Partly Cloudy / 84° F
Give children a moral compass to live by [UPDATED]
Published 9:47am Wednesday, January 9, 2013 Updated 11:52am Wednesday, January 9, 2013Want to end the shootings, break-ins, and crimes of all types? You can play a role in reforming our culture.
Shooting, muggings, break-ins, robberies, marriage breakdown, suicides, abortions, violence, etc. are just symptoms of a much greater problem.
These symptoms clearly are a result of a move away from our Judea-Christian values.
Without a compass a ship will not stay on course. It will wander around the sea until it is destroyed by running ashore at a destination it didn’t even want to be at.
So it is with humans that have no moral compass. When we reject God’s programming for our moral compass (conscience), we will go astray from the course and destination our loving God has chartered out for us.
Without God’s programming in our moral compass, we will end up at a destination that we don’t want to be at.
The Bible tells us that a “great apostasy” will occur, like a great famine, when the people will reject his word.
Perhaps it is here now, because many people have programmed their moral consciences with the
teachings” of Hollywood, video games, music, secular teachings of rationalism, relativism and situation ethics, and other secular and cultural influences.
I encourage you parents to return to the Bible and teach your children Judeo-Christian values, to shape their moral compasses, before they set a course that causes them to run ashore in place they don’t want to be, a place you don’t want them to be at, a place of hurt, pain, sorrow, anger, hopelessness, restlessness and depression.
Don’t expect pastors, teachers or anyone else to do your job for you.
Take the bull by the horns and take charge over your children’s future, teach them values that will bless them and bless others.
If you don’t know where to start, Google it.
Don Werner
Northfield
The author of this letter makes an all too typical arrogant and presumptuous Christian assertion that anyone who does not follow his religious beliefs has no moral compass. It follows then that absent his Judeo-Christian belief system he would be running around mugging, killing and robbing people. The only thing that keeps him from a life of crime and amoral behavior is the threat of everlasting damnation and that absent that threat his innate constitution is so weak he would quickly revert to a worthless beast.
I understand some Christian can only feel good about themselves when they feel guilty about themselves, but this author takes it to a comical level. If he were correct there would be no non-Christian natives in the jungle of New Guines or darkest Africa for their failure to embrace the Judeo-Christian religions would have caused them to kill each other off centuries ago……yet they survive today. (perhaps they only revert to beasts once they formally reject the Judeo-Christian religion after being informed by some meddling missionary. Come to think of it, that may be why some tiresome missionaries are sautéed or boiled in large pot’s of oil)
I hardly think I need to back up my instant thoughts, but studies have been done on the subject of the letter writers’ concerns and I list a few below.
Abraham Franzblau, “Religious Belief and Character Among Jewish Adolescents,” Teachers College Contribution to Education, no. 634 (1934): found that the higher the acceptance of religious beliefs, the less inclined to honesty the adolescents became!
Murray Ross, Religious Beliefs in Youths, New York 1950: a survey of 2,000 associates of the YMCA found that those who labeled themselves atheists and agnostics were more willing to help the poor that those who called themselves religious.
Travis Hirschi & Rodney Stark, “Hellfire and Delinquency”, Social Problems Vol 17 (1969), pp202-213: reported that there is no difference in the likelihood to commit crimes between children who attend church regularly and those who did not.
R.E. Smith, G. Wheeler & E. Diener, “Faith Without Works: Jesus People, Resistance to Temptation and Altruism.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 5 (1975) p320-330: in their study found that college-age students in religious schools were no less likely to cheat than atheist and agnostic students in non-religious schools.
David M. Wulff, Psychology of Religion: Classic and Contemporary Views, New York 1991 p219-220: reported in his vast study that people with religious affiliation and / or attended church regularly and / or rated doctrinal orthodoxy as important tend to be prejudiced, intolerant of ambiguity, dogmatic and racist.
Hey, Curly…It looks like your scriptwriter had to look W A A A Y Y B A C K into some obscure journals to find “damning” evidence of the corruption of religious people…. Or, do you just google “Crackpot athiest studies to attack religious bible thumpers” in the Democrat National Committee’s archives?
Curly, you had to do some research of obscure journals dating back 80 years or so to find those quotes? Or do you just connect to the Democrat National Committee and ask for “academically valid” attacks on religion and morality?
As to the assertion that people of faith are “intolerant of ambiguity, you are spot on in matters moral: We believe there is good and evil, and evil is intolerable; we believe in such things as right and wrong, true and false, and beautiful and ugly, and not the immoral relativism you and your fellow athiestic socialists embrace, while you preach to one and all that everything is merely relative to other things which are degrees and intensities of worth in evading responsibility and culpability for your actions.
Dogmatic? We are generally immovable in our belief in and acceptance of our Risen Savior, Jesus Christ, and resistant toward the actions of people with evil intentions who devise and scheme to dilute and trivialize His teachings. We know that in any compromise between good and evil, only evil will profit, and reject such compromise.
Laus Deo, and pax te cum.
Well it sure looks like somebody just got back to town. I wonder who. All’s quiet on the tea bagger front for days if not weeks. Then all of a sudden Mike Van Horn, (on another story) Ginny Saul and the person posing as Jerome Mullins all magically appear on these pages within minutes of each other. Just a coincidence? Yeah sure, that’s what it is, just a coincidence!
It’s even a coincidence that Ginny and the person posing as Jerome Mullins both attack my citations as being too old (80 years) and WAAAYYBACK and obscure. If both read as well as they add and subtract it’s no wonder they are both ill-read and ignorant of facts.
Neither can attack the validity of the studies I cited so they belittle the fact that one was printed in 1934. I guess the fact that these kind of studies have been going on for a long time escapes them and they consider that a detriment. Of course if the studies were done yesterday both would be here whining that the study was too new and did not have a significant history to back it up. By the way Ginny, 1991, 1975, 1969 and 1950 are not 80 years ago.
In any case my citations are there, disprove them if you can. I have better things to do today…I’m going to watch the second inaugural of our President Barrack Obama. The same guy you scientists said couldn’t win one election let along two. Ha ha ha ha Don’t either of you ever tire of being wrong? (like always, ha ha ha)
Like Oscar Wilde said “The best revenge is living well”.