History #1

So what if "winners" wrote history.  If a person who was iliterate would you believe them if they wrote history?  People who were considered "winners" had been taught how to write, grammar, and everything.  So if they recorded history, wouldn't they be more accurate.  I would not believe a text that was written by a iliterate person because they might write something down and could be interpreted in a differnt way and we wouldn't get the facts straight.  To me, I think it depends on how well the person knew how to write than their social status.
The disciples that wrote the Bible were not necesarrily "winners" unless you call them "winners" for winning people for Christ.  The disciples had decent jobs but also in the end they were all killed except for one.  They all left their possessions to follow Christ.   After Christ died they went back to their old jobs until Christ rose from the grave and told them to go into the world and preach the Gospel.  The men were tortured and killed for their faith.  Would you call that winning?  They all wrote parts of the New Testament. 
Alexander the Great won many victories but also lost as well.  King David also won many battles but lost some as well.  Everyone is wins and loses at times.  So the word "winner" wouldn't matter.  It wouldn't apply to the people who wrote history, would it?

Economics #2

I believe that we are broke because as a country we are in serious debt.  We keep borrowing and spending the money.  I think that the problem is being lazy.  Sharing money or making everything equal will not work.  If every job gets the same amount of money than who would be willing to get up in the morning and work for so many hours a day and get paid the same amount of money as a low paid job?  I wouldn't beause to me that would not be fair.  One reason that we are in debt is because we are lazy people and we do not know how to spend the money properly.  Anyways, socialism would not work because no one would really work hard at their jobs if they are all getting the same paycheck.  Everyone would become more lazy than before.

Economics # 1

  I do not mean to attack him, but the first the I noticed was that he mixed up the faiths or world views.  Marxism and Secular humanism are pretty mucht he same.  They want the oppressed to become oppressors and the  oppressors to become oppressed.  Cosmic Humanism is the world view of hopping that everyone will focus on reaching their highest inner being and than there is no need for economy.  My point is, they are all not the same.
   Mr. Moore said that the people should be able to run the economy.  Everyone has many ideas and ideas have consequences.  I agree that economy should some how be split even but that will be tricky and probabaly impossible.  I also agree that we should have a say or our voices should be heard.  He said that we should ask, is it for the common good and is good for the people?  People have different ideas for what is common good and what is good for the people. A lot of people, if not everyone, will have a say and we will have hard agreeing on something.  How will agree on something if we all have different ideas and needs? 

Secular Government

If a secular government is in rule, they would try to make everyone submit to a universal government. That means every culture and nation and religion would have to abide by the same rules or laws, but the rules, however, will be difficult to make because every culutre would want to have the laws to favor their religion or nation.  Than an uproar of how the laws should be made and who should make the laws will be controversal.  There might be a lot of laws to make everyone happy.  This type of government would try to rule out religion.  It is pretty much like a communistic government.  Instead of creating peace, this type of government will creat chaos. 

Abortion

I choose the 2nd topic or statement.

2.) Teenagers who become mothers have grim prospects for the future. They are much more likely to leave of school; receive inadequate prenatal care; rely on public assistance to raise a child; develop health problems; or end up divorced.

From a Christian perspective, teenagers should not have sexual intercouse unless they are married.  Teenagers want to get pregnant and do get pregnant which is there choice, however they suffer from consequences such as balancing or giving up school, parent accountablility, and so on.  First of all, a teenager and can wait to have child when they are more mature and out of high school.  That way they are some what prepared, have a better chance of getting into college in the futre, and can get a job.  I guess, my question is, why do teenagers want to have a child?  Do they think that is cool, or grown up thing?  It's takes a lot of responsibilty and planning.  Not to sound rude, but most teenage mothers ruin their chance of college because they drop out of high school (some mothers might be able to balance school and their kid and be successful).  Because some teenage mothers try to balance out everything, they get stressed and unhealthy habits begin to form.  Or during the pregnancy they drink, do drugs, or other harmful actions that hurt them and the baby.  Not only that they are not being "fair" to the rest of the community.  Also most teenagers that get married in their earlie teens, are most likely going to get a divorece.  I have no statistics about that, but that's what I heard.

Some teenagers get raped and do not know what to do.  From a Christian perspective, they should carry the baby and give her/him up for adoption.  Some women feel shame if they have an abortion because they killed and innocent huma being.  Some teenagers have an abortion because they do not know that the living organism that is growing is  a human being. 

Overall, in a Christian perspective, teenagers should wait to get married.  They should think about thier decsions and why they want to do what they want to do.  They need to think about the pros and cons and the struggels and the posistives.

Law 4

Equlaity means, sameness or everyone deserves the same amount of praise or reward.  Also, no one should not be treated differently because they might be rich, poor, have a disablity or no disabiltiy.  But the word "treated" could mean differently.  What I mean is, a person who has a mental disablitity would be "treated" differently in order to help him/her get through school and life, but should still be respected.  Samething with for a person who has physical disablitiy.  Justice should be done to those who have committed crimes.  Victums of crimes should be given justice.

Christians should justify according to the Bible.  We should help those in need and not to justifie according to our own standards, but God's standards and what God says.  Also go the law that governs us and see what they have to say.  God was and is the ultimate Law giver and Soverginty and there is a reason why God put in charge men and women to govern citizens.  Our jobs as citizens are to follow the laws given to us and based on the laws "justify" what is right and wrong.  From the Bible and our own morals we know what is right and wrong, but we are too also follow the laws given to us.  Justice for us to take care of those who have been wronged.  In the end, God will send judgement to those who have committed evil and have not repented of that evil.  When some one wrongs us, we are to still love them but we can also try to help correct them.  We are to forgive and love them just as the Lord has forgiven and loves us.  We define justice through God, the Bible, and the law that governs society.

Law 3

The difference between the Islamic Law and God's Law is that the Islmaic Law is sovergin over every point of a lifestyle.  For example, woman have wear clothing that covers every part of thier body, they have to pray at a certain time of day in a precise direction.  Their god, Allah, is unpredictable and therefore sometimes "his" laws are not always precise.  There might be thousands of laws that they never heard of and they might fall into hell.  

God's Law wants us to have a different lifestyle than our old one, but He is not picky about what we wear as long as it is modest.  God doesn't tell us what time of day and direction we have to pray to Him.  God wants us to talk to Him, but He won't send us to Hell for not talking to Him.  God's Law is precise and direct. 

Law 2

I think they are limited but it also depends on how the individual interprets the law, and that's if the law has more than one meaning.  Most, if not all the laws formed by the governemnt and in the Constitiution are stated clearly.  However there are some that are controversal.  For example, burning the flag of United States of America.  If a non-American citizen burned a flag of United States of American would that person be considered a terriost, and if an American citizen burned the flag, wouldn't the person be considered a terroist as well? Also, we humans can abide by the laws that govern over us or we can go against them.  We all know what is right and wrong.  But we also follow our own morals.  Our morals also govern for what we stand and believe for.  Christians follow the Bible and obey God and other people follow their country's laws and follow their god too.  But there are also times when Christians have to go against the law in order to do God's will.  For example in the Bible, Daniel gets thrown in the lion's den because he prayed to God when it was outlawed.  Missionaries go against other countries laws because they are sent to spread the word.
Therefore there are two sets of laws: Man's Law and God's Law.  God wants His followers to follow the law that rule over them and to follow His rules or guidelines.  If the government tells them to do something that is against the Bible or against their morals, then what?  I think that Christians would not follow the orders and obey God's.  Man's laws are flawed but God's laws are holy, sacred, and divine.  In other words, yes, laws are limited to our interpretation.  We can choose to follow or go agasint the laws.

Law

Government is not the ultimate authority because God is the Judge and the Authority.  God is the first being to even create laws.  In the Old Testament He created the first law (in my opinion) of not eating from the tree of life, soon the Ten Commandments followed, other laws in Leviticus and so on.  We should respect and follow the laws formed by the governemnt, but God's as well.  If the government goes against the law or asks you to go against it, than the government itself is can't be the ultimate law because the law can be easily distorted and changed.  God's laws however do not change and stay the same.  What's the differnece between a distorted law and God's law?  You will never know the meaning of a distorted law, but if it God's law, you will know the precise meaning.  A person can add or change a distorted law, but God's law stays the same and if a person tries to add or change God's law, that would be blasemphy.

Feminism

Christians should respond to feminsim not in a degrading or hateful way, but in some way make it into a friendly converstaion.  They or me, should say that feminism takes the word femine out of females in away.  Feminists want to be treated the same way as men, but I should ask what there definition of being treated the same way?  I understand that women who work the same jobs as men should be paid the same amount of money, but the physical conditions should stay the same and women should work the same hours and no short cuts.  If feminists want to be treated equal as men, they need to accept the physical conditions.  If women want to join the military, than they would need to go through the same training as men, or if they want to be a doctor, they need to go through the same training as men.  Even though God created men and women differntly, women should still be treated equally.

Feminism within the household is different than from the Christian perspective.  If they (feminists) want to be the "man" of the house, then don't get married.  One of the causes of femisim is that women begin to sleep around because men can do it, well that doesn't make it right.  When women sleep around it causes higher rates of abortion and STDs.  From a Christian perspective, there is a reason why men are at the top of the household it is because they are meant to protect, provide, and love their families.  The men of thier households might have the final say, but usually they do not make their decision without their wife's input.

Sexist; Homophobic

I think that the claim is not completely correct.  There might be Chrisitans who are like that and misrepresent the Bible because the Bible does not discrimnet people who homosexuals.  The Bible says that it is wrong because sex and marraiage is suppose to between a man and woman which creates a sacred unity.  The Bibles says that it is wrong to be homosexual.  If a person who is homosexual or bisexual, I do not mind being friends with them, but I would not particepate in the act or encourage them to keep doing their sin.  I would try my best to point it out and show them in the Bible what a marriage is meant to be.  Song of Solomon is a very poetic and descriptive book about marriage and sex.  It talks about a man and a woman, not a woman and woman or man and man.  Also the Bible does not teach Christians to stay away from people who are homos or bi, but to love them and help them get out of their sin and live a godly life. 
If I was placed in a group of homos and bis, I would feel out of place and uncomfortable, but I would try my best to be a light.  I would engage in conversations and treat them with respect but I do not agree with their perspective of what marriage should be like.  In other words, I would stand my ground, and if they ask me what I think, I would tell them without trying to put them down or hurt their feelings.  I would pull out my Bible and show them references about marriage and sex.

Sociology post

Yes, that is true, that it is the states interest to be more involved in parenting and even if it comes to the point of parenting in homes.  However, I believe that this is a bad idea because whatever worldview(s) that states teach can confuse children and children who are being raised in Christian homes.  Ideas that go into the states which release into parenting into homes, than parents themselves would have a hard time parenting because they being told what to do by the state, and the parents might no agree with the state but also do not want to go against their state.  Some ideas that come from the state could be about homosexuallity is okay and states begin to try to unite their state by teaching all families the same morals so the state would become one.  States in a way would be manipulating the citizens, by trying to get everyone under the same morals. 
It also depends on the situation as well.  For example, children who are being physically abused should be taken out of that home and be placed in a secure, safer home.  I think that's the only time that the state should be involved in "parenting."