A Rant (Why I Hate the Happiest Place on Earth)

I don't know if I mentioned it a while back, but Orlando, somewhat under the radar, passed a controversial law concerning feeding the homeless. Now, apparently, for the first time EVER, Orlando is actually enforcing their a law.This is one of the many reasons I hate this corrupt town. The elected officials of this city, conservative or liberal, are crooked to the bone, they break the law nearly every chance they get! (and it's documented!) Still, rather than staking out the officials, as they give tax dollars to strip clubs and illegal drug/prostitution rings and then attempt (half-assed I might add) to launder that money, and arresting them, they arrest subversive feeders of the poor. God bless it! Just remember, the next time you're visiting the happiest place on earth that it's only happy because the poor and needy have been swept under a big mouse head-shaped carpet and that the only reason the streets are so clean is because the drug dealers are chillin' in the courthouses with the elected officials doing blow off of their prostitutes.

On Testing Ethics

So I've been thinking a lot about Joel's question. I've wanted to write about it for quite sometime, but between a baby, catching up on school work, and the numerous different house guests that we've entertained lately, I just haven't had the time to type out my thoughts. Now the task seems so daunting that I'm afraid to start. When I re-started the blog I said that I wanted to seek out other writers and so I think I'm going to do that. Still, I don't want to completely blow off the topic at hand. Bethany, Melissa, Kat, Laura Kate, Gina, and I had a interesting discussion about the role of Christians in culture (specifically the state) that seemed to begin to help flesh why Christian pacifism still works, but I wonder if the test of an ethic should even be situational. I have a coworker who said he doesn't believe the Bible because the ethical propositions of the ten commandments "don't work in real life" and I've got former professors who somehow think that love should be this flexible ethic in which right and wrong should flow forth from the situation. Granted the situations presented here are far more "real life" than anything my coworker or professors stated, but they present the same dilemma. The test of an ethic should be Scripture. The test of an ethic should be kingdom. I think that, properly examined, Scripture tends toward pacifism (which is altogether different from passivity). It tends toward peace-making. It tends toward the putting away of swords. Our weaponry is spiritual as is our enemy. As we actively pursue peace, we fight that spiritual battle and live out the end goal of "Thy Kingdom come."

Perhaps when I have more time I will delve into the spheres of government and the battling civilizations and Christ in culture, which would further my arguments for pacifism, but right now I have reading to do.

Sorry if this seems like a cop out.