Bob: Senate should only be opened by Christian prayers

Today, Bob took intolerance of other faiths to a whole new level. He was all in a tizzy over the fact that a Hindu prayer will be offered during the opening of the U.S. Senate on July 12. That's it, folks, that's what got Bob upset.

But why is Bob so upset about this? He freely admits that it's not unconstitutional to have a Hindu offer the opening prayer. So why would he possibly be upset that out of the tens of thousands of Senate sessions that have opened, one will finally include a Hindu prayer?

Here's his reasoning: "tradition" and "culture." Bob believes that because the majority of the founding fathers were Christians, and they've been doing a lot of Christian prayers in the Senate for the last 200-odd years, they should just keep doing those forever and ever.

I'm sorry, Bob, but you must understand that "tradition" and "culture" aren't good reasons to do, or not do, anything. For example, prior to the Civil War, it was the "tradition" and "culture" of the southern states to keep slaves. Should this tradition have been upheld so that the southerners could maintain their culture? Prior to 1965, only white men had offered the opening prayer in the Senate. Should we continue to exclude non-whites and women from offering the prayer due to culture and tradition? Up until adoption of the 19th Amendment in 1920, women in the U.S. could not vote. Should we have upheld this tradition of prohibiting half the population from having a voice in our democracy? After all, it was part of our tradition and culture!

There is no rational reason for Bob's opposition to a Hindu giving the prayer. When Bob makes statements like this, I can only assume that he doesn't have confidence in his beliefs. He must be threatened that a Hindu giving an opening prayer in the U.S. Senate will somehow cause people to turn away from Christianity. But why should he be threatened? If, as he claims, his brand of Christianity is the Only True Religion, backed up by at least ten "proofs", then what is he worried about? If Bob's truly got all the facts and logic on his side, then it won't be long before all the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and Catholics and Atheists will see reason and accept his version of Christ as savior.

So relax, Bob! Maybe take another day off. You've obviously got nothing to worry about.

Bob's "Reasoning" Insults Faith

Faith, according to chapter 11 of Hebrews, is "the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen." For Christians, faith allows one to "understand that the universe was ordered by the word of God," making the "visible [come] into being through the invisible."

But what does this mean?

To start with, it means that faith is not produced by the intellect. No matter how forcefully one exercises the mind, faith will not germinate as a result. Faith is "the act of the intellect assenting to a Divine truth owing to the movement of the will, which is itself moved by the grace of God." Faith, stated plainly, is a divine gift. When God moves human will, faith is produced.

Consequently, since faith is the divine gift of God acting upon the will, it stands that faith is the evidence for the existence of God, not a product of arguments for the existence of God.

With this in hand, I want to ask a question: Does Bob Dutko have any faith at all? I don't think he does.

First of all, Bob constantly claims that Christianity is the most "reasonable" of all religions. To support his proposition, Bob points to the Bible. Bob uses the claims Christ made about his own Divine nature, the various miracles performed by Christ, and the 500 witnesses who attested to witnessing the resurrected Christ as historical proof of Christ's identity. Using the Bible, Bob reaches the logical conclusion that his faith is the most "reasonable."

But if Bob had faith, why would he need to prove anything? Remember, faith is a product of God's action upon human will. If he had faith, he could simply rest upon his faith and need not prove anything.

But Bob is even worse than this! He suborns science to "prove" his faith.

I've already covered how Bob distorts the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and the Fact of Evolution. Bob even makes wild-eyed claims about dinosaurs living on Noah's Ark! All of this in an attempt to prove his faith is the product of "reason!"

But faith isn't the product of reason! Faith is gift from God that makes us leap into action, no matter what the evidence shows! In the face of true faith, science and argument must stand mute.

Do you want to see truth faith? Look to Mother Theresa. It's faith that led her to care for the sick and dying of Calcutta. It's faith that led Dorothy Day to campaign for the poor, forsaken, hungry, and homeless. It's faith that led Martin Luther King Jr. to become a political activist and head the Civil Rights Movement.

Is there anything that Bob does that reflects a person moved by faith? Not to me. All I hear Bob do is blame liberals for all social ills, attack Islam, and claim that he can browbeat anybody who doesn't agree with him.

By insisting that his faith is "reasonable," Bob insults God by arguing His Divine gift isn't enough.

How very sad.

Why Blogging About Bob Has Gotten Difficult

Right now, as I listen, Bob is talking about embryonic stem cell research.

Again.

If he’s not talking about that, he’s complaining about the Democrats or liberals for something dumb, or bashing gay people. And if there’s a huge story involving some celebrity (such as Paris or Anna Nicole), he’ll jump on it like a “reporter” from Access Hollywood.

Bob’s show is Groundhog Day. There is nothing new. Just the same warmed over, debunked talking points. It’s not fun listening to him anymore.

However, I will Soldier on and do my duty. Let’s get to what he said about embryonic stem cell research.

Bob said he thinks that embryonic stem cell research should be supported by private dollars, despite the fact that he thinks that destroying the embryos is the equivalent of abortion (i.e. murder in his eyes).

So does this mean that Bob supports private funding for abortion clinics? After all, if Bob considers embryonic stem cell research to be on par with abortion, does he consider the murder of babies (sic) to be kosher if it’s done with private dollars? And if so, does he support the murder of people who are BORN if it’s done with private dollars? Does he support hit men?

If he doesn’t he’s a hypocrite. If he does, he’s just a sick person.