2/24/2005 11:33:00 AM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|It needs to be said, so I’m going to say it, “Doug Wead is an idiot.”
“Who is Doug Wead?” you might ask. He is a former special assistant to then-President George H. W. Bush (father of George W. Bush) and (one can assuredly now say) former friend of the Bush family. His name has been in the headlines recently because he chose to release secretly recorded conversations between he and then-governor George W. Bush in which Mr. Bush discussed his personal life, political strategy and private perspectives.
Mr. Wead, using the left-wing cover of the New York Times to reveal his cards, initially defended his actions (both of recording and then releasing the private conversations during which Governor Bush did not realize he was being recorded) by claiming that he knew he was talking with a historic figure and wanted to preserve the conversations for future generations to examine in light of history. Of course, he also conveniently released them just prior to the release of his new book on Presidential parents.
A few days later, Mr. Wead claims to have regrets stating, “"Contrary to a statement that I made to the New York Times, I have come to realize that personal relationships are more important than history. I am asking my attorney to direct any future proceeds from the book to charity and to find the best way to vet these tapes and get them back to the president to whom they belong. History can wait."
Someone needs to explain to Mr. Wead that you can’t “unring” a bell and the damage has already been done. But what is the damage?
I would argue against the idea that the release of the tape snippets did the President much harm. In fact, I think they show several things about him. First, he is pretty much the same in private as he is in public. His public policy pretty much reflects the attitudes revealed in these assorted taped statements. He identifies with the Religious Right, but isn’t their lapdog. He is a driven man in spite of his laid back appearances – he was out to win and he was serious about defeating his opponents. Howard Fineman called that “arrogance” in an article he wrote for Newsweek. I call that focused leadership – just the quality I want in a man who is defending our nation and leading our military. He seems to acknowledge that he made mistakes in his past, but he didn’t glory in those failures and wasn’t about to let them define him – both marks of a true leader. I can’t see how those revelations did any damage to him at all and in fact, in my opinion, only reinforced his standing as a principled, focused leader.
But, I think we can safely assume that Wead’s long-time “friendship” (if it ever was that) with the Bush family is DOA. What kind of friend capitalizes on his private relationship with a high-profile figure for personal gain or notoriety? Not a real friend, that’s for sure. Leadership is lonely enough and one of the reasons paranoia and reclusiveness often invades the life of public people is because it is extremely difficult to discern who is a friend and who is just another manipulative, groupie, back-stabber. I guess the world now knows what category into which Mr. Wead fits.
There’s a greater damage however, that shouldn’t be lost on evangelicals and Christian conservatives. One of the reasons Mr. Wead had access to the President and why he became a trusted confidant was his role in the conservative faith community. He served as a liaison to the often diverse and divergent factions of Christian conservatives. He was assumed to be a man of faith, integrity and trustworthiness. And with his selfish and unethical decision to break his confidence with the President, he tarnished the expectations and reputation of a whole category of influencers. If the leaders and liaisons of the religious community can’t be expected to respect their privileges, who can be trusted?
This is yet the latest example of trust violations between high-profile “religious” leaders and the public. From televangelists to political operatives, from Jim Bakker to Catholic Priests, from moral failures to ethical failures, we damage the reputation of our greater mission which is to represent the Lord Jesus Christ with excellence. When our ambassadorship of the Gospel is our first priority, lesser issues like money, power, access and notoriety follow respectfully in the shadows. When we get our priorities out of order, we besmirch the image of our Father and His Kingdom and Truth.
His current regrets are all fine and good, but as we used to say in Missouri where I grew up, “That cow’s done left the barn.” All of us who carry the title of “Christian” need to remember that there indeed is a higher standard of integrity, ethics and morality expected of those who would represent Christ.
With a friend like Mr. Wead, the President doesn’t really need any enemies. Sadly, he has also been reminded once again that true friends are often very difficult to find.|W|P|110926288870503373|W|P|With a Friend Like This....|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/22/2005 08:59:00 AM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|I hate, and I mean DESPISE, most forwarded emails. You know the kind I mean where in 2.9 seconds you can go to www.snopes.com and find out that it is completely bogus. I usually don't even read emails that begin with FW:. But my mom sent me this one and it was actually pretty good. Whether or not this is an actual editorial or not, (and I suspect it isn't -- have you ever heard of someone named "Foster Childs"?) I think it encapsulates a lot of truth. So, because I'm running low on original thought this morning, I thought I'd cut and paste it for your reading enjoyment....
Why Democrats Lost
by Foster Childs, December 5, 2004 - Tri-County Times, Mercer Cty., NJ
The devil you know, or the devil you don't.
That's how many John Kerry supporters explained their defeat in the 2004 election.
Democrats appear to be genuinely astounded that they didn't win. Many! blame their loss on the Republican party's ability to present itself as representing people of moral values. Clearly that astounds them "How could we be perceived as the party without values" they ask.
As one who embraced many Democratic principles as recently as the election of 2000, allow me to answer.
Laura Bush has personified elegance and class as America's First Lady for four years. The Democratic party countered with a vulgar, foulmouthed, brazen billionaire with the grace of a drunken hooker. Teresa Heinz-Kerry insulted every mother in America when she snidely stated in an interview that "I doubt Laura Bush has ever held a real job." I can't envision a more ill-suited candidate to represent our country as First Lady.
To most Americans Ted Kennedy is a philandering, has-been alcoholic whose money and influence allowed him to get away with murder. To the Democratic party, Kennedy is their esteemed elder statesman.
The Democratic party's most vocal spokesperson is Michael Moor e, an arrogant ass who holds America, and Americans, in utter contempt. He delights in telling the French and Germans how stupid we are. He mocks our military. He insults our president. His "Joe Average" persona is as bogus as the "facts" in his slanted books and movies. Most Americans despise him as a traitor and a slob. Yet, at the Democratic National Convention Moore was afforded the most honored seat in the house - right alongside former president Jimmy Carter.
Most Americans view gay men and women as simply fellow citizens who should be afforded the same respect as any other citizen. The Democratic party views gay men and women as a minority whose perceived "rights" should supercede the established tenets that have governed society since the beginning of time.
The majority of America understands that we must take a stand against terrorism, that terrorists are the essence of pure evil, that terrorists will always hate America and Americans, no matter what we do. The Democratic party seems to believe that if we just turn the other cheek they will go away. Their mantra of "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" smacks of pacifism.
Most Americans would find an adult male who wears makeup, high heels, a wig and women's clothing to his workplace as not just creepy, but deeply disturbing. The Democratically controlled California legislature passed a law providing fines up to $150,000 for any employer who fires a man for showing up to work dressed as a woman. Every Democrat cast a 'yes' vote.
To most of America the entertainment industry is comprised primarily of dull-witted, self-absorbed twits who, under the guise of "artistic expression," fill our living rooms and our children's brains with an endless parade of depraved garbage The vociferous Tinseltown endorsement of John Kerry merely confirmed what most of America already knows - the Democratic party reflects Hollywood's moral values, not America's.
The consensus by Republicans, and a sur prising number of Democrats, is near unanimous - the Democratic party is in ruins because they have chosen to align themselves with all that is wrong in America. They mock people of faith. They endorse special-interest agendas that tear apart the fabric of our Constitution. They embrace race-baiting opportunists like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. They support wacko organizations such as the ACLU. And, worst of all, they offer America as heroes - as people to emulate, as role-models for our children - shameless charlatans like Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore and Bill Clinton.
The answer to the question is very simple: The Democratic party is perceived as the party without moral values because they are a party without moral values.
And, as shown on November 2nd, the majority of America is finally realizing it.|W|P|110908105568593975|W|P|Why the Democrats Lost...|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/18/2005 11:38:00 AM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|Since the 1960’s, a debate has raged in many denominations and congregations about the propriety of discussing things from the pulpit that are also being discussed in Washington, DC, state capitols and mayor’s offices. Due to faulty court interpretations of non-constitutional writings, an artificial wall of separation between church and state has been interpreted as forbidding churches and pastors to be involved in the political process. Some have taken that concept further and suggest that Christians in general have no business being involved in politics and a few have even discouraged voting.
Such a position is built on an appalling absence of information regarding the heritage and tradition of political activism springing from the church and pastor’s pulpits. From the days prior to the signing of the Declaration of Independence through the fight to abolish slavery to the resurgence of “family values” as part of a political platform, pastors, churches and religious people in general have a long and rich heritage of influence in the political process in the United States of America.
One need only go back to the actually signing of the Constitution to see that pastors and seminarians held tremendous sway in the founding documents of this nation. Of those who signed the Constitution originally, twenty-seven of them (nearly one-half) had degrees from seminaries. Many ministers and theologians actively participated in the Constitutional Convention. Many of the first members of political offices from the state level to the national level were ministers.
One of the four greatest influences that lead to the conflict over slavery in this country was the Pulpit. Henry Ward Beecher would thunder against the evils of slavery from his church pulpit and reporters in the audience would record his words and publish them for the rest of the world to see. Like a wildfire, the flames of abolitionism swept from pulpit to pulpit and press to newspaper stirring an outcry against this barbarous practice.
Sadly, today many people have forgotten the power that the pulpit can have in shaping the character of a nation. In fact, some evangelicals are vocally questioning or even opposing the concept that churches should address topics that have political ramifications. Ed Dobson of Calvary Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cal Thomas, the syndicated writer and former official with the Moral Majority; and well-known pastor and author John MacArthur have all written books that call into question the propriety of Christian and church involvement in politics.
As a pastor, I believe that my position is above politics. I truly believe that if I were to step down from my pulpit to run for and even win elected office; I would be taking a step “down” in terms of eternal impact. But the fact that the role is sacred (even if the man is extremely human) carries a responsibility that demands that no compartment of life be reserved from Scriptural scrutiny and that includes politics.
Scripture calls our leaders “ministers” and they must be evaluated then by Biblical standards of right and wrong and ethics and morality. Politicians have a responsibility to provide moral and philosophical leadership for citizens. Were it not for the voices of preachers, there might be no Bill of Rights, slavery may have continued for decades longer, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s might never have occurred.
Because I am a pastor and literally thousands listen to me each week seeking Biblically inspired challenges, reminders and training, I have a responsibility also to rightly divide the truth and challenge those things that undermine truth. A pastor must be a theologian, an educator, an ethicist and a prophet. He must not shirk from any topic – even those that are uncomfortable or unpopular.
Some have suggested that a preacher who addresses political issues is demeaning his office. I disagree. I believe that a preacher who addresses political issues is fulfilling his office. In pointing out sin, wrong philosophy and dangerous trends, he calls men and women to repentance and Biblical living. Something this country always has and always will need.|W|P|110874476024114155|W|P|Of Preachers and Politics|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/17/2005 03:15:00 PM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|Years ago, I remember learning that there are seven deadly sins. It was suggested that they were deadly because indulging in them would lead to an early physical death, a permanent spiritual death or both. The seven sins were identified as lust, gluttony, avarice, sloth, anger, envy and pride. In today’s postmodern culture, what at one time was a vice or sin, has become a virtue or sickness. Let’s take a look at them again.
Unbridled lust was once the descriptor of the promiscuous and the pervert. Today, it describes at least one former President and (too-many) preachers. What once was lewd behavior by undisciplined louts has become a struggle of sexual addiction for hapless and helplessly weak men. From Bill Clinton to TV stars David Duchovny and Michael Douglas, nearly 2.5 million Americans claim to be addicted to sex. How nice that we sanitize immoral and unhealthy behavior by cloaking it as an illness.
Gluttony is also now often excused as the results of genetic predisposition or compulsive behavior by those who experience eating disorders. Meanwhile, we wait in drive-through window lines because we’re too lazy to get out of our cars and walk an extra twenty feet to grab the Extra Biggie Fries we use to chase down our mega-burgers with Big Gulps.
The love of money (or avarice) and envy go hand in hand as we have succumbed to compulsive shopping, recreational spending and esteem-building purchasing. One high-profile divorce case in recent years had a jilted wife demanding $350,000 a MONTH to support her three-year-old daughter who happened to have a billionaire father. Today’s generation is richer and sicker than ever.
Sloth has kept millions on the federal dole for years as we use every excuse in the book to justify unemployment, government handouts and lack of initiative. It’s causes run the course from prejudice to chronic fatigue to environmental disadvantages and a hundred other excuses to lay around. If you don’t have a job, you do have a job. I dare you to spend as much time looking for work as you would expect to work in a week and I guarantee you that you will soon find some job in short order.
Anger is not just for the redheaded and hotheaded any more. Anger-control classes, temper management strategies and conflict resolution courses can provide instruction and even medication to keep you from popping your top. It’s not temper and it’s not temptation, it’s an illness and you aren’t responsible for your actions. In fact, murderers are being released or they receive light sentences because of the illness of anger that leads to temporary insanity. In the experts of vice and virtue’s opinions, what you really have is an impulse control disorder that leads you to an act of road rage that inspired you to run that other driver off the road.
And last, but not least, pride is no longer a sin, but a virtue! Self-esteem, self-actualization, self-realization, self-worth and self-concept have replaced self-discipline, self-denial and self-control. Today’s children are thought to think high thoughts of themselves lest they be limited in their potential. This self-centered philosophy inspires its adherents to demand ever-increasing rights, deny responsibility and throw off any confinement of expression or behavior. We live according to the mantra of “what’s in it for me?”. Every dysfunction in life can now be traced back to a lack of self-esteem from teen-age pregnancy to drug use to anorexia to homelessness to divorce. How convenient that we no longer have to accept responsibility for our actions when a vice becomes a virtue.
Society may be changing the standards, but God’s Word hasn’t changed a bit. What was once sin is still sin and every sinner needs a Savior and His name is Jesus Christ. We may allow new definitions and trendy pop-psychology to alter how we perceive right and wrong, but that can do nothing to protect us from the consequences of violating God’s universal laws.|W|P|110867158112110120|W|P|Sin or Sickness? Vice or Virtue?|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/16/2005 01:33:00 PM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|Last week, it was my privilege to be a presenter at the Virginia/Carolinas Regional Educator's Conference for ASCI. Over 3,000 teachers were gathered in a beautiful convention center where they had the opportunity to attend workshops and keynote addresses by some of the brightest and well-known educators and thinkers in the country. My background is in education and all three of my degrees are in the field. I've been a classroom teacher and the President of the largest state association of Christian Schools (Florida Association of Christian Colleges and Schools) in the country. I teach regularly at multiple colleges across the country. Having been part of Christian education for over 25 years, I remain convinced that it is an investment worth making for churches, educators and parents.
Many Christian schools are opening their fall enrollment drives right now. Because spaces in quality Christian schools are limited and often fill up fast, many parents must chose whether or not a Christian school is right for their family at this time of the year.
I have attended public, private and Christian schools at various stages of my education. Being an educator by profession, I actually spent a quarter of a century in classrooms as a student and the rest of my adult life as a teacher or leader in the classroom. I’ve seen the differences in schools, I’ve experienced it personally and I’ve had to make the choices for my own four children.
Today’s Christian parent really must give serious consideration to sending their child to a Christian school. Whether or not you send your kids to a Christian school in general or the Christian school which I lead specifically, is not a test of fellowship with me. I believe it is a family matter. But I also believe that it is the responsibility of parents to make this decision spiritually and purposefully.
For some families, home schooling is the better option, which allows mom to stay at home and saves the cost of tuition. But let’s face it, not every parent is cut out to be a home teacher. We have home schooled some of our children over the years and know its benefits and drawbacks personally.
Some have found a particular public school or public school class or teacher shares their values sufficiently that they feel comfortable sending their kids there. I can’t envision that this will be an environment free from conflict considering the culture of public education, but a proactive parent teamed with a Christian (or at least moral) administrator and teacher might find public education acceptable for a time.
And in all honesty, I’ve been in some Christian schools that had major deficits. Some were “Christian” in name only. Others had the right motivation and were genuinely sincere, but quite frankly, just weren’t pulling it off and the students were suffering academically as a consequence. Such realities put even more responsibility on parents to be careful when selecting their child’s school.
But make no mistake; a good Christian school is a tremendous option for many families who want the values of their home and church reinforced throughout the week. Christian schools have an unusually dedicated staff that has a specific philosophical agenda which leads children to eternal truths and which encourages them to grow up with balance and an appreciation for the wonder of their Creator. Christian schools provide a safer environment which at least makes an attempt to emphasize Biblical values and to screen out the wicked values and dangerous messages that permeate so many public school programs. Christian schools can be an extension of a Godly home, but shouldn’t be considered a replacement for one.
Christian schools aren’t perfect and they won’t solve all your problems. Your children will spend more of their waking hours in a school environment than any other place during the school year. It is essential that parents be aware of the awesome power a teacher and a curriculum have. Many a sincere parent has seen their child drift away or even torn away by influences, messages and philosophies that run counter all that they believe because they have placed their vulnerable child into an educational system that is hostile to Biblical truth.
Some have suggested that we should use our kids as missionaries to the public schools. We are fools to send children into battle unprepared. It’s simply cruel. Train them first, equip them well and prepare their hearts thoroughly. Then they’ll be ready to do battle with a philosophy that needs confronted. We’d never think of putting our children onto a plane to spend months of their lives working unguided in a hostile foreign country. Why would we bundle them up as elementary or high school students and expect them to match wits with a system that is designed to reprogram them. It isn’t even rational.
Check out the Christian schools in your area. If you live in Charlotte, visit the Website for Northside Christian Academy at www.ncaknights.com. You’ll find that in the end, Christian education doesn’t cost; it pays!
|W|P|110857918731277614|W|P|Christian Education Doesn't Cost, It Pays!|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/22/2005 01:45:00 PM|W|P| Cindy Swanson|W|P|Dan, thanks for your comments in support of Christian schools. As the parent of three children who have gone through our Christian school, I can vouch for the benefits!2/15/2005 04:49:00 PM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|Recently, I've been having a dialogue with a friend and confidant whom I respect and with whom I enjoy intellectual sparring on a wide variety of topics. Our topic du jour has been the issue of racism, how to identify it and how to address it in a ministry context. It is an interesting (and might I add...on-going) exchange and it is forcing me to examine my own attitudes and responses to something that indeed stains many "southern" and "conservative/evangelical/fundamentalist" churches.
I pastor a larger church that, in all honesty, has taken unbiblical positions in its history on issues of race, integration and prejudice toward people of color. It is a stain on the fabric of our church's reputation and it has limited our ministry and diminished our effectiveness if the truth be told. I know of very few out-and-out prejudiced or racist individuals (in or out of our church) but that doesn't mean that we have a Biblical attitude toward how we should treat others who don't look "just like us."
One of the challenges of my own leadership is that I need to discern it, confront it and deal with it -- not from a cultural perspective, not from a pragmatic perspective, but from a BIBLICAL perspective. And it would also be nice if I could do it in such a way that it creates healing and repentance and unity, not controvery, disharmony and re-opened wounds. Quite frankly, I'm still searching for answers.
But a larger issue still looms as I experience the microcosm of the problem in my own ministry. What do we do about the transending problem of addressing unBiblical attitudes toward racial harmony in the Body of Christ as a whole and in local churches individually?
Recent surveys have revealed that one of the most segregated places in America is the church on Sunday mornings. Many of us send our kids to Christian school that were, at their inception, little more than white flight academies. It takes missionaries going to African continents far longer to raise their support from our local congregations than it does for missionaries going to European or even South American countries.
Why is this? Could it be that there is still the shadow of latent racism casting its ugly shadow over conservative evangelical congregations?
Some would argue that many evangelical churches have outreaches to the homeless, inner-city neighborhoods and even run buses and vans into minority communities offering free rides for the kids to Sunday school. I think these are wonderful and important facets of ministry. But I would also ask, if this is a part of our mission for reaching people of color, why aren’t our adult worship services more integrated then? Could it be that we don’t mind taking ministry to minorities, even busing their kids to Sunday school, but somehow the “welcome mat” isn’t put out when it comes to making them part of the internal life of the church? If that is the case, and I suspect it is far too frequently, then we are sinning against God and violating His word and we ought not ignore that.
Where are majority white congregations with a black or latin Senior Pastor? Where are the black or brown associate pastors on our staffs and deacons or elders on our boards? What have we done to welcome and develop and prioritize racial minority representation and participation in our local churches? Shouldn't the church be at the forefront of this and not a johnny-come-lately?
I’m afraid that some of us in churches today would protest vehemently if someone accused us of being racist, yet, under the right circumstances, in “safe” places, among our “own kind”, we are just as likely to utter some insensitive or racially derogatory remark and not even realize it unless someone had the courage to call our attention to it. How can we expect to be the kind of lighthouse for the grace and love of Christ to all people if we fail so frequently and miserably in demonstrating that grace and love in our own lives?
Sure there are cultural differences that may impact where we feel more comfortable during worship. I’ve preached at black churches in the past wherein I was the person present with the least amount of rhythm. I mean, I can’t even clap to the beat. I’ve also worshipped with Hispanic congregations where the openness and emotion were far freer than I am used to from a more staid tradition. But quite honestly, these small impediments shouldn’t keep us from being warm and welcoming to those who may not “look like us” on the outside when in the eyes of God, we are all just sinners saved by grace.
It’s time some of us took a look at our inner heart and ask the Lord to reveal any hint of residual racism that may lurk therein. Whether it is something so overt as telling a racist joke or simply insensitivity based on stereotypes and cultural traditions, we ought not make excuses for attitudes, actions and words that cause pain, demean character and build walls. We need to confront this problem honestly and deal with it Biblically.
Christians should be leading the way by confessing the sin of racism and building bridges that will move us beyond the dark days of our past. Only when we deal with this thoroughly can we expect to remove the shadows of latent racism that limit our effectiveness in presenting the gospel to all peoples today.|W|P|110850491617083196|W|P|The Stain of Latent Racism|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/16/2005 09:24:00 AM|W|P| |W|P|How true. Racism goes both ways. I have an African-American friend that gets lambasted by his family for going to a white church. I love how people of other ethnic backgrounds can help me grow more passionate in worshiping even if I can’t clap or sway in rhythm.
Don H.4/07/2005 09:50:00 AM|W|P| |W|P|Wow!!! It's funny that I would pull this article. I'm Africian American (protestant faith) my Wife is Caucasian.(Catholic faith) We also reside in Charlotte, NC and before I read this article I was surfing the net for interracial Churches in the Charlotte area.
Unfortunately this area doesn't have the diversity in the Churches that I feel is desperately needed. I feel that ministries should have more sermons on loving and embracing your fellow man no matter what race he or she is as well as truly opening the doors and your heart to someone that looks different than you.
Diversity is needed in the Africian American Church as well. I serve a God that doesn't recognize color, creed etc and he put us all here on Earth for his purpose, not ours. so... what should we do next?? I think as God's children we should really ask ourselves "what would Jesus do?" and really follow through it. great article Dan, you have my support 100% thanks for the inspiration.2/04/2005 04:32:00 PM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|I read an interesting quotation today. A well-known author penned this...
“Our youth today love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority, disrespect for older people. Children nowadays are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers.”
So who was this inciteful observer of today's dilemma?
His name was Socrates and he wrote this in 425 B.C.
It seems like there really IS nothing new under the sun, is there? Today, I read of a variety of broken young people, dysfunctional homes and an array of consequences which spring from families who've lost control of their kids. There was the story of the 10-year-old boy in Florida who raped his 8-year-old classmate. The story of the South Carolina boy (now 15, he was 12 at the time of the crime) who is on trial for the shot-gun murder of his grandparents who had graciously taken him in after he'd had trouble at home. There's the sad story out of Colorado how two very charming and thoughtful young teenage girls were successfully sued by a hateful neighbor who claimed to be traumatized by their well-intentioned act of making her a plate of cookies and delivering them to her home at 10:30 in the evening (even though she was still awake and the lights were on.) How about the Florida couple who kept their seven kids in bondage, pulling out their toenails with pliers and who had reduced a pair of 14-year old twins down to less than 40 pounds? No wonder our kids are growing up confused, angry, hurting and sometimes violent.
Sadly, some parents are setting their kids up for lives of rebellion, unhappiness and self-centered living which will rob them of joy, peace and success. These parents may be well-intentioned, but all the good intentions in the world aren't going to counter-act what they are creating.
We live in a generation of incredible indulgence. In our affluence and prosperity, many parents today seem bent on raising children whom have rarely been told no, who have never had to wait, who have had few boundaries and fewer responsibilities. As a result, we are training many of our young people into young rebels. Younger children are no committing increasingly adult crimes. From sex offenses to murder, we continue to be shocked by each new wave of youthful crime. Few people have stopped to truly explore why we are rearing a generation of young, hardened rebels.
So, I propose to you a formula that can be used to raise a young rebel. Apply these principles and you can be assured of tears on your pillow, late night visits from police officers and perhaps a lonesome old age as your children take a long walk down the wrong path.
First, teach him or her that life is fair. By giving them this unrealistic expectation of the world and its inhabitants, you will set them up for disillusionment, disappointment and depression. Appropriately taught, you child will suspect that the world is conspiring to pick on them and they will frequently turn to you and whine, “That’s not fair!.”
Next, always side with them against authority. Acknowledge that your child’s teacher really is picking on them, that Johnny is incapable of ever lying to an adult, that the pastor is being legalistic and that the policeman should be out picking up “real” criminals instead of picking on your kid.
Another way to raise a rebel is to divorce your spouse. By doing this, you can set an example that commitments aren’t forever and that running or splitting is preferred to working things out. Once you are divorced, make sure that you undermine the authority of your ex-spouse at every opportunity lest your kids begin to favor them over you.
Don’t insist that they go to church. Why if you “force” them to attend worship, they just might “reject” God. What good is it going to do them anyway if they are required to be somewhere against there will? Let them “find God” at their own pace and in their own time.
To raise a rebel, you might also want to allow them to date early and date often. Encourage your pre-pubescent young one to think of themselves as incomplete without a little gal-pal or boy-toy gracing their arm. Relive your own teen years by encouraging them to get into cars alone, go to the movies unchaperoned and to even have their dates over to the house when you aren’t home. Generally, this principal – correctly applied – might even allow you to become a grandparent years before you expected to become one!
Another idea is to pay them liberally to be part of your family. What child should be expected to tidy their room, clean off the dinner table or even mow the yard without having substantial compensation for their labor? Teach your children that if there’s nothing in it for you, then it probably isn’t worth doing. There are no real responsibilities that come with simply being a part of a family.
To rear a rebel, you should always avoid practicing what you preach. It is very important that you teach your children to do what you say, not what you do. They will be inspired by your hypocrisy and quickly learn to ignore the rest of your directives as well. This business that your walk talks louder than your talk talks is for the birds. Just tell them to shut up and listen and don’t give you any backtalk.
I could go on, but you are probably ready for me to stop. Though I’ve given you these suggestions with tongue firmly in cheek, I’m afraid that many of us set our kids up for rebellion with thoughtless actions and attitudes that teach far more than we ever considered. We don’t need more rebels without a cause in America. We just need charactered citizens who understand submission to Godly principles.
|W|P|110755326403200355|W|P|Raising a Rebel 101|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com2/11/2005 03:54:00 PM|W|P| |W|P|I really enjoy your stuff. Raising a Rebel is spot on. Keep up the good work.
John Young
BBFI, New Zealand2/02/2005 03:25:00 PM|W|P|Dan Burrell|W|P|Some days ago, I blogged my comments on the Sponge Bob Square Pants controversy in an article entitled "Sponge Bob Gay Pants?" It was obvious that the press was creating a controversy by using some manipulated comments in order to cast pro-family evangelical/fundamentalist Christians in as negative a light as possible. In my humble opinion, the mistake made by some pro-family groups who became embroiled in the controversy, was that they didn't do a better job of clarifying what they meant and in pointing out how the media was twisting their words to make them look silly. C'mon...these guys are professionals in handling the media and we all know (in advance) how they like to take a snippet and created an attention-getting headline. It's part of the media game -- I've personally played it and have been personally been played by it. Experience can lead to better judgement and we should be able to mostly avoid these scenarios.
Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and an amazing leader for pro-family issues, has finally decided to address the controversy in extremely clear and defining words. His article is worth of reading, so I will copy it here in its entirety and I hope you will read it. There really is an issue of "tolerance education" that is at the heart of his concerns and others. Sadly, that was lost in the bungled aftermath of soundbites and headlines.
Here's what Dr. Dobson had to say...
Dear Friends:
If you had told me a month ago that I’d be devoting my February letter to a cartoon character named SpongeBob SquarePants, I’d have said you were crazy. Nevertheless, by now you probably know that I have been linked to that famous talking sponge by hundreds of media outlets, from the New York Times to "MSNBC" to "Saturday Night Live." The story of how this situation unfolded is somewhat complicated, but it must be told.
In truth, this tale has very little to do with SpongeBob himself, and everything to do with the media’s ability to obscure the facts and to direct lies and scorn toward those of us who care about defending children. It all began on an evening in late January, during Inaugural Week in Washington, D.C. At that time, I spoke briefly to 350 guests attending a banquet hosted by Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and Gary Bauer’s American Values. I concluded by sharing a word of concern about a video that will be distributed to 61,000 public and private elementary schools across the nation, for use on the proposed "We Are Family Day," March 11.
The video, which millions of children will soon see, features nearly 100 favorite cartoon characters that kids will instantly recognize, including not only SpongeBob, but also Barney the Dinosaur, the Muppets, Dora the Explorer, Bob the Builder, Winnie the Pooh, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Jimmy Neutron and Big Bird. The video itself is innocent enough and does not mention anything overtly sexual. Rather, it features the children’s cartoon characters singing and dancing along to the popular disco hit "We Are Family."
But while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister. My brief comments at the FRC gathering were intended to express concern not about SpongeBob or Big Bird or any of their other cartoon friends, but about the way in which those childhood symbols are apparently being hijacked to promote an agenda that involves teaching homosexual propaganda to children. Nevertheless, the media jumped on the story by claiming that I had accused SpongeBob of being "gay." Some suggested that I had confused the organization that had created the video with a similarly named gay-rights group. In both cases, the press was dead wrong, and I welcome this opportunity to help them get their facts straight.
I want to be clear: the We Are Family Foundation — the organization that sponsored the video featuring SpongeBob and the other characters was, until this flap occurred, making available a variety of explicitly pro-homosexual materials on its Web site. It has since endeavored to hide that fact (more on this later), but my concerns are as legitimate today as they were when I first expressed them in January.
So let us consider the evidence. One of the first resources to catch our attention on the foundation’s Web site was a booklet that lists a number of organizational "allies," including five of the largest pro-homosexual organizations in the nation: the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce, and Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). Also, the Web site made available school lesson plans that suggested teachers ask these questions of students:
"How are you affected by homophobia?"
"How would you be affected by your sexual orientation were it different than it is now?"
"How will understanding these definitions change your thinking about compulsory heterosexuality and homophobia?
"How will it change any of your behaviors?"
From a handout entitled, "Talking About Being Out" there was this:
"Do you know of any people in your school whose sexual orientation differs from yours?"
"How do you know?"
"Are you comfortable with that person or those people?
"What are some factors that might encourage or discourage a person about being ‘out’ as homosexual or bisexual in this class or school?"
"Answer the above questions in regard to people in your class or school who consider themselves atheist."
One of the lesson plans, titled, Uncovering Attitudes About Sexual Orientation, presents what are deemed "stereotypical definitions" of words that encourage bigotry and bias. If you have any doubt about the pro-homosexual agenda inherent to these materials, check out these loaded terms, which could be coming soon to an elementary school near you. (All are direct quotes.)
Compulsory Heterosexuality: The assumption that women are "naturally" or innately drawn sexually and emotionally toward men, and men toward women; the view that heterosexuality is the "norm" for all sexual relationships. The institutionalization of heterosexuality in all aspects of society includes the idealization of heterosexual orientation, romance, and marriage. Compulsory heterosexuality leads to the notion of women as inherently "weak," and the institutionalized inequality of power: power of men to control women’s sexuality, labor, childbirth and childrearing, physical movement, safety, creativity, and access to knowledge. It can also include legal and social discrimination against homosexuals and the invisibility or intolerance of lesbian and gay existence.
Gender: A cultural notion of what it is to be a woman or a man; a construct based on the social shaping of femininity and masculinity. It usually includes identification with males as a class or with females as a class. Gender includes subjective concepts about character traits and expected behaviors that vary from place to place and person to person.
Heterosexism: A system of beliefs, action, advantages, and assumptions in the superiority of heterosexuals or heterosexuality. It includes unrecognized privileges of heterosexual people and the exclusion of nonheterosexual people from policies, procedures, events and decisions about what is important.
Homophobia: Thoughts, feelings, or actions based on fear, dislike, judgment or hatred of gay men and lesbians / of those who love and sexually desire those of the same sex. Homophobia has roots in sexism and can include prejudice, discrimination, harassment, and acts of violence.
Is this the kind of nonsense you want taught to your kids, especially if the nation’s most popular cartoon characters are used to get across the concepts? I pray not!
If you’re planning on visiting the We Are Family Foundation’s Web site [www.wearefamilyfoundation.org] to verify the accuracy of the above information, don’t bother. In the days since this story broke, the majority of overtly pro-homosexual content has been removed. The founder of the organization, Nile Rodgers, appeared on the "Today Show" and said that we had the wrong site and that they had nothing to do with homosexuality. That was Jan. 21. Two days later, most of the homosexual content disappeared or became inaccessible. I will leave it for you to determine the motive behind the mysterious vanishing of such material by the We Are Family Foundation. Suffice to say that we have clear documentation that these materials were being promoted on the Web site as recently as late January, despite denials to the contrary.
I’m sure you can see, now, why I expressed great concern about the intention of the We Are Family Foundation in using SpongeBob and company to promote the theme of "tolerance and diversity," which are almost always buzzwords for homosexual advocacy. It seems evident that had this connection not been exposed, the materials accompanying the video would have promoted a pro-homosexual ideology. Again, why do I believe that? Simply put, it’s because the past is often the best predictor of the future. In addition to the above material, a 2003 manual, produced in partnership with the We Are Family Foundation, featured exercises that attempted to equate homosexuality with immutable characteristics, such as race or gender.
Of particular significance is a so called "Tolerance Pledge" that appears to complement the pro-homosexual propaganda found within the once available school curricula. The second paragraph of the pledge reads as follows:
"To help keep diversity a wellspring of strength and make America a better place for all, I pledge to have respect for people whose abilities, beliefs, culture, race, sexual identity or other characteristics are different from my own." [Emphasis added.]
The words "sexual identity" in that last sentence hold the key to understanding what is going on here. They reveal a very clever and subtle intent lying below the water line. The stated purpose, as we have seen, is to teach children to respect each other and to accept those who are different. We are entirely supportive of that message. I have been teaching it for years. There appears to be another agenda operating here, however, that has serious implications for your kids. Quite simply, it is to desensitize very young children to homosexual and bisexual behavior.
During my remarks in Washington, I shared my suspicion about children being coerced into signing this "Tolerance Pledge." My critics quickly sought to marginalize my warning. Nile Rodgers exasperatingly explained to "FOX News’" Bill O’Reilly that, "Even on our Web site, we don’t ask people to sign the pledge." Oh really? Prior to my speech, the pledge, as it appeared on the foundation’s Web site, concluded with the following paragraph:
"To fulfill my pledge, I __________________ will examine my own biases and work to overcome them, set a positive example for my family and friends, work for tolerance in my own community, speak out against hate and injustice. We share a world. For all our differences, we share one world. To be tolerant is to welcome the differences and delight in the sharing."
Once the individual filled in his or her name, there was a "submit" button to the right of the pledge that would, ostensibly, officially record that "pledge" commitment. This portion of the pledge has also disappeared from the Web site.
Let me say it again for emphasis: Every individual is entitled to respect and human dignity, including those with whom we disagree strongly. The problem is not with acceptance or kindness, certainly. But kids should not be taught that homosexuality is just another "lifestyle," or that it is morally equivalent to heterosexuality. Scripture teaches that all overt sexual activity outside the bonds of marriage is sinful and harmful. Children should not be taught otherwise by their teachers, and certainly not if their parents are unaware of the instruction.
This is why I brought up this subject at the FRC banquet, explaining that there is a spiritual dimension to the culture war that many parents and grandparents are too busy to have noticed. It targets the values and attitudes of children, which after 12 years of propaganda in the public schools, can mold and shape the next generation. If a million or more very young children are going to be exposed to an organization through a video that encourages people to sign a "tolerance pledge," shouldn’t their moms and dads be told about it? We are just a few days away from the proposed "We Are Family Day" in the schools. Have you been informed of the discussions that may take place in your child’s elementary school in connection with the video, or the pledge that could possibly be placed before them?
What appears to be the case in the We Are Family program is an effort to replicate nationwide the curricula being implemented in California’s elementary schools. From my perspective, it is terribly dangerous.
Imagine a classroom full of wide-eyed five-year olds, sitting in a circle in front of the teacher. These kindergarteners will believe anything they are told, from the notion that reindeer can fly on Christmas Eve to the idea that bunnies lay candy eggs during "Spring Break." They are vulnerable to whatever adults tell them. In this instance, the kids are not learning about the alphabet or about exciting fairy tales; they are potentially hearing incomprehensible references to adult perverse sexuality. And the rationale for this instruction is "tolerance and diversity." Generations past would have been shocked and outraged by the very thought of such nonsense. Yet many parents either don’t know of the teaching or are passively willing to go along with it.
Well, this is the story behind the SpongeBob issue that outraged the media. There was a New York Times reporter at the banquet who wrote an article based on my comments. His factual representation was not entirely inaccurate, but it was written in such a way as to imply that it was SpongeBob whom I was attacking. From there, the story rapidly escalated. You won’t believe the way I was described by major news organizations. Here are a few examples:
MSNBC.com posted a commentary on the matter which read in part, "[T]here is a frightening number of so-called Christians who can be best described as creepy, rigid, arrogant, cruel, know-it-all, pompous, obnoxious and treacherous — better known by the acronym C.R.A.C.K.P.O.T."
James Carville offered these words of wisdom on "CNN": "You know what I think? I think these people have sponge brains."
The Los Angeles Times was among the many who mocked my remarks by distorting the truth: "SpongeBob holds hands with his starfish pal Patrick, and likes to watch the imaginary television show ‘The Adventures of Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy.’ Evidence enough, to Dobson at any rate, that the guy’s a menace."
"MSNBC’s" Keith Olbermann, one of the most hostile of the commentators, characterized my account of the situation as the goofiest story of the day. He cited a lawyer for the We Are Family Foundation who said that critics of this effort "need medication." Olbermann then added, "We here found it hard to argue with him." It might not surprise you that when one of my listeners wrote Mr. Olbermann a polite but pointed email in response to his comments, he replied by saying that emails such as hers would be "treated with the lack of respect they deserve." He went on to chastise her, and wrote, "…you might ask yourself if your actions are any different than someone in a cult." And some people still wonder why Americans no longer trust the mainstream media!
A columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote, "Though the cartoon’s gay agenda has forced Dr. Dobson to denounce it in the strongest terms, at least he hasn’t sunk to the level of the Rev. Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan. No one is talking about marching with signs that read ‘GOD HATES BOB.’ At least, not yet."
The New York Times published an editorial entitled "Nautical Nonsense" that referred to me as "the intolerant Dr. Dobson."
I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
In response, we received more than 100 requests for interviews within 24 hours from media entities within the United States and around the world, including the "Today Show," "CNN," the "BBC," "ABC News," the CBS "Early Show," "Good Morning America," "MSNBC," "National Public Radio," and "Hannity & Colmes" (the only one I accepted). Some of you heard the bogus story and believed it. We received more than 1,200 e-mails in the first few days, almost all of them critical because of my perceived attack on poor SpongeBob. One more time, let me say that the problem is not with SpongeBob or the other cartoon characters. It is with the way they will be used in the classroom.
And that brings me to the larger issue. It does not matter what the secular media says about me. In the final analysis, who cares? What is vitally important, however, are the children of this country and the effort being made to manipulate them for political purposes. As my father reminded Shirley and me when our daughter was in preschool, "Danae is growing up in a world much farther gone into moral decline than the world into which you were born." How much more true that is today than then!
We just came through a Christmas season where, in many schools, traditional carols were prohibited and the birth of Christ could not be mentioned. Macy’s Department Store in New York City banned any reference to Christmas. Bible reading and prayer in schools have been outlawed, and since 1980, the Ten Commandments could not be posted on bulletin boards. The Ninth Circuit Court in California did its best to prohibit the words "under God" from being cited by children in the Pledge of Allegiance. On March 2, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of displaying the Ten Commandments on government property. Easter has become "Spring Break," and the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ cannot be celebrated. But Earth Day can be observed in the curricula. "Father God" is out and "Mother Earth" is in. And in the midst of all this secularism, some schools that are having a hard time teaching kids to read, write and compute are giving precious classroom time to homosexual propaganda. That was the observation that motivated my remarks, not some fictitious cartoon character that children love. If you believed the media after having heard me and read my books for years, the question I would ask is, "Why?"
Parents, I urge you to keep a close eye on your sons and daughters. Watch carefully everything that goes into their little minds. Monitor their textbooks and the words of their teachers. Do not turn them over to harmful television programs. When God’s name is used in vain, or when sex and violence come on the screen, turn off the tube and then read and discuss together the scriptures found in Psalm 103:1: "I will set before my eyes no vile thing" [NIV]. Read uplifting and inspiring stories to your children daily. This obligation to teach your children biblical truths continually is unmistakably written in Deuteronomy 6:6-8, which tells us:
These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands, and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates. [NIV]
Focus on the Family will continue to help you fulfill this task of bringing up your children "in the fear and admonition of the Lord" (Ephesians 6:4). If you have little ones at home, you might consider signing up for our Focus on Your Child program, which provides a wealth of resources that will help parents implement a decidedly Christian approach to raising children. This donor-sponsored service delivers practical, age-appropriate advice and encouragement right to your home each month. In addition to receiving newsletters and audio journals, members have round-the-clock access to a Web site filled with helpful articles and topical advice. For more information, please visit our Web site at www.focusonyourchild.com.
Thank you for helping us continue to nourish and defend the institution of the family. We would appreciate your help in two ways. First, to pray for us as we seek to fulfill this mission, and second, to assist us financially as you can — after you have met your responsibilities to your local church. Together, we can make a difference.
Sincerely in Christ,
James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
Founder and Chairman
Here's the link for Focus on the Family. It is an excellent site and I regularly use it for everything from research to movie reviews. I'd suggest you bookmark it.
|W|P|110737663043865771|W|P|Dr. Dobson Responds to the SpongeBob Controvery|W|P|jdpettus@gmail.com
Cindy Swanson|W|P|Dan, thanks for your comments in support of Christian schools. As the parent of three children who have gone through our Christian school, I can vouch for the benefits!
|W|P|How true. Racism goes both ways. I have an African-American friend that gets lambasted by his family for going to a white church. I love how people of other ethnic backgrounds can help me grow more passionate in worshiping even if I can’t clap or sway in rhythm.