Escalation is the LAST thing anyone wants. What part of “provoked” don’t we understand? If Zimmerman walks, it won’t be for long, sadly. That’s because of the precedent that would be set.

This isn’t about racism or profiling, but that’s where it will go if we don’t figure out where we went wrong.

If you see a “suspicious person” then you’d best stay away—DAH! Why on earth would anyone want to get close to someone who presented a reason to call the police? If you are stupid enough to pursue and provoke a “suspicious” person, that person is the one who can plead “self-defense”, not you.

As I blogged recently, according to reports, 911 instructed him not to follow. The police had been advised. Had he obeyed the police, no one would have been hurt. Instead, the assailant was cut, punched, beaten… and the other guy was in far worse condition: Trayvon’s injuries were few, but fatal. The medical reports prove that Zimmerman is in far better condition than Trayvon.

Zimmerman isn’t on trial for profiling— He’s on trial for murder. If he didn’t profile Trayvon, that may upset Sharpton and NBC, but it shouldn’t change the prosecution’s case one ounce—and it certainly won’t give Mr. and Mrs. Martin their son back.

Think about precedent. If Zimmerman’s reported actions do NOT constitute second degree murder, then…

ANYONE can call 911, claim they see a “suspicious” person, then 911 would instruct the obvious—don’t follow suspicious people, DAH. Then the caller can follow the “suspicious person” anyways, get in a fight, get injured, then shoot and kill. That’s what Zimmerman did and it’s a can of worms we do NOT want to open.

American denominationalism—including divisions between “independent” congregations with a denominational spirit—are filled with argumentative Christians who are well-versed in literature of their “opponents”. Very few, however, show any sign of regular fellowship with influential leaders from the “other side of the tracks”. Christian denomination leaders don’t seem to actually sit down and have regular fellowship inside their respective cliques.

At most, they accidentally meet back stage at a conference like Promise Keepers. Then you know what happens? You guessed it. They realize that they aren’t so different. Next, seminary leaders start calling each other to create “least common denominator” statements of faith in hopes to pave the way for future fellowship. In all of it, they still miss the point: Unity comes from fellowship, not fellowship from unity. After all, that’s where it began back stage at Promise Keepers. Remember those days?

So, if you’re a security dog, sniffing around Christian lit to make sure that people are who they claim to be or find out what smells they may carry from this morning… great! Maybe you like to read blogs a lot—that’s great also. We all need to know more about each other. Just remember: Friendship can’t develop merely by reading each other’s literature. The idea that reconciliation can happen through literature alone is a fallacy that Western denominations keep falling for to this day. Books and magazines and blogs and letters are great teaching tools—for people who already understand us. Nothing replaces meeting in the flesh.

Literature is great. Fellowship is divine. It’s what Jesus died for, after all.

I’m not opposed to good security, but TSA and regulations seem to be more bureaucratic and invasive than strategic. If Dr. Edwards Deming assessed TSA for “quality per time and cost”, the agency might turn up wanting.

No offense intended at all. Actually, Sikhs are quite a peaceful group, but head turbans are a place where something dangerously non-metal could be hidden. Why not have a rule that “all head garments” be removed, including beanies and Dick Tracey hats. The rule should also go for three-piece suits and bulky jackets—any excessive clothing for that matter.

What about super baggy pants? If you wear them, mandatory frisking from mid-thigh on down… everyone. None of this crotch grabbing. Just have people hoist their trousers so security can see that there’s nothing suspicious up there.

Rather than racial, religious, or gender-based profiling… how about psychological? Get a shrink in uniform to talk to people as they go though.

But, for me, I refuse to travel on TSA-screened flights. It’s not so much a boycott as it is for my own safety. TSA doesn’t seem to care that they have an image of being obsession with bureaucratically-flavored political correctness. In my personal opinion, just the fact that they don’t seem to care about their public image could invite a real threat to think that their priorities are on the innocent instead of the real bad guys. I don’t want to be on a flight that I feel could attract the wrong people. Besides, if our government truly believes that this level of screening is necessary, none of us should be flying. But what do I know. I’m just me.

2. Conservatives want it to be easy to start your own business. The biggest problem isn’t having start-up money, but getting the government bureaucracy out of the way. With the FairTax.org system, for example, you could hire employees without having to pay a CPA. Just give them money, that’s it… legally. But Democrats want to punish you if you have your own business ideas or if you give jobs to your friends.

3. Bling bling. They call it “taxing the rich”, but let’s call it “hating on the bling bling”. I like bling and you should too. Democrats aren’t your friends if you’re ’boutit ’boutit and like bling.

4. With big government out of the way, you don’t need a college degree to get ahead. Actually, all that “smartness” can stop a guy (or you pretty gals too) from getting out of the rut. College, no college, shouldn’t matter. Democrats want to tell everyone what their job should be. Conservatives know that many of the best business people who create jobs never went to college.

5. We’re Christian and we believe in Jesus. He saves and He wants all of us to be blessed so we can bless others. It’s called Freedom, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty.

6. Conservatives like to modify stuff also. They like to fix their own cars and all that. “Do-it-yourself” is something Black Democrats and White Conservatives have in common.

7. If you never met your dad, just remember that Conservatives believe in a man and woman being faithful to each other. Democrats hate on us Conservatives all the time for that.

8. Abraham Lincoln helped start the Republican party. So, I don’t know why the Republicans didn’t help Martin Jr in the 60′s. But, they sure missed out.

9. Abraham Lincoln knew that freeing slaves was the only way to save the country. That’s ’cause he knew he needed Black people. And, we Conservatives are trying to create jobs. But, we admit defeat: We can’t save the country without the help of the Blacks. Sorry for not trying to reach out better. Please join with the Conservatives who think much the same and let’s work side by side.

As for that whole reparations thing, I don’t know much, but I feel like Democrat leaders and moderate Republicans have beat us all down so much, without racial discrimination. They just beat down everyone. White people aren’t so rich. They have all those college loans they can’t pay for. So, let’s end the racial divide also. I really want to work like everyone else and give friends some jobs. But I know that Conservative laws are the only thing that can allow that. Let’s get these moderate Republicans—and their big business friends—out of office by voting Conservative together.

By the way, I really don’t think of people as “Black” or “White”, which is why it took me so long to write this article. I just always thought “people” are “people”. But, when I saw the beautiful color difference God made, I started to see how much White Conservatives think like Black people in the hood.

And, also, if you’re Black and your last name is the same as mine, or even if it’s not, I just want to say… My ancestors were from Texas. Sorry man, for what my ancestors did to your ancestors. Let’s make sure it stops from here on out.

It’s typical for a Republican candidate to preach hard line Conservative through the primaries, then become indistinguishable from the Democrat nominee. Maybe this is because Republican consultants think “Independent voters” are “Moderate voters”. That bean-counting strategery method makes people think, by making it hard for the electorate to distinguish between the Republican and the Democrat, the Independents will get confused and split 50-50. But, I never understood “smart” people, like consultants, MBA’s, and MDiv’s who count “beans” instead of “mojo”.

I chose Romney because he’s divorced himself from the smartest guys in the room. Mitt is moving more toward teaching Conservative values as we approach the general election—completely opposite of what the academic scripts would have him do. No more calculated answers from him. This guys is speaking from VALUES and CONVICTIONS. Every so often he defends himself against false accusations, rather than simply calling them, “False,” but he does so less and less. We wanted change, Mitt finally did.

Maybe he found Jesus. Maybe he’s one of Rush’s many new listeners. Speaking of which, all those Liberals who tuned in to Limbaugh after the Fluke fluke may switch their votes, now that they have an accurate representation of Conservatism. Sorry consultants, your stats may be outdated this election.

Disappointed Obama youth may swing. Rush’s audience is up from all that free advertising his former advertisers gave him. And Mitt seems to finally have jumped on board. That sold me—not to mention the fact that Mitt is from Michigan. Go State!

So, I’m on board also. Let’s save America. Let’s make Michigan a swing State. And let’s make 2012: The End of Democrat Tyranny.

Let’s evaluate…

We aren’t allowed to re-evaluate our micro-theology niggling—as in, maybe question the new Theologies we’ve published over the last 50 years. The Lausanne Congresses—Manila Manifesto and Capetown—were good, right? I mean, Billy Graham had everyone under one roof… except for the “silly Charismatics” that is. Who would want them anyways? It’s funny, the more the Lausanne Congress gathered, the worse things got. But, that could only be a coincidence. After all, coming together (excluding Charismatics) is as wonderful as motherhood and apple pie. (For the record, it wasn’t a movement. Movements aren’t orchestrated.)

Emergent Church was a movement, but it seemed to fizzle and… well, it disappeared before the “pop”. But not before a LOT of people walked out on Christ. When that happened, did we blame ourselves? Of course not. I mean, our mainline teaching hasn’t left America’s Christian youth PRACTICALLY STARVING for Jesus or anything. No. Arguments between the Grace of Jesus versus Lordship of Jesus… those are so satisfying to listen to… along with every reason in the book why Charismatics should get left behind—or why God doesn’t heal you because you don’t have enough faith. Wow, so uplifting… makes me just want to run into Jesus’ arms. Great evangelism tool also, those Christian squabbles. I can’t imagine why anyone would find the Emergent Church Conversation Movement more interesting.

No, we can’t blame Grace Theology, even though it talks about the Grace of the Cross so much that it leaves little time for becoming fascinated with Jesus. GT doesn’t teach against fascination with Jesus, no. It just filibusters the floor so we never quite get that far.

As for Lordship Theology, we can’t blame that either. Frank B. Minirth didn’t treat depression based on ideas from LT here at this link. Nosir. And we aren’t allowed to consider, just maybe, “…but Jesus is also Lord,” doesn’t make up 100% of a well-rounded spiritual diet. I mean, after all, Jesus is Lord! What else is there to talk about? That idea alone can raise vallies, level mountains, and heal the sick! (Except, God doesn’t heal anymore because we’ve reached the Love Chapter’s ‘perfection’, but you can’t expect the Church to be perfect. At least, that’s what Lordship Cessationists will tell you.) But that Lordship of Christ… Everyone who calls Him, “Lord,” knows Him, right? It’s almost as powerful as Rhaemaists regard “faith”!

Speaking of which, Charismatics and their nameitclaimit clubs couldn’t cause depression in the youth either. No way. “You need more faith. You’re suffering because you’re clinging to a secret sin. Up with it! Confess!” Sound like the frying of a witch or pulpits of the last 30 years? Not sure, I’ll get back to you on that. But why would that message make anyone feel like God has abandoned them? When Jesus said, “No one sinned. He was born blind SO THAT the Son of Man might be glorified,” His words couldn’t have applied to people today. Not a chance. They are perfect, them Charismatics. I don’t know why they were overlooked in invitation lists of the Lausanne Congresses.

Nor do Pentecostals have anything to complain about. God has new inspired words in every assembly, after all. People should “shut-up” and listen to the elders because they, “have a word from God!!!” Who wouldn’t want to listen to God after hearing that? The prophet only wants us to say EXACTLY what God tells him to say. God’s voice speaks through the “prophets” who hear Him all the time. You can read it on the blogs… You know, that genre called “Prophecy” known by its excessive use of superlatives and adverbs, run-on sentences, bad grammar, inaccurate predictions, and, most of all, serious lack of any beneficial wisdom. I’m ready to “hear God’s voice” after every “Prophecy” blog I read, aren’t you? Maybe you are among the 1% who don’t like that “Prophecy” genre and decided that, therefore, ALL Prophecy is wrong. Don’t think that modern Prophecy could be any different from that genre, whatever you do. (Especially if your mother  was a Baptist.) What’s the point of a straw man if it doesn’t make you hate the real thing?

We can’t blame “godly authority” either. God appointed the pastor, after all. It’s as if he yanked a sword from a stone, called himself “Thor, God of Thunder”, and he alone is worthy (in his congregation) to hold the hammer. When the pastor speaks, that’s actually God speaking to you through him. Disagreeing with him is to disagree with God. You wouldn’t want to be “rebellious” against “God” now would you? So, why would the ecumenical teaching of “godly authority” make you depressed, you jerk! After all, the godly authority didn’t giver you permission to be depressed, so snap out of it!

I suppose we could buy more books on ministry strategery and how to evangelize people on the street in sixty seconds or less. But, with the economy and everything, I guess spending cash on books will have to wait. Farewell, Only Book Kenobe, you were my only hope.

We need to be positive and uplifting. It doesn’t matter that your kid attempted suicide. Just don’t complain about the teaching. It’s the pastor’s reputation that must be preserved. He carries Excalibur, after all. So, when you talk about any problems in the Church, just be super fluffy, not harsh in the least. And if you are a pastor, above all, don’t criticize any other pastors, even if they are wrong. Go along to get along. And make sure you pay your tithe. After all, the Lausanne “movement” showed that unity (excluding Charismatics) is the most important thing.

So, all in all, we’re not sure exactly what is causing the serious downfall of the American Church and its youth. Who is responsible then? I guess we’ll just never know. Life isn’t perfect after all. If you ever find the perfect Church, don’t join it because you’ll ruin it—that’s because you’re the problem, don’t you know. And being just a little imperfect is okay. So, being REALLY VERY VERY imperfect is excellent! As long as it’s everyone else who is imperfect, and not you. Things are great! Learn to deal with it and don’t be a malcontent during hard times.

[Note: This article is in full sarcasm, illustrating the absurd by being absurd. This is to give words to beliefs held by Christians all across America, who deny that they think this way, but all evidence hath shewn that they do. This thinking is not held by the majority of Christians, but it seems to be that of a very influential minority—a minority which has some of the loudest bullhorns.]

It’s hard to imagine the mind of people who are so convinced that everything they say and do is, literally, 100% from God. I tolerated it for several years, thinking you mistook superlatives (like ‘best’, ‘most’, and other words that often end in ‘-est’) for comparatives (like ‘better’, ‘more’, and other words that often end in ‘-er’). But now I can see that you actually believe this. You genuinely believe that your walk with Christ is best at “100% God, 0% you”. That may be true for you, but not for the rest of us.

Do you actually expect me to believe that your blogs are 100% God’s voice through you, not even reflecting your own style in the least? If that were true, then “God” (as you call it) is long-winded and makes many grammatical errors, but only when “God” talks through you. God does talk to us today, He has prophets, but you seem to think that Prophecy is comparable to a kind of “Holy demon possession”. As a result of this straw man you claim to be, many are repulsed by so-called “Prophecy” and, in turn, dispose of the real McCoy.

I reject the idea that Jesus wants us to be “carcasses” whom He possesses. “Dead to sin, but alive in Christ,” is not a picture of a dead body that Jesus dances around like a puppet master who is finally free to do with us as He pleases. God wants us to have personal desires so we can desire Him and also things that are good and fair toward others. But you refuse to say so and you insist on using the “dead-body” example to describe “alive in Christ”. No wonder teen suicide attempts among Christians are so high!

Your older generation’s “I’m 100% sin” message leads young people to think Jesus wants them dead… so, that’s what many of them try. It starts with trying to kill their love for others, then their love for Him, and, in some cases, they try to turn their bodies into literal, “carcasses,” as you say. I love these young people very much. If we were 0% themselves, then no one would need us because praying to Jesus would be exactly the same as talking to us. What an absurd idea. But we aren’t 0% ourselves, nor should we want to be. God made us in His Image. Jesus wants us to “be” so we can be 100% fascinated with Him and 100% loving toward each other.

At first, I thought this was a simple confusion about choice of words. But you actually refuse to abandon “100% God, 0% me” for “100% fascination with Jesus”! It’s clear. There’s no mistake. Our past conflicts were rooted in the fact that we believe in different Gods.

I can’t personally encourage all the young people who believe that God rejects them based on your teaching. So, I’ve decided to solve this dilemma by taking-on your condemning doctrine directly. By proving where you are wrong, many young people will be delivered from depression and thoughts of suicide. I’m very angry with you.

People need to know that Jesus didn’t die for us so we could become “walking carcasses” controlled by Him. The high price paid on the Cross shows how much potential He found in us, even while we were dead in our sin. As a result, we are very much alive, contraire to your mainline teachings.

If I ever was a dead “carcass” controlled by something, it was when I believed your supposed “message from God” and you were my puppet master. Well, guess what. Now that I believe the truth, God breathed life into me, and I’ve got no strings to hold me down—and it’s YOUR nose that’s getting longer.

If people walk out on you, they aren’t walking out on Jesus—they are walking TO Him because they hate being told that Jesus wants their desires to die. Will sinful desires harm us? Of course, but desires for sin and self-destruction cannot be removed from our hearts until they are displaced by desires for life and friendship with the Author of Life. Your attempts to vacuum the sin out of us hasn’t helped, it only caused our hearts to implode.

I’ve dueled with you in every arena—Pentecostal, Charismatic, Baptist, Evangelical, Catholic, Protestant—and in each arena I found your victims who ate-up your fecal hors d’oeuvres because that was the best on your menu.

If you are, in fact, a Church leader whom “God” appointed, then we all can skip you and talk to Him directly. There is only ONE mediator between us and God anyway, and that’s God Himself. So, if He did “appoint” you as a leader “over” us, then you are defined as “not necessary”. On the other hand, if you were merely a sincere Christian seeking Christ like the rest of us, well, that would change things and being your friend would be very much worth while, along with reading your blogs and listening to your teaching. But, that wasn’t enough for you, was it.

If you believe that your walk with Christ should be “0% you” then that’s another reason we don’t need to talk and young people don’t need to talk to you either. They can talk to Jesus directly. If the voice speaking through you is, truly, “100% God” then I don’t like “God”… but your voice isn’t 100% God, not even close. The young generation knows better. I know better. I thought you knew better, but, apparently, I was wrong again.

The Kingdom of God is above the earth and Christians believe that Christianity is the Kingdom of God come down to earth. Actions on the earth register with God—God doesn’t need to register with the earth.

I’m not suggesting any kind of rebellion against the earthly governments on the earth God created, mostly because Jesus didn’t either. In fact, quite the opposite: You don’t rebel against something lower than yourself… that wouldn’t make sense. If governments attack Christians, Christians get martyred because Jesus will bring us back to life—martyrdom verdicts from anti-god governments are rejected by the Courts of the Kingdom of Heaven, thus, we’re resurrected. Beat that. Why rebel against a lower court than yourself? America says it’s UNDER God, so, Christians don’t plan military revolt… well, unless they are in bed with the State. We called those “Crusades” before Luther’s day and I won’t be a part of that.

Your local Christian fellowship, as an informal fellowship, obeying local and domestic laws, is good as it is. That’s Christianity. But, 501(c)(3) can’t be “Christianity” by definition. It may be wonderful, it may be terrible, but God’s CHURCH is invisible and its address is the sky. 501(c)(3) status may be useful for Christians, but whatever is registered as a “non-profit” or “ecclesiastical entity” is NOT, by definition, real Christianity.

Once we start thinking that the Kingdom of Heaven can register with things below the heavens in order to obtain their legitimacy, we open Pandora’s box, start getting ugly with our enemies (Bible thumping), make enemies out of each other (denominationalism), risk military conflict in the name of God (against Jesus’ teaching), and start all sorts of other friction. But there’s another problem… the State doesn’t know the difference between real and fake religions.

In Sweden, a religion was created, Kopimism, which is dedicated to the belief that copyrighted material can be pirated legally—or something like that. Because those are their “religious beliefs” any action against them could be deemed “religious discrimination”.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/04/20/kopimism-swedens-pirate-religion-begins-to-plunder-america

Think the Swedish Kopimism sounds absurd? Well, this new religion based on piracy didn’t surprise me in the least. Christians have been absurd for years—registering their worship of the Eternal Most High with governments that have trouble standing for more than a handful of centuries. Maybe this anti-copyright religion (or whatever it is) would have been avoided if Christians hadn’t sent the “wrong message” to the State—the idea that “God” whom America is “under” needs to register with what’s under Him.

Why do we need to “register” with ink and papers and build a bureaucracy? Why can’t we just peacefully assemble and worship Jesus? “One nation under God.” That means America has registered with God and that should have been the end of it. But, that wasn’t enough. It just wasn’t enough.

If we’re all playing basketball, and some guy comes along and joins the game, but he starts expecting us to follow football rules… well, it won’t be long before we start arguing. That’s because we would no longer be playing “basketball”—we’d be playing “basketball de facto football”… where we use basketball words, call it “basketball”, but, actually, it’s football.

Probably, we wouldn’t get along with that guy. He might start condemning us for “not being team players”. Actually, we are great team players, but, we’re a team at playing “basketball”, not “basketball de facto football”.

The only people who could get along with him, well, probably don’t like to call things what they are. His only friends—the “team players” as he refers them—like to play football, call it “basketball”, and tell everyone else we’re stupid and “don’t play well with others”. Eventually, everyone leaves, new people join, the game is remade… and by the way, there aren’t too many fans who watch “basketball de facto football” because fans like to know the league and the rules of what they watch—fans like athletes who are honest about what they do.

I propose that most conflicts don’t stem from personality differences, but from a lack of self-honesty about our true goals. Opposite personalities will find a way to work together if they have the same purpose while complementary personalities will quarrel to no end if their goals conflict.

Maybe that’s why most Americans don’t like Moderate Republicans.

So, please, next time your organization is filled with conflict, drop the charades, stop wasting your time preaching about “team”, and play basketball.

Everybody knows that he’s a hunter who talks in “hunter” terms and shooting a coyote is merely equivalent to voting against someone in an election. It wasn’t a personal threat against the president by any means, though he doesn’t always use the most velvet of gloves. Ted likes bravado and has a lot of bark, but Romney met him up close and knows the softer-gentler Nugent.

And of course, as Ted is doing what Ted does, Secret Service is doing what Secret Service does… except in Colombia. Normally, when someone talks big like Ted talks, Secret Service pretends to investigate, using no common sense, because, as everyone knows, if Secret Service demonstrated common sense, well, people wouldn’t respect them. So, like in Meet the Parents, Ben Stiller, “…said ‘bomb’ on an airplane.” Time for the security to waste their time on someone we all know is harmless, just so the bad guys don’t take advantage of common sense in the future.

So, Ted, darnit, ease off the fluster and don’t distract Secret Service from their Colombian vacation. It was a bad taste to compare Obama to a coyote.

What about investigation of Rev Wright’s statements? America’s Right is not any kind of personal threat to Obama. Unlike the Left, Right wing voters have rules and they keep those rules. I think Ted’s point is that the Right has been too nice, assuming that the Left will play by the rules. If anyone is a threat to America, it’s not the Right, so Obama is very safe, just as he should be because America is a nation of decent men and women.

I think Ted’s point was that the Right needs to wake up and expect that others won’t play by the rules. Let’s not get distracted from that idea. But Ted, do be a little less abrasive in the future. We want you to keep giving great speeches. Just learn, in your innocence, that other people might read into your words and imagine motives that would never have crossed your mind. Wake up, Ted, and realize that others don’t play by the rules.

Notwithstanding, Nugent should have been investigated long ago from that video of him shooting a keyboard. We all know that guitars are the invasive species in music. Maybe Secret Service will uncover evidence of poaching keyboards without a license… in “Ted’s world”…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibUbIyska9k

Now, can we all relax and think about November’s election?

The law was announced in October of 2011, no wild swine in Michigan. So, farmers had plenty of time to prepare, but is the DNR handling it properly? Frankly, I don’t know. That bothers me more than anything.

DrudgeReport.com ® recently posted an article that seemed written by a nutcase, calling for arrest of DNR agents and suggesting the possibility of lethal force against them. Sorry, but I don’t go for that.

http://www.naturalnews.com/035585_Michigan_farms_raids.html

If the DNR is invading private pig farms without due process, as the article claims, yeah, they are in big trouble. But violation of due process can’t be met with taking the law into our own hands. If it actually happened as reported, then the entire DNR must be investigated by the State, not individual citizens going after individual DNR agents.

But, the article fails to report why the State has declared the species dangerous. The target is not typical pigs, but wild swine.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10371_10402-263850–,00.html

Sus scrofa is the $64,000 word for this big, fat, harry pig, but it also has a domestic subspecies, which looks a lot like Wilber. Apparently, it is an excellent carrier of terrible parasites and diseases, not native to the United States, and aggressive toward humans.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10370_12145_55230-230062–,00.html

Should we be going after invasive species? Of course, but the DNR should include the other invasive species that threaten natural habitat, not native to the USA… What about European robins, blue jays, and starlings which are destroying the native, and beautiful, blue bird? And what about the many predatorial cats—cougars and bobcats—along with wolves being released and protected by the DNR? If the goal is to reduce deer, which eat corn and kill people on highways, just declare open season on them and stop hating on people that protect ethanol sources. (But, tree-huggers usually don’t think about how much their policies contradict themselves.)

When we consider wolves and cougars “not invasive”, but then raid a pig farm rather than levying fines… I think we need to find out who is at the helm of the DNR.

Maybe the DNR did the right thing, but invited terrible press. Maybe they have their reasons. But, more than likely, all of us need to learn due process, get our pig-headed priorities straight, and, at least, stop making such terrible PR blunders—all across the board.

I don’t force my beliefs on others. Rather, I enjoy time with people who think differently. But, society doesn’t seem to accept that.

I’m a Christian.

Churchianity hates me if I don’t hate those tho disagree with me. Others who hate Christianity hate me if I believe that ideas like black, white, red, and plaid can be defined.

I’m a Christian.

I have friends who are homosexual. They know I don’t agree with them and they remain my friends. Is this not allowed? Must we agree prior to friendship?

I’m a Christian.

I join the two million and increasing number of Christians, about half of them in Asia, who find that the single greatest thing they did to grow closer to Jesus Christ was to make Jesus their only pastor and abandon clergy. Western Churchianity persecuted them, slandered them, so the Chinese Communists imprisoned them and killed them. After decades, some in the Western Church apologized to them, but what will the rest of Churchianity do to me?

I’m a Christian.

I don’t want to pray in a government school because I don’t think secular government is big enough for my Jesus. But I want Christians and non-Christians to be able to pray or not pray in the schools of their government if they want. Will I be hated by everyone if I love everyone?

I’m a Christian.

I don’t like war, but I know that ostriches would have us shove our heads in the sand and call it “foreign policy”. Peace will only come when Christ returns. So, I want us to survive long enough to fulfill the Great Commission and see His coming. Does that make me a war monger or a peace-minded hippy? It depends on who you ask, I suppose.

I’m a Christian.

I don’t fit in a box, but I don’t mind using boxes when they are convenient. Boxes help with all sorts of things… shoes, matches, paper clips, iPhones, coffee mugs, makeup, text books, and socks. But it’s hard to live in them. I’ve tried. Is it alright, anyone, if I use boxes only SOME of the time, but not all of the time? Or will that make me everyone’s enemy?

I’m a Christian.

I don’t want to oppress those who oppose me. I see the difference between sinner and sin. So, why do I draw both enemy fire and friendly fire? Does my love for justice and fairness for everyone make me the enemy of everyone? Am I expected to only give justice to those whom I favor and do harm to those who have nothing I want?

I’m a Christian.

I think I’m done with establishments. If you can walk away from it, attend it, take a membership in it, or mail a letter to it… or give money to it… then it can’t be THE Church. That local Christian congregation may be wonderful, it may be terrible, but GOD’S CHURCH is INVISIBLE.

I’m a Christian.

I don’t want to hear Christians talk about a government for future generations BEFORE Jesus returns. The earth can’t be made perfect by the US Constitution, but the US Constitution might keep Satan busy long enough so we can tell world about THE REAL Jesus and then He’ll return. When He gets back, Jesus will make the world that my grandchildren’s grandchildren can live in… and I won’t have to fight the final world war because He will fight it for me.

I’m a Christian.

I want to be just like Jesus. Maybe they’ll crucify me like they did him. That’s what happens when you serve a kingdom people can see and ignore the one that everyone only wants to see.

I’m a Christian.

Maybe you can be one too. But be careful. You’ll have as many enemies as I do. Maybe more. But, in my opinion, it’s worth it. Life makes more sense when you try to reflect ideas that most people can’t see. Ya know, I think it would be great if not so many people couldn’t see those ideas. Clear thinking, it seems, is a commodity. But I’d like to change all that. You can help if you want. Then, perhaps, you’d know what it feels like.

I’m a Christian.

How do we define “racism”? If we refer to the antiquated, overt prejudices of the South, drenched in a history of slavery and the passive superiority that Martin Luther King Jr. rebuked in his prison letter to the White American Church… well… then Zimmerman wasn’t racist. But how can that be?

From the 911 manuscript…

Dispatcher: Are you following him?

Zimmerman: Yeah.

Dispatcher: Ok, we don’t need you to do that.

…and Trayvon ends up dead. If you are being followed, the follower is obviously not “standing”. The martyr stood his own ground. Let’s all stand our ground for Trayvon.

…but stand against what?

A few days ago, President Obama asked the nation to reflect on why this sort of thing could happen.

Zimmerman shouldn’t have been pursuing someone who was walking away, even if he thought that person was suspicious. “Pursuit” is police work, not neighborhood watch work, nor is it covered by “Stand Your Ground”. There was no sign of old Southern American racism in Zimmerman. I believe he genuinely feels bad. I believe Zimmerman genuinely wanted to “protect” the neighborhood. It seems like Zimmerman was chasing a ghost that only existed in his mind… and on February 26, that ghost just might have looked like a young, Black high school student in Sanford, Florida.

The root of the crime here was a failure to talk to each other. If we allow ourselves to sit in our bubbles and worry about other people, one day, we just might get the wrong guy.

If, in fact, Zimmerman pulled the trigger, he should should be found guilty. But this is not a “hate” crime—it’s an “ignorant” crime. In the Old Testament, God said that His people perish for lack of knowledge and knowledge is something they refused to seek. Zimmerman may be sad for what he did, but not as sad as Trayvon’s mother.

How many times do we do injustice because of what we “think” we know? This is not overt prejudice—it’s ignorant prejudice… where the criminal, also, becomes one of the many victims of his own ignorance. This is our racism problem in American society today.

The only way to overcome our ignorance is to fulfill MLK’s dream: that all God’s children would join hands and sing the old Negro spiritual. If you don’t talk to people, you just might not know who your real friends are. Maybe Zimmerman and Trayvon could have been friends. Will the rest of us learn before it’s too late?

Trayvon Martin Killing | ABC News

Asperger is not a problem. Rather, it’s one of God’s answer to many problems in the world. The unifying feature of the Asperger gift is that it comes with no “Off-switch”.

Most people have an Off-switch. If they are acting out of ordinary or dangerous, we might be able to say something and then the person will almost certainly stop. Asperger, however, doesn’t work that way. In a sense, a person with Asperger’s has an Off-switch, but the switch can only be operated by God.

Satan, of course, doesn’t like this. Neither do tyrants. This tends to attract unusual hatred—from some people, not all. Even the name “Israel” means “wrestles with God”. The Israeli nation, for millennia, has functioned—corporately—like one, large, national case of Asperger: Only God can tame them—Satan doesn’t stand a chance. Perhaps increasing cases of Asperger’s is related to the approaching return of Christ—more and more people who will only yield to the Worthy Lamb… maybe.

While there are many surface Aspects we may use to describe Asperger, that one trait—God-controlled Off-switch—brings it all together. Of course, that is assuming that the person with Asperger’s has bent the knee to the will of Jesus Christ.

My friend accepted the idea the moment I suggested it. He didn’t need me to explain the concept; the concept explained his daily life.

Let’s not overlook free will. There is no such thing as a personal decision that we aren’t personally responsible for. While only God controls the Off-switch for some of us, all of us are in full control of the On-switch.

If only God can access one’s Off-switch, that person may probably feel misunderstood. Those who understand us don’t need explanation. As for those who don’t understand us, well, all the explaining in the world won’t help. That’s true of anyone. So, whether you have Asperger or not, as Sarah Palin said about reasons,

“Your friends don’t need them and your enemies won’t believe you anyway.”

The proverb is true most of the time and is usually misunderstood.

Life has its “no wake zones”. If you follow that rule, yes, things will go well with you.

But different people have different motives in regard to “no wake” policy. Do you avoid making waves because you know it is wise? Or are you one who dislikes wave makers because you don’t like your boat being rocked? How you answer could make all the difference in your floating world.

About once every three generations a tsunami “wave” sweeps through a culture, turning everything upside down. In such times, those who don’t like waves, typically, loose everything, while those who always make waves may advance—for a time. But, the people who selectively make waves—only on rare occasions—but also who don’t hate waves—they will always be ahead in any wave or tsunami scenario.

An issue is stirring among the blogosphere and Newspapers about intellectual property and plagiary. Newspapers are thinking about getting organized to bring standards that bloggers may need to comply with. There are MANY sides to this discussion.

Here is a hypothetical story:

John Doe has a simple website and wants people to read it. So, he sees an article at the Chicago Tribune website. It’s about the same topic his website fans are interested in. He copies and pastes article into his own website, so it looks like his work, but it’s not. He doesn’t see anything wrong with this and the Chicago Tribune may not be entirely angry.

Because Chicago Tribune readers read the paper newspaper at home, not so much online, JohnDoe.com’s copied article gets more Internet readers because he’s a popular guy among bloggers.

This isn’t simple copyright violation. It’s not like XEROXING a book and re-selling it. Newspapers quote each other and re-write each other’s news articles all the time. TV hosts and pundits love to quote each other. If the news media stopped talking about each other, probably 80% of their content would vanish!

So, basically, the Chicago Tribune wants John Doe to tell his friends about their article, but to at least give them some credit. How do we do that? What will the rules of the road be?

That is what you will see start to be discussed in Congress.

Here are some suggestions I have for when this issue comes across your desk:

1. Remember that bloggers are amateurs. Teach them like children who learn simple things every day. Give them much grace and use small words to educate them on Journalism ethics, which news writers and pundits are well-versed in.

2. Get a rounded view from Newspapers and Magazines, but also from blogging companies, such as Google (blogspot.com) and WordPress.com. Also, consider “sharing/link” services like Delicious.com and Digg.com where articles are “summarized” and linked to. Similarly would be Facebook “sharing” and Google’s “+1″. Also, tell the online communities openly that you want to hear from individual bloggers. TELL the people, don’t let the masses find out from someone else. Hear from all sides. Pundits are experts; amateur bloggers WANT to become experts.

3. This is more about technology than ethics. Copying and pasting the first 900 (or so) characters of an article is extremely normal in blogs and newspaper sites. RSS feeds may do this, hoping other websites will link back. A website that doesn’t want this is strange, but respected, such as ft.com.

So, perhaps websites could develop a “writer credit” technology. So, when John Doe likes the Chicago Tribune article, his blog has a place where he “rates” how much he copied the article.. something like “works copied (+50%)”, “works excerpted/summarized (-50%)”, “works cited (short quotes)”, “works re-written”, and “works consulted”. So, whenever someone reads the Tribune article on John Doe’s website, the Tribune will get online web credit. INTERNET traffic CREDIT is the issue for many websites and writers. The Tribune should also be able to choose whether they want to participate in this or not. John Doe can also offer such options on his own JohnDoe.com.

4. Blogging websites already have SOME solutions to this problem which the newspaper writers may not know about. This is a clash of professions: news writers aren’t web geeks; bloggers are often geeks, not ethic-experienced pundits. WordPress.com and others have already created ways to meet in the middle, both sides merely need help knowing it!

5. Remember, this is different from copyright stuff. News and blog WANTS other people quoting them. Writers merely want credit. Their goal is to be popular on the internet.. maybe they want numbers to show advertisers, maybe they are public speakers who want speaking invitations, maybe authors who want book deals, maybe subscription websites who want paid subscribers. Depending on the purpose, their needs will change. Everyone online wants to be famous and talked about, only in the “ethical” way, yet to be defined.

6. Encourage the private sector to develop their own guides and allow VERY simple membership. AP has a Stylebook which is available to the public. Bloggers might consider learning about such ethics, take an online test for a very small fee, and get a special code to display their membership on their blog. This way, people can respect that blogger. But, this must be VERY inexpensive and done PRIVATELY.

7. In summary.. Congress should have regulation that is a. well informed and b. minimal, placing most responsibility within the private sector.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73829.html

Businesses should take feedback—from CUSTOMERS. But these companies listened to the wrong crowd—failing to distinguish “business customers” from “cultural-ideological opponents”.

Instead of minding their own businesses, they let themselves get upset by routine media theatrics—which Rush has become callous to over the decades.

Credibility rule number one: Know when you are out of the league of your profession.

Rush Limbaugh and Larry King are experienced pioneers in “responsible” radio journalism. Carbonite is not and they shouldn’t have pretended to be—they should have stuck to backups. When Limbaugh was wrong, he admitted it. Carbonite should admit that they don’t know journalism—that would be “responsible” of them. Until then, I’m glad I chose Mozy.

Reportedly, Carbonite stock (NASDAQ: CARB) plummeted nearly 12% on Monday, after David Friend, CEO, Carbonite, issued a statement.

“Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse.”

Since, Limbaugh has cleaned-up the public’s understanding about the supposed exodus of sponsors and advertising in general. Rush explains why loosing only 28 sponsors in one weekend isn’t headline worthy. But now, anonymous sponsors are “practically begging” to return as EIB sponsors.

Where did they go wrong?

When a man doesn’t have a moral center, his opinion will shift faster than an accelerating motorcycle. If companies were so absolutely certain that Limbaugh was in the wrong, why change so fast? The answer is: They weren’t certain. Their withdrawal from Rush was based on opinion polls. Remind you of any politicians?

It’s good for a company to be held accountable to its customers. The problem in the Rush scenario is that the ex-sponsors weren’t listening to their customers—they were listening to loud, whining, Liberals who tend to want hand-outs.

Think about that: Libs and Conservatives alike know that Conservatives tend to be the Capitalists.. for better or worse. So, why would a (capitalist) company listen to people who oppose Capitalism? I suggest we have gotten too focused on loud, crying people who never were our friends in the first place. Our nation has abandoned its moral base—and Moderate Republicans have abandoned their base of voters. We have tried to befriend our few enemies, only to make enemies of our many loyal—and now former—friends.

It seems that corporations and politicians alike want to benefit from the Conservative majority, yet surrender to complaints that don’t come from their supporters.

Sure, there are Liberal-owned (capitalist) corporations which like to blast the Capitalism by which they exist. At least they are resolved on self-mutilation. But to profit from years of advertising, blasting the billboard when hippies Occupy the ground underneath it, then begging to return after loosing financially—?? That’s indicative of flaky leadership.

Rush isn’t hurting and neither are the Liberals who profit from talking trash about Capitalism. The go-along-to-get-along crowd.. As the saying goes: If you don’t stand for something, you—and your stock—will fall for anything.