Home Blog Page 50

Inspirational: I Am The Vine; You Are The Branches.

“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.” John 15:5

A personal reminder for myself. I often find myself crashing headlong into the brush only to realize all these nicks and scratches are proof of my own ego. If I remember that every breath I breathe comes from Him, I arrive at a place where I can relax and allow God to drive the outcome.

In support of your efforts,
Matt

The Five Commandments of Christian Leadership Training

If Moses were to come down from a smoldering mountain with the Five Commandments of Christian leadership training, here is what he would bring to your church or ministry today:

  • Thou Shalt Start with Vision: Leadership training–especially in a Christian context–starts and ends with a vision.  Each ministry is uniquely created to do something special in the Kingdom of God.  If you want effective leaders, they must know the vision and hold unswervingly to it.
  • Thou Shalt Not Be CHEAP: Anything worth doing will cost you something.  When you begin to raise up leaders and provide training, do not settle for anything less than the best.  Invest in help from the outside if your current leadership is not ready to build teams and other leaders.  This is crucial.  John Maxwell is right when he says, “Everything rises and falls on leadership.”  Do not look for cheap solutions when it comes to Christian leadership training.
  • Thou Shalt Focus on Service: Leadership is not about power and control.  Great leaders serve.  Serving the people we lead is not a ploy to curry sympathy.  It’s about removing obstacles and helping our followers become their best.  Leaders do not stop leading when they serve.  They are simply laying aside their rights for the good of the organization.  Serving others simply makes Christian leadership training practical.
  • Thou Shalt Focus on People: Someone once said, “Any leader who does not have followers is someone who is out taking a walk.”  Leaders who know how to love and listen to people will never have a shortage of followers.  Any leadership training, especially from a Christian perspective, has to include listening skills.  You cannot help and lead anyone until you understand where they are coming from.
  • Thou Shalt Start Young: If your christian leadership training does not have someone in high school at the table, you are making a huge mistake.  Good Christian leadership training instills a vision for creating a legacy of great leaders in the future.  How can we expect leaders to return to a foundation they know nothing about?  The Catholic Church is beginning to recognize this dilemma, and is initiating Christian leadership training programs to help.  For instance, Michael Adkins, academic dean at St. Agnes School, a K-12 school in St. Paul, Minnesota has graduates from his program come back from college to speak with his students.  Adkins says:

“It is powerful when somebody can come back to St. Agnes and can stand before our students and say, ‘I was captain of the football team at my college, and when there was lewd language in the locker room, I could stand up and say something about it.’”

Want to know more? Contact us.

Pro-Choice Argument: A Woman Should Have Control Over Her Own Body

In a fallacy that appeals to the heart, the arguer uses emotional appeals rather than logical reasons to persuade the listener. The fallacy can appeal to various emotions including pride, pity, fear, hate, vanity, or sympathy. The appeal to sympathy is actually a formal fallacy labeled ad misericordiam.

Generally, the issue is oversimplified to the advantage of the arguer. For example, in 1972, there was a widely-printed advertisement printed by the Foulke Fur Co., which was in reaction to the frequent protests against the killing of Alaskan seals for the making of fancy furs. According to the advertisement, clubbing the seals was one of the great conservation stories of our history, a mere exercise in wildlife management, because “biologists believe a healthier colony is a controlled colony.”

Have you ever run into this? For instance, take the following pro-choice argument. Is it a principle or a fallacy?

Pro-choice argument: A woman should have control over her own body.

This statement, while arguably true when applied to the individual, does not address a number of details.

First, her baby has its own body, brain, heartbeat, blood type, sex, and genes–half of which was donated by the father. Does that mean the baby is half his, legally? Or is possession truly nine-tenths of the law? This assumes we agree children are owned by their parents, of course.

Second, it neglects the controversy of whether it is a ‘fetus’ or a ‘baby’. (A popular Right to Life slogan is, “If it’s not a baby, then you’re not pregnant.”) If it is a fetus, a mere sac of blood and tissue, surely it is within a woman’s right to have it removed, the same as one would have a cancerous tumor removed. If, however, it is a baby (thereby implying that the woman is indeed pregnant and not simply experiencing a random growth or venereal disease), then one wonders what rights the unborn child is allowed to possess.

The “woman should have control over her own body” argument appeals to a liberal, human rights slant. It fuels the emotional certainty that we should all have consummate control over our bodies and what goes on inside them, while neglecting the same control for the unborn child.

In heated issues where positions are characterized by a high emotional index, it is common for antagonists to hurl fallacies at each other, but this is immature. When considering such a devisive topic as abortion, it is often difficult to separate emotions from rational debate (but not impossible.)

Pro-choice is said to follow from the widely accepted principle that individuals have a right to control their bodies. The counterargument would have to examine to what extent the principle is applicable. For example, do people have a right to kill themselves? To damage their bodies through self-destructive habits such as drinking, smoking, taking narcotics or mountain climbing? If yes, do women have that right in full when they are pregnant or do mothers have obligations to limit self-destructive habits when they are pregnant?

To the extent you weaken the premise on which the argument depends, to that extent do you weaken the conclusion for pro-choice.

5 Link Building and SEO Tips to Promote Your Church

Link building has always been one of the most important element in the success (or failure) of a website. When it comes to SEO (search engine optimization), it may be the biggest element of all.

Links are like ratings that point to a page in your website, signaling the search engines that your website might be highly sought after and deserve a higher placement in the search results.

With that in mind, here five tips to help you with your link building efforts:

1. Quality over quantity

As much as SEO experts want to build a lot of links for their clients’ webpages, having a high amount of back links doesn’t necessarily mean long-term success in SEO.

In the old days, quantity was king, but not anymore. Quality is now the most important factor when building links for your website.

Remember: Backlinks from shady websites or articles that are not relevant to your site will do more harm than good. Your site’s overall health and search placement will suffer.

2. Hire help

Link building (and SEO in general) can be a very arduous task.  This is the reason why there’s a whole industry built around it. There are lots of SEO experts, consultants and professionals out there these days. SEO will take up a lot of your time, so it can be more efficient to leave this task to the professionals. Don’t hesitate to contact us if you need help in this department. We specialize in SEO.

3. Simplify your content

Make your articles simple, so that many people can easily understand and spread your message. It is a fact that the more complicated the content is, the less it is shared.

4. Submit to web directories

Submit your website’s links to as many web directories as you can. While this was once one of the best ways you could optimize your offsite link profile, web directory listings seem to have been reduced in importance in recent years. They still hold value, however.

Web directories will not know about your site unless you submit to them directly. This takes a lot of time, but it is a very important part of SEO. To save yourself time and work, hire an SEO expert to help you with this task, so you can just concentrate on your church mission. Contact us if you need help.

5. Develop high-quality content

Google’s “Panda” update pushed pages Google considered to have been poorly written and/or have spammy content way (WAY) down its rankings. As an aftermath, websites need to focus on creating high-quality content that’s useful, informative and shareable to stay in Google’s good graces.

Low-quality content will land you in Google’s cross-hairs, but high-quality content will help you attract precious inbound links and targeted traffic. However, producing a regular stream of constant, high-value content can be difficult. Get help in this area and hire content-writing experts.

Go forth and conquer

So there you have it, five tips to help you with your link building and SEO efforts. Implement these tips and you will be on your way to achieving greater online visibility in your community.

Inspirational: When Planting Corn Pray for Rain

(I especially liked this when I heard it, so you know I had to turn it into something shareable.)

When planting corn,
pray for rain but do so with a
hoe in your hand.

God calls us to action. We are to move forward in faith and He brings forth the fruit to our labor. For me, this quote answered the question, “How much do we rely upon God and how much do we rely upon our own efforts?”

I believe we are co-creators with God. He calls us, but has also endowed us with free will. How could we choose Him back if we were created to be automatons?

Faith in action is the key. It is the key to healing. It is the key to miracles. It is the key to fostering a deep, meaningful relationship with our Lord. Examples of this principle in scripture are clear:

Mark 6:4-6,New International Version (NIV)

Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. He was amazed at their lack of faith.

Matthew 9:19-23, New International Version (NIV)

19 Jesus got up and went with him, and so did his disciples. 20 Just then a woman who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak. 21 She said to herself, “If I only touch his cloak, I will be healed.” 22 Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.” And the woman was healed at that moment.

John 9:5-7, New International Version (NIV)

While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

After saying this, he spit on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes. “Go,” he told him, “wash in the Pool of Siloam” (this word means “Sent”). So the man went and washed, and came home seeing.

Matthew 14:23-32, New International Version (NIV)

23 After he had dismissed them, he went up on a mountainside by himself to pray. Later that night, he was there alone, 24 and the boat was already a considerable distance from land, buffeted by the waves because the wind was against it.

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

27 But Jesus immediately said to them: “Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid.”

28 “Lord, if it’s you,” Peter replied, “tell me to come to you on the water.”

29 “Come,” he said.

Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus. 30 But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, “Lord, save me!”

31 Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. “You of little faith,” he said, “why did you doubt?”

32 And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down.

These are only a few examples. I’m sure you can probably come up with more. The point is, faith in action (or lack thereof) is seen over and over again.

Some folks feel they just want to “leave it all up to God.” While certainly this can be a wise take on a situation, the trap we fall into is in failing to move in the direction of our desired outcome. By failing to play our part, we place an expectation upon God to be our own personal Santa Claus.

This is obviously not in line with Christ’s examples above.

So my encouragement–to you as much as to myself–is to move forward into every day, heading toward the greater realization of God and our relationship with Him. Rest in Him and hand your troubles up. After all, it’s usually our best thinking that has gotten us into the trouble we experience on a daily basis.

Matthew 6:31-33, New International Version (NIV)

31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

In support of your efforts,

Matt Schoenherr

Are You Sure That’s FAIR? Calling Out Pro-Choice Bias in Media

“While news is important, news interpretation is far more important” – H. V. Kaltenborn

The article titled, “Abortion Coverage Leaves Women out of the Picture” by Tiffany Devitt (Special Issue on Women, 1992) asserts that the news industry repeatedly neglects to focus the abortion issue on women, instead turning the debate into an issue that is often political in nature. The author believes that the media has tended to discuss the abortion issue from a distance; a distance much too far away to involve themselves in determining the feelings and view points of those immediately impacted by the issue – women (and arguably, unborn children).

“..as is the case with other social policy issues such as civil rights or welfare, abortion is more often covered not from the perspective of those most affected by the issue, but from the standpoint of Washington politics. According to the National Newspaper Index of major dailies, there were more articles on how the issue of abortion has affected various political candidacies, races and parties than there were articles on how women with unwanted pregnancies are affected by growing restrictions on funding and counseling.” (Devitt, 1992)

Devitt makes a number of poignant arguments throughout the article. She states that one article in the Los Angeles Times debated whether women reporters could objectively write about abortion and points out that the article never even asked the same question about men. Devitt also shows how there have been a number of incidents where abortion legislation has been passed and interviews with the women who will be affected by the legislation have been non-existent. At one point, she even makes the assertion that “stories regularly [carry] the soundbites of abortion-rights representatives and anti-abortion spokespersons” but fail to glean the other side’s perspective. She does not, however, back the latter up with any examples.

This last point is especially timely for me, as I recently received a call from a distraught friend over the same phenomenon. This friend works as a legislative representative for the state Right to Life office and, as part of her duties, occasionally goes on radio and television interviews. This one radio debate, in particular, left her feeling railroaded. She knew from the opening comments between the interviewer and the third person on the line that the interviewer was already very pro-choice. As the debate progressed, it became more and more apparent that she was there merely to help portray the image that the radio station was conducting impartial forums on controversial issues. Not only was she cut off in mid-sentence during the few chances she attempted to break into the conversation, but she was also forcefully excluded from the conversation until the end when she was simply asked if she had any closing remarks. It appears, then, that the tendency to illicit supporting views at the expense of objectivity is universal.

As was the case with this article.

There were a few items that I found interesting about Devitt’s article. First, it is hosted on a website for an organization called FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting). “As a progressive group, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.” (FAIR, 2003) They go on to further describe themselves as being an “anti-censorship organization” and their mission as being one of fostering “greater diversity in the press”. For a group that calls themselves “Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting”, I saw little of it in their limited collection of abortion papers. What I saw was a collection of articles that supported one point of view; the very antithesis of what FAIR says they stand for. While Devitt was attacking the news media for a pro-life slant, she was stomping her biased feet to support the pro-choice camp. Not once did she attempt to illustrate a slant from the opposing side.

Finally, one might also notice that FAIR offers links to NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) and Planned Parenthood from their website, but they stop there. One would think that if an organization were trying to build a name for themselves as being forthcoming and accurate with the facts, they would make sure their readers had full access to all points of view.

After all, wouldn’t that be the FAIR thing to do?

 


References

Webster’s Book of Quotations. (1992). New York, NY: Pamco Publishing Co., Inc.

Devitt, T. (1992). Abortion Coverage Leaves Women out of the Picture. Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting. Retrieved April 2, 2003 from the World Wide Web:

Cohen, J. (2003). What’s FAIR?. Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting. Retrieved April 2, 2003 from the World Wide Web:

Bucher, R. (2000). Diversity Consciousness: Opening Our Minds to People, Cultures, and
Opportunities. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Special Issue on Women 1992

This graphic depicts the abortion debate as two hands tugging at a rag doll– suggesting that the debate is about an “unborn child” rather than about women’s rights (Los Angeles Times, 7/22/90).

Abortion Coverage Leaves Women out of the Picture

By Tiffany Devitt

As a background graphic for reports on abortion, TV has sometimes used a depiction of a late-term fetus hanging in space, with no connection to a pregnant woman. The “floating fetus” logo is in sync with the media’s tendency to push women out of the public’s mental picture of the abortion issue.

In recent years, national media have heavily covered the issue of abortion. In 1989 and 1990, close to 1500 articles on abortion appeared in major dailies; the weeklies — Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report — have featured stories on abortion more regularly than any other social policy issue.

However, as is the case with other social policy issues such as civil rights or welfare, abortion is more often covered not from the perspective of those most affected by the issue, but from the standpoint of Washington politics. According to the National Newspaper Index of major dailies, there were more articles on how the issue of abortion has affected various political candidacies, races and parties than there were articles on how women with unwanted pregnancies are affected by growing restrictions on funding and counseling.

Though former Gov. Bob Martinez of Florida will never have an abortion, a Washington Post headline declared (8/1/89): “Governor at Risk on Abortion Issue.” While it is individual women, not political parties, who confront the choice to terminate a pregnancy, a Wall Street Journal headline stated(10/20/89): “Abortion Debate Proves Painful for Republicans.”

National news outlets have occasionally shown themselves willing to deal with the painful reality of abortion for women and the tragedy of unwanted children — but usually only when discussing abortion policies of foreign governments, in particular the policies of Eastern European countries under Communism. For example, Newsweek published an article titled “When Abortion Is Denied: What of the ‘Unwanted’?” (8/22/88), discussing the consequences of Czechoslovakia’s ban on abortions. And the Washington Post ran a poignant article (6/17/90) on restricted access to abortion in Romania under Ceausescu. But the human consequences of restricting access to abortion in the U.S. have seldom made news.

What is striking in the coverage of abortion in mainstream media is the lack of opportunities that U.S. women have to speak for themselves and articulate their concerns. Although stories regularly carried the soundbites of abortion-rights representatives and anti-abortion spokespersons, the women affected by specific restrictions were rarely cited as sources in abortion stories.

For example, the Supreme Court decision that enabled states to require women under the age of 18 to get parental consent before getting an abortion was widely covered. However, while more than 1 million teenagers become pregnant each year, and thousands of them are affected by state legislation requiring parental consent, reporters almost never sought their reaction, covering the legal change without consulting anyone in the group that it impacts.

Articles on the recent cuts in Medicaid funding for abortion, and on President Bush’s veto of a provision that would have granted an exception in cases of rape or incest, similarly failed to quote the women who would be affected — poor women, largely women of color, and rape and incest victims. Rather, the story was played as a political skirmish, with members of Congress and administration officials, mostly male, squaring off against each other and trying to appear principled.

One recent challenge to abortion rights has been in the realm of abortion referrals and counseling. In September 1990, the Supreme Court was asked by the Bush administration to uphold federal regulations that prevent doctors, nurses and counselors at federally funded family-planning clinics from discussing the option of abortion or referring patients to abortion providers. An exceptional front-page article in the Washington Post (10/30/90) interviewed women who count on the services of these clinics and contemplated what it would mean if they closed. But most stories on the issue merely reported that the “U.S. Files Narrow Defense on Abortion Counseling” (New York Times, 9/9/90) and were relegated to the back pages.

Not only have women been undercited as a source in abortion stories, but much space has been devoted to questioning their capacity to speak on the subject altogether. (See Extra!, 7-8/90.) The Los Angeles Times (6/3/90)devoted 28 column inches to exploring the question, “Can Woman Reporters Write Objectively on Abortion?” — without pondering whether male reporters can.