Rejoice when you are hated for my name.

Blessed are you when people hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the prophets.” Luke 6:22-23.

San Antonio, named for Saint Anthony of Padua: Chickfil-A was banned from San Antonio’s airport. The Texas attorney general says it’s ‘discriminatory.’  Councilman Robert Trevino said, “San Antonio is a city full of compassion, and we do not have room in our public facilities for a business with a legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior. Everyone has a place here, and everyone should feel welcome when they walk through our airport.” Despite the false implication, Chick-fil-A has no “legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior.” The company says, “restaurants and licensed locations on college campuses welcome everyone. Our corporate office and our more than 2,300 restaurants nationwide are equal opportunity employers and we have no policy of discrimination against any group. We do not have a political or social agenda and more than 120,000 people from different backgrounds and beliefs represent the Chick-fil-A brand.

Trevino and his allies appear to lack the courage to honestly articulate the motivations for their decision. The City Council’s amendment came just one day after the far-left provocateurs at ThinkProgress reported that, in 2017, Chick-fil-A donated $1.65 million to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, as well as other smaller donations to the Salvation Army and Paul Anderson Youth Home. These facts in the ThinkProgress report appear true, as Chick-fil-A proudly acknowledged, “Since the Chick-fil-A Foundation was created in 2012, our giving has always focused on youth and education.” The City Council is persecuting Chick-fil-A for backing Christian-oriented youth and education causes. No one has ever been denied service at Chick-fil-A because of their sexual orientation or any other characteristic that defines them. But Chick-fil-A is being kicked out of the San Antonio airport because of the company’s support for Christian kids. “The Constitution’s protection of religious liberty is somehow even better than Chick-fil-A’s chicken,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a letter to San Antonio officials. “Unfortunately, I have serious concerns that both are under assault at the San Antonio airport.”

Is this a local problem? Not at all. Jesus Christ said we believers  would be “hated, excluded and insulted”. Why? Because non-believers hate Him! 

William Penn established a colony where people of faith could practice whatever religion they desired. Pennsylvania became the only colony without a state-run church. Penn’s gift to America was freedom of religion, the right to practice one’s faith in the public marketplace. “All Persons who also profess to believe in Jesus Christ, the Savior of the World, shall be capable…to serve this Government in any Capacity,” the Charter of Privileges declared. Nearly 318 years later, that fundamental bedrock of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has all but crumbled. And the statehouse has now become a place where those who profess Jesus Christ face public rebuke.

In March, State Rep. Stephanie Borowicz was invited to deliver a prayer at the beginning of the legislative day. Mrs. Borowicz, a freshman lawmaker and the wife of a Christian minister, gladly accepted the invitation. By chance, the state’s first female Muslim lawmaker was scheduled to be sworn into office on the same day. There were many Muslim visitors in attendance. Also on the agenda was a prayer that was delivered by a Muslim cleric. But it was Mrs. Borowicz’s prayer that made national headlines when she invoked the name of Jesus Christ numerous times. “Jesus, you are our only hope,” she prayed. “At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess Jesus, that you are Lord.” Movita Johnson-Harrell, who was sworn into office after the prayer, and her fellow Democrats were enraged, calling the prayer “demeaning, degrading and Islamophobic.” Gov. Tom Wolf, also a Democrat, said he was “horrified” by Borowicz’s invocation.

“This morning on a very important day, on a day when we’re swearing in a new member, the first woman Muslim serving in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in history, there was a prayer that was not meant to inspire us,” he told PennLive.com. He went on to tell a local television station that the prayer was “beneath the dignity of this House.”

Mrs. Borowicz said she considered it a great honor to stand before her fellow lawmakers inside the ornate House chamber and deliver a prayer upon the assembled. “You can see the Scripture as you stand up there and pray, that we all know the truth and the truth shall set you free,” she said referring to an inscription of John 8:32 in the House chamber. I have to imagine the Democrats were equally troubled by the fact that their government buildings are inscribed with numerous Bible verses and religious references.

She flat-out refused to apologize to anyone who took offense at the name of Jesus. “I don’t apologize for it because that’s how I pray almost every day,” she said. “It doesn’t matter who I’m standing in front of — I’m standing for Jesus no matter what.” Mrs. Borowicz faced a national firestorm of hate fomented by the Mainstream Media and Democrats. But their outrage was rather selective. Just a few moments after her prayer, a Muslim cleric delivered a prayer in which he quoted from the Quran. So if a Muslim can pray to Allah in the Pennsylvania statehouse, why can’t a Christian pray in the name of Jesus? “That’s what my 15-year-old son said last night,” Borowicz told me. “There’s a double-standard.” The freshman lawmaker said she prays to Jesus every day and reads her Bible and quotes Scripture.

As Christians we don’t pray differently based on who we’re standing in front of,” she said. “So whether that would have been in front of a crowd at my church and Christians or before Muslims or before Hindus I stand for Jesus no matter what and no matter who I’m in front of.” Borowicz dismissed accusations that praying in the name of Christ is somehow Islamophobic. “That’s ridiculous. I said I’d pray to Jesus. It’s not directed towards anyone,” she said. “We know that there’s power in the name of Jesus and so I think that it becomes offensive because there’s power behind it.” 

I was going to ask a rhetorical question, “how did she ever get elected?” Her last sentence explains it. After I published this post, I read that Buffalo NY airport followed the same mushy course as San Antonio, citing SA’s position as cover for their own lies.

Leggings stretched to the limit!

one picture = a lotta words

Sorry to gross you out readers, but I am sitting in Starbucks, trying to finish a blog post, when in walks this 50+ year old mom in leggings that probably fit 30 pounds ago, but are now stretched so tight that the area around her gluteus Maximus (well named, in this case) is closer to white than the black of the rest of the leggings. Her 12 year old or so son is with her. As soon as they came in, I looked away. No need to embarrass her, or him. But then, while waiting for their drinks, she moseyed over and stood right in my line of sight, reading with great interest the bulletin board, which had adverts for a National Poetry Month event and dementia care training, while I studiously avoided looking up from my iPad.

Recently, another mom wrote an editorial about female modesty, specifically suggesting that the women students in tight leggings were quite a temptation for the men students at Notre Dame. Needless to say, she was then subjected to a Twitter storm of criticism. And you thought that Twitter storms were only started by The Donald! I don’t think the mom in front of me got the memo. I wasn’t going to weigh in on this issue, since I don’t attend Notre Dame, don’t want the attention, don’t want a plethora of comments accusing me of sexism, and I am a bad offender when it comes to surreptitiously ogling women in leggings. You can figure out which of those reasons is the real one.

Here I am, weighing in. Has anyone noticed that the trend in swimwear is that men’s bathing suits are getting bigger and longer, and women’s bathing suits are disappearing, except for burkinis? Last night, I watched some episodes of Amazon’s new series, Hanna. There was a scene in Morocco, at a beach, where this English teenager was wearing the requisite skimpy bikini, and a teenager from a nearby Muslim family was swimming in a garment that included a hood, and completely covered her body–a burkini. I was conflicted. On the one hand, being Christian, I feel guilty about sneaking a peek, and on the other I admire the commitment to modesty, even if overdone. On the third hand–since we aren’t actually talking about hands–I am plagued with testosterone, even at 72, making me a dirty old man, and my admiration for modesty is significantly challenged by my admiration for a fit female body. Burkinis don’t solve anything, unless they don’t get wet (if you don’t know what I mean then you have never seen a wet burkini–they’re made of quick drying material).

Voluntary modesty on the part of women would help, but cleaning my own mind up would help even more. However, I am not a problem. I’m old, disabled, unattractive, and prefer blogging to…..well, you know (couldn’t think of a sexual act that rhymes with blogging). The problem is that men are visually stimulated. Women less so. Most women don’t get it. The Notre Dame feminists took their opportunity to rail against the patriarchy, even though the editorial writer was a woman. Do these women really not understand what men are thinking? Or do they understand, and enjoy their power? Not to pick on Muslims here, former Grand Mufti of Australia Sheikh Taj el-din Al-Hilal, was being brutally honest when he compared extreme female exposure to “meat left out for cats.” He said he doesn’t blame the cats for going after the meat. Horrible, I know. But what is the point of leggings or tights in public? That mom I referenced in the beginning kept pulling her shirt down over the leggings, to no avail. Why wear them, or why not wear a longer shirt?

But such questions are not for me to answer. But the Babylon Bee  says “While conventional wisdom has held that Bathsheba was bathing nude when King David saw her from his window, new analysis of the text indicates she was actually just headed out the door to run some errands while wearing leggings as pants, causing the king to stumble.

“Bathsheba was apparently headed out of the house and threw on some leggings rather than put on a pair of pants for some reason. When David saw her, he was unable to resist. He immediately sent inquiries around the kingdom asking who the women in the Aeropostale leggings was, and eventually called her up to him. Scholars found solid evidence of this theory in newly discovered manuscripts, while archaeologists confirmed this idea with their recent discovery of dozens of pairs of leggings in Bathsheba’s home.

“It seems that Bathsheba made the unwise decision to go shopping while wearing leggings as though they’re pants,” said one scholar. “This really clears up a lot of the questions surrounding the biblical narrative. I mean, Bathsheba bathing we didn’t really get, but with the leggings as pants? Makes perfect sense. Further analysis indicated that she was wearing Ugg boots and a North Face jacket.”

 

 

Idiots of the world, unite!

I paid $40 for a chaise., but I am not an idiot.

Appropriately, this weekend’s movie takes were:

1.“Dumbo,” $45 million ($71 million international).

2.“Us,” $33.6 million ($22.6 million international).

3.“Captain Marvel,” $20.5 million ($26.4 million international).

4.“Five Feet Apart,” $6.3 million ($6.2 million international).

5.“Unplanned,” $6.1 million.

6.“Wonder Park,” $4.9 million ($2.5 million international).

7.“How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World,” $4.2 million ($2.6 million international).

8.“Hotel Mumbai,” $3.2 million ($640,227 international).

9.Tyler Perry’s “A Madea Family Funeral,” $2.7 million ($35,000 international).

10.“The Beach Bum,” $1.8 million ($427,000 international).

Normally, the biggest markets for almost any film, no matter how stupid, especially if stupid, are New York and Los Angeles. That was not the case for the number 5 movie, Unplanned, which had its biggest audiences in Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas, then Nashville and other “flyover” cities. You know, where people tend to be more likely to think for themselves than to fall in line with Perfectionist progressive orthodoxy. Unplanned box office receipts were almost 16% of Dumbo receipts. However, “box office receipts” can be misleading. Major markets like New York and Los Angeles charge more for tickets than smaller markets, so Unplanned, based on actual bodies in seats, may have been viewed by almost as many people as Dumbo. In addition, Unplanned played on 1,059 screens, compared to Dumbo, which played on 4,259 screens. According to Marketplace newsletter, depending on seating, prices can vary widely.

Theater company IPIC offers chaise lounges sold in pairs, where moviegoers can “lie down and relax in full recline position with a front row seat to the big screen,” the website boasts. And the price for comfort in one of these lounges? In Los Angeles, $40 for two seats, plus $24 in VIP fees. In Westchester, New York and Fort Lee, New Jersey, chaise lounges cost $30. Other theaters have taken a different approach to selling tickets. The Blanchester Theater in Blanchester, Ohio, sells $5 movie tickets — it even offers free popcorn if you sign up for its newsletter. Harkins Theatres, a Scottsdale, Arizona-based privately owned movie chain, sells 2D and 3D movie tickets for $6 each. Up until last year, tickets at the Tucson Harkins theaters were $5 each.

It’s probable that the majority of moviegoers paid way less for their Unplanned experience than their Dumbo experience. Let’s consider what Unplanned was about. The film tells the true story of Abby Johnson, who worked at Planned Parenthood for eight years before becoming a pro-life activist. In her own words………….

I worked at Planned Parenthood for eight years, rising through the ranks from volunteer escort, to clinic counselor to clinic director. I was awarded the Employee of the Year prize in 2008 and was one of the youngest clinic directors in the country, setting an example of how to run a clinic to churn out as many abortions – the biggest money maker – as I could. Then it all changed when I was asked to assist in an ultrasound-guided abortion.

“Some images stick with you forever, images that you can’t unsee. The photo of the first responder carrying the limp child in his arms after the Oklahoma City bombing. The photos of the Twin Towers falling. These images burn in your mind, causing you to replay them over and over again. They are impactful. That was what I saw on the ultrasound screen.

The fetus was 13-weeks-old and I could easily see it’s head, arms, and legs. The abortion instrument – a suction tube – was on the screen as well. The baby jumped away from it but it was all for naught. The abortionist turned on the suction and I saw that baby get sucked apart right in front of me on the screen and inches from the probe I was holding. In mere seconds, that fetus’ life ended and the screen only showed a black, empty uterus. The life that was there just a couple minutes ago was gone. In that moment, I saw for myself what I was supporting for the last eight years and it broke me.”

There’s more, but you could always just see the view and decide for yourself…..even if you live in New York or L.A.