Breakfast Links for 11/30/12: Armageddon 2.0; Sex and God at Yale; Same-Sex Marriage and Slippery Slopes

BREAKFAST LINKS 11/30/12:

Mark D. Roberts, Patheos/Mark D. Roberts: “In Advent, we prepare for the coming of Christ. In fact, we are actually getting our hearts ready for two advents: the first which happened 2,000 years ago in a stable near Bethlehem, the second which is yet to come, when Christ returns to establish fully the kingdom of God.”

Debra Saunders, Real Clear Politics: Dem’s Unwritten No-Cuts Tax Pledge

Jaweed Kaleem, Huff Post Religion: Rick Warren on Obama and Religious Liberty

John Turner, Patheos/The Anxious Bench: “Our best recourse is to stop complaining and start imitating the man who became Santa Claus.”

David DesRosiers, Washington Times: Sex and God at Yale

Bill Blankschaen, Patheos/Bill in the Blanks: “My greatest concern — dare I call it fear — is that marriage, once legally redefined, will be used as an ideological bludgeon to further pummel us into compliance with a worldview anti-thetical to our Faith.”

Fred Guterl, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: Armageddon 2.0

Alexei Laushkin, Patheos/The Earth Is the Lord’s: “But when leaders who have dedicated their lives to alleviating poverty raise the alarm about the climate crisis, maybe it’s time for people of goodwill to take action.”

Makena Clawson, Catholic News Agency: Is Facebook the New Church?

 

 

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Evangelical
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://middletree.blogspot.com James Williams

    The thing about that Bill in the Blanks fellow: He writes well, and has informed opinions, some of which I agree with, some not. But I cannot take anyone seriously who describes themselves as a “thinker” (see right next to his picture). There is something about that that I can’t put into words. It’s as if he’s saying “most of the rest of you don’t think, but I do.” It comes across as fairly ridiculous.

  • Kubrick’s Rube

    Are you still planning on writing soon on how same-sex marriage can impinge on religious freedom? Because the Blankschaen post provides only one hypothetical with vageuly defined terms, and I’d be interested in a clearer, more fleshed out version of the argument that same-sex marriages are a special case (as oppsosed to any other already legally sacntioned marriage that may go against one’s religious beliefs) and how exactly religious freedom or liberty is being defined here.