America’s Greatest Threat: The Cultural Cancer

The greatest threat to America is not North Korea, Russia, Iran, or any external enemy. Radical liberalism, our worst enemy, is growing exponentially in our country as a cultural cancer. Like cancer it can’t be cured, but it can be forced into remission. Saving America from radical liberalism will only be possible if all citizens who truly love their country draw a line in the sand now.

Radical liberals will always claim they love America. They don’t love the country of our forefathers–the country that, by the grace of God, became the greatest example of faith, liberty, and prosperity in the history of mankind. They love the humanist, socialist, and amoral culture they endeavor to advance by siphoning off the God-given resources of this nation.

The past two years have seen a stark display of the true face of this faction of our society. Their agenda had been cruising smoothly under the leadership of President Obama and was supposed to advance even more swiftly under a President Clinton. The worst thing that happened to the movement was President Trump. The desperate radical left retaliated with unleashed incivility that has been the recent state of America. There was the FBI debacle; endless and baseless investigations; violent demonstrations; the celebrity insanity of Kathy Griffin, Stephen Colbert, Madonna, Robert DeNiro, et al.; and the biased mainstream news media that trumpet everything negative about conservatism and the President while reporting almost nothing positive.

The last few weeks’ assaults from the left have escalated beyond comprehension. The family separation immigration issue was ignored for years until radical liberals, including the news media, saw an opportunity to showcase it with Trump in office. It has been like piranhas attacking a piece of raw meat. Outrage, accusations of cruelty, spontaneous demonstrations, screaming and weeping news commentators, fake pictures and reports. North Korea, the economy, tax cuts, etc. became invisible.

When the Red Hen restaurant refused to serve Sarah Sanders because she worked for the President, virtually all liberals applauded the restaurant. Quite a shift from when the same people demonized the conservative baker for not participating in a gay wedding because of religious convictions. Then there was Congresswoman Maxine Waters who incited mob force by instructing demonstrators, “If you see anybody from (Trump’s) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.” Really? She is not an American; she is an anarchist representing radical liberalism. And, liberals will still vote for her.

Radical liberals will stop at nothing to force their will on the rest of America. Yet, it is very rare to observe conservatives responding in kind. Do you see conservatives demonstrate with violence, hear conservatives threaten injury or death, or know of conservatives who refuse to serve liberals just because they’re liberal? Typically, conservatives counter the radical left with civil means. Usually, that involves going to the voting booths to bring about change. That is what happened in November of 2016. The “red wave” of patriotic conservatism put Trump in the White House and a majority of conservatives in the House and Senate. The only chance conservatives have to weaken the radical liberal movement and ultimately keep the cancer in remission is to show up on election day with overwhelming presence. Don’t stoop to their bottom-feeder level of behavior. Help others to see these people for who they really are, but take your animus out on the ballot. There are more people in this country who love it and are passionate about its heritage than there are who want to dismantle it, at least for now. But, the majority loses when it allows the minority to elect its leaders.

We must not fall into the trap of staying home on election day because we are frustrated with some conservative politicians. A vote for a weak conservative is a far better choice than not voting. We must also convince others of the reality of losing our country as we know it and urge them to vote.

I believe the future success of our nation depends on another “red wave” this year. Otherwise, it just may be too late. Please share this post as a step in that direction.

Do Tattoos Define the Person?

Tattoos have been linked with certain cultures for over 5,000 years, the most prevalent being the Egyptians of the second millennium B.C. In most ancient civilizations, they were expressions of tribal, religious, or philosophical identity. Today’s body art obsession seems to have the same objectives. Does that mean tattoos, especially extreme ones, reveal the true heart and soul of the host? If so, it’s a sad reflection of our culture.

I just returned from a fun family week at a popular theme park. Our day at the water park included an abundance of skin on display, most of it covered with ink. I could not get the who, what, and why out of my head regarding this craze that is trending upward. A recent Harris poll found that 30% of Americans have at least one tattoo. Pew Research shows that, among millennials, it’s over 40%. This theme park may have been a demographic anomaly, but surely over half the tourists had tattoos. Is it peaking in popularity, or will essentially all newborns become living canvasses someday?

A clarification is in order here. I am not anti-tattoo. They’re not for me, but I appreciate a reasonable size design of good quality that expresses something positive or of personal value. I have many friends and loved ones who have modest statements of this nature in appropriate body locations. Furthermore, I don’t feel animosity toward those who choose to have more radical, suggestive body art, but I just don’t understand why they make that choice or what it means.

There are many reasons not to subject oneself to tattoos. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has hundreds of reports on file of people developing physical complications from the injected ink. Scar tissue sometimes builds up after getting a tattoo. Ongoing FDA research on the long-term effects of tattoos is not yet definitive, but there are concerns about delayed allergies and cancers.

Some Christians consider tattoos a sin based mainly on Leviticus 19:28, “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.” However, placing that statement in context with the culture of that day, I believe God desired His people to be set apart from pagan worshipers and sorcerers who tattooed themselves in those ancient times. Personal interpretation as to whether the biblical prohibition applies to tattoos today is between the believer and God. Perhaps a more applicable teaching concerning tattoos is from 1 Peter 3:3-4, “Your adornment must not be merely external…but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.” In other words, let your outward body represent your inward heart. Therein lies my concern with many tattooed people. Do the adornments that cover their bodies really reflect the nature of their inner selves–their hearts?

When the lavishly tattooed proudly display skulls that represent death, satanic figures, and evil dark world images, are they baring the true reality of their souls?  I would rather think that most are just wanting to command attention. But, that is also a character issue. Do they crave attention so desperately that they promote evil and darkness to be noticed? Are they so displeased with their body that they yearn to mark it up with images that have shock effect? Often the attention comes from the tattoo location on the body’s sensual areas that invites ogling. Some say it is creative art. If it’s about art, why not take up painting? I don’t have the answers to what drives people to extreme tattoos, but here is my prediction. Today’s newborns will not all be tattooed someday as I alluded to earlier. Rather, as young adults, they will look at their tattooed elders with washed out images sinking into their wrinkles and, with disgust, resolve never to do such a crazy thing. Grandparents with radical tattoos will be explaining to their grandchildren why they chose to permanently cover their bodies with scary images.  I just resolve to love the profusely tattooed people, but to not love that which mars their bodies.

That is my opinion. I invite your comments.



The US/NK Summit: What You Must Know

America and the rest of the world are about to witness the most historically significant meeting since the 1986 Reagan-Gorbachev talks. The Singapore Summit will consume all media outlets and has the potential of beginning a peaceful resolution to a volatile international crisis. It could also be a possible first step to the reunification of two nations, a la Germany, 1987. To understand what is really at stake, you must understand the following.

Before 1910, Korea was a peaceful and beautiful farming country ruled by a succession of kings. During the Russia-Japan war, Japan took control of Korea for the next 35 years. Japanese culture and religion are still evident in north and south Korea, a hold-over from that period. After World War II, allies US and Russia agreed that each would control half of Korea much like the post-war agreements regarding other countries of the world. Korea was divided with Russia taking the north and the US taking the south. Russia installed a communist regime in the north under Chairman Kim Tu Bong, later ceding influence to China. The US installed a capitalist democracy in the south under Kim Koo. In 1948, Kim Il Sung became the dictator of North Korea until his death in 1994 when his son, Kim Jong Il, became head of state.

In 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea with the objective of reunification of the two countries under communism. The United Nations sent military forces from several nations into South Korea under the command of General Douglas MacArthur. The UN forces, predominantly US, ran the North Koreans back into their country and continued to push them all the way to their border with China. China, fearing reunification of the Koreas as a democracy, entered the fray causing heavy casualties on the UN forces which retreated back to their borders. In 1953, an armistice, or cease fire, was signed between the north and the south. This agreement established a demilitarized zone (DMZ) at the 38th parallel with a buffer zone containing only a few soldiers from both countries to ensure border security. However, an end to the war was never declared–there was never a surrender of either side.

North Korea flourished under communism for several years until they became consumed with military power pouring their economy into weapons and combatants. At the same time, South Korea was coming of age in its democracy with international trade sky-rocketing its economy. North Korea shocked the world in 2006 when it tested a nuclear bomb. The UN immediately enacted a resolution prohibiting further tests by the Kim Jong Il regime. A second test came in 2009. In December, 2011, Kim Jong Il died, and his son, Kim Jong Un, succeeded him. Within a few months, the new dictator test-launched a technically advanced missile followed by a third bomb test in February, 2013. Since then, there have been three more nuclear bomb tests and 26 ballistic missile tests. The last missile test was an intercontinental missile which demonstrated the capability to reach anywhere in the US.

Kim Jong Un initiated the songun philosophy of defense, meaning “army first,” with the motto, “everyone feeds the army.” Over the last five years, he has radically and exponentially advanced the political and military pursuits of his father and grandfather. Obviously, he is determined to secure his dictatorship by military power, mostly in the form of nuclear ballistic missile capability. This effort comes at the expense of nation-wide poverty of his people and decimation of his economy. He has not shown a desire for quality of life for North Koreans, but rather a desire for global extortion and self aggrandizement. This type of rogue leader in possession of nuclear bombs also paves the way for terrorists to obtain tactical nuclear weapons.

It is going to be an extremely difficult negotiation. Convincing a ruthless dictator to give up what he sees as central to his survival and world view seems virtually impossible. Based on past promise reneging by him and his predecessors, we should be very skeptical about what may appear to be an accommodating spirit. The summit also has critical implications regarding our relationship with China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea. But, the bottom line is that the world must stop North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons. The question is how–by diplomacy or by military action. This summit will probably determine which will have to be used. Pray for godly wisdom for our president and his staff.



Powered by

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: