One of the pet peeves at our home is the “Everyone’s a winner” philosophy. Yes, I know, we are probably way too competitive, but for some reason this really annoys us. We groan when we see a bumper sticker that says, “Every child is an honor student at such and such a school.” We rebel against the idea that excellence cannot be recognized and that all efforts should be equally rewarded.

Our youngest son, Timothy, entered a reading contest at the library this summer. Every time you read a certain number of books, you put a ticket in the pot. The grand prize? Two brand new shiny bicycles – one for a girl and one for a boy. Timothy was really hoping for that bicycle, so he was very excited when my wife brought him to the library last week for drawing day.

Now this contest was not even based on ability or skill. This was a simple drawing a ticket from a box. And yet the woman in charge reminded all the kids before the drawing was made, “I just want you to remember, everyone’s a winner!” Timothy sighed, “Yeah, right!” If everyone’s a winner, then why doesn’t everyone ride home on a shiny new bike?

We were talking about this at the dinner table later in the evening. Of course the motivation is good, the adults don’t want any of the kids to feel bad, but our boys said that all the kids see right through it. And it doesn’t reflect real life when these same kids will later be competing for real jobs and scholarships and championships.

I asked the boys, “What if they ran the presidential race like this? What if they told all the presidential candidates, “It doesn’t matter whether you actually become president or not. Everyone’s a winner!” I liked my son Ramon’s suggestion, “You could give them all participation ribbons!”

No, Timothy did not win the bike. So what are your thoughts on “everyone’s a winner”? Feel free to disagree.

Christian author and apologist Ravi Zacharias speaks about the impact of the Judeo-Christian worldview on the founding of our country in the context of electing the next president.

What we want is a politician who will understand . . . the framework of the value of human life and the moral framework of the Judeo-Christian world view, which is the only moral framework under which this country could have been framed . . . that we are all created equal, that liberty and justice and all of those terms that I’ve given only make sense within the Judeo-Christian world view.

Created? Equal? Naturalism does not tell us we are equal. Naturalism does not tell us we are created. Liberty? Islam does not believe in the total liberty of the individual. Equal? Hinduism believes in the caste system. The Judeo-Christian world view is the only world view that could frame this country. And so I think as we elect, we go before God and see out of the candidates who will be the best one to represent the values and at the same time be a good leader for the country whose first responsibility should be to protect its citizens.

HT: Hugh Hewitt

Related posts:

• Still Leaning Towards Fred
• Mike Huckabee’s Sunday Sermon at Prestonwood
• The Cluster Approach to the GOP Nomination
• The MPR Select a Candidate Quiz
• Memo to Evangelical Leaders on Romney
• Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
• Should Christians Call Mormonism a Cult?
• Rudy, John, Mitt . . . and Fred?

This just in from The Christian Post on the defeat of the proposed marriage amendment in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts lawmakers blocked a proposed constitutional amendment Thursday that would have let voters decide whether to ban gay ”marriage” in the only state that allows it.

The proposal, which sought to change the state’s Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, needed 50 votes to advance to the 2008 statewide ballot. It got 45, with 151 lawmakers opposed.

The narrow vote was a blow to efforts to reverse the historic court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. More than 8,500 gay couples have ”married” there since it became legal in May 2004 …

The measure needed 50 votes in two consecutive legislative sessions to advance to the ballot, and it had passed with 62 votes at the end of the last session in January.

I live in Massachusetts, and this is a big disappointment to the many people in the state who feel they should have the right to vote on an issue of this magnitude. The Massachusetts Family Institute collected a record-breaking 170,000 signatures in support of the amendment, nearly three times the required signatures needed for certification by the Secretary of State and the greatest number ever in Massachusetts history.

In November 2003, it took only four Massachusetts judges to make gay marriage legal in the state (by a 4-3 vote). Now in June 2007 the proposed amendment misses the ballot by five legislative votes. Meanwhile, the entire voting populace of Massachusetts is left out of the decision making process, including the 170,000 who signed the petition. I feel the legislature has really let the people down on this one.

Should Christians call Mormonism a cult? Is the word “cult” a useful term in public speech today? These are some of the questions John Mark Reynolds addresses in his article: On “Cult:” Is the Word Useful in Political Speech? The question is especially important to consider with a Mormon, Governor Mitt Romney, currently running for President.

Reynolds points out that the word “cult” has at least three different meanings associated with it. It can mean either:

1. the religious practices of a particular group,
2. a group that claims to be Christian but denies orthodox doctrine, or
3. a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister (Oxford American)

The first definition makes no value judgments and could refer to any religion (including the Christian faith). The second definition makes a value judgment as regards the truth claims of a particular group, i.e. whether or not the group aligns with historic Christian teaching. The third definition makes a value judgment as regards the social acceptability of the group.

When Christians speak of Mormonism, Christian Science, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. as cults, we usually mean the word in the sense of the second definition above. We simply mean that these are groups which claim to be Christian but do not hold to key points of historic Christian doctrine – teachings such as the trinity, the deity of Christ, salvation by faith in Christ alone, or the Bible as our sole authority for faith and practice. These are areas in which Mormons deviate from Christian belief, and so, in this sense of the word, we could properly term Mormonism as a cult.

(more…)

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the constitutionality of Congress’ 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. This is the first time a specific abortion procedure has been successfully banned in the United States.

As someone who is strongly pro-life, I was pleased to see this ruling. If you would like to know how the various presidential candidates have responded to this historic decision, 2008 Central has been compiling the candidates’ official statements. 2008 Central seeks to provide “non-partisan comprehensive coverage of the 2008 U.S. presidential election.”

HT: SmartChristian.com

Update: PastorBlog has assembled a number of links for further reading about the Supreme Court’s decision.

John Mark Reynolds reflects on what it means for him to vote as a Christian and a citizen in the upcoming Presidential primary and election.

Space race. This woman plans to run the Boston Marathon in space. Rocketing along at a speed of 17,500 mph on the international space station, astronaut Sunita Williams should complete the course in a record-breaking 5.4 seconds. But she will track her time and distance on a treadmill just to keep it fair.

Rudy, John, Mitt . . . and Fred? Former Tennessee senator and actor Fred Thompson looks like he is getting closer to considering a run for the Presidency on the Republican side. If you want to know more about the “Law and Order” actor’s political views, you can check out the transcript of Chris Wallace’s interview with Thompson from March 11, 2007. Whether you agree with his positions or not, you have to admit that he is a straight shooter.

Related posts:

• Still Leaning Towards Fred
• Mike Huckabee’s Sunday Sermon at Prestonwood
• The Cluster Approach to the GOP Nomination
• The MPR Select a Candidate Quiz
• Memo to Evangelical Leaders on Romney
• Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
• Ravi Zacharias on Electing the Next President
• Should Christians Call Mormonism a Cult?