Since we don’t live in Mayberry any longer, parents need to reject the wisdom of this age and the foolish counsel from state officials. Instead, the way of wisdom, maturity, and love calls for parental engagement, which sometimes means telling our kids, “Wait…trust me…[while we] try to keep temptation away” for your present good and everlasting joy.

In a 1961 episode of Andy Griffith, a drifter who was hanging around Andy’s hometown of Mayberry had exerted some influence over Andy’s son, Opie. The drifter, while being confronted by Andy, told Andy that he should let Opie make his own decisions about life and how Opie wants to live.
Andy’s reply is a display of parenting wisdom.
You can’t let a youngun’ decide for himself. He’ll grab at the first flashy-with-shiny-ribbons-on-it-thing he sees. It’s difficult for him to tell the difference between right and wrong. When he finds out there’s a hook in it, it’s too late. The wrong kinds of things come packaged in so much glitter, it’s hard to convince him that the other thing might be better in the long run. All a parent can do is say, “Wait…trust me”…and try to keep temptation away.
Fast forward to 2023 and this type of wisdom is in short supply in our culture.
Instead, many in our culture believe we need to let our kids make their own decisions, without any input, challenge, or correction from the adults…parents included! Listen to Minnesota Lieutenant Governor, Peggy Flanagan: “When our children tell us who they are, it is our job as grown-ups to listen and to believe them…That’s what it means to be a good parent.”[1] According to this elected official, a good parent merely listens and believes all children. There is no nuance in this statement, and it reflects the increasingly common ideology of unquestioned expressive individualism. That is, every individual, no matter their age, should define their own reality, including something like their gender.[2] And parents, have no authority or permission to offer a corrective.
If a girl thinks she’s a boy, though genetically a girl, then the parent is slave to the child. They must do what she wants. And if, under the counsel or coercion of a teacher, physician, or YouTube influencer, that child wants to have top surgery, bottom surgery, or some combination of the two, the revolutionaries of our day tell parents they have no authority to challenge the child.
The problems are readily apparent, particularly in reference to children. What parent hasn’t dealt with a child who simply is not thinking clearly about a situation? Perhaps a girl thinks she is fat, so she makes herself vomit on a regular basis. Do we simply affirm her belief that though she weighs 80lbs, she is obese? If someone identifies as a worthless human being who is better off dead, do we affirm their self-hatred and usher them towards suicide?
Is it not a common thing for kids, and their wild imaginations, to dream about all sorts of fantastical realities? Are we not aware of how fickle the feelings of immature children can be?
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Curtis C. Thomas |
Sunday, August 20, 2023
Our attitudes (or perspectives) are very important ingredients in our Christian walk. They not only affect our own outlook but also those of our families, our co-workers, our friends and neighbors, our fellow church members and the lost whom we hope to evangelize. If our outlook is pessimistic or dismal, people simply do not want to be around us, much less listen to us. If we exhibit a genuine optimism and a joyful spirit, people will be attracted to our testimony.

About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the other prisoners were listening to them (Acts 16:25).

It has been said that the way a person looks at a rose bush determines whether he is an optimist or a pessimist. A pessimist is sad that rose bushes have thorns. An optimist is delighted that thorn bushes have roses. Our attitudes, or perspectives, are extremely important and often will determine how effectively we can witness.
The context surrounding the verse quoted above from Acts 16 contains Paul’s and Silas’ witness in Philippi. After Paul and Silas had cast out an evil spirit from a slave girl, the owners of the girl dragged Paul and Silas before the authorities with trumped-up charges. The crowds joined in the attack against these two godly men, after which the authorities had them stripped, beaten and severely flogged. Then, without any medical attention to their severe wounds, and though they were Roman citizens, they were thrown into the jail where they were placed in the inner cell. Their feet were placed in the stocks—a device that caused severe pain.
Even though they were publicly humiliated and were in intense pain, Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns. The other prisoners were listening. No doubt they were wide-eyed as Paul and Silas, rather than complaining and threatening to retaliate against their accusers or the authorities, were praising God through their prayers and hymn-singing. Suddenly, God miraculously delivered them by an earthquake. In the process the jailer, his family and possibly even some of the fellow prisoners were saved through the gospel testimony of Paul and Silas.
Paul’s and Silas’ attitudes (or perspectives) were an important ingredient in their testimony. Had they been grumbling, complaining, even cursing their situation, nobody would have listened to them. But instead, they were doing what Peter urged his readers to do when he wrote: “In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have suffered grief in all kinds of trials” (1 Peter 1:6). Peter’s readers had been dispersed because of persecution and had lost all things—their homes, their jobs, their worldly possessions and, in many cases, their families. Like them, we are also called to rejoice even when we are suffering.
Our attitudes (or perspectives) are very important ingredients in our Christian walk. They not only affect our own outlook but also those of our families, our co-workers, our friends and neighbors, our fellow church members and the lost whom we hope to evangelize. If our outlook is pessimistic or dismal, people simply do not want to be around us, much less listen to us. If we exhibit a genuine optimism and a joyful spirit, people will be attracted to our testimony.
A number of years ago I learned a phrase from a young man who was an energetic witness of the gospel.
Read More
Related Posts:

Technology has torn through all that’s worth conserving, and it has often preferred to wear a white coat while doing so. Yet medicine and health cannot escape the human body in all its glory, frailty, and limits, and it is out from that center of moral gravity that we can build. Strictly defining medicine’s rightful authority, embracing the limits of embodiment, and building communities where we suffer together and embrace those who are suffering even to our own hurt gives us the framework we need for technology that serves human nature rather than destroys it.

For a tech-skeptic lover of Wendell Berry, Ivan Illich, and Neil Postman, as a family physician I sure picked the wrong job. Doctors have always used various technologies for treating patients, from the ancient Egyptian prescription to fumigate the womb with incense for eye pain to today’s slightly more informed but still ineffective placebo surgeries. The human body as it has been given to us by God has all sorts of vulnerabilities — to infection, to trauma, to its processes gone awry — and technology gives us power to prevent or treat a wide variety of problems that arise from those vulnerabilities.
To make matters worse, though, nowadays doctors have admitted that they cannot know everything and so they have abandoned their pocket handbooks for databases on smartphones. A good doctor, I tell my students, looks up something new every day and books cannot be printed quickly enough to keep us all up to date. My use of WhatsApp to examine rashes or read ECGs is a bit more primitive than the systems that are evolving in highly developed contexts, but medical practitioners everywhere are finding that technology is invading every imaginable aspect of their work.
This might be tolerable if it was all beneficial, but it’s clearly not. Francis Bacon famously urged us to use science and technology to ameliorate human suffering, but now the Baconian Project has fooled us moderns into thinking that suffering ought to be optional, and we must use technology to eliminate suffering. If technology gives us the power to turn stem cells into useful organs, turn useful organs into simulacra of the opposite sex’s organs, or eliminate un-useful children before they are born, the logic of technology is that those powers ought to be used. If technology doesn’t work, as it often doesn’t, Stanley Hauerwas has suggested that doctors who are unable to ameliorate suffering effectively often feel the need to kill the sufferer.
One can find countless examples of Jon Askonas’ thesis that technological innovation bulldozes tradition throughout medicine; a new drug or device can make years of careful study and practice unnecessary. For the most part, this is a good thing: the vexatiously difficult-to-dose blood thinner warfarin was replaced by much simpler drugs about a decade ago, requiring far less expertise and work from the doctors prescribing it. Yet the existence of any new drug, device, or treatment tends to inspire a search for patients with insurance who will pay for them. Disease mongering, indication creep, overuse of fancy gadgets, and the marketing of insecurity to sell cosmetic surgery have been problems for decades, now reaching a horrifying apotheosis in the current craze of teenagers being memed into thinking that they should be chemically or surgically altered to change their gender expression.
More subtle are phenomena like antibiotics, which are one of modern medicine’s greatest gifts and thus have been terribly abused to the point where now it is an open question whether we will have any working antibiotics in fifty years. The culture that the technology of antibiotics created — desiring a pill or injection to immediately cure an infection — has made antibiotics less effective. Whenever one tries to assert the dangers of technology to human culture and flourishing, antibiotics are one of the first examples that uncritical devotees to the Baconian Project point to: So, you conservatives want to take us back to when we didn’t have penicillin? No, in fact, the revolutionary way in which we have been shaped by technology is already taking us back to the pre-antibiotic era.
Read More
Related Posts: