The August 3rd raids at a whole food co-op in California and illegal arrest of its owner and a worker came to my attention today. That and the also illegal arrest of a woman who owns a goat farm. Their misdemeanors? Daring to supply people with raw milk.
The spokeswoman for the FDA, whom I would like to give a name but I will somehow restrain myself, makes this idiotic statement: “Our biggest concern is really with children, because pathogens that can be in raw milk can be extremely dangerous... we've seen people wind up as paraplegics.”
Reaaallly? Since you have no support for your illegal actions, pull the "it's all for the children's sake" card, to divert attention from the real issue at the heart, oh, and throw out unsourced scary claims too - I guess the first thing that came to her mind to use as a scary example was paraplygia. And notice her careful wording "pathogens CAN be in raw milk..." (While, ironically, she doesn't mention that pathogens are ALWAYS in commercially produced milk - that's why they have to pastuerize it, to kill the millions of pathogens swarming about in it, since it was produced improperly.)
All to cover the fact that this is all about government power.
And fear that the powerful dairy industry will lose support if too many people start taking charge of their own health. Oddly enough, another article in the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-milk-raid-20110804,0,7791693.story) brought up this unholy alliance between the government and the dairy industry: "Raw milk, in particular, has drawn regulatory scrutiny, largely because the politically powerful dairy industry has pressed the government to act." Hmm - if even LA Times isn't hiding that fact, perhaps it's something worth looking further into, no?
"Government regulators contend such products can be dangerous; there is scientific evidence linking disease outbreaks to raw milk. The milk can transmit bacteria, which can result in diarrhea, dangerously high fevers and in some cases death."
Oooh, scary stuff. DEATH. That's why all the health nuts who've been dowsing this toxic raw milk have been dropping dead left and right. That's why people in this country are dying of heart attacks and cancer at alarming rates - probably somehow consumed some raw milk somewhere, forced on them.
I could turn this into a rant on the evils of a government that's far too big for anyone's benefit except its own, or a raillery against the FDA, which more closely resembles the Mob than anything else and shouldn't exist anyway. However, I hope that thinking people everywhere recognize that the government has no business and no right to dictate what consumers choose to consume, regardless what personal views on what is safe be. What food I eat is my personal choice - it's my body, and I take full responsibility for all consequences of my food. Terribly radical, isn't it?
Rather, I'd like to defend raw milk.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Why Do Women Dress Like They're Going to a Bar When They're Going to Church?
I write in fear in trembling.
How could someone who's screwed up like I have dare to write about such a subject?
I have not yet attained perfection. (MATT 5:48.) And I fear Matthew 7. “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
Yet, knowing that I have not always made the wisest choices, that my thots and intentions have at times been sickly impure, that there were times when I wasn't really very modest... I venture into this topic.
I went to church today.
I don't understand. Actually, more than that, it makes me mad.
Two places where women ought to not dress immodestly it frequently happens they do: the workplace and church.
Work ought to be a no-brainer: SEX DOESN'T BELONG IN THE WORKPLACE. It's about WORK and PRODUCTIVITY. So don't dress suggestively in a job environment, especially if you want to be respected and seen as responsible. Actually, even if you don't care about that - don't dress suggestively in the workplace.
Church. If there is one place men ought to have a respite from dealing with the sensuality our culture throws at us, church ought to be that place. Right? I'm assuming the best and that most men's motives in going to church is not to look at hot babes, but rather they're looking for fellowship, or to be challenged spiritually or... anything but the former. And yet they can't even be free to relax and not be bombarded by sexual images at church.
It's really distracting, just for me as a girl. If I'm at Bible Study group before service, during discussion time, and the girl who's talking happens to be dressed provacatively (i.e., say revealing cleavage), in looking at her, I can't just give her my attention... I have to see more of her than I really wanted to in such a public setting - and I'm just female. How much more distracting must it be for someone who's male?
It makes me mad, because - our poor men have been bombarded on all sides. They have enough work cut out in seeking to live a godly lifestyle in our dark and evil culture. Shouldn't they be able to come the one place that preaches a godly lifestyle and be able to enjoy fellowship and meeting sisters who will encourage them and build them up in a godly lifestyle, rather than girls who will encourage them to be disctacted by a display of sensuality and lasciviousness - distracting with what God gave them by using it innapropriately and irresponsibly. In other words... church shouldn't be about sex. There certainly is a time and place when sex glorifies God but if you're single... no. It doesn't glorify him to be partaking in sensuality.
So why? Why bring sensuality into church? If so-called "Christian" women don't really enjoy the innapropriate attention they're calling for perhaps they're trying to get a man with it? (by a very wrong way obviously - I think most of us want a Godly man who will respect us as virtuous women, not a man who pursued us out of a strictly lustful response to our seductive overtures. It's something we ought to consider before we employ this dangerous tactic for snaring a man.) Regardless of the reasons why - it doesn't show a sign of respect or care for our brothers. Instead of saying, "I respect you and care about the fact that you as a man have enough to deal with out in the world; I honor you as a brother and want to do my best to build you up in purity and love; I'll choose to consider that my dressing revealingly can cause you to stumble and in turn not participate in such a thing that will be a distraction and a temptation for you," the prevalent attitude seems to be: "I don't care about my brothers or how my choices affect them; I like the power innapropriate attention gives me, and I'll flaunt what I want."
That is not taking on the Sprit of Christ whatsoever.
"Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy." Romans 13:13
You can argue all you want, but you really can't argue with God's Word.
I thot I was going to take this in the direction of an empowerment talk - how being modest and pure empowers women, because you're respected for who you are, while partaking in the culture's value of women (your value is just in how sexy you can be)degrades them, making them just sexual objects to be used... but an empowerment talk isn't called for.
For some women... you can talk about empowerment til you're blue in the face, but they just won't give being dignified and respected very much value - ever.
Because it's really about sin. The sin in our hearts. Our lustful, fleshly desires. Desiring the things of the flesh rather than of the Spirit. It's just an outward sign of what's going on in our hearts.
And what we really need to do is stop blaspheming God and His Word. That's what it comes down to. Do we honor him and our siblings in Christ, or do we have a heart that is hard to his word, willing to go our own lustful way?
I want to live for Jesus. I want to live purely and righteously - FOR HIM. That's what I want my life to be marked by.
How could someone who's screwed up like I have dare to write about such a subject?
I have not yet attained perfection. (MATT 5:48.) And I fear Matthew 7. “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
Yet, knowing that I have not always made the wisest choices, that my thots and intentions have at times been sickly impure, that there were times when I wasn't really very modest... I venture into this topic.
I went to church today.
I don't understand. Actually, more than that, it makes me mad.
Two places where women ought to not dress immodestly it frequently happens they do: the workplace and church.
Work ought to be a no-brainer: SEX DOESN'T BELONG IN THE WORKPLACE. It's about WORK and PRODUCTIVITY. So don't dress suggestively in a job environment, especially if you want to be respected and seen as responsible. Actually, even if you don't care about that - don't dress suggestively in the workplace.
Church. If there is one place men ought to have a respite from dealing with the sensuality our culture throws at us, church ought to be that place. Right? I'm assuming the best and that most men's motives in going to church is not to look at hot babes, but rather they're looking for fellowship, or to be challenged spiritually or... anything but the former. And yet they can't even be free to relax and not be bombarded by sexual images at church.
It's really distracting, just for me as a girl. If I'm at Bible Study group before service, during discussion time, and the girl who's talking happens to be dressed provacatively (i.e., say revealing cleavage), in looking at her, I can't just give her my attention... I have to see more of her than I really wanted to in such a public setting - and I'm just female. How much more distracting must it be for someone who's male?
It makes me mad, because - our poor men have been bombarded on all sides. They have enough work cut out in seeking to live a godly lifestyle in our dark and evil culture. Shouldn't they be able to come the one place that preaches a godly lifestyle and be able to enjoy fellowship and meeting sisters who will encourage them and build them up in a godly lifestyle, rather than girls who will encourage them to be disctacted by a display of sensuality and lasciviousness - distracting with what God gave them by using it innapropriately and irresponsibly. In other words... church shouldn't be about sex. There certainly is a time and place when sex glorifies God but if you're single... no. It doesn't glorify him to be partaking in sensuality.
So why? Why bring sensuality into church? If so-called "Christian" women don't really enjoy the innapropriate attention they're calling for perhaps they're trying to get a man with it? (by a very wrong way obviously - I think most of us want a Godly man who will respect us as virtuous women, not a man who pursued us out of a strictly lustful response to our seductive overtures. It's something we ought to consider before we employ this dangerous tactic for snaring a man.) Regardless of the reasons why - it doesn't show a sign of respect or care for our brothers. Instead of saying, "I respect you and care about the fact that you as a man have enough to deal with out in the world; I honor you as a brother and want to do my best to build you up in purity and love; I'll choose to consider that my dressing revealingly can cause you to stumble and in turn not participate in such a thing that will be a distraction and a temptation for you," the prevalent attitude seems to be: "I don't care about my brothers or how my choices affect them; I like the power innapropriate attention gives me, and I'll flaunt what I want."
That is not taking on the Sprit of Christ whatsoever.
"Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy." Romans 13:13
You can argue all you want, but you really can't argue with God's Word.
I thot I was going to take this in the direction of an empowerment talk - how being modest and pure empowers women, because you're respected for who you are, while partaking in the culture's value of women (your value is just in how sexy you can be)degrades them, making them just sexual objects to be used... but an empowerment talk isn't called for.
For some women... you can talk about empowerment til you're blue in the face, but they just won't give being dignified and respected very much value - ever.
Because it's really about sin. The sin in our hearts. Our lustful, fleshly desires. Desiring the things of the flesh rather than of the Spirit. It's just an outward sign of what's going on in our hearts.
And what we really need to do is stop blaspheming God and His Word. That's what it comes down to. Do we honor him and our siblings in Christ, or do we have a heart that is hard to his word, willing to go our own lustful way?
I want to live for Jesus. I want to live purely and righteously - FOR HIM. That's what I want my life to be marked by.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
