Monthly Archives: September 2022

Reflections on “Ode to the West Wind”

Sydney Harris

This ode, written by Percy Shelley, is one that tells a story of wishful thinking. The speaker uses the many functions of the wind to convey the power it has. He speaks to the fact wind drives away the autumn leaves, places seeds in the earth, brings thunderstorms and the cyclical “death” of the natural world, and stirs up the seas and oceans. He explains these functions in a way trying to connect with the wind. He pleas to the wind for it to act in the way it does, but on him. He wishes, with the help of the powerful force of nature, to have his ideas and works spread out and dispersed throughout the world. He wants the wind to be as harsh and real in his life as it is in the winter months. He knows the West Wind of autumn is wild and rough but is always followed by spring, a time of beauty and growth. He wants the wind to blow away all of the negative things in his life and create a new spirit in him, like it does for the leaves of the winter or the waves of the ocean. He wishes to be moved into a new version of himself, to fulfill his full potential.

In the beginning of the first canto he addresses the wind, describing it like a breath of Autumn. He talks about it as a magician banishing evil, the way it blows away dead leaves. He then says it carries seeds to their places around the earth and leaves them they’re until Spring comes for them. The wind burying seeds in the ground is like a charioteer taking corpses to their grave. He thinks of the spring wind as blue and as the cause of all revival of nature. He says it blows like a clarion and all the seeds bloom, filling every “plain and hill” with “living hues and odours.” The last few lines depict the speaker describing it as a “Wild Spirit” that’s omnipresent. It’s the “Destroyer and Preserver,” as winter brings death but gives way to revival of spring. He ends saying “hear, oh, hear!”, wanting the wind to hear his unknown request.

The second canto is a continuation of his description of the West Wind. The clouds, in his words, are scattered through the sky like dead leaves in a stream. The leaves fall from the trees like the clouds fall from the sky, all working together to balance our weather. This is all to indicate a storm that is coming. He uses the simile of clouds being like angels of rain and lightning. He then goes into a detailed description of what the West Wind is like during a storm. The thunderclouds, “locks of the approaching storm,” disperse through the West Wind or the “blue surface.” He says the thunderclouds to the West Wind are like the Mænad’s locks of hair are to the air. A Mænad was one of the fierce women who spent time with the Greek god Dionysus. Their hair was wild and crazy and that’s the point he used to connect the two. He then uses a melancholy metaphor to describe the power the West Wind has. He says it’s like a funereal song played as the past year comes to an end. As the storm comes, the thunder, lightning and rain will be like the tomb being rolled over the grave. He ends, again, asking the wind to hear him but we don’t exactly know what for.

In the third canto, he details the weird and strange things the West Wind does. The Mediterranean is awoken, making the wind and storm begin to come. This happens because the sea had been calm and still during the summer, while on vacation like the Romans. During the summer, the Mediterranean dreams and sees the “old palaces and towers” along Baiæ’s bay, overgrown and unkempt. The Atlantic then breaks itself into “chasms” for the West Wind. He uses all these words to say the wind disrupts the water, creating waves but is at the service and will of the West Wind and all its power. The speaker talks about how all the see plants hear the West Wind and become disheveled and go all over the place in fear and hurt themselves. The canto ends the same way the others have, with the speaker asking for the wind to hear him.

The fourth canto begins to reveal the request the speaker has for the West Wind, beginning with him wishing he was a “dead leaf” or a “swift cloud” the West Wind could carry or he wishes he was a wave that could be rocked by the West Wind’s “power” and “strength.” He has hopes of becoming free and as “uncontrollable” as the West Wind. The speaker will even settle with just having the same type of relationship he had with the wind when he was younger, when they were “comrades.” He reflects on when he was younger and was faster and stronger than the West Wind. He clarifies wanting to feel the same way he did in the past, youthful and strong, is the only reason for coming to the West Wind. He wants to be given the same treatment as the waves, leaves and clouds, saying “I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!” Time has made life dull and hard for him along with his spirit, which is no longer “tameless, and swift, and proud” like the West Wind.

The last canto depicts the speaker asking to become an instrument. He wants the West Wind to turn him into a lyre. During his time, the æolian harp, a type of wind chime, was a popular instrument during the Romantic era. The harp is played by simply setting it in the wind, which is what the speaker longs for. The speaker says he wants to be used by the wind in whatever way the West Wind wants to use him. He wishes to be blown by the Wind like the branches are, leaves attached or not. His pride has been stripped of him like the leaves on the trees, and both are dying.

He then goes as far as to ask the “fierce” spirit of the West Wind to take over his soul and live in him. His thoughts are like the dead leaves and if the West Wind could control them, maybe instead of dead leaves, they can be something that dies but can grow again in the springtime. The speaker suggests the words of his poems are being blown around into the world as “sparks” and “ashes.” The speaker describes himself as the “unextinguished hearth” the sparks come from, a fire that is slowly dying but still there.

He ends, returning to his wish of being played like an instrument, referring to himself as a trumpet the wind should blow its prophecy through. His last line is “If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?” This simple question holds more weight than meets the eye. He needs the answer to be “yes” because he knows he can’t take much more of the torturous winter that is his life at that moment.

This is composed in a set of separate sonnets brought together. It is formed so that one must continue reading to find out how the story ends. It leaves the reader on edge, going through everything in real time with the author. This has Romanticism seen all throughout it. Romanticism stressed strong emotion, imagination, freedom from classical art forms, and rebellion against social conventions. He provides the reader with the chance to envision what the wind is really like with all his analogies. He had been overtaken, he felt, by society and all that had happened to him and wanted the wind to free and renew him. It provides a sense of hope for things to come and is very optimistic.

From a Christian perspective, this is resonating with me due to personal struggles. In life, there are many ups and downs and as a Christian, it’s hard to believe God hears all my prayers. But, like the speaker had a hope, the faith like a mustard seed, and constant belief that better must come stays alive. God tells us, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths” (Prov. 3:5, 6). In this verse we can be reassured God will never forsake us and if we continue to praise him in the bad times He will always see us through. This year has been a series of highs and lows for me, and in the bad times I often want to give up and question why God is testing me in the way He is. But, when I get to my lowest point, I step back and think, who am I to be feeling the way I do, and what kind of faith do I have to believe God can’t get me out of my little situation. Trust in God is imperative, especially in the bad times. Even if you don’t believe in God, simply keeping a positive mindset will get you so much farther in life.

In the Bible, the greatest example of faith and hope I know is Job. He had everything he could possibly want and more: family, money, and notoriety. He served God but he had everything; it was easy to. God let Satan attack Job to just show him how strong his servant was. He had literally everything stripped from him even to the point where Satan took away his health and Job was dying. He was in the hardest time in his life, the worst season or the harshest winter. He still believed in God’s plan and the hope that tomorrow will be better than the day before. In God’s timing, he renewed Job’s health and gave him what he had and so much more for his faith.

The speaker in the ode may not have gone through what Job did but he still showed faith and hope and that is recognized. I appreciate this poem and the reminder it gave me personally to do as God says in John 16:33, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world, you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

Review of Is Genesis History?

Leave a reply

Seraphim Hamilton

The following review was published on Seraphim’s Web site Apologia Pro Ortho Doxa in late February 2017.

I went last night to see the special showing of the new creationist documentary Is Genesis History? The film represents a major improvement upon previous creationist documentaries because those interviewed represent intellectual honesty, creativity, and the best in modern creationism. Kurt Wise, Arthur Chadwick, and Todd Wood are all prominently featured. This makes the film an excellent introduction for those interested in the state of creationist scientific argument today. But even referring to this as a scientific “argument” somewhat misstates the nature of this work, because it is not principally about apologetics. Instead, it represents the classical Christian view of scholarship: faith seeking understanding. Beginning from a position of trust in the God who gave the Scriptures, these scientists seek to understand Earth history simply because of the joy of understanding the creation of the Almighty.

We are introduced to Steve Austin and Andrew Snelling’s fascinating work on the sedimentary record, showing that there are certain features of that record which imply rapid deposition on a worldwide scale. For example, major sedimentary layers in the Americas have counterparts not only across the American continent, but across all continents. This is very significant: instead of arguing, as older creationists unsuccessfully did, that the geologic column is simply a fiction, these scientists point to the very existence of a worldwide pattern in deposition as evidence that the deposition must substantially be the product of a worldwide catastrophe. Indeed, the fact that there is a geologic column is powerful evidence of a flood. Moreover, between sedimentary layers are “unconformities,” thought to represent hundreds of millions of years of “missing time” where there was no sedimentary deposition. Yet, the surfaces of the sedimentary rocks are relatively flat, which is difficult to account for if there were millions of years of weathering and erosion.

Dr. Kurt Wise, arguably the founder of the modern creationist movement, takes a look at fossils, suggesting that the order of fossils in the record are the result of a succession of ecological zones in the antediluvian world. The suggestion that a flood would deposit fossils in mixed heaps simply misunderstands how sedimentation works: floods bury animals basically in place. They don’t float around in the water for an extensive period of time before being buried from fossils from other areas. Since the original creation was created with zones in place, the antediluvian world had an intelligently organized ecosystem with different zones, instead of the modern ecological system, which represents the contingent events of post-flood dispersion and intrabaraminic diversification.

Dr. Todd Wood looks at the creationist view of the kind, or baramin, suggesting that the creationist “kind” is roughly on the level of the biological family, and that after the flood, there was rapid and significant diversification. He extends this to humankind, noting that statistical baraminology, which was developed before it was applied to humans and generally identifies the baramin along the lines of the family, generates a real distinction between humans and other apes, confirming a key creationist prediction. I wish the editors of the film included more material dealing with Wood’s arguments, because it is essential to note that the mechanism of diversification in the creationist model is not Darwinian, but epigenetic. God intentionally frontloaded information into all baramins giving them an intrinsic potential for diversity.

Finally, the film looks to the history of the Tower of Babel, interviewing Douglas Petrovich. It is here that I disagree with the arguments set forth. Dr. Petrovich is a defender of the conventional chronology of the ancient world, which is irreconcilable with the biblical chronology. His archaeological setting of Babel at Eridu cannot be sustained within a creationist framework, because the archaeological context is post-Stone Age. On the creationist model, Stone Age remains postdate the dispersion from Babel. The life of Abraham (archaeologically the late Chalcolithic) occurs merely centuries after the end of the Stone Age, and the traces of Stone Age culture in Genesis are significant — note the use of caves by Abraham and Lot’s home in a cave. These were used by early settlers after Babel until populations were sufficiently large to construct advanced cities — which is misinterpreted by modern anthropologists as the invention of agriculture and civilization. This means that the remains of Babel must predate the so-called Paleolithic, and will likely be conventionally dated anywhere from 200,000 B.C. to 1,000,000 B.C. depending on one’s view of Neanderthals and other hominids. These are undoubtedly human, but I think they represent small dispersions from Babel before the main dispersion. During the time when the majority of the human family lived together in the Near East, I suggest that they homogenized into H. Sapiens, as other families who had left beforehand, during the period of major intrabaraminic diversification, became H. Neanderthalensis, H. Erectus, H. Naledi, H. Floresiensis, and probably A. Sediba. Hence why these fossils generally predate the arrival of Sapiens. Local legends of a small, talking, clothed (speech and clothing are the biblical criteria for humanity) people on the island of Flores suggests that H. Floresiensis may have survived until about 200 years ago.

Anyway, this is to say that Petrovich simply cannot be correct.

Overall, I would highly recommend this film for an accurate, though somewhat dry, presentation of the state of creationist science today — but I would strongly recommend pursuing the writings of these scientists to gain a more comprehensive look.

Out of a Black Hole

Leave a reply

Katie Kenney

A black hole is an invisible area of outer space with gravity so strong light cannot get out of it. They are believed to be the outcomes of massive stars collapsing. A black hole is an astronomical term, but there are times in human life when it feels like a black hole has been created by a tragic occurrence. It may feel like nothing happy or good will come into existence ever again. It can be hard to get up in the morning because feelings of worthlessness and hopelessness are overwhelming. Making breakfast and actually consuming it can be the biggest accomplishment you’ve achieved that day. Life can be exhausting and there are times where all you’ll want to do is just lay down for a minute because everything that is happening is too much to handle. Maybe you won’t want to ever get up or maybe you won’t think that you can. But you can get back up and here’s how to do so.

Talking to people can be absolutely terrifying to some people. Laying your feelings and emotions out on the table for someone to asses can make you feel way too vulnerable. You don’t know what they have to say or what they’ll think of you. It may feel like it’s easier to just stay quiet and keep everything inside. This won’t help your situation. It can be incredibly hard to talk to someone, but just talking about what you feel will help you figure things out. This isn’t a new discovery, but reinforcing the importance of it is necessary. Just having someone to confide in can put you at ease. Find someone you trust and talk to them. Their fresh eyes will help you sort out the confusing things. People are ready to be there for you and help you, but they won’t know when to come and help if you keep them in the dark. More people care for you than you can think of. You aren’t alone in this world. Not everyone will understand everything you are going through because they aren’t, and haven’t, gone through the exact same thing as you are. Even people who have experienced the same thing you experienced will perceive and view things differently because no one is the same. Our minds are complex things, with no mind being an exact replica of another. This means no person is an exact replica of another and no one will think in the exact same way. Even though people are different in this sense, they can still comfort you and be there for you. All you need to do is reach out.

Some people don’t want to reach out though. Many people just don’t want to seem weak and won’t ask for help in any situation. They could refuse receiving help when they can’t reach something on the top shelf or they could refuse to receive help when they feel like they are drowning in their own feelings. You are not weak if you ask for help. You can’t do life alone; no one can. Asking for help doesn’t undermine anyone or make someone any less of a man. Everyone needs help at same point in life and asking for it won’t change you fundamentally as a person. It can change your life, though, and for the better. Trying to walk alone in this world will only increase pain and suffering. We need people to hold on to when things get rough and to lean on when you feel like you can’t possibly stand up straight. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness and never will be.

You should take things slow. Trying to jump out of quicksand won’t get you out of its grasp; in fact it will only submit you to a stronger hold. In the same way, if you try to jump out of feelings of sadness, anger, or other emotions that can be exhaustive, you will only fall deeper into their hold. Taking baby steps will allow you to make mini accomplishments and slowly get out of your black hole. Getting out won’t happen overnight no matter how badly you want it to. Black holes are tricky things in the human sense, so you must approach them carefully, willing to keep calm and take things slowly. If you rush on in then there is a great possibility you will be submitted to a stronger force of gravity, making it harder for you to escape your black hole.

The world is broken and fallen, so bad things will happen and in turn not go your way. It can make you feel like you will never see the light of day again. Blaming yourself for bad events will only make you feel worse. It may take some time, but it is key you understand you are not the problem. Hurting yourself, emotionally and/or physically, isn’t beneficial, not even in the slightest. You must take into consideration bad things happen to even the best people. This world is broken and fallen, so bad things happen. Blaming yourself for all the problems that occur isn’t logical. There are some things in life you just don’t have control over, no matter how badly you want to dictate how they play out. You aren’t the playmaker of life, so whatever happens, or happened, isn’t your fault.

Your black hole is different from my black hole, which is different from some other person’s black hole. Acknowledging what you’re going through is entirely unique to you will help you get out of the grasp of your emotions. Knowing how your black hole is specific to you will help you figure out how to overcome it. Something could quite possibly help me rise above what I feel, but it could, instead of helping you, cause you to sink further into what you feel. Realizing what helps others might not help you will benefit you in growing stronger. Trying to make something work that just won’t will waste your time and efforts and could cause you to lose hope. Stop trying profusely to make something work that just won’t; it can’t help you.

Overthinking, in all actuality, is not good in any sense. Mulling over every miniscule detail of every little thing you are thinking about won’t bring you peace of mind. It will bring you stress and anxiety as you try to dissect the small prospects of whatever you are thinking about. In most cases, overthinkers are more stressed than those who think about something just once in great detail. If you keep reviewing every conversation you had and everything you think you did wrong, it can make you “find” even more things you messed up. I put quotations around find because you come to a certain point when you overthink you start to make things up. You may deduce a chain of events happened just because you said one wrong word, but that might not be the case. When you try to find bad things about yourself, you will do anything to find them, including make them up, when you are in a black hole. Overthinking can cause a situation to be changed in your mind, and it most likely won’t be changed into a more accurate description of the occurrence. Looking at everything through a magnifying glass won’t help you get away from bad feelings, but it can bring you even closer to them. You do not need to know every single detail about something that happened. It won’t help you. Don’t worry about it; just know it happened and figure out what you can do to overcome the feelings that came out of it.

Let it out. Everything that has been held inside will eventually spill over and be overwhelming to you. Just crying can help. Screaming and yelling just to get the hurt out is so much better than withholding those feelings. When you cry, your body releases endorphins, which helps your body feel better because they relieve stress and ease pain. Letting yourself feel is so much better than shoving everything down inside and willing your tears not to fall. Withholding all your feelings will add to any stress you have and add to the fear of someone finding out about something you don’t want them to. It can be exhausting to constantly worry about information leaking. Just taking some time to cry it out, or scream it out if you would like, can help you come to terms with what you’re feeling. It is impossible to get out of your black hole if you haven’t accepted what you are feeling. You can’t get over feelings by ignoring them because they will still be there, lurking in the background waiting for you to properly address them.

Looking at the past can be hurtful and harmful. It is completely possible to look back fondly at memories, but you can also look back at them and only see the bad in them. Reflecting on the bad memories is okay to a certain extent; you can see how far you’ve come since then and be filled with determination because you want to keep on going and completely conquer whatever has a hold on you. However, if you look too closely at the bad memories for too long, you can feel like there’s no point anymore. Maybe you’ll feel like you haven’t progressed enough or even at all. So, you should avoid dwelling on the past and think about the future and what you can do today to help you in the future. Think about things you can do to be happy. Do things you enjoy and make good memories to look back at later in the future when you are in a more stable and safe place. Focusing on what you can do today is much more beneficial than reviewing the past.

You need to realize you have the power to overcome any obstacles that come in your way. You are stronger than you think. You have hidden talents, abilities, and power you just need to find. You have the ability to rise above things that hurt you, whether they are situations, people, or something entirely different. You never truly know the extent of your abilities. People tend to either overestimate their abilities or drastically underestimate them. And when you’re in a black hole, the underestimation possibility is more probable and common. If you believe you can climb out of your black hole, then you can. Encouraging and believing in yourself will help you achieve your goals in life, where having a bad view of yourself and being discouraged in your abilities will make it so much harder to reach where you want to be. Be nice to yourself. You need to remember you can do this. You have the ability and skills to overcome anything that gets the in the way of where you want to go.

Get up and do something. Figure what brings you joy or just something you like. Do something that makes you happy, whether it be something of the artistic realm, a sport, or just talking to someone about the what ifs of the world. Making an effort to change your state of mind can be hard. It can be so much easier and more appealing to just lie under the covers of your bed alone in your room and mull over everything bad that happened on a certain day, but getting out of bed to do some sort of activity will help you. You may not want to do it, but just trying will help you. It can give a taste of something other than sadness if you let it.

Avoiding certain situations can seem much nicer than going through with them. However, going out of your way to get away from something will hurt you. You need to confront things head on. It can be absolutely terrifying to do so, but you can do it. You have the power to overcome things, so avoiding them is neglecting that ability. Avoiding something can cause you to have a great deal of guilt later on, not to mention the regret. Regretting not doing something is very common when it comes to people who get themselves out of doing things. Adding more feelings and emotions onto your plate obviously doesn’t lighten your load or make it any easier to carry. Just confront it. Go into the situation carefully, but willing to do what you need to do to help yourself. If you do so, the stress you had about being very cautious anywhere close to the situation will go away. You will have a sense of accomplishment because you did something hard for you and that would be a huge accomplishment. It would mean you are progressing and getting further away from your black hole.

Cut out anything and everything toxic. Keeping harmful substances in a room with a baby in it is an obvious hazard to her health. In the same way, keeping harmful people or things in your life is hazardous to the development of your life. Get rid of the things that hurt you. Sometimes something that is hurting you is actually a person. Telling someone to get out of your life sounds pretty harsh, but if they are preventing you from achieving what you want to it isn’t. It can be hard to stop all contact with a person, but it is necessary for you to do so. The things that hurt you won’t magically start to benefit you one day. Keeping them around you only gives them more power to harm you and an easier time finding things to do that will hurt you.

All sorts of people have black holes that seem to keep them captive. Everyone is going through something in their life, it isn’t just you. Different things may work for them that don’t work for you. They may have entirely different coping mechanisms than you do and that is okay. It is also okay to hurt. It’s okay to be sad and have all of these feelings people tell you you can’t have because they aren’t happiness. You are allowed to feel; don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. You have the power to overcome anything that poses a threat to you. You are greater than what tries to hurt you and people are there for you when you feel like you aren’t. People are ready to help you get through any and all struggles you have, you just need to let them know. They can’t help you if they don’t know you need help. It can be scary to tell people what you feel. It can be scary to confront a situation you hate. Life is scary, but when you believe you can get out of the grasp of your black hole, it won’t be as intimidating. You can do this. You can get out of your black hole.

Two Worldviews Outside of Christianity

Leave a reply

Destiny Phillips Coats

As young believers in a Christian environment, we often forgot the rest of the world does not think the same as we do. 32 percent of the world is composed of Christians across the globe. 63 percent of Americans claim to be affiliated with a church. That is 247 million people out of roughly 321 million people. With those huge numbers and big percentages, why does it seem like around the world, but specifically America, Christianity is being vehemently opposed? This is because there are strong competing worldviews in direct opposition to Christianity. One’s worldview affects the way he sees himself and those like him, those different from him, and the world itself. Two opposing worldviews to Christianity today are Islam and Marxism. As young Christians, it is extremely important to understand these main worldviews before we enter the adult world so we can be knowledgeable when spreading God’s word and understanding the times.

In examining both of these worldviews, one must know the key terms that build the worldview itself up. When an American hears “Islam,” words like religion, Allah, terrorist, and Muhammad are things that come to his mind. Things like this come to their minds because when America as a nation has interacted with Islam, it is typically associated with these words also. Personal encounters with Islam will cause individuals to have more, less, or different words be associated with Islam also. What is Islam in and of itself? Islam is defined as a theistic worldview centered on the life of the prophet Muhammad that derives its understanding of the world thought the teachings of the Quran, Hadith, and Sunnah. Key words to understanding this definition are theistic, Muhammad, Quran, Hadith, and Sunnah. Theistic is an adjective for something that believes in the existence of god. In the Muslim religion, there is one “true” god. Islam originated from revelation given to Muhammad from the angel Gabriel. Gabriel is an angel from the Christian faith. Muslims, Islam’s followers, believe themselves to worship the same god as the Jews. “God” in Arabic is “Allah.” The Quran is the holy book of Islam. It is full of dictations from Muhammad, which Muslims believe is the direct word of Allah. The “Hadith” is the oral history of Muhammad’s teachings, rulings, and the actions of himself and his early companions. The Sunnah is the specific part of the Hadith describing Muhammad’s exemplary actions. This definition of Islam as a worldview explains where the ideas that shape the worldview come from. Muslims view themselves, others, and the world per the teachings found in their main doctrine, the Quran.

Unlike Marxism, Post Modernism, and Secularism, Islam is not only a worldview but also a religion. Because of the religious practices and teachings of Islam, a perception of life itself is also developed. The three perceptions worldviews deal with are oneself and those like him, others, and the world. “Islam” translated to English is “submission to the will of god.” Based upon the Quran, the world itself is divinely created by the one true Allah. They see the world in complete “submission” to Allah. Because everything is in submission to Allah, everyone is a Muslim at birth. Muslims see themselves as inherently Muslim. They are in submission to Allah. If Islam claims everyone is Muslim, how does it explain the lack of the whole world worshipping Allah as one Islamic body of believers? Those who do not believe in Islam are seen to be in rebellion against Allah. Based on the Islamic worldview, the world is divinely created and in submission to Allah; people themselves are born inherently Muslim; those who deny Islam are in rebellion against Allah. If an entire group of people see everyone unlike them, in rebellion to their deity, what is the action to be taken? In the Quran and exemplified in the Hadith, Muslims are to wage jihad or “holy war” against those in rebellion against Islam.

According to Islam, jihad has two meanings. Translated to “struggle” in English, jihad is both the inner spiritual battle of every Muslim to fulfill his/her religious duties and the outer, physical struggle against the enemies of Islam. Just like any other religion, practices and rituals come with being a part of Islam. These include following Shariah Law and participating in the Five Pillars of Islam. This is the inner jihad. The outer jihad is to physically fight against those who do not believe in or submit to Allah. Do all Muslims believe they are called to fight against those who do not agree with their worldview? No. The population of Muslims who actually wage war on “infidels” or nonbelievers is very little, but those who do are simply following the teachings of their worldview. Both forms of jihad are justified in the Quran. Examples are in Surrahs 3-5.

And their Lord hath heard them (and He saith): Lo! I suffer not the work of any worker, male or female, to be lost. Ye proceed one from another. So those who fled and were driven forth from their homes and suffered damage for My cause, and fought and were slain, verily I shall remit their evil deeds from them and verily I shall bring them into Gardens underneath which rivers flow — A reward from Allah. And with Allah is the fairest of rewards (Surrah 3:195).

This passage is one of many that claims those who fight and perish for the name of Allah will be pardoned from all sin and greatly rewarded by Allah. A lot of Americans think because a very small percentage of Muslims are openly radical, the faith of Islam itself is not a threat, just those specific jihadists (those who practice the outer holy war against infidels). However, what is the danger of a worldview that believes everyone is in direct rebellion against god and is to be warred against? The one word answer is terrorism. Does every Muslim seek to destroy the lives of infidels? No. But Muslims look at the life of Muhammad and his followers like Christians do the first century church. They desire to emulate them. Muhammad and his followers spread Islam by military conquest. They used violent force to convert people to their faith, thus creating a culture of people who believe in Islam as a worldview. They used fear to create Islamic societies. Like the Christian religion, Islam shapes the way you think. The way one thinks will have a huge bearing on his actions. Because of the early Caliphs and how they interpreted their religion, they acted violently toward nonbelievers, creating one of the strongest empires the world has ever seen. What is to stop Muslims today from rising and waging war on all the world for the sake of Allah? People around the world cannot afford to think groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and political powers in Iraq are simply all about power. What they are doing is tied to their faith, their worldview. If the rest of the world is not careful, we will find ourselves fighting a battle we welcomed into our own backyard.

Often people think Communism died with Stalin. That is not true. The average person also is not completely aware of what Communism means or where it comes from. Communism is a societal structure that flourishes under the worldview developed by Karl Marx, Marxism. Marxism is an atheistic and materialistic worldview based on the ideas of Karl Marx that promotes the abolition of private property, public ownership of the means of production (i.e., socialism), and the utopian dream of a future communistic state. Key terms to understanding Marxism as a worldview are communism, socialism, class struggle, atheistic, and materialistic. Communism is the Marxist ideal of a classless and stateless utopian society in which all property is commonly owned and each person is paid according to his or her abilities and needs. Socialism is an economic system based upon governmental or communal ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services. Class struggle is the economic and social differences between the upper and lower classes. Atheistic is a descriptor meaning a thing does not believe in the existence and or relevance of God. Materialistic is a descriptor meaning a thing believes nothing exists except the material world we can see and observe.

Like Christianity and Islam, Marxism as a worldview tells a
“metanarrative” — a single, overarching interpretation (or grand story) of reality. Christianity and Islam start with divine creation. Because Marxism is atheistic, it cannot entertain divine creation. The only thing left to believe is evolution. Marxism’s “holy book” is The Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx himself. Marx starts his metanarrative with the world history of class struggles. In this first portion of the manifesto, Marx explains the historical misfortunes of the world as a struggle between the rich and the poor or the “bourgeoisie” and the “proletariat.” He gives example of master and slave, lord and serf, and upper and lower class. What is the cause for class distinctions? Money! Money is the deciding factor between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. So to Marx, the problem and solution for mankind is economics.

Before Marx’s time, democracies, republics, feudal systems, monarchies, and dictatorships had been tried. None seemed to work because of the corruption of the bourgeoisie from their money. Marx concluded in a society where everyone works, one is paid according to that work and what he needs to live, with nothing more and nothing less; everyone can be happy and equal. This is communism. Communism is a societal structure in which there is no such thing as “mine” but instead “ours.” Everything within society belongs to the people. No matter how much more work one does over another, he walks away with only what he needs. Everything is owned by everyone. The strong make up for the weak and everyone gets their fair share. This seems all good and fine until one stops and thinks. How many people are going to be willing to release all their revenue to benefit those who did not work for it? Not very many. Marx knew this. He knew communist perfection or “utopia” (an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect) could not be obtained without violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie by the proletariat, the oppressor by the oppressed.

The societal enemy of Marxism is the rich or bourgeoisie. The economic enemy of Marxism is capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system in which capital assets are privately owned, and the prices, production, and distribution of goods and services are determined by competition within a free market. Two words that obviously make capitalism an enemy of Marxism are “privately” and “competition.” Marxism is all about the abolition of private anything and everything. Competition implies there will be someone on top and someone on the bottom. Marxism desires for all people to be on an equal playing field at all times. If communism calls for the equal distribution of wealth always in perfect harmony, how does one get there from capitalism? The answer is socialism. According to Marx, socialism is the path to communism and will inevitably always end up at the communist utopia. Socialism is a word more of us are familiar with. Recent presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is a proclaimed socialist. Europe is governed by a social democracy. China and North Korea are governed by a cross between communism and dictatorships with an economic combination of socialism and capitalism as well. We can see from these few examples Marxism is not dead but very much alive and well in influential parts of the world. So as a worldview, how does Marxism view its followers, outsiders, and the world?

Marxism’s view of the world is evolutionary. Evolution is progressive — always moving forward and getting better. If the social end in Marxism is communism, they view the world and people as always progressing toward socialism and eventually to communism. Marxists believe the world will inevitably arrive at utopia through a communist state. Marxist claims those who believe and drive society to this social end is the oppressed, the proletariat. Everyone against this inevitable social end is the rich, the bourgeoisie. The problem with Marxism is not its diagnosis for the world but rather its prescription and treatment. Because Marxism is atheistic, good and evil, moral and immoral do not have a universally understood standard. Instead, good or moral is anything and everything geared toward the advancement of the proletariat and the eradication of the bourgeoisie. Bad is everything in opposition to the proletariat. This definition of good and bad justifies all behavior that progresses the proletariat agenda. This is what must concern the world. Today it might seem like people desiring marriage equality and cheap affordable all-inclusive health care is a simple policy fix. But if a generation of people viewing good as what supports the agenda they have, a violent overthrow like that of Germany during WWII will overtake hundreds of modern day societies.

Unlike Islam, it is not our job as Christians to wage war on nonbelievers. God tells us in Scripture not all of mankind will come to the knowledge of Him. We know there will be those who vehemently deny the faith. We know there will be people who try to manipulate the faith to suit their own ideologies. With that knowledge, what must we do? We are called to love all those who are made in the image of God and spread the Gospel with everyone regardless if they become believers or not. Both Islam and Marxism seek to wrongfully control mankind. Islam seeks to war against all in opposition to it. Marxism claims all actions, no matter how vile, are good if they progress to communism. Moreover, Marxists believe the only way to reach utopia is through violence. What an oxymoron: violence will bring about peace? That goes completely against the current natural order of violence and disorder creating more violence and more disorder. Islam and Marxism believe all who are opposed to them deserve death and punishment. Christianity proclaims those who do not believe are to be loved and witnessed to until the point of death. God does not call us to wage war against His opposers, but rather show them love, thus revealing His character. Scripture contains all the tools necessary to build a case for itself against any argument. God foresaw all the ideas His truth would face. Because God declared we “are the head and not the tail,” we can always come out on top in any argument or situation if we present the truth contained in the Scriptures. However, it is our duty to also understand what we are up against so we might be able to defend the hope within us properly and adequately.

The Problem with the American Foster Care System

Leave a reply

Emma Kenney

“Foster Care” is defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as “a situation in which for a period of time a child lives with and is cared for by people who are not the child’s parents.” Each year thousands of children make their way through the American foster care system. The point of foster care is to remove children from situations that could be potentially disastrous and place them within a safe and secure environment; however, each year hundreds of these children are placed in environments that are equally as bad, if not worse, than the ones they were previously removed from.

Statistics show a proven 28% of children within the foster care system face abuse each year. However, it is estimated far more are abused each year and are simply conditioned not to speak up about it. According to an article written by psychologist Susanne Babble:

Amy (name altered), an adult client who spent over seven years in the foster care system, told me that roughly nine out of ten fellow foster children she crossed paths with claimed that they had been abused by their foster parents.

She also expressed that foster children are often taught by their circumstances not to speak up and are conditioned to think abuse is “normal.” Additionally, Amy felt that it was not in their best interests to report abuse and risk being relocated, where they might be subject to yet more “unknown” abuse … and also have to endure another drastic change. She explained, “A foster child is already taught that you don’t speak up. It’s dangerous.”

It’s no easy task to find homes for thousands of children, and often the amount of children in the system far outnumbers the amount of foster homes able to care them. This leads to social workers potentially ignoring regulations and requirements for who is legally able to foster a child and allowing men and women with criminal charges of various sorts, including but not limited to drug use and domestic abuse, to become foster parents. While this creates more opportunity for a child to have a home it ultimately defeats the whole point of the system — to ensure the safety of children who have nowhere else to go! This is one of the biggest causes of child abuse within the system.

In 2010 a former foster child, who wishes to be known as John Doe to protect his identity, sued his former foster father John H. Jackson. Jackson had criminal charges for drunken driving, drug abuse, child molestation, and domestic violence when he was approved to foster children. Doe faced hundreds of episodes of sexual and physical abuse while in the care of Jackson. He lived with the man for 4 years until his birth father was able to reclaim him. Other children weren’t as lucky and were forced to remain with Jackson until they aged out of the system or ran away. Jackson now faced life in prison, but the emotional trauma Doe was left with still remains.

Yet another example of this is the story of 17-year-old Jada. Jada and her younger sister Faith, as well as an older girl named Monica, were placed in the care of Audrey Chatmon when they were 2, less than a year, and 15 respectively. When Chatmon received the three children there had already been multiple cases of child abuse filed against her, all of which had been overlooked and ignored by the social workers who placed the children within her care. In fact, the Department of Children and Family Services even advised Chatmon to formally adopt the three girls. According to Garrett Therolf, a writer for the Los Angeles Times, “The children noticed that Chatmon was often drunk and spent her days buried under her covers. She was surrounded by bottles of drugs to treat her bipolar disorder and was under the care of a county psychologist, according to court records.” It should have been obvious to social workers that Chatmon was unfit to care for foster children, yet they were placed within her care anyway. Unfortunately, neglect wasn’t the worst thing Jada would face while in the care of Chatmon. When Jada was four she was found crouching in the road by local police officers. Over half of the girl’s body was found covered in burns so severe she had to be sedated in order for them to be treated by doctors. However, like Doe, this is not where the damaging effects of her time in foster care ends. The girl, now a teenager, still faces daily emotional trauma as a result of the time she was left in the care of Chatmon. Her adoptive mother, who wishes to remain anonymous to protect Jada’s identity, explained it is obvious the 17-year-old still struggles to live as a normal child, even within a safe environment.

However, more factors exist in Jada’s case than might first meet the eye. When Jada and her two foster sisters were asked if their social workers had ever checked in on them like they were legally required to, all three girls denied ever seeing their social workers after they first left them with Chatmon. There are thousands of children in the American foster care system and not enough social workers to properly keep track of them. This means oftentimes after children are placed into a home, whether fit or unfit, their social workers never come back to make sure they properly adjust and their foster parents are treating them in the right way. Children are being left alone to face scary and potentially dangerous situations. The lack of social workers is one of the contributing factors as to why unfit homes even exist. Periodically, homes and families approved to foster children are supposed to be re-examined to ensure they are still fit and safe for the children being placed in them. However, without a proper number of social workers to manage the workload needed to make the American foster care system succeed, the homes within the system can be left unchecked for much longer periods of time than proper or even indefinitely.

Babbel, who was also a social worker herself, explains:

During my own time working with foster care agencies and group homes, I often witnessed the agency staff become overwhelmed with the number of children they were required to monitor — not to mention the pressure of completing mountains of paperwork. The paperwork would often trump the actual visits in priority because it was required in order to keep the agency funded and our jobs intact. There seemed to be incentives in place to keep children with foster families they were assigned to, which sometimes led to lenience when evaluating conditions. (Foster agencies receive money for each placement. If a child is removed from a placement, the agency can lose the commission. Although foster agencies and social workers usually have the child’s best interests at heart, these factors may contribute to a less than efficient system of properly monitoring foster homes.) Many of the caseworkers (like myself) were fairly young, inexperienced recent graduates of psychology school putting in their time to accumulate enough hours to get their state licensing. Having little experience, we did not always know how to detect abuse or handle the enormous emotional volatility that is inherent in such a job. Other caseworkers were older adults with years of exposure to the failures of “the system” and defeatist attitudes that did not help them in their jobs. Ex-foster children I’ve spoken with reported jaded caseworkers who always seemed to “turn a blind eye,” never asking probing questions or visiting the sleeping areas of their charges. Making things even trickier, there are statutes of limitations and other restrictions in place to prevent prosecution of perpetrators or state agencies too long after-the-fact. In Pennsylvania, for instance: “…the statute of limitations in most civil assault cases is two years from the date of the injury. If the injured victim is under the age of eighteen (18), the victim must file suit before they reach the age of twenty (20).” (This information is according to the law firm Andreozzi & Associates, who specialize in foster care abuse claims.) However, there are sometimes ways around these restrictions. They say that “One exception to the statute of limitations for sexual abuse and molestation in Pennsylvania surrounds what is known as the common law ‘discovery rule.’ The application of this rule allows victims to file suit within two years of the time: (1) they discover the injury; and (2) they discover the source of the injury.’”

This leads to yet another problem with the American foster care system: group homes. Children are placed in group homes with any number of other children in an attempt to compensate for the lack of available foster care families to take care of them and as an alternative to placing them in an unfit home. Unfortunately, these group homes are often just as bad as the unfit homes social workers are trying to avoid. In these homes children often face abuse when they get into fights with other children or don’t follow the rule. Even if children don’t face abuse, these group homes often leave them dealing with emotional detachment disorder. Babbel explains it as follows:

Within the group home system, children are moved around to facilities with varying levels of security and structure depending on their behavior and psychological/emotional growth. A change in level often means a child is immersed in yet another strange new environment. Each time a child is moved to another level, he or she gets new teachers, new therapists, new classmates, new roommates, and a new life. Foster children who have moved multiple times often develop detachment disorder: they become unable to attach to others as a defense mechanism. Sadly, this often results in a child who is not able to form normal long-lasting relationships that are crucial to success later in life.

Foster or group home children generally lack the childhood experiences that teach other children to trust authority figures. What can seem like a lack of emotion or attachment ability in these kids may often be a veiled protection mechanism: they may remain reserved within relationships in order to protect themselves from further hurt. They might innately be aware of the sad truth that they are viewed by caseworkers and foster parents as potentially “troublesome,” and that — unlike most children — they must prove themselves to be trustworthy before they will be fully loved. This can seem like an overwhelming task for an already overly stressed child with compromised coping mechanisms. One former foster care client expressed: “What one has to consider is that foster kids are taught to not trust … so while it seems that we are detached, the truth is, often we know full well what is going on. But yes, we do have to protect ourselves, and hence, what seems like detachment to the clinical eye is simply what a ‘normal’ individual would call ‘reserved.’”

It should be blatantly obvious the American foster care system is broken and in desperate need of reform. A system intended to protect children, to give them their best chance in life, is currently the cause of those children being placed in danger. Hundreds of children are being neglected, beaten, and sexually abused by their foster families as well as ignored by their social workers within a system that promised to make things better for them. Until these children are protected by the American foster care system, it will always be flawed, corrupt, and detrimental to the wellbeing of a future generation.

Works Cited

Babbel, Susanne, Ph.D, M.F.T. “The Foster Care System and Its Victims: Part 2.” Psychology Today. N.p., 03 Jan. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2016.

“Estey & Bomberger Announces Jury Awards $30 Million in San Jose Molestation Case.” Business Wire. N.p., 05 Aug. 2010. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

Gomez, Mark, and Linda Goldston. “South Bay Sex-abuse Lawsuit: Ex-foster Child Awarded $30 Million.” The Mercury News. N.p., 05 Aug. 2010. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

Therolf, Garrett. “Jada’s Case Highlights Problems in Foster Care System.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 18 Dec. 2013. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.

Drugs

Leave a reply

Tim Seaton

Drugs are a growing problem for teens in our society. They affect them negatively in many ways. They are seen being used in schools and not just public schools. Students in private and Christian schools are not immune to the temptation either. Kids are enticed to use them by their friends and sometimes fall prey to the myth using them “just once” won’t hurt them. Drugs are addictive, drawing in users until more and more time and money are spent procuring the drugs and being high on them. Research shows drugs lower life satisfaction, lead to poorer physical and mental health, and increase relationship problems for users. They negatively affect people by numerous means and can have an impact on users for the rest of their lives.

The number one reason for people using drugs is people around them. When kids are able to get their hands on drugs, whether by buying them or by any other means, they are going to make sure their friends know about it. Then their friends might want some of their stash if they use drugs. Most teens see various people using substances. They see parents, friends, and other people smoking, drinking, and sometimes using other substances. The teen social scene often revolves around drinking and smoking. Through social media, kids urge each other to use them and show off when they do. A teen is just as likely to start using a substance if it is readily available. They will use what they can find, whether cigarettes or pot or marijuana. If they see all their friends enjoying it, they are more likely to do it because they want to fit in. In their minds, they see drugs as just another part of a regular teens life.

Popular media is another factor in why kids may want to do drugs. In a recent study, 47% of teens agreed TV shows and movies made it look like drugs were okay to use. It also showed 12-17-year-olds who saw more than three “R”-rated movies per month were seven times more likely to smoke cigarettes, six times more likely to use marijuana, and five time more likely to drink alcohol than kids who hadn’t watched “R”-rated films.

Different rebellious teens choose different substances to use based on their personalities. Alcohol is the drug of choice for the angry teenager because it frees him to behave aggressively. Methamphetamine, or meth, also encourages aggressive, violent behavior, and can be far more dangerous and potent than alcohol. Marijuana, on the other hand, often seems to reduce aggression and is more of an avoidance drug. LSD and hallucinogens are also escape drugs, often used by young people who feel misunderstood and may long to escape to a more idealistic, kind world. Smoking cigarettes can be a form of rebellion to flaunt their independence and make their parents angry. The reasons for teenage drug-use are as complex as teenagers themselves.

Kids also use drugs to escape things or for self-medication. Depending on the substance they are using, they may feel blissfully oblivious, wonderfully happy, or energized and confident. Since the teenage years can be tough and take a toll on them, they often feel depressed. When they are given the chance to use something that can calm them down like marijuana, they will take it. They use any drug that appeals to them at the time that will express their emotions.

Perhaps the most avoidable cause of substance abuse is inaccurate information about drugs and alcohol. Many teenagers have friends who claim to be experts on various recreational substances, and they’re happy to assure her the risks are minimal. Educating teens can be the best way to avoid drug usage in their lives. Parents are also a leading factor for adolescents to stop using drugs. Since they have grown up with them, the child will believe and follow what their parents say most of the time, unless swayed to otherwise by a group of people who have influence over them.

Some signs people may be using drugs are bloodshot eyes, bad grades, loss of interest in topics they are usually interested in, frequent hunger, frequent smell of smoke on clothes, or unusual tiredness. Some other ways to identify if someone you know is abusing drugs is by seeing unusual behavior. If someone starts stealing for no reason when he usually won’t, that is a sign he may be using drugs. Another way to tell is if he stops meeting requirements for work or school he usually meets. Some other ways are slurring of speech, drowsiness and being tired when he shouldn’t be, emotional changes, and a lower body temperature. If you see many of these signs, ask because people are more willing to open up about an addiction if confronted first.

Many teens use drugs often. One in five teens have abused prescription medications, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Approximately 21% of 12^th graders have admitted to using marijuana in the past month. 1 in 3 parents believe there is not much they can do to prevent their kids from using drugs despite the fact parents are the leading factor in drug usage prevention. More teens die from prescription drugs than heroin and cocaine combined every year. In 2013, more high school seniors regularly used marijuana than cigarettes. 22.7% used marijuana and only 16.3% smoked. 60% of seniors see marijuana as a harmless substance, even though the “thc” (the harmful substance in marijuana) is nearly 5 times stronger than 20 years ago. By eighth grade, 28% of adolescents have consumed alcohol, 15% have smoked, and 16.5% have used marijuana. Young kids who hear drugs are dangerous are 50% less likely to use them after hearing it from their parents. 6.5% of high school seniors use marijuana daily, up by 5.1% five years ago. Less than 20% of twelfth graders think occasional use is harmful. Around 50% of high school students think it isn’t harmful to use cocaine once or twice.

Many drugs are used by teens now since they are more readily available. One of the most used drugs is marijuana. As stated before, marijuana is a calming drug often used by teens to calm themselves down. In a recent study, more than 1 in 3 Americans said they have used marijuana in their lifetime. Using it often can affect your body and mind. Teens use it in any way they can, whether putting it in food, through drinks, or straight up. No matter how it gets in your body, it still affects you in harmful ways. It affects almost every organ in your body. It also affects your immune system and your nervous system. When you smoke it, the effects take place almost instantly. If the marijuana is used through foods or drinks, the effects may take a little while to start, but both smoking and through food and drink have effects that usually end after 3-4 hours. Smoking it can lead to a heart rate two times greater than normal. This is why some people have a heart attack right after they smoke pot. It can affect your breathing, make you have a lower blood pressure, and can also affect your blood sugar. Research has not been able to show if marijuana affects lung cancer, but we do know it irritates your lungs, which is why smokers will often have a bad coughing and breathing problem. Other physical effects include dizziness, shallow breathing, red eyes and dilated pupils, dry mouth, increased appetite, and slower reaction times. This leads to a doubled chance of an accident while driving after using a substance. Most people use marijuana to make them feel more relaxed, happy, or withdrawn from society. Some mental problems are a distorted sense of time, random thinking, paranoia, anxiety, depression, and short-term memory loss. Like the physical effects, mental effects can wear off after a few hours. Though you may have heard marijuana isn’t addictive, it is. 10% of people who use it say they have become dependent on it. Doctors aren’t sure if marijuana is a gateway drug that leads people to use “harder” drugs like cocaine and heroin. The “thc,” (tetrahydrocannabinol) the main mind-altering object in marijuana, has increased by a wide margin over the past few years. The leaves used to have around 1%-4% of thc in them, and now they have around 7% in them. Scientist are worried this will raise the dependency rate and the psychological effects of the drug. Even when buying it legally as a medicine, it is still hard to tell how much thc is in the medicine, so the effects can be differing. Marijuana can also affect you even more negatively if you have problems like liver disease, low blood pressure, or diabetes. Research shows a link between marijuana use and mental health problems like depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, short-term psychosis, and schizophrenia. While it’s not clear if marijuana causes these conditions, it can make them worse.

Another heavily used drug is alcohol. Alcohol has been classified as wine, beer, whiskey, vodka, spirits, gin, liquor, and many others. It is accessible to people through legal means and illegal ways too. They can access it at bars where alcohol is drunk and used as the main source of entertainment. It is used at parties, sometimes legally, sometimes not. It is used at homes in the form of wine and beer. Not all alcohol is bad to use occasionally. Since the age limit for drinking is at 21, kids at or above that age can legally drink and buy alcohol. They can then take it anywhere, and there are no restrictions, they can get drunk with nobody there to keep them in check. They use it, and then they don’t or can’t think and so they go and drive or do something else stupid. Often, this ends up in a car accident and many times death of either them, passengers in their car, or death in another car.

Alcohol can affect many parts of your body. Your brain is interfered with as the alcohol takes effect and so it can’t think right, and it messes with your timing also. It also affects your heart. If you drink over a long period of time or too much at one time, it can cause cardiomyopathy, arrhythmias, stroke, and high blood pressure. Research does show drinking a little bit of alcohol can help protect healthy adults from developing coronary heart disease. Heavy drinking also takes effect on your liver and can lead to many problems and liver inflammations including steatosis, or fatty liver, alcoholic hepatitis, fibrosis, and cirrhosis. Damage can happen to the pancreatitis also. Alcohol causes the pancreas to produce toxic substances that can eventually lead to pancreatitis, a dangerous inflammation and swelling of the blood vessels in the pancreas that prevents proper digestion. Drinking alcohol can also lead to a greater risk of certain cancers, such as mouth, esophagus, throat, liver, and breast. Drinking too much alcohol can also weaken your immune system, making your body easier to target by diseases. Chronic drinkers are more liable to contract diseases like pneumonia and tuberculosis than people who do not drink much. Drinking a lot on one occasion slows your body’s ability to ward off infections, even after up to 24 hours.

Children who have parents who abuse substances are affected even by their parents drinking. Often kids are sexually abused by drunk parents. Sometimes, kids are physically or verbally abused in extreme ways. Sometimes the kids are forced to hide their parent’s addiction for fear of being hurt. Often, these kids are left at home and neglected for hours on end. They are ignored and so their needs aren’t being met, leaving them helpless. Often, people in prison had tumultuous upbringings from drug abusing homes. Lots of them even knew about friends who abused drugs, but their family did it, so they figured it was fine to do.

This goes to show kids aren’t affected by just what they do, but also by those around them. They get influenced and go with what their friends do and what their family does. If you know people who use and abuse drugs, stand up to it and show them it is unsafe, unhealthy, and sinful. We need to have those examples in society of people who have led others to be healthy, God loving people who came out of their addictions because others stood up for what was right. Could you be the person who leads a friend out of an addiction and makes their life so much better? If you think so, have them call 1-888-744-0069 for the addiction hotline for help. Drugs are definitely a negative influence on our lives, planted there by Satan to lead us deeper into the bottomless pit of sin. Don’t let him influence you. Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

Bibliography

“10 Reasons Teens Abuse Alcohol or Drugs.” Drug and Addiction Treatment Centers Promises. Promises Treatment Center, 15 Feb. 2016. https://www.promises.com/articles/teens/10-reasons-teens-abuse-alcohol-or-drugs/. 09 Nov. 2016.

“11 Facts About Teens And Drug Use.” DoSomething.org. Dosomething.org, n.d. https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-teens-and-drug-use. 09 Nov. 2016.

“Drug Addiction.” Symptoms. Mayo Clinic, n.d. http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/drug-addiction/basics/symptoms/CON-20020970. 09 Nov. 2016.

“The Effects of Alcohol Use.” DrugAbuse.com. Drug Abuse.com, 29 Jan. 2016. http://drugabuse.com/library/the-effects-of-alcohol-use/. 09 Nov 2016.

Important Life Lessons only Sports Can Teach Us

Leave a reply

Christopher Rush

(Just joshing, Sports Fans. We kid because we love.)

Hope, the Gospel, and the Liberal Arts

Leave a reply

Professor Robert W. Jenson

The following article is a prime reason why I finish books I don’t really enjoy — you never know if some worthwhile nubbins will squeak out by the end. After 180 pages of sub-stellar essays spanning twenty-five years of his output, Professor Robert W. Jenson gave us this not-too-shabby contribution in 1990 concerning three of our favorite topics.

Nearly all American institutions that have in any generous or authentic fashion taught “liberal arts” were founded by the Christian church. Most of these schools are now much secularized. It is a question whether American colleges’ cultivation of the liberal arts can survive this development, except as provision of amenities for the most leisured or alienated among student constituencies. The evidence is not encouraging. The sense in which even the most elite schools can now verify their title as colleges “of” liberal arts is with rare exceptions decidedly attenuated. It seems likely that the liberal character of America’s colleges stands and falls with their ideologically and liturgically Christian character.

The alliance, of course, long antedates America. The liberal arts are the inheritance of Athens’ free polity, of the arts required for public debate of the good and in turn nurtured by the discourse thus constituted; they are, as old classicists like myself never tire of repeating, “the arts proper for a citizen to acquire.”¹ The liberal arts, when vital, were not ornamental arts; they were the praxis of public life as different from private, economic life — they seem impractical to us only because we have made a political choice to restrict serious praxis to the private sphere.

So soon as the Christian movement, coming into the Hellenized world of later Mediterranean antiquity, encountered the liberal curricular inheritance, it appropriated these arts as its own. Vice versa, since the final collapse of pagan antiquity, the liberal arts have appealed and could appeal to no other protector or promoter than the church.

The question of my essay is: What can be the basis of this mutual attraction? Indeed, of this mutual dependency? “Athens and Jerusalem” are not in general likely allies. Greek religion is polymorphous; the Lord is a jealous God. Greece’s deity is eternal by immunity to death; Israel’s and the church’s God by suffering and conquering it. The free polis was indeed an unprecedented public space for those admitted, but excluded most of the population; in Christ there is neither slave nor free, male nor female. The Greeks were incurable elitists; Christ has chosen the lowly of this world. Athens seeks wisdom, whereas Jerusalem seeks righteousness; and the gospel slashes this already drastic polarity with the foolishness and offense of the cross.

Athens and the Christian movement had of course to meet and talk. When the mission of the gospel invades new cultural and religious turf there occurs always a mutual new interpretation: interpretation of the gospel claim that Jesus rules in light of the antecedent hopes and fears of the invaded culture, and vice versa, of the culture’s antecedent convictions in light of the gospel. So it went also on that branch of the mission that moved from Jerusalem and Antioch into the centers of Hellenized antiquity — and eventually to us. At the basis of specifically Western Christianity and the once-evangelized Western culture there are an appropriate baptizing of Hellenism and a reciprocal hellenizing of the gospel. By and large, however, the conversation between these partners — unlike, for apparent example, that in black Africa — has been a gloriously productive millennial agony. Why then the one area of peace and harmony?

II.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Let me suggest: the gospel and the life of the free polis each perceive an intimate enemy, and it is the same on both cases. When the gospel is heard and not believed, or when freedom is frustrated or merely exploited, the specter of nihilism rises. Against this haunt, one can never have too many allies.

It is of course from the writings of Nietzsche that the word “nihilism” resonates among us, but for the purposes of this essay I will follow a usage less convoluted than his. By nihilism I will simply mean lack of hope. Or, what is the exactly same thing, I will mean inability to find reason for valuing human persons by warrants decisively different from those by which we value galaxies or cows or proteins or whatever. Perhaps I may best display the concept by pointing to its most massive historical exemplification: Hitler’s variety of fascism. Or by pointing to a trivial and momentarily benign case: the animal-rights movement.

The Hellenized world into which the gospel emerged from Judea and Galilee was a world staring into an abyss of anthropological despair and hypnotized by the returning stare. Christianity inherited from Judaism an exploration of the same abyss, wherein “All is vanity, and a striving after wind.” Each could thus share with the other the same fear and a dialectical but nevertheless real hope, that hope as such is not in vain.

Greece had drawn the great anthropological line to the contours of the polity: she had defined human transcendence as freedom in contrast to servility. Accordingly, for all Hellenism the possibility of political freedom was the possibility of specific humanity itself. Thus Greece always had difficulty knowing why the disenfranchised — slaves, the conquered, unwelcomed pre- or early post-partum infants, and in some respects women — should be treated differently than other animals. But what then if the suspicion arises, “Perhaps we are all, really, slaves?”

The possibility of such suspicion was always there in Greek experience. Since the rebirth of Greek civilization from the Dorian devastations, Greece’s energizing terror had been the fear of time’s mischances. That old Chronos eats all his children, that what time brings forth, time — and probably rather sooner than later — again devours, was for Greece a founding horrific experience. There had been a glorious, rich, and pious Greece, the Greece of Mycenae and its heroes; and in a moment it had been swept away. Two passages have always defined my understanding of Greece’s interpretation of reality. The second decrees that we may “call no one happy, until he has reached the end of his life without suffering misery.”²

For reawakening Greece, worth and beauty and truth — all together, “being” — could thus lie only in permanence; applied to personal beings, in “immortality.” It will be seen that, in Greece, love of freedom must therefore always be on the verge of self-refutation; for it is time that is the very horizon of freedom, of making choices than can make a difference, and it was precisely time that Greece feared above all else.

In her search for protection from time, Greece necessarily looked to the one permanence immediately obtrusive on ancient peoples, that of cosmic order. The heavens move, but their very movements exemplify unbending law and guarantee against all surprises. The splendor of the heavens can overwhelm even us, who so rarely attend to attending so, Greece thought she could see what she longed for, the timeless being in which our hastening times may find standing. We inhabit, she believed, a “cosmos”: we, fleeting as we are, may look out from our immediate world, fleeting as it too is, into an encompassing immunity to all time’s chances. We are housed within divine immutability.

But cosmic changelessness can be read two ways. Greece initially invoked it as just described, as footing for humanity daring to be free. But it can equally well appear as enveloping indifference precisely to freedom, as the body of a universal determinism. Within reality invoked as cosmos, we may be enabled to say, “There is no point in ventures, since all paths by iron necessity only return whence they came.” With the disappearance of actual free polities from the Hellenistic world, the latter reading replaced the former.

When Alexander and the Romans were finished, Mediterranean civilization had become “cosmopolitan”; all were citizens of but one great “city” of the great world as such. But can I be free, if I have the cosmos for my only polis? In what forum do I speak to its future? Where do they count the ostrakon I cast against its rulers? If the cosmos is my “city,” am I not then the inhabitant of a collective as indifferent to the choices of mortals as were any of the ancient local tyrannies?

It is into such Hellenism that Paul and the rest carried the gospel. “Greeks” like Origen who believed, and those like his schoolmate Plotinus who did not, were folk convinced that to be specifically human was to be free, and desperately afraid that freedom was a delusion. Those like Origen saw in the gospel new hope and rejoiced; those like Plotinus derided the new Pollyannas.

The religious and “philosophical” cry of declining Mediterranean antiquity was “Is there any way out of cosmos?” “Is freedom possible?” All the religions of the conquerors and the conquered, transmogrified into “mysteries,” answered, “You may indeed breach the iron heavens, by sacramental identification with our cult-figure, who has gone before you.” And all the “wisdom” of the “philosophical” ways answered, “Those in the know can find their way through the walls of necessity, to the freedom of pure spirit. We can teach you the secret.”

There was only one hitch: all these were indeed ways out of the cosmos, and those who followed them thus left behind also that human polis for which freedom was wanted in the first place. The freedom of the cults and of esoteric wisdom was a private freedom very different from a citizen’s freedom; and the cultic and esoteric arts were very different arts from those called “liberal.” If the one goal is to die and go to heaven, inwardly now and outwardly later, who needs politics? Or then its arts?

Americans should be familiar with the syndrome, if only in a secularized and therefore pusillanimous version. It is, we say, “a free country,” and thousands have dedicated their lives and sacred honor to keeping it so. Yet in that country we have come to interpret freedom as the very opposite of dedication to the community, as a commandeered private sphere of “rights” in which the community is not to meddle. By “a free country” we have come to mean a society with no very peremptory public sphere, a society that demands of us as little as possible. It is no accident at all that mystery-cults and esoteric wisdoms flourish in California or Minneapolis as once in old Corinth or Alexandria. Neither is it an accident that the liberal arts languish.

“Can there be freedom?” Also the gospel came with an answer, but one very different from that of the mysteries and wisdoms: “There is freedom, because the world is not in fact a cosmos, but instead a creation.” Inheriting the doctrine of Judaism, the Christians knew the encompassing world as itself again encompassed, in freedom, in the freedom indeed of a person, who can if he will speak to us and attend to our answer. The world, said Jews and Christians, is not a structure of indifferent law but the referent of an encompassing free purpose. The world, they said, is from its deepest reality hospitable to choice that makes a difference, since it is itself nothing but the referent of a great such Choice. Prayer is possible, and therein freedom.

Over against despair of freedom in the world to which it came, ancient Christianity thus made precisely freedom a chief slogan of its promises, of the “gospel.” The freedom believers proclaimed was, moreover, a freedom that could be, if there were a community to receive it, political freedom, the freedom of that community to choose its courses of action and set out to follow them.

Hellenists who persisted in the memory of free citizenship and — even if merely nostalgically — carried on with its arts, could hear the gospel as a message of hope. They could even see, in the community of the church itself, a restored place for the practice of freedom’s arts, for the cultivation of language and public discourse and for the interpretation of texts and of history, as once again communally necessary arts. And that is to say, they could hear the gospel as a promise that specific humanity, just as Athens had evoked it, was not a delusion, and they could see the church as a community in which specific humanity could occur.

Indeed, in the centuries after the final collapse of ancient civilization and the emergence of the new synthesis we have called “Western” civilization, the alliance of the gospel and the liberal arts was to create new free public spaces also outside the church. The great free cities of the medieval empire were democracies far more direct than any we now have in America. Or again, the “holy commonwealths” of Puritan New England provided the very pattern of democratic aspiration throughout the founding periods of this nation’s life.

Vice versa, believers could see in faithful Hellenists — which very soon was for most believers to say, in their own past selves — spiritual comrades in all but the identification of the Savior: as Israel had longed explicitly for Messiah, the “Greeks” had longed for the freedom he would bring. The “preparation for the gospel,” they decided, had been separate but equal in Jerusalem and Athens.

And as the church came to recognize that Christ had not returned so quickly as first expected, that she had to settle down for a longer historical haul, the church needed what all historically continuing communities do, appropriate education. What better curriculum could there be for a community that saw itself as the bearer of God’s own freedom than the arts of freedom?

This line of discussion has one more step. After long centuries of Western history carried by the conversation between Athens and the gospel, the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, or rather its more popularized versions, dissolved the conversation, sending, as they superstitiously identified the parties, “reason” one way and “revelation” another — it is this dissolution that has, a bit later than elsewhere, now undone also American colleges of arts.

Thereby antiquity’s plight was repristinated: the indifferent cosmos was reinvented. The new prison is duller than the old one; in the meantime, Christian skepticism has made it impossible to see any creature as divine, so that the inexorable cosmos now appears merely as a “machine.” But the effect is the same: insofar as we have been taught about “science” by the seventh grade and by Public Television physicists, we again suppose we inhabit an adamant system of predictabilities, alien to freedom, indifferent to our choices and appeals.

III.

To compound our need, the alliance of Athens and the gospel has on the way conjured from the deeps a new nihilism, of its very own sort. It has been labelled “historical relativism.”

According to Judaism and the gospel, we live not in a “cosmos” but in an encompassing history. In this metaphysic, being has temporal sequence itself as its horizon, and consists in choice of what is not yet but is to be. The coherence of things is not, on this interpretation, lawlike regularity, but dramatic coherence of events across time. The sequence of history has plot, so as just thereby to be indeed history and not mere meaningless succession.

Most of Western intellectual and cultural history has consisted in the slow appropriation of this very unhellenic interpretation of reality. We may, for one quick historical instance, think of the Reformation‘s elevation of “faith” to the key position in human being, as faith is “the assurance of things hoped for….”

In this metaphysic, freedom is not problematic; but the point of freedom may become so. Where the gospel is heard but no longer believed, freedom may become absurdity. My life will be a tale told by a poet, signifying much, only insofar as it does in fact have plot, as it has complication, crisis, and resolution.

The problematic of this “insofar” is that it takes at least two to make drama, so that my life can be plotted only in community. And when the reference is made to community, the question of plot is repeated at a new level, for it is again dramatic coherence that makes a group of individuals into a community. But whose story is this common story?

As “Enlightenment” had been the spiritual event of the West’s eighteenth century, so “historicism” was the spiritual event of the nineteenth. Historicism consisted in the exploration, both theoretical and in political and religious practice, of the question just posed. The Enlightenment, then and still not “overcome,” made it seem hard to say boldly as did the Bible, “The common story is the story of God.” A series of philosophers unparalleled since Athens therefore attempted approximate assurance: “The common story is the story of absolute Spirit.” “The common story is the story of universal humanity.” But the slide once underway, someone eventually had to say: “All the common story there is, is the story of our community and its spirit. Other communities have other stories.” Or even, “How can there [be] any common story? Plot out your own life, even if such an undertaking is absurd.” Therewith the demon was out.

“We have our values, you have yours.” Or even, “I have my values, you have yours.” We are accustomed to this historicist sort of nihilism, but it is nihilism none the less. For of course, unshared “values” are no values at all, since “good” and “bad” refer — as we all really know — exactly to what we do with and for one another. A “morality” that I am unwilling to “impose” on anyone else is wholly illusory, and will give no shape to my life either, however privately that life may be conceived and lived. Most who will read this essay entertain in fact “no hope in this world”; or at least so they assure all inquirers, convinced as they claim to be that “values are relative.”

Historicist nihilism manifests itself most democratically as sheer inability to reason ethically. I choose an instance that notably infests the academic, reminiscently “liberal” community. A Minnesota Poll recent as of this writing reported that most Minnesotans believe (1) that abortion is the taking of personal human life and (2) that folk should have “the right” to abort as they freely choose. The evil to which I here call attention is not the number of abortions that Wade vs. Roe has produced, terrifying as this is. The subtler, more demonic evil appears in our ability simultaneously to entertain the two referenced opinions. The nihilism is the escape of “choice” from community. It is freedom that consists in excuse from responsibility for the other and for the storyline of my life so far, freedom that occurs on a horizon of sheer temporal sequentiality with no plot at all.

In the academy, of course, we expect also explicit ideological appearances of whatever is going; and indeed sundry ways of carrying historical relativism to its spooky end are now the chief menu at conventions of all disciplines but the natural sciences. I mention but one, since it is the currently favored way of displacing the liberal arts. It is, we are told, legalistically repressive — indeed “dualistic,” “hierarchical,” even “phallocentric” — to insist that any text can have its own sense, which it is a teacher’s task to defend against mistaken readings. Therefore it is supposed also to be an arbitrary imposition if we set up any particular set of texts as essential in the curriculum; for since any text can have any meaning, any text can serve wisdom as well as any other.

Where freedom is abstract and arbitrary, and needs no community, neither does it need arts. It is again no accident that where historical relativism rules, the liberal arts die.

IV.

There is hope for hope. The gates of nihilism will not prevail against the one holy catholic church — though they may, of course, prevail against particular parts of the church and have sometimes done so — and therefore the will be heard in the world so long as the world lasts, telling of the good for whose coming we may hope. And therefore also there will so long as the world lasts be in the world a community in which hope is practiced.

It is, of course, not guaranteed that Western civilization will last, or that its teaching and practice of liberal arts will last. Even less is it guaranteed that the Western part of the church will endure to the end, or even very long. But just because nothing along such lines is ever guaranteed, neither can we know that these things will not last or even suddenly be reinvigorated. In many ways, both surviving custodians of Athens’ arts and believers in the gospel find themselves thrown back into the situation in which they first made alliance. A mighty tree came from that inconsiderable seed; why may it not happen again?

The first step is simply the recovery, on both sides of the old alliance, of mere clarity about who we are and what we need. God willing, the Western church might yet remember that it is not an all-purpose volunteer religious society for whatever causes society currently defines as good. We can at any moment take instead to proclaiming the gospel. And if the church did that, then in the Western context its message would again as in ancient days be a word of hope for freedom, of hope for hope.

All the masters of the liberal arts have ever needed is a bit of such encouragement. And whenever we dare to cultivate our arts as more than decoration, as life-praxis of whatever little communities we can find for them, the mere practice itself becomes a spring of hope. Folk who labor on great inherited texts as if they matter liberate all around them to confidence that history does have some plot. Those who practice the arts of public discourse open little polities just by doing so, each time they break their silence. Those who discipline themselves to the outcome of experiment and observation, when they do it for the sake of truth, encourage all to faith that there is truth. To pursue beauty is to create it for all to see and hear. When we act as if human deliberation and decision could make a difference, they do make a difference. When we act as if community were real, it just thereby becomes real.

The gospel gives hope for the freedom that the liberal arts serve. The liberal arts give hope that the free person whom the gospel evokes can actually exist. And this circle is not vicious: we can be swept into its whirl catch-as-catch-can. Hope for hope is, after all, itself hope.

End Notes

¹ Aristotle, Politika VII:2.

²Sophocles, Oidipous Tyrannos, 1528-1530.

Bibliography

Jenson, Robert W. “Hope, the Gospel, and the Liberal Arts.” Essays in Theology of Culture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1995. p.180-189. Originally published in A Humanist’s Legacy: Essays in Honor of John Christian Bale, ed. Dennis M. Jones (Luther’s College, 1990).

Abortion: Divisive in Nature

Leave a reply

Destiny Phillips Coats

In America today, we are all familiar with the term abortion. We hear about it on the news, in school, on television, at church, and in the public square. We hear the terms pro-life, pro-choice, and Roe v. Wade often as well, especially during last year’s election. Currently in my sociocultural class, we are discussing modern issues that should concern the modern Church (body of Christian believers). These issues include marriage equality, new forms of gender roles, right to privacy, infringement upon free speech, the ACA or “Obamacare,” college discrimination laws, and abortion. Although we are going over abortion’s effect on the country currently in class, I did some outside of class digging to uncover the history of abortion for myself to put my knowledge to the test. During this quest of discovery, I realized I knew very little about the subject.

Per Meriam Webster’s Dictionary, a “simple” definition of abortion is a medical procedure used to end a pregnancy and cause the death of the fetus. With that definition in mind, let us start at the beginning, the very beginning. Abortions have been practiced since ancient times. The first recorded abortion dates to 1550 bc in Egypt. The Ebers Papyrus, also known as Papyrus Ebers, is an Egyptian medical papyrus (a material prepared in ancient Egypt from the pithy stem of a water plant, used in sheets throughout the ancient Mediterranean world for writing or painting on, also for making rope, sandals, and boats) of herbal knowledge dating to c. 1550 BC. Abortions at its early points in history were performed through strange physical practices that were not very effective — jumping up and down, the drinking of strange herbal elixirs or potions, and the killing of the baby post-delivery. Overtime the science of abortion has evolved immensely. Since abortion is an old practice like homosexuality, murder, bestiality, etc., why is it within the last 41 years becoming legal in the United States of America?

Most of America 50 years ago would easily say the United States was founded on Christian/Godly principles found in Scripture. Why is this? The Founders were living in a Christian world. One of the big reasons America was founded was for religious freedom. Was this because the Founders wanted to practice witchcraft and such? No, the Puritans and Protestants wanted to live in a new land, free of religious persecution from England. Puritans and Protestants are Christians. They are not a part of the Church of Scientology, the Church of Satan, or Hinduism. They are indeed denominations of Christianity. If most of the world was Christian at this time in world history, that would then also mean many things would be considered horribly immoral. Abortion was included among these things. Psalm 127:3 (ESV) “Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward.” Now if most of the world believes children are a heritage or “gift” from God, how many do you think will rally behind those who desire to murder them in the womb? Not very many would. Furthermore, 1 Samuel 2:6a declares “The LORD kills and bring to life.” The Bible is full of Scriptures concerning all aspects of life in the womb and how it is divinely ordained by God. Abortion was doomed to be a forbidden practice in everyone’s eyes. With that said, how did we get to where we are today?

Because of sin — specifically Modernism — we now live in a Secular Western world. Secularism as a worldview is atheistic in nature believes mankind will only progress to something better, and relative/personal truth is what individuals are to be governed by. As American society has moved farther and farther away from Biblical standards of morality, it has become clearer and clearer the intentions of our government to make everything under the sun legal. However, our legal system is way more deceptive than just making something a law on no grounds. They instead have falsely laid abortion’s foundation in our new “living” Constitution. The premise upon which abortion lies in the Constitution is the “right to privacy.” This “right to privacy” was discovered by the Supreme Court in the 1920s in the 4^th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The 4^th Amendment reads

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Reading this personally I see nowhere a direct claim to a “right to privacy” outside of the inability of government to come into your property and unlawfully search it. The argument used for the “right to privacy” is privacy itself is the underlying meaning of all the Amendments. Protection of beliefs, the home, property, personal information, etc. listed in the Bill of Rights are now considered private matters protected by the Constitution. Because of this perception of the Amendments, the Supreme Court named privacy as a “right.” Rights are defined as legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement. Entitlement is defined as the belief one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment. The word entitlement is very key in understanding why people now believe privacy is a “right.” Entitlement implies one is deserving of it (the entitlement itself). If a right is an entitlement, and privacy is a right, then everyone is required to have their own personal “right to privacy.” This “right to privacy” is fine when it falls in alignment with what the Bill of Rights has clearly laid out in its text, but in the 1920s the Supreme Court applied it to things not enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The first application of this new right was to a marriage and now has been applied to the practice of abortion.

The two cases leading up to the final decision made by the Supreme Court in 1973, legalizing abortion was Doe v. Bolton and Roe v. Wade. Doe v. Bolton was a case in which a married Georgia woman, Doe, claimed the reasoning behind her denial for an abortion under the current Georgia state laws in 1971 were “unconstitutional.” Doe claimed Georgia state law regarding abortions was in direct opposition specifically with the 14^th Amendment. The 14^th Amendment was adopted in 1868 as a response to the emancipation of African Americans and their rights to all rights and freedoms Whites had from the Constitution. Now one can logically infer taking an Amendment aimed at protecting African Americans from injustice and applying it to a case concerning abortion is a stretch. In this case, the courts ruled in favor of Doe because of what would take place in Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade was a case brought to the Supreme Court concerning a single pregnant woman, Roe, who desired to be granted an abortion outside of the current abortion laws for Texas. Her defense claimed abortion fell under the “right to privacy” that had been discovered and applied to other rulings in recent years made by the Supreme Court. In a majority vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court changed the course of America by making abortion of any kind legal.

At this point in history, abortion was a procedure taken up until the end of the first trimester or first 12 weeks of pregnancy. As of today, abortion is legal up until birth. Matter of fact, partial birth abortions were banned in 2003. To better understand abortion in and of itself, we need to uncover the different types of abortion that must be taken dependent upon the different stages of pregnancy. During the first trimester one can have a surgical abortion: manual vacuum aspiration (MVA), or medical abortion: the abortion pill (mifeprex). After the first trimester, surgical abortions are the only option. Abortions have evolved a lot since ancient times, but no matter how it is done it is all murder one in the same.

Medical abortions are abortions in which a form of medication, a pill, can be taken to terminate a pregnancy. Surgical abortions are a surgical procedure must take place to physically remove the baby from the womb. Surgical abortions range from vacuum procedures in which the pregnancy is chemically terminated and the contents of the child are sucked out of the womb, all the way to partial birth abortions in which the child is killed after she has partially departed from the womb during labor, and her first breath has not yet been taken. Partial birth abortions were determined illegal in 2003; however, Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was intent on legalizing it again.

We now know what abortion is, when it started, when it became legalized, and its different forms. But what are the two positions on this issue? Anyone who goes outside her door has heard the words pro-life and pro-choice. What do they mean? Without looking at specific statements made by both groups, we can decipher from the verbiage used “pro-life” means for or supporting life and “pro-choice” means for or supporting choice. Pro-life argues the unborn child is alive and abortion is a form of murder. Pro-choice argues a woman has the right to choose to terminate her pregnancy because she is in complete control of what goes on in her body. These are two very different arguments. One argues for life and the other for choice. Logically we can see why the two groups are at such odds and will never truly come to a decision on the matter. The two groups are arguing different things. They will always butt heads. To better understand how we as believers should feel about the subject, we need first to look at what God has said concerning this issue.

As Christians living in a very secular world, we are constantly hitting road blocks concerning ideas that make us nervous when in the public arena. Often Christians are faced with an opportunity to speak out on subjects of much controversy but do not out of fear or lack of understanding of what God has revealed in His Word concerning it. At the beginning of Scripture, we read God bringing forth life. He created all life known to man in six days. In 1 Samuel, we see Hannah go before God barren, pleading with Him for a child to whom she would dedicate back to Him. God answered her prayer with Samuel and she in return honored her promise to the Lord by giving him to Eli to live under the teachings of the priest. Because of David’s sin with Bathsheba, God took away the life of their son. Because of Pharaoh’s wickedness, the Angel of the Lord took away the first-born son of all the Egyptians who did not cover their doors with the blood of the lamb. Mary was impregnated by the work of the Holy Spirit and gave birth as a virgin to King Jesus. Throughout the entirety of Scripture, we see God is the giver of life and He is the one who takes it away. To affirm the doctrine implied by pro-life, life begins at conception. God granted Hannah the ability to have a child. God made Mary pregnant with baby Jesus. God declares children are His gifts to us.

Most Christians agree on this topic but many are shaken on the subject of rape. “What if someone is raped and becomes pregnant? Some people cannot bear to carry a product of a traumatic experience.” A lot of reasoning is given in support of abortion after rape by nonbelievers and believers alike; however, believers have no excuse to come to this terrible conclusion. Why? God declares in Deuteronomy 24:16, “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death for the sins of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.” Rape falls under the category of “sin of their father.” When believers support the “rape argument,” they are going in direct opposition to God being the giver of life and a child is not to be punished for the sins of their father.

Pro-choice I believe is another struggle for believers to negate. The whole premise of a pro-choice believer is the body belongs to the woman and she alone has the right to control all things that occur. “And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand” (Mark 3:25). When a believer who dresses inappropriately, uses foul language, practices fornication, constantly breaks God’s laws, etc. is observed by nonbelievers and then claims pro-choice is in direct opposition to the faith, on what grounds are they not to be judged by those who affirm pro-choice? By claiming the faith and then walking completely outside its principles and teachings when it is convenient for them, their witness/words are meaningless. They are a house divided. If we want women to understand our bodies are not our own, we as believers must walk out our day-to-day lives honoring our bodies as God would want us to. 1 Corinthians 6:19 says, “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own.” This Scripture is not only applicable to abortion in negation of pro-choice but is to be applied in all domains of life on Earth. Our body should reflect God in how we dress, how we talk, carry ourselves, and even what/how we eat. We as believers must walk this principle out in every aspect of our lives so our words against pro-choice are stronger.

Talks about abortion are not few and far between in our society today. It is a divisive subject in which people are often afraid to speak out. Educators even encourage students not to write concerning this subject, because it is so commonly written about. However, I encourage everyone to do some digging about abortion. For this topic, unfortunately there are only two sides — for or against. There is no in between. Our society has lost its moral compass that was once the Church. Of course, there are many reasons why that has occurred. The most basic answer without pinpointing specific times throughout history is sin. Things are going to get worse before they can get better, but it is not our job as believers to retreat into our churches and stand by. We are called to consider the full counsel of the Word and apply those principles to our everyday lives. We are to be the moral compass of society. Therefore, it is so important the church be united on divisive subjects like abortion. For those who think they know about abortion and how they think they are supposed to feel, go on a journey of discovery to uncover the truths of what God says about it. Furthermore, discover what God has said in His Word concerning all divisive topics that burden believers today.

Bibliography

“Abortion: Legal Until Birth — Why Pro-Life?” Why ProLife. World Press, 16 Feb. 2016. Web. 01 Nov. 2016. By an Amendment to Her Complaint, Roe Purported to Sue. “Roe v. Wade.” LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

“Abortion in the Ancient and Premodern World.” About.com. Education. About Education, 28 July 2016. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

“Abortion Procedures During First, Second and Third Trimester.” American Pregnancy Association. American Pregnancy Association, 02 Sept. 2016. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

“FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court Case and Opinions.” Findlaw. Find Law, 2016. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

Linder, Douglas O. “The Right of Privacy: Is It Protected by the Constitution?” Exploring Constitutional Conflicts, n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

In Defense of Community College

Leave a reply

Alice Minium

When you tell someone you go to community college, their face darkens a bit like they suspect of you Secretly Doing No Work and Having No Grand Plans. They awkwardly attempt to hide the judgment in their eyes with an averted gaze and a disinterested, “…Oh. I meant real college.” Little do they know, at their local community college is many a genius in disguise.

Yes, it is “lame” I still live at home. It is lame I go to a school with no football team and a school that actually has promotional TV commercials.

Do you know what’s more “lame” than that? Student loan debt, and bad grades. I don’t get to live in a dorm or have the “college experience,” but my experience has been profound nonetheless — and that experience has taught me many people, myself included, are not ready right away for the college experience, and that is perfectly okay. I don’t have crazy college weekends, but I have straight As and a safe place to come home to without distraction. I don’t have “that independence” of living on your own, but I have been able to have a job while in school to build up my savings. I don’t have to borrow money from my future self for each coming semester, or take out any loans at all, and that makes me feel secure. That makes me feel like I can study what I love and work in a field that excites me instead of absorbing the hereditary pressure to get a career, any career, marry rich, get a mortgage, stay out of debt. Those pressures are all very real and I’m not exempt from them, but I have been lucky enough to be in a situation where I can stave them off for a little while. That makes me feel gratitude, not shame.

Nobody has bumper stickers on their cars that say “Proud Parent of a Community College Student,” because the very words are synonymous with letdown. But my experience is that is definitely not so.

If anything, the majority of people I’ve met who go to community college (mostly who are older, that is) work much harder, and are much less entitled, than their four-year university counterparts.

Most of these people have full-time jobs and families, and they pursue schooling not as a diversion or as One Step Closer to Daddy’s Love but because they want to improve their lives. That genuine desire to learn commands respect not scorn.

Knowing these people has taught me:

1. To be thankful college was expected of me by my parents, cause it’s not by everyone.

2. The amount you work in life is not proportionate to the amount of reward you reap. In fact, it’s often the opposite — the most hardworking people are often in the worst situations.

3. You share more values with this myriad crew than with the predominately white suburban club of 20-somethings beginning university. You are more alike than you are different.

& 4. The world is big. Really big. Bigger than your hometown, bigger than your high school, bigger than your prospective field. It does not matter you check in all the boxes of Growing Up in exactly the right socially preordained order, it matters so much more that you make the most of what you have. You are fortunate, and you appreciate education so much more once you realize that fact. You value it — you choose it, instead of taking it for granted.

It is meaningful. It is your own.

I sit here filling out my Letter of Intent to Transfer to Christopher Newport University — the end of my stint with community college is now in sight, at long last. I am relieved to be moving on, yet I cannot say in entirety TNCC has done me wrong — they are as inefficient as the DMV on Planet Neptune, but they have taught me much and more (even the convenience and efficiency of university administration is an example of privilege — some places are designed to help you succeed, and some almost make you wonder the opposite). Though my crossing to the other side is still a year away, I am thrilled I am no longer stuck at TNCC.

Despite popular belief and our 11% graduation rate, a few of us students do get out. And let us have respect for the ones who haven’t “gotten out” yet — for we are waiting. All part of the plan, my friends. All part of the plan. We slither under the radar, ready to spring into full unanticipated glory of ourselves, and shame on you, naysayers, for not seeing it coming.

Redeeming Pandora

A Journal of Scholarship and Opinion

Monthly Archives: September 2022

Reflections on “Ode to the West Wind”

Sydney Harris

Review of Is Genesis History?

Seraphim Hamilton

Out of a Black Hole

Katie Kenney

Two Worldviews Outside of Christianity

Destiny Phillips Coats

The Problem with the American Foster Care System

Emma Kenney

Drugs

Tim Seaton

Important Life Lessons only Sports Can Teach Us

Christopher Rush

Hope, the Gospel, and the Liberal Arts

Professor Robert W. Jenson

Abortion: Divisive in Nature

Destiny Phillips Coats

In Defense of Community College

Alice Minium