www.TheRebelution.com

Alex and Brett are not here. You can find them at:

www.TheRebelution.com

rebelution + conscont = The Rebelution

www.rebelution.blogspot.com
In a very cruel trick on the dear Dawn Eden (author of The Dawn Patrol) Brett and I timidly announce the merger of Conscientious Contemplation and Rebelution. After discussing the possibility with our parents, we came to the conclusion that it was in our own interest, and in the interest of our readers, to consolidate our entries to a single blog. We also realized that the longer we waited, the harder it would be to make the switch. This afternoon featured a flurry of activity as all the posts here were cross-posted to their new home: The Rebelution

Unfortunately, while the timing was as perfect as it would ever be, some confusion will most likely result. In an incredible act of kindness, Dawn decided to feature us in her weekly column Blog On! in the New York Daily News. While it will not appear until Sunday (the 28th), the interview, writing, submission, and finalization of the column was all accomplished before our decision to merge.

As it is, all of the entries that Dawn cited from my blog can be found here. Her column was correct in every detail. The purpose of this post is only to alert you that all future posts by both Brett and myself will be made at The Rebelution.

Soli Deo Gloria, Alex Jordan Harris

A Guest Post by My Father (Part 1)

In the comments section of The Myth of Adolescence (Part 2), fellow blogger Jan (The Happy Homemaker) requested that I share about the environment in which Brett and I were raised. There are few better ways to accomplish this end than to share the following article by my father, Gregg Harris. Originally published in TABLETALK magazine in August of 1999, these words capture the heart of my father's approach to raising his children. Long a reformer, my father was a leading member of the home-school movement, and has more recently turned his focus to the reformation of the church. He currently serves as a teaching elder of Household of Faith Community Church. The church was planted in our family's living room in August of 1998, when Brett and I were 9 years old. Besides his study, writing, and teaching, my father still occasionally travels and speaks around the country, and is actively involved in the raising and instructing of his remaining (at home) 5 children. Serving as Brett's and my manager, advisor, and visionary, our father is our hero. Now, without further ado, I present my dad:

Priceless Treasures: My Reasons for Home Schooling
by Gregg Harris
C.S. LEWIS ONCE OBSERVED that God is not so much offended that we want too much as by the fact that we are satisfied with so little. Though He offers us the highest of adventures in our Christian life, we settle for the stale mediocrity of our lukewarm religious routines.

The parental counterpart to this idea is that most mothers and fathers actually want too little for their children - they settle for success in this world's terms. But God would have us aim higher, not like an ambitious stage mother pushing her mildly talented children into the spotlight, but like a fine jeweler making the best possible use of each bit of gold, silver, and precious stone he has. My children are priceless treasures, and I want God's highest and best for them.

What does it mean to aim high in this way? What am I really trying to accomplish in the education of my children?

Is it enough that they read well? No, not for me. I want them to commune with great authors from throughout the ages and be able to comprehend the profound ideas and truths that God has used to change the course of history. Let them be voracious readers of truly great literature.

Do I want my sons and daughters only to write and spell correctly? No, I want them to correspond with fellow enthusiasts in their chosen areas of endeavor. If they have the gifting, let them eventually author intelligent, superbly written works concerning the important issues of their day. Let them be prolific writers, whether privately or publicly

Do I want them merely to know enough history to pass a written test? No, I want them to understand the times in which they live and to be able to pass the real tests of life they will face in voting booths and on battlefields. Let them be like the sons of Issachar ("who had understanding of the times," 1 Chron. 12:32) in the unfolding dramas of future events.

But education is so much more than mere academics. It is primarily matter of character development. Self-discipline may be out of style, but it is never out of work. Do I want my children simply to be nice, well-behaved, and safe from peer pressure? Not at all! Aslan, in Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, is not a tame lion, but he is good. I prefer my children to be like that - good but not tame, men and women of integrity, not conformity. Let them be so influential and contagious in their faith that they turn the hearts of their companions toward God. Let the world grieve that its best and brightest have become Christians...

A Definition of 'Sin'

What is sin? This was the question posed by young collegian John Wesley in a letter addressed to his mother. Wesley’s goal was to get a clear, cut-and-dried formula for what comprised "sin." After all, such technical definitions are easy to get around; stretched and bent for the allowance of things that our consciences (except when mollified by sinful rationalization) could never justify.

Wesley woefully underestimated his mother. The response given by this wise and godly woman was far different from what he expected... And it changed his life:

“Would you judge of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of pleasure, of the innocence or malignity of actions? Take this rule: whatever weakens your reason, impairs the tenderness of your conscience, obscures your sense of God, or takes off the relish of spiritual things; in short, whatever increases the strength and authority of your body over your mind; that thing is sin to you, however innocent it may be in itself.”

The Washington Examiner Lambasts "Superhero for Choice" Cartoon

As recently announced on 'The Dawn Patrol', our efforts to alert the media regarding Planned Parenthood's "Superhero for Choice" cartoon have resulted in an unexpected editorial in The Washington Examiner.

In the editorial, entitled "Planned Parenthood Takes Low Road," PPGG is taken to task for its film depicting violence against pro-lifers.

The Examiner's editors write:

Apparently, the lesson to be learned [from "A Superhero for Choice"] is that abortions are OK, especially if it means less welfare payments later. The animation ends on the high note of referring to the Rev. Jerry Falwell as a "schmuck."

The video is a shameful and disrespectful take on the very sensitive issue of abortion and reproductive rights, where good, reasonable people disagree for good and reasonable reasons. By taking the low road and appealing to the lowest - and juvenile - common denominator, Planned Parenthood demeans its opponents and, even more, its supporters.

As Dawn points out, the fact that this is a Washington, D.C., paper is particularly exciting, because it will most likely be read by those on Capitol Hill.

If you have not seen the film, please visit my detailed synopsis, which includes a comprehensive list of links of where the video and transcripts are hosted.

As promised, here is the screenshot of "A Superhero for Choice" as featured on PPGG's Web page before being removed by the organization several days ago (without comment or apology).

You Read It Right: Complete Blog Commenting Guidelines

For the purpose of facilitating logical and respectful argumentation and discussion, the lovely Dawn Eden of The Dawn Patrol commissioned us (Brett and I) to write out the complete blog commenting guidelines. We are now pleased to present:

Commenting for "Newbies"
(A "Reminder" for the Rest of Us)

About the Authors: Alex & Brett Harris have competed for four years in high school speech & debate, including policy and value debate, persuasive platform speaking, limited preparation categories, and even interpretative events. Over the past two years they have combined for 5 national titles, making it into final rounds over 18 times. They have been contributing authors to several debate sourcebooks and have coached high school speech and debate clubs in Oregon, Washington, and Maryland. They currently author the blogs ‘Conscientious Contemplation’ (Alex) and 'The Rebelution’ (Brett).

You Have Entered “The Comment Zone”
It is crucial to a vibrant and healthy comment section for participants to understand the purpose of discussion, and to possess a proper respect for their fellow contributors. Whether you maintain your own blog, comment on other blogger’s posts, or both, you have most likely been frustrated by the lack of proper argumentation and the seeming epidemic of disrespect, primarily among your opponents (Insight #1: They feel the same way towards you).

The truth is that we all can use a helpful reminder every so often as to how we should conduct ourselves in the high-intensity role of “the commentator’s commenter.”

For that reason we present, “Commenting For ‘Newbies’ (A ‘Reminder’ For The Rest of Us),” as an invaluable resource for bloggers and their readers; an aide-mémoire, if you will. Yes, logic, evidence, and respect still exist and can be realized—even in your comment section.

The Purpose of Argumentation
Critical to proper argumentation is an understanding of why we argue; we argue in hopes of persuading dissenting opinions to conform to our own. If we disagree, it is because we think we are right and others are wrong. We take the time to discuss our disagreements in hopes of proving the validity of our views. It is frustrating, therefore, when we find ourselves perpetually clashing with our opponents, while making seemingly no headway towards our goal of changing their minds.

In fact, at times it can feel as if, were we to publicly claim that rabbits exist, our opponents would deny it; even if one hopped up, said, “What’s up, Doc?” and starting burrowing into their heads. How do we get past these confounding doldrums and arrive at a place from which the discussion can progress in an intelligent manner?

Here are three steps to improve your skills of argumentation:

Step One: Remember that your opponents have come to their conclusions using more or less the same rational process you have. The difference is not necessarily their intellect, but rather the information they had at their disposal and the values they hold.

Step Two: Understand that this means your opponent feels just as confident about the accuracy of his or her position as you do about yours, and will only be persuaded otherwise if you prove that their information or values are out of line.

Step Three: Realize that successful argumentation will only take place when you make it your goal to inform and persuade, by supplying additional bits (or chunks) of information and by addressing the values behind your opponent’s conclusions.

8 Principles For Logical & Respectful Discussion

The key to respectful, profitable argumentation is to respect others and to be respected. You respect others by acting civilly and arguing reasonably. You cause others to respect you by not acting like a fool in your manner or in your argumentation. Here are eight principles that allow you to do both:

NUMBER ONE: Understand the ‘classical’ view of tolerance.
The classical view of tolerance lends itself much more readily to intelligent argumentation than does the modern view. It teaches that, while we may strongly disagree with dissenting opinions, we still treat the person behind those opinions with respect.

DO feel free to disagree, even strongly, with other people, and say so!
DO feel free to permanently demolish opposing viewpoints. (Good luck!)
DO NOT attempt to demolish opposing “people.”

NUMBER TWO: “No ‘ad hominem’ attacks, you moron!”
Nothing more quickly degenerates a discussion than when people start attacking those making the arguments rather than refuting the arguments themselves. Remember that the character, circumstances, or political ideology of the person has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the proposition being defended.

DO NOT stoop to name-calling (moron, idiot, etc.)
DO NOT imply negative monikers onto people simply because they disagree. (i.e. “Anyone who’s even slightly intelligent will believe that cows are people too.”)

NUMBER THREE: Eschew Obscenity & Prohibit Profanity
The use of inappropriate language and shocking statements is a sure sign that the author lacks the ability to communicate their position in a calm and reasonable manner. It shows tremendous disdain for others and will not be allowed on respectable blogs.

DO NOT be upset when your comment is deleted for inappropriate language.
DO NOT be upset when you IP address is banned for multiple offenses.

NUMBER FOUR: He who asserts must prove.
This is one of the most critical aspects of proper argumentation and requires that you carefully guard yourself from making groundless statements. Every proposition should be supported by either logic or evidence.

Logic includes everything from complex syllogisms to plain ol’ cause-and-effect. Evidence can take the form of examples, statistics, and/or quotations from authorities in the field. Supported arguments stand until refuted. Unsupported arguments do not deserve a response and might as well not exist.

DO feel free to confirm other people’s points without providing additional support.
DO NOT make additional arguments or publicize your disagreement with someone else’s position without providing adequate support.

NUMBER FIVE: Respond to the argument, not to the spelling.
There is no surer sign of inadequacy on the part of a debater than when they take issue with some small “error” on the part of their opponent, while ignoring the main point/s their adversary is trying to make.

If you are unable to refute your opponent’s position, don’t insult his or her spelling, grammar, or insignificant deviations from fact. Your opponent is most likely correct, and their small errors have nothing to do with the overall truth or falsity of the proposition they defend. Don’t make a fool of yourself by being a sore loser.

DO feel free to point out significant errors that impact the validity of a claim.
DO NOT point out errors solely for the purpose of embarrassing your opponent.

NUMBER SIX: Debating When Less Is More.
A common tactic adopted by inexperienced debaters is to ask a long series of questions that place an enormous burden on their opposition, without actually making any particular point. Such an approach is not only unfair to your opponent, but it really isn’t argumentation at all. These kinds of “question avalanches” can hardly be responded to in the confines of a comment section, but will often foster animosity.

The same is true of those with too much time on their hands (or a gift for speed writing) who present far too many arguments at one time in hopes of “burying” their opponent under the supposed “empirical” weight. Both of these abuses inhibit true argumentation and inevitably degrade the quality of a discussion. Respect yourself and your opponents at all times by using moderation in your argumentation and questioning.

DO feel free to ask pertinent and probing questions about your opponent’s position.
DO NOT expect answers for loaded questions.
DO NOT ask loaded questions.
DO feel free to make powerful and relevant arguments against your opponent’s position.
DO NOT expect answers to your 5 page tome.
DO NOT write 5 page tomes.

NUMBER SEVEN: Do your own research.
Remember that your opponents are busy people who are taking time out of their day to discuss relevant issues with you. Do not place an excessive burden on them by requiring them to go “off-site” to read lengthy articles or study ancient philosophers, scientists, etc. If Aristotle makes “your” point then “you” should be able to make the argument. Your opponent certainly will not (and shouldn’t have to) make it for you.

DO feel free to provide links to outside sources for your opponent’s consideration.
DO NOT expect your opponent to read them unless you make them want to. (i.e. “If you go read Maxwell’s five-foot bookshelf, then you’d agree with me!” never works)
DO feel free to support your arguments with outside resources. Just make sure you summarize what the resource says. Otherwise your opponents will consider your argument unsupported until they go read/see the support. Which they most likely never will.

NUMBER EIGHT: The fallacy of the majority.
When the majority of participants in a discussion hold your position, it is common to start acting as if the last seven principles no longer apply to you. You feel you can destroy the dissenter, along with their position, since you have so many like-minded chums. However, the majority has no more right to silence the opinion of a minority through disrespectful, improper argumentation, than the minority would have, if it were able, to silence the opinion of the majority using the same methods. Victory by means of respectful, logical argumentation is true victory. Victory by any other means is no victory at all.

DO feel free to destroy dissenting opinions using respectful, logical argumentation.
DO NOT silence dissenting opinions by majority “piranha attacks.”

NOTE: Provided that proper credit is given to my twin and me, the preceding guidelines are freely available for use by any bloggers wishing to do so. May they serve you well. Soli deo gloria!

Alex Jordan Harris

The Myth of Adolescence (Part 2)

In Part 1 of this series, I wrote of the great elephants of India, who, although they have the physical capacity to uproot trees during the day, can be restrained all night long by a piece of twine and a twig. How is this possible?

The elephant’s training begins when it is still young and considerably less powerful. Removed from its mother, the elephant is then shackled with an iron chain to a large tree. For days and weeks on end, the baby elephant strains against its restraints, only to find that all exertion is useless. Then slowly, over a period of several weeks, sometimes months, smaller chains and smaller trees are used. Eventually, you can use a piece of twine and a small branch, and the great beast will not budge. Its mind is fully committed to the idea that it cannot go anywhere when there is something around its right hind leg.

And so I ask my generation, individually and corporately, “What is holding us back?” History demonstrates that we are far more capable than we think we are. Our failure to realize substantial achievement at early ages is due, not to any innate inadequacies on our part, but rather to our social conditioning. American society, with its media-saturated youth culture, not only follows trends and fads, but it creates them. Classrooms, TV shows, magazines, and websites, are not only addressing us at the level of social expectations, but they are in fact dictating those expectations. They tell us how to act, think, and talk; they tell us what to wear, what to buy, and where to buy it; they tell us what to dream, what to value, and what to hate. We are being squeezed into a mold where there is no room for Christian character or competence. And as the famous proverb goes, “As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.”

In what could be considered the most maddening aspect of this crisis, not all areas of maturity are being stunted. In a powerful demonstration of teenagers’ ability to meet the expectations set before them, we witness young people today reaching unprecedented levels of technological proficiency and sexual experience. It is ironic that many teenagers, while fluent in multiple computer languages, are not expected to carry on an intelligent conversation with an adult. It is heartbreaking that so many young girls, while constantly pressed to become more and more sexually alluring, are not expected to attain any notable level of character beneath the surface.

Our world cannot last another generation of Christian young people who fit in. The shackles of society are on our minds and hearts, not our ankles. We are held back only by the myth of adolescence and the lies of social expectations. If we would only recognize that our restraints are illusory, and then let God’s Word and all of history govern our sense of what we are capable of, we would be a force this world could no longer ignore.

We face a crisis and an opportunity. A crisis, in the sense that we can no longer afford to slowly drift towards adulthood, viewing the teen years as a vacation from responsibility, and an opportunity, in the sense that we can embrace life now and make a difference for the glory of God, and for the good our family, our nation, and our world. Look down at your “ankle” and see the pathetic contrivance that has been restraining you. Now renew your mind in the light of God’s Word and take a step forward.

Empirical Proof: Operation Lars

UPDATE (3:30 PM, PST): Just got off the air with Lars for the second time today. When confronted with additional evidence, he gave me a somewhat broader explanation than what I received earlier. He said that he and his people looked into the cartoon when it first came out and called Planned Parenthood, who denied any knowledge of the film. He then admitted that the cartoon has been traced back to the Golden Gate affiliate, but that he didn't think it was that big of a deal. That struck me as odd, because earlier he said that he would definitely "take Planned Parenthood to task" if they were behind it. Unfortunately, people like Lars don't feel that such a news item is worthy of their time... Despite the fact that PPGG gets 53% of its funding from taxes and that a similar cartoon by a pro-life group would spark uproar and lawsuits. Larson is someone I respect and admire, but I am disappointed.


Announcing Operation Lars, a project aimed at alerting conservative men and women of influence, like talk show host Lars Larson, who (by no fault of their own) have been fed misinformation by those sympathetic to Planned Parenthood's agenda.

Empirical Proof:

1.) As of now, Plannned Parenthood Golden Gate still hosts the cartoon on their server, though the link and image from their main page has been removed. Dawn Eden, who originally broke the story, has screenshots of the home page (as it was just a few days ago) on her computer. They should be available for posting soon. If the cartoon was really created by a third-party and uploaded via "hacking" or an "inside" job, wouldn't Planned Parenthood have removed the cartoon immediately and issued a statement of explanation?

2.) Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's annual report includes multiple images of characters found in the cartoon, including title character Dianysus. These are Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's characters... The art is identical to that found in the film.

ATTENTION: This post will be updated throughout the day as evidence comes in.

Planned Parenthood Spreading Lies?

I just got off the phone with Lars Larson. He said he had heard about the "Superhero for Choice" cartoon, but that his understanding was that it was made by a third-party and then attributed to Planned Parenthood Golden Gate. I have no idea where he got that from. If that was true, you would expect that PPGG would have removed the snapshot image from its front page last week when the story broke and released a statement denouncing the film and explaining that someone had hacked their server. Conveniently, the snapshot image is gone now. I'm kicking myself for not taking a screenshot. If anyone did, please let me know.

Lars said that if Planned Parenthood was really behind this, he'd take them to task for it. Conveniently for them, he's heard things that neither Dawn nor I (nor anyone else in the blogosphere) have heard... Things which don't line up with the facts, but effectively keep him from using his national radio show to alert people around the country. All these "convenient" happenstances seem a little too fishy. Planned Parenthood seems to be trying to get away with not apologizing, by silencing (with more false information) those with the potential of threatening them.

The Myth of Adolescence (Part 1)

The trained elephant of India is a perfect picture of the power of psychological captivity. Tamed and utilized for its enormous strength, the great beast stands nearly 10 feet tall and weighs up to 5 tons when fully grown. Its tasks may include uprooting full-grown trees, hauling great boulders, and carrying enormous loads on its shoulders. And yet, when the day’s work is done and this powerful beast must be kept from wandering off during the night, its owner simply takes a piece of twine, attaches it to a small branch embedded in the ground, and ties it around the elephant’s right hind leg. Reason dictates that the elephant can easily snap the twine or pull the twig from ground, and yet the owner does not worry, fully confident that when morning comes he will find the animal exactly where he left him. And he does.

I’ll admit that upon first hearing of this practice, I couldn’t decide which was harder to believe: that the owner was confident, or that his confidence proved justified. A beast that can uproot trees is suddenly unable to pull up a twig? What is it about the piece of twine and the small branch that allows them to subdue all of the elephant’s power? I soon discovered that it had little to do with the twine around the elephant’s ankle, and everything to do with invisible shackles around its mind.

My contention is simple: The young adults of our generation are the elephant. Our twine is the 20th century concept of adolescence. Our twig is societal expectations. We stand restrained as a hurting world burns around us. Yet our twine and twig are of a recent origin. Young adults of the past were not so encumbered.

David Farragut, the U.S. Navy’s first admiral, became a midshipman on the warship Essex at the age of 10. At the age of 12, a mere boy by modern standards, Farragut was given command of his first ship, sailing a capture vessel, crew, and prisoners, back to the U.S. after a successful battle. Young David was given responsibility at an early age, and he rose to the occasion.

The father of our country, George Washington, though never thought to be particularly bright by his peers, began to master geometry, trigonometry, and surveying when he would have been a 5th or 6th grader in our day and ceased his formal education at 14 years of age. At the age of 16 he was named official surveyor for Culpepper County, Virginia. For the next three years, Washington earned nearly $100,000 a year (in modern purchasing power). By the age of 21, he had leveraged his knowledge of the surrounding land, along with his income, to acquire 2,300 acres of prime Virginian land.

These examples astound us in our day and age, but this is because we view life through an extra social category called ‘adolescence’, a category that would have been completely foreign to men and women just 100 years ago. Prior to the late 1800s there were only 3 categories of age: childhood, adulthood, and old age. It was only with the coming of the early labor movement with its progressive child labor laws, coupled with new compulsory schooling laws, that a new category, called adolescence, was invented. Coined by G. Stanley Hall, who is often considered the father of American psychology, ‘adolescence’ identified the artificial zone between childhood and adulthood when young people ceased to be children, but were no longer permitted by law to assume the normal responsibilities of adulthood, such as entering into a trade or finding gainful employment. Consequently, marriage and family had to be delayed as well, and so we invented ‘the teenager’, an unfortunate creature who had all the yearnings and capabilities of an adult, but none of the freedoms or responsibilities.

Teenage life became a 4-year sentence of continuing primary education and relative idleness known as ‘high school’ (four years of schooling which would later be repeated in the first two years of college). Abolished by law were the young Farraguts and young Washingtons, who couldn’t spare the time to be children any longer than necessary. Cultivated instead was the culture we know today, where young people are allowed, encouraged, and even forced to remain quasi-children for much longer than necessary.

The effect of this seismic shift in America’s philosophy of education is not limited to students in the public schools. As homeschoolers we may feel as though we have escaped the danger, but an honest evaluation proves that, as a whole, we also fall short of realizing our potential. After reading the examples of great men of our country’s past, we should recognize that there is no reason why a 13 to 18 year old cannot behave as a responsible adult. History proves it is possible. Diverse cultures confirm its validity. The only thing holding young people back in America today is the twine of this perpetual recess called adolescence and the twig of lowered social expectations. We expect immaturity and irresponsibility, from ourselves and from one another, and that is exactly what we get.

Announcements, Forecasts, and Shout Outs...

A big thank you to everyone who responded to my post exposing Planned Parenthood Golden Gate's "A Superhero for Choice" cartoon. I was on the Lars Larson Show here in Portland on Monday, alerting Jeff Kropf (who was filling in for Lars) and Northwest listeners about the film, and I plan to call in tomorrow and talk to Lars himself. Meanwhile, be sure to alert as many people as possible about Planned Parenthood's advocation of violence against pro-lifers. The national organization still refuses to renounce (or even comment on) its affiliate's film, despite pressure from the American Life League.

A further thank you to Dawn Eden who unexpectedly mentioned Brett and I on her blog 'The Dawn Patrol'. Both Brett and I have been greatly inspired by her work and heartily recommend her blog.

I apologize for the lack of posts over the past several days. For those of you who were not aware, my niece Faith Felicity Harris was born last Monday to my older brother Joel and his wife Kimberly. Diagnosed with Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome (HLHS) prior to birth, Faith was found to possess several additional heart abnormalities, which rendered the planned surgery impossible. Flown down to the Loma Linda University Medical Center in southern California yesterday, Faith will wait for a heart to become available (the average waiting time is 4-6 months). The last several days have been a bustle of activity in order to get everything ready for Joel, Kimmy, and Faith to make the last-minute relocation. Provided a heart does become available, they could be gone for nearly a year. Prayer for Faith would be much appreciated, as 50% of babies die while waiting for a heart. Pray that she would remain strong, healthy, and stable for as long as necessary. For information on where to find updates, photos, etc., please see the comments section for instructions.

Part 1 of 'The Myth of Adolescence' will be posted tomorrow morning, with Part 2 scheduled for Saturday (at the latest). Several interesting topics are coming up after that, including an interactive examination of a tactic frequently used by liberals to great effect, and rarely by conservatives, a short treatise on tolerance, as well as a possible investigation into the paralells between Vietnam and the war in Iraq, particularly among the media and protesters.

Most of you are already keeping track of Brett's recent entries (Part 1, Part 2), but for those of you who are not, or who have failed to take the time to read them, I urge you to do so. The message found in his current series strikes right to the heart of what both our blogs are about.

Thank you all for reading. God bless you!

Soli Deo Gloria, Alex Jordan Harris

"If I wanted to be truly prepared for adult life,
I would have to take more
responsibility for my own education."