Did Harvard University hire the blond, blue-eyed Elizabeth Warren, a U.S. Senate candidate in Massachusetts, because she claimed to be an American Indian?
That’s what members of the Massachusetts Republican Party want to know. They’ve called for Harvard to investigate whether Warren’s supposed racial minority status played a role in her recruitment. Warren, who is challenging Sen. Scott Brown for his seat, listed herself as Native American in legal directories but said she was hired on merit. Columnist Michael Barone said Warren identified as an Indian at previous schools where she taught.
Read the full article.
*Wish I’d come up with that name, but Mark Steyn beat me to it.
[Note: The point I tried to make in the column was how ridiculous it is for the blond, blue-eyed Elizabeth Warren to list herself as a racial minority, an American Indian, not that the descendants of American Indians cannot be blond and blue-eyed.]
Update (5/8): North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
*****
North Carolina already has a law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Why do legislators want another? Read on, and if you’re a registered voter in North Carolina, please vote.
[On Tuesday, May 8], North Carolina voters will decide for or against the following language:
“Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.”
If the voters who choose to protect marriage outnumber those who don’t, the following will appear in the state constitution:
“Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.”
At least 41 states have laws banning homosexual “marriage” by amendment or statute, including North Carolina. In 1996, the state legislature passed a law that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. But the political landscape has changed in 16 years. Homosexual activists have become much more determined to redefine marriage and render it meaningless. North Carolina lawmakers decided to let the people vote directly and make the ban part of the state constitution, so only the voters—not courts or lawmakers—can change it, according to state law.
Read the full article.
In case you haven’t figured it out, today’s my birthday. 
Time…it flies, no?
How should Christians respond in the so-called illegal immigration debate? Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition, opposes laws like SB 1070. In fact, he favors immigration reform, a euphemism for amnesty. “Hospitality is not at the margins of Scripture,” he said earlier this year at the G92 South Immigration Conference at Samford University. “Jesus wasn’t kidding around when He said, ‘I was a stranger and you welcomed me.’”
Scripture misapplication notwithstanding, Christians certainly are called to be compassionate, but are we called to welcome lawbreakers? In light of such questions, Professor James K. Hoffmeier, author of The Immigration Crisis: Immigrants, Aliens, and the Bible (Crossway, 2009), investigated what the Bible has to say about foreigners/strangers/visitors in a host country. The relevant terms he found are ger,zar, and nekhar. Zar and nekhar refer to people passing through, but only ger refers to foreigners who live in the land with the host’s permission.
Read the full article.
