What Have We Become?

What Have We BecomeIn the wake of the senseless shooting of Australian baseball player Christopher Lane, people are now forced to contemplate this generation’s capacity for violence.

‘Violent generation’

The three Oklahoma teenagers who killed Lane admitted to the police that they shot Lane out of boredom. The darkness of the soul of those cold-blooded youngsters that killed a promising athlete is indeed unfathomable. What have we now become — a violent generation?

Right now, we live in a world that worships violence. Just take a look at the most popular movies, the scream-your-lungs-out songs, and even the most “exciting” video games that we play. The more we expose ourselves and our kids to these sources of violence, the more they become insensitive to the value of life, and the easier they find it to pull the trigger and end a person’s life.

‘Values’

Where are the parents of those three Oklahoma teenagers charged with the murder of Christopher Lane? Where are the parents of other lost children who spend most of their waking time in front of violent video games and fantasize about shooting someone in real life instead of just inside the realms of a game? What sort of values are ingrained in the minds and heart of these kids? Or most importantly, are there still ANY values being taught to them?

The parents of today’s generation put so much responsibility of child rearing on the shoulders of the government, babysitters, and teachers that most of them fail to perform their own responsibilities well. We have become lost in being so liberated that we have forgotten to teach our kids to fear God and bestow love upon mankind. Many have already turned their back on God and lost track of what is right and what is wrong. Now, look where this so-called “liberation” has gotten us.

Can all the violence and hate still be undone? Do you still teach your kids about morality and fear in God? Are we at fault for all the senseless crimes that abound?

Image: The Christian Science Monitor

Chris Matthews: Romney Challenging Obama Is Unconstitutional

Chris Matthews Romney Challenging Obama Is UnconstitutionalThis week, MSNBC “star” Chris Matthews made the following statement, clearly speaking out of frustration as he watched President Obama wilt under the scrutiny of the second presidential debates where he was challenged repeatedly by Republican Mitt Romney: “I don’t think he understands the Constitution of the United States…He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance.’”

‘Above the people’

Chris Matthews was angry with Romney challenging the president on his record during the course of an election to unseat him. You would think Matthews would know what is in the Constitution and what is not. Nowhere in the Constitution does it set forth that a president of the United States is above the people and cannot and should not be challenged. Is that not what a presidential election is all about – challenging an incumbent president on his record?


‘Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution’

The Founding Fathers specifically limited the powers of the president and did not exempt a president from abiding by the laws of the land in the same manner and to the same extent as the average citizen. The president of the United States in the Oath of Office swears to the following:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

I have news for Matthews: there is no greater responsibility a president has than to preserve, protect and defend the Constitutional protection of a citizens’ freedom of speech — presidents are neither immune from it nor protected from it.

How about you — what is your opinion about Mitt Romney challenging President Barack Obama? To which candidate are you casting your vote for?

Source: Fox News

Image: The Blaze