And this brings me back to the thought of loyalty. There is much to be said on that subject. And one of those conditions of commitment and loyalty is towards one's spouse. 

It also is evidenced in parent-child relationships. There's a certain admiration we often have for love. Sometimes it can be seen as beneficial, and sometimes not so much so. But, who can fault the love that is found in a parent's defense of their child. Yet, some parents do it to a degree where they cross that sometimes fine line of accountability and leadership, ignoring too many wrong actions and avoiding confrontation at all expense ...which arguably could be said is not love.

Ultimately, we can argue almost any point ...yet, it seems to me very difficult to ignore that love comes from God.

And of course, I realize the quick answer to that is that there are many ways that we see God (speaking to His character, not actually seeing Him). But, it can also be said that way too often we see Him incorrectly ...and not to be ignorant to the fact that each differing view could claim that each opposing view sees Him incorrectly.

That is why I don't rely on my own emotions ...but, on the Book. And of course, I realize there are many books and versions of books ...yet, the one I feel speaks of God, and of Jesus in a genuine fashion, is the Bible.

So, when we speak of loyalty, commitment, and guidelines of right & wrong ---yes, things like that ---that is when the Bible is critically important for the survival of these things we should hold dear.

I realize that if I needed a critical operation done on my brain, it would not be as important to me what the acclaimed Doctor believed in ...other than the fact that he believed he could save my life, and had a strong unbending commitment to do so.

Yet, I think it is at this time that I should mention that society has been operating on our brain for some time now. And society often offers disclaimers ...directed towards the One who can save us, and it (society) seems to have an unbending commitment to not only bend us, but to break us.

Therefore, though my physical well-being may be under the care of someone who would not be my first choice to run our country ...on the other hand, it may just be that the capable hands of that person may be the best choice to guide our nation.

I'm speaking of Benjamin Carson. He does not have the political experience of many who are running for President ...yet, is that not rather overstated. Personally, I often feel a bit uncomfortable when someone has lots of experience ...because I question what quality of experience that is. I don't want someone who is experienced at deceiving the public, caving in to special interests groups (which should be labeled, self-interest groups), and compromising the values that made this country strong just so a few feathers aren't ruffled and they can get re-elected.

Yes, I would rather not so much that the leader has so much experience ...as I would that he or she could use sound discretion in choosing those who have the correct kind of leadership skills in the various departments of government. In short, that such a leader could surround themselves with the right people.

When asked whether he would support a Muslim, he did not answer the way that most of the media made it out to be. They mostly left out the part of him saying he would have no problem with them if they denounced Sharia.

Now, I know several people who did not vote for Mitt Romney because they feared he would turn our country into a Mormon country. I feel that was more than a bit far-fetched ...but, I did not rip them for having that point of view. Did they feel Mitt would appoint a bunch of Mormons into the government ...and if so, what would be their vision on how the government would then change?? Or what would be the view of those who would envision us having Muslim leadership?

Truthfully, we already do have many making decisions with much Muslim sympathies ...not allowing them to even mention that the extremists may just be more dangerous than climate change. And under Muslim leadership, wouldn't that negate the right for women to vote? And how would they treat the LGBT? But, clearly, how could they actually call themselves Muslim if they differed from Muslim beliefs?? And if claiming still to be Muslim, where would their loyalties lie?? It seems to me to be just another on a long list of unfair questions ...while avoiding the fair questions.

My loyalties are where it seems Ben Carson's loyalties are. I believe that we should not be accused of supporting today what happened in the Old Testament. I understand why it happened the way it did in the Old Testament ...but, I also believe it's clear the direction Jesus has pointed us in the New Testament, that we should be living by today.

God promised us in the Old Testament what He fulfilled in the New Testament with sending Jesus, and ultimately leading to His death by crucifixion.

Prior to that, Jesus said, "Can the friends of the bridegroom fast, as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast."