Missouri’s Casino Loss Limit May Be Removed

Unless pro-family voters get immediately active, Missouri’s gambling lobby may prevail this year in their 15 year assault on loss limits.

Most Missourians know the history. In 1992, paddleboats were going to saunter along the Missouri and Mississippi rivers for tranquil riverboat gambling cruises. But once the voters approved the measure, the paddleboats never moved, and the boats weren’t boats at all, but massive buildings that didn’t budge and the gamblers came, losing personal wealth that went pouring into the pockets of greedy out-of-state casino owners.

The one thing that remains from that original proposal is a $500 loss limit every two hours. It now has a giant bulls-eye painted on it in the form of SB 430. The bill bears the innocuous title “Smart Start Scholarship Program”. Hey, it worked before, why not now. Just tell Missourians money is going to schools and that their kids will get some scholarship dough. They’ll go for it.

Yet tucked away on page 9 of the 17 page bill is the little phrase: “..provided that the commission shall not establish any maximum loss limit…” Here are three reasons why you should encourage your senator to oppose SB 430.

1) On the principle of the matter. Missourians voted in the loss limit in the early 1990s and it is the only part of the original legislation that remains intact to protect Missouri families.

2) The loss limit serves as a great protection to families of problem gamblers and thus protects our state from expenses relating to gambling.

Many gamblers can easily lose $25,000 in a short time span. Could you imagine the devastation caused to the families of compulsive gamblers in our state if the loss limit is removed?

Mark Andrews, a tireless crusader opposing gambling’s further devastation of Missouri lives and head of Casino Watch, in a June 20, 2003 letter to the editor of the St. Louis Business Journal, Andrews wrote:

A 2001 study by two economists, Grinols and Mustard, from the Universities of Georgia and Illinois, suggest through their method of calculating the cost of casino gambling in the United States, that Missouri's annual cost may easily be $800 million. The costs they enumerate are crime, suicide, bankruptcy, courts, prosecution, etc. Even if casino taxes to state government were $300 million, the costs far outweigh the income. No business can operate with a negative bottom line, and government shouldn't either.

3) Also, the loss limit serves to deter criminals from money laundering. This is why Attorney General Jay Nixon opposes the removal of loss limits. You can read his letter here.

This past week, SB 430 was almost dead through another one of the principled filibusters of Matt Bartle (District 8—Lee’s Summit). But after a 9 hour filibuster that spanned Monday night and Tuesday morning, Republican floor leader and bill sponsor Charlie Shields (District 34—St. Joseph) said he would keep the Senate in session over the weekend if that was what was required to get his gambling friendly bill passed. With some strange maneuvering, the filibuster ended with another tax hike to the casinos; but the $500 loss limit repeal still firmly in place, with a squeaker of a vote--17 yes, 16 no.

Please contact your Senator on Monday (April 30) and politely, but firmly ask them to vote against SB 430. The bill still needs a “third reading” before it gets passed on to the House. Protect Missouri families. Call your senator and urge a NO on SB 430.


Frank Barnitz (573) 751-2108
Matt Bartle (573) 751-1464
Joan Bray (573) 751-2514
Victor Callahan (573) 751-3074
Norma Champion (573) 751-2583
Dan Clemens (573) 751-4008
Maida Coleman (573) 751-2606
Jason Crowell (573) 751-2459
Rita Heard Days (573) 751-4106
Kevin Engler (573) 751-3455
Michael Gibbons (573) 751-2853
Jack Goodman (573) 751-2234
Chuck Graham (573) 751-2162
Timothy P. Green (573) 751-2420
John Griesheimer (573) 751-3678
Chuck Gross (573) 751-8635
Jolie Justus (573) 751-2788
Harry Kennedy (573) 751-2126
Chris Koster (573) 751-1430
Brad Lager (573) 751-1415
John Loudon (573) 751-9763
Rob Mayer (573) 751-3859
Ryan McKenna (573) 751-1492
Gary Nodler (573) 751-2306
Chuck Purgason (573) 751-1882
Luann Ridgeway (573) 751-2547
Scott Rupp (573) 751-1282
Delbert Scott (573) 751-8793
Charlie Shields (573) 751-9476
Wes Shoemyer (573) 751-7852
Jeff Smith (573) 751-3599
Bill Stouffer (573) 751-1507
Carl Vogel (573) 751-2076
Yvonne Wilson (573) 751-9758


By the way, here’s how the votes went down on SB 430 this past week. Senator Maida Coleman was absent (illness). A "NO" vote was against the repeal of the loss limit.

NO -
1. Frank Barnitz
2. Matt Bartle
3. Joan Bray
4. Jason Crowell
5. Mike Gibbons
6. Jack Goodman
7. John Greisheimer
8. Chuck Gross
9. Harry Kennedy
10. Brad Lager
11. John Loudon
12. Rob Mayer
13. Chuck Purgason
14. Delbert Scott
15. Bill Stouffer
16. Yvonne Wilson


YES -
1. Victor Callahan
2. Norma Champion
3. Dan Clemens
4. Rita Days
5. Kevin Engler
6. Chuck Graham
7. Tim Green
8. Jolie Justice
9. Chris Koster
10. Ryan McKenna
11. Gary Noddler
12. Luanne Ridgeway
13. Scott Rupp
14. Charlie Shields
15. Wes Shoemyer
16. Jeff Smith
17. Carl Vogel

The Courage of Convictions

While Missouri Baptists struggle with whether to maintain their unique identity as non-drinkers or whether to conform to worldly standards of alcoholic consumption, Catholic leaders are showing no reluctance in distancing themselves from anyone who assaults the tenets of their faith.

Consider yesterday’s decision by St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke to resign as Chairman of the Board from the Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center Foundation. For several weeks and apparently months, the Archbishop has been waging a behind-the-scenes battle to have an invitation to pop music legend Sheryl Crow withdrawn. Crow was asked to perform for a benefit to raise money for the Bob Costas Cancer Center of Cardinal Glennon.

Crow, known recently for her eccentric call to limit Americans’ use of toilet paper to one square per sitting, is also a vociferous defender of abortion on demand, a practice that brutally dismembers and kills innocent, developing babies within the wombs of mothers. Crow, a Missouri native from the bootheel (Kennett), also campaigned for Amendment 2, a new Missouri law that makes cloning legal and commercializes the destruction of human embryos for the harvesting of stem cells.

It’s a no-brainer that Crow belongs nowhere near a Catholic institution. Sadly, Archbishop Raymond Burke is one of the few Catholic decision makers that got it right.

Kudos to the Archbishop for his courageous and self-denying decision to step down from a plush position to draw attention to the dichotomy. Maybe Catholics and other pro-life Missourians will follow his lead and boycott Saturday’s concert.

"It is so ordered."

With those stark and straightforward words concluding the majority opinion, the United States Supreme Court upheld yesterday in Gonzalez v. Carhart the constitutionality of Congress’ ban on partial birth abortion and delivered a major blow to America’s pro-abortion legions.

The court was divided on the issue by a 5-4 vote, reaffirming how essential the election of George W. Bush was to the Presidency. He nominated both the current Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Alito who both joined with Justices Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas for the majority.

The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) went ballistic, charging on their website:

“The Supreme Court has done the unthinkable and upheld the Federal Abortion Ban with no exception for a woman's health.”

“Today's decision shows Bush's appointees have moved the Court in a direction that could further undermine Roe v. Wade and protections for women's health. The Court has given anti-choice state lawmakers the green light to open the flood gates and launch additional attacks on safe, legal abortion, without any regard for women's health.”

I, for one, hope their prognostications are correct. What America needs now is a complete assault on the barbarous and heinous brutality of abortion. While partial birth abortion is especially troubling because of the baby’s late term development, it is no less brutal than all abortions which unnecessarily and viciously kill innocent and developing babies.

Justices Thomas and Scalia were willing to go further. Writing a concurring opinion, they stated "...the Court's abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), has no basis in the Constitution.”

The Center for Reproductive Rights was even more fanatical in commenting on the ruling, saying: “This is a terrifying development…”

Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said "It took just a year for this new Court to overturn three decades of established law. Today's ruling is a stunning assault on women's health and the expertise of doctors who care for them."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the minority, offered her own sagacious bantering: “In sum, the notion that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act furthers any legitimate governmental interest is, quite simply, irrational.”

Sure Madame Justice, protecting innocent babies from having their brains sucked out is not a legitimate governmental interest. Just who is being irrational?

Ginsburg continued:

“The Court’s defense of the statute provides no saving explanation. In candor, the Act, and the Court’s defense of it, cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court—and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives.”

I hope we do more than “chip away” at abortion. This barbarity must be abolished from American culture.

Democratic National Committee Censors Jesus

Don Wildmon, with American Family Association, brought to my attention this latest quirck by Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

On March 30, he and DNC Vice Chair Susan Turnbull issued a press release entitled “DNC Offers Passover Greetings” which read:

"On Monday night, Jews around the world will begin celebrating Passover, a week-long holiday that commemorates the Israelites' freedom from persecution and slavery."

Good enough. The trouble came a few days later when the DNC issued its Easter Greetings

“Easter Sunday is a joyful celebration. The holiday represents peace, redemption and renewal, a theme which brings hope to people of all faiths. During this time Christians are called to remember who they are as people of faith, and that even the greatest of evils will not have the last word. It is also a time to reflect upon and be in solidarity with those who are persecuted and suffering among us. We should also use this time to honor those who continue to make incredible sacrifices for us, including our brave men and women in the armed forces serving overseas during this holiday. I would like to wish all those celebrating around the world this Sunday, a joyous Easter.”

Okay, class, can you say J-E-S-U-S? Easter isn’t a holiday for “people of all faiths.” It’s a uniquely Christian celebration of the resurrection of Jesus as the world’s Savior.

If you want to blow some steam, go here to send an email to DNC Chairman Howard Dean.

You can read one of the earliest commentaries on this issue here.

Falwell Declares Limited Atonement 'Heresy'

I would have hoped that when Ergun Caner went to teach theology at Liberty University and periodically launched his vitriol against Calvinism, he might have been tempered by the more seasoned and theologically mature Chancellor of Liberty and Senior Pastor of Thomas Road, Dr. Jerry Falwell. But, it seems, the opposite has occurred. This past Friday, Dr. Falwell, in a sermon to prospective students, said:

“We are not into particular love or limited atonement. As a matter of fact, we consider it heresy.”

Whoa! Liberty Mountain seems to have gone into full attack mode. Falwell just launched the H-bomb. Is it really heresy to believe that third point of Calvinism? Let’s see, that would mean the church has followed such ‘heretics’ as Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, William Carey, John Bunyan, Charles Spurgeon and Benjamin Warfield.

Tom Ascol has a great post on his blog [as usual]:

Does Jerry Falwell and Liberty University really judge John Piper to be a heretic? If we take his words seriously, as surely we ought if we are to honor him, then he believes that Al Mohler, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, D. James Kennedy, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, Tom Nettles, Wayne Grudem, Sinclair Ferguson, James White and Fred Malone teach heresy. That certainly is his and Liberty's right to believe. I simply regret that they believe it. I do not regard my universal redemptionist brothers to be heretics because of their views of general atonement. I think they are wrong and they think the same of me. But that does not mean that we have to accuse each other of being heretics.

Humm, this is a good case study in how we use our mouths. I’m particularly interested in this because there’s quite a bit of this same verbal attack on brothers going on in Missouri. It’s just, that in Missouri, it isn’t about Limited Atonement, but issues relating to our former Executive Director.

The author of Pilgrim’s Progress, John Bunyan (yep, another heretic according to the Falwellian Friday edict) wrote about 3 people who attacked a character he called Mr. Valiant-for-Truth, one of which was called ‘Wild-Head.’ Ernie Reisinger wrote a great little paper in which he says:

We have seen Wild-Head in operation many times. Sometimes with his pen in hand. Sometimes behind the pulpit. Sometimes in private conversations or debate. We have seen him rush at the character of some saint who was just not enlightened, whose understanding was not as good as his Christian experience. Will Wild-Head never learn that truth apart from the Spirit will not develop hristian character? Grace and truth must be together. Mercy and truth must be together as they are in Jesus.

In this awful, confused and divided Church today we need great care, wisdom and charity in applying the truth as we have come to see and love it. I mean applying it as to time, manner and method.

What is one safeguard at this point? Not putting asunder what God has joined together. Mercy and truth, Psalm 85:10, 86:15, 89:14; Proverbs 14:22, 16:6, 20:28. Kindness and truth, and truth and love, Ephesians 4:15--"speak the truth in love." Grace and truth, John 1:14, 17--"Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. Yes, He was full of "grace and truth." One great safeguard, therefore, is not putting asunder what God has joined together.

We really do need a larger measure of grace these days. If we believe we’re right, can’t be find more graceful ways to say it?

I can think of no more fitting words to this situation than those written by the great-Reformer, Richard Baxter in his Reformed Pastor (caution: Baxter is a heretic according to Falwell’s schema because he, too, believed in Limited Atonement):

How tragic it is that there are those who tear their brothers apart as heretics before they made any effort to understand them. We must learn to understand the basic reasons for controversies, and then reduce them to the point where we see the differences between genuine differences instead of just seeing the prejudices. Then we will refrain from making the differences worse than they really are. Instead of quarreling with our brethren, let us rather cooperate against our real and common adversaries.

Ah, yes, “our real and common adversaries.” We’ve virtually forgotten about those. And while we “bite and devour one another” (Galatians 5:15), our enemies march on. The theological merits of Calvinism certainly warrant significant discussion, as do a host of other issues such as emerging churches and MBC policies. And they will, no doubt, limit fellowship within the fold. But “heresy” is just too strong.

P.S. I have tremendous respect for the work and ministry of Dr. Falwell.

P.S.S. I’m leaving to look for a mirror…I’ve got a little self-examination to do.

Good Friday -- Thank You Jesus For Your Blood

Titus 3:4-7

But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.


Romans 3:23-26

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.


Romans 5:6-11

6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.


Ephesians 2:11-22

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands-- 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father. 19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

St. Patrick's Day Parade

Will some modern Baptists be marching in tomorrow’s St. Patrick’s Day parade? I ask (with no small degree of cynicism) because many of them have a fondess for beer. The day is too often marked by drunken revelry rather than a reflection upon the life of the wonderful Christian missionary, Patrick of Ireland.

Interestingly, the Chicago parade site has fewer beer links and/or brewing or beer selection suggestions than some church websites I’ve seen recently. Hummmmmmm….

A Breath of Fresh Air – Heretics Attack the Resurrection

I know it’s odd to consider liberal and heretical illogic that disparages Biblical faith in a good way. But that’s how I’m seeing it. It at least has unified the SBC blogging world from attacking their own.

The sarcasm being aside, though, the situation is rather irritating. In case you’ve missed it, Titanic director James Cameron is filming a ‘documentary’ on a 1980 archaelogical find of an ossuary box (casket). The bottom line is he believes the find contains the bones of Jesus. Yeah, right!

You can watch Dr. Al Mohler defend the orthodox position on Larry King here or read the complete transcript here.

And the best blog on the topic with helpful links is here.

Welcome to 21st century Corinth.

There is a strong movement, particularly within some younger pastors to indulge their carnality under a cloak of spirituality. Specifically, these churches host “Bible studies” or some type of community forum in bars, pubs, breweries or some other venue where alcoholic consumption isn’t just tolerated, it’s encouraged.

I understand some of these folks are genuinely trying to reach people with the gospel wherever they are (including bars). They are not the consideration of this post. However, many of these churches seem bent on getting as closely aligned with the world as they possibly can.

I’ve been contending for awhile, that if Southern Baptists weaken our position on alcohol abstinence, the next social issue will be gambling. Well, today a friend sent me a link to Damascus Road Church in Seattle, Washington. They are an Acts 29 church plant and have one of the most aggressive and offensive “Beer & Bible” promotions of all the pro-alcohol Acts 29 churches.

In what appears to be a promotional email for their men’s Bible study, Damascus Road Church says:

“In the Northwest, we consider coffee a meal and Beer liquid bread. AND we know from the Psalms, God has given us bread to strengthen man’s heart. (Psalm 104:15). So, join us from some hard words and strong brew as we gather like men to learn about what God expects of us as men.”

But the really offensive part is their promotion of “Men’s Poker Nights.” Yep, you read that correctly.

Damascus Road tells you:

It's not about poker, its about relaxing, enjoying the company of some men, making grunting noises, and laughing at Junior High humor. If you're a man, and you have 10 bucks, here's your chance to prove your poker skills or lack there of. Depending on the number of men who show, we will have several $5 games in before the night is through. Bring your favorite soothing beverage (barley pop, soda, water, etc.) and bring something fattening to eat! For the same price as a movie, you can enjoy some laughs and, if you're lucky, go home with a little extra. Invite your buddies!

I’ve been arguing that these new Libertines would soon be promoting gambling (after all, the Bible nowhere gives an outright prohibition!), equating it with money spent on some other form of entertainment.

Guys like me keep seeing this common thread in a lot of Acts 29 churches. And we’re wondering to what degree are our Southern Baptist churches being influenced by this kind of (un)Biblical application?

I have no doubt many, if not most, of these churches are orthodox in their doctrine. But I find the application of their doctrine (if in fact it is orthodox) woefully lacking.

Titus 3:5-6

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Black History Month, William Wilberforce and the SBC Alcohol Controversy

It is right and proper to acknowledge the role of William Wilberforce in his tireless effort to end the English slave trade. This year marks the 200th Anniversary of its abolishment and an upcoming movie, Amazing Grace, chronicles his story in this noble crusade.

I’ve been asking around for some feedback on the issue of slavery and its parallels to the alcohol controversy within the SBC. I haven’t gotten much from the few sources that I’ve queried. No one who adheres to a “moderate drinking” persuasion either in theory or practice has quieted my objections that the same thing that can be said of alcohol can be said of slavery. So, I’ll boldly publish these queries and see what wisdom the blogging world might shed on my thinking.

Of course, Southern Baptists have a dark history with this dark and evil institution. When our Baptist mission board refused to appoint slaveholders as missionaries, key leaders gathered in Augusta, Georgia in 1845 and formed the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). Southern Baptists repented of their ties to slavery in a formal resolution adopted in 1995.

I suppose there remain a few racist SBCers lurking under a few rocks here and there. But our denomination has transcended the South and is now present in all 50 states and is America’s largest Protestant denomination. There are no voices crying for the return of slavery. Thankfully, we universally acknowledge the sin of slavery.

However, I’ve noticed a few parallels with a debate currently being waged on our most recent resolution, this one centering on alcohol.

Advocates of moderate drinking allege two major tenets to justify their position: 1) the Bible nowhere gives an outright prohibition of consuming alcohol; 2) the Bible sometimes portrays alcohol in a positive way. I will not here, at this time, delineate those arguments fully, since most have a good grasp on our controversy. Neither will I put forth the overwhelming textual evidence that portrays alcohol in a negative light. But, may I daringly say, those were the same arguments made by our Baptist forebears to justify slavery.

“Wine is sometimes portrayed positively in the Bible!” sounds mighty close to Richard Furman’s (pastor of the First Baptist Church of Charleston, South Carolina) pronouncement back in 1838: "The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example."

And factually, Furman wasn’t lying. There are Bible passages that portray slavery in a positive way, most notably Leviticus 25:44: “Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life.”

Regarding slavery we’d say, that isn’t the full counsel of God. So why can’t we say that regarding the consumption of alcoholic beverages?

“But Jesus turned water into wine!” Yes, and he also healed a Roman centurian’s slave (Matthew 8:5ff) with nary a word of rebuke against slavery. So, if we are to conclude that Jesus’ making of wine in the first century is an endorsement of 21st century distilled alcohol, then can we relax about the enslavement of people in our world today?

“But Paul told Timothy to drink wine!” Yes, for medicinal purposes. And he also told the runaway slave Onesimus to return to his Christian slave-holding master Philemon. If Paul was endorsing beer drinking, why wouldn’t we consistently argue he was endorsing slavery?

“But we drink in moderation, there is no abuse of alcohol!” Baptist pastor Basil Manly encouraged his slave holding colleagues with the same logic. In his 1836 “Lecture on Ants” to the Charleston Literary and Philosophical Society, he said: “It surely ought to comfort the abolitionists to know that although the ants do hold slaves, the masters are humane and gentle, and the slaves are contented, industrious, and happy.” Ah, yes, no abuses there.

No one within the SBC is arguing slavery or racial bigotry. Fortunately, the counsel of God has thunderously invaded our hearts and minds on this issue. In fact, I imagine this post will be highly offensive to many who hold to “moderate drinking.” But I believe the parallels are significant. I can only say that our pilgrimage to resist slavery and view it as ungodly and unbiblical was not based on any singular ‘smoking gun’ verse; but on the Holy Spirit implanting the mind of God in our hearts. We saw the whole counsel of God. Knowing Scripture never contradicts itself, we saw the “pro-slavery” passages in their proper view. I hope we will soon do the same regarding alcohol.

Black History Month

One of the darkest days of U.S. history occurred on April 4, 1968. On that day, a prominent preacher stepped onto the balcony outside the Motel Lorraine in Memphis, Tennessee, and was shot dead by an assassin’s bullet. The preacher’s name was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Had he lived, I believe America would be different today—and better. We may still have been struggling with pockets of racism, but this passionate follower of Jesus would have assailed (and conquered) the high places of racial prejudice. He certainly would have prevented the ‘takeover’ of the civil rights movement by proponents of ‘black power’ and the movement’s subsequent derailment from its true purpose.

But he would have done more, because the greatness of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was not exclusively in his attacks against racism. His greatness lied in his core belief—that the principles of Jesus Christ would give us a just and better society. And because of that essential belief, King is more than just a great black leader, he’s a great American. I’ve no doubt that Dr. King would have crusaded against pornography and abortion and a host of other evils that subjugate the human spirit. Dr. King was not a perfect man. He struggled with (and was too often overcome by) significant sin issues. But he was a clarion voice for the church to be engaged with its culture.

His “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” ranks, in my mind, as one of the greatest pieces of literature in American History. At one point King wrote:

“So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an arch-defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent and often even vocal sanction of things as they are.”

February is Black History month throughout our nation and it’s a good time to reflect on the contributions of some fantastic Americans who happened to have been black. Two of my favorite Americans were black (Dr. Martin Luther King and Frederick Douglas). Their writings have helped to significantly shape my thinking about the church and its role in society. If you’ll study them and their writings, they’ll teach you one of the greatest lessons you could learn—the church of Jesus cannot be silent or idle in the face of injustice and immorality.

In the days of slavery, the prominent American poet Henry David Thoreau once went to jail rather than pay his poll tax to a state that supported slavery. His good friend Ralph Waldo Emerson hurried to visit him in jail and, peering through the bars, exclaimed: “Why, Henry, what are you doing in there?” Thoreau replied, “No, Ralph, the question is, what are you doing out there?”

Long before Dr. King had a dream of racial equality, Jesus had a vision for His church and prayed “that they all may be one” (John 17:21). Paul wrote “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). And in one of our favorite worship songs we sing of the redeemed church from “every tribe, every tongue, every people, every land” (Revelation 5:9). I love to see people of color in our congregation. It gives us a better visual picture of heaven. I feel closer to God when I’m worshipping with other races and I long to see our church even more integrated.

But leaving philosophical and religious writing aside, consider some more practical examples like the refrigerator, the clothes dryer, the ironing board, the fire extinguisher and the lawn sprinkler. All of these were invented by black Americans. We need to confront our own biases and prejudices and we need to lead our nation to confront its prejudices and racism. Mostly, we need to be engaged in the great battles of our time and advance God’s cause of justice.

Worth Reading

Baptist Press published a brief article by Douglas Baker that is worth your reading time. Baker’s insights, entitled “Inerrancy Isn’t Enough” encapsulate one of the key issues facing the Southern Baptist denomination. Here's a sampling.

It is not enough to trot out the usual statements about the importance of inerrancy and expository preaching. While these are laudable expressions of orthodoxy and practice, the reality remains that the mere mention of these words now too easily evokes expected agreement and adulation (a good hearty “Amen” in Baptistspeak), but little application and practice in pulpits and Sunday School classrooms.

Read the entire article here.

A Mess in Texas

Texas Governor Rick Perry, normally a friend of conservative families, rammed a controversial edict into Texas law, requiring young girls entering the sixth grade to be injected with a human papilloma vaccine (HPV). HPV is a horrible (sexually transmitted) disease and the vaccine does show promise of protecting against cervical cancer, though evidence is not conclusive.

However, some concerns are readily apparent.

Why by-pass the legislature? This seems to be an area where public participation, parental concerns, religious viewpoints and political debate should be expressed. Governor Perry has squashed this great hallmark of American government and is acting more akin to the British monarchy from which we revolted. And the requirement is a further erosion of parents’ rights over their children’s health. Parents, not government, are responsible for their children.

Why the hurry? Seems like the pharmaceutical company Merck’s monopoly on the vaccine and their subsequent contributions to Governor Perry’s political campaigns and that of a Republican Women’s group might be in play. With Merck’s rival GlaxoSmithKline close to releasing their own vaccine (Cervarix) perhaps that’s why Governor Perry is acting so hastily and irresponsibly.

Dawn Richardson, co-founder of Parents Requesting Open Vaccine Education (PROVE) said of Perry's order: "There are bills filed. There's no emergency except in the boardrooms of Merck, where this is failing to gain the support that they had expected."

And why vaccinate? HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. Sure, some young girls will behave in a sexually irresponsible way. But we are now going to forcibly vaccinate young girls who are chaste?

This is another sad example of a pro-family leader’s betrayal of causes important to American families. Let’s pray this injustice is corrected.

More Gobbledygook

Associated Press reporter David Lieb writes about Senator Matt Bartle’s bill to reverse Amendment 2, Missouri’s new (and America’s first) clone-to-kill law.

Matt Bartle is a relentless and conviction-driven politician. Incidentally, his 17 hour filibuster of Warren Erdman's appointment to the MU Board of Curators is a record for a one man filibuster. On the eve of the 200th anniversary of William Wilberforce’s successful campaign to abolish the slave trade in England, one can readily think of some similarities between Bartle and Wilberforce.

What struck me in Lieb’s article was this statement:

“Bartle's proposal would reverse language in last fall's ballot measure that allows a certain form of embryonic stem cell research to occur in Missouri. Instead, it would ban the cloning procedure and allow the Legislature to restrict state funding for research."

It is interesting how Lieb rightly identifies “a certain form of embryonic stem cell research” as a “cloning procedure.” That’s the trouble with Amendment 2. It legalizes the cloning procedure of embryonic stem cell research, while at the same time, making cloning illegal.

So, is cloning legal or illegal in Missouri? Well, with its 2,100+ words, Amendment 2 went to great legal gymnastics to re-define cloning. Still, reporters like Lieb and regular citizens like me know the truth. Embryonic stem cell research is cloning.

Update on Anti-war Vandalism

Wayne Allard, Republican senator from Colorado, is at least one politician who plans to address the blatant disregard of law enforcement that occurred this past weekend by some anti-war protestors. “I was absolutely dismayed by the vandalism and the blatant disregard for respect of property that occurred at our Nation’s Capitol this weekend,” Allard said in a press release.

With so many Democratic politicians involved in the protest, it seems Speaker Pelosi, who oversees the U.S. Capital Police (USCP), may have interfered with law enforcement. The Hill, a DC newspaper reported police officers were livid when they were told to fall back by U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) Chief Phillip Morse andDeputy Chief Daniel Nichols. "They were the commanders on the scene," one source said, who requested anonymity. "It was disgusting."

This episode seems to have credible evidence of an egregious abuse of power. Perhaps Senator Allard can expose the truth, though I doubt much will come of it.

Anti-war protest fails to bring clarity

The anti-war rally held in Washington DC this past Saturday had many interesting quirks associated with it. While I respect those who have legitimate concerns about this war (I’ve even expressed a few of my own reservations) we are hard pressed to take this movement seriously. Here are a few of my reasons:

First, there’s the old mantra that we shouldn’t be in innocent Iraq. This time, a pre-teen was exploited to carry that banner. 12-year-old Moriah Arnold, who had organized an anti-war petition at her school told the crowd: “Now we know our leaders either lied to us or hid the truth. Because of our actions, the rest of the world sees us as a bully and a liar.”

Well, our leaders haven’t lied. They were misled by incomplete intelligence, but both Presidents Clinton and Bush suspect foul play in Iraq, along with the United Nations and the world community. And while we didn’t find everything we thought we’d find there, we have found plenty of terrorist activity. Trying to paint President Bush as a lying power-monger undermines the credibility of this movement. It shows there’s a significant faction of the anti-war movement that seems more concerned about destroying President Bush than protecting America. I’d take heart if I thought their movement had to resort to children bantering this mantra, but I’m pretty sure there were more than a few adults who would have been glad to have said what little Miss Arnold said.

Second, “Hanoi Jane” Fonda came out of retirement. Any movement that revives her traitorous voice is suspect.

Third, one of the Hollywood cohorts who attended, Tim Robbins stated: “Nixon -- Richard Nixon -- talked to the walls. Bush is talking to God. But it's not a god I recognize.”

I’m not sure what he was talking about, but Robbins needs to read the Bible to recognize God. Maybe then he’ll learn something about justice, war and respect for government leaders. And Robbins better recognize God before he meets Him who has “eyes like a flame of fire”.

Fourth, and most troubling of all, was the vandalism of the protest. MSNBC billed it this way:

The rally on the National Mall unfolded peacefully, although about 300 protesters tried to rush the Capitol, running up the grassy lawn to the front of the building. Police on motorcycles tried to stop them, scuffling and wrestling with some and setting up barricades along the front steps. Protesters chanted “Our Congress” as police faced off against them. Their ranks grew and several dozen shouting “We want a tour” broke away and tried to get into a side door.

But Family Research Council reports Capitol police were under orders not to arrest anyone. So, as protestors defaced public property, officers stood idly by. FRC has called on Speaker Nancy Pelosi to explain why no attempt was made to halt or arrest these vandals.

"For any other group, such acts would mean immediate arrest. This time, the Capitol police's hands were tied because they were ordered to stand down by their Chief of Police who answers to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). To add insult to injury, public employees had to come in on their day off, at taxpayer's expense, to clean up the mess the protestors left behind.

According to the news reports the rank and file police officers were 'livid' that they were ordered not to arrest anyone. Since the Capitol police answer to Speaker Pelosi, the question arises, did the Chief of Police give the 'no arrest' order or did it come from someone else? Whoever is responsible for the order needs to explain why the physical destruction of taxpayer property is acceptable.

The U.S. Capitol belongs to every American and the building, and those who represent us within it, deserve respect. Surely, the tens of millions of dollars the
American people have invested in the security of their Capitol means there is videotape that will assist in the identification and arrest of the perpetrators. Speaker Pelosi should direct that investigation and prosecution go forward. If the U.S. Capitol has a new policy on such acts, does it apply to everyone - or just to those whose views the majority in Congress favors?"

Seems like that's quite a story the news media isn't telling. But what else is new? Few Americans know the successes we're having in Iraq.

Hate Crimes Legislation Meant To Silence Christians

The House Judiciary Committee is already holding hearings on H.R. 254 (also known as “David’s Law”, a bill sponsored by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), which will establish a new federal offense for hate crimes and will require a separate federal criminal prosecution for state offenses tried under these new provisions. A sentence of life imprisonment could await those convicted.

“Hate crimes” legislation is designed to protect homosexuality. Family Research Council highlights this example of the end result of “hate crimes” legislation from our northern neighbor Canada.

A Catholic city councilor in British Columbia has been ordered to pay a homosexual couple $1,000 for publicly saying that their lifestyle is "not normal and not natural." The man in question, John DeCicco, was simply restating the church's teaching on homosexuality, but the state considered his personal beliefs "hate speech" under Canada's hate crimes law. While DeCicco has since apologized to the men, the couple's complaint has resulted in a hefty fine and potential court proceedings. In an interview, DeCicco said, "In this great nation of ours, we can express our opinions and, when you can't, there's something wrong."

"The proposed federal hate crimes bill is a dangerous threat to our civil liberties," stated Repent America director Michael Marcavage. "Having been charged under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law for declaring the truth about homosexuality, I can assure you that if this bill is passed and signed into law, it will be used to put Christians behind bars," Marcavage continued.

Marcavage was referring to an October 2004 incident, when eleven Christians with his organization were arrested in Philadelphia for expressing their religious views against homosexuality during "OutFest" a publicly-funded celebration of homosexuality. After spending 21 hours in jail, District Attorney Lynne Abraham's office charged them under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law called "Ethnic Intimidation," along with a host of other felony and misdemeanor charges. The charges were eventually dropped, but the protestors, if convicted would have faced up to 47 years in prison and $90,000 in fines each.

"H.R. 254 is nothing more than an attempt to provide federal prosecutors with the ammunition to police our thoughts, which will ultimately lead to the death of the First Amendment," Marcavage said. "This bill is unnecessary, unconstitutional, and simply un-American," he continued. "Christians must pray and respond to this emergency situation by urging their representatives to vote against this dangerous bill," Marcavage concluded.

H.R. 254 looks like it will pass both houses of the new Democrat-controlled Congress. We must appeal to the President to veto this legislation.

Last night, the Governor of Missouri delivered his State of the State address. It was a little better than President Bush’s State of the Union speech. Remarkably, our pro-life President made no statements about protecting life. And this was one day after the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that gave American legal abortion-on-demand through the entire 9 months of the baby’s development. Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council gave an excellent response to the President’s rather empty address.

Governor Blunt did mention getting $200,000 into the budget for pregnancy resource centers, which offer truthful and candid information about all options. I am grateful for that. This governor has been solid and faithful in his opposition to the horrors of abortion.

However, he did not mention ending Planned Parenthood’s tax funded monopoly of sex-education in the public school arena. And he didn’t talk about his aggressive insistence of giving public money to the biotech industry for embryonic stem cell research through the sale of loans by the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority (MOHELA), a position that contradicts what being “pro-life” is all about.

Overall, the Governor sounded a lot like the President. Fiscally responsible Republicans should be proud. Morally minded Republicans should be stunned. I am hopeful we’ll see more than we’ve heard.

Detroit's Auto Show

We still live in a sex-saturated culture. Newsweek magazine, publicizing Detroit’s car show blurped:

For Americans, car shows have always been about desire, as automakers tempt us with brawny novel engines, sleek new shapes and lush (often leather) interiors. And what better way to generate excitement than with a bevy of attractive young women showing off your wares? Yes, it may be sexist, but the car companies still do it. The 2007 North American International Auto Show, which kicked off Sunday in Detroit and is on view to the public Jan. 13-21, hasn't disappointed those of us who lust after the new car models of today and the fantastic concept cars of tomorrow.

Hey, when it comes to new cars, my lust (coveting) is already in high gear. I don't need flesh to add to my carnality.

Kudos to NEWSWEEK's Detroit bureau chief, Keith Naughton, whose photo shots showed us the cars, not the women.

If you’re going to surprise me on my birthday, skip DaimlerChrysler's Smart 'fortwo' model as well as Ford’s Airstream. My personal favorite is the Efijy concept car from GM's Australian brand, Holden. The Chinese actually call this a pickup?