
W.W. Bridal is facing the possibility of having to close their shop in a state that hasn’t even legalized same sex marriage.

The state of New York has legal same sex marriage. From there, we now have this heart-rending case:

The Gifford family in upstate New York has operated Liberty Ridge Farm for over 25 years. The farm is their home. They live on the second and third floors of the barn. And they open the farm to the public for events like berry picking, fall festivals, pig racing, parties, and also weddings and receptions. When the Giffords book a wedding, it’s not just about opening up the barn for the ceremony and/or reception. They greet the guests and take them from where they park to the barn in their farm trolley. They decorate and set up the floral arrangements, provide catering and even arrange fireworks displays. The Giffords take extra-special care in providing special services to couples because they are Christians.

When Melissa Erwin and Jennie Mc Carthy attempted to book the farm for their wedding ceremony and reception, the Giffords declined their request. Cynthia Gifford told them she and her husband, Robert, could not in good conscience hold a same-sex wedding ceremony in their home. The lesbian couple, now married, brought an “unlawful discrimination” suit against the Giffords.

A judge with the New York Human Rights Commission ruled against the Giffords, forcing them to pay a $1500 “mental anguish” fine to each of the women and a $10,000 civil fine to New York State. Plus, the Giffords must implement so-called anti-discrimination procedures, including posters posted prominently. They have to provide their staff with training, re-education, if you will, in non-discrimination.

Believing saint, this is really happening. And it’s tyranny.

Cell Phone Distraction

A majority of Americans have cell phones, and we are just now beginning to see the impact they are having on our lives. They can be powerful tools, but they can also be significant distractions.

I am sure all of us have noticed the people with a cell phone sometimes seem distracted. And after they answer a text or e-mail, they seem to spend a few minutes trying to recollect their thoughts before they had the interruption.

An article in Newsweek magazine documents what many of us have always suspected: there are two major drawbacks to these devices. The first is distraction overload. A study at the University of Illinois found that if an interruption takes place at a natural breakpoint, then the mental disruption is less. If it came at a less opportune time, the user experienced the “where was I?” brain lock.

A study at George Mason University found that if the distraction came during a checklist, it was easy to miss an item. Sadly, an airline crash in Madrid a few years ago was attributed to a mistake by the pilot from an interruption-induced error.

A second problem is what is called “continuous partial attention.” Cell phone users like to use their devices while they should be paying attention to something else. Psychologists tell us that we really aren’t multitasking, but rather engaging in rapid-fire switching of attention among tasks. It is inevitable they are going to miss key information if part of their focus is on their cell phone.

But another hidden drawback associated is less creativity. Looking at your cell phone when you are “doing nothing” replaces what we used to do in previous decades. Back then we called it “daydreaming.” That is when the brain often connects unrelated facts and thoughts. You have probably had some of your most creative ideas while shaving, putting on makeup, or driving. That is when your brain can be creative. Checking e-mail reduces daydreaming.

Cell phones are here to stay and are powerful tools. But we also need to know the strengths and weaknesses of the technology.

Common Core History

Common Core has set standards for every academic subject. Lately the Common Core History Standards have come under attack. Critics say that the standards will be used to indoctrinate students with viewpoints from the Left.

Stanley Kurtz says that the new plan will remove the “traditional emphasis on America’s founders and the principles of constitutional government.” This emphasis will be replaced with a progressive “emphasis on race, gender, class, and ethnicity.” That means that most of the founders and framers will be left out unless they are “presented as examples of conflict and identity by class, gender, race, or ethnicity.”

A letter sent to the College Board by American Principles in Action and Concerned Women for America outlines many problems. They say the new standards present “a consistently negative view of American history by highlighting oppressors and exploiters while ignoring the dreamers and innovators who built our country. Instead of striving to build a ‘City upon a Hill,’ as generations of students have been taught, the colonists are portrayed as bigots who developed a rigid racial hierarchy.”

The letter says that the new standards ignore “the heroism and sacrifices of America’s servicemen and women.” The standards make “no mention of the sacrifices America’s Greatest Generation made to rescue much of the world from a long night of Nazi and Japanese tyranny.” Instead, they talk about the internment of Japanese-Americans and the decision to drop the atomic bomb.

The standards are not intended to provide a comprehensive list of people and topics. But the letter notes that many heroes like Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Dwight Eisenhower, Jackie Robinson and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., have been excluded. But the standards do have space for Chief Little Turtle, the Students for Democratic Society, and the Black Panthers.

Common Core standards in mathematics have come under attack from many quarters. But it is easy to see why the history standards will also face controversy. They seemed to be written to advance a left-leaning view of American history.

Culture Shock

Many pastors avoid dealing with controversial issues. That certainly is not the case with Chip Ingram. His sermons and books go to the hot-button issues of our day with his biblical convictions and his biblical compassion.

His latest book is a good example of this. Culture Shock: A Biblical Response to Today’s Most Divisive Issues takes on a variety of topics ranging from abortion to the environment. But the major focus of the book is human sexuality.

When he was on my radio program we spent most of our time talking about human sexuality, cohabitation, and homosexuality. Teen sexual activity rose from around 5-10 percent in the 1950s to 70-80 percent today. Fifty percent of all women under thirty cohabitate prior to marriage.

As a pastor, he has lived in Santa Cruz, California and now in the San Jose area where large segments of the population are gay or lesbian. He also has seen the way some Christians have poorly treated people who define themselves as homosexual. With conviction and compassion, he takes on the various presuppositions of the homosexual community: I was born gay, this is who I am, and homosexuality is normal and natural.

He calls for us to balance both conviction and compassion. He says: “we must treat homosexuality as we do other temptations and sins. We need to be forthright and truthful as we present the truth of the Scriptures, but do so with humanity and compassion, not a sense of condemnation or superiority.” On the other hand, we should be willing to reach out. “Most of those in the gay community have never met a kind, nonjudgmental Christian who had the courage to share God’s love and plan of forgiveness and eternal life.”

I applaud Chip Ingram for addressing so many of the divisive and controversial issues in our society. And I am grateful that his book and small group program provide light where there is often just heat.

Arming the Police

Sometimes the pictures we see of the local police look more like photographs of army personnel in battle gear. So it was not too surprising to see pictures from Ferguson, Missouri with police wearing Marine-issue camouflage and military-grade body armor. Police officers riding around in armored vehicles looked more like soldiers in Afghanistan.

There is a reason for that. The National Defense Authorization Act allowed the federal government to transfer property (such as arms and ammunition) of the Defense Department to local governments. So it’s not surprising to see local police officers toting military-style semi-automatic rifles and wearing night-vision goggles. A few police departments even have grenade launchers.

Some police departments even drive around in MRAPs (which stands for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles). As the name implies, these are designed to protect soldiers from IEDs and other roadside bombs. So far, no IEDs or other explosive devices have exploded in Ferguson, Missouri or anywhere else in the United States.

Senator Rand Paul is concerned. “Washington has incentivized the militarization of local police precincts by using federal dollars to help municipal governments build what are essentially small armies—where police departments compete to acquire military gear that goes far beyond what most Americans think of as law enforcement.”

With the equipment comes a mindset. Soon police officers start acting like soldiers. Civil liberties and due process often goes out the window. Citizens are subjected to no-knock break-ins, broad search warrants, and a variety of other intrusions into their rights.

I can understand why police departments want military equipment. They want to stay one step ahead of criminals. But we as citizens should be concerned when the local police look more like an invading army.

Same-Sex Marriage

Whatever you may think about it, same-sex marriage matters to the church and to the future of our society. It is becoming a reality to America, and we need to know how to respond. Sean McDowell and John Stonestreet take on the issue in a fresh and practical way in their book, Same-Sex Marriage: A Thoughtful Approach to God’s Design for Marriage.

They begin by providing a helpful overview of what just happened to our culture. Then they provide both biblical and secular analysis to the issue of same-sex marriage. While it is important to know what God thinks about marriage, it is even more helpful to show why traditional marriage is important even if you don’t accept the Bible and its teachings. There are good secular arguments for traditional marriage.

Consider these three undeniable facts of reality. Sexual intercourse between a man and a woman brings babies. Societies have a vested interest in the process that produces children. Numerous studies demonstrate that children fare better when cared for by their biological mothers and fathers. Put simply: sex makes babies; society needs babies, and babies deserve mothers and fathers. That is why societies have recognized and managed these three truths, both culturally and legally.

In the second part of the book, they talk about what we can do for marriage. They say we should learn from the success of the homosexual movement that radically changed America’s thinking about same-sex marriage in less than two decades. They also believe that Christians should repent of bad attitudes. We should repent of telling inappropriate jokes that dehumanize gays and lesbians or treating people differently because of their sexual orientation.

Their final chapter provides lots of practical suggestions for everyday questions. What if a gay friend, co-worker or family member announces that they are getting married to their partner? Fortunately, they provide practical and biblical answers to questions we will have to consider in this new cultural and social environment.

“CHRISTIAN” SEXUAL MORALITY by Penna Dexter

Now that certain mainline Protestant denominations have decided to ordain homosexual ministers and publicly affirm same sex unions, we have to ask, what do the people sitting in the pews of these denominations really think about certain facets of morality about which there used to be a Christian consensus?

Like adultery. Does the word even mean the same thing for same-sex and opposite sex marriages? What about premarital sex?

Mark Regnerus is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas at Austin. He says, “Integrating homosexual relationships into Christian moral systems is not simple.” To say that’s even possible when you define Christian as biblically faithful is a stretch. But let’s go with Dr. Regnerus, since he conducted a comprehensive study in early 2014. It’s called the Relationships in America survey. He interviewed 15,378 Americans ages 18-60. For the purpose of this question, he restricted his analysis to people who defined themselves as churchgoing Christians.

These people were separated into categories according to whether they supported or opposed same sex marriage and asked about various practices. The survey found that 33 percent of the same-sex marriage supporters think viewing pornography is OK. Compared with those who oppose same sex marriage, that’s seven times as many approving porn use. Three times as many of those who support same sex marriage think it’s fine to cohabit with a lover before marriage. Thirty-seven percent of the same sex marriage supporters approve cohabitation.

And Dr. Regnerus found six times as many same sex marriage backers are “OK with no-strings-attached sex, five times as many think adultery could be permissible, thirteen times as many have no problem with polyamorous relationships, and six times as many support abortion rights.”

Mark Regnerus concludes that     self-professed churchgoing Christians who support same sex marriage look very much like the rest of the country in terms of these questions of sexual morality. But mainline pews are still filled with folks who oppose same sex marriage and these behaviors.

The churchgoers who are homosexuals and lesbians themselves were more in favor of all these behaviors but not as supportive as gays and lesbians outside the church. Forty-nine percent of self-professed gay churchgoing Christians think no-strings attached sex is ok. A whopping 80 percent of gay and lesbian non-Christians think so.

It’s encouraging to note that among evangelical denominations that adhere to Biblical orthodoxy, only 11 percent of survey participants under 40 actively expressed support for same sex marriage. Younger evangelicals were also much less likely to believe that cohabitation before marriage is a good idea. Five percent — compared with over 70 percent in the broader culture — think cohabitation is OK.

Believing saint, we can sink our teeth into these results. Voices within the Church say society’s cultural erosion is unstoppable     and we shouldn’t bother opposing it. But we can defend and advance principles close to God’s heart — and we should.

Addicted to the Cell Phone

The cell phone today has nearly complete market penetration. According to the Pew Internet Project on mobile technology research, 90 percent of American adults own a cell phone and 58 percent have a smartphone.

This relatively new technology has also provided a rich field for study. And what psychologists are finding isn’t encouraging. At the top of the list is the concern about addiction. There is increasing evidence that more and more of us are becoming addicted to these devices. One of my colleagues teaches a college class on technology. One of the requirements is to take a 24-hour fast from technology by handing over their smartphone to him. A surprisingly large percentage of students cannot do this.

With the addiction to cell phones comes another concern. We are passing down the bad manners that often accompany cell phone use to the next generation. Parents ignore their children when they are on the phone. Children learn that it is easier to send a text than to call someone or have a face-to-face conversation.

Psychiatry professor David Greenfield lists all the associated problems with excessive cell phone use. “It can lead to a marked reduction in real-time social interaction as our capacity and desire for regular face-to-face conversation decreases.” He also talks about the displacement of other positive activities. “When we’re engaged in these digital technologies we’re not doing other things that may be important for our lives, whether it’s exercise, socializing or work.”

He also explains why some people can so easily be addicted to cell phones. He says a smartphone is like the “smallest slot machine in the world.” When your phone buzzes, you can’t predict what the message might be. It could be something good or exciting, so we get a pleasurable neurochemical hit of dopamine.

Cell phones are supposed to make our lives better, and they do. But in the process, many have become slaves to these devices. It’s time for many of us to break the chains that addictively bind us to these devices.

No Time to Think

Most of us in modern society feel overscheduled and over committed. You have probably heard people say that they are “super busy” or “crazy busy.” Perhaps you have said it yourself. You are busy at work and busy at home.

That is why Kate Murphy, writing in the New York Times, says we have “No Time to Think.” Our busy, fast-paced, frenetic lifestyles give us little or no time for quiet contemplation. And when we do have a moment for reflective thought, many of us hate the quiet. In fact, there is a study that shows how much we hate a quiet moment.

I first heard about this study by psychology professor Timothy Wilson from a Breakpoint commentary by John Stonestreet. He was quoting from a science journal that reported, “Given the choice, many people would rather give themselves mild electric shocks than sit idly in a room for 15 minutes.” Kate Murphy quotes from the same study.

Here’s the background. Students were asked to sit alone without mobile devices for 15 minutes. Half found this to be an unpleasant experience. In the next experiment they were given a small electric shock. Most of them said they would be willing to pay not to experience the shock again. Yet when they sat in the room “alone with their thoughts” two-thirds of the men and a quarter of the women were so eager to do something, they actually gave themselves shocks.

There are all sorts of theories why people keep themselves busy so they don’t have to think or reflect. Perhaps they are trying to avoid thinking negative thoughts. Perhaps we are all addicted to busyness. Whatever the reason, we see that the Bible values quiet and mediation on God’s Word. Psalm 46:10 say we are to “be still, and know that I am God.”

The Bible teaches, and the lives of great Christians in the past, remind us that we need time of solitude, prayer, and reflection. Our busy 21st century lives are just the opposite of that. It is time to make time to think and be still.

Pot and Public Health

An increasing percentage of Americans support the legalization of marijuana even though medical research is raising even greater concerns. Bill Bennett and Robert White wrote in a recent column that this is indeed an irony. Public opinion is going in one direction and scientific and medical research is going in the opposite direction.

One example they use in their column is a study that just appeared in the journal Current Addiction Reports. The study found that regular pot use (defined as once a week) among teenagers and young adults led to cognitive decline, poor attention and memory, and decreased IQ. They go on to point out that since few marijuana users limit themselves to use once a week, the actual harm is much worse for developing brains.

The American Psychological Association noted that young people who become addicted to marijuana lose an average of six IQ points by adulthood. Other studies pegged the IQ loss even higher.

In the midst of all these new studies demonstrating the dangers of marijuana use are the increasing numbers of Americans who support marijuana legalization. One poll has the percentage as high as 55 percent. In another poll, Americans were asked to rank the harms of various substances. Americans ranked sugar as more harmful than marijuana.

Bennett and White try to inject some reality into this discussion. “The marijuana of today is simply not the same drug it was in the 1960s, ’70s, or ’80s, much less the 1930s. It is often at least five times stronger, with the levels of the psychoactive ingredient THC, averaging about 15% in the marijuana at dispensaries found in the states that have legalized pot for medicinal or, in the case of Colorado, recreational use.”

Supporters of marijuana legalization say they are the progressives. In reality, they are stuck in the past. We now know more about the dangers of marijuana, and that is why we should not be making pot even more available.