Liberty Just in Case

A Dialogue for the September 12th World

Archive for February, 2005

Blogging in a Fear Society

Posted by Mark on February 23, 2005

Natan Sharansky divides the world in to free societies and fear societies. This site is designed to protect those bloggers courageously telling the truth in spite of the danger. Put it in your favorites folder, and go there regularly.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

A Frozen Ocean on the Equator of Mars.

Posted by Mark on February 23, 2005


The case for manned landings on Mars is building. A ready source of water provides all we need live and work permanently on another planet. And Mars appears to have vast quantities, not only at the poles, but across the surface.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

A Frozen Ocean on the Equator of Mars.

Posted by Mark on February 23, 2005


The case for manned landings on Mars is building. A ready source of water provides all we need live and work permanently on another planet. And Mars appears to have vast quantities, not only at the poles, but across the surface.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Spirit of Jayson Blair is Alive and Well

Posted by Mark on February 21, 2005

Wizbang has picked up this story from Sri Lanka.. Remember that baby that was found claimed by nine sets of parents. It appears on a ninth of the story was true. Considering the past record of the MSM, that’s a pretty good percentage….

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

The Spirit of Jayson Blair is Alive and Well

Posted by Mark on February 21, 2005

Wizbang has picked up this story from Sri Lanka.. Remember that baby that was found claimed by nine sets of parents. It appears on a ninth of the story was true. Considering the past record of the MSM, that’s a pretty good percentage….

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Bush Tapes: Exactly What Do You Disagree With?

Posted by Mark on February 20, 2005

To hear the MSM talk, you’d think Doug Wead’s betrayal of a friend’s confidence was right up there with the Johnson and Nixon tapes. The main revelation appears to be that the private Mr. Bush is, horrors! much like the public one. Here’s one thing the MSM isn’t touting much:

Early on, though, Mr. Bush appeared most worried that Christian conservatives would object to his determination not to criticize gay people. “I think he wants me to attack homosexuals,” Mr. Bush said after meeting James Robison, a prominent evangelical minister in Texas.

But Mr. Bush said he did not intend to change his position. He said he told Mr. Robison: “Look, James, I got to tell you two things right off the bat. One, I’m not going to kick gays, because I’m a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?”

Later, he read aloud an aide’s report from a convention of the Christian Coalition, a conservative political group: “This crowd uses gays as the enemy. It’s hard to distinguish between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality, however.”

“This is an issue I have been trying to downplay,” Mr. Bush said. “I think it is bad for Republicans to be kicking gays.”

Told that one conservative supporter was saying Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire gay people, Mr. Bush said sharply: “No, what I said was, I wouldn’t fire gays.”

As early as 1998, however, Mr. Bush had already identified one gay-rights issue where he found common ground with conservative Christians: same-sex marriage. “Gay marriage, I am against that. Special rights, I am against that,” Mr. Bush told Mr. Wead, five years before a Massachusetts court brought the issue to national attention.

As readers know well, distinguishing between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality is one of the underlying themes of this blog. For the President to “get it” long before it became a blazing issue shows once again why he’s running circles around the left today.
It appears the only big news is how little news is contained in the tapes. I do wonder if the Left will castigate Wead for his secret taping the way they did Linda Tripp. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Times editorial on that one.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

The Bush Tapes: Exactly What Do You Disagree With?

Posted by Mark on February 20, 2005

To hear the MSM talk, you’d think Doug Wead’s betrayal of a friend’s confidence was right up there with the Johnson and Nixon tapes. The main revelation appears to be that the private Mr. Bush is, horrors! much like the public one. Here’s one thing the MSM isn’t touting much:

Early on, though, Mr. Bush appeared most worried that Christian conservatives would object to his determination not to criticize gay people. “I think he wants me to attack homosexuals,” Mr. Bush said after meeting James Robison, a prominent evangelical minister in Texas.

But Mr. Bush said he did not intend to change his position. He said he told Mr. Robison: “Look, James, I got to tell you two things right off the bat. One, I’m not going to kick gays, because I’m a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?”

Later, he read aloud an aide’s report from a convention of the Christian Coalition, a conservative political group: “This crowd uses gays as the enemy. It’s hard to distinguish between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality, however.”

“This is an issue I have been trying to downplay,” Mr. Bush said. “I think it is bad for Republicans to be kicking gays.”

Told that one conservative supporter was saying Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire gay people, Mr. Bush said sharply: “No, what I said was, I wouldn’t fire gays.”

As early as 1998, however, Mr. Bush had already identified one gay-rights issue where he found common ground with conservative Christians: same-sex marriage. “Gay marriage, I am against that. Special rights, I am against that,” Mr. Bush told Mr. Wead, five years before a Massachusetts court brought the issue to national attention.

As readers know well, distinguishing between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality is one of the underlying themes of this blog. For the President to “get it” long before it became a blazing issue shows once again why he’s running circles around the left today.
It appears the only big news is how little news is contained in the tapes. I do wonder if the Left will castigate Wead for his secret taping the way they did Linda Tripp. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Times editorial on that one.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Threats to Marriage: Evangelicals Have Been Fighting Them For a Long Time

Posted by Mark on February 19, 2005

I don’t run in Evangelical circles much these days. My faith walk has led me away from the Wheaton College, Christianity Today world of my youth. Oh, I’m still firmly committed to the faith traditions and history of Evangelicalism, but am not around Evangelicals much any more. It therefore came as quite a surprise to wake up from surgery last Friday night, and find my roommate to be a top executive in one of the major Evangelical publishing houses. (To say more would infringe on this person’s privacy.)

Initially, my roommate did the “background check” common in the Evangelical world; when did you accept Christ? What’s your background? Where are you spiritually right now? Being Episcopalian required some explanation, and confirmation that the church I belong to is a conservative, evangelical Episcopal Church.

The background check is not meant to be judgmental in any way. It’s a security clearance of sorts, confirmation that the person you are talking to will understand your world view, and share it. Having just awakened from 3 hours of surgery and still feeling the effects of the anesthetic made the task of “passing muster” doubly difficult, but I apparently passed with flying colors.

We settled into a discussion of books, culture, and the Faith in general, using phrases that would have seemed foreign to anyone not raised in the Evangelical mainstream. It made my hospital stay much more pleasant, and provided me with an inside look at the Christian publishing world I could not have received anywhere else.

Evangelicals never stopped believing in covenant marriage, and it one of those principles that have placed Christians at odds with the culture since the oxymoron “no fault divorce” became common decades ago. The concept of marriage being about covenant, rather than some goopy feeling of being “in love” was the topic of more sermons and youth meeting lessons than I can count while growing up. It was just as much a given as respecting my parents and knowing it was wrong to swear. I learned the Greek terms for love early on, and the differences between them.

The threat to marriage from gay unions is not from the idea of committed relationships. This commitment to the needs of someone completely different from your self has been one of the cores of the marriage covenant. Giving of our selves in every area of our lives is so completely alien to us that it needed to be set apart or “sanctified” as a different class of relationships from any other in which humans are involved. The Bible calls it becoming one.

It is the very fact that the sanctity of marriage means so much that motivates gay couples to want the validation so much. Marriage is more than just living with someone. And divorce is more than ending a friendship. Divorce means ripping what was one apart. This always involves pain, no matter what the reason.

But commitment is not covenant, just as eros and philos are not agape. There were reasons why contracts in the Old Testament were done in ink and stone, while covenants required the shedding of blood. Making synonyms of commitment and covenant requires redefining both words, and devalues one.

The threat to marriage, if there is one, lies in the concept of two very different humans becoming one. Can this be accomplished by two of the same sex, regardless of their level of commitment? Or does it devalue the covenant relationship to insist “two of the same” coming together are of the same kind as “two of the different.” Redefining the marriage covenant is not to be done lightly, in favor of commitment, no matter how strong or lasting that committment. This redefinition is at the heart of the controversy. Evangelicals understand this difference well, having been taught it from the cradle. The culture is just now coming to understand the importance of commitment again. The distinction between it and Covenant may still be part of the “foreign language” of the evangelical world.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

Threats to Marriage: Evangelicals Have Been Fighting Them For a Long Time

Posted by Mark on February 19, 2005

I don’t run in Evangelical circles much these days. My faith walk has led me away from the Wheaton College, Christianity Today world of my youth. Oh, I�m still firmly committed to the faith traditions and history of Evangelicalism, but am not around Evangelicals much any more. It therefore came as quite a surprise to wake up from surgery last Friday night, and find my roommate to be a top executive in one of the major Evangelical publishing houses. (To say more would infringe on this person�s privacy.)

Initially, my roommate did the “background check” common in the Evangelical world; when did you accept Christ? What�s your background? Where are you spiritually right now? Being Episcopalian required some explanation, and confirmation that the church I belong to is a conservative, evangelical Episcopal Church.

The background check is not meant to be judgmental in any way. It�s a security clearance of sorts, confirmation that the person you are talking to will understand your world view, and share it. Having just awakened from 3 hours of surgery and still feeling the effects of the anesthetic made the task of “passing muster” doubly difficult, but I apparently passed with flying colors.

We settled into a discussion of books, culture, and the Faith in general, using phrases that would have seemed foreign to anyone not raised in the Evangelical mainstream. It made my hospital stay much more pleasant, and provided me with an inside look at the Christian publishing world I could not have received anywhere else.

Evangelicals never stopped believing in covenant marriage, and it one of those principles that have placed Christians at odds with the culture since the oxymoron �no fault divorce� became common decades ago. The concept of marriage being about covenant, rather than some goopy feeling of being �in love� was the topic of more sermons and youth meeting lessons than I can count while growing up. It was just as much a given as respecting my parents and knowing it was wrong to swear. I learned the Greek terms for love early on, and the differences between them.

The threat to marriage from gay unions is not from the idea of committed relationships. This commitment to the needs of someone completely different from your self has been one of the cores of the marriage covenant. Giving of our selves in every area of our lives is so completely alien to us that it needed to be set apart or �sanctified� as a different class of relationships from any other in which humans are involved. The Bible calls it becoming one.

It is the very fact that the sanctity of marriage means so much that motivates gay couples to want the validation so much. Marriage is more than just living with someone. And divorce is more than ending a friendship. Divorce means ripping what was one apart. This always involves pain, no matter what the reason.

But commitment is not covenant, just as eros and philos are not agape. There were reasons why contracts in the Old Testament were done in ink and stone, while covenants required the shedding of blood. Making synonyms of commitment and covenant requires redefining both words, and devalues one.

The threat to marriage, if there is one, lies in the concept of two very different humans becoming one. Can this be accomplished by two of the same sex, regardless of their level of commitment? Or does it devalue the covenant relationship to insist �two of the same� coming together are of the same kind as �two of the different.� Redefining the marriage covenant is not to be done lightly, in favor of commitment, no matter how strong or lasting that committment. This redefinition is at the heart of the controversy. Evangelicals understand this difference well, having been taught it from the cradle. The culture is just now coming to understand the importance of commitment again. The distinction between it and Covenant may still be part of the “foreign language” of the evangelical world.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

More Evidence of Water on Mars

Posted by Mark on February 18, 2005

The research that continues to come in of water, methane, and other marks of life on Mars are really exciting. This decade promises to be even more amazing than the last for exploration of our own Solar System and beyond.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »