Archive for October, 2012


In the upside-down, gay activist lexicon, tolerance means intolerance, inclusivity means exclusivity, and diversity means “my way or the highway.” Angela McCaskill, associate provost of diversity and inclusion at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C., is the latest victim of the diversity police.

McCaskill is now on administrative leave after working at Gallaudet for 23 years. She assumed her current position as the university’s first chief diversity officer in January 2011, and she seemed ideally suited for her job, being female, African-American and deaf.

In fact, she was “the first deaf African-American woman to earn a Ph.D.” from Gallaudet, hailed as “the nation’s premiere school for the deaf.” At present, however, she is so shaken by the university’s actions that her husband reports she is under doctor’s care.

What was this accomplished woman’s great transgression? As a private citizen and resident of Maryland, she signed a petition in July supporting marriage as the union of a man and woman. She signed this petition on the way out of a church service where her pastor had preached against redefining marriage. Almost three months later, a faculty member became aware of this and issued a complaint to the university, and McCaskill was immediately relieved of her responsibilities.

PlanetDeafQueer reported that, “On November 6th, Maryland voters will decide whether the Civil Marriage Protection Act, which was enacted by the Maryland legislature and grants lesbian and gay couples the equal right to marry, is upheld or rejected. While there are many that support overturning this important civil rights legislation, one person you would never expect to be in favor of doing so is Gallaudet University’s own Chief Diversity Officer and Maryland resident, Dr. Angela McCaskill,” noting that her “job at Gallaudet is to promote diversity and inclusion at Gallaudet.”

But there is not a single mention of gay or lesbian issues on the university’s Web page entitled, “About the Office for Diversity and Inclusion.” Instead, the Mission Statement declares, “The mission of the Office for Diversity and Inclusion at Gallaudet University is to promote an academically enriching and supportive climate that allows all the diverse members of its community to thrive and succeed. The Office for Diversity and Inclusion will achieve its mission by collaborating with units on campus to intentionally design a comprehensive, university-wide approach to diversity; facilitate equity, access, social justice and inclusion; and, empower students, faculty, and staff to build a diverse and inclusive campus community. Through the cultivation of diversity, the Office for Diversity and Inclusion will lead efforts to institutionalize diversity as a fundamental transformative force that fosters professional growth and academic excellence.”

Can someone fulfill this role without believing that marriage should be radically redefined? Is it possible for the chief diversity officer “to promote an academically enriching and supportive climate that allows all the diverse members of its community to thrive and succeed” without believing that a man should be able to marry a man and a woman marry a woman?

The answer is obviously yes, since even PlanetDeafQueer noted that, “McCaskill is well liked by students. ‘She’s been a great ally to the LGBT community and supported many of the LGBTQA Resource Center’s programs,’ said one student, who asked to remain anonymous. ‘I’m heartbroken about this.’” So, you can be a friend of the LGBT community without believing that marriage should be redefined.

But there’s a more fundamental question to ask: Whatever happened to “diversity and inclusion”? Whatever happened to Dr. McCaskill’s Constitutional rights and freedoms?

Before “diversity and inclusion” became gay activist code words, they actually used to mean what they meant. (What a novel idea!) “Diversity and inclusion” referred to the welcoming of diverse viewpoints and ideologies and peoples. Now, however, in classic doublespeak, they mean the opposite of their original definition (and in the name of “tolerance” at that). – Source

Check out Line of Fire Radio. Listen to full audio here.

The U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, actually served as a meeting place to coordinate aid for the rebel-led insurgencies in the Middle East, according to Middle Eastern security officials.

Among the tasks performed inside the building was collaborating with Arab countries on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria.

The distinction may help explain why there was no major public security presence at what has been described as a “consulate.” Such a presence would draw attention to the shabby, nondescript building that was allegedly used for such sensitive purposes.

Since the mission was attacked last month, countless news media reports around the world have referred to the obscure post as a U.S. consulate. That theme continues to permeate the media, with articles daily referencing a “consulate” in Benghazi.

U.S. officials have been more careful in their rhetoric while not contradicting the media narrative that a consulate was attacked.

In his remarks on the attack, President Obama has referred to the Benghazi post as a “U.S. mission.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has similarly called the post a “mission.”  – Source

Check out – Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.

A very quick & simple answer. Tune in … to Hollywood?

Check out Line of Fire Radio. Listen to full audio here.

Let it be known that the author of this blog sees no salvation possible other than “Lordship Salvation”. Simply put, who should wear the crown in your life? See Revelation 4:10.

The following quoted from Theopedia:

Lordship salvation

“By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.” (1 John 3:10, ESV)

Lordship salvation is the position that receiving Christ involves a turning in the heart from sin and, as a part of faith, a submissive commitment to obey Jesus Christ as Lord. It also maintains that progressive sanctification and perseverance must necessarily follow conversion. Those who hold to the doctrine of perseverance of the saints see this not only as a requirement, but an assured certainty according to the sustaining grace of Christ.

The doctrine of lordship salvation has implications for evangelism, assurance, and the pursuit of holiness. The grace of God in salvation not only forgives, but transforms, and a lack of obedience or transformation in a person’s life is warrant to doubt that they have been born again. The grounds for assurance include not only the objective promises of God (like John 3:16), but also the internal testimony of the Spirit (Romans 8:16) and holiness the Spirit produces in our lives (1 John 2:3-4,19).

The non-lordship salvation position is popularly known by critics as “easy believism”, and by adherents as “free grace”. However, proponents of Lordship salvation frown upon this usage of the term “free grace”, as the free grace spoken of in the Bible both justifies the sinner and transforms the heart unto obedience.

Media:
Favorable

Critical

Check out Line of Fire Radio. Listen to full audio here.

Reza Khalili explains the meetings with Iran that started having effect already.

Check out – Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.

Does Torah obedience have a “halacha equivalent” (how to apply God’s laws in a practical day-to-day sense) for Messianic Jews or Christians that have a deep appreciation for the complete Bible (often the “Old Testament” is neglected as if there is nothing of value to be found there anymore for ‘modern Christians’).

Halacha roughly means – “the way in which to walk [through life]”.

Torah obedience has always been & will always remain a matter of the heart & the condition thereof. Remember that Christians everywhere are also called to Torah obedience if you consider John 1:1-5.

See also The Pilgrim’s Progress for edification in the journey of every follower of Jesus / Yeshua.

Note that the image is for illustration purposes only. It is a modified image of an actual book – likely on orthodox / traditional halacha.

Check out Line of Fire Radio. Listen to full audio here.

Check out Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.