Although better remembered today for his tales of the mythical land of Narnia, the so-called “Space Trilogy” of C. S. Lewis has remained of great interest to students of the thought of the Oxford don who moonlighted as a Christian apologist.
A generation ago, Lewis’ nonfiction works such as Mere Christianity and Surprised by Joy were of primary significance for those individuals engaged in substantive reflection on his thought. Nevertheless, the fictional works that gave expression to Lewis’ worldview never lagged far behind in sales and readership. In fact, today Lewis’ apologetic writings have been eclipsed in the public spotlight by his works of fiction, even as he remains prominent among in the ranks of the 20th century Christian apologists.
An Illinois appeals court has ruled against a woman who sued a Planned Parenthood clinic because it did not inform her that the abortion she requested would take a human life. As reported by LifeSiteNews.com, “The plaintiff, identified only as Mary Doe, had an abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Chicago in 2004, before which she says she had specifically asked a clinic counselor if her unborn child was a human being. Two years later, she filed a malpractice action against the clinic based upon the fact that the counselor had erroneously told her no.”
On August 22, the First District Appellate Court dismissed the case, affirming a lower court decision. “No court, regardless of where it sits, has found a common law duty requiring doctors to tell their pregnant patients that aborting an embryo, or fetus, is the killing of an existing human being,” wrote Justice Rodolfo Garcia wrote in a 16-page court opinion, as reported by the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. Garcia said the “negative answer from the Planned Parenthood counselor to the plaintiff’s question of whether ‘there was already a human being in existence’ during the plaintiff’s intake evaluation simply reflects the opinion of Planned Parenthood on when life begins.” He wrote that it was clear from the consent form the plaintiff signed that she knew “there was going to be a termination of pregnancy and that she would not have a child.”
Liberals often tout themselves as the epitome of tolerance, which makes the production of a video game entitled “Tea Party Zombies Must Die,” by StarvingEyes Advergaming, all the more confusing. In the new game, players are encouraged to shoot such Tea Party favorites as Glenn Beck, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and many others, some of which do not exactly fit the criteria of the Tea Party movement but who appear in the game nonetheless.
The Blaze reports:
In a new online game created by liberals titled “Tea Party Zombies Must Die” players can live out your most vicious fantasy by gunning down prominent conservatives with an Uzi. Among the “zombies” available for slaughter: Glenn Beck, Brit Hume, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich and the Koch brothers.
Players begin the game with just a crowbar as their weapon, but as they work their way up through the different levels, they acquire different guns until they reach the uzi.
A mob of angry “Asians” — the media’s code-word for Muslims — in England attacked a busload of members of the English Defense League who were traveling through an Muslim neighborhood in London on their return from a rally.
The “Asians” launched rocks and bottles at the bus, which broke down in the dangerous place, and then attacked a white woman who exited the bus. Police arrested the victims of the attack and not the attackers.
The sudden upsurge of hornet-like violence is yet another sign the EDL is hitting a nerve. It is protesting the Islamization of England, and the “Asians” don’t like it.
During the past three years, Muslims have repeatedly called for Sharia law in England, and one radical suggested that Muslims should kill the royals at the recent nuptials of Prince William and Kate Middleton.
The Parents Television Council (PTC), a conservative watchdog group, has released a new study of network cartoons that are being viewed by kids, and, predictably, the findings are grim. In Cartoons Are No Laughing Matter, PTC used data from the Nielsen research group to identify the network cartoon shows most viewed by tweens and teens from ages 12 to 17. Based on those findings, “PTC examined 123 episodes of animated programming that aired on Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, Disney Channel and Nick at Nite for the presence of sexual content, violence, drugs and explicit language between March 21, 2011 and April 14, 2011,” the report stated. The findings were disturbing, to say the least, with nearly 1,500 documented incidents of explicit language, drug use, violence, and sexual content during the time period studied.
Noted the report: “On average, young viewers were exposed to adult content once every two minutes and 19 seconds. TV-PG rated animation featured sex, drugs, or profanity every two minutes and 31 seconds.” Researchers said that some of the most explicit and objectionable content was found on Adult Swim, “which used to begin airing at 11:00 pm ET and now begins at 9:00 pm ET (8:00 pm CT).” The network shares air time with the Cartoon Network, which has long been considered a child-safe channel.
China may soon be the largest economy in the world. It has always had those things required to be a giant on the world stage: very industrious people culturally inured to thrift, a large nation with diverse climatic conditions, and a huge population. As Dr. Thomas Sowell has pointed out in his brilliant studies of ethnic characteristics, throughout Asia the Chinese people have been the most financially successful.
Malaya and Indonesia, for example, are lands in which a large percentage of the income and wealth is in the hands of ethnic Chinese immigrants. Hong Kong, long before Britain left when its 99-year lease expired, had among the highest standards of living in the Eastern Hemisphere. Singapore, too, far outstrips most other lands in Southeast Asia.
Chinese-Americans have also proven very capable professionals and entrepreneurs, starting from the very bottom of the socio-economic scale — lacking not only English language skills and a phonetic script, but a background in the Judeo-Christian religious traditions, and with a distinctive appearance that make them easy to recognize.
Writing for the New York Times, Andrew Sorkin was puzzled that he couldn’t find any evidence that Steve Jobs, Apple’s founder, had given away any part of his significant $8.3 billion personal wealth. What he did find is that when Jobs returned to his old company in 1997, he canceled Apple’s philanthropic programs and they have remained dormant ever since.
Sorkin explained: "None of this is meant to judge Mr. Jobs. I have long been a huge admirer of Mr. Jobs ... because of the enormous positive impact his products have had by improving the lives of millions of people through technology.... But the lack of public philanthropy by Mr. Jobs ... raises some important questions about the way public views business and business people at a time when some 'millionaires and billionaires' are criticized for not giving back enough while others like Mr. Jobs are lionized."
He then compares Jobs’ stinginess to the generosity of Bill Gates and Warren Buffet in establishing a foundation to “enhance healthcare and reduce extreme poverty” around the world. The unstated question to Mr. Jobs in Sorkin’s article is: Why not you, Mr. Jobs?
A 35-year-old Navy veteran, Luis Lebron, is suing the state of Florida over its policy that all welfare applicants be drug tested prior to receiving benefits. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), America’s legislative lobbying and litigation artisans whose stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States," will be representing Lebron.
The Orlando resident is currently pursuing an accounting degree at the University of Central Florida, while taking care of his four-year-old son and mentally disabled mother. One of many victims of the Great Recession, Lebron was laid off in 2008, and has been unable to find another job since. After exhausting his veteran’s benefits, he applied earlier this summer for welfare benefits.
"It made me feel really bad; I just felt like everything was caving in on me," Lebron lamented. "I felt like, I served my country for four years; doesn't that mean anything anymore? I've worked for pretty good companies. I'm going to school; I'm supposed to graduate. I shouldn't be in this position."
President Obama will be the featured speaker at an “interfaith faith prayer service” at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. on the evening of September 11th to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attack on the nation. Curiously, while the event will also include a “Roman Catholic bishop, a Jewish rabbi, Buddhist nun, a Hindu priest, the president of the Islamic Society of North America, and a Muslim musician,” reported Ron Kerby at Beliefnet.com, “…not a single protestant or evangelical has been invited to participate.”
Most conspicuously absent, noted Kerby, will be official representation from the nation’s 16.6 million Southern Baptists, by far America’s largest Protestant denomination. “Completely left off the program was anybody represented by the National Association of Evangelicals,” he added. “No Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Congregationalists, Wesleyans, or Mennonites. Nobody from the Church of Christ or the Assemblies of God.”
A Christian a cappella singing group at the University of North Carolina (UNC) is under scrutiny after its members voted to expel another member who is openly homosexual. The Christian Post reported that the student group, called Psalm 100, “was founded on core biblical principles. When its members discovered that William Thomason, a UNC senior, disagreed with the biblical teaching on the sinfulness of homosexuality, a vote was held to have the student removed from the group.”
Winston Crisp, vice chancellor for student affairs at UNC, told the student newspaper, the Daily Tar Heel, that the university would investigate to see if the group had violated the school’s non-discrimination policy. “We are on notice that there is a question as to whether or not a student organization has acted in compliance with the policy or not,” the official said. “We take that very seriously and that will be investigated.”