Can someone tell me how a USC win in the Rose Bowl would have been a three-pete? People seem to be forgetting who won the 2004 championship. Great game, Texas! Geaux Tigers! HT: Ray Bowman
-
-
Who’s Dodging a Judicial Philosophy?
Stephen L. Carter of Christianity Today expresses a bit of cynicism concerning evangelicals who hold to Originalism as a judicial philosophy (see “The ‘Judicial Philosophy’ Dodge“). He thinks the very notion of having a judicial philosophy is a “slippery” business at best. All the talk about opposing judges who “legislate from the bench” and supporting judges who interpret the Constitution according to “original intent” is just code for one’s position on abortion. For Carter, the popular distinction between Originalism and the “Living Constitution” approach is nonsense—”not merely nonsense, but nonsense on stilts.” Carter may be correct that some evangelicals support justices based on outcomes and not based on actual judicial…
-
Bethlehem Withdraws the Motion to Accept Unbaptized Persons as Members
For those of you who read my blog, you may remember my two previous posts on the elders at John Piper’s church who were proposing that certain unbaptized persons be accepted into their fellowship as members (read them here and here). You may also remember my post in December in which I disagreed with this decision on the part of the elders (read it here). I am happy to learn that the elders have withdrawn the motion (click here to read the notice on the church’s website). Bethlehem still needs our prayers, however, as the issue is still not resolved. This is evident in the statement posted on the church’s…
-
The Incoherence of Darwinism on Display
Olivia Judson, an evolutionary biologist at Imperial College in London, writes an interesting Op-Ed in today’s New York Times titled, “Why I’m Happy I Evolved.” The essay is interesting because it puts on plain display the incoherence of atheistic Darwinism. She writes: Some people want to think of humans as the product of a special creation, separate from other living things. I am not among them; I am glad it is not so. I am proud to be part of the riot of nature, to know that the same forces that produced me also produced bees, giant ferns and microbes that live at the bottom of the sea. It is…
-
The Last Christmas Blog
Since it is New Year’s Day, I figure there is time for one last holiday post. World Magazine takes an entertaining look at Santa Claus and makes the argument that jolly old St. Nick should be enlisted in the Christian cause. The article is titled, “Slappy holiday: Why not take the Santa Claus tradition a little further?” If you are a theologue, then you will likely find this piece quite amusing. HT: Carl Miller, the SixPointCalvinist
-
Deliver Us from Kony
Christianity Today has run an article on what U.N. officials have called “one of the worst human-rights crises of the past century.” The article is titled “Deliver Us from Kony” and is about the butchery and inhumanity of a guerilla paramilitary group known as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in northern Uganda. The leader of the LRA is Joseph Kony. The worst of the LRA’s crimes have been perpetrated against children, whom the LRA routinely kidnaps and forces to serve in their ranks. Perhaps the greatest atrocity is teaching these children that they spread this carnage by the power of the Holy Spirit to purify the “unrepentant,” twisting Christianity into…
-
Alito Argued That Roe v. Wade Should Be Overturned
In a 1985 amicus brief, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito appears to have supported the overruling of Roe v. Wade. The brief reads as follows: “We should make clear that we disagree with Roe v. Wade and would welcome the opportunity to brief the issue of-whether, and if so to what extent, that decision should be overruled” (“Memorandum,” p. 9). In spite of all the media ballyhoo, I don’t think this is as big of a story as it’s being made out to be. First of all, when this brief was written, Judge Alito was working as a lawyer for President Reagan and was advocating for a position on behalf…
-
Anti-Bush Bias at the New York Times (So what else is new?)
Why did the New York Times splash a story about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) secret surveillance program? There appears to be no laws broken (it’s not clear that FISA applies here), and other presidents (like Clinton and Carter) have authorized similar programs in the past. So what was the motivation for the New York Times’s putting forth a story that it has been sitting on for over a year? Why now? Edward Morrissey of The Weekly Standard has a plausible answer to that question in a story titled “Fit to Print? Neither the Bush administration nor the NSA broke the law, so why did the New York Times break…
-
Guilt by Association: Intelligent Design on Trial
U.S. District Judge John E. Jones put Intelligent Design (ID) on trial in the Pennsylvania legal battle over the teaching of evolution in public schools. Judge Jones ruled that the Dover School Board violated the constitution in requiring science teachers to read a brief statement about ID and evolution before teaching about evolution in Dover Public Schools (click here to download the proposed statement). In Judge Jones’s 139-page opinion, he charges that “ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism” (p. 31). In other words, as far as Judge Jones is concerned, ID is simply creationism in sheep’s clothing. Judge Jones argues that ID has a religious pedigree linking…
-
Defeatists Just Don’t Listen (even at the Associated Press!)
President Bush delivered a great speech tonight—one that was long overdue. He brought the nation up to date on the progress of the war in Iraq, defended his decision to go to Iraq in the first place, and warned about the deadly consequences of pulling out of Iraq before winning the war. He assured the American people, “Not only can we win the war in Iraq—we are winning the war in Iraq.” The President also directly addressed his critics and political opponents: I also want to speak to those of you who did not support my decision to send troops to Iraq: I have heard your disagreement, and I know…