I saw this Moonbat Rule Book posted at Free Republic today. According to the post, someone left it insecure at a Starbucks in Portland, Oregon where it was apparently captured by a Freeper Patrol. Like all classified information left insecure, heads are sure to roll over this:
Rule 1.0 - If you don't agree with our unfair stereotype of conservatism, you will be guilty of conforming to our unfair stereotype of conservatism.
Rule 2.0 - All Republicans are guilty of something and it is usually mass murder. Rule 2.1 - If Republicans have not been found guilty of something just give us time and pay for the investigation. We will find something.
Rule 3.0 - Democrats are NEVER guilty of anything. Ever. Rule 3.1 - If a Democrat ever makes a mistake or is accidentally found guilty of something; BLAME THE REPUBLICANS.
Rule 4.0 - It is not who VOTES that matter. Rather it is who COUNTS the votes that matter. Please refer to Washington State and Oregon State elections offices. Rule 4.1 - It is OK for Democrats to fix elections and find votes for dead people. It is NOT ok for Republicans to find fault with that.
Rule 5.0 - Americans share our moonbat values. However never, ever campaign on Moonbat values because Americans are stupid and will never actually vote for Democrats if they really KNEW they shared our moonbat values. Rule 5.1 - Never, ever under any circumstances admit rule 5.0.
Rule 6.0 - Bush did it. Unless it is good.
Rule 7.0 - Make sure we always attack the military. However, ALWAYS say we are defending the military when we are attaking them. The mainstream press will never know the difference.
Rule 8.0 - Do not ever speak in public or post to a conservative blog the way we normally speak amongst ourselves. We know we have potty mouths but we really really don't want everyone else to know it.
Rule 9.0 - It is OK to hate. Just so long as you hate conservative Republicans Rule 9.1 - Remember all Republicans are Nazis so it is OK to hate them and if anyone backs you into a corner you can always yell "NAZI!" and that will usually fix things.
Rule 10.0 - Confusion is our ally. Any fallacious argument that can be made will help advance the cause and mire the opposition in refutation of our logical inconsistencies.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Moonbat Rule Book Left Unsecure, Captured
Men at the Cross Challenges Men to be a Man
By Lillian Kwon
Christian Post Reporter
Sat, Jul. 12 2008 12:19 PM EDT
It's a fatherless world. Thousands of men leave their wives, children and responsibilities and tack on to crime or pornography. But one ministry wants to bring the father back – and back to the cross.
Men at the Cross launched on Friday the beginning of a movement to help men reach men for Christ and break the "transgenerational curse" of men handing down bitterness and inactivity to their sons. The ministry's first ever stadium event is being held in St. Louis, Mo. this weekend where thousands of men are expected to converge.
"Men at the Cross is just men at the cross," ministry founder Dr. Joe White told The Christian Post. "It brings men together in arenas just to teach men to be Paul's in a fatherless world."
In the New Testament, Apostle Paul discipled a young man named Timothy. Paul considered Timothy like a son as he personally trained him in faith and charged him to teach others as well.
White hopes to equip men across the nation to find their "Timothy" and commit six months to teaching and discipling him until he reaches maturity in his own faith and can disciple another man.
Eventually, the goal is to reach every man around the world.
Men at the Cross was birthed out of a large need for a disciple-making movement. White has worked with men's ministries, including the prominent Promise Keepers, for three decades and wanted to create a movement where denominational walls would be dropped and all men would unite under one banner.
The ministry is launched at a time when Promise Keepers, which has reached hundreds of thousands of men since 1990, has scaled back its stadium-sized events and is in a period of recalibrating.
Out of demand from thousands of men, White founded Men at the Cross not as a competing men's ministry but to meet the need, help plug in more men to the local church, and help build men as Christ-like.
With the pervasion of crime, divorce and pornography, White is hoping to tackle the root cause of it all – fatherlessness.
He described fatherlessness as men not having a "dad" who can teach them how to serve their wives, children and church and who can mentor them to follow Christ.
"We want to equip men [so] that every man eventually will have a spiritual dad in his life who can train him in difficult principles of living," White said.
And it all begins at the cross.
"The cross is the greatest symbol of meekness that there ever has been," he noted. "It's strength under control. Christ humbled himself – that is the picture of meekness. There is nothing stronger and more humble than God on the cross."
It's a struggle for many men, who have grown up with a "macho feeling" and have been taught to overpower, to embrace the cross.
But White says the beauty of the cross is "when a man realizes there is strength that washes feet, that says 'how can I serve you, will you forgive me, I made a mistake.'"
Men at the cross are "men who are willing to lead in a different way. Men who are willing to lead by serving," White says.
This year, Men at the Cross will hold eight stadium events across the country. The ministry hopes to expand to 19 events in 2009.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
George Washington Carver: Scientific Insight from the Bible
American Minute from William J. Federer
Born a slave around JULY 12, 1864, George Washington Carver became a scientist of international renown.
On January 21, 1921, Carver addressed the United States House Ways and Means Committee on behalf of the United Peanut Growers Association on the use of peanuts to improve Southern economy. Initially given ten minutes to speak, the committee was so captivated, his time was extended.
Explaining the many products derived from the peanut, including milk, mock beef and mock chicken, George Washington Carver stated: "If you go to the first chapter of Genesis, we can interpret very clearly, I think, what God intended when he said 'Behold, I have given you every herb that bears seed. To you it shall be meat.' This is what He means about it. It shall be meat. There is everything there to strengthen and nourish and keep the body alive and healthy."
After nearly two hours, the chairman asked: "Dr. Carver, how did you learn all of these things?"
Carver answered: "From an old book"
"What book?" asked the Chairman.
Carver replied, "The Bible."
The Chairman inquired, "Does the Bible tell about peanuts?"
"No, Sir" Dr. Carver replied, "It tells about the God who made the peanut. I asked Him to show me what to do with the peanut and He did."
Tolerance or Honor?
Dr. Richard Wells, Senior Pastor of South Canyon Baptist Church, has a piece in today's Rapid City Journal on the recent decision of the California Supreme Court to legalize homosexual "marriage."
I talked to Pastor Wells around the time he wrote this piece, and I believe he sent this to the Journal about four weeks ago. It certainly took the Journal long enough to get around to posting it.
A couple of salient excerpts:
No, the justices didn’t “interfere with” the will of the people. They trashed it. They acknowledged that marriage has been only “between a man and a woman” since “the beginning of California statehood.” Undeterred, a 4-3 majority simply decreed that recent laws favorable to homosexuals constitute “explicit official recognition” of a “right” to homosexual marriage. Let that word “explicit” sink in. The only thing “explicit” in this case was the vote for Prop. 22.
And
The court deems it insufficient to give mere legal recognition to homosexual partnerships; California must also grant them the “right to have their family relationship accorded dignity and respect equal to that accorded other officially recognized families.” The message to Californians is clear: “You must not only tolerate the homosexual lifestyle, you must honor it, no matter what moral or religious convictions you hold.”
That is exactly the case. We have moved far beyond "tolerance" of homosexual behavior. We're deep into the "celebrate" and "honor" phase of the campaign now.
Unless, of course, people once again get in touch with their moral compass--and their common sense--and say, "Enough is enough."
We should get an idea of whether that has happened this November, as the people of California vote on a marriage protection amendment for their state constitution, and in South Dakota as South Dakotans get a chance to vote for or against legislative candidates who support this kind of thing.
Pro-Homosexual Group Announces South Dakota Legislative Candidate Endorsements
The pro-homosexual group "Equality South Dakota" has released a list of South Dakota legislative candidates they are endorsing, along with $15,000 they are contributing to the general election.
I don't see the announcement up on their website yet, but this announcement comes via the SD Watch blog of Todd Epp, who is a member of the group.
Here is a list of the candidates Equality South Dakota is endorsing, from Todd's blog:
Eric Abrahamson, House Dist. 32, D
Suzy Blake, House Dist. 13, D
Elaine Elliott, House Dist. 2, D
Mitch Fargen, House Dist. 8, D
Dennis Finch, Senate Dist. 33, D
Mary Ann Giebink, House Dist. 10, D
Nyla Griffith, Senate Dist. 31, D
Jacey Harmon, House Dist. 14, D
Bernie Hunhoff, House Dist. 18, D
Everett Hunt, House Dist. 28A, R
Daniel Kaiser, House Dist. 2, R
Fern Johnson, House Dist. 35, D
Paula Johnson, House Dist. 12, D
Kevin Killer, House Dist. 27, D
Greg Kniffen, House Dist. 12, D
Larry Lucas, House Dist. 26A, D
Curtis Marquardt, House Dist. 35, D
Fred McPherson, House Dist. 29, D
Jeff Nelson, House Dist. 33, D
Nic Nemec, Senate Dist. 23, D
Dennis Nemmers, House Dist. 6, D
BJ Nesselhuf, Senate Dist. 17, D
Janelle O’Connor, House Dist. 16, D
Kevin O’Dea, House Dist. 31, D
Mark Remily, House Dist. 3, D
Kim Sargent, Senate Dist. 24, D
Darrell Solberg, House Dist. 11, D
Bob Stevens, Senate Dist. 14, D
Bill Thompson, House Dist. 13, D
Craig Tieszen, Senate Dist. 34, R
Martha Vanderlinde, House Dist. 15, D
Nate Welch, Senate Dist. 11, D
Bethany Wojahn, House Dist. 32, D
I noticed there were only a couple of "R"'s on the list, but all should be taken note of. I counted 33 endorsements, so that's a lot of legislative races.
I noted the first candidate listed, Democrat Eric Abrahamson. In addition to running for Lieutenant Governor in 2006, in 2004 he defended the controversial link on the South Dakota state library website to the Planned Parenthood site for young people called TeenWire.
From the Rapid City Public Library website:
State library board member Eric Abrahamson of Rapid City was the single board member to vote against removing the teenwire link. He said Monday that the governor doesn't understand the function of a library. A library's purpose is to provide an array of information and points of view on many topics. "Libraries historically are protected from executive authority to insulate them from political pressure,"
That link has since been removed, but TeenWire is still out there. The website contains "advice" for young people that essentially amounts to advice to do whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want, with who ever you want.
Some of the topics teens can learn about at TeenWire:
- "Communication is key when it comes to oral sex"
- "Yeast Infections 101"
- Sexual arousal
- Losing your virginity
- Relationships ("My boyfriend wants oral sex all the time, but I hate doing it")
- Is there a type of condom that's best for homosexual guys?
- I dress up in women's lingerie when I masturbate. Does this mean I'm gay?
You can read more about what Abrahamson defended at TeenWire here. Or go to the TeenWire website for yourself, if you dare.
From their website, the mission of Equality South Dakota is
The mission of Equality South Dakota (EqSD) is to secure, protect, and support the rights and the well being of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) South Dakotans and their families.
At least it's clear in these races what you're voting for. So vote accordingly.
Thanks for the tip, Todd.
John McCain's First Weekly Radio Address
The following is the text of Presidential Candidate John McCain's first weekly radio address, as prepared for delivery:
(Click here for audio)
Good morning. I'm John McCain, and this week I've been on the road in Colorado, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. I've been holding town hall meetings to talk over the subject on most everyone's minds these days -- our slowing economy.
More than 400,000 Americans have lost their jobs since December, and the rate of new job creation has fallen sharply. Americans are worried about the security of their current job, and they're worried that they, their kids and their neighbors may not find good jobs and new opportunities in the future. It's a big problem when gasoline, food, and other necessities of life carry the price tag of luxury goods, and that's what it feels like to millions of Americans.
I have a plan to grow this economy, and it starts with getting a handle on the cost of gasoline and regaining America's energy security. I believe we should immediately suspend the federal gas tax for the remainder of the summer driving season. We also have billions of dollars of oil in the United States, and vast reserves of natural gas as well. So we must commit to producing more of both, to send a message to the market and trigger lower prices for oil and gas.
We will develop more clean energy, and especially zero-emission nuclear energy. We will build at least 45 nuclear plants that will create over 700,000 good jobs to construct and operate them. At the same time, we will develop clean coal technology -- which alone will create tens of thousands of jobs in some of America's most hard-pressed areas.
Under my energy plan -- the Lexington Project -- we will also accelerate the development of wind and solar power and other renewable technologies. And we will help automakers design and sell cars that don't depend on gasoline. Production of hybrid, flex-fuel, and electric cars will bring America closer to energy independence. And it will bring jobs to auto plants, parts manufacturers, and the communities that support them.
My opponent has an answer to the Lexington Project, and it's "no": No to more drilling, no to more nuclear power, no to more use of coal. For a guy whose "official seal" carried the motto, "Yes, we can," Senator Obama's agenda sure has a whole lot of "No, we can't."
We need to think as well about small businesses and the jobs they create. Small businesses are the job engine of America, and I will make it easier for them to grow and hire more workers.
My opponent would make it harder by imposing a healthcare mandate that will add a crushing $12,000 to the cost of employing anyone with a family. My plan attacks the real problems of health care -- cost, availability and portability.
In an economic downturn, the worst of all ideas is to raise taxes. And Senator Obama will do just that. If you are one of the 23 million small business owners who files as an individual rate payer, watch out -- because as your business grows, my opponent proposes to raise your taxes. If you have an investment for your child's education or own a mutual fund or a stock in a retirement plan, watch out -- because Senator Obama intends to nearly double the taxes on capital gains. He will raise estate taxes to 45 percent. I propose to cut them to 15 percent. For those of you with children, I will double the child deduction from $3,500 to $7,000 for every dependent, in every family in America.
To promote job creation, we must also get government's fiscal house in order. Government has grown by 60 percent in the last eight years, because this Congress and this Administration have failed to meet their responsibilities. When I'm president, I will order a stem to stern review of government, and I will veto every single bill with wasteful spending.
For his part, Senator Obama proposes to create sprawling new federal programs that will increase government spending even more. As for earmark spending, I have never asked for a single earmark in my entire career. In his Senate career, Senator Obama has requested some $930 million for earmark projects. That comes to more than a million dollars in pork for every working day since he became a United States Senator.
In America, the most important measure of the economy is the opportunity -- the chance for every man and woman to find a better life, and to make one better still for their children. That is all a part of the promise of our country. And if I am elected president, I will see that promise kept.
We're passing through a very tough time, my fellow Americans. But we've been through worse, and beaten longer odds. And very soon, we're going to get this economy running again at full strength.
Thanks for listening.
Change we should worry about
BY STAR PARKER
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT
COALITION ON URBAN RENEWAL & EDUCATION
Are we undergoing some kind of sea change of attitudes in America today?
Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne reflects such sentiment -- perhaps I should say wishful thinking -- by those on the left that indeed we are. He says capitalism is having a "reality check."
The era of big government is back, according to Dionne. Americans now want to re-regulate, re-tax, redistribute, and re-socially engineer.
I don't think so.
What we do know is that Americans are unhappy with the state of their country (almost 85 percent say they are dissatisfied) and their political leaders (more than 70 percent are unhappy with their president and 90 percent are unhappy with the Congress).
Although enthusiasm for the Republican Party is without question on the wane, there is no accompanying surge of popularity of the Democratic Party.
According to recent reporting from the Pew Research Center, favorability ratings for the Republican Party have gone from 55 percent in 1993 to 39 percent in 2007 as unfavorable ratings increased from 35 percent to 53 percent. However, over the same period, favorability ratings for the Democratic Party have also declined, although more modestly -- from the high 50s in 1993 to the low 50s in 2007. And Democratic Party unfavorable ratings went up from around 35 percent to 41 percent.
And let's not forget that both houses of Congress are controlled by Democrats where approval hovers at an all time low.
What do I think is actually going on?
First, I think it is a mistake to associate disillusionment with today's GOP with disillusionment with the principles of limited government and traditional values. It has been so long since American voters have seen the GOP led by anyone who truly carries the banner of these great American principles that they can't remember what it is like.
Under Republican leaders in the last 25 years, we've seen government grow, entitlements expand, and -- except for welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican congress and signed by a Democratic president -- we've seen little in the way of market-based reforms and government rollback.
Despite accusations that John McCain is simply running for George W. Bush's third term, the ease with which Sen. Barack Obama has embraced one of President Bush's signature programs -- faith-based initiatives, in which government doles out funds to religious institutions -- tells us something. And it is not that Obama is becoming more conservative.
What's going on is not an ideological crack-up but a branding crack-up. Rejection of the Republican Party today is not a rejection of limited government and traditional values. It is a rejection of what the Republican Party morphed into.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, has remained true to its principles of big government and moral relativism. And it's not registering more enthusiasm among voters.
It just doesn't take rocket science or an expensive political consultant to appreciate that voters are, for darned good reason, unhappy. Politically, what being unhappy means is either not voting or voting for whatever the alternative is.
What also is happening is we are witnessing a phenomenon that, at least for the time being, is personal -- not ideological.
Obama is succeeding in tapping into the public's general disgust with everything and using his considerable charm and calm and reassuring persona to exploit it.
It's why he may succeed in flip-flopping all over the place and taking liberties with the details of stands he takes over time. Much of the enthusiasm he is generating is not being generated by those details. It is being generating by him.
The Pew Research Center recent report shows an incredible gap in visibility of the two candidates. They report 71 percent visibility of Obama and 11 percent for McCain. This is the "percentage of the public that has heard the most about each candidate that week."
Roger Ailes, president of Fox News, says in his book "You Are the Message" how he helped Ronald Reagan get re-elected in 1984 by getting him to stop worrying about details and just be himself. And, in fact, Reagan's campaign that year was about "morning in America."
So the 2008 election is about change. It's not ideology. It's personal. And those who care about limited government and traditional values should be worried.
Star Parker is president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education and author of the new book White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.
Prior to her involvement in social activism, Star Parker was a single welfare mother in Los Angeles, California. After receiving Christ, Star returned to college, received a BS degree in marketing and launched an urban Christian magazine. The 1992 Los Angeles riots destroyed her business, yet served as a springboard for her focus on faith and market-based alternatives to empower the lives of the poor.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Right to Life Contest Winner: Personhood is Relative in Postmodern World
By Eric Young
Christian Post Reporter
Fri, Jul. 11 2008 11:57 AM EDT
A high school senior from Georgia won the National Right to Life oratory competition this past weekend, emphasizing in his speech how abortion “is but a branch to the Post Modernist root.”
“They cannot say that an unborn child is or is not a person, because hey, it’s all relative. It may be a human to you, but not to me,” Blake Adams from Powder Springs, Ga., expressed in his entry titled “Truth.”
Before winning the national competition Saturday evening in Washington, Blake had won his district competition in Cobb County, the Georgia state competition, and the preliminaries at the National convention earlier in the morning.
After winning, Adams told Georgia Right to Life (GRTL) Education Director Bethany Burrell that he was “grateful to Georgia Right to Life and the NRLC for their encouragement, support and prayers.”
“They have given me the privilege of honoring and glorying God by speaking the truth for those who cannot speak themselves,” he added.
In his speech, Adams criticized Post-Modernism, which he described as a “belief that states: what you think, and what you believe, is no better and no worse than what I think, and what I believe.”
“Therefore, who is right? Who is wrong?” Adams posed. “There is no such thing as truth. The only possible way to know if something is wrong is if it hurts, or, if it’s illegal. Because mankind has bought into the ideas of Post-Modernism, people with no moral compass of their own must default to the decisions of the powers that be.”
Commenting on Adams’ speech, which has been posted on GRTL’s website, GRTL President Daniel Becker said: “Blake has done an exceptional job of humbly establishing how vital the truth of personhood is in a society which has tried to change the meaning."
The Oratory Contest is an annual, spring event that is open to all junior and senior high school students.
Contestants are encouraged to research, write and present an original, 5-7 minute, pro-life speech on abortion, infanticide, euthanasia or stem cell research.
This year, twenty-two states held regional and state contests. At all levels of the competition, they were judged on content and delivery.
On the Web: Blake Adams' Winning Entry at grtl.org
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Homosexual, Pro-Family Panelists Share Feelings on Marriage, Faith
By Michelle A. Vu
Christian Post Reporter
Fri, Jul. 11 2008 11:10 AM EDT
WASHINGTON – The issue of same-sex “marriage” provokes strong emotions and actions on both sides of the debate with little common ground seemingly to be found. But on Thursday the beginning of an unlikely understanding appeared to emerge at a panel discussion that included Christian conservatives and a gay activist.
All five panelists at the Family Research Council event, with the exception of the gay activist, were against the legalization of same-sex “marriage.” At the end of the discussion, no one had changed their position although both sides felt they could better understand the issue from the other’s point of view.
On the traditional marriage side, some panelists listed legal problems, including infringement on religious liberty, which resulted from California’s recent ruling that legalized same-sex “marriage.”
Chief Counsel Benjamin Bull of the Alliance Defense Fund gave examples of California churches that have been sued for refusing to perform same-sex weddings. He also questioned how California’s same-sex “marriage” ruling will affect state clerks that do not want to grant marriage licenses to homosexual couples because of their religious beliefs.
“What is the problem with the California same-sex ‘marriage’ case?” Bull asked. “There are lots of problems with it that are huge and profound.
“One of them is what radical, homosexual-activists will do with the new institution of same-sex ‘marriage’ and use it as a battering ram across America to blast open new areas that ultimately diminish the rights of Christians to express their faith in their lives and how they live.”
Bull, who has defended the religious freedom of many Christians in gay rights cases, contends that in the end a person’s faith will only be a “personalized, individualized” faith and that you can “think about it but you can’t even talk about it” if the homosexual agenda continues to spread.
Yet he softened after hearing Professor Chai R. Feldblum of Georgetown University Law Center speak about the issue from the other perspective. He had expressed eagerness to talk more with the gay activist after hearing her moderate tone.
Feldblum, who described herself as a practicing lesbian, said she is against the gay community’s lack of respect for religious people’s values. As a former Orthodox Jew and daughter of a rabbi, Feldblum said she understands being religious means engaging in certain conducts.
“My sense of being religious completely intertwined with conduct that I did as a religious Jew,” she said. “If someone had told me that I could be a religiously firm Jew but I couldn’t engage in certain conduct or I had to engage in certain conduct – like I had to turn on the light on Shabbos (weekly Sabbath or day of rest in Judaism) – ‘What is the big deal you are just turning on the light on Shabbos?’
“Ok, let me tell you for a firm Jew if you do not turn on the light for Shabbos. That’s a sin,” she said. “Nor do you facilitate someone else who is Jewish to turn on the light. That’s a sin.”
As a result of her own former religious background, Feldblum said she “can’t stand” those in the gay community that say people of faith should “just get over it” when it comes to performing a legal action that goes against their values, such as a county clerk who believes homosexuality is a sin making a marriage license for a gay couple.
“To say just get over it to me demonstrates a complete lack of respect for what that person is feeling in terms of their sense that they are facilitating sin,” Feldblum said. “You do not say to someone who feels they are facilitating sin ‘Get over it.’”
But on the other hand, she said homosexuals feel humiliated and hurt when a county clerk or a facility refuses to serve them because they are gay.
“Can you imagine if you are a black person and it is like, “Ok, well no, I don’t serve black people but this person will,” Feldblum said.
She called for a discussion involving both sides to find a way to accommodate both parties so that gay people can have their rights recognized without the cost of “crushing” the liberty of religious people.
“Gay people should understand religious people and religious people should understand gay people more than they do now,” Feldblum states.
And if one’s answer to the religious liberty conflict is to stop same-sex “marriage” then it will be hard to have a reasonable conversation, she said, as opposed to saying, “We understand it is hard for you when you’re conduct is suppressed because your relationships aren’t recognized, but now let’s have a conversation about what that will mean to us as religious people.”
Several times in her talk, Feldblum emphasized that the views she presented on the issue are her own and not the “norm” in the gay rights movement.
The FRC-hosted event opened with the release of a new poll on the political impact of a state marriage amendment. The national survey, conducted by Wilson Research Strategies, found the majority of voters, 58 percent, indicated they would be more likely to vote for a candidate that supports state marriage amendments that define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.
Others on the panel on Thursday included Kevin J. “Seamus” Hasson, founder, chairman of the Board, and president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty; Professor Teresa Stanton Collett, University of St. Thomas School of Law; and Nathan J. Diament, director of the Institute for Public Affairs of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Race Card is Unnecessary for Hope and Change
By Marie Jon'
Let us be extremely wary when we ask for "change." The Democrat Party is guilty of injecting race into the presidential campaign. America is no longer a racist country, and Americans are deeply offended when it is portrayed as such. These accusations and the apprehension tied to them have been insidiously worked into our collective subconscious. Keep that in mind when you're feeling guilty for something in which you most likely took no part. The days of slavery and segregation are gone.
It is not anyone's imagination that voices of dissent have been heard throughout our land ever since Obama became a lightning rod for Rev. Jeremiah Wright's bigoted inflammatory words: "God Damn America."
Something very evil has been purposefully created. Many Americans know and feel this. Some can't quite put their finger on it, but they can sense trouble. If we are not wise and prudent, our country will move into a very dangerous area. This is not the time for problems caused by manipulative racial divisiveness.
It has been noted that, in his world, it is perfectly acceptable for Barack Obama to play the race card. He will undoubtedly continue to do so if and when he sits in the Oval Office. Obama is not a uniter; he only sounds like one. What legislator will dare question President Obama with the spectre of being branded a racist looming before them?
It was no coincidence that the woman who sang at the Denver State of The City Address was inspired to change the words of our National Anthem. She did so because Obama is the presumptive presidential candidate for the Democrat Party. The lyrics to "Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing" were intermingled with the melody of The Star Spangled Banner. The Black National Anthem was used to create hostility and division where none should exist. When interviewed, Rena Marie said she would do it over again. She recanted her apologies later on and appeared to be not only disrespectful, but antagonistic.
As the campaign clock ticks on, more unpleasant tactics will be employed. When it becomes excruciatingly obvious, it will be too late to retreat from a very disingenuous dialogue about race.
Black activism and activist churches are dividing America. The sanctuaries of these churches contain political pulpits. There is far too much harsh rhetoric spoken openly during a time that God intended for worship and reflection upon His word. It is taking its toll upon our society, because what is spoken inside of a church has repercussions on the outside.
Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not of the uppermost importance to the pastors therein. Let it be understood that what is being taught in these militant denominations is called the "Social Gospel." Scripture is set aside and replaced with man-made theology.
So far, religion has been a big part of this election. In March, Obama gave a speech about race to cover up for his former pastor. Dr.James Dobson accused Obama of distorting the Bible. Obama has never made a clear statement about his present attitude towards Rev. Wright, Rev.Otis Moss III or Father Michael Pfleger. If he is elected, it is more than likely that they will be allowed back into his good graces once again.
Hold on America. Seems like there may be more ranting and scolding in store for us...
It is not by chance that Obama is proposing a government-funded faith based program. Church-affiliated programs where the Bible is not taught in a traditional manner will benefit from Sen. Obama's plan. While there will probably be some that reject the plan to maintain their religious liberty, organizations such as Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition will have its coffers filled to overflowing. The devil is in the details.
The United Church of Christ as well as those which belong to the Council of Churches are made up of far Left constituents. Their biblical teachings are progressive. They have no problem updating God's immutable word to meet the needs of the immorality that they embrace. A big government-funded faith-based program will not bother them in the least.
The plain truth needs to be understood. A black Republican presidential candidate would not have brought with him the racial rumblings being heard today. The party of Abraham Lincoln is not invested in the color of a person's skin; only the Democrat Party takes an unhealthy interest in color. Anyone can be a success story in America; the opportunities are there for the taking.
Obama is a questionable man. He obviously cares little for the issue of the company he has kept, then thrown under the bus on his way to the White House. Terrorist organizations such as Hamas and the New Black Panther Party are cheering for an Obama presidency. Various radical groups and people gravitate toward him. That alone should trouble all Americans.
This upcoming election is being viewed by some as a test. America has shown a willingness to vote a black president into office and lead our nation, but what we need at this crucial hour is an experienced leader. This fact is race-neutral. Hope and change that is worth having should not bring with it an Obama candidacy racial test. America simply cannot afford such disunity.
Related Readings:
Wake Up the White Folk: Rev. Lainie Dowell
Dr.James Dobson accuses Obama of distorting the Bible
Focus on The Family talks about Barack Obama:Listen
Marie Jon' is a political/religious-based writer and founder of http://www.drawingclose.org/ — a sister website to RenewAmerica. Marie extends her hand of welcome; visit DrawingClose and receive your free gift of salvation by taking an online Bible study. Join Christians from all over the world by becoming a free member of GO Fellowship. The website is a nondenominational gathering of believers.
Marie's writings have appeared on many sites, including The New Media Journal, ChronWatch, and ABCNews, to name a few. She is a regular columnist for CapitolHillCoffeeHouse, The Daley Times Post, RenewAmerica, The Conservative Voice, Newsbull, GreatAmericanJournal.com, Radiofreewesthartford.com, Conservativecrusader.com, RightSideNews.com and WesternFrontAmerica.com.
Marie brings a refreshing and spirited point of view that is reflected in her writings, as well as genuine and spiritual insights regarding God and his teachings as they pertain to our modern society. Marie is a nurse, a lay student of the Bible, and a patriot. She is an advocate for American troops serving abroad, as well as the Blue and Gold Star Mothers of America and their families. Marie has appeared as a guest with political talk show host Bruce Elliott on WBAL-1090 AM (Saturdays 5AM-9AM EST).
© Copyright 2008 by Marie Jon'
Does Barack Obama Speak 50 Languages?
GUEST COLUMN
BY ANTON KAISER
Why should we worry about immigrants learning to speak English, Barack Obama tells us. Instead, “You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual.”
What is it about learning to contort and twist the tongue, in harmony with guttural and melodic sounds, that supposedly would make American children better? By fact, shouldn’t we all learn to speak our own native language first, before attempting to acquire any elementary skills in one or more other languages?
“We should have every child speaking more than one language. It’s embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is merci beacoup, right?” says Obama.
Ignoring the terrible construct of Obama’s own extemporaneous English (a man so praised for his eloquence when reading from a teleprompter), we are now told that every American child should learn to speak Spanish. (Personally, I would prefer if they learned to speak proficient English first.) Like most liberals, Obama believes that to be multilingual is to be worldly, educated, sophisticated, inclusive, progressive, futuristic, admired, and respected in the world. Really?
Why learn Spanish? Why not the most common language in the world, Mandarin Chinese. Why not Hindustani (Hindi and Urdu), the third most common language after English? Better yet, why learn another language at all?
During two tours in Germany, I was frequently asked if I spoke German because of my last name. When I said “no,” the always somewhat haughty and abrupt Aryan reply was, “Too bad.” I invariably responded with, “Maybe. But I was born during the Nuremberg trials.” This response, which is perfectly true, invariably produced a richly ironic pregnant pause, which I enjoyed to no end. But to ease the social discomfort, I would usually follow up by mentioning that I actually spoke more than fifty languages, at least by European standards. Here is what I mean.
From the center of Germany, within a radius of just a few hundred miles, one can easily encounter French, Italian, Polish, Dutch, and multiple dialects in various languages (such as high versus low German - Prussian versus Bavarian - etc.). Therefore to speak different languages is natural to the geographical culture of the continent. For instance, Switzerland borders France, Germany, and Italy, so the Swiss naturally speak all three languages. That fact doesn’t make them more worldly, just less amalgamated and more tribal.
On the other hand, this kind of compressed cultural density is abnormal to our own continent. Trust me, Europeans simply can’t imagine the geographical vastness of the land mass of Canada and the US all speaking the same language (recognizing that Quebec prefers French). A European has absolutely no chance of traveling three to 5,000 miles without encountering multiple languages like we can in America and Canada.
Imagine if each of our fifty states spoke a different language. Would we, by natural association, learn to speak Wyoming, North Dakotan, Minnesotan, Montanan and Nebraskan? As South Dakotans, of course we would. Do more Americans on our southern border know how to speak Spanish than those who live in our more northern states? Of course they do. Using these analogies, I suggested to my German friends that I spoke more than fifty languages, by European standards.
So Europeans aren’t smarter, or more useful, or more educated because they speak multiple languages, they are simply more culturally challenged within their own limited geography.
The three most common languages in North and South America are English, Spanish, and Portuguese. So why aren't we told to also learn Portuguese? Could it be because the Portuguese language doesn’t border any of our states? Of course it is.
Finally, why do most Europeans still learn the English language in school, even though there is no border association requiring it? The answer is because they either lost to us in WW II or because they relied on us economically during the Marshall plan after the war. Through military and economic necessity, European schools made learning the English language mandatory and that reality persists to this day. I suppose we would also readily learn Spanish given those same conditions.
Europeans shouldn’t be praised for their European language skills anymore than Americans and Canadians should be chastised for the commonality of their continental language. Such statements by Obama only serve to frame the true nature of his relative inexperience and his lack of exposure to the rest of the world.
Anton Kaiser was born in Aberdeen, South Dakota, and retired in Rapid City after serving twenty-seven years as a U.S. Army infantry officer. He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy, West Point, and holds Masters Degrees in Business and in Public Administration from Webster College, St. Louis, MO. He is also a veteran of Vietnam, Berlin, Operation Just Cause (Panama) and an honor graduate of the Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, KS.
The Immutable Law
American Minute from William J. Federer
He intentionally fired into the air, but his political rival, Aaron Burr, took deadly aim and fatally shot him in a duel JULY 11, 1804.
Born in the West Indies, he fought in the Revolution and was aide-de-camp to General Washington. He helped write the Constitution and convinced States to ratify it by writing The Federalist Papers. His name was Alexander Hamilton.
The first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton had written in "The Farmer Refuted," February 23, 1775: "The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power."
Alexander Hamilton continued: "Good and wise men, in all ages...have supposed that the Deity, from the relations we stand in to Himself, and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is indispensably obligatory upon all mankind."
On April 16, 1802, Alexander Hamilton wrote to James Bayard: "Let an association be formed to be denominated 'The Christian Constitutional Society,' its object to be first: The support of Christian religion; second: The support of the United States."
Group Honors Pro-Life Heroes
By Lawrence Jones
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 12:01 PM EDT
A pro-life foundation announced on Tuesday that it plans to give away up to $600,000 in awards to leaders and groups that have significantly advanced the culture of life.
The Gerald Health Foundation said it will recognize up to six individuals or groups with the "Norinne A. and Raymond E. Ruddy Memorial Pro-Life Prize," created to honor the parents of pro-life philanthropist Raymond B. Ruddy.
"Our primary objective is to reward those who are preserving the culture of life through their charitable enterprises or through advocacy programs that defend and preserve the sanctity of human life," says attorney Cathy Ruse, executive director of Life Prize.
Ruse, who serves as a senior fellow of legal studies for Family Research Council, said the foundation hopes the prizes will also inspire young people to join the pro-life movement.
While executive director of Students for Life of America Kristan Hawkins noted the already "incredible momentum" going into the younger pro-life movement, she believes the prizes will "transform that momentum into inspiration for today’s teenagers, college students and young professionals."
More than 100 pro-life leaders received nomination packets this week. They have until August 15 to submit their choice of candidates. Nominees will be evaluated by their advances in public advocacy, scientific research, outreach and public disclosure activities, legal action or other noteworthy achievements, according to the foundation.
Life Prizes winners will be announced in October and officially receive their awards during a ceremony in Washington, D.C., held in conjunction with Students for Life of America’s annual conference in January 2009.
The initiative has received the blessings of many pro-life figures including Dr. Jack Willke, president of Life Issues Institute and former president of National Right to Life Committee, who says he's thrilled for the new program.
“The Life Prizes program will elevate the pro-life commitment in remembering the significant victories we have achieved and demonstrates that there are many fruits to be harvested by the next generation in carrying the pro-life torch and taking the movement to a new level," he stated.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Brazilian Schools to Get Condom Machines
By Aaron Leichman
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 07:31 PM EDT
Pro-family advocates and critics around the world expressed strong opposition this week after news spread that the nation of Brazil would begin a large scale effort to combat the spread of AIDS and STDs through the installation of condom vending machines in hundreds of its schools.
According to Health Minister Jose Gomes Temporao, AIDS is a major problem among Brazilian youth with an alarming 70,000 cases of AIDS reported among Brazilians under 24.
Eduardo Barbosa, head of the National Program for Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS, had explained the new development as one that would be crucial in combating AIDS and STDs.
"The expectation is that all of the public schools will have at least one machine. At the end of the year, we will evaluate the usage and the appropriateness of the machines in the school environment, and how we give information and guidance regarding them," Barbosa told the Jornal do Brasil.
Critics, however, have been skeptical about the notion of putting condoms in schools.
Cristovam Buarque, a former Minister of Education, has made his opposition to the measure known since the debate over it first began last year. Buarque has been among those who argue that only through adequate sex education policies in schools – not the careless distribution of condoms – can the incidences of AIDS and STDs decrease.
“The solution is not the mechanical ease of machines that distribute condoms,” he told Brazzil.com.
“Today, many children are enrolled in school but do not attend. They go merely for the snacks served. Now, they will go to receive condoms,” he added.
Pro-family advocates, meanwhile, argue that abstinence and faith-based programs are the only tried and true ways to stem the tide of AIDS.
Most notably, studies in the United States have consistently revealed that abstinence-based education programs have been effective in schools.
In a review by The Heritage Foundation, 15 out of 21 abstinence-education programs “showed positive behavioral results in the students, including the delay or reduction of sexual activity.”
"The big problem with this government program for distributing condom machines to the schools is that, rather than teaching fidelity and respect in relationships with others, it runs the risk of creating an incentive to engage in sexual intercourse, including premature sexual intercourse," explained Dom Dimas Lara Barbosa, the secretary-general of the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops (CNBB), according to LifeSiteNews.com
"Our mission as Catholics must be to reaffirm the beauty of human sexuality, but above all, the respect that one should have in every action, including the conjugal act. Safe sex, only in marriage, blessed by God,” he concluded.
The new measure will begin taking effect in October.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Video: U.S. House Candidate Chris Lien on Upcoming ANWR Trip
From the Chris Lien campaign blog, a video explaining why Chris will be going with other U.S. House candidates in a few days to visit the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska.
Many people (myself included) believe we should be drilling for the oil in ANWR. It could provide much-needed relief in our oil supply while making minimal impact on this otherwise desolate area.
Have a great trip, Chris!
Code Change Allows Veterans in Civilian Clothes to Salute Flag
I know what I'll be doing the next time I see Old Glory in public: saluting.
From the Houston Chronicle:
A change in the U.S. flag code now allows both veterans and active servicemen and women to salute the flag without wearing dress attire. President Bush signed the code into law in January.
For those who prefer not to salute Old Glory, you still can stand at attention, remove your hat and place your right hand over your heart.
The Alamogordo Daily News has more on the code change:
Section 594 of the National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law as Public Law 110-181 on Jan. 28, allows veterans out of uniform to salute the flag.
Section 9 of Title 4, United States Code, was amended by striking "all persons present" and all that follows through the end of the section, and inserted the following: "All persons present in uniform should render the military salute. Members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute. All other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over their heart, or if applicable, remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Citizens of other countries who are present should stand at attention. All such conduct toward the flag in a moving column should be rendered at the moment the flag passes."
After 10 years in the Air Force (with many of my day's duties including posting or retiring the flag), saluting the flag was a hard habit to break when I got out of the military.
Now I can go back to what I still feel is the best way for a veteran to show respect to our nation's flag.
Don't tell anybody, but years ago I taught my children to salute the flag when we post and retire it in front of our home. ("Present, Arms!" "Order, Arms!")
Study: Divorce Damages Children Despite Greater Social Acceptance
LifeSiteNews.com points to yet another study proving what we've known all along but would really like to forget: divorce harms children.
The article examines a British study on the effects of divorce on children, even going so far as to compare the effects in the past when divorce was more socially frowned upon to more modern times where it's more socially acceptable.
The finding: children are hurt just as bad now as they were 50 years ago.
Besides finding an increased divorce rate among couples, the study found that, contrary to the expectations of some, an increased social acceptance of divorce over the years has not reduced the negative effects experienced by the children of divorced parents.
So we essentially have the same amount of damage per child, just more divorce and thus more overall societal damage.
The study points out the negative effects on children running from trouble in their own relationships when they grow up, to more depression, academic problems, less education and diminished career prospects.
An additional factor not mentioned in this piece, but which is well documented is crime. Children from broken homes have less supervision (one parent simply can't do the work of two) and the children are often hurt and angry, which can result in rebellion and acting out. This often brings them into conflict with the law, which leads to: increased property damage, theft, law enforcement expense, court costs, and incarceration costs.
Sometimes there is no alternative to divorce, in abuse or addictive behavior cases, or in cases of infidelity. But no-fault divorce ("I don't love him/her anymore") has wreaked untold havoc and suffering across the world.
We simply must pull back from this culture of irresponsibility and indulgence, or the suffering will continue getting worse with each generation.
Study: 84 Percent of Americans Call Bible 'Holy'
By Elena Garcia
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 02:58 PM EDT
A new Barna survey shows that more Americans accept the Bible as "holy" or "sacred" than they would other books.
Respondents of the survey for The Barna Group identified around 12 books they thought fit the bill as "sacred literature" or "holy books." The list included expected titles such as the Bible and the Koran and others such as Quiet Strength by football coach Tony Dungy.
However, the Bible stood out by far from other texts with 84 percent of Americans deeming it a holy book.
Only three books were recognized as holy by at least 1 percent of Americans. The Koran trailed behind the Bible in second place with 4 percent; the Book of Mormon as labeled by 3 percent as sacred/holy; and the Torah was deemed holy by 2 percent of the public.
Most of the other books listed in the survey failed to even garner 1 percent of the public's vote.
While only 7 percent of Christians in the study would categorize a book other than the Bible as holy, around 40 percent of non-Christians would point to the Bible as holy.
"Most Americans consider the Bible to be the word of God – and do not believe any other document fits that description. People associated with other faiths are much more likely to view the Bible as sacred literature than Christians are to view any other document to be holy," observed George Barna, the researcher of faith trends who directed the study.
The study also found that men, conservatives, older Americans, and individuals who had lower income and education levels were more likely than their counterparts to accept the Bible as holy.
Not surprisingly, the study found that adults under 25, residents of the West and liberals were the groups most likely to consider non-Bible books as holy.
Barna said this rings true because these groups "tend to be the most experimental in spirituality.
And among the different types of Christians responding to the survey, evangelical Christians appeared to hold the firmest conviction in the holiness of the Bible. A high 99 percent said the Bible was sacred.
Overall, people's responses in the study demonstrate America’s singular connection to Christianity, concluded Barna.
Barna noted that while Christians in America are "only moderately committed to Christianity and to the church they attend most often, they have no inclination to embrace anything besides the Bible as sacred, especially if it originated from a different faith tradition."
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Environmental Extremists Oppose Refinery Expansion
Apparently some people in America aren't too concerned about paying more than $4.00 a gallon for gas.
CNS News reports that while BP wants to expand a refinery in Whiting, Indiana, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is fighting the expansion.
So what if the expansion increased gas and diesel production by 1.7 million gallons a day. So what if the expansion created 2,000 construction jobs and 80 permanent jobs.
Now, I've never driven through Whiting, Indiana, but I have driven through and stopped in Billings, Montana many times. Driving along I-90, refinery infrastructure is about all you see. I had family living not to far from there a few years ago, and the last I knew, people weren't dying in the streets and the vegetation looked pretty healthy. No apocalypse to be found.
The United States hasn't built a new refinery in over 30 years due to the massive regulatory and permit boondoggle. It is fantastically expensive and time consuming, thanks to bureaucracy and pandering to environmental extremists. Meanwhile, our refining capacity is pretty much maxed out. And a disaster (Katrina?) in the wrong place could seriously set us back.
Hyperion is looking to build a new refinery near Elk Point, South Dakota, but that effort has also been hindered by environmental extremists with connections to California environmental groups. For now, the citizens of that area aren't buying the extremism; last month voters gave the green light to necessary zoning changes with 58% approval.
The Elk Point project plans to employ about 4,500 workers to build the facility, permanently employ 1,800 people, and process 400,000 barrels of oil a day.
None of that matters to earth-worshippers. No energy supply will ever be clean enough to make them happy: they don't like coal, they don't like oil, they don't like nuclear, and they don't even like wind power (kills birds and makes the skyline icky).
As long as we pander and kowtow to environmental extremists, keep your wallet handy. It's time to do to them what their extremism merits: ignore them.
Meanwhile, the rest of us have a great nation to run. (Unless you like paying nearly $100 to fill your gas tank).
Obama: Your Children Should Learn to Speak Spanish
Obama derides English-only efforts but says your American children should learn to speak Spanish.
Pastor Encourages Open Discussion of Social Issues
By Lillian Kwon
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 08:53 AM EDT
As Christians across California grapple with the legalization of same-sex "marriage," the shock factor at one emerging church remains small.
And it's not because the young and growing church embraces a liberal theology or supports gay "marriage," but because they don't avoid talking about sexuality, including homosexuality.
"In our church, at least from the people I have been hanging out with, I have not yet heard too much 'Oh my god, look what happened,'" said Dan Kimball, pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, Calif., and a well-known emerging church leader who subscribes to a more conservative theology. There wasn't much of a reaction at Vintage Faith to the May 15 court ruling that allowed same-sex couples to wed, he said. Many believed it was inevitable.
And Kimball had more conversations with pastors outside the state who were more curious about the impact of the ruling than those around his church. He believes people at his church were not shocked partly because of their openness in discussing marriage and homosexuality.
At Vintage Faith, they've created a culture of addressing and responding to such issues. Kimball encourages other churches to do the same – to create a culture of teaching the theology of these controversial issues in a way that people can understand and not approaching the issues just at the surface level.
"I hope then people will be able to respond in a healthy way and not [be] reactionary," he said in a recent interview with Skye Jethani, managing editor of Leadership journal.
Kimball is currently teaching out of the New Testament book 1 Corinthians in a series titled "Sin City: Being the light of Jesus in a darkened culture." Early in the series, which launched on June 15, he addressed marriage and human sexuality, teaching the theologically conservative position that marriage is designed for a man and a woman. An open forum followed the sermon last weekend.
While Vintage Faith does not endorse homosexual "marriage" theologically, the church – like any emerging church – is ingrained in the culture, a culture that has becoming increasingly tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle.
"To me, I really believe that if church leaders aren't involved in people ... [who] are gay outside of their church, that needs to happen so that they can just understand [their] lives more," Kimball said in the interview.
"So when they think about [homosexuals], it's not just this population of people that is faceless; they really can think of hearts and minds and eye expressions," he added.
Church leaders need to see every human being, regardless of their sexuality or lifestyle, in the image of God, he stressed.
"That to me is critical because then you respond differently," the emerging pastor said.
Kimball's seven-week "Sin City" series continues on Sunday with a message on "Single Like Jesus." The series aims to help Christians share the way of Jesus in their culture and avoid being consumed by a sin-saturated culture.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Atheist Soldier Sues DOD For Religious Freedom
By Lawrence Jones
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 08:37 AM EDT
A soldier who served in Iraq is suing the U.S. Defense Department for violating his religious freedom, claiming he was discriminated against because he is an atheist.
Army Specialist Jeremy Hall said that his non-Christian identity cost him his military career and put his life at risk.
He also claims he was passed up for a promotion because he refused to pray with troops.
"I was told because I can't put my personal beliefs aside and pray with troops I wouldn't make a good leader," Hall told CNN in a sit-down interview.
Hall said he was raised a Baptist but left his faith after being confronted by atheists on the Bible.
He said that after his faith change, he received threats by other troops and the military assigned him a full-time bodyguard. He also referenced an incident from two years ago when he was asked to sit at another table after he declined to pray before Thanksgiving dinner.
Hall told CNN that he isn't seeking compensation from the suit but the guarantee of religious freedom in the military.
While the Pentagon has declined to discuss the specifics of Hall's case, citing litigation, Deputy Undersecretary Bill Carr affirmed to CNN that such constitutional rights are already being upheld by the Pentagon.
"If an atheist chose to follow their convictions, absolutely that's acceptable," said Carr. "And that's a point of religious accommodation in department policy, one may hold whatever faith, or may hold no faith."
The U.S. Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, among others, are named as defendants in Hall's suit.
The U.S. Justice Department is expected to issue a response this week.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Christian Convert Detained by Iranian Secret Police
By Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jul. 10 2008 09:43 AM EDT
A former Muslim who converted to Christianity is being held by Iran’s secret police on suspicion of “apostasy,” or leaving Islam, according to a report Wednesday.
Mahmood Matin, 52, has been held in a detention center in the southern city of Shiraz since his arrest on May 15, according to Compass Direct news. His wife, who visited him on June 24, said Matin did not know where he was being held until she told him, according to a source who requested to remain anonymous for security reasons.
Matin told his wife that authorities were pressing him to reveal what foreign church he was connected to. But that he told them he was not related to any church outside of Iran.
The imprisoned convert claims he is being treated well, but his wife believes otherwise. During their five-minute conversation, officials were listening in, the source noted.
Matin was originally arrested in May when he met with 13 other Muslim converts to Christianity in a park in Shiraz.
Under Iranian law, apostasy is a crime that can be punishable by death. The county’s parliament is reviewing this month a draft penal code that would make the death penalty mandatory for anyone found guilty of leaving Islam or who uses the Internet to encourage others to do so.
The June 24 visit was the first and only face-to-face contact the Matin family had been allowed since his arrest. His wife had traveled 17 hours by bus from her home in Tehran to visit her jailed husband.
Iran is ranked third on Open Doors’ World Watch List for countries with the worst persecution of Christians. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom also lists Iran as a “Country of Particular Concern,” a label given to countries with the worst religious freedom abuses.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Homosexuals Demand Access to Public Sex
England, the country I lived in for three years back in the late 1980s, has lost it's collective mind (but the U.S. isn't far behind, these days).
From the Telegraph:
Bristol City Council wants to prune bushes and remove cover from an area known as the Downs to improve the landscape and encourage rare wildlife.
But its own gay rights group has opposed the move, claiming that cutting back the bushes was "discriminating" to homosexual men who used the area for late night outdoor sex known as dogging.
So now cleanup efforts are on hold while the homosexuals wrangle to protect their wrangling-spot.
To the Telegraph's credit, they did cover an aspect of the story you might not find in most American newspapers: the illegality of these sexual antics.
Peter Abraham, a Conservative councillor, hit out at the anti-gay accusations as "offensive".
He said: "How can it be discriminatory to clear land that might stop what is an illegal practice? We need to manage the Downs properly. For a long time we have been told that the scrub land needs to be opened up.
"I find it offensive to suggest that by taking this action - which might stop people collecting to carry out what some might describe as illegal acts and certainly offensive behaviour - you are being discriminatory."
So not only are these homosexual activists brazen enough to demand the bushes be left alone for them to frolic in, they make this demand in open defiance of existing law!
Apparently this isn't the first time this brushy area has been the scene of a skirmish between law and decency on one side, and immorality and perversity on the other--with immorality winning.
A row blew up last October when it was revealed that four fire fighters had been disciplined for allegedly disturbing a gay sex session on the Downs by shining their torches into the bushes.
After complaints that their actions were homophobic, the four senior officers from Avon Fire Service were fined £1,000 and transferred to other fire stations.
Now take a step back from this story for a minute and consider the activity objectively. Consider that this homosexual group is vehemently demanding the right to have sex in a public area, and that (public property) brush in that area not be cut so as to keep their sexual activity more conducive, and they are demanding this in open defiance of the law.
Does this sound like a sane response? Does this kind of heated, lustful behavior and the demand for access to it sound normal, natural or healthy?
Obama's Vision of Mandatory Volunteerism
GUEST COLUMN
BY ANTON KAISER
It seems to be getting harder and harder to find out what is going on in liberal politics these days. Despite the World Wide Web, reports from our American mainstream media simply dull the senses.
Take for example this nugget from Obama’s speech on national service last Wednesday at the University of Colorado. He promised that as president he would "set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year."
Like so many other federal education programs, he would enforce this social service program by withholding federal education dollars if it isn’t complied with. But what kind of bureaucracy will be required to implement and monitor such a program? Who decides which service programs qualify? And what does national service have to do with education anyway?
In the past, volunteerism and community service have been a freedom, an elective choice. Kids, in accordance with parental control, could collect money for UNICEF on Halloween or fill their bags with candy. It was their choice. Even national military service has been made voluntary. But now we need a military-style draft to force our children into national service even before the age of emancipation? And parents will have to chauffeur their kids at personal expense to meet these mandatory government demands because their school needs those otherwise denied federal funds?
Why doesn’t the media jump all over these kinds of political statements by liberal candidates? When Bush proposed the same thing for academic standards, something actually related to education, they had a fit. But when Obama proposes socializing our schools, something that has nothing to do with academics, those same keypads suddenly go silent. Why?
Might I suggest that teaching politics in our schools through forced participation in selective social service programs is just fine as concerns the liberal mind. Witness our overwhelmingly liberal colleges. And enforcing a mandatory national service program in our secondary schools simply expands that agenda, opening yet another liberal gateway into the minds of our youth--and for the same political purposes.
Anton Kaiser was born in Aberdeen, South Dakota, and retired in Rapid City after serving twenty-seven years as a U.S. Army infantry officer. He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy, West Point, and holds Masters Degrees in Business and in Public Administration from Webster College, St. Louis, MO. He is also a veteran of Vietnam, Berlin, Operation Just Cause (Panama) and an honor graduate of the Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, KS.
The Destiny of Nations
American Minute from William J. Federer
Millard Fillmore became the 13th President, JULY 10, 1850, when President Zachary Taylor died unexpectedly.
President Millard Fillmore stated: "A great man has fallen among us and a whole country is called to...mourning...I dare not shrink; and I rely upon Him who holds in His hands the destinies of nations to endow me with the requisite strength for the task."
President Millard Fillmore was remembered for sending Commodore Perry to open trade with Japan, admitting California, which had just begun the Gold Rush, into the Union as a free state, and when the Library of Congress caught fire, he and his Cabinet formed a bucket brigade to help extinguish the flames.
After being sworn into office, President Millard Fillmore, who was a member of the Episcopal Church, stated: "The Sabbath day I always kept as a day of rest. Besides being a religious duty, it was essential to health. On commencing my Presidential career, I found that the Sabbath had frequently been employed by visitors for private interviews with the President. I determined to put an end to this custom, and ordered my doorkeeper to meet all Sunday visitors with an indiscriminate refusal."
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Couples Vow Recommitment to Marriage
By Aaron Leichman
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Jul. 09 2008 02:27 PM EDT
In an era where rising divorce rates and marital infidelity are rapidly becoming societal norms, hundreds of couples met together last month to buck the secular trends of the world with a renewed commitment to God and the sanctity of biblical marriage.
Worldwide Marriage Encounter (WWME), which is active in over 90 countries and exists to give couples a “weekend experience” to recommit their marriages through “techniques of loving communication” centered on God, held its 40th anniversary convention on June 27-29 at the Ontario Convention Center in Ontario, Calif.
"This is a way for us to reinforce the permanence of our marriage vows and the sanctity of the sacrament of matrimony," said couples Tony and Cathy Witczak, who attended the group’s anniversary convention, in a statement.
The event, which gathered over 2,000 participants from around the world, was called a success by WWME which spoke glowingly of a banner proclamation affirming the commitment to biblical marriage that was signed by thousands of people at the conclusion of its anniversary event.
The banner, which included a statement of faith and belief that marriage is an institution existing only between a man and a woman,” featured "Forever Yours" in large print at the top.
WWME, which holds events periodically throughout the country, describes its programs as unique and innovative.
“It's not a retreat, marriage clinic, group sensitivity, or a substitute for counseling. It's a unique approach aimed at revitalizing marriage,” the group says on its Web site.
WWME, which continues to fight daily in its struggle to uphold the sanctity of marriage, is a non-profit organization that uses all its proceeds to finance its programs and give struggling married couples new hope in their lives.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Less Religious Americans Favor Obama
By Jennifer Riley
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Jul. 09 2008 12:08 PM EDT
Presidential candidate Barack Obama has stronger support among less religious Americans than rival John McCain, a survey revealed.
The survey, conducted by The Gallup Poll and released Tuesday, found 55 percent of Americans who say religion is not important in their life backed Obama, compared to 36 percent for McCain. The reverse was true for Americans who said religion was important in their life, with 50 percent to 40 percent preferring McCain over Obama.
This correlation is most clearly seen in the segment of Americans who are white and identify themselves as either Protestant or some other non-Catholic Christian tradition. Among these believers, McCain beats Obama by a 36-point margin, 63 percent to 27 percent. The two candidates were essentially tied among those in this group who say religion is not important in their life, with McCain at 46 percent and 45 percent for Obama.
But exceptions to the correlation between religiosity and support for Republican McCain occur among Hispanic Catholics and black non-Catholic Christians. Among white Hispanic Catholics, Obama beat McCain by a large margin even among those who said religion is important in their life.
Obama received 57 percent support among religious Hispanic Catholics, compared to McCain’s 31 percent. The Illinois senator, who is vying to be the first black U.S. president, won by an even larger margin among those that said religion is not important in their life, 63 percent to 30 percent.
Preference for Obama over McCain was even more dramatic among black non-Catholic Christians. Ninety percent of this group’s religious voters supported Obama, versus 4 percent for McCain. The number was slightly raised among the group’s non-religious voters, with 92 percent for Obama and four percent supporting McCain.
The finding that religious voters prefer a Republican candidate is not new. Evangelical Christians, who are viewed as highly religious, have traditionally been stalwart voters of the Republican Party – although that idea is being challenged this election year.
Younger and moderate evangelicals have been more open to Obama’s candidacy than in past elections towards a Democratic contender. Many find his emphasis on social justice issues such as poverty and Darfur appealing. The Obama campaign has also aggressively courted religious voters with initiatives explaining how Obama plans to put his faith into action.
Experts have predicted that Obama could gain as much as 30 to 40 percent of the evangelical vote this fall.
The Gallup poll for this survey questioned 95,000 registered voters from March through June of this year.
Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Christian Group Ordered to Hide the Cross
Another example of blatant government hostility toward Christianity from OneNewsNow:
After last year's Independence Day parade in Chesapeake, Virginia, several groups were allowed to set up booths in the city's Lakeside Park. Christian Rights Ministries (CRM) set up its booth, which included a 12-foot-tall white cross. But city officials ordered the group to remove the cross, calling it "offensive," "way out there," and "blatantly Christian." When city officials refused to respond to calls and letters from the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) on behalf of CRM's founder Steve Taylor, the group sued.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
What's wrong with this picture?
What's wrong with our country?
