andrewlohr

Just another WordPress.com site

Blogbait 27 June and earlier

So when a couple from Westboro Baptist “Church” wants to get married, and they ask Robert Mapplethorpe to do the photography and his sister Michelle to make the cake, and the Mapplethorpes refuse, do the Mapplethorpes get arrested and fined and sent to sensitivity training?

(Fact check: Robert, famous “gay” photographer, died A.D. 1989, and I have no idea of his sisters’ names or occupations or predilections.)

Freedom means (in part) letting other people do things of which one disapproves. Does it have to mean applauding or subsidizing it, or allowing it within zones that prefer it not?

Alprova, since “gays” can’t breed–breeding involves the opposite sex–Darwin might disapprove of it without reference to the Holy Holy Holy One. Retract your claim that the only opposition is religious. (If science develops artificial wombs and/or artificial sperm, that’s artificial opposite sex; still not “gay” breeding.)

If Muslim Sharia law executes “gays,” and our President subsidizes Sharia regimes, is our President forcing U.S. taxpayers to subsidize the execution of “gays”? Since “gay” behavior spreads the AIDS virus (formerly “GRID,” gay related immune deficiency; and of course other fornication also spreads it), are “gays” murdering each other? (Points from Douglas Wilson.)

God now orders all sinners–not just the “gay” minority–to repent: Acts 17. Jesus Christ died for our sins and rose up alive on the third day. Mr Mapplethorpe simply died (from sins, not for them), and stayed dead, awaiting the Judgment Day.

To Bennett 20 June:

What evidence would impress you? Not what I offer, which I’m sure you know, but what would?

On Solyndra, the conservative tale is that the company was asked to keep quiet about layoffs until after the A.D. 2010 election. Maybe not illegal, but politics with tax dollars?

On the IRS, we hear Bush met with his IRS boss once, Obama 157 times. And we’re to believe Obama had nothing to do with what went on there?

(A National Review Online article by an inspector general who was fired at one hours’ notice for insisting on investigating an Obama donor who had apparently misspent a grant suggested that the threat of this kind of pressure is keeping IGs from doing their jobs.)

On Benghazi, we hear the regime blamed a Jewish filmmaker and put him in jail. (One of these days I oughtta watch the film.) They revised their memo a dozen times, and substantively. They made no military effort. The most transparent administration in history has not told us how the commander-in-chief used the time between when he heard of the attack and when he heard it had succeeded.

(I can understand Obama knowing it’d take a couple days to put together a military plan and diplomatic agreement, and that he didn’t have a couple days, and if he got into a Black Hawk down situation the GOP would pester him for that. But hey. The President is C-in-C so he can react fast in an emergency, and now we have phones. Call Joe Wilson and Michelle Bachman and ask them to go on record backing his effort and promising not to unduly second guess. Send in the F-18s, or whatever could reach Benghazi in time, and tell Hillary to earn her pay soothing ruffled feathers afterward. President Jackson, call your office.)

Fast and furious: sending guns to criminals is a good idea? Why is Holder still holding office?

The problem isn’t just with the details, but with the system. The tax laws (and other laws) are too complicated. Crony capitalism sucks: let people risk their own money. The border is porous. (Send them alligators instead of guns; if gators can live in Florida we can probably build them some swamps along the Rio Grande 🙂 The State Department is too big: Washington had Thomas Jefferson and 7 clerks with quill pens, Lincoln had Seward and 33 clerks. Shrink D.C. and shrink the problems. Turn Christian and solve them.

To the Nt Wright facebook page of his publishers (Harper & Row?)

A few days ago pastor Doug Wilson blogged about something Dr Wright had said, and Dr Wright posted a brief comment among (now) 72 comments:
http://dougwils.com/s16-theology/n-t-wright-rides-a-pale-horse.html
Later Wilson responded (12 June, Wed, 12:24pm “But What About Chauncey…?)
Briefly, my version, Wright had said American Christians tend to be more right-wing than Europeans. Wilson invited Wright to consider that true, wise Christian compassion calls for a much smaller government even than the US has.
May I urge Dr/Bishop Wright to take up the invitation? As a point of contact, the U.S. Coast Guard, which saves lives in U.S. oceans, is a government agency, but I’ve read the British equivalent is a private charity. Good for the Brits! Do I accuse them of lacking love for those in trouble in the deep? Far from it! (Read “The Theory of Market Failure,” edited by Tyler Cowen.)
Wilson fully agrees with Wright that Jesus is President of presidents and (pidgin Greek) archon tase basileis tase gase, but Wilson thinks (my version) Jesus is rather libertarian: generous Himself rather than with money taken from other people, truly generous rather than bogus-ly, a small-government Man because good sense and true love favor this. How would the advice your God would give a constitutional convention compare with triune Jehovah’s advice in I Sam 8? Hw would your God’s lists of jobs for government to do compare with the lists in Romans 13 and I Tim 2?

To Clay Bennett cartoon, TFP 15 June: possibly not posted, or deleted

Problem? Lack of Christianity. Afghanistan was a mess because led by devout Muslims, the Taliban. Lots of Muslims don’t make the trouble the Taliban makes, but few Muslims would deny the Taliban are devout Muslims. Iraq’s Hussein was a practicing atheist in a turban, so to speak; same with Libya’s Quadaffi and Egypt’s Mubarak; same with Syria’s Assad. Replacing Q&A with Al-Quaeda and Hezbollah may not improve. (I notice our friendly neighborhood democratic Party apparatchik did not draw Libya and Egypt as loads on the man’s back.)

Solution? Compare Christendom with Atheistic and Islamic countries, the US, badly short of Jesus as we fall, with North Korea and Saudi Arabia. Obviously we need something Jesus, the President of presidents, gives, something leaders who die with their own sins instead of dying for ours, and who stay dead for more than three days, cannot give. What love, to die for His enemies! What power, to rise up alive from the dead! Atheists who investigate the resurrection of King Jesus with an open mind tend to become known as Christians, e.g. Frank Morrison, Viggo Olson…

So as a condition for helping Syrian or other rebels, we should insist that they establish religious freedom, so that Muslims and others who choose to reject Islam and become Christians are free to do so and free to group with others for worship and good works. In Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, and Libya we failed to do this, and my brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus are suffering as a result, especially in Iraq and Egypt. (I send a little help through http://www.barnabasaid.org; go thou and do likewise.)

To National Review online, Jonah Goldberg on libertarianism as a new idea:

Looking around the world, the countries of Christendom tend to offer more freedom than Islamic or atheistic or Hindu/Buddhist countries. “Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof” comes from Moses, who (under God) freed the Jews from the only superpower du jour 3500 years ago. “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ (King Messiah) has made us free” comes from a Jewish Christian named Paul. The Bible’s advice to a constitutional convention (I Samuel 8) and its very short lists of jobs for government to do (Romans 13, I Timothy 2) sound relatively libertarian, at least in pointing to smaller governments than are popular today, if not dotting every i and crossing every t of some philosophical definition. In France, England, and Scotland, who opposed royal absolutism in the A.D. 1500s and 1600s? Us Calvinists of all people; and this has been traced down to the American Revolution as a revolt of the Presbyterian “black regiment” against the prospect of an Anglican hierarchy. Messiah Jesus, President of presidents, deserves more credit than He often gets.

To pingback on Doug Wilson’s NTWright rides a pale horse

When Christians say “capitalism” or “libertarianism” we may not agree with everything that goes by those names (how can we?), or with every jot and tittle of some system using those names; we may agree with the drift–government should be a lot smaller–and be willing to qualify details as needed. When Pastor Wilson mentioned N. T. Wright and then slammed Keynes, I suspect Wilson meant that Wright favors liberal (big government) politics, not that Wright agrees with every jot and tittle of Keynesianism; and I suspect Professor Wright may have taken this more personally than it was meant, instead of accepting Wilson’s invitation to reconsider whether God favors big-government-ism or disfavors it.

Since God is practical–the Word became flesh–God favors what is really logical and what really works; so the [overstated] von Mises logical approach and an empirical approach should, and I think do, tend to confirm the wisdom of the economics that are Biblical; and I am trying, as in my post on Wilson’s blog, to say this nicely for the most part. (There are times to hit hard.)

Have you considered government’s ability to be the problem? Do you support the Institute for Justice? Many US poor people have cars. Many US cities limit the number of taxis. This makes it hard for poor people to earn money as taxi drivers. It enables taxi owners to oppress the drivers who work for them. It makes it hard to get rides: easy to drive past a black customer and choose a white one. It raises the price of rides.

Keynesianism started in A.D. 1953?? In the US? Eisenhower? Not Hoover/FDR? The A.D. 1853-1953 century had seen the Civil War and two world wars, and the great depression, which may’ve slowed the economy; and libertarians have noted government interventions–in the margin of a liberal book entitled The Robber Barons (by Josephy??) I noted dozens of government interventions that enriched some at the expense of others, or government failures to stop sheer fraud–that messed things up. And Keynesianism worked? Carter’s stagflation? Obama’s stimulus? (Empirically, Bush’s deficits had not prevented the great recession, so Obama should’ve known the porculus wouldn’t work; logically, the porculus money came from taxes, depressing spending at one point in order to stimulate another with no net gain, or from borrowing, so D.C. borrows and Main Street can’t, or printing, reducing the value of dollars–so logically, as well as empirically, it was worthless. Greedily, Solyndra was a half billion dollar photo op, and Solyndra was asked to hold layoffs until after the election; that’s how govt “invests” our money.)

You take the parable of the talents as describing the judgment the Jews expected, so how come Jesus didn’t set it in that context: “You expect…”? He had compared himself/God to a thief in the night/unjust judge, so your nobleman is within His range. That He said nothing about the generosity of the master or the productive servants does not mean He did not expect, want, or presume any. You gotta earn, or inherit, or receive, what you give away! Business at its best–which it is often not at (Rob’t Graves)–serves in love, enriching both parties. Taking is basic to government; sharing, offering people what they want, is basic to business.

The Christians selling Jerusalem real estate had been warned by Jesus that in a generation it would be worthless; selling it was a sharp warning to buyers to turn to the Messiah, an enacted parable, in contrast to the opposite action of Jeremiah.. Not quite insider trading, since I’m sure they shared Jesus’s warning. And of course it enabled them to be generous on that occasion. We should all be generous, but perhaps it’s not a coincidence that that particular form of generosity is recorded only on that occasion?

So shrink the government.
(Andrew, husband of Wendy–easier than signing out/in).

To Wash Post column on legalizing pot, 8 June:

Legalize, says this fundamentalist and rather libertarian Christian. Drunkenness is sin (so Ted Kennedy is probably in Hell, and for adultery also), but Jesus Christ used wine; He even made some, without registering for taxes. Hemp is a fiber and pot, I gather, no stronger than wine. I’ve never used it, and am not interested (unless medically useful at some point), but the police have better thaings to do than go after pot users, or even hard drug users who control themsleves.

On the other hand, anyone who does have standards against drug use should be allowed the enforce those standards within their sphere. I’m sure Walmart won’t make all its customers give urine samples, but it might require this of its workers or would-be workers. Insurance companies may want to charge different rates based on different risks arising from use versus abstinence. A bed-and-breakfast or someone seeking a roommate may want to keep the stuff out. The police have better things to enforce than new laws banning discrimination against pot or drug users. Legalize both use and non-use. When prohibition ended, states could still be dry if they so chose.

To Clay Bennett cartoon 8 June:

The cartoon shows Mr Bennett can actually put out something with a different look than his usual–perhaps not better, but at least different–and can actually sort of hint that maybe liberals can do something wrong. Will wonders never cease!

Maybe he’ll go farther and take some art lessons from his wife, who does some very nice still lifes–look ’em up on Facebook–and maybe he’ll consider that liberalism (big-government-ism of both old parties) has bad problems built into it, including:
(1) It gives some men power over others’ lives, as the cartoon hints, and this to a needless extent. Letting some live by the sweat of others’ brow is slavery. Making some jump through arbitrary hoops, and forcing some to follow orders instead of using their own heads, are at least akin to slavery. All this invites corrupt and power-hungry people to go into government instead of making them earn a living.
(2) Liberalism does dumb things such as forcing healthy people to pay sick people to be sick. That’s what O’Romneycare is; that’s what its ‘three pillars’ listed by Paul Krugman yesterday amount to.
(3) Liberalism claims to make people more equal; but enforcing this puts non-equal power in the hands of the Equalizer, thus making inequality worse instead of better. It’s easier to get a bit more more money than a bit more power. Aristocracy is therefore worse than plutocracy, and egalitarianism contradicts itself, so abandon it. There are plenty of artificial differences that can be struck down, as the artificial differences between black and white people were struck down; but when affirmative action requires half the NBA’s players to be white (or female), enforcing this artificial version of sameness means not everyone has the same power.
(4) And in other cases, even when liberalism perceives a real problem, its efforts at solution make the problem worse instead of better, subsidizing the problem instead of letting people do what they can to shrink it.
(5) Liberalism has promised more than it can afford to deliver; it’s running low on other peoples’ money. Deficits are unpatriotic, said Senator Obama–so deficits are a problem his golf games haven’t hidden from him.
(6) Liberalism is unconstitutional; it claims powers not granted to the D.C. government. It’s a breach of contract. The contract can be amended if need be.
(7) Liberalism is unBiblical; Jesus solved problems Himself, not by crucifying the taxpayers, and He sets the standard. When FDR and LBJ die for my sins, I’ll believe they love me; when they rise up alive on the 3rd day, I’ll worship them. Until then, Jesus is good enough.

To Paul Krugman 7 June:

“The Spite Club” sounded as if Mr Krugman was writing about himself; as usual, he oozes hatred.

Most of O’Romneycare “will go fully into effect at the beginning of next year.” Uh, what percentage of us are opting out by not buying coverage? 75%? (It’s a factual question. I could be wrong. Answer it.)

And how many Americans will remain uninsured under full effect? 30 million?

Massachusetts has had this for 7 years. How do MA health costs compare to the rest of the country? Highest? (Factual question.)

O’Romneycare’s 3 pillars–“same coverage,” forced purchase, and subsidies–all, in plain English, force healthy people to pay sick people to be sick. Will subsidizing illness improve health?

Since O’Romneycare increases demand without increasing the supply of doctors, won’t it make emergency rooms more crowded rather then less?

Since prices and variety convey information, what’s the difference between “same coverage” and telling lies? Are Mr and Mrs Krugman equally able to become pregnant? (She, perhaps unlikely; he, impossible.)

The Constitution is the fundamental contract of America. If Federalist #45 paragraph 9 be true, is Obamacare, however wise, a breach of contract, requiring an amendment?

Let Mr Krugman worship Jesus of Nazareth, a generous, rather libertarian Jew who in requiring repantance always showed love. Replace “The Spite Club” with the good news, the Gospels.

To Chatt Times 6 June:

klifnotes, does your own chosen nickname tell us you don’t do your own research? Libyan Christians have been persecuting Muslims for decades? Huh? How many Tea Party rallies or meetings have you attended? If you (and dd and im) had read my 1st post, you might have noted that I expressed agreement with some of what Mr Killian and Editor Sohn said. If you think getting rid of Christianity improves government, have you heard of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and North Korea? He was OK in person at a libertarian meeting, but do the cartoons of the Times’s cartoonist not express “hate, rage and bigotry” against those whose politics differ from his? Obviously the Rwanda genocide and US slavery/Jim Crow racism were terrible sins by people who call themselves Christians, and it’s standard Christian doctrine that all Christians “fall short of the glory of God,” but what in the Bible or in the conduct of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ had what part in bringing about the Rwanda genocide? Do they credit the very devout Christian William Wilberforce for ending the slave trade and slavery in the British empire, and that without civil war? Evangelicals had some part in ending slavery and Jim Crow here too (and atheists not much; nominal Christians and other theists some). Liberal bigots, repent or perish. (Conservative bigots ditto).

To Clay Bennett cartoon, TFP 5 June:

Obamacare (O’Romneycare) forces healthy young people to buy insurance for less healthy older people. So, Ted Cruz for President.

Why did Martyn Lloyd-Jones switch from medical doctoring to preaching? Because his mentor had diagnosed King Edward VII with nicotine poisoning–too many cigars–and kept noting that sick people ate too much, drank too much, and smoked too much. Often, not always, the problem didn’t come from the disease; it came from doing stupid things such as fornicating. On a policy level, why subsidize stupidity, especially when stupidity is fun? On a personal level, repentance–change–is what we need, which Jesus Christ brings and insists on. (I rejoice that Lloyd-Jones’s sermons can now be heard free at mljtrust.org. My 3rd grader says his accent remind her of Gollum in Lord of the Rings.)

To Paul Krugman, NY Times, 3 June:

So the news isn’t terrible. Neither is it good. D.C. is spending more than it collects, and in ten years the gap will get worse. Social Security has promised more than it can afford to pay. So has Medicare. Both are “broke”–perhaps not as badly as Solyndra, but in the same kind of pickle. And Professor Krugman, like our President, is defending the problem against any urgent current efforts at solution.

Even in the name of compassion, isn’t an affordable safety net better than a broke one? Isn’t an uncomfortable, or very plain, net better than a lazy hammock? Isn’t a very flat tax rate, paid by “the 47%” as well as “the rich,” better than one that kicks in just as people are starting to climb the ladder, so that to earn what welfare offers one needs to earn $70,000 a year or whatever?

And if you want to ask whether these programs are Constitutional as regulation of private warships is COnstitutional, or whether they’re Biblical…think on these things. Jesus submitted to crucifixion, which was very generous of Him, rather than crucify the taxpayers.

To yahoo article on Mayweather-Alvarez fight arranged:

Frank Lotierzo at The Sweet Science has written that Mayweather may be wanting to fight Alvarez now, before Alvarez gets a little more tough experience and Mayweather gets a little older. Yeah, it’s a step up for Mayweather. Yeah, Alvarez may be his best competition below 154 pounds. So far so good. But Sugar Ray Robinson took on the light-heavyweight champ (and was winning until he became exhausted.) Good as he is, and careful as he is, does Mayweather want to raise his stature enough to take that kind of risk?

To Doug Wilson, 31 May:

Feminism isn’t just an error; it’s an error sometimes encouraged (provoked) by some conduct of some men. (Not Doug as far as I know–he’s having good sound fun here–and of course some women provoke some men–but even a blind sow may find an acorn now and then, eh? It’s wrong to condemn an elder on one witness, but it might be OK to advise him to follow the Billy Graham rule against being alone with a woman, and to read I Cor 13 a couple times, as opposed to doing nothing?)

To NY Times, Paul Krugman, 31 May:

Wife, 6 kids, no job: we get food stamps. Thank you, taxpayers. To keep us from starving, though, you could pay for mostly a few staples: potatoes instead of hazelnut coffee creamer, for instance. Bill Buckley wrote this would cut costs by 3/4. (Leave, say, 10% flexible to put spread and bacon bits on the potatoes.)

Net spending stagnates when tax dollars taken from point A are spent at point B; A cannot spend them. (McConnell’s 8th edition, page 245-6 or so, had a sentence from which it can be deduced that GDP would double if D.C. took every dollar and gave it back. Obvious hogwash. Jesus is libertarian; He’s a sensible guy. Follow Him.)

$1 SNAP raises GDP $1.70? Only because the SNAP $1 is counted as raising GDP, right? And even here in TN, less than 10 cents per dollar spent comes back as sales tax–and none from SNAP, spent tax free.

Help families and children? Encourage marriage: stop the vile monogaphobic bigotry that subsidizes fornication. “Dan Quayle was right.”

Why do farmers want SNAP cut? Public spirit, perhaps? It seems against their interest.

Time to be angry? We Tea Party hobbits wonder when old orc Krugman is ever not angry. Can he even say “Cheese” for the NYTimes camera?

To Chatt Times 31 May:

Tell us how outsourcing sewer bills to Hemet, CA helps Chattanoogans?

Tell us why Ann from Credit Card Services isn’t in jail for making “Do not call” calls?

Make Patten Towers pay its bills? Yeah. Subsidize golf courses,
Tivoli, and Memorial Auditorium? Why should taxpayers do that? Jesus is libertarian: generous with Himself, not with other people’s money. Jesus or Hell.

To achristianthing.wordpress.com

Your regular fans may know, but on my first visit (from a comment on Doug Wilson’s blog) your undefined use of ‘oriental’ confused me. Pastor Wilson used North Korea and Zen as negative analogies; both are Oriental and so are you; is that what bothered you, or does ‘oriental’ have an established meaning here? Albania 40 years ago was what North Korea is now, and the confusion of deconstructionism might rival that of Zen, so if Wilson is perceived as racist here I see the perception as false, and the false perception bothers me more than what triggered it. All I see is a couple casual analogies, not anti-orientlism. Are we anti-ostrich if, knowing better, we use the analogy of ostriches with heads in the sand? You might ask Wilson to draw more of his negative analogies from the West, tho Rachel Held Evans and apostate churches are Western negative concerns. (My GUESS is Wilson holds the average Chinese evangelical church in higher overall esteem than the average American.) Your article struck me as isogetical, pouring a lot of stuff you have in mind into a couple casual references, only incidentally Asian, in Wilson.

That feminism and whatnot do at least partly react against actual evils I agree, and since these evils have been experienced they are deeply felt. (Re infant communion, since I was denied God’s Table as a child I have had a similar experience and feeling.) But reaction does not guarantee correctness: was the Third Reich a proper reaction to the evils of the Gulag empire and communism, however evil and in need of correction the Gulag was? Is fornication a proper response to sexual deprivation? (C.S. Lewis: widespread drunkenness is the mother of prohibition and prohibition of widespread drunkenness.) It is (usually) the duty of those who oppose an evil not just to react against it, but to find the truth. (Dig up “Feed God’s babies” on my web-archived old website, http://www.lohr84.com, or scroll down my blog to find it, and see how I do with infant communion, trying to be forceful, balanced, and loving.) So yeah, Wilson and co. would do well to heed what feminism & co. are saying and to deal with evils it opposes. But feminism etc may still be basically wrong. (“The cults are the unpaid bills of the church.”)

And was it you or Wilson contrasting grace with law and discipline? Why would anyone do that? It’s gracious of God, and His messengers, to tell us what He wants. It’s gracious of Him, and his gracious agents, to rap our knuckles to bring us to repentance. (He will use ungracious agents at times.) I try to correct my kids in love, not to hurt them for hurting’s sake. Love and grace include instruction and correction.

27 May ’13 Times-Free Press (Free Press, Drew’s Views)–article was from 19 Apr, and this may not have posted.

So, Hunter, do you oppose O’Romneycare, since it imposes insurance on those who haven’t asked to buy it? And since it is unjust to force healthy people to pay sick people to be sick; it destroys domestic Tranquility when we have our hands in each others’ pockets; it promotes not the general Welfare but only the welfare of particular groups; and it reduces Liberty by 2700 pages of laws and 13,000 pages of regulations?

Perhaps Mr Bennett will next receive the Nobel prizes for literature and peace?

Not sure if posted on blogger.com, Dead Theologians

I am–so one can–be for infant communion as Biblical without being for FV (I’m unsure on FV), without insisting on intinction (wait until weaning is OK), and without water regeneration (one might say Spirit baptism–in a reformed, not pentecostal, sense–saves or at least accompanies salvation.) We’re showing Christ’s death; he died (we suppose) for covenant infants; so how can the showing exclude them? Examine yourself specifically to see if you’re including everyone you should (read the context!) And if infants are saved, are they saved without faith? If so, where’s sola fide? (Hint: my pretalking infant trusts me, and hears the gospel. My 3- infant says “Jesus loves me best.”) For 30-40 pages on paedocommunion starting with 1-page summaries, try https://andrewlohr.wordpress.com/2013/02/page/2/; be ready to scroll.

To David Cook, 3 or 4 may, TFP:

A doctor who very nicely tells all his patients “You’re healthy” is killing people, and a moralist who tells all his sinners “you’re righteous” is sending people to Hell. Warning fornicators (of all stripes, please, not just one strange minority) to repent lest they perish is an act of love, just as a doctor telling a patient he needs rigorous treatment is an act of love. Let it be done as nicely as may be. Let no undue nastiness accompany it. But let it be done. The gospel in a word can be “repent!”–and this is indeed very good news compared to “You’re as good as you’ll ever be.”
(Speaking of gospel, the recorded sermons of Martyn Lloyd-Jones are now available for free download.)

To Paul Krugman, NY Times, 3 May

Inflation (rising prices) hurts those with money, since their money can buy less, and hurts those on fixed incomes. Falling prices would help. But why let the Fed cause inflation and enrich speculators rather than producers? Just legalize the use of gold, silver, and foreign currencies on a level playing field with dollars so people who want to evade inflation can easily do so. Competition will either keep the Fed honest or make it irrelevant. Would people buy more wine if all wine were watered down?

And how can “stimulus” spending do any good whatsoever? When D.C. stimulates Solyndra with a dollar taxed from Main Street, Main Street cannot spend the dollar, and Solyndra wasted it: the net effect is destructive, not productive. When D.C. borrows the dollar, someone else does not borrow it. When D.C. creates the dollar, it either causes inflation, or, as your column may suggest, simply does no good at all. (Is it storing up inflation for later?)

Force people to “serve one another in love” (Galatians) rather than pick each other’s pockets. The more transactions are freely entered into so that both parties gain something they prefer, and the fewer ‘transactions’ are forced at the point of an IRS or regulatory gun, the richer we all get.

To Human Events Dennis Prager/ response to Harvey Ardman comment on sex.

Not bad: God created it. Earned? I didn’t earn Wendy, but I did arrange and commit to honor her gift, and to reciprocate. Procreative? Yeah, but not always. Puritan? Saint Oliver Cromwell the Great, pray for us–a faithful husband who enjoyed a good time. People are sinful but can repent, and many pleasures need not be sins.

I hate and fear my impulse to smack you–should we indulge all our impulses?–but I will mirror your view of motives. Our President forcing people to pay for contraceptives sees sex as anti-procreative, something which must be subsidized (sex needs subsidies?), a good greater than religious freedom, a profoundly diabolical point of view based on the notion that human beings should be evil and must not be allowed “pleasures forevermore” at God’s right hand.

Andrew, husband of Wendy

Link to a defense of President George W. Bush’s record:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346355/reading-bush-years/page/0/1

To Bennett cartoon, TFP, 23 Apr; the ??? refers to the first three comments

???

Two perfectly legal immigrants, one of whom in hindsight offered warning signs, murder three people, and Mr Bennett worries that illegal immigrants aren’t being sufficiently welcomed? If they enter his house without invitation, would he worry about that? (It wasn’t martial law that caught the younger murderer. It was a guy with a $50,000 boat.)

Maybe Mr Bennett should worry about the assault rifles our Attorney General shipped to Mexico, or the faux Eric Holder who was invited to vote without ID. Oh, well. Standards are things liberal hypocrites, on their road to Hell, want to impose on Republicans. Jesus (is libertarian) didn’t like hypocrisy, and He warned about Hell. Repent, guys. This means you, Mr Bennett.

To Chatt Times editorial 23 Apr

Call him Mayor Bowater because he’s so foggy, with an agenda behind the outer fog?

“Family development” ought to mean encouraging to parents to be married before they become parents, to get good advice before they get married and avoid getting into a canoe half a mile above Niagara Falls, and to work out difficulties and stay married afterwards. I see the hate-filed monogaphobe bigots in D.C. set some tax line at $400,000 for single people and $450,000 instead of $800,000 for married people. Maybe the city attorney and the ACLU could sue to stop this discrimination against the monogamous lifestyle, which is no doubt genetic, and thus improve society.

To Wash Post 22 Apr

“Stimulus” didn’t work, and can’t, because the stimulus dollars spent on Solyndra come from Main Street, producing a negative stimulus (cost) that balances any positive stimulus (spending), so the stimulus is and is bound to be completely worthless overall, though it may buy some votes. Borrowing, same thing: Pennsylvania Avenue borrows on behalf of Sesame Street and Main Street pays the bill and connot borrow Big Bird’s nest egg. New money, same thing: it reduces the value of the dollars in Main Street’s pockets, so that I can only buy 20 washcloths today for the price of 30 under Bush jr, and 2 gallons for the price of 3.

So do what? Jesus is libertarian. Legalize gold and make Ben Bernanke’s paper compete with gold, silver, platinum and foreign currencies on a level playing field, since his record shows we can’t trust Ben with the dollar or with the economy. Put D.C.’s spending on a new tax form on which taxpayers can vote to cut spending and give ourselves 1% of whatever we cut, limited to 5% cuts per year (about $250,000,000,000 per year) so as not to be too disruptive. Limit the effect of most regulations to 1 hr/day and 2% of spending total, so regs can’t overwhelm small businesses; with stupidity of the regulation a lawful defense in court. (Justin Amash said big biz asks for regulations to stifle small.)

To Human Events article, G. Will on Justin Amash, 22 Apr (George Will, Wash. Post 19 Apr)

AT the April 15 Tea Party rally in D. C. Amash and Mike Lee spoke. Both warned against crony capitalism, against big businesses using regulations to stifle competition. Amash said big biz asks him for regulations for this purpose. (He also remarked that not everyone in Congress is a crook, but there are a fair number.)

To Paul Krugman, NY Times, 22 Apr ’13

Don’t say we “can’t” be Greece. USA is the only superpower du jour, succeeding Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Macedon, Rome, Byzantium, Spain…We can, and probably will. Are we heading that way?

As for joblessness, when our government spends money it takes from us, whoever it was taken from can’t spend it, so whatever jobs are created at Solyndra are lost on Main Street: no net stimulus. When it spends borrowed money, Main Street cannot borrow the money: no net stimulus. When it spends new money, the value of old money is reduced: under young Bush, gasoline, whose price drives most other prices, cost less than $2 per gallon, not more than $3.

So how can D.C. create new jobs? Approve the Keystone pipeline. How does building Keystone across the sensitive Rockies to put oil into wreckable tankers for the polluting Chinese guard the environment? Approve the Institute for Justice agenda: cut crony capitalist regulations that keep jobs from being created, or that tell workers to stop working. Trim the “safety net” so it’s more affordable and less comfortable: make my family eat more potatoes on food stamps and cut out hazelnut coffee creamer. (Bill Buckley, 40 years ago, wrote that the cost of food stamps could be cut by three quarters by distributing a few staples instead of stamps.) Didn’t some study say firing bureaucrats results in job creation, and another that spending cuts best be six to one over tax hikes to balance a budget?

Worship Jesus the libertarian.

Blogbait 28 March ’13 ff

To Free Press 28 March
Abolishing the death penalty guarantees injustice for the victims of murder. Right now there’s at least a slim chance of justice.

The editorial failed to name anyone who has actually been executed in the US and proven innocent. Its vaporous fears remind me of liberals who impose malfunctioning monstrous programs on the taxpayers lest one person suffer, thus causing massive suffering.

We Christians do know one innocent Man who was executed by the only superpower of His days. Was the death of Jesus Christ merely an accident, or did it have something to do with justice? Of the two terrorists executed with him, which one went to Heaven, the one who admitted he deserved the death penalty he was receiving, or the one who asked for a stay of execution?

Five abortionists, who commit murder for hire, have been murdered. At least one of the murderers was executed. Are murderers of abortionists a minority that gets the death penalty too often?

To E J Dionne, Wash post, 18 March
But the war on poverty is a quagmire that has failed: we have more poor than before, and because of these programs they’re more stuck in poverty than when they knew they’d have to work. Keynesianism has failed: we have the great recession and the jobless “recovery.” The GI bill was a voucher bill: can we have the same at lower levels? Jesus is libertarian: generous himself, but not blowing the trumpet before him about how much of other peoples’ money he’s given away.

To National Review re let pope govern, 18 March
I’d like to see him issue an encyclical saying simply “All fornication is sin.  Repent or perish.  This includes clergy.”  
Would fabius allow that married priests exist; for a priest to be married is no sin, and this differs from “gay” actions and from murdering babies?  (For a priest who has taken vows of celibacy to get married is a different question. But we do know Peter was married and we don’t know about Judas Iscariot.) 
Also, evangelical Christians have roots in Jesus and the Bible, but Mormons have roots in a con man who tried to shoot his way out of his unjust imprisonment and lynching, and in a book that has no more to do with American history than “The Lord of the Rings” with European history; though it may sometimes encourage virtues, as a Gandalf-ist religion might, anyone who takes their book seriously as history is showing poor judgment there.

To some theology blog, re article on 5 myths of translation:
http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2013/03/five-myths-about-bible-translation

Good enough here, but in your NIV 2011 review a couple years ago you used “accurate” to favor one kind of accuracy (idiomatic meaning) over another (more literal), rather than value each for what it offers. (And since “The Message” is in English, it’s a translation in that it puts the Bible from the original tongues into English even if Rev Peterson didn’t refer to the originals).
And re Mk 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11, Burgon did his homework and made a case for those passages, even if none of his followers has reached his level. The modern scholarly majority that rejects those passages tends to publish their position without bothering to refer to anyone trying to prove it. (‘Modern theologians are like a bunch of dogs sniffing each others’ behinds’–David Chilton.) The old NIV footnote said the 2 best mss omit Mt 16:9-20. Burgon says Sinaiticus, tho early, is a bad ms (10 scribes tried to correct it), and Vaticanus has a unique gap that would hold 9-20, i.e. its scribe knew of those verses; and Burgon offers a theory as to how they dropped out of some mss. And most NT autographs went to the “Byzantine arc” around the NE Med; odd copies getting to Alexandria and its textual critics might establish an idiosyncratic local text with local ‘corrections’ there. (Tell us about a definitive refutation of Burgon?) Besides doctrinal ‘corrections,’ Greek stylists had an “Attic” fashion wave that could’ve shortened texts, and later an “Asiatic” waved that could’ve embellished them.

To Bennett cartoon, 16 March
We bearded men born in Pakistan advise you to be careful, Mr Bennett 🙂

Anyone else see any of Doug Wilson’s debate with Andrew Sullivan on the issue? Sullivan thinks marriage is for only two people, so does he want “sharia law” against a bisexual who wants to marry two partners? Or to suppress Islam and some forms of Mormonism which allow polygamy? Wilson’s point is not just that ‘gay’ marriage slides down a slippery slope to worse things; it’s that to prevent this slide, Sullivan has to agree with Wilson in drawing a line somewhere, somehow against what some consenting adults want to do. Wilson draws the Bible and Church line (he’d be patient with polygamists who get saved).

And when every arrangement that anyone wants to call “marriage” is so called, what will “marriage” mean anymore? (When I thank God for Wendy, once or twice a day most days, I thank Him “for bringing us together in holy marriage.”)

Marriage is a grouping. It’s one thing to let sinful groupings happen. It’s another to deny other groupings the right to their own standards, as my ‘sharia’ brother in the White House is trying with regard to contraceptives. Can a Christian photographer turn down an offer to shoot a ‘gay’ marriage? Can a Christian bed & breakfast set standards for who gets into its beds?

It’s another thing to force healthy people to pay sick people to be sick, or to force wise people to pay high-risk people to take risks.

It’s another thing to deny freedom of speech. Can Canadians post lists of Bible references to ‘gay’ conduct? Christians have a duty to speak lovingly–“Repent or perish, and PLEASE don’t perish!” rather than “Repent or perish, and the sooner and more miserably you perish the better, you @##$$%&!” But he who hates his neighbor fails to warn him of dangers before him; the Church needs to preach “Repent!” more, not less, than it does (and not just about the weird sins of a small minority, but about laziness, gluttony, and worldliness, to name three of mine, and of course fornication in general, not just its ‘gay’ form.)

Maybe I should congratulate Clay for his courage in mocking the Koran and Islamic law. (Copy this cartoon before it gets pulled, Bennett fans?)

To Doug Wilson, 15 March: (Blog and Mablog) Doug replied Andrew, thanks.
For more light and less heat,could you replace “paleo-Confederate,” which sounds like a defense of the whole Old South, which is not your position, with, say, “Idaho Confederate,” which means: you and whatever you want it to mean? I doubt any effort you make to define “paleo-Confederate” your way will either placate your critics or offend them in gospel-necessary ways. “Idaho Confederate” might, maybe, more easily convey that you find things to admire in the old Confederates, but also things to dissent from or denounce as sin, and that you’re not “neo-Confederate,” but have your own quirks. (Maybe “Idaho anti-racist Confederate”?? Or just “anti-racist Confederate?”) Not that racism is or was unique to the South (or to whites). Anti-racist you are, and the gospel is: might as well say so, even if it is PC.

Under Moses’ law, false accusations are to be punished as if the accuser has committed the crime he’s falsely accusing of. Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley should be treated as rapists. Maybe some of your critics should be treated as racists?

“Racial insensitivity” means racial lines are involved and someone’s feelings are hurt, perhaps badly–which I’m not slighting, though it can be overdone. Would you care to extend an olive twig toward Brian Crawford Lovitts (spelling??) by admitting, again, that the atrocities he mentions did, here and there, take place–along with others like outlawing teaching slaves to read the Bible, and laws discouraging manumission? And as he takes the sufferings of his ancestors to heart, somewhat similarly you take the virtues of your southern ancestors (?) to heart while denouncing their sins and trying to keep their sins and their enemies’ sins, and virtues, in balanced perspective? He wants you to say extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice. You want him to admit that it can indeed be a vice, else how many abortionists has he shot? (Is he pro-life, if he doesn’t even want to talk about whether black wombs are more dangerous today than in A.D. 1858?) Another point you might have in common is that you’d say the gospel is indeed revolutionary (or something like that, if “revolutionary” is a bad word to you), though the Civil War was in some ways a wrong kind of revolution, even though it got rid of one evil. If he’ll put his hurt feelings on the negotiating table, if forgiveness will get on his agenda (and it probably is, though he may not have applied it here yet), maybe you can address them somewhat?

The book “Emancipating the slaves, enslaving free men” listed six positions on the Civil War (yours was not one of them, though I think the author had read most of the standard literature), and I think it concluded that slavery was indeed the defining issue for secession. I’ll grant you that other things were involved and could be more than excuses, but slavery was majorly involved and the Confederacy was on the wrong side of that issue taken alone, as perhaps you’d grant. I think (and posted to Pastor Thabiti) that the word “slavery” meant different things in the OT, Rome, and the old south. Proving that Moses approved of something called “slavery” does not mean he’d approve of Jefferson Davis’s version, which didn’t feature freedom with supplies after six years as a routine feature. I agree with you that the trend of the Bible is toward freedom but this does not mean immediate manumission in every case in a I Tim 6:1-2 situation.

To David Cook 13 Mar Times-Free PRess:
Under one-way it was still lively, at least Saturday nights. Two-way was a waste of 2 million bucks: not the disaster I feared, but a waste. (My traffic engineer brother also opposed it.) A waste, imposed against the popular will–Mayor Corker ducked a vote–and supported by one lie I clearly remember, the claim that one-way kept little cross streets busy: they were dead as a doornail. It’s still a street: use it as one, though maybe turn some unused buildings into parking lots.

To Washington Post, E. J. Dionne on new pope, 13 Mar:
Francis (as he now is) left a palace for an apartment, and God’s Son left Heaven for earth: so far so good. Libertarians can be personally generous. Jesus touched lepers, and Francis has touched AIDS sufferers. In an Argentine financial crisis, Francis insisted that crony capitalist welfare for the rich not crowd out welfare for the poor. OK.

Here in the US where the “poor” own cars, TVs, houses, and thousands of jacuzzis–by Jesus’ standard most of us would be rich–replacing 90% of food stamps with a few tax-paid staples (leave 10% for condiments to make them taste better?)–might cut cost there by two thirds without starving anyone. (I’d miss my hazelnut creamer, but baked potatoes aren’t bad.) Replacing bureaucratic programs with less costly vouchers under our own control could cut costs and empower the poor: schools, insurance…Is it “social justice” when our President sends his own daughters to private school but tries to deny that choice to poor D.C. parents? Is it “social justice” when someone wants to offer tours of D.C. and D.C. wants to make him get a license? The Institute for Justice has a vision of social justice and empowering the poor that puts liberals, who sound a trumpet before themselves about how much of other peoples’ money they’re giving away, to shame. I hope our new pope (if trademark Catholics will allow us adjective catholics the “our”) and his friends pick up on the IJ kind of justice. You too, Mr Dionne. You too, Mr President.

To Washington Post 13 Mar re article about President Obama eating with GOP guys:
Most of the comments show hatred, ignorant of those with whom the commenters disagree, that the column suggests an improvement on. Jesus would talk with anyone, and sometimes demand drastic changes in their life.
Most mass murders take place in gun-free zones. The Joker chose a gun-free theater over bigger and closer theaters.
What if someone’s religion is true? If Jesus rose from the dead, he deserves some kind of special attention. A priori rejection of facts is no excuse. Suspicion, maybe, but not rejection. And I think he lived a rather libertarian life: generous himself, but not blowing the trumpet in the synagogues and streets about how much of other people’s money he’d given away.

Blogbait 1 Apr ’13

To Pulse, Janis Hashe on SPLC
Psychoanalyzing without asking whether your targets, however wrong in some ways, have any legitimate concerns? Does this show (the wrong kind of) fear in Dr Beirich and the Pulse? Just askin’–think about it.

Perfect love throws out fear, says the Bible, and the man who let himself be crucified to express God’s love for sinners has earned the right to claim he has achieved victory over fear. (Let himself be crucified? Staying alive as long as he could was not Jesus Christ’s top priority, as even theological liberals would admit.)

Among His followers, Wycliffe Bible Translators is driven not by fear of people who speak other languages, but by love for them.

Most of the Tea Party would probably have voted for Herman Cain had he been nominated, and I didn’t see the party of Bill Clinton and Teddy Kennedy rushing to Mr Cain’s defense when he was charged with adultery, nor saying “We’re for gay marriage, what’s the problem with what Mr Cain is alleged to have done?” I suspect the left is scared stiff lest a black Ronald Reagan emerge. Are the enemies of Ben Carson, Allen West, and Clarence Thomas racist? Does the SPLC defend those men?

The problem with our current President is not his skin color–I’ve voted for darker–but the fact that under him, the rich have gotten richer and the poor actually poorer. (Under Bush, the poor got richer but the rich got richer faster, increasing the gap but not hurting the poor.) The fact that Romneycare in Massachusetts has increased the wait time for seeing doctors, and is fixing to increase taxes, and that Obamacare copied Romney. The fact that $5 will only buy 20 washcloths at Family Dollar these days, instead of 30: inflation at 10% a year. (See also gasoline prices, and he’s been blocking the Keystone pipeline.) (Those are anecdotes, but a statistic is a collection of anecdotes, and I’ve seen serious economists argue the official inflation statistics are too low.) He’s been a lousy President, as Jimmy Carter was. I don’t think it’s worth calling him “socialist,” but he does want to redistribute power from the people to himself. I don’t think he’s a Muslim, but his sympathy for Muslims has backfired, replacing a tamed regime in Libya with one that let our ambassador be murdered.

They have sandpapered the Homeric laughter off Aphrodite’s face, complained a “common chastitute” known as C. S. Lewis. So these “gays” are causing legal trouble for someone who didn’t want to do a job photographing one of their “wedddings” (3rd d for the devil; two can play at word games), and someone who didn’t want to make a wedding cake for one. Is there freedom for “chastitutes”? In business, I’ve worked for a lesbian and been sent out front to serve a “gay” couple while a couple urban rednecks laughed in back. Don’t worry, wrote Saint Paul, about how nonChristians fornicate; keep the Church clean, and grow the Church as you can.

To Pulse, 8 April, on letting IRS fill out tax forms
Since the IRS has to do the work anyway, let ’em do it in advance to be approved or corrected by taxpayers.
But once they’re doing it, yeah, they might want to crowd out competitors: IRS agents are just as human as TurboTax workers, just as greedy, perhaps even a bit more power-hungry on average just in the nature of things.
Prove it? The IRS wanted to force mom-and-pop tax preparers to get IRS approval–and this was just fine with H&R Block (???and TurboTax???)–big companies cronying up with big government, like Tennessee-American Water Company having a monopoly on water supply in a river town surrounded by other water districts, instead of allowing competition.
So every law, every ad and every form had better make clear that competing with the IRS is legal and always will be.
Can we trust D.C. about this? No, but I’d hate to clutter the Constitution with an amendment guaranteeing this right. I’d settle for an explicit law, referring to the existing guarantees of freedom of association to petition for redress of grievances, freedom of press (to create and print alternative tax worksheets), and freedom from slavery.

To NYTimes, The Stone, col of 30 Mar
Considering Stalin and Mao, how can atheism claim to exemplify either love or rationality? We Christians have Jesus of Nazareth to consider.

Considering that my wife and her mother have experienced Christian miracles, how can atheism be factual? A universal presupposition against miracles is refuted, as a complete account of reality, by a single counterexample.

Wendy’s cat was raised from the dead: therefore Marx and Rand are in Hell. Follow Jesus, and them only to the extent they borrow from Him, or illuminate things He didn’t bother with in 33 years.

“The historical stories…are best taken as parables”? All of them? Was there an historical Jesus? Did he say anything? Did he do anything? Was he crucified? Was he buried? Four days after he died, was his corpse still at Rush’s “room temperature”? Four days after Buddha, Mohammed, Marx, Darwin, Rockefeller, Gandhi, and Rand died, were their corpses at room temperature? Did His followers start half the hospitals in the third world, even in China?

To Paul Krugman, NYTimes, 1 April A.D. 2013
Andrew Lohr
Chattanooga, TN

Californians average poorer than Texans when taxes and cost of living get considered, eh?

CA schools are a mess? They get paid whether or not customers like what they offer, unlike businesses which have to keep customers happy. Simply divide the dollars by the students and let families choose to spend on home, private, public, college, or other education–even park the money in an education/medical/retirement account for students who aren’t ready for school right now. Parental involvement, instant accountability, variety–bingo! Jesus is libertarian (and Easter reminds us that He outranks the only superpower du jour.)

The GOP is a minority in CA? Do minorities have rights? Maybe the conservative part of the state has a constitutional right to secede and form its own state, as West Virginia did.

Andrew Lohr tutor Chattanooga = last post in Feb archives. This is Feb/Mar ’13 logbait.

To Bennett cartoon 1 Mar:

Bigotry exists (repent!), but when the kind of criticism Clay peddles is directed at President Obama, it cannot be bigotry, can it? If it were, he’d a hypocrite for peddling that kind of thing himself.

When our President is criticized for reasons of policy–deficit, joblessness, broken promises, going from bad to worse–that’s not bigotry. When he’s criticized by people darker than he, such as Alan Keyes or Herman Cain, or by white boys who’ve voted for Keyes and the like, that’s not bigotry. When he’s called “unpatriotic,” that can’t be bigotry, for he used that term of President Bush’s deficits, and Senator Obama wasn’t a bigot, was he?

He was relected by about 20% of the US people, not “a majority.”

Ike, TR, and Lincoln were left of Pres Obama?

To TFP (Bennett cartoon) 27 February, before editing to get it under 3000 characters:

Beats bathhouses…but when it burns, they’ll be in trouble…

Creation: Adam and Eve. (Evolution: Adam and Eve, or no kids until artificial wombs and/or virgin conceptions come on line. Artificial insemination and surrogate motherhood still require the cooperation of both sexes, albeit not in bed: Adam + Eve. Evolution shows “gay” behavior? It also shows cannibalistic behavior and parasitic behavior. “Gay” is genetic? A strongly genetic gay wouldn’t breed, so there’s an element of choice, however hard a sexual habit may be to break. And hard to break completely doesn’t mean impossible to bend or to try to break. Smoking may be hard to break, but wouldn’t you advise a smoker to keep trying?)

I’ve posted before here that there’s something to be said for allowing Registered Significant Others (RSOs) for hospital visits, prearranging for peaceful distribution of stuff in case of a breakup, and so on. But “gay” behavior is a grouping, and if “liberty” and “justice” call for tolerating such grouping, what about at least equal liberty and justice for non-“gay” groupings? It’s one thing to stop sending the cops after “gays.” The police may well have better things to do than hunt for “gays.” It’s another thing to send the cops after people who idolize evolution as described above, or who believe what the Bible, the Church throughout history, and the God-fearing sections of the Church today say to “gays,” namely “Repent and be saved! (Same as any other sinners, which is all of us except Jesus Christ.)” If a somewhat Christian outfit doesn’t want to hire “gays” or do business with them, let it keep up its standards. Liberty! Justice! I practice monogamy (thanks, Wendy); why should I subsidize insurance for people who do riskier things? (RSOs might reduce promiscuous “gay” sex, maybe.)

In I Corinthians 5:9-13 Paul tells us Christians not to worry about the fornicators of the world. outside the Church (he knew sex is very popular), “But…not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or covetous or an idolater or a railer [nasty bigmouth] or a drunkard or an extortioner; with such a one, no not to eat.” If someone calls themselves a Christian and is doing these things, Christians must not eat with them. Got that? (I hope I have now, though I don’t follow people around to make sure.) “For what have I now to do also with them that are outside [outside the church]? Do you not judge those that are inside? But those that are outside God judges.” So throw the fornicator out of the Church [until he repents. The particular man Paul was writing to the Corinthians about did repent, according to II Corinthians, and was to be let back in.]

So I don’t see that Christians have to avoid “gays” outside the Church (I used to work for one, and was once sent out to wait on a “gay” couple by good ole’ boys who preferred to laugh in a back room), but we do need strong standards inside as against other sins (“Be ye holy for I am Holy”–God). Repent [change] and be saved!

Going through old emails, I found this. Still relevant (In fact, I think I’ll post it separetely as well.)
—–Original Message—–
From: Andrew Lohr [mailto:alohrm3s@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sun 4/10/2011 11:03 PM
To: Letters to the Editors
Subject: evolution controversy

Evolution is the theory that it’s OK to eat evolutionists, so the 17 UTC
faculty who signed a letter (Times April 8) saying “biological evolution is not
controversial in any sense within the scientific community” have no grounds in
evolution to complain if creationists eat them or collect taxes from them.  Of
course they don’t want to be eaten, but nature red in tooth and claw won’t
defend them.  They need love:  “God shows His love for us in that while we were
yet sinners the Anointed King died for us” (Romans 5:8).  They need faithful,
Trinitarian love:  “The Father loves the Son.”  They need “Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you.”

The 17 in 500-odd words neither argued for evolution nor said where such
argument can be found.  Evolutionists need to show that breeding has no limits;
but  breeding horses with donkeys produces sterile mules.  Breeding does have
limits:  this is an observed fact, not a theory.  Evolutionists need to produce
actual living things from nonliving chemicals.  Evolutionists need to show that
nothing can produce something, or to combine eternal matter with the big bang,
and/or to combine eternal matter with the tendency of things to get messy like
my socks  rather than organize themselves.

Why no controversy?  Because evolutionists suppress dissent and doubt,  as Ben
Stein’s movie “Expelled” showed–showed as an observed fact, not  just a
theory.  Marxism wasn’t controversial in the USSR.    Evolutionists debating
creationists sometimes lost.   Some creationists have solid scientific
credentials, and an old survey  found the average rank-and-file creationist knew
more details about  evolutionary theory than the average evolutionist.

Free speech,  please.

To YFP Bennett 26 Feb:

US taxpayers already get hit as hard for health as foreign taxpayers, so why aren’t we already getting what they get? Because our government is wasting health dollars. So why should we trust our government with more health dollars and more control?

Instead, increase supply so costs go down. Increase the supply of medical personnel by letting nurses, pharmacists, etc write prescriptions, not just doctors. (Stop using laws to make favored groups rich; legalize competition.) Increase the supply of drugs by making approval easier. Increase the supply of insurance by making it easier to compete with existing companies. (Stop crony capitalism; legalize competition.)

Reduce the demand for medical services by making people pay out of their own pockets for at least some part of services. Encourage high-deductible catastrophe-only coverage, and medical savings accounts whereby we can keep what we don’t spend. Let insurers set rates according to what they think risks are, so people who make wise lifestyle choices aren’t forced to subsidize people who make foolish ones.

O’Romneycare claims to increase demand (cover everyone) while reducing supply (paying doctors less) without ‘death panels’? Why not repeal the law of gravity along with the law of supply and demand?

To TFP Bennett 21 Feb:

Relabel the cup “Liberalism.” As often, the drawing fails to speak for itself.

Liberalism has promised more than it can afford to pay for, and hallucinates that this is no problem. The Tea Party sees a problem, and sees that a government that stayed within its Constitutional functions would not have this problem. (It might have different ones.)

Our current President defends the problem against solution, with RINO help. Ron Paul would solve the problem (and bring on others). Even Paul Ryan was willing to work on it. Saint Paul would make Ron Paul look liberal: government should protect the peace of doers of good (I Tim 2:1-7) by terrorizing evildoers (Romans 13); that’s basically it.

And I see he hasn’t even tried to mention any particular problem.

Andrew L tutor Chattanooga = next post (scroll down); this is blogbait to 7 March ’13

To Wall St Journal article, 6 views on what new pope needs, 9 Mar

Nice range of insights in your six articles, but James Carroll considers the religions of Osama bin Laden, of Joseph Stalin, and of those who martyred Graham Starnes and his young sons, “authentic ways to God”?  No, they are authentic ways to Hell.  Those who follow those religions, and those who lead them today, are people who deserve the love Jesus showed and requires us to show, a love we Christians show in visible but fallible ways. Do you know what percentage of 3rd world hospitals were started by Christians?  How does the average government in Christendom compare with the average  Muslim, atheistic, or even Hindu government?   A doctor who tells all his patients “You’re healthy” is a liar, and however nice he is his actions are a form of hate. “Love” in a doctor is telling his patients “You need this rather rigorous treatment.”
To Bennett cartoon, TFP 24 February:
Now that Mr Bennett has spoken in (forked) tongues, here’s an interpretation.  From wikipedia: “hasta” = until, as in hasta manyana (until tomorrow), hasta la vista (until the sight, until we see each other again). From urbandictionary.com:  “la tuya”  = yo mamma, or at least, yours with overtones of yo mamma (“la” is feminine); far from a compliment.

Why do they want to come here?  Because it’s a better country.  Why better?  They had the great Aztec and other civilizations (massive human sacrifice and war, but impressive pyramids and other infrastructure), overtopped with the great Spanish civilization; lots of natural resources (that Amazon rainforest)…why aren’t we sneaking south?  Because of evangelical Christianity here.  Liberating, hardworking, creative, flawed but aspiring, all with honor to triune Jehovah.  Repent of the problems and join the solution.

The best known Hispanic in the US is a Republican, Marco Rubio, joined by Ted Cruz in the Senate.  Whether their politics of freedom and respect will outdo the Democrats’ plantation (hacienda) policy of buying votes with tax dollars and borrowed money and unfunded promises, we shall see. Liberty versus aristocracy.

To TFP, guest col by Ron [Hart?], 22 Feb:

Takes a blind partisan to know one, nukky.

Ha, Ron.

If you want to transcend partisanship, Jesus is libertarian, so replace partisan political democracy with nonpartisan economic democracy.  Instead of Biden wins Palin loses, economic democracy–libertarianism–gives us burgers and tacos and pizzas and subs and even the wingnut sushi radicals all at the same time.  Instead of being stuck with a failed President for four years at a time, economic democracy lets us vote McDonalds out and Burger King in right away:  instant accountability.  Instead of promising more than it can afford to deliver, economic democracy’s contracts are legally enforceable, and blatant fraud punishable. Economic democracy connects what we pay with what we get:  If I want peanut butter I pay for and get peanut butter, instead of paying taxes into a general fund.  Give us less political dictating, and more economic democracy, please.
To a Mark Horne post on a “Kuyperian” website, 23 Feb.
Hi, Mark. “Calling people idiots and denying that they should ever be heard or considered has a far greater role in the “Christian world and life view” as it is actually practiced by Christians than anyone wants to admit.” Uh, I think you avoided “idiot” and “ever”–you wrote’ learn,’ not ‘just shut up’–but you did come across as denying that some should be heard, coming kinda close to your own cross hairs. Paul, I don’t think he called for censorship (except by selves and maybe implicitly by editors, church boards, etc, within their own scope, which I have no problem with). You both come across as kinda censorious. I agree with you that God can make sure His friends know what they need to know, and with Mark that there’ll always be more we can learn which may affect what we partly know or think we know (and you’d probably agree). Maybe Mark happens to have heard more “Calling people idiots…” than he liked lately??
I’d like to add that given division of labor (Eve got pregnant, not Adam), we all have partial knowledge that MAY be enough for our purposes. Islam obviously does harm by denying the Trinity (god simply one all alone, one prophet, one ayatollah, hence dictatorial tendencies) and denying the atonement, and Muslims should become Christians, whether or not Ibn Saud is in bed with Obama, and whether or not Atheism overall does more harm than Islam. Some of us may be called to witness to Muslims without knowing or caring much about the latter two questions; others may be called to tackle the latter with associated evils. (Not every blog or site needs as much on paedocommunion as mine has, and while I argue for its importance I acknowledge that not everyone need pay it as much attention as I.)
To TFP Bennett 23 February
Ha.  But in a rare example of bipartisanship, National Review and Paul Krugman, the half-hobbits and the orc, both endorsed the sequester.

The previous comments, while nasty, were illuminating.  Are our liberal friends sleeping in this Saturday?  Oh, well, back to bed if the kids are quiet.

Show what you’re learning.  I’ll help you learn.
Any age (pre K to older adult). I do best with students willing to learn.

Editing and proofreading
For students
Let me read and mark a copy of what you’ve written, then talk it over with me and make what you decide are improvements.  Or look over your computer together.    A school is trying to teach you, so I’d better try to help you improve this paper in ways that will make it easier for you to write better next time.  I’ll use what I know of English (both grammar and what sounds good), and my general knowledge, to help you improve, but I won’t write it for you.   The teacher needs to know that you know, so you, not just I, need to know.
For writing aimed at publication
Here I might go farther in drafting bits and pieces, and work less at trying to teach you how to write well, since the aim here is a good piece of writing more than a well-taught student.
Tutoring
If you’re in a class with textbooks, show me what you’re working on (textbooks and assignments) and I’ll try to help you grasp it so that you will know what you need to know and be able to show the teacher that you know.
If you want me to teach you something I know, get in touch and we’ll work out details.
History–B.A. degree from Covenant College (GPA around 3.5), and a lot of reading.
English–good grades and a lot of reading.
Math–good grades, Calculus in high school and graded Calculus papers in college, A in statistics at UTC.
Theology/Bible–Covenant Clg, Chatt State, UTC, CSU-DH classes, lots of reading, decades of trying to live it out.
Literature–a few courses and a fair bit of reading.
Accordion–see my youtube videos (as “alohrm3s”) and some yahoo voices videos.  Two terms of lessons in high school.
New Testament Greek–4 semesters at Covenant 30 years ago, dabbling since.
Lifestyle counseling–talk about where you are and where you want to go, and I’ll give you whatever feedback and advice seems useful from 51 years (born A.D. 1961) of experience.  Maybe I can help you make different mistakes.
High school valedictorian, top 1% SATs, college 3.5 or so, 4-time graduate school dropout.
I use my own name, Andrew Lohr,  on the web.  (Think of it as a rehearsal for the Judgment Day.) You can find things I’ve written and decide if I know enough in general, and enough of writing in particular, to help you.   (Decide if, when I write informally, I’m doing so by accident or on purpose–because I can’t help it or because it communicates well where I choose to use it, so I can help you avoid it if you need standard English, but can also work with you if you’re trying to write differently.)
Blog  https://andrewlohr.wordpress.com/   (You are here).
Yahoo voices collection, some articles, some videos:   http://voices.yahoo.com/search.html?content_type=article&q=andrew+lohr&search=SEARCH+VOICES
Youtube videos: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=alohrm3s&oq=alohrm3s&gs_l=youtube.3…38586.40394.0.42442.8.8.0.0.0.0.199.896.2j6.8.0…0.0…1ac.1.8Qepu7gu4ow  I don’t think you want me teaching you video technique.
Amazon reviews: http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A208LPU0USFMVQ/ref=cm_cr_pr_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

Universitytutor handle:  Andrew L.

Price–basically $15/hour to begin with.  Negotiable.  For example, say we start clocking right after we meet and stop clocking when we’re done.   If we seem to have been working hard and productively the whole time, $15/hr.  If it feels like we got 1 hr of work done in 2 hours, maybe deduct an hour or drop the rate, especially at first session.  If you’ve had more expensive tutors who do worse or no better than I, I can take a raise.  I expect to earn my pay, but I aim to do a good job helping you; I’m not out for every buck I can get.  I might need to ask for parking fees, or driving fees if I have too far to go.
Place–public, e.g. a restaurant or student center.   As Billy Graham requires of himself and his team, not alone behind closed doors.
Time–whatever we agree on.   “Anytime” means you’re welcome to ask; I have been known to get up early when a friend finished drafting his paper, and go through it with him.  It doesn’t mean I’ll be free every minute 24-7.
Phone–493-9449.  I wake up easily, and there’s an answering machine.
Facebook:  Andrew Lohr or Wendy Dibble-Lohr; make sure you tell us you want tutoring.  (She’s on more than I).

Evolutionism and creationism


From: Andrew Lohr
Sent: Sun 4/10/2011 11:03 PM
To: Letters to the Editors
Subject: evolution controversy

Evolution is the theory that it’s OK to eat evolutionists, so the 17 UTC
faculty who signed a letter (Chattanooga Times April 8 A.D. 2011) saying “biological evolution is not
controversial in any sense within the scientific community” have no grounds in
evolution to complain if creationists eat them or collect taxes from them.  Of
course they don’t want to be eaten, but nature red in tooth and claw won’t
defend them.  They need love:  “God shows His love for us in that while we were
yet sinners the Anointed King died for us” (Romans 5:8).  They need faithful,
Trinitarian love:  “The Father loves the Son.”  They need “Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you.”

The 17 in 500-odd words neither argued for evolution nor said where such
argument can be found.  Evolutionists need to show that breeding has no limits;
but  breeding horses with donkeys produces sterile mules.  Breeding does have
limits:  this is an observed fact, not a theory.  Evolutionists need to produce
actual living things from nonliving chemicals.  Evolutionists need to show that
nothing can produce something, or to combine eternal matter with the big bang,
and/or to combine eternal matter with the tendency of things to get messy like
my socks  rather than organize themselves.

Why no controversy?  Because evolutionists suppress dissent and doubt,  as Ben
Stein’s movie “Expelled” showed–showed as an observed fact, not  just a
theory.  Marxism wasn’t controversial in the USSR.    Evolutionists debating
creationists sometimes lost.   Some creationists have solid scientific
credentials, and an old survey  found the average rank-and-file creationist knew
more details about  evolutionary theory than the average evolutionist.

Free speech,  please.

Link to some comments on National Review online

I posted several comments about Gingrich and Romney in the comments to this article:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/340485/buckley-rule-according-bill-not-karl-neal-b-freeman?pg=2 13 Feb ’13

Basically, Romney acted, or let his friends act on his behalf as, a liar against Gingrich and Santorum, and as a thief and bully against Ron Paul’s people at the convention, so no wonder their friends weren’t too keen on him.

some blogbait from February ’13

To http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/opinion/ re Clay Bennett cartoon 5 Feb ’13. I include this link because I often post here.

Says Clay? Limbaugh, who was fired 7? times, earns more money, I’m sure. The Tea Party noticed a problem that Senator Obama considered serious–“unpatriotic”–when it was Bush’s problem, and promised to cut in half when he was asking us to make it his problem, but has made worse; indeed he’s defending the problem, deficits, against solution. NRA: “More Guns Less Crime” is the facts. Heritage does lots of homework. Drudge and Back may have bees in their bonnets, but they do some interesting journalism. Fox and GOP offer mixed bags. CPAC sounds OK.

Trouble is, Mr Bennett’s ideology blinds him–officially as a cartoonist, anyway–to virtue on the right to a ridiculous (and only rarely funny) degree. Wish he’d open his official mind a bit, if his (equally bigoted) bosses will let him. Surely his criticisms of those of us who are right would have more bite, not less, and draw more interest from unpredictability, if he noticed officially that some lefties have faults and that the right has virtue here and there. I will cheerfully admit that he can draw better than I (and for all I know, play the accordion better), and perhaps he’ll cheerfully admit his wife can draw better than he, or at least than his cartoons demonstrate.

To David Cook column same date:

Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall. I tend to agree with your point. These people are working hard, and they deserve to earn something (and in some cases, I understand, the rules against pay make it hard for them to get money they truly need). But you make it a smug way, an arrogant way, a colonialistic way may I say? Memorize I Corinthians 13, or recite it before writing and before rewriting a column. Frederick Douglass had, I’m sure, met all the abolitionist big shots, and said Abe Lincoln (of the GOP, whatever his and its flaws) was the only one who seemed to treat him as truly his equal. Beware.

To Free Press editorial:

God created Adam and Eve. If He hadn’t, our esteemed editor and I wouldn’t be here. Jesus used the creation arrangement as evidence that somewhere around every divorce was sin. The same applies to ‘gay’ conduct. What’s new this generation that changes that? Sin is sin. Pure ‘gay’ can’t breed (until artificial fertilization and articifial wombs come around); breeding requires the cooperation of both sexes. So ‘gay’ always has some wiggle room, some degree of choice. Likewise other sexual tendencies, some of which can be worse sins sometimes. (Brothers, straight fornication and divorce also involve sins, and are more popular than ‘gay’ sins.) Some accommodation or toleration, fine–Christians and churches need to be holy, and to preach repentance, but need not worry too much about what unbelievers do. But forcing accommodation on those who’d rather not? How bigoted. How phobic. How timebound. How vile.

To FP ed of 4 Feb after 34 comments:

If fracking replaces more coal with gas than it adds methane, it’s a net benefit, right? Isn’t that why the US is both richer and less polluting than when Al Gore was veep?

Love is more than niceness, but conservative shows more signs of knowing God is love than his (her?) liberal critics here, and has researched a better Book though maybe not as many lesser books.

To Times editorial 7 Feb eulogizing Mayor Gene Roberts of blessed memory:

And the twice I met him he was courteous to me well beyond the call of duty.

I think one or two of his budgets spent fewer dollars than the previous year’s budget. That’s amazing in a politician. (The Times being the liberal Times, no wonder they didn’t mention it.)

Did the school merger really save the $40 million a year that was promised, though? If not, should we be cautious about future system mergers? (Some may work, but crunch the numbers hard.)

February 7, 2013 at 6:41 a.m

To blog and mablog: http://www.dougwils.com/Creation-and-Food/the-need-to-cross-check.html#JOSC_TOP

Jonathan, “many Christians are taught to automatically distrust anything that comes out of such a methodology”? Who teaches this?

Many of us are taught to distrust evolution, but evolution is the hypothesis that there are no limits to breeding. But mules are sterile, so the hypothesis is false. Evolution is also the hypothesis that it’s OK to eat evolutionists. But murder is sin, so the hypothesis is false.

If psychology is science, I suppose Christians doubt it next to evolution. Did you catch Leithart’s claim, I think from Jared Diamond, that 80% of those in most psych surveys are psych undergrads? That’s like doing 80% of fish studies in Lake Michigan.

Miracles? Hypothesis: if I touch the hem of His garment, I will be healed. Result: healed. But no repeating. Different kind of complication for Doug’s and your criteria.

A statistic is a collection of anecdotes.

To dougwils.com on N. T. Wrights and wrongs, specifically Obamacare:

Forcing healthy people to pay sick people to be sick is wise policy?

If so, is it Constitutional? Or should it, if wise, be done by amendment, by 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states, rather than by breaking promises? (There was also a promise not to raise taxes on anyone making under $250,000 per year.) Psalm 15.

Health is external? Drunkards, gluttons and fornicators mess up their health because of what’s in their hearts. Force people to subsidize sin? I heard tell Safeway groceries kept their health insurance costs flat A.D. 2005-2009 using health incentives.

Health, health care, and health insurance are three different things.

To Paul Krugman NY Times 8 February:

You admit the federal debt to GDP ratio was a third lower when Speaker Gingrich left office than it was when he came in. As soon as President Clinton divorced Hillary and married Newt, the budget headed toward balance.

You fail to admit that the Bush tax cuts increased revenue by almost $5 trillion. Spending caused the deficits.

If deficits are good now, why didn’t President Bush’s deficits save the economy?

If deficits are good, how come the recession President Harding ignored went away quickly but the recession Hoover and FDR threw money at became the Great Depression? (Harding’s tax cuts also increased both revenue and the percentage paid by the rich.)

I still haven’t seen you say how stimulus paid for by taxes can stimulate the overall net economy, since the taxed money cannot be spent by the taxpayers; nor how stimulus paid by borrowing can stimulate, since what D.C. borrows we can’t borrow (isn’t shortage of credit an admitted problem?); nor how stimulus paid by printing new money can stimulate, since it reduces the value of all dollars (washcloths and gasoline prices are up 50% under President Obama), and since it didn’t work for the Confederacy, the Wiemar Republic, or Zimbabwe.

Did y’all see Ben Carson’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast?

11 Feb Yahoo response to news the Pope is resigning:

Again bro Joe, aka/dba pope Benedict, show he’s a capable man. Let us pray, and pray hard (fasting anyone?) for a new pope who serves triune Jehovah and triune Jehovah’s people at least as well; or with even more wisdom, trust in God, love (love as defined by God, not by corrupt culture), holiness, zeal, and wisdom in delegating, plus whatever other qualities a pope needs.

(From an “adjective catholic,” with brotherly love for “trademark Catholics” in Christ Jesus the Lord of lords–Pope of popes?–and only Savior.)

21 Feb TFP

To TFP Bennett 21 Feb:

Relabel the cup “Liberalism.” As often, the drawing fails to speak for itself.

Liberalism has promised more than it can afford to pay for, and hallucinates that this is no problem. The Tea Party sees a problem, and sees that a government that stayed within its Constitutional functions would not have this problem. (It might have different ones.)

Our current President defends the problem against solution, with RINO help. Ron Paul would solve the problem (and bring on others). Even Paul Ryan was willing to work on it. Saint Paul would make Ron Paul look liberal: government should protect the peace of doers of good (I Tim 2:1-7) by terrorizing evildoers (Romans 13); that’s basically it.

And I see he hasn’t even tried to mention any particular problem.