CONFESSIONS OF A STARBUCKS PASTOR

Have you ever noticed a small piece of thread and given it a little tug only to find out it kept coming? Your entire garment could become unraveled if you continued. That is what is happening in the Middle East. Long a hot bed of conflicting religion and government, don't think that the Syria "threads" aren't reaching far and wide. While this 67-year old country has never enjoyed a serene existence, the 2011 Arab Spring opened the door to a civil war where anything goes. Protestors were tired of the Ba'ath Party, a socialist movement led by Bashar al-Assad. The government responded to the protestors with kidnapping, torture and murder. The civilians organized and continued.  In return, the government escalated their responses by destroying whole neighborhoods and towns. Other entities have joined in. Of the more than 110,000 people killed in this short period of time, when WMDs recently killed 400 children a few weeks ago, a thin red line was finally crossed ...

What? The attorney for the recently convicted abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell was being grilled on FoxNews the other day by Megyn Kelly. She kept questioning how either he or the doctor could condone a late term abortion. The attorney kept responding that the primary practice targeted abortions in the first term, and that only "a few" were late term. He proudly stated that the clinic was not in the poor condition the media depicted, and that many clients were referrals. Pregnant Megyn kept at him until he finally acquiesced, sputtering that pro-choice people should "choose quicker" and that an abortion over 24 weeks was just "too late". What? There is a cut off line between when it's the choice of convenience or harm to a human? Before a certain period of time, a life in the womb (with a beating heart and fingerprints not to mention being fully formed) can be disposed of and referred to as pro-choice? After this invisible line, it becomes illegal...

I spent a bit of time perusing the internet the other day and read some chilling stories about how government has treated select groups of people. One group of people had marginalized citizenry, was prohibited from certain areas and received reduced rations going without public transportation. Another group of people had marginalized citizenry, was prohibited from certain areas and received reduced rations also going without public transportation. In both cases the government legitimized the seizure of personal property for redistribution and labeled such targeting as a national security measure. In both cases only those not fitting a particular point of view were targeted. In both cases it appears as if the rest of the nation went along with it, for awhile. Who am I referring to? In the first illustration, I am referring to the Holocost where over 11 million people were relocated and murdered because they did not fit a certain profile. In the second illustration, I am referri...