Some Light Reading
Sorry to have been gone for a while. The Charming Mrs. GotDesign and I went to Reno, NV for a week. What a beautiful area! It is places like the Sierra Nevada mountains and Lake tahoe that reaffirm what Paul said in Romans 1:20:
The power of God is clearly seen in His creation -- the Sierra Nevadas, Lake Tahoe, etc.
I have a few reading assignments for you. They are on subjects that are dear to me. One is about the growing attacks on Christianity and its evangelical practitioners in particular. The other is about an attack on an obscure provision of the Constitution of the United States.
Were Nazis Christians? Are Christians fascists? by Marvin Olasky is about recent attacks on Christianity. There seems to be a growing trend in trying to paint all Christians as extremists and radicals. This might become so if the culture continues to be pushed farther and farther to the Left. But, for centuries Christianity has been mainstream, not some farcical, extremist belief. One could even argue that Christianity has been mainstream in Western society since Constantine the Great legalized Christianity throughout the Roman Empire in 313 AD. It seems to me that Olasky does a good job of reporting on the fallacies of these recent attempts to paint American Christians (Evangelicals) as radicals. Go take a look at the article and let me know what you think.
The second article is about Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger's recent veto of a bill from the California state legislature that would have given all of the state's electoral college votes to "whichever candidate receives the most popular votes nationally." This may take a little explanation by way of introduction.
Many people came to realize during the 2004 Presidential election that the United States is (and always has been under its current constitution) an indirect democracy. By "indirect," I mean that the people do not directly elect their chief executive. When the people vote, they are signalling their intent to an Electoral College which then places the actual votes for the presidential candidate. Each state within the Union decides how to allocate the electoral votes. Some will cast all of their electoral votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote within their states, while some states cast their electoral votes based on which candidates wins a majority in each congressional district. So basically, each state sets its own policy on the casting of electoral college votes.
This particular bill in California would have cast all of California's electoral votes for whoever wins the popular vote nationally. It means that California would turn over its votes to the majority of other states -- effectively nullifying the will of California's voters. George Will explains this failed legislation very well. Take a look and let me know what you think.
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
The power of God is clearly seen in His creation -- the Sierra Nevadas, Lake Tahoe, etc.
I have a few reading assignments for you. They are on subjects that are dear to me. One is about the growing attacks on Christianity and its evangelical practitioners in particular. The other is about an attack on an obscure provision of the Constitution of the United States.
Were Nazis Christians? Are Christians fascists? by Marvin Olasky is about recent attacks on Christianity. There seems to be a growing trend in trying to paint all Christians as extremists and radicals. This might become so if the culture continues to be pushed farther and farther to the Left. But, for centuries Christianity has been mainstream, not some farcical, extremist belief. One could even argue that Christianity has been mainstream in Western society since Constantine the Great legalized Christianity throughout the Roman Empire in 313 AD. It seems to me that Olasky does a good job of reporting on the fallacies of these recent attempts to paint American Christians (Evangelicals) as radicals. Go take a look at the article and let me know what you think.
The second article is about Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger's recent veto of a bill from the California state legislature that would have given all of the state's electoral college votes to "whichever candidate receives the most popular votes nationally." This may take a little explanation by way of introduction.
Many people came to realize during the 2004 Presidential election that the United States is (and always has been under its current constitution) an indirect democracy. By "indirect," I mean that the people do not directly elect their chief executive. When the people vote, they are signalling their intent to an Electoral College which then places the actual votes for the presidential candidate. Each state within the Union decides how to allocate the electoral votes. Some will cast all of their electoral votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote within their states, while some states cast their electoral votes based on which candidates wins a majority in each congressional district. So basically, each state sets its own policy on the casting of electoral college votes.
This particular bill in California would have cast all of California's electoral votes for whoever wins the popular vote nationally. It means that California would turn over its votes to the majority of other states -- effectively nullifying the will of California's voters. George Will explains this failed legislation very well. Take a look and let me know what you think.
Posts
