Applaud the Courage of the Sinner?

From The Recovering Legalist:

If homosexuality is to be considered a sin no longer, all because it corresponds with one’s sexual desires; and if one’s sexual desires should not be repressed if one’s sexual desires constitute one’s identity; what other up-till-now adherent abhorrent behavior, along with all recognized “normal” behavior, could be used to justify breaking the clearly outlined command of God, “Thou shalt not commit adultery”?

Countless men are walking away from marriages and being praised for it. “Brave” and “courageous” are what they’re called. They succumb to desires which for some reason have become attached to their nature and demand to be respected. The wife and children are mentioned only as a sidebar to the “valor” of the adulterer, and the clearly delineated commands of God are relegated to a dusty “suggestion” box.

Anthony Baker is right that even the church is redefining sin, excusing some and in some cases applauding the courage of the sinner.  

We’re all sinners.  I won’t pick up a stone against a gay man or woman, or even one who can’t figure out which category fits them.  Yet sin is wrong for more than one reason: The damage caused by some who are simply following their heart, or whatever…that damage is permanent in the lives of their families.

What then of the regular adulterer? What then of any number of definers by which one self-identifies? Fill in the blank with whatever you want – voyeur, philanderer, exhibitionist, pedophile, scumbag. Who are we to ostracize any of these if in the event of coming out of their own closets they bring about the destruction of a family unit? Should we not praise them for being brave?

(UPDATE, fixed a typo.)


Applaud the Courage of the Sinner?

Truthful Pro-Sharia Video Banned on YouTube

Sorry.  Did I say, pro-sharia?  No, it was a truthful anti-sharia video.  The video also connects the Muslim Brotherhood and civilizational jihad.  If you’re tired of hearing about all this, don’t worry.  It’ll be all over in a little while.

Robert Spencer:

For the Left, truth is no defense.

What they want to do is silence their ideological foes. That’s all. The problem with the increasingly mainstream concept that “hate speech is not free speech” is that what exactly constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment, often based on the political proclivities of the person doing the judging. If a Leftist analyst who subscribes to the fantasy that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “firewall against extremism” is doing the judging, he may think that the information below is “hate speech” — not because it is actually hateful, but because he opposes this message. On the other hand, if someone who is aware of the true nature and magnitude of the jihad threat is the judge, he would more likely consider Hamas-linked CAIR’s “Islamophobia” reports to be genuine “hate speech.”

Here’s a copy of the video.  Here is a transcript.

YouTube has every right to pull a video if they want.  I have every right to publicize their decision and take my cat video watching elsewhere.

Crossposted at Dave Alexander and Company


Truthful Pro-Sharia Video Banned on YouTube

Inadvertent Ambiguity and NC State

My post regarding my Freedom of Information Request for North Carolina State University is here. I also posted the article on A Conservative Christian Man as well.

A Christian group sued because it was being asked to fill out a form t0 distribute literature on campus.  They won a temporary injunction, and will continue to sue to have access to the NC State Campus. I asked to see all of the forms which groups had filled out requesting to pass out literature.  The response was a very small number and some sections were blocked out. I requested an explanation.


Mr. Alexander:

First, student names/personal information and comments unrelated to the scope of your request (distributing literature) were redacted.
Second, your request specified literature distribution. Only those records were provided. So you may have inadvertently narrowed the scope of your request. The numbers in Chancellor Woodson’s statement include more than just literature distribution requests.
Hope that makes sense.

My new request:

Dear Mr. Kulikowski,
In am requesting again information regarding on campus activities.  My previous request resulted in a very small collection of the public records for on campus activities.  As you state in your email, I may have inadvertently narrowed my search. 
Under the North Carolina Public Records Law, G.S. §132-1., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records which relate to NC State Policy 07.25.12, specifically all requests submitted  for on campus activities.  It is our understanding that students and others must submit requests, and it is our assumption that these requests have been retained.
I am requesting all facilities use agreement forms which were filled out under the policies described on this NC State webpage:
If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $ 20.00.   I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the policies of the university regarding free expression.  
 As I noted in previous communications, Chancellor Woodson stated that more than 2200 such requests were filled out over the last three years.  My request is the subset of requests for the academic year 2015-2016.  
Thank you for your time,
Dave Alexander

I’ve tried to eliminate any potential ambiguity.  But I remain dubious about the inadvertent ambiguity.  Yeah, I’m not giving up.

I don’t think that Christian groups have been targeted for this policy, but if it turns out that many groups on campus have NOT had to fill out a form, then the policy wasn’t being applied fairly.  I simply want the information to make that determination.



Inadvertent Ambiguity and NC State

Sen. Ben Sasse on Russian Moves Against Religion

I don’t bother much with Russia, since I don’t expect Putin to respect any kind of freedom, but here goes:

Sen. Sasse:

There are troubling new developments in Russia. Russia’s parliament, the Federal Assembly, has just approved so-called anti-terrorism legislation that criminalizes free speech and that attacks religious liberty.

If President Vladimir Putin signs this into law in the coming weeks, it will be illegal for Christians to share their faith outside of a church building, as if faith is constrained by the four walls of a structure and belief to a single day of the week.

In some ways, this isn’t a surprise.

In some ways?  Yeah.

We’re in a dangerous age.

At the same time, Americans well understand that it is not our national calling—nor is it within our power—to attempt to right every wrong in a broken world.

But we should be clear about what is happening—as well as the fact that there is not an easy fix here. It is naive to hope that Russia can be reformed with reset buttons or with promises of future “flexibility.”

Instead we need to begin telling the truth about an increasingly aggressive actor in global affairs.

Sen. Ben Sasse on Russian Moves Against Religion

NC State University and Freedom of Religion


A student group at NC State sued in April over the university policy that requires a permit for folks to pass out information or set up a table.  A judge issued a preliminary injunction putting aside the rule for now.  The university is expected to appeal. My previous story here.

Early in June, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all permit requests.  I did this out of a basic notion: if large numbers of groups requested permission to distribute literature, then there should be a huge file of requests.  The requests should also reflect a broad spectrum of college life.  If the spiritual groups needed to fill out a request, then the fraternities, on-campus clubs and other groups would need to also, right?

The University Chancellor sent a letter to the entire campus April 28th with this statement:

NC State University issues hundreds of permits each and every year to religious, political, healthcare, public and special interest oriented groups. Over the past 3 years, NC State University issued 2280 permits to student and non-university groups to either speak or distribute information on campus. Of those issued, close to 500 were issued to faith-based groups or individuals. None of these individuals or groups have ever been denied the right to speak or distribute materials based upon their message content or beliefs.

This is in stark contrast to what I see.

My request for all the permit requests was delivered by email Friday.  There were many redacted portions, and not just in minor areas.  I expected that some personal information might be left out.  Actually, some pages were 50% black, which made compiling the numbers rather difficult.  I counted the redacted sections as requests.

By my count, There were 119 requests for facilities use in the file I received.  Twenty-eight were for the kinds of groups you’d expect: The Offroad Club, a food ordering company, and the Entrepreneurship Initiative, for example.  Seven requests came from fraternities and sororities.  Three political groups or campaigns made requests.  There were 32 blacked areas which I interpreted as requests.

41 requests were from Christian Organizations and 8 from a group called Students for Enlightenment and Visionary Activism.  They’re a spiritual yoga group.  No Jewish groups, no Muslim or Buddhist groups. Call it 49 religious requests.

34 percent of all requests were from religious organizations.

That seems like a lot.  If you like bullet points, and who doesn’t:

  • 119 total requests, including the redacted requests
  • 26 for various groups
  • 7 fraternities/sororities (there are 29 fraternities and 21 sororities)
  • 3 political campaigns
  • 41 Christian group requests (most are from the same organizations)
  • 8 requests from a Spiritual Yoga group


There are 34-thousand students at NC State.  The campus is about 2,000 acres.  

If I have an accurate and total count of all requests for the entire 2015-2016 academic years, then this is the most politically inactive, socially dull university campus in America. There were no requests which obviously relate to Black Lives Matter, anti-rape demonstrations or even House Bill 2, which is often called the “bathroom bill.” The HB2 controversy began in late March.  So, nobody needed to fill out a request for an event to hand out literature?

I have calls in to NC State, the Alliance Defending Freedom which represents the student group involved in the lawsuit and with the church group.

There’s always the chance someone will say “oh, you want ALL of the requests….I thought you meant just some of the requests, with some of them redacted and most of them missing.

Quote of the week:

NC State FIOA Representative: Are you a member of the media?

Dave Alexander: Yes.  I’m a blogger. 



NC State University and Freedom of Religion

NC State vs Religious Speech on Campus

A Christian student group at NC State in Raleigh has had to sue for the right to distribute literature on campus at the Raleigh, NC university without a permit. We have already covered the temporary injunction which stopped the university.

A Conservative Christian Man filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all of the public requests. The results are interesting. Monday we’ll have a write up.

Untill then, pray for your neighbors, find a shady place and enjoy the weekend.

NC State vs Religious Speech on Campus