Politics

So what would a conservative Mennonite care about mere earthly politics? And why?

Reuters and Truth

Reuters says much of the federal government is shut down. Right.

I was taking a break from work while I waited for my computer to update and reboot when I saw on Reuters (HT: Google News) that much of the US government is shuttered. 😯

Seriously? I thought it was only 17%. 😳 Reuters? Are Cowan and Reid stretching things?

Or maybe there’s a subliminal message intended:

Non-essential personnel were furloughed.
That’s “much of the U.S. government.”

Maybe that’s the explanation. 🙄 Richard? Tim? Am I on the right track? 😉

Well, here’s my screen capture of the report in question: Read it all

Name That President

He signed into law a measure that stigmatizes homosexual people and bans giving children any information about homosexuality.

You know at least one president which did not do this:

President…signed into law a measure that stigmatizes gay people and bans giving children any information about homosexuality.

The ban on “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations” is part of an effort to promote traditional…values…

But which president did do that? (Today, apparently.)

Please, if you’re going to take part in this news quiz, do not search online for the answer. This is not an open-book quiz. Thank you. 🙂

What Marriage Isn’t

In the opinion of five people on the US Supreme Court

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

That’s what the Defense of Marriage Act, Section 3 claimed for almost 17 years.

And what humanity claimed from the beginning of time.

And what God declared from eternity.

And what the Supreme Court of the United States today said isn’t so.

Well, what five members of that court said.

Actually, just one that mattered (if you want to look at it that way). If one of those five had voted differently, the outcome would have been different.

I wonder how those five propose to define marriage.

On what basis would they say these aren’t valid marriages:

  • Three or more people without regard to gender?
  • Two people sharing one or more spouses but not married to each other?
  • An adult and a teenager?
  • Two adult siblings?
  • Any two adults without regard to marital status or family relationship?

And how is denying such arrangements not a manifestation of bigotry, hate, phobia, and so forth?

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil — God says so.

Well, here’s another book for your consideration: Reforming Marriage

Scandalous Scamps Schemingly School Scurrilous Skunks

Might this be a politically proclived post in disguise?

Scandalous — disgraceful; shameful or shocking; improper; a louse devoted to scandal

Scamps — unscrupulous and often mischievous people; rascals; rogues; scalawags

Schemingly — making sly, underhanded, crafty plans

School — to educate; teach; train

Scurrilous — characterized by or using low buffoonery; coarsely jocular or derisive

Skunks — thoroughly contemptible people

And now you’ve had your delightfully delicious daily dictionary dose.

I suppose you thought this would be a politically proclived post pertaining to one or more or all of the following: Read it all

Above all, love God!
Private