Monday, March 28, 2005
I like to think of myself as a modern guy. I dress well. I like good movies. I'm well read. I have a growing jazz collection. I know about John Coltrane and WB Yeats and Jack Kerouac and Joe Namath and Truman Capote. I have a small collection of Banana Republic bags behind my dresser. I even know a healthy portion of the Smiths' back catalog. I can read the Metrosexual Guide to Style
and find just enough of a reflection of myself to make me uncomfortable. All in all, I'm not what you'd call old-fashioned.
Or am I? I attend an Old South university. I'm not a part of a fraternity, but I find myself admiring the adherence to tradition that is seen in a lot of the fraternities and sororities here at the University of Alabama. I like to dress nice when I go to football games. I no longer wear jeans or flip-flops to church on Sundays. I like hymns. I find the occasional liturgical church service to be refreshing. I think ritual is important in any society, and I believe that we as Americans are dangerously close to losing part of our heritage as we abandon our rituals and traditions.
I spent the Easter weekend at home with my family, eating a lot of wonderful food and watching a lot of great college basketball. At one point over the weekend, I made a comment to my father, wherein I expressed my admiration for some traditions that still take place in a lot of small Southern communities. My dad wisely replied that while he can respect tradition, he can't respect getting into a rut. We should be on guard against routine and unconscious ritual.
I thought of this on Easter Sunday. It's a big day for the Church. We dress a little nicer. The music is a bit more focused. The preachers work a little harder on their outlines. And why? Not for a ritual. Not for mere symbolism or metaphor or allegory. Not for Church tradition, however important all those things are. No, Easter, like Christmas a few months before it, is huge and vast and joyous and loud and orchestrated and well-dressed and flowery and full of good food and dear friends and family because Christ is alive! Because we need not fear the grave; we can indeed go up home to live in green pastures. Because there is freedom from the bondage of sin; Christ has conquered Hell and death. Our sins have been forgiven and indeed forgotten. There is new life, there is Truth and Freedom and Hope. This is why our traditions and rituals have life. This is why we celebrate.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Courtesy of our friend Michael Spencer at the Boar's Head Tavern
comes this post by Joe Carter
of the Evangelical Outpost. Joe rightly notes that the deterioration of marriage laws in America have brought us to the point that we now face. Terri Schiavo's plight would not likely be at this point if common law marriage statutes were still in place. I like Joe's take; Gay marriage should be of concern to us, but "it would take an army of homosexual rights activists several decades to do as much damage to the sacred institution as heterosexuals have done by tolerating no-fault divorce and the repeal of common law marriage
I think about this often, particularly when I hear the James Dobsons and Jerry Falwells of the world decry the Godless judiciary. (Speaking of these men, can we not find a better spokesman than Pat Robertson? He was just Hannity & Colmes; it was cringe-inducing. Sean should know better.) Oh sure, the judicial branch of our country has gone nuts. I don't pretend otherwise. The whole issue brings me to a question: Where has the Church been the last fifty years of judicial activism? Oh, that's right. Cloistered away in our churches, making our own neat subculture of G-rated cartoons, bad music and pop psychology (see: Osteen, Joel). JP Moreland and Mark Noll warned us that the Evangelical mind was dangerously behind the rest of the world. That doesn't mean that the Church should take after the zeitgeist; these scholars simply asserted that the Church was not producing critical minds. To this end, I believe that the current judicial situation is the rotten fruit we've sown.
On the topic of bedmaking, Jeffrey Overstreet of Looking Closer
has a fantastic post. (Some readers may recognize Overstreet as a frequent film critic for Christianity Today
) Check out the comments section, where Overstreet poses an interesting question:
Perhaps most disturbing of all: How many of those actively protesting Terry's present crisis have ever gone out of their way to personally minister to someone in Terry's condition? It's so easy to jump on a political bandwagon and wave a flag or shout a slogan. But what about the long hours Terry spent before this crisis? How many were visiting her and contributing to her quality of life, influencing her desire to live, before it came to this? And how will protesters be involved after Terry is saved (if, indeed, she is)?
I would take issue with some of Overstreet's assertions. Terri Schiavo has not been alone in her disability. Her family has been by her side the whole time. While her church and other Christians - the rest of us, in truth - owe her a level of support and comfort, this is not a situation where the visits of random believers was necessary or perhaps even wanted. Yet Overstreet is posing a very important, provocative question.
What do we do then? Do we abandon this fight because we precipitated it by our inaction in previous decades? Heaven forbid. Negligence in an earlier age is no excuse for avoiding activism in the present day. The situation of Terri Schiavo is dire; we cannot help but speak up. If, as in Joe Carter's post linked to above, we have been silent in prior years, then our responsibility to help now is even more urgent. Once Terri's Fight is over, and I fear it may be over sooner rather than later, then we must understand how we can help prevent this sort of madness in the future. While we fight abortion, we must do all that we can to discourage sexual promiscuity and to minister to the unwed mothers in need of care and comfort. While we oppose gambling as a means of funding government programs, we must help find new and innovative ways to support education and the other necessary functions of our state governments.
I won't pretend that there are easy answers to these questions. All we can do from here on out is serve God, humbly and justly, and in all things honor and enjoy Him. We can't forget to include the life of mind, or else the intellectual realm of our society will be ruled and dictated by those who reject the supremacy of God in all things.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
I am not the most astute guy you'll ever meet, but there are a few sure signs that you might have a bad day. Mine starts off with oversleeping. Sleep is nice, mind you, but I don't need to miss an 8 a.m. class. Even better is when I almost sleep through the next class. I rush through the shower and out the door, barely stopping to dress myself. I am getting over a cold. I roll the window down halfway, in the rain, to...um...take care of the business that colds require us to take care of. Let's just say I don't quite make it out the window.
I am within a mile of campus when I am stopped at the train tracks. By a very long train. I suffered through class in an all-too-humid classroom only to be told that my paper would not be returned until next time. Thanks, dude. Everyone else in the room gets to read their verdict, but I'm still hanging in there. The good stuff was on the way. I walk out of class and into a deep-fried Dirty South Heart of Dixie thunderstorm. I'm dry from the waste up; thank Heaven for my Marmot
waterproof shell. The waist on down is another story altogether. It is raining, and raining hard. And the wind is blowing. In my direction. Initially it only looks like I spilled a drink in my lap, but in a few minutes passersby get the impression that I might have been hosed down by a fireman. I have to walk around a quarter of a mile, at least, to my car. There are puddles everywhere. If there is no puddle, then there is mud. My shoes are soaked. My socks are soaked. My pants are soaked. I am cold. I look as though I just jumped into the Black Warrior River, because, you know, what's a Tuesday morning without a swim in a filthy river? That's right, it's fulfilling. I am not fulfilled this morning; I am cold and wet and miserable.
So I am.
What about it? I have a car to climb into and I drive home to my apartment to change before work. Some folks would have been forced to go on to work, wet or dry. Others might not have had a car; they just keep walking in the rain and mud and puddles. Or maybe they have a bad Tuesday because their children or friends or fathers were mowed down in cold blood by a messed up kid. Or maybe their daughter is slowly being starved and dehydrated by a husband who just can't let go. Or maybe they're still trying to rebuild their villages because the ocean swallowed it whole. Or maybe they're preparing to bury a child that was brutalized and murdered by a psychopath.
No, thank God, my day wasn't quite so bad.
Monday, March 21, 2005
My SCO colleague Rick had a nice post
over the weekend concerning Democrat obstruction in the Terri Schiavo case. When Rick said that this sort of thing prevents him supporting the Democrats, I was reminded of Rod Dreher's Touchstone
piece a few years back, The Godless Party
The article generated a controversy. Editor S.M. Hutchens responded with this editoral on Practical Atheism
. This quote gets to the crux of the whole issue:
One of the most common defenses for Democratic loyalties is to assert the moral equivalence of the two parties, to claim that their respective errors leave the Christian to vote for the one he thinks most Christian, or least unchristian. If the Democrats endorse abortion, sodomy, and the like, Republicans cut social programs for the poor. This is a plausible and attractive argument except for one thing. We know with certainty that abortion and sodomy are evil, but we do not know with any certainty whether any particular disbursement of funds for the poor is good or bad or mixed. Our faith directs us to give alms, quietly and generously, and to bless and care for the widows and the fatherless, but it also tells us that those who will not work shall not eat. Distinctions, often difficult ones, must be made in our policies between who should be marked as poor and who should not, and on how collective monies should be spent or not spent for their relief, the kind of distinctions that have historically marked differing party philosophies, and upon which Christians have historically had differences of opinion. A Christian may think the Democrats’ social, economic, or environmental programs are superior to the Republicans’, but he knows that the Democrats’ moral policies are aggressively ungodly.
I realize this will likely restart an argument I'm fond of having. So be it; this is a hill I'm willing to die on. If a believer wants to support Euro-style economics, fine. We can have that argument another day. And no, a person's salvation is not dependent upon this sort of thing. Still I fail to see how a Christian can support a party that is such a willing accomplice in the Culture of Death.
Saturday, March 19, 2005
My parents always said I was hardheaded. They were right. It takes a long time for an idea to sink into my head, unless that idea is an overwhelming craving for pizza or Ben & Jerry’s or caffeine. I felt for a while that my life was sort of bland, but I’m starting to realize that I’m smack dab in the middle of this transient twenty-something subculture. And I’m perfectly comfortable with that. No, scratch that. Positively thrilled might suffice.
I rushed home from work yesterday. My roommate was returning from Atlanta; his MBA class had taken a day trip to Atlanta. His girlfriend had come over and done some cleaning; she had left but would return. I started cleaning, and when I say cleaning, I mean an all-out blitz. It was weird, too, because parents weren’t coming. No preachers or popes or presidents. Just some friends from out of town that we haven’t seen in a few months. Roommate comes home, and Roommate’s Girlfriend returns. We clean and we clean frantically. My mother would be impressed, but frankly I’m a little scared. I cleaned like mad for some friends that I care about but I’m not out to impress; Lord only knows what I’ll be like when I have in-laws to score points with.
Anyway, cleaning notwithstanding, our friends came to town. Roommate and I skipped out on the Drive-By Truckers in order to see our friends. It was worth it. (Incidentally, I found out yesterday that one of the Truckers singer/guiter players - not Patterson Hood, but the new guy, was two years ahead of me in elementary school in rural northwest Alabama) We ate at Hooligan’s. We talked until 3 a.m. We gave the beds to the girls and the rest of us slept on couches or floors. We woke up this morning to coffee and The Return of the King
. We ate nice Italian food for lunch (or was it breakfast?), and everyone went back home by 1 pm.
By 1:30, my best friend from high school was at my front door with another friend in tow. We drove over to the hallowed steps of Bryant-Denny Stadium for The
University of Alabama’s annual spring football scrimmage. It was too cold for late March in Alabama. The freshman quarterback looked good. Nice running backs, too. The stadium is under renovation, but the most exciting thing for me are the signs noting that this fall, the stadium concession areas will feature Golden Rule BBQ
. Thanks heavens. It's not Corky's
, like they have at Ole Miss
, but it will do. After the game we hit up a surprisingly not-too-crowded Buffalo Phil’s
for a snack and some NCAA tournament viewing. I was hoping to watch the Crimson Tide today, but no dice. Thanks, Mark Gottfried. No bother, though. Back to my apartment, and everyone was gone by six.
It’s weird how transient we all are. In the span of eighteen hours I’ve said hello and goodbye to six friends; some I’ve known for a year or two. Others I’ve known for ten. I’m fortunate to have these sorts of people in my life; friends who make me think and care and stretch my personality in ways that I’m not entirely comfortable with but are terribly needed. It’s a lot for me think about, really, so I fell asleep on the couch while Kentucky and Cincinnati were lighting it up in Indianapolis. It was a quick nap, though. I woke with Roommate tossing a remote control at me. What else is left to do on a Saturday night when you're too tired to organize a shindig or group adventure? I did what comes natural. I rode off to the bookstore. Why? Because I’m both a geek and an addict.
By geek, I mean I love books in a way that would make Tolkien proud. By addict, I mean I buy magazines like a woman buys makeup. I can’t just read them at the store and put them back on the rack. I have to own a copy of that Christopher Hitchens story about anti-war protestors or David Sedaris’ ridiculous new essay. It’s turned me into a pack rat. Anyway, concerning magazines. I’ve gotten over my beef with Relevant
, or at least come to an understanding. I can appreciate the goal of the magazine and I’ll enjoy what’s there for me. I’m just “over” their demographic. You know the guy in the ad with the Chuck Taylors and messy hair. That was me four years ago. I still have messy (though now slightly receding) hair, but I prefer my Polo sweater.
I bought my magazines – National Review
and the Atlantic
– and a book – Matthew Paul Turner’s The Coffeehouse Gospel
. In the car I was listening to Kentucky/Cincinnati or Wake Forest/West Virginia. Everyone with a shattered bracket raise your hand. Good, I’m not alone. I like sports on the radio; we enjoyed them a lot growing up as a family and it’s still a lot of fun. It was tempting to revert back to my current music obsessions: Richard Buckner, Sufjan Stevens, Iron and Wine. Oh well. Save it for another day, when no basketball is played, and perhaps the day has been too much and it’s better to let someone else do all the talking.
Friday, March 18, 2005
There was a saying among gay rights and AIDS activists during the initial HIV outbreaks during the 1980s. If you're not mad, you're not paying attention.
Conservatism tends to pride itself on its ability to remain calm and focused. We don't often make a loud ruckus; we work out our political salvation in the think tanks and classrooms. We are unlikely to take to the streets. That tendency was what always appealled to me concering liberalism. I was always intrigued by the willingness to protest publicly against a percieved injustice. Maybe it was my youthful interest in punk rock. I'm not sure. Not much gets me angry anymore, but to continue with the punk rock metaphor, the case of Terry Schiavo makes me want to reach for a microphone and scream at the world. Well, not the world so much as that vile husband of hers and the depraved Judge George W. Greer.
What a terrible situation. Should our outrage ever move beyond e-mails, phone calls and blogs? I don't suggest violence, but where are the protests? I am paying attention, and I am angry. This is not a living will or death with dignity and it's not even some form of euthanasia, however inexcusable that would be. This is murder, and we must call it so. If Terri Schiavo is killed, we should not hesitate to loudly and forcely call Michael Schiavo and George W. Greer what they are. Murderers.
For more information, read this old NRO article by Wesley J. Smith
. Hugh Hewitt is talking some sense
As adamantly as I oppose abortion and assisted suicide, I realize that practioners of such things often believe they are doing the right thing, the helpful thing. We should be strong in our opposition, but such issues have become entrenched to the point that we must now engage in dialogue. The days of calling abortion doctors murderers as part of routine discourse has passed, for better or for worse. Terri's Fight is altogether different, however; a life on the mend is soon to be extinguished.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
It seems as though things in the blogosphere have slowed in recent months. The end of the election is the likely culprit. My own work at Stones Cry Out
has taken away, somewhat, from my work here at this site. Fear not, dear reader, this party ain't shutting down. I'm simply determining how to rework things. I think I will try to shift the greater political talk over to SCO. My ramblings about culture and evangelicalism and sports and various personal matters will likely find their home on this site.
I promise not to get too personal. I'll likely remain my stoic, blogging self. I'll keep dealing with the serious questions, like what to do when reruns of both the Simpsons and Seinfeld are on television. And what kind of toppings do I want on that pizza I'm about to order?
Important, serious stuff.
Sunday, March 13, 2005
Last weekend I visited my parents for the weekend. On Saturday, my mother and father were out of the house for a while, leaving me with the responsibility of preparing dinner. Barbecued ribs. All five of us - the parents, the siblings and yours truly - were looking forward to the meal. My dad gave me some instructions and save for one crucial detail, I followed them to perfection. As it turned out, my mistake was correctable and we ended up having a pretty decent meal. My BBQ skills have lots of room for improvement, but I'm learning. When my father joined me in inspecting the goods on the grill, he joked that I need to take a class on how to grill. I pointed out that I had never before prepared ribs, and such knowledge is not organic in the American male. We had a nice laugh, but it caused me coalesce my thinking on the way my generation is learning to deal with being adults.
(As an edit, I should point that I am slightly ashamed, as a Southerner, of my inability to properly grill a slab of ribs. It's a problem I need to fix.)
Last fall - like a lot of other Christian bloggers - I read Al Mohler's comments on marriage. (See Part 1
and Part 2
) My initial reaction was mixed. On one hand, I was thankful that a prominent Evangelical leader was questioning the notion that marriage was something to be delayed until we all had six-figure salaries and a massive 401K. On the other hand, I felt that Mohler was somewhat out of touch with reality. I continue to hold this dual opinion. Readers will notice that Mohler's columns are based upon a speech he gave to one of Josh Harris's conference. On dating
. It seems as though Mohler's audience was primed for such a message. I wonder if his comments would be so well-recieved if given at any random Campus Crusade or RUF meeting on the campus of a major university like the Universities of Texas, Alabama, Georgia or Virginia.
A few weeks ago, Michael Spencer addressed some of his issues with Mohler's statements.
Spencer's words provide a nice compliment to Mohler's. I think some marriage (no pun intended) of the two ideas would be quite fruitful. But let me chime in with the opinion of a twenty-somthing male, a voice that I don't hear much of in the blogsophere (at least as evangelicals are concerned). See the comments to Spencer's post and you'll see readers, and Spencer himself, noting that Mohler all but ignores the socio-economic factors affecting young people today. As I said before in my pieces concerning the Twixters phenomenon(follow thinks here
, education lasts a lot longer than in previous years. Many, many students remain in undergraduate programs for five years, to say nothing of post-undergraduate education. It's disappointing that a prominent evangelical leader puts forth such an uncritical analysis of a major issue.
Equally disappointing is Mohler's failure to look in the mirror. Not as an individual, but as an evangelical. Where in the evangelical community is there a serious body of believers raising mature teenagers? I'm not talking about nice, clean-cut, cookie-cutter kids with good grades and a shelf full of CCM. Nor am I addressing the growing but still small number of bloggers who are clearly raising families in a traditional context that goes against the grain of our consumerist culture. I am talking about mature, reasonably adjusted young people who are equipped to handle some level of mature relationships. To call the message concerning dating and marriage within the evangelical culture mixed would be to speak too highly of a state of confusion. We're told to kiss dating goodbye. We're told to "court." We're told to only date someone we're willing to marry. We're told hang out in groups. We're told to not get married until after college. Your average evangelical youth group will here a plethora of messages about dating and marriage and sex from all of the camps and conferences it attends, to say nothing of the words from parents and pastors and youth leaders. It should come as no surprised that a great many Christians in their 20s and 30s just don't know what they're doing. With all due respect, Mohler would be well-served to leave the seminary campus and spend some time on the campus of a state university. He might understand what life is like for the rest of us.
Simply put, my generation has not, whether by community, school or church, been prepared for the kind of life that Mohler attacks. It's not that he's wrong so much in his conclusion as he is wrong in his assumptions. This kind of maturity is not organic. We are not consciously turning away from a life of marriage and family. To join with the changes in socio-economic conditions, we have not and are not being raised to live the kind of life that Mohler advocates. For the singly thirty-something, the ball is in their court. But for the rest of America's Christians, the ball is in the court of parents and churches. Change must be brought about from the outside; children, teenagers and college students must have the support of their churches and families. We cannot be allowed to live as clean-cut hedonists through high school and college and then have people like Mohler expect us to be married and birthin' babies before we turn twenty-five. Growing up physically is natural; emotional and spiritual maturity must be supported by those around us.
Friday, March 11, 2005
Michael Spencer has written about a dustup involving Brian McLaren and the Kentucky Baptist Conference
. He has some cautious words for overly pragmatic evangelicals. Whatever we think of McLaren and the emergent church, the Monk is offering some thoughtful advice. I have yet to read any books by McLaren, though this selection from a letter McLaren wrote to Chuck Colson
piques my interest. It piques my interest, mind you, but not necessarily my agreement. I would also like to examine another emergent hotshot, Don Miller; Spencer's review is encouraging
Here's my worry. Miller is openly political liberal. The activism links on his website
are of the sort that would anger Joe Lieberman or perhaps even Joe Biden. McLaren is wishy-washy, at best, what with his ties to Tony Campolo. I'm guessing both guys would suggest that Christians can be conservatives as easily as they can be liberals. I'm not so sure. Conservatism and liberalism make vastly different implications about human nature. Is Scripture so indifferent?
Am I wrong? If so, correct me, but again: conservative views of taxes and welfare say very, very different things about human nature than those of a liberal. Can a Christian take either side and still be in line with Scripture?
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
A few weeks ago I discussed Andrew Sullivan's views on the new iPod world.
Since then I found this post
over at Crux Magazine's Signs of the Times blog. I took particular interest in the closing passage:
That might, incidentally, be all it takes: a willingness to stop off at a bar occasionally for a drink. If many people did that, maybe the yarn of society would start meshing together and something better would be knitted from it. It beats all the individualistic strands lying around in a heap today.
Just a few drinks at the bar. In what other era has civic mindedness made such an easy and enjoyable request?
Reasonable people will differ on the merits of stopping off at a bar, but let's keep the point intact. If needs be, substitute the word "coffehouse" for bar. Or maybe deli. Or cafe. Etc. These establishments become what Russell Kirk called "little platoons," place of voluntary communion among neighbors. This is why some of us are so upset to see Best Buy replacing the local record store and Home Depot replacing the local hardware. Think of the hardware store on a television show like Home Improvement or the coffee shop on Friends. Yes, those are television shows, but I think we all know that such places exist. I can think of several in my own community. Yes, the free market is good, but if we don't work to preserve local institutions, we'll lose them. Just imagine a world where the local barbershops are replaced by MasterCuts.
I know I treasure my mornings spent at the Crimson Cafe
here in Tuscaloosa, and I know that countless friendships have been formed by the cafe's patrons. (Even better, I know of several Christians who are regulars. Their friendships with employees and other customers is likely bearing fruit for the Gospel.) Whatever we think about the drinking of the characters on Cheers, the fellowship they shared was a good thing. These institutions are good for the community and, I would argue, for the church, as well. Our bonds with our neighbors should, as much as possible, pre-exist before we decide to evangelize.
Saturday, March 05, 2005
Courtesy of Michael Spencer at the Boar's Head Tavern
, I found this post over at the Thinklings
discussing some recent comments made by Bono of U2:
"[Bush needs to] clear up some confusion about America's basic beliefs. Americans are overtly devout. And yet Europeans, who inhabit a more secular world, give more per capita than Americans to what the Bible calls "the least of these" - the world's poor. The United States is in 22nd place, last in the class of donor nations. (Add private philanthropy and it's up to 15th.) Europeans see the discrepancy, and they smell hypocrisy."
There's a lot to chew on in this quote. To begin with, Bono's initial exclusion of private philantropy gives up the ghost in a hurry. The majority of Americans - even some liberals - do not see the government as the chief means of accomplishing some task. It's not the way we work. We work for ourselves; the government only works when we commonly agree that some task cannot reasonably be performed on our own. (Think roads, briges and street lights) It has been this way since our founding. You would think that after two hundred something years, the Europeans would understand this. For all his time in America, Bono cannot see this.
Secondly, Bono should know by now that depsite the faith of our President and our religious heritage, America is not a nation of Christians in the sense that every American is a practicing Christian. This is the danger of some on the religious right who insist that America is a "Christian nation." The implication to those around the world, then, is that our nation will act in the manner of an individual Christian. This is nonsense for a nation in a hostile world. America is a huge nation, with vast land and a tremendous population. We have our own to care for in addition to those overseas. Bono has seen the plights of those in the Delta and surely he is aware of the poverty in the inner city. We must help those within our own borders, in addition to those around the world. Given our population and the needs of the American poor, surely a gap will emerge somewhere.
Here's an offbeat example. Last football season, every single NCAA Division 1 football program in the state of Alabama played in a bowl game. That's 100 percent, and it may very well be the highest percentage from that season. The catch is that Alabama only has four such programs. Imagine the same scenario in Bono's statistics. A small nation with high taxation handed over to the UN's relief programs will quickly outdo the U.S. Bono's using the stats to say whatever he likes, but he's ignoring reality.
These are gaps in ideas between Europeans and Americans, and it is a difference that may have to exist between evangelicals and Catholics on both sides of the pond. I'm not sure there's much to change this in the near future. Still, American Christians should be very cautious in labeling America a Christian nation. The problem does not lie in our defintions; the trouble comes with everyone else's definition. Unless we're prepared to move beyond the Dobson-esque cliches, and defend the American approach to government, economics and charity, to say nothing of condemning our materialistic culture, we're going to live a world of confusion that will only grow worse with time.
I concede that there is always more to give. There is always one material thing we can do without, and there is another one, five, ten dollars we can spare to ease the plight of those suffering in America and around the world. Yet let us not be lulled into a sense of guilt and anxiety over the self-righteous misunderstandings of the rest of the world.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
The Internet Monk has a response to Al Mohler's view of marriage and young people.
Links to Mohler's pieces on the topic are contained within Spencer's article. Do check them out. Both sides are worth hearing. I'll have more to say on the topic later, hopefully this weekend. I know, I know, but it's been a busy week.