Thanks! Here's a poem of his. Have you seen this book?

! If only we lived in a place like Uganda - there the fat is respected! If you're fat there, it means your "blessed" which lends you respect and credibility in society's eyes. It's great! And the clothing there is not all westernized so that you can wear beautiful draping garments - lots of variety. Maybe we should move to Uganda. :tongue_smilie:

Thanks for that. If you come across anything else, let me know.

I agree. That was a super movie. I really like Casey Affleck's acting!

Wrong movie! Sorry!

And can you tell me of some other accessible works of his for children? Thanks!

I know it's a late date to be posting on this thread, but I thought I'd throw out a couple of other sources. Have you ever heard of Robert Spencer? He is an amazing student of Islam and understands it inside and out. He has many associates who have worked with him on different projects. I don't agree with every view he puts forth, but I definitely think he's got a handle on historical Islam. He took part of a documentary "What the West Needs to Know about Islam" along with some ex-PLOs (and others). I especially appreciated Ms. Bat Ye'or's insights. As you'll see if you visit his website, Mr. Spencer has written numerous books on Islam. He's definitely not going with the mainstream (which I always appreciate). Sometimes, as I'm sure you've experienced, going against the stream can make you a bit caustic after a while. But I appreciate his courage and I think, for the most part, he's a gentle person, even while being forthright.

Thank you. That's refreshing after getting accused of "trolling" last night.

Most welcome. God bless.

I agree with Peek a Boo, "It is my understanding in exploring the same issue that the two options are not mutually exclusive. Different people are called at different times for different purposes." I think the blog I referenced spells it out fairly well from a Scriptural standpoint. I don't necessarily believe we can interpret God's providence in a particular instance so that we could conclude that He is shaming our nation by His appointment of Polin as VP (assuming she is elected), or that He is commenting on the inability of the men who are left unchosen by McCain. However, I do think that this, or something like it, is the general mindset of the Scriptures. I would rather say that the circumstance of women taking up leadership in the State is often an unfortunate necessity - which may, of course, be used by God to bless. God's pattern is to shame the strong by using the weak to save (1 Cor. 1:27). This highlights His mercy at the same time that it demonstrates man's (or men's) ineptitude. When I say "weak" in reference to women, I'm thinking in terms of 1 Pet. 3.7 where he calls the wife the "weaker vessel." I don't think this is a judgment of quality. Rather, it is a comment on the nature of woman. She is a weaker, i.e., a "delicate" vessel while the man is a stronger, "cruder" instrument. They are made for different uses. A tea cup is delicate but not very appropriate vessel for hammering nails. A hammer is useless for the sophistication of tea-time, but is good for construction, even if it's not much to look at. And so, when God uses a tea cup to drive nails, it suggests He finds the hammer useless.

I'm sure Joan of Arc's contemporaries would agree that the officers and men who had failed to lift the siege of Orleans were, at the same time, both shamed and thankful (in that order) for her leadership and subsequent success.

Tis true. But wars have characterized our democratic-republic ever since, too. I don't think any particular form of government is going to alleviate the problem of war. According to James, as you know, wars without come from sin within. And sin is not something the State can save us from (although it tries). Only Jesus is savior. Right?

My point exactly - a woman is not made to fight. :D Key phrase "made" - not to imply that they're not good at (as our little frackas demonstrates).

I think we should have a king.

A woman may be legally qualified, i.e., according to the law of the land (as in our nation). And she may be qualified in terms of her ability to do a good job in said office. But what does this "mean?" The author of the article seems to think that it means the nation is compromised when such a situation arises. Thus the title of my first post "celebration or mourning." Hope that helps.

I agree. Her gender does not disqualify her. You must have missed the point.

I'm sorry, I misunderstood. No, I don't think the author voiced any concerns. That may be because he didn't think Hilary had a chance, and so his concerns were not so pressing. Or it may be that he's new on the blogging scene. I'm pretty sure, though, that this has been his longstanding position since it seems pretty thought out.

I'm kidding.

Phred's wife.

More so, but for more reasons, too - namely, I disagree with Hilary's political views.

I wholeheartedly agree with the link. I just disagree with your conclusion that I think it implies "don't vote for McCain."

Uh... not really. I'm not sure who we should vote for and don't pretend to offer my advice.

Good question. I think a woman "can" be in charge of our military and even do a better job than any man. But I agree with the main point of this article, i.e., that when God appoints a woman to hold a political office, it can be interpreted as part of His displeasure with that nation generally, and with the men in that nation particularly. If, as the article points out, a political office is a function of the sword, then its a sign of a people's weakness for a woman's hand to be the strongest to wield it. Unfortunately, women are regularly called upon to do the job of abdicating men. Shame on the men who abdicate.

But if my point holds, then it's too bad the Brits didn't have a man who could have done the same.

I'm happy that McCain's vice-presidential nominee is conservative, especially that's she's pro-life. But I can't help but think of some other unfortunate implications of this choice.