Worldview Review: "Blood Father" (2016) Mel Gibson

Very violent, as expected, but the violence is inherent to the story.  The overarching theme of a broken, flawed father's struggle to redeem himself is told strongly.  Like its title, full of layers to examine.  For adults of formed conscience, ready for "meat" as opposed to "milk," it is well worth a view and a ponder.

Daily Wire: Matt Walsh's Very Important Personal Announcement

READ IT!  -->    Matt Walsh's Important Announcement

I'm in tears laughing at Walsh's essay!

Whoops!--sorry, as my pronoun is "you," my noun is "obstacle," my verb is "cha-cha," my preposition is "around," my adjective is "every" and my adverb "cheerily," I meant to write:

"You shall cheerily cha-cha around every obstacle."

That is my sentence.  Please do not reply to, comment upon, or talk about, this post or this blogger with any other verbiage. Thank you.

Daily Wire: Calvin Klein Forced to Apologize, but the reason may surprise you. . .

Daily Wire:  Calvin Klein Forced to Apologize, but the reason may surprise you

The problem IS the "blurred lines" themselves.

They have told us (and told us and told us, and painstakingly taught generations of children now) that there ARE no lines.

But clearly, there ARE.

It's just that now, nobody (following this Leftist agenda) knows where they are.

So they, each and all, scrap and scrabble to defend "their" line in these shifting sands.

I witness all this internecine battery with a kind of horrified hope.

Why "God the Father"? PragerU Perspective

This recent PragerU video gives a strong argument for the practical value of referring to God as a "He."  Mr. Prager's perspective is characteristically kept on the applied, social-political level of human experience, and everything he proposes here is valid and well supported:

I just wanted to add that there are other layers of additional reasons, as well.  For example, theologically speaking, the Catholic answer to this question also includes the notion that God's primary identification in scripture is as masculine because God is "outside" of our experience (outside space/time/material existence) and comes "into" us to create life.  If you think about that for just a moment you'll see how that is inherently better described by masculine rather than feminine identification.

Note also that while the Bible does consistently refer to God as "He," sometimes in the Bible God uses feminine imagery to describe "Himself."  For example, the image of God as a mother bird, longing to enfold Israel under her wings to keep the nation safe.  And finally, of course, it is important to remember that when God made humans "in God's image," the Bible is very specific that this includes "male and female" humans, so--as Mr. Prager properly points out--God transcends our limited notion of male and female, all people are made in God's image, whether male or female, masculine or feminine, but still, just as all human beings have a human father who "gave us life" (whether currently present in their lives or absent), so too we all have an eternal Father who created our very lives, and Who is ever-present.

In this current culture with so many fathers absent from their children's lives, Mr. Prager is right to point out that the existence of this Father, and the hope of relationship with Him, is an essential hope to cling to--for the sake of our civilization's continued survival.

"Veep" Sinks Deep

I received this from a friend:

"I don't know if you've seen "VEEP." The comedy about politics and the vice president trying to grab the presidency. This is the sixth and final season. It's dark humor and very metropolitan.  So, at the end of last season, one of the staffers discovers she's pregnant by a member of the rival team. They decide to raise the baby amid their political differences. Then, in the new season, they have a silly spat. She hangs up the phone, and then places another call. "I'd like to make an appointment with the OBGYN... Yes, it's to schedule an abortion. And as long as I'm going to be there, I might as well schedule a flu shot too."

Our jaws hit the floor. The next episode was primarily focused on the abortion. "Happy Abortion Eve!" chirps a coworker. Then we follow them through the whole process, except with more punch lines than most abortions, I assume.

Then they cut away, and we held our breath. Would they call it off at the last minute? Nope. The next time we see them, they are in the recovery room. She gets a phone call with a new job offer. She says she has the time now!

I felt physically ill."


Apparently, my friend's description of this is far kinder than the episode
as written. For one example, the character's response to the job offer was
actually:  “You are in luck, because my schedule just got scraped clean.”
(https://www.lifenews.com/2019/04/15/character-on-hbos-veep-cant-wait-to-kill-her-baby-less-talk-more-abortion/) 

If the technology to replay these things exists 100 years from now,
whatever culture is rebuilding then will hold things like this up as
incontrovertible evidence of our barbarity.  The Aztecs cut the living
hearts out of their enemies and offered them to their terrifying god.
We destroy OUR OWN CHILDREN in the name of convenience. 

Honestly, I have far more respect for the Aztec religion.  Or even for the
Molech-worshippers, who sacrificed infants.  These religions were
horrifying--but at least sincere in their attempts to relate to their
conception of something greater than themselves.  We allow a mother to
have her own child murdered for no better reason than
to--essentially--worship herself ("me/my needs are paramount, my child
is nothing in comparison").

P.S. Whoever else may read this:  I am NOT saying that that is the
only reason that women get abortions.  I am saying that we allow
abortion for that reason--for any reason.  That's why this series can
make a "joke" about having your own child murdered just to spite your
political opponent.  God save us.

_The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great_, by Ben Shapiro

Well worth the read. Shapiro makes a strong case for an important thesis: first, that Western Culture IS great (in contrast to the awful, nasty, bullying, oppressive, "unfair" culture that the Left wants us to believe that it is); and second, that the reason WHY it is so is because it was built upon the twin foundations of Faith and Reason (in contrast to the vision that the Left would have us buy, that Faith and Reason are diametrically opposed and forever mutually exclusive, so we must pick one--which leaves us fatally unbalanced--or throw them both out, which leaves us adrift in a sea of chaos).

I do wish that there were better sources for historical perspective that didn't "skew Protestant"--it's funny, because Mr. Shapiro works closely with at least two Catholics, I would think they might have provided some illumination there, but no, he still misses the fact that many of the things he decries in the gradual perversion of the "Enlightenment" are direct legacies of the Protestant rebellion. Interestingly, he misses the fact that the seeds of the collapse of the values upon which Western culture were built were planted then and there.

If each person may decide his own interpretation of scripture and pursue his own "individual relationship with God"--without any recognized authority to inform him when that relationship is in or out of reasonable bounds--then that is clearly the genesis of the entire Postmodern relativistic debacle that is reaching its absurd pinnacle now. If we all get to decide what Truth is, then we all get to decide what it is. . . which means "there is no such thing as truth."

The thing is, like all great lies, this one is based upon an important actual truth: we all DO have an individual relationship with our Creator, just as each child of a given parent has a very individual relationship with that parent. And our relationships will develop differently, and be expressed very differently, etc. But "my relationship with Truth" is not the same thing as "my Truth." And as we've seen, when a child is left to "grow wild" without appropriate parental supervision or instruction or correction. . . well, just look around.

Or read Shapiro's book. (Yes, do.) Just keep in mind that this is what always happens when children grow up without their (appropriate, loving) parental authority. As G.K. Chesterton noted, we don't need a religion to tell us when we are right; we need a religion that will tell us when we are wrong. If we buy in to the notion that we all get to decide for ourselves what "feels right," then it would take a person of heroic virtue indeed to end up anywhere but on the wrong road.

Weed Killer

This morning someone sent me this tragic story of a rural murder.

Farm Worker

This is all part and parcel of choosing death rather than life:  "We need to kill the 'weeds'," as your general orientation/goal, rather than  "to grow healthy, flourishing crops."  This habitual, oppositional/violent orientation is endemic to our culture, and poisons everything--every encounter we have, not just with "weeds," but between people as well (this story illustrates both rather well).  

If, instead, the goal were to grow things that are as healthy as possible, to "choose life" in that occupation of farmer--to walk in a peaceful way with all living things they encounter, in their occupation--then anything one farmer did for his crops could only help the neighbor's crops, or at least wouldn't be able to outright kill them.  But if "maximizing yield" (and therefore money) is the primary goal, then that one choice right there leads inevitably to violence (a violent orientation sets you on that path); that choosing of death rather than life, right on that apparently innocuous level ("they're just weeds") is choosing death. 

Soldier, Vietnam

It doesn't matter how innocuous the choice seems at the time, how small, how correct even; that path leads to destruction.  That's just where it goes.  Death for the weeds, suffering and death for the people who harvest the crops and are exposed to the toxic chemicals, somewhat slower suffering and death for people who eat them (or eat the things that eat them) and are exposed to lower but chronic levels of those toxins, and in this case, outright death by explosive violence for one man at the hands of his own neighbor. 

"Today I have set before you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your children might live!"  --Deuteronomy 30:19

Here's something else in the article that is so common in our culture: 

"We cannot lose this technology," Perry Galloway, an Arkansas farmer who has used dicamba and dicamba-tolerant soybean seeds. "We've come too far at this point to just throw it away."

This is a hugely common, and very strong, fallacy.  "We've come too far," "We've invested too much," etc.  But C.S. Lewis addressed this best:

"We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."

The good news is, it's never too late to start choosing life.  And even the tiniest choice begins to correct the course.