What’s interesting in the news today?
Open Thread
1. The number just keeps growing. Turns out their were actually 2 major breaches. It went from 4 million affected, to 18 million, and now we’re up to 32 million.
From TheWashingtonTimes “As many as 32 million Americans might have had their most sensitive data stolen in a breach of the federal government’s human resources agency computers, lawmakers speculated Wednesday as pressure grew on President Obama to oust the woman who heads the agency that botched its cybersecurity.
Katherine Archuleta, director of the Office of Personnel Management, fought for her job, telling the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that she, herself, is likely a victim of the breach and takes it seriously.
But her uneven performance, which often included reading rote responses from prepared notes rather than answering direct questions, didn’t sit well with key lawmakers, who called for a housecleaning at the agency.”
“The OPM has acknowledged losing data in two breaches: One intrusion stole personal information of about 4.2 million current and former federal employees, and hackers in the second breach gained access to the background check system, with some of the most sensitive information on millions of Americans who have filled out the government’s background check packet.”
_____________________________________
2. It seems Obama’s BFF Valerie Jarrett isn’t just a Muslim Brotherhood supporter. She’s got some commies in her closet too.
From JudicialWatch “Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files obtained by Judicial Watch reveal that the dad, maternal grandpa and father-in-law of President Obama’s trusted senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government.
Jarrett’s dad, pathologist and geneticist Dr. James Bowman, had extensive ties to Communist associations and individuals, his lengthy FBI file shows. In 1950 Bowman was in communication with a paid Soviet agent named Alfred Stern, who fled to Prague after getting charged with espionage. Bowman was also a member of a Communist-sympathizing group called the Association of Internes and Medical Students. After his discharge from the Army Medical Corps in 1955, Bowman moved to Iran to work, the FBI records show.
According to Bowman’s government file the Association of Internes and Medical Students is an organization that “has long been a faithful follower of the Communist Party line” and engages in un-American activities. Bowman was born in Washington D.C. and had deep ties to Chicago, where he often collaborated with fellow Communists. JW also obtained documents on Bowman from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) showing that the FBI was brought into investigate him for his membership in a group that “follows the communist party line.” The Jarrett family Communist ties also include a business partnership between Jarrett’s maternal grandpa, Robert Rochon Taylor, and Stern, the Soviet agent associated with her dad.
Jarrett’s father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, was also another big-time Chicago Communist, according to separate FBI files obtained by JW as part of a probe into the Jarrett family’s Communist ties. For a period of time Vernon Jarrett appeared on the FBI’s Security Index and was considered a potential Communist saboteur who was to be arrested in the event of a conflict with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). His FBI file reveals that he was assigned to write propaganda for a Communist Party front group in Chicago that would “disseminate the Communist Party line among…the middle class.”
It’s been well documented that Valerie Jarrett, a Chicago lawyer and longtime Obama confidant, is a liberal extremist who wields tremendous power in the White House. Faithful to her roots, she still has connections to many Communist and extremist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Jarrett and her family also had strong ties to Frank Marshal Davis, a big Obama mentor and Communist Party member with an extensive FBI file.”
_____________________________________
3. Have we officially reached peak leftism?
From NationalReview “If it seems to you that the Left has, collectively, lost its damned mind as the curtain rises on the last act of the Obama administration, you are not imagining things. Barack Obama has been extraordinarily successful in his desire to — what was that phrase? — fundamentally transform the country, but the metamorphosis is nonetheless a good deal less than his congregation wanted and expected. We may have gone from being up to our knees in welfare-statism to being up to our hips in it, and from having a bushel of banana-republic corruption and incompetence to having a bushel and a peck of it, but the United States of America remains, to the Left’s dismay, plainly recognizable as herself beneath the muck.
Ergo, madness and rage.
We have seen an extraordinary outburst of genuine extremism — and genuine authoritarianism — in the past several months, and it will no doubt grow more intense as we approach the constitutional dethroning of the mock messiah to whom our progressive friends literally sang hymns of praise and swore oaths of allegiance. (“I pledge to be a servant to our president” — recall all that sieg heil creepiness.) There is an unmistakable stink of desperation about this, as though the Left intuits what the Right dares not hope: that the coming few months may in fact see progressivism’s cultural high-water mark for this generation.
If there is desperation, it probably is because the Left is starting to suspect that the permanent Democratic majority it keeps promising itself may yet fail to materialize. The Democrats won two resounding White House victories but can hardly win a majority in a state legislature (seven out of ten today are Republican-controlled) or a governorship (the Democrats are down to 18) to save their lives, while Republicans are holding their strongest position in Congress since the days of Herbert Hoover. The Democrats have calculated that their best bet in 2016 is Hillary Rodham Clinton, that tragic bag of appetites who couldn’t close the deal in the primary last time around. “Vote for me, I’m a lady” isn’t what they thought it was: Wendy Davis, running for governor of Texas, made all the proper ceremonial incantations and appeared in heroic postures on all the right magazine covers, but finished in the 30s on Election Day. With young people trending pro-life, that old black magic ain’t what it used to be.”
_____________________________________
4. You knew this was coming. The fact that they trying to defend them means someone already wants them changed.
From StarsAndStripes “The U.S. Army on Wednesday defended its past practice of naming forts and posts after Confederate Army generals, saying they memorialize historic figures, “not causes or ideologies.”
The issue arose following the deadly shooting at a historic black church in Charleston, S.C., and amid debate over Confederate flags and other Civil War-era symbols of the pro-slavery secessionist Confederacy. The white shooting suspect has been shown holding Confederate flags in widely-seen photos.
Numerous U.S. Army posts in the South are named for Confederate soldiers.
The Army’s top spokesman, Brig. Gen. Malcolm B. Frost, issued a brief statement in the aftermath of questions about whether the military ought to consider changing the name of bases such as Fort Bragg, N.C., which is named after the man who led the Confederate Army of Tennessee, Gen. Braxton Bragg.
“Every Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a place in our military history,” Frost said. “Accordingly, these historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies. It should be noted that the naming occurred in the spirit of reconciliation, not division.””
History means nothing to them.
_____________________________________
Wandering Views 
Anyone who is alert knew almost from the beginning that Valerie Jarrett was not only a Brotherhood supporter but a socialist. And she, along with Michelle, are virtually running the country.
As for the Confederate names, As I said about the flag, there is no end to it.
Always something.
It isn’t that history means nothing to them. It is that it is something to exploit.
LikeLike
New “scientific” discovery creates dilemma for liberals. It turns out Confederates were “born that way”. All US culture is actually a dangerous form of conversion therapy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
#1: we received our notice that our info had been breached. But the letter was very clear that the government was not taking responsibility for it and not one person was responsible for it.
LikeLike
As simply as I can put it on the Confederate flag issue, it really is no different than flying the swastika flag from the German Third Reich, or the rising sun flag of Imperial Japan. I suspect you’d be against those.
The actions of the southern states and generals meets the very definition of Treason in the US Constitution: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them.” That is exactly what they did, starting at Fort Sumter. In a way, it’s poetic justice to see the battle flag of a war that ended a century and a half ago,
I hold these men, and the battle flag they fought under, in dishonor by virtue of their cause. As soldiers, I am sure many fought, and died bravely, however mistaken their cause. So did German and Japanese soldiers. I respect that, but not the cause that their flags represent, and not the men who followed that cause and led those soldiers even unto their deaths.
You can try and pretty it up any way you want: claim that it was states’ rights or economics that was the casus belli for the rebelling states. Yet the right they fought to exercise was the right to have laws enslaving other men. Their economies were based on chattel slavery. Dig deep, look honestly in the mirror, and underlying it all, their tragic “Lost Cause” was a war to continue slavery.
So no. Neither our federal nor state governments should be displaying the flag they fought under, nor honoring their leaders.
As for individuals, the First Amendment grants freedom of speech. Wave the battle flag, wear the arm band, salute the rising sun, have posters in your bedroom or statues on your lawn of Nathan Bedford Forrest or Erwin Rommel. The rest of us will use our freedom of speech to call you out on the ideologies they represent, and express our disagreement.
LikeLike
So while I supported the call to take down the flag from displays on official government property, I don’t agree with wiping it out from historic memorials in what now sounds like a “cleansing” frenzy.
It’s fast becoming a politically punitive (to the south) offensive push, which I just think is uncalled for. I understand that a CNN commentator even asked whether it’s time for the Jefferson Memorial to be removed. After all, he owned slaves …
Withdrawing the flag from a position in which it would seem to reflect official state sanction is appropriate in my mind. Going on a partisan binge to forcibly wipe it from the face of the world is kind of silly and naive (but predictable, alas). And no, I don’t see it as akin to the German flag, fyi — I’m not southern and I don’t “get” some of that regional loyalty, but I do understand that it simply doesn’t represent the same thing to all people.
I liked the way South Carolina state Sen. Chip Campsen put the decision to take down the flag from that state’s capital:
“Let’s do this as a reciprocal act of charity and grace extended to the fallen, their families, and the congregants of my friend and colleague Clementa Pinckney. They have demonstrated forgiveness, charity, and grace before God and a watching world. Both in life and in death they have shown us how to love, forgive, and pursue peace and mutual upbuilding. It is now our turn to follow their example.”
Voluntarily and with charity, with malice toward none. That’s grace, that’s what we in this country should be interested in reclaiming. I, for one, am just sick of the bickering and over-politization of every issue that comes down the pike.
But I’m a dreamer.
Now, sadly, the reality is that the “war on the flag” (spare us) is becoming a political steamroller cause designed to punish, silence and control.
What happened to liberalism that it has now become so illiberal and intolerant?
LikeLiked by 1 person
From NewsMax
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the nationwide availability of tax subsidies that are crucial to the implementation of President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law, handing a major victory to the president in a 6-3 ruling.
Is anyone surprised?
LikeLike
Watchdog: IRS workers mistakenly erased tea party emails
Jun 25, 3:33 AM (ET)
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
(WASHINGTON (AP) — Investigators are blaming mistakes by IRS employees — not a criminal conspiracy — for the loss of thousands of emails related to the tax agency’s tea party scandal.
It was an honest mistake. You knew it all the time didn’t you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I see on One America News that John Kerry has announced that cyber relations between the US and China have improved.
This turned out to be a big day.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Haha 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
From Drudge:
Louis Farrakhan stated “We need to put the American flag down. Because we’ve caught as much hell under that as the Confederate flag” in remarks before the Metropolitan AME Church in Washington, DC on Wednesday first reported by DC’s WMAL.
Farrakhan said, “White folks march with you because they don’t want you upsetting the city, they don’t give a damn about them nine.”
He added that when the police took suspected shooter Dylann Roof to Burger King they were saying “You did a good job. Kill all them [bleep.]”
Later, he declared, “I don’t know what the hell the fight is about over the Confederate flag. We need to put the American flag down. Because we’ve caught as much hell under that as the Confederate flag,” comments that were meant with cheers and applause. He added, “Who are we fighting today? It’s the people that carry the American flag.”
Audio via WMAL.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anonymous, along with your right to free speech might come the respect of using your name.
I would like to point out that historically you are very much mistaken. Withdrawing from the union was nothing akin to treason–it was, in fact, a constitutional right. Think about it: by the reasoning that states cannot ever sever their ties with the USA, 500 years from now states will still be bound to the union. We can grow bigger, but we can never grow smaller. Marriage is at least annulled by death, but union with the USA is eternal, whether you like it or not. If the US decides to kill everyone over the age of 50 and all who are deemed unfit, no state or group of states can say, “We want out!” We supported the right of countries to leave the USSR, but we don’t support the right of states to secede.
The right to secede was extremely clear in the days of our nation’s founding. We were the United States–a voluntary union that used a plural verb (“United States are” not “is”), seeing ourselves as a junction of individual states with individual governments. The federal government was subservient to state governments. The constitution explicitly spells out that any right not granted to the federal government is reserved for the states. States could legally, for example, define marriage, and could outlaw abortion, and could do any number of things without the federal government having any say. Did that include immoral choices like allowing chattel slavery, yes it did. But now, states are required by law to allow the even more immoral slaying of our unborn. At least we used to have the freedom to outlaw what a state found reprehensible. And we had the freedom to leave the voluntary union if we no longer felt it represented our best interest. When the wrong side won the War of Northern Aggression, the lie that freedom did not include the right to secede became ingrained in the American conscience.
I detest it that the Confederate flag has been wrongly associated with racism. But that is not ultimately what it stands for. It stands for freedom, freedom that was lost when the wrong side won the war.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My husband forwarded me this: Textbook issue: State sovereignty and the reserved right of secession was by the US to cadets at West Point from 1825 to 1840 through William Rawle’s book, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America. Source: Edgar S. Dudley, “Was ‘Secession’ Taught at West Point?”, The Century Magazine (New York, 1909), Volume LXXVIII, page 635.
State Positions relative to joining the union:
“We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the general assembly, and now met in convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us to decide thereon, Do, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will…. That each State in the Union shall, respectively, retain every power, jurisdiction and right which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States, or to the Departments of the Federal Government.”
“We, the delegates of the people of New York… do declare and make known that the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the department of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the said Constitution, which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any powers not given by the said Constitution; but such clauses are to be construed either as exceptions in certain specified powers or as inserted merely for greater caution.”
“We, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and Plantations, duly elected… do declare and make known… that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the department of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same;… that the United States shall guarantee to each State its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution expressly delegated to the United States.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Unfortunately, the comments of Anonymous go beyond private attempts at conversion therapy and into the realm of hate speech and Southronphobia. Surely, this was a micro aggression. We need to create a “safe space” for
LikeLike
(Continued) Southerners. I can hardly eat my Cheerios for all the emotional hurt I now feel.
Yes, spouting liberal psycho-babble can be fun! No offense intended, Anonymous. I’m just having a little fun.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An interesting note: King George III threatened to free the slaves in the American colonies. This was an issue in the American Revolution. He also promised and granted freedom to slaves who would leave their masters and fight for the British.
LikeLike
So Anonymous, on July 4th you can waive your American flag and shoot fireworks or salute Erwin Rommel, but as you say, some may “call you out for the ideologies they represent”.
LikeLike
You know, I was thinking about it another way: Would you buy property if there was a clause in it that your descendants had to live on it forever? Our founding fathers didn’t do such a thing. This nation was founded by separation from England. Our founding fathers did not create a union that couldn’t be dissolved. They had no such intention–they would not have done so. Remember “When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them . . .” (That’s the opening of the Declaration of Independence, if you aren’t familiar with it.)
After more than half a million people died the first time seccession was tried, it would take a great deal of courage ever to try it again. It took an awful lot of courage the first time–and that courage is represented by the flag. I don’t fly it, and don’t intend to start. But I’m willing to defend those who choose to do so for noble reasons–and those people do exist.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We can choose to make it illegal to display any emblem that causes pain or distress to anyone else, make it self-evident that choosing to display such an emblem is hateful.
But if we do, watch out–because under such freedom never to be offended, the cross of Christ will be made to come down. Well, the cross is more than an emblem, and there’s no reason a church has to have a cross on it in order to be true to the gospel–but do we want the government deciding that the cross is offensive, or using Scripture verses on a church sign is offensive? How about if we decide that it is offensive to have a Christmas tree that can be seen from the street? Basically, if we decide that anyone who is offended has a right to that offense, and the person offending them cannot possibly have a good reason for the emblem of offense, we have slammed the door on an awful lot of rights we take for granted.
Again, I’m not arguing that we all should get Confederate flags . . . but you who are saying that they must be taken down because of the potential for offense, be very careful. The end results of the “right never to be offended” have already proved disastrous to the right to engage in any business serving weddings. This could be very open the door to a whole lot more erosion of rights. Personally, I’d rather accept the reality that someone, somewhere is going to offend us about something, and deal with it, than to try to ban anything that causes offense, whether intended or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Which is why I appreciated the gestures that were voluntary (but, yeah, will become stupidly mandatory under a liberal government — oddly, go figure. Democrats of the leftist variety are turning the notion of true liberalism on its totalitarian head.
But good points, Cheryl
LikeLiked by 1 person
With all the Supreme Court news coming out this week, check out this entertaining “Running of the (news) Interns” clip about how the big decisions make it to the cameras and microphones (since there are no ‘devices’ allowed in the courtroom)
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/6/353033-the-2015-running-of-the-interns/
LikeLike
That was an interesting clip on running with the news. But it doesn’t matter. I will wait for Shannon Bream, no matter how long it takes.
You had to scroll down to see the article on Bob Beckels. I watch the Five and will miss him. He was the token liberal on the team. But he knew what he was talking about.
LikeLike
I am beginning to think Cheryl and I were originally conjoined twins and when we were separated she got the brain. I sit here and think of all the things I know that defend the position we in the South have taken on freedom of expression and regional pride, but I cannot put it in words. I read the Lily Livered Anonymous post earlier today and thought about what I would say, but as usual, I waited long enough and Cheryl –who wan’t born and raised in the SouthEast came along and eloquently said what I was thinking much better than I ever could have.
I would add that we have forgiven every other nation or entity we have fought against. We NUKED Japan, but we went in and spent billions of US Dollars to rebuild it. If you go to Hawaii the menus are in English and Japanese. We have forgiven Germany and Italy. The United State of America has YET to forgive the South. We bear the legacy of being the only Americans to ever lose a war. Our men came home battle scarred and broken THEN lost what little they had left.
For many people in the South they didn’t have the luxury of looking down on the former slaves. Everyone was starving and everyone needed each other. As another poster here said earlier in the week, “I have more in common with the Southern Black Culture than I do with the Northern (Western) White Culture. The rest of the United States doesn’t want the people of the South to be united. They would lose the last group of people they could openly scorn.
All we have heard the past week is how horrid the Confederate Flag is. How Evil it is. How racist the South still is. Why haven’t we seen more pictures of blacks, whites, and any other color or nationality attending church services together in Charleston? Why haven’t we seen more pictures and coverage of the UNITED People of Charleston walking across the bridge together? Why haven’t we heard about the changes in the South? Why hasn’t the GRACIOUS way Charleston has handled this been more admired and held up as something to emulate been the focus of the media?
It would baffle Liberal brains to see how the South really is. It would shatter their stereotypes. Notice that the loudest voices and the most agitators come from OUTSIDE the South. We have banded together on this. If you want to come and honor the dead, if you want to come be part of the Southern Renaissance come on down. If you want to come tell us how ignorant, backwards and redneck we are—Stay Home! It you want to stir up hatred and unrest–STAY HOME. We don’t need or want you.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Lily-livered is such a great term
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am not from the South, but several of my friends are. I have begun to see that the South fought the war because they felt the Federals invaded their territory. They felt there was nothing in the Constitution that said the individual States could not secede from the Union. So yes, they fought against the US, but they had good reason to, in my opinion.
Now that Obama and his ilk are taking over the nation, I feel the States need to start thinking about their rights under the 10th Amendment. And with a SCOTUS that seems to ignore the Constitution, and a Republican Congress that seems to be giving up it’s power to the Executive, perhaps it is time for a State or two to secede in protest.
As for the slavery issue, it is my understanding that few Southern whites had slaves, and the vast majority of CSA soldiers were poor farmers. The Generals were honorable men, more so than men like General Sherman. Look at Lee and Jackson. A more godly man you won’t find in the list of US generals.
If we should take down the Confederate Battle Flag because the South was an “enemy” of the US, then we should send all Volkswagens, Mercedes and Audis back to Germany, as well as all Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, etc. back to Japan. We should stop eating pizza and spaghetti, as well as Mexican food, since they fought against us. I know this sounds ridiculous, but saying that those who have CSA battle flags are promoting a former enemy are sounding ridiculous as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The flag in SC — from what I understood — went up in the early 1960s and was understood at that time to be wrapped up in the federal Civil Rights movement that was the revival of states’ rights causes.
It’s possible that the left may continue to overplay their hand and wind up looking, well, like the totalitarian-leaning bunch that they have come to be. ?
Hope springs eternal. There’s always 2016 …
Still, so much damage in the wake of the past almost 8 years. But it’s not just the government (I’d feel better if it were). To a large degree, I think, it also speaks to the body politic and how we seem to have lost so much of the understanding, history and principles that held us together as a people for so long.
LikeLike
The flag went up in 1960. It was raised by Democratic governor Fritz Hollings. I think it was in recognition of the anniversary of the secession in 1860. i.e. The centennial.
It was flown over the state house for almost fifty years before anyone noticed that it would make a good political objective.
The civil rights issue was not active in 1960. The election of JFK was then. It was during the LBJ administration that the commotion started.
LikeLike
Chas, this South Carolina Senator tells the history of the raising of the flag: http://www.worldmag.com/2015/06/let_s_remove_the_confederate_flag
I looked up the concept of states right’s. I came across a lot of references to this: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford.
LikeLike
I think most of us are coming to the conclusion that short of an absolute miracle, the whole nation can not be redeemed. God spared Nineveh for a time, so that miracle could still occur. Absent that, the question becomes: Can any part of the nation be saved? The South is not yet hostile to Christianity. The South is not yet fully committed to socialism or perversion. There may yet be hope for the South.
More than anything, Confederate flags stand for Southern Nationalism. That is one thing we will need if a part of the country is to be saved.
LikeLike
Ricky, God works through His people, which never was the United States of America (or the South). He works through the church. Nations come and go, but His people are called to faithfulness regardless of their national identity. The Confederate flag is no more an emblem of Christianity than the US flag or any other; there is no hope for any of us outside Christ, and it isn’t Christ plus something, but Jesus Christ alone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cheryl, I do not disagree with anything you said. The question is: do you want to live in a nation that is in rebellion against God, that is hostile to him and his people
LikeLike
Or do you want to live in a segment of that country that has not yet turned its back on Him? The South may also be past the point of no return, but what happened in Charleston after the shooting makes me think: Maybe not yet.
LikeLike
Ricky, as a married woman, I live with my husband. I haven’t always lived where I would personally choose, but I’ve always lived where God has wanted me to live. And I’m not inclined to retreat from that for my own ease and comfort. Sometimes God has even let me minister to my neighbors in places where on my own I wouldn’t ever choose to live–because sometimes He places His people in uncomfortable places that are in sore need of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I’m glad the apostle Paul didn’t put His own comfort first–aren’t you?
LikeLike
I’m not talking about ease and comfort. Do you think Lot should have taken his family out of Sodom a little earlier?
LikeLike
I am e easing from my cell phone but I’d I could there are several posts I would like
LikeLike
It is interesting that you bring up the missionary issue. Over the last five years I have spoken to many couples with young children who have been called to some pretty primitive and rough places. In some cases, family members have questioned the wisdom of taking young children out of the country. The response I have heard is : We think our children’s eternal souls are safer in Mexico, Mongolia, or Africa than in the US.
LikeLike
Hey, I draw the line at having to send my Honda back!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky, should Lot have taken his family from Sodom earlier? Maybe. But maybe Lot should have been evangelizing in Sodom, as apparently Abraham expected to be the case when he asked God for mercy for Sodom if there were 50 righteous, then 40, and so on down the negotiation.
I have no problem whatsoever with those who think that they want to raise their young children elsewhere (but where?). But sometimes our place is within the danger and sin, because that’s where God wants His salt. That’s how I felt when I lived in inner-city Chicago. I wouldn’t have wanted to live there with young children, if I had any–but there already were other people’s young children there, and the people there needed Christ. Quite a few people from my church were scattered within a few miles of the church, living in neighborhoods where the people didn’t look like us, but where they too were made in the image of God.
God has different callings for different people. But for some, yes, He has missions in Sodom.
LikeLiked by 2 people