The World According to kcillini77

September 16, 2009

I’ve Moved!

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 9:09 pm

Please update any bookmarks.

September 2, 2008

If you can read this you’re too close

The announcement that Sarah Palin’s teenage daughter is pregnant has the blogosphere and radio waves abuzz.  A few days ago no one outside of Alaska really knew anything about her, but now her statements in support of “abstinence-only” sex ed are fuel for the fodder that, SEE, we need comprehensive sex ed that includes education about birth control methods and techniques so that our kids don’t wind up knocked up.

Sex education has long been a hot-button topic.  It seems that the vocal opinions, as the political climate seems to dictate, are always at polar ends of the spectrum from each other.  One choice is to sit our kids down, give a cursory overview of fallopian tubes and vas deferens in front of a diagram,  give them statistics on teen pregnancy and STDs and the many dangers of sex, and remind them that the Bible says sex outside of marriage is a sin.  So DON’T DO IT.  Phew, now we can get back to boycotting Hallmark.

The other option is to give a cursory overview of the potential dangers of sex, then tell them we’re smart enough to know they’re going to do it anyway, so here’s a manual on sexual positions, 50 condoms, and oh, yeah, you need to pass a test by demonstrating you can roll one onto a banana.

I think there’s a middle ground.  I’m not sure where it is, but I think it’s there and we, especially those of us associated with American evangelical Christianity need to find it.

The biggest problem when it comes to American Christian parents relating to their kids in the area of sexuality is that we are presenting them with an impossible double standard.  We want them to follow the straight and narrow path of avoiding all forms of sexual immorality and save themselves for marriage, BUT we also want them to achieve financial independence and be educated for a great career before they enter into a marriage covenant.  We’ve bought into the American Dream, and we are trying to fit morality into that dream.

Let’s say your daughter comes to you at the age of 17 and she says, “Daddy, I’ve met the greatest guy in the world.  We have the same hopes and dreams and values, and we want to get married.”  What are you going to do?  You’re going to give her sage advice and say, “Honey, you have your whole life ahead of you.  You don’t even know what love is yet.  This is infatuation.  You have a scholarship offer and you’ve always wanted to be a doctor.  This is puppy love.  Go out to movies and have fun (not too much) and you’ll meet a great guy later in college.”  This is wise in the way of the American Dream.  But you’ve provided no solutions to a girl who loves a guy and has raging hormones (designed by God).  You expect her to find some way to remain physically chaste, but you know there is no human way possible that she will live up to the standard set by Jesus.  You know she will lust.  You know he will lust.  But you want them to figure out a way to suppress that for the next 10 years until they can have good-paying jobs and are able to start out life on the right foot.  Then they can put rings on their fingers and start enjoying the sexuality that God intended for them.

So what’s the solution?  Do we sign the papers so our son can get married while he’s still on the JV football team?  Do we just go ahead and let him sleep over at his girlfriend’s house and figure he can ask for forgiveness from his future wife for all the past girls he remembers?  No.  I don’t think so.  But maybe we do our best to foster an open dialogue on the good and the bad.  Maybe we don’t go ballistic when they fail.  Maybe we admit that we are all a part of an oversexualized world and we all struggle with temptation.  Maybe we believe a marriage can make it even when they seem too young.  Maybe then when all of their Christian friends say, “They just got married at 19 so they can have sex,” they can smile at them and reply, “Well, that wasn’t the only reason, but rest assured I ain’t going back to single life!”

August 29, 2008

I Guess I’m a McCain Voter

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 6:25 am

Despite my last post, I do think it’s important that I figure out who I’m going to vote for.

Barack seems like such a nice guy, and he’s from Illinois, and it would be a historic event to elect a black president.  I WANT to vote for him.  But there’s the pesky topic of “the issues” to consider.  A friend sent me this quiz, put together by ABC News.  You read quotes from each candidate (but without the speaker’s name) and then select the one you agree with most.  There’s still more research to be done on my part, but given my results, it’s not looking good for Obama.  Then again, I live in Kansas, so my vote doesn’t really count.  Maybe I should go ahead and vote for him for the heck of it.

August 25, 2008

The False Gospel of Prosperity

Filed under: America,Christianity,Church,Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 10:18 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

From John Piper – not sure if this is from two different sermons or one, but a message worth a couple minutes of your time.

July 12, 2008

Man, am I glad I read this sign…

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 9:52 am

Could have been trouble.

July 5, 2008

Field Sobriety Checkpoints vs. Saturation Patrols

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 5:08 pm

An interesting article appeared in today’s Kansas City Star questioning the effectiveness of field sobriety checkpoints.

The biggest problem I have with checkpoints is not the fact that the real drunks can avoid them.  It’s the hypocrisy in having a pseudoscientific blood alcohol content limit be the determining factor in whether one is drunk or not.  A few weeks ago someone brought a breathalyzer to our neighbor’s 30th birthday celebration.  I personally blew just over the limit at one point and then retook the test 2 minutes later and was at half the limit.  The difference – the first time I had just taken a sip of beer.  So someone else who had just blown a .02 took the test with a small amount of beer in their mouth and blew a .4 – legally dead, I think.

Cities earn lots of tax money from bars so they will never threaten their existence.  But the guidelines bartenders are to abide by state that they are not to serve someone who “appears intoxicated”.  One does not “appear intoxicated” until they are stumbling over themselves and starting fights at the bar.  By that point they are well over a .08 limit.  Meanwhile someone who has had 4 beers at a bar after a softball game, happens through a checkpoint, tells the officer he had a couple, and blows a .081 gets thrown in the slammer and has their license taken away, while a habitual drunk tells the officer they didn’t have anything to drink or happens to not be one of the 25% they check that night.

I know that anyone who argues against checkpoints is viewed by MADD as someone who wants drunks on the street and people killed.  But I simply agree with the article that saturation patrols are much more effective in keeping the real drunks off the street.  If someone is more in danger of killing or injuring someone than usual, it should be very obvious to a trained officer.

October 18, 2007

I’m a lazy bum

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 6:44 am

All apologies to anyone who has checked my site recently.  As Kristi pointed out, I have not posted in a while.  Lately I’ve been spending way too much time after Brinton’s in bed watching the latest TV shows and/or sports.  Tends to take away from my reflective time.  I do have something written up on paper that I just need to take the time to type.  Look for it in the next couple of days.  I am still here – don’t worry!

March 28, 2007


Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 7:51 pm

Haven’t posted in quite a while.  I just wanted everyone to know I’m still here.  I just got back from a trip to upstate New York tonight, and while I could post something deep and philosophical, I think I’ll just veg out in front of the TV with Jen tonight instead.  But I will be back, and I’ll try to be more pensive next time.

February 27, 2007

A Few of My Favorite Things

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 9:23 pm

We’re headed into my favorite time of year. Spring, when hope springs eternal. I could wax philosophical about the wonder of Easter and the new life that sprouts up in the natural world, but right now my thoughts turn to sports. March Madness is right around the corner, and though there are probably only six or so teams that could legitimately win it all, I’m sure I will fill out a bracket where Illinois wins it all. I always do. This team is nowhere near the talent of the 2005 team that made it to the championship game, but as March approaches, it’s all about the chance. If we make the field, who knows what could happen.

March Madness may be my favorite sporting event, but more than that, I cannot wait for baseball season. We have our Opening Day tickets for the Royals and on April 1, everyone will be even in the standings. I know the Royals aren’t going to make the playoffs this year, but Dayton Moore is changing the way business is done in Kansas City, and the future looks bright. Regardless of the standings, I just love driving around town or mowing the lawn listening to a game. The fact that the game is played almost every day for six months is what makes it magical to me. You lose one day and get another chance the next. Play Ball!

February 15, 2007

Defining Homophobia

Filed under: Uncategorized — kcillini77 @ 8:14 pm

From former NBA star Tim Hardaway:

“You know, I hate gay people, so I let it be known. I don’t like gay people and I don’t like to be around gay people. I am homophobic. I don’t like it. It shouldn’t be in the world or in the United States.”

Now, let’s get this clear. These comments are intolerant and homophobic. Having thoughtful, pursuasive moral reasons for opposing the practice of homosexuality and the political agenda of the gay-rights movement, while affirming the value and dignity of all people created by God (including homosexuals) is NOT homophobic, and is, by definition, decidedly tolerant.

Get it? Got it? Good!

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at