Further. Every. Day.

Sources: https://crimeresearch.org/2016/02/yet-more-evidence-that-terrorists-pick-gun-free-zones-to-attack/

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/yet-more-evidence-that-these-killers-are-deterred-by-people-with-guns-charleston-south-carolina-church-shooter/

https://crimeresearch.org/2018/06/more-misleading-information-from-bloombergs-everytown-for-gun-safety-on-guns-analysis-of-recent-mass-shootings/

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater-because-it-banned-guns

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/28/us/covenant-school-shooting-nashville-tennessee-tuesday/index.html

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47060

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj_w-GeqZT-AhU5jYkEHbBaBroQFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpmc%2Farticles%2FPMC5178031%2F&usg=AOvVaw2t9KUaqZ0cf9sgnJioYpi0

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4274821/

You may have seen the memes recently from those who claim that Easter is from Ishtar and that Easter is pagan, you may have wondered if there is anything there. Well, there is, and there isn't. Both sides have set up intellectual embattlements, and I've heard people on both sides make blatantly wrong or false assertions. With that said, I don't think either side is getting the point. The focus should always be on Christ.

Before we start, let us put on the correct spirit.

“Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.”

‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2:8‬

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”

‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2:16-17‬ ‭

“But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.”

‭‭Romans‬ ‭14:10, 13-15‬ ‭

There are two views on this, here is the basis for the predominate Anti-Easter view:

Genesis 10:8-10 says:

And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was BABEL, and Erech, and Accad,and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.”

After the death of Cush, his father, Nimrod married his own mother and became a powerful King and a god-man to the people. Semiramis, his wife and mother, became the powerful Queen of ancient Babylon. Later to become the 'mother of god' and the 'Queen of heaven'.

Nimrod was eventually killed by an enemy, and his body was cut in pieces and sent to various parts of his kingdom. Semiramis told the people of Babylon that Nimrod had ascended to the sun and was now to be called "Baal", the sun god.

Semiramis claimed that she was immaculately conceived and she taught that the moon was a goddess that went through a 28-day cycle and ovulated when full. She further claimed that she came down from the moon in a giant moon egg that fell into the Euphrates River. This was to have happened at the time of the first full moon after the Spring Equinox.

Semiramis became known as "Ishtar" which is pronounced "Easter", and her moon egg became known as "Ishtar's" egg”(Easter Egg). Ishtar (Semiramis) soon became pregnant and claimed that it was the rays of the sun-god Baal that caused her to conceive. The son that she brought forth was named Tammuz.

Tammuz was noted to be especially fond of rabbits, and they became sacred in the ancient religion, because Tammuz was believed to be the son of the sun-god, Baal. Tammuz, like his supposed father, became a hunter. The day came when Tammuz was killed by a wild pig.

Queen Ishtar told the people that Tammuz was now ascended to his father, Baal, and that the two of them would be with the worshippers in the sacred candle or lamp flame as Father, Son and Spirit. Ishtar, who was now worshiped as the "Mother of God” and “Queen of Heaven", continued to build her mystery religion.

After Tammuz was killed by a wild pig the “Queen of Heaven” proclaimed a Forty-Day period of sorrow each year prior to the anniversary of the death of Tammuz. Every year, on the First Sunday after the first full moon, after the spring equinox, a celebration was made. It was Ishtar's (Easter) Sunday and was celebrated with rabbits, eggs and ham.

The truth is that the FORTY DAYS OF LENT, eggs, rabbits, hot cross buns and the Easter ham have everything to do with the ancient pagan religion of Mystery Babylon.”

“When Nimrod eventually died, the Babylonian mystery religion in which he figured prominently continued on. His wife Queen Semiramis saw to that. Once he was dead, she deified him as the Sun-god. In various cultures he later became known as Baal, the Great Life Giver, the god of fire, Baalim, Bel, Molech, etc.

“Later, when this adulterous and idolatrous woman gave birth to an illegitimate son, she claimed that this son, Tammuz by name, was Nimrod reborn.”[4] Semiramis “claimed that her son was supernaturally conceived [no human father] and that he was the promised seed, the ‘savior'” – promised by God in Genesis 3:15. “However, not only was the child worshipped, but the woman, the MOTHER, was also worshipped as much (or more) than the son!”[5] Nimrod deified as the god of the sun and father of creation. Semiramis became the goddess of the moon, fertility, etc.” ( http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t020.html)”

We even see this worship in Old Testament Biblical times. There were appointed 40 days to weep for Tammuz, the Queen of Heaven's child. This was often preceded by wild drunken and gluttonous behavior, sound familiar?

“In verse 14 of Ezekiel 8, Ezekiel expresses his "dismay" at yet a greater abomination: "women . . . weeping for Tammuz." This is another pagan practice, a very sexual one involving ritual prostitution. Ezekiel saw them involved in a rite in which they were mourning the death of a Mesopotamian god whose myth said he was resurrected to new life, a mockery of the redeeming death and life-giving resurrection of the true Son of God. This vision reveals that paganism had deeply affected the women in Israelite society as well.” (https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/13229/Weeping-for-Tammuz.htm)

“Symbolism is very important aspect of pagan worship. If pagans have depictions of their moon goddess on a moon, history tell us and shows us about Semiramis and Tammuz (Nimrod) being worship as gods, and the bible clearly denounces the worship of the “Queen of Heaven”, why do your churches allow worship and prayer to their images and why do they addressed Mary as the queen of heaven knowing it was used for a false goddess? Like I said before, because your churches are still worshipping theses false gods. The worst part about it is that your priest, pastors and the pope know their worshipping them but the masses of people don't know the truth. Ask your leaders about these things and show them the proof, they will deny it. Your churches are under satan and your being deceived. Wake up to the truth because our Heavenly Father will not accept our ignorance because He knows we do not search for the truth and even those that will hear the truth won't believe. Share this truth with others and come back to the God of the bible.” (https://bibletrutheducation.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/jeremiah-4410-27-they-ar/)

And here is the Pro-Easter argument:

From History.com

“According to some sources, the Easter bunny first arrived in America in the 1700s with German immigrants who settled in Pennsylvania and transported their tradition of an egg-laying hare called “Osterhase” or “Oschter Haws.” Their children made nests in which this creature could lay its colored eggs. Eventually, the custom spread across the U.S. and the fabled rabbit's Easter morning deliveries expanded to include chocolate and other types of candy and gifts, while decorated baskets replaced nests. Additionally, children often left out carrots for the bunny in case he got hungry from all his hopping.”

So is Easter a Pagan Holiday? Maybe, maybe not but do the eggs and rabbits ultimately replace Christ as the focus of Resurrection Sunday? More often than not, little Easter goers actually walk away with very little of Christ and very much of the egg laying rabbit. Perhaps we should look more to the feasts that Christ fulfilled: Unleavened Bread, Passover, and First Fruits.

Christ came into Jerusalem on Unleavened Bread during the time the Passover Lamb was to be brought into the city on the same route. They shouted Hosanna and casted palms before Him. Christ was crucified as the ultimate Passover Lamb the day before Passover and his work was done. On Sunday, First Fruits, Christ rose as the First Fruits of the Resurrection. All in fulfillment of prophecy.

May I encourage you this year to think more about Christ and His glorious fulfillment of our salvation than you do Rabbits and Eggs.

We often fail to realize the power of God, let alone fully appreciate it. Please join us as we discuss the deconstruction and deconversion experience.

https://youtu.be/UxLv-vBRFp8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSxUDT8ZnQA #america #conservative #google #woke #fed #furthereveryday #christianity #podcast #podcasts #listenable #freedom #deconstruct #deconstructed #deconstruction #deconstructingchristianity #fed #deconstructingfaith

I suppose the simplest way to break down the issue with the modern debate over Christian Music comes down to 3 questions:

What Are You Glorifying?
What Are You Offering?
Why Are You Doing These Things?

What are you glorifying? What I mean by this question is several things: Are you glorifying God, Man, or Feelings? Is our focus during worship on our feelings and emotions or is it upon the Lord? Are we in the same state of mental release as we would be in a stadium while listening to our favorite band, or are we in a state of gratitude and exaltation towards our Abba Father?

In the same vein, are we focused on the person or people leading the worship as much or more so than the God whom we claim we are praising? When we clap our hands, are we exalting the work and being of our Heavenly Father or are we exalting the musicians?

Why do we hold our worship services the way we do? Are we facilitating worship or attempting to increase numbers for numbers' sake? Are we building a place of worship or a place of entertainment?

These are issues within the Church's walls, but these same questions can be asked of any of the songs and hymns that we sing within the Church's walls. Does this song focus upon God or the sinner? Does it glorify God, or an experience? Why are we bringing this song before God? Does it sound like an offering of penance, praise, worship, or glory? What I mean by that is: Does this song make an offering to God the Father that is focused on Him, or does it sound like we're talking about ourselves?

Many songs, whether old or new, don't pass the sincerity test. However, as many or more fail the theological sniff test. Whether we like it or not, some people walk away from a service with more from the worship service than they do from the sermon. Why then, would we allow poor or false doctrine into the service via a poorly or incorrectly constructed song?

Would you allow a false teacher to preach from the pulpit? Would you read his sermon? If not, then why would you sing the songs of someone beholden to such doctrine? People like Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation hold to the Prosperity Gospel, why would we entertain their doctrine by singing their songs in front of our children and more importantly, our God? Again, why are we doing these things? If we're singing to offer praises to God, would we not want the best of doctrine in the songs that we sing as an offering of praise?

(At the same time, being concerned about false teachers, should we not be concerned about false prophets. Those that are weaving the "New Age" beliefs into Christianity, like Bethel, have mislead Christians into believing that supernatural powers just need to be harnessed. As with the direction of CCM, the worship of one's self is being preached and written about in books. CCM must be analyzed before being brought into one's church also a through background check done on all worship leaders concerning the music they have sang.)

The final issue that tends to stand out in the Contemporary Christian Music world is that there is an incredible amount of reverence and respect towards the people who author these songs. It's an attractive position to be a CCM singer or author. In the infamous interview with a reporter, Katy Perry mentioned that she had released a Gospel Album, but “That didn't work out, so I sold my soul to the Devil.” Now, all of the issues with that statement aside, there's an allure to the borrowed favor and fame that the CCM title gives people's work. People who may be fine Christians with room to grow are put on the spot and fail miserably, I'm looking at you Lauren Daigle. These too are a tragedy.

While there's nothing wrong with new songs by nature of their newness, not all old or new songs are created equal. We should carefully examine the words that we offer our Holy God as offerings of praise. Note, all of this needs to be done in light of grace.



Katy Perry Interview:
https://youtu.be/8ZGoixVlrKE

https://www.youtube.com/live/gvEji9_P6bw?feature=share https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atamvkV0V_w

https://youtu.be/UyiS9fXBrt8

#chat #chatgpt #america #conservative #google #openai #woke #fed #furthereveryday #christianity #podcast #podcasts #listenable #freedom #chatgpt3

What exactly are Baby Boxes and from where do they come?

What is the primary reason for infant abandonment?

Explore this with us!

Please find the Chat GPT Conversation below:

I asked Chat GPT about the topic and these were the results:

Johnathan Fiala

What exactly are Baby Boxes and from where do they come?

Baby boxes are a type of program or initiative that provides new parents with a box full of baby essentials and other items, often as a way to promote safe sleep practices and reduce the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The origin of baby boxes can be traced back to Finland, where they have been provided to new parents since the 1930s as part of a comprehensive maternal and child health program. The idea behind the baby box is to provide families with a safe and comfortable place for their baby to sleep, and to encourage parents to use the box for the first few months of their baby's life. Today, baby box programs can be found in many countries around the world, with various organizations and governments partnering to distribute them.

Johnathan Fiala

Not those baby. Boxes, the ones that they abandon babies in

I apologize for the confusion. You are likely referring to "baby hatches" or "safe haven" laws, which provide a place for parents to leave their newborn infants anonymously and safely, without fear of legal consequences. These laws were created in an effort to reduce instances of infant abandonment and to ensure that newborns receive proper care and protection. However, their use and effectiveness remain a subject of debate and controversy, with some arguing that they may not address the root causes of infant abandonment and may lead to exploitation of vulnerable women and children.

It's important to note that the practices of baby hatches and baby boxes are distinct, and that baby hatches are typically only found in certain countries with specific laws regarding safe haven policies.

Johnathan Fiala

Which countries?

Baby hatches or "safe haven" laws can be found in a number of countries, including:

Germany

Austria

Italy

the Czech Republic

Japan

South Korea

China

India

South Africa

Australia

Canada

It's important to note that the specific laws and regulations regarding baby hatches can vary significantly from country to country, and that they are not universally accepted or supported. In some countries, safe haven laws have faced opposition and controversy, with some arguing that they do not address the root causes of infant abandonment and may put vulnerable women and children at risk.

Johnathan Fiala

How would these laws put children at risk?

The use of baby hatches or "safe haven" laws can put children at risk in several ways:

Lack of medical attention: In some cases, newborns left in baby hatches may not receive prompt medical attention or care, which can put their health and lives at risk.

Child trafficking: There are concerns that baby hatches could be used by child traffickers to obtain and exploit children for illegal purposes.

Missed opportunities for reunification: Abandoning a child through a baby hatch may prevent the child from being reunited with their birth family in the future, or from receiving important medical or familial information.

Encouraging abandonment: Critics argue that baby hatches may encourage parents to abandon their children rather than seek help and support from family, friends, or authorities.

It's important to note that the specific risks associated with baby hatches can vary depending on the laws and regulations in place in a particular country, as well as the resources and support available to families in need.

Johnathan Fiala

How about dangers to the women?

The use of baby hatches or "safe haven" laws can also pose dangers to women, including:

Lack of support: Women who are struggling with difficult or dangerous pregnancies may feel pressure to abandon their babies in baby hatches, without receiving the support and resources they need to address their underlying issues.

Fear of legal consequences: Women may fear legal consequences for abandoning their babies, even if safe haven laws are in place, which can prevent them from seeking help and support.

Missed opportunities for safe surrender: Safe haven laws may prevent women from using legal alternatives for safely surrendering their babies to authorities, such as hospitals or police stations.

Stigma and shame: Abandoning a child through a baby hatch may carry a significant social stigma and contribute to feelings of guilt, shame, and trauma for the birth mother.

Missed opportunities for medical care: In some cases, women who abandon their babies in baby hatches may not receive prompt or adequate medical care for themselves, especially if they are dealing with complications related to pregnancy or childbirth.

It's important to consider these potential dangers and to ensure that women in need receive comprehensive support, care, and resources to help them address their underlying issues and provide for their children in a safe and healthy way.

Johnathan Fiala

What is the primary reason for infant abandonment?

Infant abandonment can have many complex and interrelated causes, and the reasons for abandonment can vary from case to case. Some common factors that may contribute to infant abandonment include:

Poverty: Financial difficulties or inability to provide for a child can lead to abandonment.

Lack of support: A lack of social or family support, or a lack of access to resources and services, can make it difficult for parents to care for their children.

Teenage pregnancy: Young mothers, especially those who are not emotionally or financially prepared to care for a child, may be more likely to abandon their infants.

Mental health issues: Mental health problems, such as depression or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), can make it difficult for parents to care for their children and lead to abandonment.

Unwanted pregnancy: In some cases, women may abandon their infants if they feel that they are not emotionally or financially prepared to care for a child, or if the pregnancy was the result of abuse or violence.

It's important to note that these are just some of the many factors that can contribute to infant abandonment, and that the reasons for abandonment can vary greatly from case to case. Addressing the root causes of infant abandonment and providing comprehensive support, resources, and care to families in need is critical to preventing abandonment and ensuring that all children have the best possible chance for a healthy and happy life.

Johnathan Fiala

What would be better than baby boxes?

There is no one solution that will address the issue of infant abandonment, but a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of abandonment and provides families with the support, resources, and care they need is likely to be more effective than relying solely on baby hatches or "safe haven" laws. Some potential alternative approaches include:

Increasing access to family planning and reproductive health services: Providing women with access to safe, affordable, and effective methods of birth control and reproductive health care can help reduce instances of unintended or unwanted pregnancy and prevent infant abandonment.

Providing support and resources to families in need: Offering families in need access to financial assistance, housing, child care, and other essential resources can help prevent infant abandonment and ensure that all children have the best possible chance for a healthy and happy life.

Improving access to mental health care: Providing parents with access to mental health care and support, especially for those struggling with depression, anxiety, or other mental health issues, can help prevent abandonment and ensure that children are raised in safe and healthy environments.

Increasing public education and awareness: Raising public awareness about the dangers of abandonment and the importance of supporting families in need can help prevent infant abandonment and reduce the stigma associated with this issue.

Developing a comprehensive and coordinated response: Working with government agencies, non-profits, and other organizations to develop a comprehensive and coordinated response to infant abandonment can help ensure that families receive the support and resources they need, and that all children are protected and provided for.

It's important to note that these are just some of the many approaches that can be taken to prevent infant abandonment and to ensure that families in need receive the support, care, and resources they need to raise healthy and happy children.

Questions for the Chairs:

Theology: How does the Bible command us to live and work in regards to orphans and those children who are abandoned? How should the Church as a whole react to this cultural phenomenon?

Philosophy: How should we go about dealing with child abandonment? Is it better to provide a place for these children to be safely deposited, or are the critics of the Baby Boxes correct?

Culture: What has failed in our culture to create such a large population of single women? How should the Church and her members go about changing the Culture?

Politics: What should the Christian do about “Safe Haven” Laws? How should we respond to the Baby Box phenomenon?

Economics: When the underlying issues are often financial, how should the Church respond to the epidemic of single motherhood?

First off, not everyone that is in the LGBT movement would endorse some of the activities that we are discussing today. We want to acknowledge that from the outset. However, every type of sin, whether it is marital infidelity, lying, stealing, or LGBT, is connected by a continuum of severity in the Christian Worldview. A white lie or two are the first steps on the road to a life pathological lies, one flirtatious conversation is an intro into a broken marriage, and changing the context of sex from between a man and a woman into anything else, is a road that the Christian will not follow. If you put a banner for that behavior, give it a name, and make it entirely “inclusive”, there is no way that a Christian could possibly endorse or stand under it.

This week, NHL player Ivan Provorov refused to wear pride paraphernalia on his person while playing for the Philadelphia Flyers. This led to an uproar from the Left to the point where the NHL, thankfully released this statement: "Players are free to decide which initiatives to support, and we continue to encourage their voices and perspectives on social and cultural issues." This was amid calls for millions of dollars in fines and demands for the Ivan's dismissal from the team.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/american-sports/nhl-lggbtq-philadelphia-flyers-provorov-28993278

The Left could not conceive a reason why someone would not want to wear the banner of “inclusivity”. There will come a day that they will not be stopped by those with cooler heads, however and they will be successful in destroying good people, if we as a church fail to be the salt and light that repel this type of corruption and darkness.

There are reasons, however, for such protestations. Take the most recent case of Zachary and William Zulock who have been arrested for making videos of them assaulting their adopted boys sexually, in every way and metric, and having pimped these boys out to their LGBT group. THIS is why a Christian cannot blanketly endorse a flag that stands for this behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r45dLIgWPRw

Let's look at another example of this. There is a growing trend of implanting uteruses in men from women who wish to go through gender surgery. This may soon result in men being able to donate their sexual organs for women. You may ask why this is an issue, but you must remember that we are now talking about 15, 12, and 7 year olds being encouraged to “transition”. This is no less predatory than the activities of the Zulock men and their LGBT friends. Doctors will now be incentivized to push people to transition for the prospect of selling their body parts to someone else that the doctors are incentivized to goad into a “reassignment implant”.

When you step outside of the precepts that God has set, there is no positive end. We cannot nor will not support an agenda that has caused so much harm. If someone says that Christianity has caused wars and inquisitions, the two are not the same. Atrocities committed in the name of Christ all have one thing in common, they always run contrary to the teaching of Christ. Whereas all of the atrocities above were committed in the name of self-actualization, a core tenant of faith for those in the LGBT movement.

Just remember the Church of Smyrna, the most persecuted and poor church of Revelation 1-3. All they had to do to resolve their situation was to burn some incense to Caesar and they could live free of persecution like anyone else. Will we have the strength when the time comes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejwxEH-DCHc

https://youtube.com/shorts/JhEu76pThT0?feature=share

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2021.1915635

Questions for the Chairs

Theology:

What does the Bible say about aligning ourselves with people who do not live righteously or hate God?

2 Chronicles 19:2: And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord.

Deuteronomy 7:3-5: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.

Philosophy:

What does participation in a Pride event or wearing a pride token symbolize? How can we serve both God and the Culture?

Culture:

If we support something, even implicitly, what does that do to our influence upon the Culture? What are we called to do?

Politics:

Once speech is compulsory, how easy will it be to share the Gospel? What should our goal be as a Christian in the Political sphere?

Economics:

What should we be warning the World about in regards to adoption agencies and their income, and doctors and procedures that involve expensive organ transplants? What kind of economic incentives are in play? How do these calculations devalue the human that is made in the image of God?

During the Zenith of the Civil Rights Movement, Lyndon B Johnson became president and made a decided mark on American Politics, Economics, Race Relations, and Christianity, and none of it for the better. In his inaugural address, LBJ proclaimed: “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.” Let's break down that War on Poverty, its implementation, and effects today and see how beneficial or rather detrimental these policies have been on Race, Religion, and Family in America.

Economics:

Let's look at the results of this War on Poverty from an Economic standpoint. The goal of the War on Poverty was to reduce the percentage of Americans who were living in poverty.

Did it work? Apparently not, but it may have done something more harmful…. According to the US Census Bureau's own statistics, poverty was on the decline before the so-called war on Poverty. Despite 22 trillion dollars (as of 2012) having been spent on this war, we still see roughly the same percentage of people below the poverty line. So what happened to the money being spent on the less fortunate? How is it remotely possible for so much money to be missing? Well, as with many such government programs, there are lies, darn lies, and then there are statistics. The way that these statistics are calculated always omits the amount spent on welfare. This may seem trivial, but with $9,000 spent on each recipient, on average, that is more than enough to raise many recipients above the poverty line, if it was reported as income. These people are no longer living in the mirey conditions that we connote with the War on Poverty. Roughly $1.00 out of $2.40 is actually reported by the US Department of Labor. In these families we see the following conditions as noted by Robert Rector Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation:

“Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, at the beginning of the War on Poverty, only about 12 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Nearly three-quarters have a car or truck; 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks.[9]

Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite television.

Two-thirds have at least one DVD player, and a quarter have two or more.

Half have a personal computer; one in seven has two or more computers.

More than half of poor families with children have a video game system such as an Xbox or PlayStation.

Forty-three percent have Internet access.

Forty percent have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV.

A quarter have a digital video recorder system such as a TIVO.

Ninety-two percent of poor households have a microwave.”

So, why the bait and switch? One would imagine that government would desire to take credit for raising people out of poverty. But that is never how government works.

Politics:

From a political standpoint, let me ask you… would you be better off solving people's problems… or running on the same issues with a built in voter base, imprisoned by class and racial divisions?

LBJ said himself that: “These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don't move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there'll be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there'll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It'll be Reconstruction all over again.”

Johnson was no friend of the Civil Rights movement, but rather a brilliant tactician. He is also quoted as saying: "I'll have them n-words voting Democratic for two hundred years." This is not the man of the Civil Rights movement, he was a Democrat politician whose party was losing power to the engine that was driving the Civil Rights movement, the Republican Party.

So how would Johnson change the face of the Democrat Party? These were the same people that had held slaves and had enforced Jim Crow, by dirty cop, gun confiscations, and lynch mobs…. This would be quite the magic trick. However, if there is one thing that can make people forget the past, it is prosperity, or the promise of it. During the Great Society Era, LBJ exchanged the ruthless Democrat policies that reoriented the Democratic Party as the rich uncle who would buy the favor of the population that it had spent centuries oppressing. All of this was at the expense of the taxpayer, but also of the supposed beneficiaries.

Culture:

If you look at what really happened during the War on Poverty, you'll see that, although the amount of people in poverty had been trending downward for 15 years, 3~5 years after the War on Poverty programs were implemented, that downward trend stopped. In fact, according to the Census Bureau's own numbers, the decline of poverty appears to effectively be arrested since the War on Poverty has started.

We know that the counting is dishonest, when you consider the fact that the average welfare recipient receives $9,000 a year from the government, but there is something else that is wrong here. We see a culture of dependence that has grown from the government's intervention.

Why this has occurred is perhaps the most interesting result of this miss-happed societal experiment. We see here that the anti-marriage policies of the War on Poverty have created a new societal trend, the unwed mother. Indeed, this should not come as a surprise when we not only recognize the 60s as the time of the Boomer Generation's rejection of Traditional Marriage, but we also see that many women were incentivized to have children for the welfare benefits, and enjoyed a no-fault divorce settlement to boot with child support.

According to Robert Recto at Heritage: “Today, unwed childbearing and the resulting growth of single-parent homes is the most important cause of official child poverty.[25] If poor women who give birth outside of marriage were married to the fathers of their children, two-thirds would immediately be lifted out of official poverty and into self-sufficiency.[26]

The welfare state has also reduced self-sufficiency by providing economic rewards to able-bodied adults who do not work or who work comparatively little. The low level of parental work is a major cause of official child poverty and the lack of self-sufficiency. Even in good economic times, the median poor family with children has only 1000 hours of parental work per year. This is the equivalent of one adult working 20 hours per week. If the amount of work performed in poor families with children was increased to the equivalent of one adult working full-time through the year, the poverty rate among these families would drop by two-thirds.[27]”

There are stories of agents and social workers coaxing people to not marry for the benefits of this new welfare state. This has generated not only a reliance upon the government for mothers, but a fatherless generation who now live as their parents do, single mothers and divorced or single men, with no intergenerational wealth.

THIS is the systemic discrimination of modern America. We have watched society crumble beneath the weight of this sick idea, that man is somehow basically good and needs the right environment. When you look at the world around you, it is clear to see that this simply isn't so.

Philosophy:

So what causes poverty? LBJ said in his inaugural speech that he would strike at the “heart of the causes of poverty”. What are these causes really and how would we go about remedying poverty?

On one hand the economist and philosopher Amartya Sen proposed that poverty should be re-understood in terms of capability deprivation. Here again, we see man attempting to make poverty about exterior circumstances, instead of a condition within man himself. Ignoring human nature, however, has far-reaching consequences. In this framework, poverty will be very hard to measure, and such a change disconnects the concept of poverty from more than a century of detailed empirical and theoretical research. Amartya Sen (1983), however, insists that poverty is not just relative, but also absolute. In short, in Sen's framework, the poor are poor because that is who they always have been and ever will be. If this were true, then a communistic structure would be the only compassionate way forward.

A libertarian approach to poverty would seek to rekindle that spirit, rather than expand a government that sucks the oxygen out of families, private charities, and the very poor that it purports to help.

But as Christian that poverty is a result of a broken world. And we as humans follow the path of less resistance, it is easier to work at McDonald's and then get fired to get unemployment, than it is to excel and work hard. It is easier to fly below the poverty line radar and cash government aid checks than it is to work 40 hours a week.

Theology:

First off, let's acknowledge God's heart for the poor. The Lord has commanded us to give to the poor in Proverbs 19:17 He says: “He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again.” In Pro 28:27 we also have a blessing promised from God: “He that giveth unto the poor shall not lack: but he that hideth his eyes shall have many a curse.”

In Deuteronomy, we see that God put laws in place to protect the poor, the Israelite people had just come out of profound slavery and poverty and God wanted them to remember from where they had come: In Deu 15:8-11 we see God say “But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth. Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought; and he cry unto the LORD against thee, and it be sin unto thee. Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto. For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.”

God never intended His people to be stingy. In fact, just as God has lavished His Grace upon us, we are to also lavish it upon our families, communities, and strangers. We see this in 1Jn 3:17 “But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?” A lack of generosity is seen here as a sign of one who does not know God.

However, not only do we see a call to be generous to others in the Scripture, but a call to industriousness. There is a balance. In 1Ti 5:8 we see this about folks who do not provide for their families: “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”

In the Proverbs, we see that a lack of work ethic, is a sinful state in God's eyes. Pro 10:4-5 says “He becometh poor that dealeth with a slack hand: but the hand of the diligent maketh rich. He that gathereth in summer is a wise son: but he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame.”

Similarly, we see in 2 Thessalonians 3:10: “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.” It would seem that God prefers an individualized work ethic as well as an individualized charity. The government should not make you work or provide charity, but both are commanded by God.

In Pro 3:9 Our work is supposed to honor God: “Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase: So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine. “ This command to honor God with our wealth also comes with a promise of provision.

In Mal 3:10-11 we also see what Proverbs 3:9-10 looks like in practice: “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.”

What we have is not our own. It all belongs to our Heavenly Father. When we replace Church giving with Government spending, we replace God with Government. One provides supernaturally and changes men's souls, the other leaves men without hope and purpose, creating the intergenerational poverty that we see in the West today.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19Mm9ebFmf5RhZzgVabg8I5TKxDUivOOVROHQW40zMsI/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/19Mm9ebFmf5RhZzgVabg8I5TKxDUivOOVROHQW40zMsI/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/19Mm9ebFmf5RhZzgVabg8I5TKxDUivOOVROHQW40zMsI/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/19Mm9ebFmf5RhZzgVabg8I5TKxDUivOOVROHQW40zMsI/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/19Mm9ebFmf5RhZzgVabg8I5TKxDUivOOVROHQW40zMsI/edit?usp=sharing

https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/the-war-poverty-after-50-years

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/17/1123508069/religion-christianity-muslim-atheist-agnostic-church-lds-pew

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/09/13/modeling-the-future-of-religion-in-america/pf_2022-09-13_religious-projections_00-01/

https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines

http://blackyouthproject.com/50-years-later-an-look-at-the-war-on-poverty/

https://talkpoverty.org/2014/06/19/beezat/

https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/eras/war-poverty-1964/

https://www.masslive.com/politics/2014/12/war_on_poverty.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People%27s_Campaign

https://www.dailysignal.com/2014/11/18/war-poverty-hurt-american-marriage-rates/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8X0b7yeQFU

Video Resources

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYvZZdOI2YQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkN3Gzob_Vk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n0e3_vD-xE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxZVfwudvC8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J6xO4gtCJM

Just as Conservatives warned the culture about the slippery slope of the LGBT agenda, the warnings concerning the normalization of Pedophila have been sung through Conservative halls for decades.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9619045/Paedophile-threat-tripled-year-child-pornography-use-soars-lockdown.html

According to D2l.org:

“• Child sexual abuse is likely the most prevalent health problem children face with the most serious array of

consequences. 2

• About one in 10 children will be sexually abused before their 18th birthday*. 1

• About one in seven girls and one in 25 boys will be sexually abused before they turn 18*. 1

• This year, there will be about 400,000* babies born in the U.S. that will become victims of child sexual abuse

unless we do something to stop it.”

Now, just as we saw in the late 2000s in academia, we see the rise of new terms, meant to soften the practice of pedophilia, Minor Attracted Persons, or MAPs. Unlike the LGBT issue, with exception for minor transitions, the harm is not self harm, but the deflowering of children by predators.

We need to make three points clear for those who wish to normalize the pedophilic urge:

Pedophilia is NOT a sexual preference. It is a predation, by nature.

Pedophilia is a learned trait, usually through trauma or exposure to erotica.

Normalization of Pedophilia as anything other than a predation will silence abused children.

Now, to make these points.

Sexual preferences, heterosexual, homosexual, poly-amorous, etc are just that, preferences. These can be changed by decisions that are made over the course of a lifetime, for good or for ill. The New York times, in a pro-pedophile piece even admits this:

”'Science in recent years has begun to provide some answers. One thing most pedophiles have in common: They discover, usually as teenagers, that their sexual preferences have not matured like everyone else's. Most get stuck on the same-age boys or girls who first attracted them at the start of puberty, though some retain interest in far younger children.

“People don't choose what arouses them — they discover it,” said Dr. Fred Berlin, director of the Johns Hopkins Sex and Gender Clinic. “No one grows up wanting to be a pedophile.””

Now with any of these preferences, if one were to force someone into an intimate relationship without consent, it would rightly be considered assault. Children do not understand the nature of sexuality and therefore CANNOT consent. Any attempt by an adult to participate in these relationships is inherently predatory. Even more so than a slave trader conniving to sell a 6 year old into a lifetime of slavery with the offer of a trinket or morsel of candy, the pedophile is radically changing the life of a child who no more understands the gravitas of one situation over the other.

Point 2, Pedophilia is a learned trait and normalizing it will only lead to more people learning that trait. Now there is disagreement in the studies concerning the “abused become abusers” trope. There is widespread anecdotal evidence of this, but studies show that there are a number of reasons, including the following:

“experiencing emotional and physical abuse or neglect as a child (Salter et al. 2003);

being exposed to family violence (Salter et al. 2003); and

early exposure to pornography (Simons 2007).”

Now, with the last one in mind, does it really make sense to “normalize” pedophilic behavior? If erotica stimulates and develops these feelings in a person, should we not see it necessary to slice this cancer out of our culture?

Argument 3: Consider a world where pedophilia is normalized, and such behaviors are considered normal. Do you not believe that a 6 year old girl who is taken by a predator wouldn't be even more afraid than she would be today to come forward with her allegations? If the Pedophile were to have the status that the LGBT individual enjoys, then such an allegation would be even more difficult to bring forward. As it stands, if an adult forces themselves on a child, there is no equivocation; the child cannot consent because they are still innocent and naive to the point where consent is impossible.

https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi429

https://www.unitedfamilies.org/sexuality/pedophilia/pedophilia-on-the-rise/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/29/us/pedophiles-online-sex-abuse.html

https://www.d2l.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/all_statistics_20150619.pdf

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/03/18/national-center-missing-gexploited-children-online-reports-increase