Bedrock

A Sonnet to the Savior, not the Santa or the Sentiment by J. Roger Wilson, ©December 2006 Who gives the greatest Christmas hope, a babe or bearded man? Have songs and stories of St. Nick o’ershadowed God’s own Son? Of one we hear we’d best watch out or lose the gifts we plan. It’s just a Child, though angels sang—not much, the other one. Satisfied by Christmas treats? He is the Bread of Life! Though reindeer fly in Christmas tales; He is the Shepherd Great. How often lights make winters bright, while He’s the world’s Light. It’s toys and elves at Santa’s home, but Christ is heaven’s Gate. Some Grinch might steal our fun away, but Jesus died to save! Could any toy, that soon will break, e’er match the Truth, the Way? Holly, ivy, Christmas trees will die; the Vine will last. Indeed, Saint Nicholas will kneel before “I Am” one day. Love Himself has come to earth, by birth, to give by grace. Don’t trust a lovely fantasy; He’s God of time and space. As I reflected on the barrage of

“ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness .” These words from our Declaration of Independence explain the reason 13 colonies became the United States of America. They are words every citizen should remember and understand; they are words that must continue to inspire us. Those who disagree with and fail to support them should not be trusted nor given power. They provide the backdrop against which another set of words were written: “ We, the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America .” Together, they define the reasons this nation exists and wh

I am not a Republican although I have been in the past. I was actually a precinct delegate for a couple of years during the Reagan Revolution. Like many others, I sought to give a voice to my convictions. I experienced, first hand, the hostility of the so-called moderates, whom we had displaced from controlling the party in this state and throughout most of the country. As citizens, we have the right to engage actively in the political process. Today, however, the GOP has not represented my views and the views of many other social and economic conservatives very well. Many will be tempted not to vote or to vote against Republicans. I understand their feelings, but I hope they think carefully before doing either. As we move toward the November elections, we get an eyeful and earful of campaign rhetoric. Frankly, I wish there were a law that required ads to be truthful, although I realize that “truth” is relative to most people. We could get rid of a great deal of the worst lie

Should a person who does his job poorly get a raise? Can a company that makes a tool that breaks when you use it or a machine that fails to do what it was made to do raise its prices and increase profits on its defective products? Would you be willing to pay a car mechanic or plumber when they have failed to fix the problem, over and over again? Would you be willing to guarantee your grocery store regular price increases, even when you regularly buy milk that is sour, fruits and vegetables that are half rotten, and meat that is spoiled? I suspect most of us would answer all of these questions with a resounding, “No way!” Amazingly, that is exactly what the public education establishment expects us to do. In Michigan, next month, the voters will have the chance to guarantee annual increases to the state education budget, by-passing the legislature’s budgetary responsibility. Of course, that money would be on top of what federal funding, which feeds billions into a public education syste

People blog for many reasons, but I write to influence people. Blogging for me is the first step in pursuing a plan to try to change things. Over a year ago, a friend approached me with a desire to join our resources to address concerns that we both saw as threatening the future of our country and of the faith we share. I spent nearly 15 years in radio and my entire adult life in serving people. We talked about writing and broadcasting, about the ideas that we regard as sina qua non, the basics without which we have nothing. To a great extent, we share with many Americans a desire to restore the bedrock of our heritage of freedom and faith expressed freely. I have begun writing about some of those basics on this site. Let’s say that one objective is to “ Keep it solid ”—truth, absolutes, basic essential ideas, bedrock. I have invested a big part of my last 25 years in Biblical peacemaking. By that, I refer to resolving interpersonal conflict using Scriptural principles and the

Today is Independence Day. The date may be July 4, but the holiday celebrates independence, and it’s better to be reminded. Have you read the Declaration of Independence recently? You should. Among other things, it will remind you that this nation was founded not only to win free of the tyranny of the British king but also to protect our “unalienable rights” of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The balance of the document provides a list of grievances, which are a telling reminder of what they sought and, perhaps, what we may have lost or, at least, forgotten. How should we celebrate Independence Day? I have seen fireworks twice already. They reminded me of “the rockets red glare” from our national anthem, another good text to review from our second war with England (the War of 1812. Personally, I love the sights and sounds of fireworks, but they aren’t merely awesome for everyone. For those who have endured war or risked their lives to fight, they recall rea

I wrote the following in response to 2 columns by Charles Haynes of the First Amendment Center . I don't know about you, but I get tired of being told that Christianity being seen or heard offends people, when we are the majority in this country, and that we must yield to their discomfort. Then they tell us we have no right to ask the same of those who offend us with the sleezy sights and sounds of raunchy music, TV shows and films, movies, and advertisements, that we must endure almost everywhere. Anyway, here's what I wrote to Mr. Haynes: Dear Mr. Haynes, I read both of your “graduation prayer” columns, I still firmly agree with the majority. I am distressed that a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center would seem to take a position so far removed from the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.” Despite the way that recent courts have distorted t

I started this article in April; it's still a work in progress, but it makes the point I want to make... In the circus, high wire or trapeze acts that perform without a safety net to take a great risk, just to amaze an audience with their skill and bravery, but hopefully not their foolhardiness. The risk, of course, is serious injury or death if these highly skilled and experienced entertainers make a single mistake. Of course, they earn good money for taking such risks, and the decision to carry out dangerous exploits is theirs to make. Hopefully, they also provide themselves and their dependents with health and life insurance. Life is uncertain. Some activities, jobs, professions, and amusements are more dangerous than others. As a teacher, I had my students read a book called The Giver about a place without risks. Making a world perfectly safe required removing much of what makes life worth living. For junior high teenagers, the word for such a world is boring. Creating

The nature of political and social discourse is rarely honest. Opponents often choose issues and words that intentionally put their side or position in the better light by making the other side look bad. The abortion debate is a good example. It starts with as simple a thing as names. Although one side calls itself “pro-life,” the other side chooses to call it “anti-abortion,” giving the position a different character. The other side does the same, calling them “pro-abortion,” even though they prefer “pro-choice.” In fact, it is easy to spot the biases of those reporting on the controversy, by the labels they use. Most of the media use “pro-choice” and “anti-abortion,” showing themselves to be on that same side. Conservative or Christian reporters will say “pro-life” and “pro-abortion.” The rare but objective reporter [1] will respect all parties, using “pro-life” and “pro-choice.” The divergence and duplicity extends throughout the controversy. The pro-choice su

Everyone thinks he or she is right. As long as facts are correct, information given is true, and reasoning is logical, most people will possess accurate knowledge to the level of their age, experience, education, and abilities. Of course, none of that controls the opinions people may hold. Children believe what their parents tell them, whether it is the existence of Santa Claus or their assurance of love. Adolescents may refuse, for a time, to believe anything their parents say. Some hold ideological or religious opinions uncritically, but wise adults usually learn never to assume that any person, organization, or party may be trusted unconditionally. An ideology or system of thought is only as good as the mind or minds that create it, and a wise person takes care even with one’s own beliefs. Since nobody is perfect, no one’s system of beliefs is perfect either. While Christians may be confident that that God and His Word are perfect, none of us sinners can be trusted always to