Is the Trans Community under Attack?

A couple of headlines about the LGBTQ community recently caught my eye; one of them had the word “attack” in it, while the other one used the phrase “anti-LGBTQ.” As I skimmed the articles, it quickly became apparent that the authors were referring primarily to bills and laws that are seen as restrictions on the rights of the trans community.

So far in 2023, 33% of such legislation are school restrictions, such as limiting classroom discussions of sexuality and gender; another 27% are health-care restrictions, such as prohibiting trans kids from receiving “gender-affirming care.” Other such legislation includes prohibiting trans-identifying individuals from using restrooms of their choice and playing on sports teams aligned with their gender identity.

There is much that could be (and has been) said about each of these types of legislation. I would like to focus briefly on trans women in sports because of the issue of fairness. Last year, Lia Thomas became a household name because of the fact that he won several NCAA swimming events against women; I use the pronoun “he” in reference to Lia Thomas because Riley Gaines and other female swimmers have seen him naked in the locker room, and he is most definitely a man, not a woman. The vast majority of people understand that it’s patently unfair to allow a biological man to compete against biological women. I think the only solution to this unfairness is to have a third category of athletes, perhaps called “other,” for those who identify as transgender.

One of the aforementioned articles also mentioned corporations such as Anheuser-Busch (the parent of Bud Light) and Target as having “caved” to criticism from conservative groups over their partnerships with members of the LGBTQ+ community. As of June 20, Bud Light has seen its revenue drop ~25% since the beginning of the boycott in early April; the boycott was spurred by Bud Light’s decision to feature transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in its advertising. One strange thing about supposed “caving,” though; last weekend, Bud Light was one of the sponsors of the Toronto Pride parade, which featured naked men standing around and riding bicycles in clear view of children attending the event. That is not what I would call “caving,” to put it mildly.

In a similar vein, Target doesn’t seem to have learned its lesson from 2016, when it adopted an “inclusive” restroom policy which caused its revenue to plummet. Last month, because of its “pride”-themed clothing, Target also faced a boycott which caused its revenue to drop ~20% and its stock price to plummet to a three-year low. Customers were especially infuriated by “tuck-friendly” women’s swimsuits and “pride”-themed clothing for children being featured front and center at some of its stores. As a result, some Target stores moved their “pride” section to the back, but that has not been enough to satisfy some Target shoppers.

Bud Light’s very recent sponsorship of the naked-featuring Toronto Pride parade, on the heels of the boycott, and Target’s “pride”-themed clothing, even after its restroom fiasco a few years back, has prompted me to wonder whether those in charge at these two companies are primarily focused on sales; it doesn’t seem so. While I usually admire companies that don’t seem to be overly focused on their bottom line, my admiration does not extend to Bud Light and Target.

While researching all of this, I came across some revealing (no pun intended) statistics in regard to Americans’ perceptions of gender. 61% of Americans now think that “defining gender as the sex listed on a person’s original birth certificate is the only way to define male and female in society.” This is a huge increase from 51% just a year ago. In a similar vein, only 36% of Americans now believe that “the definition of gender is antiquated and needs to be updated to include identity.” This number is down significantly from 42% a year ago. These numbers indicate a growing backlash against the push by trans community activists to expand their rights. In a similar vein, I came across an article by a gay man named Ben Appel about his perceptions of what the White House called LGBTQ Pride Month. I was struck by this quote: “Though I’m gay, I feel something besides pride on the occasion. The socially compulsory celebration now is something to dread. It means that for the entire month of June, you’ll get to hear about the plight of transgender people, just like you do the other 11 months of the year.” So, even within the LGBTQ community, there is resentment against the focus on the rights of the transgender community.

Putting it all together, there are three ways in which the transgender community appears to be experiencing a backlash: legislation that limits their rights; boycotts of companies that overreach in their support of trans people; and beliefs of Americans in relation to the definition of gender. You could also add negative feelings, which are often unspoken, at least in public. As for myself: last year I wrote that although I don’t have compassion for transgender activists, I do have compassion for the transgendered, who are often not the same people as the activists. My compassion in this regard is especially strong for those kids who are confused about their identity, plus those who have detransitioned back to their original biological gender. You can read more about that here: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2022/02/23/clarity-and-compassion-for-the-transgendered/

May the Lord continue to use His people to show and tell His truth and love to those in the transgender community. May some in that community come to understand that the Creator God made them in the first place, and that He doesn’t make mistakes; may this lead them to repentance.

Theological Implications of Intelligent Extraterrestrial Life

Since the federal government released its long-awaited UFO report in January, there have been plenty of headlines related to UFOs. (Technically, the government refers to them as UAPs, or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena; I have no doubt a good number of taxpayer dollars were used to pay someone to come up with that acronym.) Two months ago, the Pentagon said it is in the process of reviewing more than 650 UFO (oops, UAP) incidents. So far, it says none of them can be attributed to alien (extraterrestrial) origin.

This report has prompted me to revisit something I hadn’t thought much about for 40+ years: how does the possibility of intelligent extraterrestrial life relate to Christian beliefs? Let’s go back to 1976. This is when the two Viking landers on Mars performed several experiments to determine whether Mars had any microbial life. Although initially there was plenty of excitement about the results, ultimately, they were inconclusive because they could be explained by unusual chemistry rather than biology (life); in other words, there was something in the soil mimicking life, but it wasn’t life itself. And of course, even if the Viking experiments had shown evidence of such life, it wouldn’t have been evidence of intelligent life. A few years later, I read a book by German astrophysicist Reinhard Breuer called Contact with the Stars. Breuer came to the conclusion that, at least within our galaxy, we are the only technological civilization. (Among other things, the Drake Equation is fascinating, although it relies almost purely on various kinds of speculation; you can research it if you’re interested.) Breuer left open the possibility that there was intelligent life out there, but perhaps we just didn’t know it yet because their technology had not yet developed enough for them to send out messages, for example.

The idea of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is a very intriguing idea, to say the least. For naturalistic scientists who believe in evolution, it seems illogical that our planet is the only one in the universe where intelligent life exists. However, it is not so easy, to put it mildly, for life of any kind to develop by chance; click here if you want to read more: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2023/02/09/the-intelligent-designer/ In addition, however, it seems that some people have an understandable desire to find life elsewhere because they think, among other things, that intelligent beings from another world would help us Earthlings solve some of the problems we have here. This presupposes that these beings from another planet would not be hostile, but is that realistic?

I have enjoyed good science-fiction novels, short stories, movies, and TV shows since I was a boy. Many of these have to do with encounters with intelligent extraterrestrial life, very occasionally friendly (the blockbuster 1977 movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind), but almost always hostile. Admittedly, this is all fiction, but it seems to me that the hostile portrayals of extraterrestrials are more likely than the friendly ones.

If you’re a Christian, then you know that sin entered our world through Satan, who tempted Adam and Eve into sinning; this is commonly referred to as the Fall. I believe that if there are planets with intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, then the Lord created it, just as He created Adam and Eve, the parents of the human race, here. I also believe that Satan would visit such planets and try to do what he successfully did here. Would intelligent life elsewhere be able to resist the temptations of Satan? C.S. Lewis wrote a space trilogy, the second book of which is Perelandra. On Perelandra (which is the planet Venus), there exist two beings, a king and a queen. A visitor to the planet who is possessed by Satan tries to tempt the queen into doing the one thing she had been commanded not to do. However, there is also another visitor (a Christ-like figure) who ultimately battles, and defeats, the demon-possessed man. Thus, sin does not enter Venus, so the Fall never happens.

I enjoyed Perelandra, and it is truly wonderful to imagine a world where Satan does not succeed in his temptations of the first people there. However, if Satan succeeded in tempting intelligent beings on another planet (which I think is likely), then sin would enter that world as well. Taking it a step further: would the Lord enact His plan of salvation on that world? I believe the answer is yes. However, wouldn’t that mean that Jesus, God’s Son, would have to die for that race of intelligent beings as well? Based on everything I read in the Bible, I believe the answer is yes. Hebrews 9:22 says, “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”

I can’t imagine the Lord Jesus, Who is my Lord, having to die again and again for sinful intelligent beings on other worlds. This has become the most fundamental reason why I don’t believe there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Perhaps I will be proven wrong someday, but so far, the scientific evidence doesn’t suggest that there is life of any kind elsewhere in the universe, let alone intelligent life.

I should add that I’m aware of Christians who have said that angels (and demons, for that matter) are examples of extraterrestrial intelligence. However, even though angels can take corporeal (bodily) form, they are spirit beings. In addition, demons cannot be saved from sin; they will spend eternity in hell.

Are we alone in the universe, as some like to say? I believe that in a sense, we are. However, it is a universe created by the Lord God, and He chose to create this life-sustaining planet for all life, including intelligent human beings, to live on. And then, after the parents of the human race sinned, He enacted His plan of salvation for all who believe and trust in Jesus. How amazing is that?!

Making Your Mark

People may not articulate it or even be aware of it, but deep down, everyone wants to make their mark in life. Some ways are very negative, while others are positive, even God-glorifying.

In my city, as in many others, there are two very obvious negative ways I have noticed that people try to make their mark, quite literally, in fact. One way is graffiti, sometimes done by gang members as a way of marking their territory. In my neighborhood, there is only one time that I have seen graffiti, many years ago on what was essentially a faceplate over electrical wiring. However, in a couple other parts of the city, graffiti is much more prevalent, some of it gang-related. The other obvious negative way that some have tried to make their mark is by “burning donuts” on the street or in a parking lot, most often with a pickup. Many years ago, we had a young neighbor and his friends who used to enjoy making their mark in this way, in our neighborhood as well as in other areas.

On the one hand, graffiti tends to be more permanent than “donuts,” although thankfully, the former can be painted over. “Donuts” fade over time; the worst ones that we had in our neighborhood had faded in a matter of months. Every several years, the city also paves over streets with fresh blacktop. As far as dealing with the people who perpetrate their graffiti: according to the National Gang Center Bulletin, gangs have been around in various parts of the United States since the early 19th century, but in the West only since the early 20th century. The Bulletin attributes the emergence of many of the street gangs to immigration and poverty. However, on a more fundamental level, especially in today’s world, much has been written elsewhere about how gang membership provides a way of belonging, especially for those from broken and dysfunctional families.

As for those who enjoy making their mark with donuts: that seems to be less a function of gangs and more of a function of young single guys with pickups and too much time on their hands. (My wife had also mused, “Who pays for the tires that these guys are quickly wearing down on our streets?”) Regarding the young ex-neighbor that I mentioned in a previous paragraph: I contacted the owner of the house that he was renting, and she came up with the wonderful idea of gradually raising the rent over a period of a few months until the guy was priced out. Thankfully, he ended up living in our neighborhood less than a year.

On a related note: there was another neighbor around that time who sometimes enjoyed speeding around in his pickup. One afternoon I heard him speeding around the block, so I went outside with a clipboard and pen. When he came careening around the corner, only somewhat in control of his vehicle, he ended up stopping in front of my house, breathing hard and clearly relieved that he hadn’t had an accident. While he sat there, I wrote down some info, like the color and make of his pickup, and frankly just some scribbling, before I went back in the house. He slowly drove away, and the next time we saw each other, we nodded; I didn’t notice him speeding around again. On yet another related note, and also around that time: one evening a friend stopped by to pick up my son for an event at church, and while we were chatting for a few minutes out front, I noticed three young guys I had never seen before sitting on the curb several feet away. Every time I looked their way, they were staring at me, so I eventually stared back. A few minutes after my friend left, I went back outside, and the three guys were gone; I never saw them again. Maybe it was nothing, but maybe it could have been. Only the Lord knows. Thankfully, my neighborhood is now much more peaceful than it had been for a couple years back then.

The examples of graffiti and donuts have struck me as pathetic attempts by young guys who are trying to make their mark. On the other hand, I understand that a lot of these guys didn’t grow up with a father in the home. Thankfully, there are positive ways to leave your mark. In almost any kind of work that people do, they have the opportunity to leave their mark. One obvious example is construction. I have never worked in construction, but I have a lot of respect for people who do. Several years ago, we hired a guy and his crew to replace our roof; about twenty years later, you can still see the quality of the job that they did. My plumber is another man I admire for several reasons; one is the quality of his work. His father (now in heaven) used to be our plumber, and his son has taken over the business. A couple months ago, he replaced a couple of fixtures for us, and he commented on a related fixture by saying, “I see my dad’s handiwork here; he and I replaced this for you.” He talked about how he had learned so much as an apprentice from his dad, and now he is following in his dad’s footsteps, in faith as well as in work.

I’m retired now, but I used to be an ESL teacher in my city. A former student of mine used to work at our local pharmacy, and every time I went in, I took great pleasure in watching her at work and in talking with her. She was always (overly!) complimentary of me and my teaching as well. I have another former student who works at a restaurant that my family and I frequent; I also take pleasure in watching her at work and in talking to her. (She also sometimes gives us a free dessert!) I periodically run into other former students whose names I usually don’t remember but whose faces I do; somehow, they always seem to remember my name.

Speaking for myself as a Christian: the most important way that I can leave my mark is in the lives of others. I have mentioned some of my former students who are still here in my city. I also have other former students that I taught in a Third World country many years ago; I have had the incredible joy of seeing some of them come to saving faith in Jesus Christ. For some, I have been there at the moment when they prayed to accept Christ; for others, I have found out later that they became Christians and that the Lord allowed me to play a part in that. If you’re interested, you can read more about that here under the theme of planting, watering, and harvesting: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2021/02/24/planting-watering-harvesting/

There’s an excellent old movie from 1938 called You Can’t Take It with You. The message of the movie is that no matter how much money and “success” you have, you can’t take it with you. For those of us who are Christians, I have heard it said that the only “thing” we can take with us to heaven is people. Amen to that.

More about Heroism

At the beginning of this month, Jordan Neely, a homeless man, entered a New York subway car and began both speaking and acting in a threatening manner to the other passengers. According to the police report, Neely was acting in a “hostile and erratic” manner while shouting threats that he would hurt people. He also said something about “going to jail or getting life in prison.” Perhaps most ominously, Neely said he was “ready to die.” Marine veteran Daniel Penny stepped in, attempting to subdue Neely by putting him in a chokehold for about fifteen minutes; once Neely stopped struggling, Penny put him in the recovery position. However, Neely was later pronounced dead at a hospital.

Initially, it seemed that might be the end of it, but the following week, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg gave in to mob pressure (including people standing on subway tracks) and charged Penny with manslaughter. Leftist activists, including several in the media, have called Penny a “vigilante.” As so often seems to be the case with the homeless, no one seemed to care about Neely in life, but so many have jumped on the Jordan Neely bandwagon to exploit his death.

Thankfully, there has been an outpouring of support for the heroic Penny, including financially, to the tune of more than two million dollars for his defense fund. Many others have expressed their thanks to Penny: “I would’ve wanted you on the subway if I was there. You are a very brave man,” one donor wrote. Another wrote, “I would only hope that if my husband wasn’t with me and someone was threatening me, someone would help me as well. Thank you sir. May God be with you and your family during your time of need. My prayers are also with you.”

Daniel Penny didn’t know this about Jordan Neely at the time, but Neely had been arrested forty-two times, including multiple times for assault. Like many homeless people, he suffered from mental illness. This is not to say that Neely’s life didn’t matter; of course it did. It does, however, give some context to his death. Mentally ill or not, each of us is responsible for our words and actions.

Ultimately, the charges against Penny may very well be dropped. If this case were to ever go to trial, I believe he would be acquitted; hopefully, it won’t come to that. Regardless, cases like this are going to continue to have a chilling effect on potential heroes stepping up in situations where others are being threatened, or even attacked. Why would someone be willing to risk his life, given the threat of losing his freedom even if he is successful in protecting the safety, and possibly life, of a potential victim?

On a related note: Back in 2009, before my son went off to college, I had a conversation with him related to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech two years before. I asked him what he would do if a gunman entered his classroom, and although our responses to that situation were different, it was a rich conversation. Just a couple years ago, he wanted to talk about that kind of situation again, and my heart swelled with pride when he indicated that he would rush the gunman if the opportunity presented itself.

With the ever-increasing prevalence of mass shootings, I have thought about what I would do if a gunman entered my church. I have wavered between at least three options: covering my wife with my body; throwing a chair at the gunman; or grabbing a mike and commanding him to stop in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. I suppose my response would depend in part on where the gunman and I were in relation to each other. Lord willing, one thing I would not do is cower. However, part of me wonders whether I would be arrested if I hurt the gunman. Seriously!

2 Timothy 1:7 (NIV) says, “For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” I like the way the New King James Version puts it even better: “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.” We can never know for sure how we will react in dangerous situations, but if we are prepared, it is more likely that we will respond the way we want to rather than being frozen in fear. Because of Daniel Penny’s military training, he knew how to respond to the threat posed by Jordan Neely; I want to be ready as well for whatever situation I may find myself in.

You’re probably thinking that it’s unlikely you will ever be faced with someone who is acting threateningly, or with some other imminently dangerous situation. I would say you’re probably right. However, I believe this kind of mental and spiritual preparedness can also make us ready to step in to help in other, more ordinary, less risky situations. For example, have you ever had the pleasure of changing a tire for someone? I have, a couple of times. These days, for various reasons, it seems that this skill is one that many people don’t possess, at least in my area. Or how about jump-starting someone’s vehicle? Maybe you can clean out the gutters of your elderly neighbor. These actions may not seem very “heroic,” but they can have a profound effect on the person you help.

(A while back, I wrote another post about heroism; take a look if you’re interested: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2021/07/27/what-does-heroism-look-like/)

Climate Change: Alarmism vs. Facts

Much has been written and said about climate change, often with rather extreme predictions about what will happen relatively soon if we don’t make radical lifestyle changes. This post begins with examples of alarmist predictions related to climate change and then moves on to facts via a couple of “cool” graphs that I came across. I will conclude with a Christian perspective on this issue.

Here are a few alarmist predictions about world catastrophe related to climate change.

  • In 1967, a book came out called Famine 1975! America’s Decision: Who Will Survive? (Notice the alarmism in the title!) This book predicted widespread starvation in the developing world in less than ten years due to ever-increasing population. Here’s an alarmist quote from the book: “Today’s crisis can move in only one direction – toward catastrophe.” However, in the ensuing decades, deaths from famine plunged, thanks in large part to major improvements in farming technology. In fact, more people died from famine in the decade immediately prior to the book’s publication than have died from it in the 50+ years since! In 1989, there was an echo of that starvation prediction by U.N. official Noel Brown, this time moving from overpopulation as its cause to climate change: “Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands.” That hasn’t happened, either.
  • In the 1970s, believe it or not, there were widespread forecasts of global cooling–even global freezing. In 1970, for example, in the book Earth Day: The Beginning: A Guide for Survival, Kenneth Watt warned that then-current trends would make the world “eleven degrees colder in the year 2000 … about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Five years later, British scientist Nigel Calder wrote in International Wildlife magazine, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.” Three years after that, even Leonard Nimoy (who played science officer Spock in the original Star Trek series) joined the chorus, predicting a coming ice age in a documentary film. Given the current hysteria over global warming, these global ice age predictions may seem hard to believe.
  • In 1989, U.N. official Noel Brown made yet another prediction: “The most conservative scientific estimate [is] that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees [Celsius] in the next 30 years.” However, from 1989 to 2019, the temperature rose about half of a degree Celsius, according to NASA. (More on this below.) In a related prediction, Al Gore in his 2006 movie An Inconvenient Truth predicted that much of Florida and the San Francisco Bay would be underwater by 2016; has that happened, even now, seven years later than predicted? The movie also suggested that hurricanes would increase in frequency and intensity because of climate change; however, hurricane frequency has decreased since 2006, and their intensity has not increased significantly. A side note: Al Gore has since bought a beach-front property near Los Angeles for nearly $9 million, indicating that he doesn’t seem overly concerned about rising ocean levels.

Now let’s move from alarmism and hysteria to facts. Is global warming real? Yes, it is; the question is how much. Click here for a fun chart, which shows global temperatures from 2500 B.C. to 2040 A.D. (predicted), along with several historical notes: http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm The most important thing to note is that climate change is cyclical over the long term; in other words, there are alternating periods of global cooling and global warming; we are currently in a period of global warming. The only thing I don’t like about the chart is that it shows temperature fluctuations in Fahrenheit rather than Celsius. For example, in the small orange rectangular box in the upper left, it says “RECORD GLOBAL WARMING IN 2016/2020; global temperatures hit 1.69 degrees above normal.” 1.69 degrees Fahrenheit = 0.94 degrees Celsius. Here’s the link to another chart that shows global temperature changes from 1880-2022: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature You can see that since 1977, every year has been warmer than average. Notice, however, that it has not been a continuous upward movement from one year to the next; 2022, for example, was significantly cooler than 2020.

Sometimes, scientists and politicians make very revealing comments. For example, in 1989, Stephen Schneider, a professor of biology at Stanford University, told Discover magazine, “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” And here’s Sen. Timothy Wirth, a Democrat from Colorado, who said in 1988: “We’ve got to … try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong … we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” Do you think anything has changed in the last 30+ years? Are “scary scenarios” and “simplified, dramatic statements” still the norm? How about it, Al Gore? And ponder Wirth’s frightening statement: “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong … we will be doing the right thing anyway…” The current “Go Green” movement is an extreme extension of that, with one of its goals to make fossil fuels obsolete and eventually make all of us drive EVs.

Climate change is related to environmental stewardship. Since this blog is focused on giving Biblical answers to questions and issues, what does the Bible have to say about this issue? In Genesis 1:28, God says to newly-created Adam and Eve: “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.'” This verse and others like it indicate that we are to responsibly take care of creation.

I have told many people over the years that some of my best times of worship have been out in nature, enjoying God’s creation. I believe that Christians should be the best stewards of creation on the earth! However, I don’t believe that alarmism and hysteria from any of our scientists and politicians is helpful. Obviously, they do it to get our attention, but in so doing they distort the truth, to put it mildly. Let me repeat a sentence from biology professor Stephen Schneider, above: “Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” Now that’s scary! I believe it’s clear that climate change is cyclical and that in the current cycle, the globe is getting warmer. However, I also believe that at some point (probably beyond my lifetime), we will enter another cycle of global cooling.

In the article under the 2500 B.C. – 2040 A.D chart (see the first link, above), meteorologist Randy Mann says, “We believe we should be ‘going green’ whenever and wherever possible. However, some of the long-term warming and cooling of global temperatures may be the result of climatic cycles, solar activity, sea-surface temperature patterns and more. Our planet seems to be in a cycle of constant change.” I don’t agree with everything he writes in his article, but I agree with this statement, and I appreciate his nuance and balance. Our leaders should learn to do the same.