Before I get into the topic of this post, I just want to say that I'm flabbergasted by some of the comments from my recent political posts.  I know that I shouldn't be surprised, but I am. I guess I spend too much time in my little conservative world. What upsets me is that two commentors see my posts and now judge "Christianity" based on what I've written. That's pretty heavy. I hope I haven't pushed anyone away from Jesus.  Bottom line, I am human. I can easily make a mistake in my undestanding of the Bible. And in this case of Sarah Palin, I am still trying to figure out how I think this lines up with the Bible. If you are not a 'Chistian", then don't use the easy way out and refuse Chistianity because of one person. If you really want to get radical, read the Bible yourself, and see what it says to you.

Okay, on to the topic of the WASTED vote.

My husband has been considering voting third party during this election. He couldn't justify to God his vote for McCain based on several issues. But, when we shared this view with people, we almost ALWAYS heard that a vote for a third party was a wasted vote. I haven't really known how to respond to this until now. I'm quoting this from a member on my favorite board:

If you vote for a third party, the message you will be sending your sons is this:
"Boys, principle is more important than victory. It's better to do the right thing than support a little bit of wrong hoping things will come out right. The ends do not justify the means, and I would rather lose and submit to the results than do something that I can't justify to God."

That's an awesome, spectacular message to send to your sons. You'll do more good sending that message to your sons than you will in four hundred years of voting, which will likely never accomplish anything substantive at the national level.

Isn't it worth "wasting" your vote to teach this wonderful, Biblical lesson to your sons?

I completely agree with this line of thinking. Christians shouldn't be forced into voting for McCain just because we don't want Obama to win. I will happily support my husband, no matter who he chooses to vote for. No doubt, the addition of Palin to the McCain ticket has him thinking and praying about who to cast his vote for.

One of the comments from my last post was by someone outraged about my views on women. I just want to clarify.

1. I never said God made women 'less equal' than men. He did not. He did, however make women with a specific purpose:

Genesis 2:18 says "The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." Then in verse 21 "So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs ^[h] and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib ^[i] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. "

We were never created to be independent beings, doing our own thing, focusing on our own mission. We were created to help our men and support them in their mission. In fact, the Bible is clear that they NEED us. We are indispensible to them. How can we read this and think that we are 'less equal' or not as worthy as a man. We are indeed. We are needed, we are special, we are the crowning of creation.

We are equal with men, only different.  Just as my children are equal in my eyes, yet different. I don't expect them to accomplish the same mission or achieve the same goals, just as God doesn''t expect women to do the same work as men.

2. I did NOT say that 'having a women in power means the end of the world." Clearly, we would have already reached the end of the world if this is the case, as women have been in power since before the time of  Queen Hatshepsut.

I did say "when women rule over men it is a sign of judgement from God". God's plan from the beginning was to have Godly men rule. However, since the fall, sin has brought deviations into God's perfect plan. I'm not at all saying that God isn't soveriegn, because He is. But He allows sins' consequences in our lives. One of those consequences is that when men abdicate their roles as leades, women step in and lead for them. As a nation, I consider having a woman as the second-in-command to be a judgement from God. However, my prayer is that God will use this woman to bring about repentence in the heart of this country.

3. While it might seems to be splitting hairs, I didn't say "a woman can't have a great career and a great family", I said that "women cannot do both well. Either home or work will suffer".  Matthew 6:24 says that "No one can serve two masters, because either he will hate one and love the other, or be loyal to one and despise the other." Women cannot serve both a boss/business and a husband/home. What happens when your boss wants something from you that your husband doesn't want? Who do you serve?

I have NEVER met a woman who WANTED to be the provider for her family, the nurturer of her children, the keeper of her home, all at one time. Are there some amazing single moms out there that do this everyday? Sure, but it is not God's example of how a family should be.

4. My intention never was to 'judge' Sarah Palin. I have no idea what the Lord is asking her to do. I do, however, has a responsibility to look at a situation that effects me and see what the Bible says about it.

Here are a couple of good articles about Sarah Palin. They come from different points of view (although both are conservative).

Voddie Bauchum on Sarah Palin

Doug Wilson (not Phillips) on Sarah Palin

I found things in both articles that I totally agree with. FIrst, I agree with Bauchum about gender roles. He says

"Are we really saying that we want to completely erase the distinctions between men and women.  Do we really believe that it is good for our country to promote the view that women are merely men who happen to be biologically capable of having children (when it does not interfere with career advancement, of course)? "

This is a big concern of mine. When Sarah Palin becomes VP, she'll perpetuate the idea that women can 'have it all" by being sucessful business women and run a home. That's simply not true. Women cannot do both well. Either home or work will suffer. Women were made distinctively different from men, with different roles and duties. Which role are we going to embrace - the one God designed for us, or the counterfeit that the world offers?

Wilson discusses this issue as well:

"One more thing. An issue that will be discussed among some conservative Christians is the propriety of electing a woman. Evangelical Christians are overwhelmingly hostile to feminism, and so what is with that? I have argued before from Isaiah 3:12 -- "children are their oppressors, and women rule over them" -- that feminism is one of the things Scripture uses as an indicator of God's judgment on a culture. I still believe that, and also believe that we are in fact under this particular judgment in our culture. But as a biblical absolutist, and not a simple traditionalist, I also want to make room for the occasional Deborah. Life is funny, and you should remember that in the Bible Deborah was the dame who upstaged a fellow named Barak. Kinda spooky when you think about it."

Even though we know that having a woman VP doesn't fit into God's original plan for gender, we do need to "make room for the occassional Deborah".  But no matter what, when women rule over men it is a sign of judgement from God. If we do have a female vice-president, it will be a sign that the men of our country have fallen asleep on the job and our content to let a woman rule them. I'm just not sure we should be so excited about it.

Great pics. I'm beginning to like what I see of Sarah Palin. Obviously, she can't sling the baby forever, and the idea of a two year old in the white house is laughable. In the end, her working is between her and her husband. Plus there are greater moral issues at play here.

So, McCain has chosen a pro-life mom of five to be his VP. I'm not sure how this sits with me yet. On the one hand, I'm excited that he chose someone who is pro-life not just in record, but in application. She chose not to abort a down syndrome baby earlier this year. I also dig that a 'larger' family is in the news without being slammed for having more than two kids.

However, my real big hangup is that this woman belongs at home. She has a young child to care for, and by putting her in office I will feel like I am condoning her choice to stick her baby in daycare (or nanny-care). I'm not comfortable with that.

And the vote this November gets even more sticky. Thankfully, I don't have to make a decision. In the end, I will vote for whomever my husband feels is the best candidate. And no, I don't have a problem with that. I don't care how hard women worked to get the right to vote, I'm not going to vote against my husband. In the end I tend to agree with the oldschool concept of giving the heads of households the right to vote.

But that's just me being old fashioned... :)

Alright folks, I'm pooped from being pregnant and unable to put together words in a coherent way. So, I'll just point you to a blog post by Candy that discusses taxes, Christianity, and slavery. Its a great read.

http://myblessedhome.blogspot.com/2008/04/why-i-think-government-handout-programs_28.html

My thoughts on this won't be nearly as effective as the following. I have permission from the author to reprint this. His blog is http://voiceofjohn.blogspot.com.

Crying out against the State of Texas

Looks like the dems have chosen Obama, although by a narrow margin. The repubs are still unsure, but at least Huckabee is in the race. I don't believe Huckabee will end up with the rep nomination, but I'll still pray for it anyway. He won all over the south, and I loved his speech that included college football references. If you've ever been in the south, you know the pull of college football.

Obviously, we don't know how this election will turn out, but it has the large possibility of being a history maker. We could have the first woman or the first African-American president. None of that impresses me, but hey, its history.

My hubby and I tag-teamed the polling place yesterday. We don't live far from it, so he went and then I went. We didn't figure that the polling officials would appreciate four boys and a double stroller making an appearance.

On another political note, I'm reading a great book. "Crunchy Cons" is about "Birkenstocked Burkeans, gun-loving organic gardeners, evangelical free-range farmers, hip homeschooling mamas, right-wing nature lovers, and their diverse tribe of counterculture conservatives." Its a great book that makes a lot of good points. Many homeschoolers fit the profile of Crunchy Con(servative).  Here's a link to the author's column. Pretty good reading.

My favorite author of all time is Angela Hunt (boy, that sounds super lame, like, fer sure!)  The first book that I read of her's was The Canopy. The Canopy completely changed how I looked at Christian fiction. I was immediately impressed that a work of fiction could change the way that people see God. .

What makes me like Angela Hunt even more is this blog post about skanky-six-year olds and the fact that she is Mike Huckabee supporter!  Woohoo!

For more on the grassroots campaign of Mike Huckabee, try this site.

I'm reprinting this, as some of you may not be HSLDA members.  I encourage all homeschool families and anyone interested in parental rights to support and utelize HSLDA.

-----------------------

HSLDA PAC--Mike Huckabee for President

Dear HSLDA members:

HSLDA's PAC Committee has taken the historic step of making an early
endorsement in the 2008 race for president.

We believe that Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas, should be elected
the next President of the United States. Mike is a principled
conservative, a friend of homeschooling, a man of character, and a man
with a mature faith in Jesus Christ.

Mike Huckabee, as governor, was the first to appoint a homeschooler to
the Arkansas State Board of Education, and to our knowledge the first
to do so in any state. He is adamantly opposed to the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child and is committed to stopping the
erosion of parental rights. He is pro-life. He supports traditional
marriage. He believes that the Internal Revenue Service should be
abolished and replaced with the Fair Tax--a move that we strongly
support because it would greatly benefit homeschooling families. He
believes and is willing to say that Islamic extremism needs to be
understood as a theologically driven threat. He believes that America
must be strong, but should never be perceived as a bully. He believes
that our borders must be secured not only from illegal immigration but
from the growing trend among American judges of "illegally importing"
international law into our American judicial systems.

There are a few other candidates in the race who are properly
described as principled conservatives. None of the media's
"frontrunners" would qualify for this designation. But we believe that
Mike Huckabee is by far the best communicator in the race--he is able
to articulate his conservative principles in an incredibly winsome and
articulate manner. Moreover, among the principled conservatives,
Huckabee is the only one who has been a governor. And we have not
elected members of either the Senate or the House--and certainly not a
mayor--as President of the United States in nearly a half century.

We believe that Mike Huckabee may be the only candidate in the race
who could defeat Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Because of her past support for the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child, we believe that it is absolutely essential to find a candidate
who can beat her. If she is elected president, both homeschooling and
parental rights would be in serious jeopardy.

To date, based on early polls, we are told that Rudy Giuliani is the
front-runner for the GOP nomination. It is our judgment that Giuliani
cannot possibly beat Hillary Clinton. Since 1976, no person running
for president as a moderate Republican has ever won the election. (Not
everyone running as a conservative proved to be a true conservative,
but we are analyzing elections.) Ford and Dole--both moderates-- lost
in 1976 and 1996. Reagan, a clear conservative, won landslides in 1980
and 1984. George H.W. Bush portrayed himself as a Reagan man in 1988
and won. But as president he violated his famous "read my lips-- no
new taxes" pledge, and was defeated in 1992 when it had become clear
to America that he was a moderate. George W. Bush ran as a
conservative and was elected in 2000 and 2004.

Moderate Republicans simply cannot win the presidency. If the nation
wants a Democrat, they choose the real thing. This is particularly
true on the abortion issue. Giuliani supports Roe vs. Wade and will
never win the support of the crucial block of social conservatives.
Hillary Clinton will be elected president if Giuliani is the
candidate. We think this is true of any of the other
front-runners--none of whom comes close to being labeled a truly
principled conservative. Do not believe the early polls. History is a
far better means of analysis. No moderate Republican can be elected
president.

We have taken this historic step of an early endorsement because the
process of electing our president is based on a radically different
timetable in this election. The vast majority of the primaries will be
earlier than ever before. If we do not act now, all conservatives will
be driven from the race by lack of funding and we will be left with
only unacceptable choices.

Thus, we urge our members to do four things:


1. Support Mike Huckabee in your state's presidential primary (or
other nomination process).

2. Please pray for him on a regular basis.

3. Please consider volunteering for his campaign. You can view his
website at http://www.explorehuckabee.com/.

4. Please make a donation TODAY to his campaign at
https://www.explorehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contribute.Home.

Do not think that your gift is insignificant because you cannot give
thousands of dollars. A campaign like Huckabee's will only work when
thousands of friends network together giving, $25, $50, $100, or even
just $10 each. Frankly, a campaign that receives $25 from 10,000
people is far stronger than a campaign that receives $10,000 from 25
people.

Grassroots conservatives often complain about the big-dollar types who
try to control the process. The only solution is for a whole bunch of
small-dollar people to stand together and give together. And the left
has learned to drive millions of people to websites and to fund large
campaigns based on grassroots supporters who contact their friends and
urge them to get involved.

It is far safer for an organization like ours to sit silently on the
sidelines for a long time. But, it is our judgment that we must get
behind a conservative candidate who will provide a viable option to
Hillary. Moreover, many of us have waited a long time for a
presidential candidate who is a truly qualified and articulate man who
shares our values down to his core. Mike Huckabee entered politics for
the same reason that most of us began homeschooling. He wants a future
that is grounded upon timeless values.

We think that the time is now. Please support Mike Huckabee.

Sincerely,

J. Michael Smith
HSLDA President

Michael P. Farris
HSLDA Chairman & General Counsel

The Abortion Conspiracy is alive and well.  Lawmakers held a hearing on post-abortion depression/trauma where one woman testified as to her post-abortive experience.  Of course, the people (usually women) at the forefront of the conspiracy don't want to  admit that someone might get depressed after having an abortion.   If women are getting depressed after abortion, then it means that something is inately wrong with abortion.  So, they will not even consider the possibility that killing your own child could cause a woman a little heartache.  For a great fictional (but probably more true than we realize) account of the abortion conspiracy, read The Prophet by Frank Peretti.

For post-abortive counseling go to www.healinghearts.org

For more on the recent hearing go to http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000004534.cfm

BlogGirl came to visit this morning, and she has a very important message. Who is BlogGirl?  She is my alter ego, of course.  When a post is written too bluntly or is offensive, BlogGirl is to blame!  Please don't be upset with her, she is only trying to inform people of the sad state of the world.  She is passionate about the Truth, and since the pen (or the keyboard?) is mightier than the sword, she just might make ya bleed every now and then.

There are a couple of things that are bugging BlogGirl this morning, and they both have something in common - Sally Lieber.  In case you've been hiding under a rock, Sally Lieber is the wack-job California government henchwoman who wants to outlaw spanking.  Apparently, Sally Lieber has no respect for parental rights.  She is also trying to push a law making the new and ridiculous HPV vaccination mandatory for girls entering the 6th grade.  If you don't know how BlogGirl feels about the HPV vaccination then click here. 

BlogGirl knows that this is just a matter of time, but what she wants you to know (especially PS parents), is that you do have rights (even though you have signed most of them away when you put your child into the government education system).  Every state has different exemption policies.  You do not have to vaccinate your child against an STD (or any other disease, for that matter) if you don't want to.  Be informed.  Make better choices for your children.

BlogGirl is not surprised at the government's continued intrusion upon parental rights.  Once the government was given the "job" to educate our children, the fight to maintain our rights as parents begun.  If you give a mouse a cookie...