O Holy Night

This is Christmas week, and so I thought we might reflect on the hymn, “O Holy Night” by John Dwight.

“O holy night! The stars are brightly shining. It is the night of the dear Savior’s birth. Long lay the world in sin and error pining, Till He appeared and the soul felt its worth.”

Jesus came into the world to save us and so we feel valuable and our soul feels its worth. Perhaps the most quoted verse in the Bible is John 3:16. It tells us that Jesus came because “God so loved the world.” He came so that our souls would feel their worth to God.

This hymn also asks us to consider the fact that the King of kings was born as a human infant and placed in a manger. “The King of kings lay thus in lowly manger, In all our trials born to be our Friend. He knows our need, to our weakness is no stranger. Behold your King, before Him lowly bend.”

Isn’t amazing that there were some who were willing to worship him even while merely a babe in a manger? The hymn then talks about how we should respond to one another in humility.

“Truly He taught us to love one another; His law is love and His gospel is peace. Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother, And in His name all oppression shall cease.”

We no longer have slavery in this country, but many people are still enslaved to various forms of sin and need Jesus as their Savior. And we as believers are to model the humility that Jesus demonstrated when He stepped out of eternity into time and gave up His rights as God.

This is a message we not only need at Christmas, but every day.

O Little Town of Bethlehem

This is Christmas week, and I thought it might be worthwhile to spend a moment to reflect on the words to the hymn, “O Little Town of Bethlehem.” It was written in 1867 by Phillips Brooks (an Episcopal pastor from Philadelphia). He had been in Israel two years earlier and had celebrated Christmas in Bethlehem. He wrote this song to reflect on what the night of the birth of Jesus might have been like.

O little town of Bethlehem, how still we see thee lie! Above thy deep and dreamless sleep the silent stars go by. Yet in thy dark streets shineth the everlasting light; The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.

While the streets of our cities are quiet on Christmas day, most likely that day was just like any other day for the people in Bethlehem. But as evening came, the town grew quiet and something remarkable took place.

In the second verse the hymn says, “While mortals sleep, the angels keep their watch of wondering love.” This is just like today. Our world goes about its business, usually oblivious to the spiritual realities around it.

Jesus came into the world quietly. Yes, there was the angelic announcement to the shepherds, but most other people were unaware of the fact that the most significant event in history was taking place. God became a man. But he was born in a stable and laid in a feeding trough. There was no pomp or circumstance as you would expect of a King.

Jesus came not only to live among us but to ultimately die for our sins. He took upon Himself the sins of the world (your sins and my sins) and paid the ultimate penalty that we deserved to pay that we might have everlasting life.

During this Christmas week, I hope you will stop long enough to consider what happened in that little town of Bethlehem. But even more so, I hope you will think about what Jesus did for you at Calvary.

CENSORING LINUS by Penna Dexter

Some public education officials are conflicted this time of year. Oh it’s fine for educators to celebrate all the trappings of Christmas at school. Even to get a couple of weeks off because of it. But dare mention the real reason for the season, the birth of Jesus Christ, and you’re censored.

That’s what happened to Dedra Shannon, a staffer at Patterson Middle School in Killeen, Texas. She decorated the school’s nurses’ office door with images to recreate a classic scene from the beloved animated television special, “A Charlie Brown Christmas.” You know the scene. It’s the one where Linus explains to Charlie Brown the real meaning of Christmas. Charlie Brown is wondering why he’s not happy about the Christmas season when everyone else seems to be. He’s particularly dismayed at the over-commercialization of the holiday. The kids suggest Charlie Brown try directing the Christmas play as a possible solution to his depression.

Ms. Shannon’s door decorations included Linus and the scrawny Christmas tree Charlie Brown picked out for the play. He was mocked for choosing the tiny sapling, and this only adds to his frustration. He finally asks loudly if anybody really knows what Christmas is all about. Linus answers with the annunciation to the shepherds scene from the Gospel of Luke. Ms. Shannon’s door decoration included part of this: “For unto you is born this day in the city of David a savior which is Christ the Lord.” Then Linus says, “That’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.”

The principal told Ms. Shannon to take her decorations down because of — well, you know — that part about Christ. The principal said it’s “an issue of separation of church and state.”

Fox News’ Todd Starnes wrote of the incident: “Public schools are supposed to be in the education business and Ms. Shannon was simply educating students about the true meaning of Christmas.” That’s what Linus was doing when he quoted scripture to Charlie Brown.

The state of Texas actually has a law on the books that supports what Ms. Shannon was attempting. It passed in 2013, with bipartisan support, and was signed by the governor. Its purpose is to protect the constitutional rights of students, parents, and staff. The Merry Christmas Law states that no school official in Texas can silence a Biblical reference to Christmas.

Based upon this law, the Texas attorney general has called upon Killeen’s school board to intervene in the censorship at Patterson Middle School.

The door decoration would still be up if not for those words Linus spoke about the birth of Christ. But Ms. Shannon told Todd Starnes, “I just took the entire thing down. I wasn’t going to leave Linus and the Christmas tree without having the dialogue.”

Exactly. Sometimes the secular Left even opposes Santa Claus and Christmas trees. But they’ll tolerate those. What they won’t allow and simply cannot countenance is keeping Christ in Christmas.

Repeal and Replace

For more than six years, Republican politicians have been repeating the mantra of “repeal and replace” concerning health care. But they were never very clear about what the replace part of the equation would look like. Now we have a much better idea.

When Donald Trump tapped Representative Tom Price to head the Department of Health and Human Services, he signaled that the proposal by Dr. Price would most likely be the Obamacare replacement plan. For the last three years, Dr. Price has proposed (and updated) his bill for creating a more consumer-driven health insurance plan.

In a recent column, Dr. Merrill Matthews reminds us of the various elements in his replacement plan. First, is a desire to provide all Americans with tax fairness. As I have mentioned in previous commentaries, people who do not obtain their medical insurance from an employer do not enjoy the tax benefits as others who have employer-provided insurance. The Price bill allows self-employed people to deduct 100 percent of their premiums.

His bill also expands the use of Health Saving Accounts. These tax-free accounts can be used for smaller routine health care expenditures. They also encourage patients to comparison shop in the marketplace. Employers and individuals can make contributions to these accounts.

Finally, the bill addresses the difficult issue of preexisting conditions. On the one hand, we want to protect people with such conditions. On the other hand, there is a problem of people who don’t bother to get insurance and only sign up for insurance after a medical event. That happened in Romneycare in Massachusetts and is also happening now in Obamacare. The Price bill would allow those who have had continuous coverage for 18 months to obtain coverage in the individual market. This would also be an incentive for the uninsured to get medical insurance.

We will be hearing lots more about “repeal and replace.” At least now we know a little more about what the replace part will look like.

CEOs and their Rants

The CEOs of major corporations may be smart people when it comes to business, but many of them apparently don’t know when to keep their comments to themselves after the 2016 presidential election. Their public rants against Donald Trump’s election and their criticism of voters aren’t likely to encourage people to buy their products.

Matt Maloney is the CEO of Grubhub. The company offers take out, but lately seem more intent in telling its conservative employees to get out. After criticizing the president-elect and the people who voted for him he concluded: “If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation, because you have no place here. We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.”

Bill Penzey of Penzey Spices went on a rant about Donald Trump and then concluded with a pointed comment to anyone who was stupid enough to vote for him. He said: “You really are a good bunch, but you just committed the biggest act of racism in American history since Wallace stood in the schoolhouse doorway 53 years ago.”

The next company to join these ranks is the Kellogg’s company. It recently announced its decision to pulls ads from the conservative media giant Breitbart.com. The company executives argued that the 45 million monthly conservative readers of Breitbart “are not aligned with our values as a company.”

Breitbart responded by explaining that they “are fearless advocates for traditional American values, perhaps most important among them is freedom of speech.” They also launched a #DumpKelloggs petition and called for a boycott of Kellogg’s cereals, Eggos, Pringles, and other brands.

As I have said in previous commentaries, it would be wise for businesses and corporations to stop alienating customers and stay out of the culture wars. Unfortunately, a number of CEOs haven’t figured this out.

CEOs and their Rants

The CEOs of major corporations may be smart people when it comes to business, but many of them apparently don’t know when to keep their comments to themselves after the 2016 presidential election. Their public rants against Donald Trump’s election and their criticism of voters aren’t likely to encourage people to buy their products.

Matt Maloney is the CEO of Grubhub. The company offers take out, but lately seem more intent in telling its conservative employees to get out. After criticizing the president-elect and the people who voted for him he concluded: “If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation, because you have no place here. We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.”

Bill Penzey of Penzey Spices went on a rant about Donald Trump and then concluded with a pointed comment to anyone who was stupid enough to vote for him. He said: “You really are a good bunch, but you just committed the biggest act of racism in American history since Wallace stood in the schoolhouse doorway 53 years ago.”

The next company to join these ranks is the Kellogg’s company. It recently announced its decision to pulls ads from the conservative media giant Breitbart.com. The company executives argued that the 45 million monthly conservative readers of Breitbart “are not aligned with our values as a company.”

Breitbart responded by explaining that they “are fearless advocates for traditional American values, perhaps most important among them is freedom of speech.” They also launched a #DumpKelloggs petition and called for a boycott of Kellogg’s cereals, Eggos, Pringles, and other brands.

As I have said in previous commentaries, it would be wise for businesses and corporations to stop alienating customers and stay out of the culture wars. Unfortunately, a number of CEOs haven’t figured this out.

Virgins Are Healthier

A new report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) finds that teenage virgins are healthier than other students who are sexually active. At first, you might think that is merely an obvious conclusion since virgins are not likely to contract a sexually transmitted disease (STD).

But the conclusions are based on many other factors as well. Students who are virgins actually rate significantly and consistently better in nearly all health-related behaviors and measures than their sexually active peers. Let’s look at a few examples.

Sexually active teens are 3,300 percent more likely to smoke daily than their virginal peers. And same-sex and bisexual sexually active teens are 9,500 percent more likely than virginal teens.

The same dichotomy exists with dating violence. Sexually active teens are 260 percent more likely to experience some form of physical violence in dating relationships. Same-sex and bisexual sexually active teens are 683 percent more likely than their virginal peers.

As you might expect there is a real difference in terms of alcohol and drug use. Sexually active teens are 337 percent more likely to binge drink than teen virgins. They are also 336 percent more likely to use marijuana and 500 percent more likely to have injected a drug than teen virgins.

All the statistics reinforce the idea that sexual chastity and involved parenting make a difference in the lives of teenagers. Some of these activities may not be directly related to being a virgin or being sexually active, but they do show a strong correlation between a two different mindsets. Teens that control their sexual urges are usually making other wise decisions about other aspects of their lives.

Purge Christian Doctors?

Should Christian doctors be purged from the U.S. medical system? The question is absurd. Even so it is seriously asked (in a less offensive way) in a recent bioethics journal article. The two authors argue that Christians (and other people who hold to traditional religious beliefs) should not be given the right to refuse to perform services that the physician believes are ethically questionable.

They believe that Christians (and others who hold to traditional views) should not be admitted into medical school and should not be practicing medicine. Usually, exemptions are provided for these “conscientious objectors.” They point to countries like Sweden that “provides no legal right of employees to conscientious objection.” Thus, they argue in the title of their journal article that: “Doctors Have No Right to Refuse Medical Assistance in Dying, Abortion, or Contraception.”

I must admit that I am bothered by the way these three moral issues are lumped together. I don’t know many doctors who balk at prescribing contraception. And it isn’t hard to get various forms of contraception in your local drug store. But the other two issues of abortion and euthanasia raise significant moral concerns.

Let’s also remember that doctors (like my grandfather) used to swear the Hippocratic Oath. It says: “I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion” and “neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so.”

Proponents of abortion and physician-assisted suicide argued that people should have a right to make these moral choices. But once such procedures were legalized, now we have others arguing that Christians who would refuse to abort an unborn child or refuse to terminate a life should not be admitted to medical school and should not be permitted to practice medicine. This is now the battle the pro-life movement will need to fight.

DEFENSE BILL by Penna Dexter

It looks like we’ll end the year with a final defense bill that provides more money for military and defense operations than requested by the administration. It’s normal, in December to find lawmakers working hard to get the National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA, finalized and to the president’s desk. There are lots of pieces and parts to this bill and members of the conference committee appointed to reconcile the House and Senate versions had their work cut out for them.

The bill that came out of conference included some very good news: America’s daughters will not have to sign up for the Selective Service. This means, that should we ever institute the draft, women will not be included.

Back in 2015 the Department of Defense issued a directive requiring all military roles be opened to women and directed that women are eligible to serve in combat. When a presidential administration issues an order, sometimes Congress takes the opportunity to enshrine it into law. That’s how much of the social engineering that’s taken place in the military has become entrenched. When the House of Representatives debated including legislation that would implement this directive in the NDAA, opponents named it the “Draft Our Daughters Act.” House members wisely voted it down. But the Senate included a “Draft Our Daughters” provision in their version of the NDAA. Wisely, the conference committee took it out.

The disappointing news is that lawmakers stripped language out of the final conference bill that would have protected the religious liberty of military contractors. This was an amendment the House had passed that would have allowed the Defense Department to continue working with religious corporations, associations, and educational institutions for services without those organizations having to jettison their religious beliefs.

Religious groups are often uniquely qualified to work as partners with the military in functions like serving refugees, veterans, and children. But, according to a 2014 presidential executive order, the hiring practices of all military contractors must protect sexual orientation and gender identity. So contractors that have conduct standards concerning marriage, sexual behavior, bathroom policies would be ineligible to work in partnership with the U.S. military.

Oklahoma Congressman Steve Russell introduced an amendment to prevent the administration from severing contracts and pulling funding from faith-based service providers just because their staffing policies line up with their faith principles.

Opponents argue that this language would give Christian businesses and organizations the right to “discriminate” based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

They won the day. The Senate did not pass the Russell Amendment and the conference committee did not include this language in the final bill.

Faith-based groups should not be excluded from partnering with the federal government just because they oppose an extreme sexual ideology.

Congress should try again, early in its next session, to find an opportunity to tighten religious liberty protections and create a level playing field for religious contractors.

Communism and a Grocery Store

Dr. Anne Bradley has been on my radio program and in a recent article talks about her first trip to the Soviet Union. Even as a teenager she could see through the attempt to make Russia look more prosperous than it was. In fact, her visit was one of the reasons she became an economist. She ends her article by telling the true story of what happened when Boris Yeltsin visited the United States.

He was newly elected to the Soviet Parliament and the Supreme Soviet. After he visited the Johnson Space Center, he made an unscheduled stop at Randall’s Grocery Store in Houston. This trip to a simple grocery store changed him forever.

Yeltsin roamed the aisles to see the number of products available to every customer. They were offering free cheese samples. He was overwhelmed. He could not believe the bounty before him. Even members of the elite Politburo did not have the choices available to every person who walked into the store.

A reporter captured his comments in an article in the Houston Chronicle. “When I saw those shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartons and goods of every possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for the Soviet people.” He went on to say, “That such a potentially, super-rich country as ours had been brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it.”

What a statement from a man who was powerful and well connected politically. He may have had great political power in Russia, but he was powerless to provide to the Russian people what was typical for all Americans. The communist government failed to provide the basic necessities for their people. This is what happens in a centrally controlled economy.

This is a lesson we need to pass on to our children and grandchildren. The abundance of goods on the shelves of that Houston grocery store weren’t provided by the government. They were provided by a free market.